‘Do not avoid a test for HIV’

First published in News Bicester Advertiser: Photograph of the Author by

A WOMAN living with HIV has called on people across Oxfordshire to get themselves tested for the disease.

Oxford resident “Mercy”, 40, who was diagnosed in 2004 after seeking treatment for abdominal pain.

The mum-of-three, who wished to remain anonymous, has spoken out for national HIV testing week.

She said: “It was devastating, it was like it was the end of my life and initially I couldn’t believe it.”

Her condition ultimately led to the breakdown in her marriage.

But with her HIV under control with three tablets a day, she said she was grateful she found out when she did.

She said: “It’s no longer the death sentence it was.

“It’s very important to go for the test because you know more about yourself and you are able to take care of yourself.

“If I hadn’t known I would have exposed my ex-husband to HIV.

“You can’t take care of something you don’t know about.

“It will save more people from being affected and it will ultimately safe lives.”

National HIV testing week start ed yesterday and runs until Thursday.

The Oxford GUM Medicine Clinic based at the Churchill Hospital is calling for people who may be at risk to get themselves tested.

Related links

Consultant Dr Jackie Sherrard said there were 499 people they were aware of living with HIV in Oxfordshire.

If diagnosed early enough, the majority of victims have the same life expectancy as those without the condition.

Dr Sherrard said: “There are more people living with HIV year- on-year because treatment is keeping people alive and well.

“If they get diagnosed later where the immune systems are quite damaged, it is more complicated and more serious.”

The clinic is particularly keen to see people who are most at risk, including men who have sex with men and those sexually active in countries where HIV is common.

SIMPLE AND QUICK

Testing is done via a blood sample, with results back within a few days.

Those deemed higher risk may be offered a pinprick rapid HIV test, with results coming back much faster.

Specialist nurse practitioner Nellia Sande said: “I don’t think there’s anything to lose getting tested.

“We are a very friendly bunch and we try and make it as comfortable as possible for the patient.”

Drop-in clinics are held at the Churchill from 12.15pm to 3.15pm Monday to Friday and at the Orchard Health Centre, Banbury, on Mondays and Fridays from 9.15am to 12.15pm.

To find out more, visit sexualhealthoxfordshire.nhs.uk

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:21pm Sat 24 Nov 12

Lord Palmerstone says...

The clinic is particularly keen to see people who are most at risk, including men who have sex with men and those sexually active in countries where HIV is common
The latter group presumably don't live in our country so it is tricky to understand the message, particularly as intravenous drug users appear to have been excluded.
Moreover the name of the appellant, even if pseudonymous, does not appear to be an Oxfordshire name either. Most confusing.
The clinic is particularly keen to see people who are most at risk, including men who have sex with men and those sexually active in countries where HIV is common The latter group presumably don't live in our country so it is tricky to understand the message, particularly as intravenous drug users appear to have been excluded. Moreover the name of the appellant, even if pseudonymous, does not appear to be an Oxfordshire name either. Most confusing. Lord Palmerstone
  • Score: 0

11:50am Sun 25 Nov 12

Tomás Brewster says...

Fran Bardsley, this is misleading given the fact that no HIV test Kit directly detects "HIV" itself, and since the test kits currently used to diagnose alleged "HIV infection" only rely on surrogate markers such as antibodies or genetic material, a study should exist somewhere in the published medical literature which shows that at least one type of surrogate test for HIV has been validated for accuracy by the direct isolation of HIV itself from people who test antibody, RNA , DNA positive or negative.

A study that validates HIV test kits is missing from the medical literature and It has been 30 years since the alleged discovery of HIV and the development and marketing of the HIV antibody test kits, yet it appears that no study ever validated HIV tests by the direct purification of HIV from persons who test positive or have a “viral load.”

The accuracy of the HIV antibody tests used around the world to say someone is infected with HIV has never been properly established, and there’s no information in the published medical literature showing how many positive tests occur in the absence of infection with HIV/LAV.

