ReThinking AIDS is a Cult, just like Scientology

The past several years have brought many documentaries about Sceintology as well as books by previous Scientologists. They all tell the same tale about Scientology and show it to be a cult. One thing that is very disturbing is “The Church’s” penchant for trying to destroy the lives of former Scientologists who turn away from “The Church” and tell the truth. They call these former members “SP’s” or “Suppresive Persons”.

This is the same tactic that ReThinking AIDS has taken over the years and is still happening today. And it happens in several ways.

The first way is very subversive and spits on the graves of their dead. Many times when current AIDS Denialists die, those still alive begin to make very public assumptions about the illicit drug use of their own dead. They will go to any length to make it appear as if their death was from anything except HIV; even disparaging their own. You can peruse this list of Dead Denialists at for yourself and do your own research. I would suggest starting with: Mark Griffiths, Huw Christie Williams, David Pasquerilli and Jody Wells.

The most recent example I could find of RA and other living Denialists accusing dead dissidents of recreational drugs causing their death is that of Emery Taylor. If you look at some of the comments on this blog post, especially by Elizabeth Ely, you will see examples of such heinous victim blaming.

Another tactic of RA and the living denialists is to blame ARV’s on the death of current denialists. I was contacted by the longtime boyfriend of Rex Poindexter, John Boucher, back when I wrote a previous blog, Dissidents4Dumbees. Rex was featured prominently in the AIDS Denial propaganda cult film, The Other Side of AIDS. John told me how angry he and Rex were at Maggiore and others because they all turned their backs on him because he turned to ARV’s while on his death bed in the hospital. John told me specifically that Maggiore herself told Rex to not take ARV’s while he was dying in the hospital. You can read a beautiful tribute to Rex by John here.

RA and other living denialists also blamed ARV’s for the death of Karri Stokely, despite the fact that Ms. Stokely died over four years after stopping ARV’s. Although the living denialists used Ms. Stokely as a martyr, her husband and children have not upheld the martyrdom for their deceased spouse and mother. That speaks volumes to me. Just as the husband and only living child of Christine Maggiore, Robin and Charlie Scovill, have chosen to not carry the torch of martyrdom of Christine.

A third example of how RA likes to destroy the lives of those who have had the audacity to leave RA is happening currently. David Crowe, President (and horcrux) of ReThinking AIDS is using the facebook page of RA to attack the character of John Strangis. What is most distressing about this attack is that Crowe is doing it on a closed facebook page; Mr. Strangis has no way of directly defending himself.

It is equally distressing to me that Crowe is being extremely hypocritical in his character assassination of Mr. Strangis.  David Crowe starts the discussion with a childish taunt about a blog post Mr. Strangis made on his personal site about volunteers for a new HIV medication. Crowe whines:

Come help John Strangis make a difference…to BMS’s bottom line. You too can be a guinea pig…No experience needed, just misplaced trust and naivety.

On February 4th, Crowe says:

David CroweIt’s important to comment on this.

Then, one day later on February 5th, after Mr. Strangis replied to Crowe via video on Strangis’ own site (since Crowe will not allow Strangis to defend himself directly on RA facebook page) Crowe cowardly backtracks thusly:

David CroweDavid CroweI think it’s worth posting, but not worth responding to…
So what could have changed Horcrux Crowe’s mind from the importance of commenting…to it not being worth responding to?  From the comments it seems that Crowe did not foresee that many at RA would actually click over to Strangis’ site and view the video for themselves. Nor did Horcrux Crowe anticipate that some of his readers might actually form their own opinion of the scenario in direct conflict of his own narrow view.
While this is somewhat optimistic to me that the current crop of dissidents do not swallow hook, line and sinker what their “leaders” feed them, we still have a long way to go to stop the Cult of AIDS Denial.

Elizabeth Ely: “Hey, you got your crazy chocolate in my crazy peanut butter.”

There are 3 characteristics common to AIDS Denialists that have continually fascinated, frustrated and frightened me about them:

  1. Irrational Intellectual Arrogance
  2. Complete lack of Self Awareness
  3. Extreme Hypocrisy

This post is going to focus on the last two and was brought about by a ridiculous comment by Elizabeth Ely on the facebook page for her How Positive Are You? podcast. It seems that Ms. Ely has decided there is one conspiracy theory that is too crazy, even for her. This particular idea is so crazy that Ms. Ely does not want it to ever be mentioned in the same breath as her pet AIDS Denial theory because it might tarnish the brand.

Q: What could possibly be so “out there” that even Ms. Ely does not believe it?

A: That the earth is flat.

