HIV Innocence Group Truth

The fakeruptcy depositions that Clark Baker has been sitting through should be considered the Gold Standard for how to commit perjury. Not only is Mr. Baker misrepresenting the facts, or at least the ones that supposedly don’t elude his recollection, and throwing all his one-time supporters under the bus, he is also making a huge fool out of himself. Once the transcripts are cleared for posting I will have plenty of material that would embarrass Mr. Baker: if he had a shred of integrity, that is. But for now I will give you a little taste.

Mr. Baker has claimed on many occasions that Electron Microscopy is the Gold Standard for HIV and other viruses. Mr. Baker has made that claim in regards to the HIV Innocence Group. He and his co-conspirator David Rasnick in Viral Forensics have made it the anchor of that impotent “business”. In David Rasnick’s White Paper for Viral Forensics he states:

In contrast to these tests, Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) has been the “gold standard” for viral detection and characterization since the 1930s.

The first commercial TEM was not developed until 1939. So Rasnick is not only lying when he says that EM is the gold standard, he is definitely lying when he gives it a definitive time period. But I will not deconstruct that bit of bullshit just yet. Let me first tell you what Mr. Baker said during his deposition:

Page 24 Baker is being asked about EM. Baker had said it was the “gold standard”.

Q: And on what basis do you refer to it as the “gold standard”?

A: A history of virology established a long time ago, long before I was born, that EM is the gold standard.

Baker was born around 1955. EM was first used about 1940 to visualize virus. And it was in 1948 that EM could distinguish features between small pox and chicken pox. And it was 1952 when Polio virus was first seen by EM. So in other words, EM was not the “gold standard” long before Baker was born. Actually, EM is still not considered the gold standard. A fact that Baker finally admits during the deposition by Dr. Murtagh’s brilliant attorney:

Q: What organization has deemed it the gold standard? Yeah, let’s start with that.

A: I–I don’t think any organization deems it the gold standard for diagnostic purposes.

Q: OK, so you’re referring to it as the gold standard for forensic purposes?

A: For our purposes.

Q: And your purposes are forensic purposes?

A: Yes. And to gather evidence for court cases.

Q: And what organization deemed it the gold standard for forensic purposes.

A: Well, so far, none that I — that I know of.

That singular answer, “for our purposes” says it all. And that purpose is just to scam people. They first tried to scam attorneys, judges and juries in HIV criminalization cases. They hoped if they scammed enough people in the court system, that would spill over and influence the general public. They are continuing their public scam with Viral Forensics.

For several years Clark Baker and his co-conspirators have been screaming that Electron Microscopy is the supposed Gold Standard of HIV.

There is only one gold-standard tool used for observing HIV — an electron microscope — but EM is completely off-limits to the public and has never been approved by the FDA to test for HIV.

Side note: What does Baker mean by EM being “completely off-limits to the public…”? Perhaps he is using hyperbole, but it makes absolutely no sense. Most of what Baker writes is just non-sense when you devote even one brain cell to his blatherings. In fact, EM is not off limits to the general public. EM is used in many hospitals for diagnostic purposes in those instances where it is appropriate.

Clark Baker even made EM a lynch pin in the defense of several of his clients with the HIV Innocence Group. Baker wrote the following in a post about the Nushawn Williams Case:

“OMSJ experts contend that, as the ‘gold standard’, EM is the only reliable method that can identify the presence of the virus.”

As I wrote when discussing the Williams Case, Mr. Baker and his so-called experts cannot just arbitrarily bestow EM with the crown of the Gold Standard.

When an adroit attorney challenged his baseless assertions in a military case and got the EM results thrown out, Clark Baker screamed about prosecutorial misconduct. Clark Baker (via OMSJ) even helped to fund an embarrassing “research” paper on EM by Andrew Maniotis. (The previous link does not have the paper, but this is the current working link to that abysmal research paper. Enjoy the crazy.)

That is just a small sampling of the many, many times that Baker and his cronies have made the false and baseless claim that EM is the Gold Standard. Thanks to this deposition Clark Baker has admitted that he and his partners in crime just made it up and acknowledges that no person nor entity ever proved nor even said that Electron Microscope is the Gold Standard for viewing any virus.

