Questioning AIDS 
with Christine Maggiore 

Good Numbers vs Good Health 


Why Do My Numbers Say I’m Sick When I’m Not? 

Dear Christine,
 I tested positive two years ago. Before and since testing positive, my health has been fine. I feel normal and have no particular complaints or problems. Despite this, my doctor says that “my numbers” show I am sick and that I need to be on drug treatment. He says I will die unless I start soon. 

While everyone around me has the flu, I’m fine. How can my T-cell numbers show one thing and my health show another? 
Confused in OC 

Dear Confused, 
Lots of people write to me with questions about T-cell counts. Doctors use these measurements to declare that people are sick when they are clinically well and even though T-cell count has not been shown to provide reliable information about wellness, illness or the state of the immune system. 

If you check the medical literature you’ll find there are no properly designed and conducted studies establishing idea that T-cell counts are a reliable measure of health. For example, AIDS scientists have yet to compare T-cell counts in HIV-positive and HIV-negative matched cohorts. Matched cohorts would be HIV-positive and HIV-negative diagnosed people who are matched for “AIDS risks” such as hemophilia, IV drug use, a history of multiple STDs and other infections, etc. There are also no studies that follow T-cell counts in the general population over time or in a variety of life circumstances such as during periods of stress, as we grow older, among menopausal or menstruating women, etc. 

One study conducted on Olympic athletes in the early 1980s showed their T-cell counts averaged between 400 and 600. Ironically, until the mid- 90s, a T-cell count of 500 or less in an HIV positive was considered indicative of immune collapse and a need for aggressive therapy with AIDS drugs. According to that guideline on T-cell counts, exceptionally healthy young athletes would be regarded as facing imminent illness and death. 

Contrary to popular assumptions, a number of well-respected mainstream AIDS doctors and researchers question the use of surrogate markers like T-cells and viral load to measure or predict health. AIDS researcher Dr. Mario Roederer of Stanford University School of Medicine remarks that “the blood is an imperfect reflection of the immune system . . . the facts that HIV uses CD4 cells as its primary receptor and CD T-cell numbers decline during AIDS are only an unfortunate coincidence that have led us astray from understanding the immunopatho-genisis of [AIDS]... “ 

Roderer also notes that researchers Pakker, et al have produced “powerful evidence that the increase in cell numbers observed shortly after initiation with HAART (Highly Active Anti-Retrovial Therapy) are caused by T-cell redistribution and not T-cell proliferation.” What this means is that the AIDS cocktails aren’t causing the production of new T-cells, rather they redistribute ones already present by bringing T-cells out of lymphoid tissues and into the peripheral blood where they can be counted. The common belief that HAART increases T-cells is like believing you have new living room furniture because furniture normally found in your bedroom is moved to your living room. (Quotes are from “Getting to the HAART of T-cell Dynamics” Nature Medicine Volume 4 No 2 February 1998) 

Jay Levy, MD, a respected mainstream AIDS doctor from the University of California at San Francisco has much to say about T-cell and viral load measurements in his article “Is There Truth In Numbers?”: 

-”Peripheral blood lymphocyte numbers [T-cell numbers] represent only a small percentage (3%) of the total T-cells in the body...” 
- “Changes in CD4+ cell levels do not appear to reflect consistently the clinical outcome of antiviral therapy.” 
-”Redistribution of these cells from lymphoid sources, not necessarily de novo synthesis [new production], appears to be the mechanism for the increase in number.” 
- “...CD4+ cell levels during therapy have not correlated with survival.” 

(Quotes are from the Journal of the American Medical Association July 10, 1996, pp 161-162) 

You can also find official AIDS publications from the U.S. government acknowledging a remarkable lack of evidence for assumptions about T-cells. Here are a couple of revealing quotes from “The Relationship Between HIV and AIDS,” a mysteriously authorless document from the National Institutes of Health that purports to prove that HIV causes AIDS: 

- “HIV infects and kills CD4+T lymphocytes in vitro, although scientists have developed immortal T-cell lines in order to propagate HIV in the laboratory.” Translation: Scientists can only show HIV infecting and killing T-cells in lab dishes, not in human beings, and ironically, scientists grow the lab culture known as HIV in T-cells that are never adversely affected by the presence of this HIV (“immortal T-cell lines” are T-cells that never die). 