Here is her comment:

Has anyone else noticed this? There’s suddenly a big pile of YouTubes out there extolling “flat earth.” All I can think is, the PR geniuses out there are going to “pump and dump” this idea, “pumping” it until enough AIDS rethinkers and other truth tellers jump on, then “dumping” it. They’ll “prove” that way that we’re all a bunch of nuts. I can think of no other reason why all this so suddenly appeared and spread so quickly, with certain people in this community targeted for the message. And looky here . . . clips from “How Positive Are You,” beginning with Celia Ingrid Farber, then crazy stuff about the flat earth.

Ms. Ely goes on to chastise a reader who believes the Flat Earth Theory and demands this reader not discuss his crazy belief while also discussing AIDS because it might “confuse our message on AIDS, providing an opportunity to discredit the whole thing…”

Ms. Ely goes on to provide further advice while using herself as an example:

“And seriously, I have some pretty wild views on some things too. I base those views on some good information and reasoning. I am never bringing that to the AIDS discussion. Then people might feel they must reject the AIDS information if they are not willing to also look into those other things.”

I would have to agree with Ms. Ely that she does indeed “have some pretty wild views on some things too.”  Ely does not believe in the existence of HIV, HepC or any virus, actually. She also said in a recent interview with World Beyond Belief, “the idea that cancer spreads in the body is complete baloney.”  Ely also believes that climate change is a hoax, vaccines cause autism, that GMOs are bad and who knows what else. Ms. Ely needs to realize and accept that most people who believe in one crazy conspiracy theory ascribe to many others as well. She can’t pick and chose what nuts she lies down with and it’s hypocritical for her to arbitrarily chastise her fellow nuts for discussing their other crazy beliefs in conjunction with her equally crazy HIV belief.

It should also be noted that in Ely’s first statement above  where she claims that the Flat Earth Theory is being propagated by “PR geniuses…to prove that we are all a bunch of nuts.”  This statement is also a baseless conspiracy theory as well as proof that Ely is paranoid. The truth is, the Flat Earth Theory is being propagated and supported by the very people with whom Ms. Ely just gave a 2 hour interview; The World Beyond Belief. This is from their website and was published on July 18, 2015:

The focus of this WBB surrounds elements of the NWO that would be greatly hampered if the Flat Earth theory was proven and subsequently accepted as true by a certain amount of the population. Beginning with a quick review of some of the major deceptions of the 20th century, it is noted that many of these tricks are still actively deceiving much of the population up to the current time. The Ball Earth theory comes equipped with an epistemology that involves not trusting one’s 5 senses and seeing only authority (science) as the absolute last word on everything. This authority is eventually transferred to the mainstream media, Hollywood and the most sophisticated mass deception mechanism in the world known as NASA. Since the control matrix is Satanic in basis and structure WBB explores how this fits with the Flat Earth model – to find out that IT DOESN’T.

In conclusion, Ms. Ely is once again demonstrating her lack of self awareness as to her own level of crazy beliefs as well as her hypocrisy for denouncing others for their beliefs and telling them in what capacity they can discuss those beliefs.

Lastly, here is a partial list of the craziness that the people at World Beyond Belief espouse: (You may have to google many of these as they are waaaaayyyy out there.)

1. Voting in the US is fake. People vote but their votes are not truly counted. Politicians are really “representatives of the satanic cabal”.
2. State Sponsored Trauma Based Mind Control
3.  The New Age agenda was created and orchestrated by Luciferians from the Theosophical Society and later picked up by the dark psychologists at the Tavistock Institute.
4. Climate Change is a hoax.
5. Recent Paris attack was a “false flag”.
6. Planet Nibiru: Is this the planet of the Anunaki or simply a destroyer from the heavens?
7. Project Blue Beam that outlines how all of the world religions will be united under an Alien Messiah. This Alien Messiah is a false god and actually a false alien.
8. Agenda 2030
9. Agenda 21
10. World Beyond Belief welcomes the artist and creator Seven to discuss her latest endeavors and the more recent incidences of her personal torture and persecutions at the hands of the Satanist Cabal that controls the world. During this episode, she reviews how her intellectual property, worth undisputed billions of dollars, was stolen and resold around the world to provide riches for the very rich and finance false flags and general repression of the masses through mind control.
11. Moon landing was fake.
12. Part of the Luciferian control matrix is Artificial Intelligence
13. The earth is flat
14. Underground tunnels connecting Wal-marts with Deep Underground Military Bases (DUMBS) used by the military and aliens (from outer space, not illegal from Mexico).
15. Saturnian Matrix.