Now Clark Baker, David Rasnick, David Steele and David Crowe are once again lying to the general public about EM being the Gold Standard and are charging $1,500.00 for a blood test to challenge a valid diagnosis of HIV, HPV, HCV and other virus for which there are proven treatments. And what could possibly be their motivation for such duplicity? The only end game here is to sew doubt in the minds of people who may have a potentially life threatening virus and get them to stop taking their medication. Hell they did that to Kari Stokely and look how well that turned out for her.

A little over two months ago I reported that Clark Baker had filed bankruptcy. As I said then, Baker felt this was a smart strategy to stop the impending avalanche of hefty financial judgments against him. Unfortunately for Mr. Baker, this was the worst thing that he could have possibly done. And now Mr. Baker is feeling the pressure.

Last Friday Dr. Murtagh’s attorneys began the first of many depositions against Mr. Baker and many of his cronies. You see, bankruptcy court allows Baker’s creditors much leeway and many options to get to the bottom of this fakeruptcy. Baker has sat through one deposition as the CEO of OMSJ that lasted 8 hours and he is scheduled to sit for another one this Thursday representing himself. Next week Carol Dunn, Baker’s “wife”, will be subjected to the same scenario. It will not be long before Robert Leppo, the multi-millionaire who financed OMSJ to the tune of $1.4 Million dollars since 2009, will be forced to account for his actions. This is just the start of the heat and Baker is feeling it.

Baker testified that he has been forced to retire because Mr. Leppo cut off the money train and Baker appears to be obviously bitter. Baker’s retirement fund is paltry, even by non-LA standards, and Baker is not ready to curb his exuberant lifestyle that was financed by Mr. Leppo. It’s getting ugly and Baker has adjusted his loyalty to cover his own ass.

If you have been even a small part of Baker’s operations you might want to consider coming forward now and save yourself. Contact me via comment (that I will not publish) and I can get you in touch with the winning team. I’m speaking directly to you, Mr. Leppo. Do the right thing and set the record straight.

In this post I am going to examine and deconstruct the White Paper written by David Rasnick to scam potential clients into using explain to potential clients the Electron Microscopy service offered by Viral Forensics (VF).

A white paper is an authoritative report or guide informing readers in a concise manner about a complex issue and presenting the issuing body’s philosophy on the matter. It is meant to help readers understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a decision. The initial British term concerning a type of government-issued document has lately proliferated taking a somewhat new meaning in business, which is closer to a form of marketing presentation, a tool for persuading customers and partners and promoting a product or viewpoint. (all bolding mine)

I have never read a white paper before so I am not sure about the proper format. However, I would assume the paper should appear familiar to the audience to which it is geared. In that respect, Rasnick’s strategy to write his white paper in a format similar to a research paper is brilliant. But Rasnick’s audience is not necessarily scientists, doctors and those in the healthcare industry. That is another reason why Rasnick’s strategy to cloak this non-sense in the format of a research paper is so smart; he is hoping to fool normal people into using this “service” by giving the information the appearance of legitimacy. Unfortunately for Rasnick, his paper falls apart under professional scrutiny.

A hallmark of all scientific research papers is the footnote citation which has several important purposes:

“…to uphold intellectual honesty (or avoiding plagiarism), to attribute prior or unoriginal work and ideas to the correct sources, to allow the reader to determine independently whether the referenced material supports the author’s argument in the claimed way, and to help the reader gauge the strength and validity of the material the author has used.”

Mr. Rasnick liberally peppers his white paper with footnoted citations. However, upon close inspection, all of his citations are woefully deficient. Their deficiency falls into at least one of the following categories:

• A They are completely untruthful and/or inaccurate.
• B They do not support the cited statement.
• C They refer back to another AIDS Denialist.
• D They are misleading and disingenuous.

To prove these categories, I will provide the statement, the (supposedly) supporting citation and the truth.

Let’s start with the last citation which is both completely untrue as well as misleading (categories A & D). It is the perfect example to prove that the service marketed by Rasnick is bull-pucky.

I. Statement:

Viral Forensics LLC offers the only forensic examination of blood plasma samples to confirm the absence or presence of viral pathogens. Being 100 times more powerful than a conventional light microscope, TEM can make any viral pathogen visible. TEM can easily confirm the presence of HPV (50–60 nm), Epstein–Barr virus (120–180 nm), HIV (100–120 nm), Ebola (700–1400 nm), etc. In light of the shortcomings, abuse, and unreliability of ELISA, WB, PCR, Flow Cytometry, and phylogenetic technologies, forensic TEM is available to physicians and patients to visually confirm the presence or absence of viral pathogens before committing to unnecessary regimens of care and toxic pharmaceutical drugs.12

Citation 12:

Pharmaceutical critics of TEM counter that HIV is not found in blood, which conflicts directly with marketing claims that PCR tests detect viral particles in blood.