- “Several mechanisms of CD4+ T-cell killing have been observed in lentivirus systems in vitro and may explain the progressive loss of these cells in HIV-infected individuals.” Translation: AIDS researchers have seen viruses similar to HIV kill T-cells in lab dishes and somehow their observations “may explain” T-cell loss in HIV positives.

 - “Other auto-immune phenomena may also contribute to CD4+ T-cell death since HIV envelope proteins share some degree of homology with certain major histocompatibility complex type II molecules.” Translation: Other things can cause T-cell loss, and by the way, the very proteins that are supposed to be unique to HIV — hence their use in tests claimed to identify the specific presence of HIV — are not unique components of HIV. 

I hope this helps you. Let me know how it goes. 

Will My Viral Load Numbers Rise? 
Dear Christine, 
I have just stopped HAART because of lipodystrophy (hollow cheeks, lumps on my back, high cholesterol, etc) and other side effects like constant diarrhea. Since stopping, my viral load numbers are up. I’m scared. My doctor says my T-cells will decrease, my viral load will continue to rise and I’ll get sick with pneumonia. What do you say? 
Scared Guy 

Dear Scared, I can understand why you have stopped HAART with side effects like that and I can also understand your concern about getting ill. I think the best way to evaluate your situation is to examine what viral load is measuring and what the drugs can and cannot do. 

Viral load is not able to detect or quantify HIV. The test picks up scraps of genetic material, not whole infectious virus, and is not even approved for use as a diagnostic. The test kit literature says the test “is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or to confirm the presence of HIV infection.” 

Four years ago, when I had a load of 359,000 I was fine. Ironically, when I had a low load of 980, I got sick with pneumonia. (I recovered quickly using natural therapies and my HIV-negative younger brother who had pneumonia at the same time took longer to get better —pneumonia happens.)

I recently reviewed the medical records of someone we helped in a legal case. His viral load went from undetectable to 750,000 and then dropped to around 150,00 without drug therapy. I say “around” because his blood was sent to two different labs on the same day (using the same drawing of blood) and the two tests came back with a difference of almost 200,000 between them. His load then went way up again and then down to a little over 2,500. During all the ups and downs, there was no correlation between viral load and T-cell counts, which were done at the same time. When the load went high, sometimes T-cells did, too. When T-cells dropped, his viral load went both down and up. During the whole monitoring period — almost two years of up and down tests that did not correlate with each other — this person was in perfectly normal health. Every entry on his medical record during the time notes all was normal and that he had no yeast, swollen glands, infections, diarrhea or other disorders one might see in someone who is immune suppressed. 

The newest studies show what HAART drugs can do is inadvertently inhibit the proteases of certain pneumonias, and some fungal and bacterial infections. This unintended effect may help someone who is very ill, but does not mean HAART works against HIV, nor that it’s the best choice for someone experiencing illness, or that it makes a good treatment for people who test positive and aren’t ill. 

If you consider that HAART is supposed to act specifically against HIV but that it is so non-specific it inhibits the proteases of other microbes as well as the human digestive proteases, and that it can cause metabolic disorders, fat displacement, digestive troubles, pancreatitis, kidney stones, liver failure, heart attacks and strokes, I don’t know if HAART is the best way to prevent illness. 

I think your decision about HAART should be based on a risk/benefit ratio and all the facts about lab numbers. If I can help further please let me know. 
Take care, 

ALIVE & WELL Alternative AIDS Information Network (the organization formerly known as HEAL Los Angeles), offers free information, free meetings and classes challenging the HIV-AIDS paradigm. Call toll-free for details (877) 92-ALIVE, or check out our very comprehensive website:   Also e-mail 

Return to the May/June Index page