Shilling for Viral Forensics: Elizabeth Ely’s Editorial of Errors

Elizabeth Ely and David Crowe are using their How Positive Are You podcast to shill for Viral Forensics. They are even trying to scam a referral fee for a “service” that does not require a referral. I’ll discuss that in more detail in another post when I deconstruct the actual podcast with David Rasnick.  For this post I want to take a look at a post by Ms. Ely ahead of the actual podcast on the importance of accuracy in testing.

Ms. Ely cleverly called her post an “editorial” which is nothing more than a person’s opinion. However, after crafting a caring, nurturing tone in her opening paragraph, Ms. Ely immediately assumed an air of authority on the subject. This propensity for those lacking in any scientific discipline to assume such authority is both frustrating and humorous to me. Being a trained and certified Medical Laboratory Scientist who actually does diagnostic testing on a daily basis, I find it difficult to imagine the amount of hubris and arrogance Ms. Ely must possess to speak with supposed authority on this subject. After receiving a B.S. in Biology I then spent another year in MT school, 8 to 5 Monday thru Friday. I then spent six months training in an actual hospital laboratory after which I had to pass a very strict test that took several hours. Now I am required to perform 12 hours of continuing education every year to maintain my certification. Ms. Ely calls herself an “Alternative Health Journalist” but her contently page leaves much to be desired in any journalistic field.

Let’s get to Ms. Ely’s actual post. I first want to reiterate something I have discussed many times: In the context of any scientific discussion, citations to supporting evidence, especially in the form of peer reviewed literature, are paramount. I recently documented how Mr. Rasnick’s own White Paper for Viral Forensics is woefully deficient in this area. Ms. Ely’s “editorial” suffers in much the same way; Her citations are simply circular logic that track back to other AIDS denialists’ articles which themselves have no supporting documentation OR her citations prove exactly the opposite of what she is trying to prove.

I. Sciencey-Sounding Shit

“The commercially available tests for “HIV positivity” or “viral load” have never been validated to the presence of live, infectious virus in human blood.”

WOW! That sounds impressive. But when you stop to consider the statement you realize that it is totally lacking in substance. It also makes zero sense. Furthermore, Ms. Ely has no knowledge of how these tests were designed, engineered or validated. To make such a bold statement would require at least a somewhat detailed explanation along with a link to a valid, verifiable source.

Not only is the statement lacking substance, it is also not true. Dr. Peter Duesberg, a once respected virologist and the Father of AIDS Denial has publicly stated that HIV has been isolated and validated by the most rigorous methods modern science has to offer:

HIV exists, and has been properly identified as a unique retrovirus on the grounds that (i) it has been isolated – even from its own virion structure – in the form of an infectious, molecularly cloned HIV DNA that is able to induce the synthesis of a reverse transcriptase containing virion, and (ii) that HIV-specific, viral DNA can be identified only in infected, but not in uninfected human cells. I will base my case for the isolation of HIV on the most rigorous method available to date, ie. molecular cloning of infectious HIV DNA, rather than only on the much less stringent, traditional “rules for isolation of a retrovirus … discussed at the Pasteur Institute, Paris, in 1973” that were stated criteria of isolation in the Continuum”s Missing virus reward (Continuum, 1996) . Indeed I will show that molecular cloning of infectious HIV DNA exceeds the criteria of the old “Pasteur rules”.

Ms. Ely’s next sentence is equally clueless:

“The accepted procedures of microbiology would require culturing cells from live persons and then looking for evidence of “HIV” in them under an electron microscope…”

Again, Ms. Ely is not only wrong on this matter, she offers no source to support her erroneous statement. Furthermore, this “accepted procedure” is not what Viral Forensics offers either. Viral Forensics simply looks at whole blood neither cultured nor amplified.  As I have shown before, Dr. Hans Gelderbloom, the Father of Electron Microscopy has stated that viewing whole blood with EM is not adequate nor sufficient for finding HIV in whole blood:

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.

But who needs to listen to actual experts in their field like Dr. Duesberg or Dr. Gelderbloom when you have an actual Alternative Health Journalist?

II. Commercial Tests are not Sufficient for Diagnosis of HIV

“Further, all commercially available “HIV tests” and “viral load” assays are packaged with warnings that they are not sufficient to diagnose HIV infection or any known disease without also considering clinical symptoms.”  (bolding mine)

Let’s first consider what I put in bold. That is just a silly statement. Testing and symptom presentation go hand-in-hand. A patient that presents with vomiting and chills will get a plethora of tests and questions from the doctor because those symptoms could be a myriad of illnesses. You wouldn’t want to go to an ER with a week long persistent headache and the doctor to immediately schedule a brain surgery. How about a little common sense.