Truth:

Nowhere will you find a legitimate critic make the statement “HIV is not found in blood.”  Quite the contrary. What you will find are statements about the required concentration of HIV that must be present in whole blood. Like this one from the Father of Electron Microscopy, Hans Gelderbloom:

Historically, electron microscopy has served as an effective method to identify viral agents of infection. However, the use of electron microscopy as a diagnostic tool is limited by its requirement for a high concentration of particles in the clinical sample. The limit of detection for diagnosis of a virus by electron microscopy is widely accepted as 10^6 -10^8 particles/ml.1 For HIV-1 patients, a “high” viral load may range from 10^4 – 10^6 HIV RNA copies/ml. Because each HIV particle carries 2 copies of the viral genome, 1×10^6 copies/ml would translate to 5×10^5 particles/ml, placing, in many instances, the positive detection of virus outside of the detection limit of electron microscopy. Another consideration is that although HIV can be transmitted through blood and blood products, the viral burden in an infected individual is found primarily in the lymphatic tissue, not in the blood (HIV in the blood may represent just 2% of the total viral burden). Finally, the detection of HIV in blood by electron microscopy may be further complicated by the structural pleomorphism the virus displays.

This is the same response I posted in June 2014 when I deconstructed the abysmal Electron Microscope research paper by AIDS Denialst Andrew Maniotis. And yet the AIDS Deniers are still parroting the same “facts” that have been refuted time and again.

II. Statement: (I broke this paragraph down into two parts to deal with each untruth properly.)

While the development of biological testing has made many advances in the detection, diagnosis, and treatment of infectious diseases, FDA package inserts that come with the widely used ELISA, Western Blot (WB), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests clearly describe the unreliability of such testing.1 (bolding mine)

Further, the use of Flow Cytometry (to count CD4 cells) and phylogenetics (to identify the DNA pedigree of the suspected virus) is still too unreliable for FDA approval.2

Citation 1:

Although polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a reliable technology, its application in the detection of so-called “viral load” of alleged pathogens like HIV has more to do with marketing than science. Comments by PCR inventor Kary Mullis PhD explain further at http://www.duesberg.com/viewpoints/kintro.html

Citation 2:

See Nancy Banks MD The Use of Flow Cytometry for CD4+ T Cell Counts in HIV Testing, THE OFFICE OF MEDICAL & SCIENTIFIC JUSTICE (OMSJ), Jan 2012.

Truth:

Not only is the statement completely untrue, it is also ridiculous. This link to the FDA website has a list of all the FDA approved HIV test kits. All of them describe the tests as being incredibly reliable for both sensitivity and specificity. I should also note that AIDS Denialists claim that the package inserts state they are not approved for the purpose of diagnosis. This is also untrue and each insert clearly states: For in vitro diagnostic use only. AIDS Denialists do not seem to understand the diagnostic algorithm of ELISA + Western Blot which explains the near-perfect degree of both sensitivity and specificity.

Citation 1 fulfills deficiencies B & D. Not only was the quote about PCR viral load being “more marketing than science” never uttered by Kary Mullis, and therefore does not support the statement (B), it is also misleading (D) because, ironically, the rambling statement by Mullis is about his elusive search for that one, sole, singular “scientific reference to support a statement I had just written: ‘HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.'” This is ironic because my entire post right now is about scientific citations to support important statements.

BTW, there is no disease (or any scientific discovery) that has one, singular, definitive research paper that proves it’s existence. NONE! That is NOT how science works. Anything that is proven in science is done so with the Scientific Method which not only requires, but is dependent upon, the validation by other scientists who duplicate and repeat the exact procedure step, by step, by step and come up with the same, exact results!

Citation 2 fulfills deficiency C in that it refers back to the work of another AIDS Denialist. Which AIDS Denialist authored this particular bit of buffoonery is interesting because it was originally attributed to Clark Baker only. After I wrote two separate posts debunking the science, (Part I here and Part II here) Nancy Banks was added as second author. Now, Nancy Banks is listed as the only author. I have no idea why we should accept Nancy Banks as knowledgeable about Flow Cytometry when her education and experience is that of an OB/GYN doctor. There is no citation to show that Dr. Banks has ever used Flow Cytometry herself nor is there any citation showing Dr. Banks’ education in said technology.