Ms. Ely’s main goal here is simple obfuscation about the reliability of the tests. If you click on the link to the word “warnings” you will be directed to a page with several package inserts for HIV tests. This is a favorite gambit of the AIDS Denialists; create the false illusion that even the test manufacturers admit their tests are fatally flawed.

Let’s discuss a few things about these inserts:

  1. Each insert should be viewed as giving the reader the facts. If you are an AIDS Denialist trying to misinform, you can do as Ms. Ely does and make a blanket statement to obfuscate the truth and mislead and scare the reader. The truth is, the inserts state how the tests should be used; responsibly, taking into account symptoms and advising repeating of positive results and if still positive, further testing with different modalities. In other words, responsibly.
  2. The tests themselves state how highly accurate the tests are. Here is one example from the simplest test on the list: “OraQuick test will produce one false positive result out of about every 5,000 tests in uninfected individuals.”
  3. Not all the tests state they are not intended for diagnosis. The tests for diagnosis state there should be confirmation testing. The tests that explicitly state they are not for diagnosis NOR confirmation are those tests that are strictly for following disease progression and prognosis.

III. The old “cross reactivity” trope

“They (clinicians, doctors, healthcare workers) also never, to our knowledge, warn patients of the cross-reactions documented in mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific papers.”

Again, this is just a scare tactic. In fact, as Ms. Ely admits, these cross-reactions are well documented by a plethora of “mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific papers”. Even the previous link to the package inserts states this on many of those inserts. What Ms. Ely wants the reader to think is that these cross-reactions happen every time and not the rare occurrence that the peer reviewed papers prove them to be. That is also what duplicate testing and confirmation tests are for. No doctor, clinician or health care worker would ever tell a person that their tests are definitive and they should not nor could not seek a second or even third opinion.

IV. The situation is getting worse…NOT!

This is the most ridiculous, misleading and completely false statement Ms. Ely makes:

“The situation may be getting even worse, as the CDC announced in April 2014 that testing is not even required for a diagnosis of “HIV infection.” It is also widely – yet quietly – acknowledged that the Western blot, long used to “verify” an initial ELISA test, is problematic and no longer considered a useful confirmatory test.”

Ms. Ely’s first outrageous statement that “testing is not even required…” is complete non-sense and her link simply circles back to an AIDS Denialist podcast that is not true. Once again Ms. Ely thinks she can get away with making an outrageous statement and not link to a legitimate, verifiable source. As for her next statement that WB “is problematic and no longer considered a useful confirmatory test” is both false and misleading and demands further explanation as well as citations to legitimate, verifiable sources. The truth is, the WB is still used but newer, more appropriate supplemental tests are suggested such as Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests. The fact is, HIV testing is now in it’s Fourth Generation of testing and includes combination Antigen/Antibody tests. Also, each generation of testing is improved upon and HIV testing is definitely some of the most accurate testing there is.

In conclusion, Ms. Ely has no education or experience in this field and her title of “Alternative Health Journalist” is circumspect at best. Furthermore, Ms. Ely has proven over the years that she has chosen to believe that HIV tests are fraudulent and worthless and her only agenda is to deceive the general public based on nothing more than her emotionally informed belief.

Elizabeth Ely Explains the Science used by Viral Forensics, LLC

Nothing makes me happier than when AIDS Denialists discuss science and show just how pathetically ignorant they really are. The latest entry is by Elizabeth Ely at the How Positive Are You? facebook page where she tries to explain to someone the procedure and technology of the latest AIDS Denialist scam, Viral Forensics. I guess that is what she is attempting to do. I don’t have the ability to translate her rambling non-sense.

Elizabeth Ely Elizabeth Ely It’s a service that leaves the AIDS debate behind. They examine those usual “particles resembling HIV” in a sample done by the usual, contaminating methods. That’s what “HIV” looks like. Then they examine the patient’s blood just as it is, basically. If they find “particles resembling HIV,” okey-dokey. If they don’t, well I guess you’re not “infected.” No matter what kind of “viral load” you just got. 

The discussion came about when Ms. Ely promised a new HPAY? podcast with David Rasnick of Viral Forensics. She promised to post it in the next few days and when she does, I will deconstruct the crazy as best I can. I am giddy with anticipation!

Clark Baker Admits Electron Microscopy is NOT the Gold Standard

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.

Clark Baker Bites the Hand that Fed Him: No Longer Loyal to Robert Leppo

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.

Viral Forensics White Paper is Not Worth the Paper it is Printed On: Part II in a Series

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.


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

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.


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.


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.


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.


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.