III. Statement:

In contrast to these tests, Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) has been the “gold standard” for viral detection and characterization since the 1930s. Unlike the ELISA, WB, and PCR tests, the undirected “open view” of TEM provides the rapid, and objective detection, identification, and quantification of any virus present in a person’s plasma, pustules, sputum, urine, feces, and tissues.

Citation:

Surprisingly there is NO citation for the above statement which DEMANDS proper citation. Dr. Rasnick can not make such a bold statement about TEM being“the ‘gold standard’ for viral detection and characterization since the 1930s” and expect people to take him at his word.

Truth:

Actually, EM is quite limited in the identification of virus. It can not identify a virus past the Family level:

“EM, though it may not be able to identify a virus beyond the family level, at least points the way for more specific identification by other methods such as biochemical assays for specific pathogens.”

“Family” is one of the seven designations within the Taxonomy naming system in the Biological Sciences. Here are the designations from broadest to most narrow:

1. Kingdom
2. Phylum
3. Class
4. Order
5. Family
6. Genus
7. Species

HIV is Classified thusly:

• Family: Retroviridae
• Genus: Lentivirus
• Species: Human Immunodeficiency Virus

So if TEM can only identify down to the Family level and HIV is two levels LOWER, then how can TEM be the “gold standard” of detection?

IV. Statement:

This white paper presents a concise explanation of TEM and its usefulness in verifying the presence of suspected pathogens reported by less accurate technologies. More importantly, we propose the scientifically indisputable and cost-effective solution of employing TEM to confirm the presence or absence of viral pathogens.3

Citation 3:

While this White Paper often uses HIV tests as an example, the same technology and limitations applies in the testing of HPV, HCV, Ebola, and other pathogens.

Truth:

First of all, Citation 3 is not a citation at all, but a wide-ranging, blanket-definition that shows just how lazy and pathetic the Viral Forensics service is in challenging tried and true diagnostic testing modalities. Also, and this can not be over-stated: Dr. Rasnick never cites nor proves that other “technologies” are “less accurate”.

Secondly, I have already shown the extreme limitations “…of TEM and its usefulness in verifying the presence of suspected pathogens…” by proving that EM is limited to the “Family” level of taxonomy, the Biological Naming System.

Lastly, I have proven that this Viral Forensics White Paper is NOT “the scientifically indisputable and cost-effective solution of employing TEM to confirm the presence or absence of viral pathogens.”

The White Paper of Viral Forensics is so lugubrious and loaded with so much misinformation that this post is already bordering on 2,000 words. I will have to stop for now and finish this post at a later date as Part III.

I have written two separate posts about the saga of Jason Alexander Young. This will be my third. Mr. Young was the first “client” that Clark Baker attempted to provide proof that his “group” was beneficial in helping. Mr. Young has now been arrested again in Georgia for 7 counts of Reckless Endangerment after spending time in prison in Aiken, SC for the same offense.

My first post was about the original plea deal and was supported by court documents and news articles.

My second post was about my direct correspondence with Mr. Young via email and the telephone after Mr. Young discovered my original post about 3 years after his release. The second post showed just how much Mr. Young believed that Clark Baker’s involvement was crucial in securing his plea deal. In that post I provided Mr. Young’s complete comment to me which spurred my phone conversation with Mr. Young. The complete, unaltered comment is here. (All bolding in mine. All bad grammar and punctuation belong to Mr. Young)

Jason A. Young
Airfury83@gmail.com
66.87.102.90
Submitted on 2014/08/11 at 6:36 pm

“My name is Jason Young and I am the defendant mentioned in this case. I am sending you this comment while I sit in from of my bank here in Georgia. Not from a prison cell. Now i have made it a point not to look on the Internet since I was released from prison but my new wife text me this link for me to read. I ask you to please remove this page and I will tell you why. You are wrong. I sat in Aiken County Jail for over 10 months, housed in solitary confinement the entire time, only allowed out of my small cell for 1 hour a day all while the courts denied my fast and speedy trial because they said their docket was to full to accommodate. My daughter, who I love with all my heart and have even worked out to me getting for 2 weeks a month with her mother was 6 months old when I was arrested. Her mother is the one who started the investigation because we were fighting over custody. Long story short, I am a Freemason, member of Phi Beta Sigma, spoke at different churches in the area, cub scout leader and coached kids soccor. Even though I was well known in the community I did not take a plea deal of “no contest” to spare anyone embarrassment. My attorney (Aaron Walsh) did not give the affidavits to the prosecution until 3 days before they offered the plea deal. And yes, my attorney told me that I would be home by Christmas. All I thought is that I’m not going into a courtroom and saying that I’m guilty of something I’m not and the paper that my attorney gave me even had a release date of December 12, 2011 if I can remember. Aaron told me that I can fight this once I get out through a PCR. Now being that I have never been in this situation before I believed everything he told me. I should not have become I took the plea as instructed and was not out by Christmas. All and all I only did a year and five months in prison. But when someone is housed in solitary confinement for no reason other then being trained by the military to escape, they would do anything they can to get their lives back. Anything… If it was not for Clark Baker my life would have been over with. I owe everything to him. But to say the solicitor offered the plea to spare the so called victims (none of witch had tested positive) is so wrong. The solicitor has tried a case just like mine 5 years before that and wanted to make a name for herself. She told my daughters mother that they were no interested in a plea deal because I was an animal that should have been stopped. That was told to her 2 weeks before the plea deal. So what is the difference between that moment and the deal???? The affidavits… So please do not sit in the outsiders point of view and act as though you were riding shotgun in the car with me. If anyone knows the truth, I would. So with all due respect sir, you are wrong… And don’t try and judge me due to this so called crime spree when even if someone does have HIV, they are no different then you or I. They are normal people who just want to be treated the same as others. On ALL levels. If they don’t disclose their status to their partner they are ethically wrong. But it has no place in any court room. Just like have hepatitis C is not a crime not to disclose then so should hiv. By allowing this to remain a crime to telling people that they are not personally responsible for their own health. When it’s your responsibility to protect yourself. Not someone else. Thank you for your time and understanding.”

Mr. Young has now been arrested a second time for sleeping with women and not disclosing his HIV Positive status. Less than two weeks before his arrest, Mr. Young left the following comment on my blog:

Jason Young
Alexanderjason8833@gmail.com
66.87.101.77
Submitted on 2015/08/04 at 2:26 pm

“All of this about Clark Baker is a lie. I have been out of jail for a few years and have put my life back together after this ordeal. I have been married now over a year and have a child on the way. Both my wife and child are STILL negative. Clark Baker saved my life. As for the plea. Let someone keep you in solitary confinement for over 10 months, only allowing you an hour a day to take a shower, watch tv, write letters, read letters, use the phone, clean your cell and exercise. Then back in your cell you go. Imagine the only thing you look forward to is meal time. All this after serving your country. You would have taken a plea to if it ment getting out 2 less then 2 months so that you can hold your 1 year old child again. Now i have already spoken to you over the phone about what I went through and what happened. Why you still post things like this about Clark is besides me. Either way, you talk about the truth. Then tell the truth.”

There are many things about these two comments that stand out for me (and I have highlighted them) and show why Mr. Baker has exhibited an undue influence on Mr. Young that may have contributed to Mr. Young’s reckless behavior.

Before Mr. Baker became involved in Mr. Young’s life, Mr. Young understood the ramifications of his behavior. Mr. Young was adhering to his medical treatment regimen. He understood the science and the positive impact on his health. However, after his experience with Clark Baker, Mr. Young stopped believing in the science of HIV and the medication that would save himself, his wife and his unborn child. After Clark Baker’s undue influence, Mr. Young has put himself, his wife, his children and countless women whom he seduced via social media at unnecessary risk. Mr. Young is a grown adult who has lived through this horror before. His own words above tell the real-life truth of the horror he experienced:

• I sat in Aiken County Jail for over 10 months, housed in solitary confinement the entire time, only allowed out of my small cell for 1 hour a day…
• Let someone keep you in solitary confinement for over 10 months, only allowing you an hour a day to take a shower, watch tv, write letters, read letters, use the phone, clean your cell and exercise. Then back in your cell you go. Imagine the only thing you look forward to is meal time. All this after serving your country.

Mr. Young has either forgotten or chose to ignore these obscene realities and decided to supplant his real-life experiences with Mr. Baker’s fantasy of lies and bullshit. This denial is the only thing that can explain why Mr. Young has chosen to dive head first into a life of misery and possible death for himself, his wife, his children and the women to whom he has used to his fulfill his own selfish biological urges.

And Mr. Baker’s culpability can not be ignored in any future criminal charges.