The accuracy of an antibody or other surrogate test for a virus can only be established by verifying that positive results are found exclusively in people who actually have the virus. This standard for determining accuracy was not met in 1984 when the first HIV antibody test was developed.

To this day, positive HIV antibody screening tests (ELISAs) are verified by a second antibody test of unknown accuracy (HIV Western Blots) or by “viral load,” another unvalidated test that detects bits of genetic material (RNA or DNA) that are thought to be associated with the virus.

A validation study would prove the ethical and scientific basis for the practice of telling people who test antibody, DNA , or RNA positive that they are infected with "HIV". Without evidence of validation by direct purification of the virus, a diagnosis of HIV infection rests on unverified beliefs and unfounded assumptions.

Current HIV tests signal the presence of antibodies that react with an assortment of proteins associated with HIV, however, none of these proteins are unique or specific to HIV. Without a validation study, no honest, well-informed doctor can say with any degree of certainty that someone who tests positive is indeed infected with HIV.

“viral load” tests cannot be used to validate HIV antibody tests because viral load tests are not able to directly detect HIV itself. Instead, these tests detect only fragments of genetic material (DNA or RNA) associated with HIV.

To date, there is no study showing that the DNA or RNA attributed to HIV is found only in people who are actually infected with HIV using direct isolation as a gold standard to determine true infection. In fact FDA approved HIV antibody test kits disclaim themselves for this lack of "Gold Standard" by stating that this test is:

“not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic to confirm the presence of HIV infection”

Searching the vast published medical literature, there appears to be no evidence showing that popular interpretations of the significance or "accuracy" of HIV test kits are scientifically valid or correct.
Fran Bardsley, this is misleading given the fact that no HIV test Kit directly detects "HIV" itself, and since the test kits currently used to diagnose alleged "HIV infection" only rely on surrogate markers such as antibodies or genetic material, a study should exist somewhere in the published medical literature which shows that at least one type of surrogate test for HIV has been validated for accuracy by the direct isolation of HIV itself from people who test antibody, RNA , DNA positive or negative. A study that validates HIV test kits is missing from the medical literature and It has been 30 years since the alleged discovery of HIV and the development and marketing of the HIV antibody test kits, yet it appears that no study ever validated HIV tests by the direct purification of HIV from persons who test positive or have a “viral load.” The accuracy of the HIV antibody tests used around the world to say someone is infected with HIV has never been properly established, and there’s no information in the published medical literature showing how many positive tests occur in the absence of infection with HIV/LAV. The accuracy of an antibody or other surrogate test for a virus can only be established by verifying that positive results are found exclusively in people who actually have the virus. This standard for determining accuracy was not met in 1984 when the first HIV antibody test was developed. To this day, positive HIV antibody screening tests (ELISAs) are verified by a second antibody test of unknown accuracy (HIV Western Blots) or by “viral load,” another unvalidated test that detects bits of genetic material (RNA or DNA) that are thought to be associated with the virus. A validation study would prove the ethical and scientific basis for the practice of telling people who test antibody, DNA , or RNA positive that they are infected with "HIV". Without evidence of validation by direct purification of the virus, a diagnosis of HIV infection rests on unverified beliefs and unfounded assumptions. Current HIV tests signal the presence of antibodies that react with an assortment of proteins associated with HIV, however, none of these proteins are unique or specific to HIV. Without a validation study, no honest, well-informed doctor can say with any degree of certainty that someone who tests positive is indeed infected with HIV. “viral load” tests cannot be used to validate HIV antibody tests because viral load tests are not able to directly detect HIV itself. Instead, these tests detect only fragments of genetic material (DNA or RNA) associated with HIV. To date, there is no study showing that the DNA or RNA attributed to HIV is found only in people who are actually infected with HIV using direct isolation as a gold standard to determine true infection. In fact FDA approved HIV antibody test kits disclaim themselves for this lack of "Gold Standard" by stating that this test is: “not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic to confirm the presence of HIV infection” Searching the vast published medical literature, there appears to be no evidence showing that popular interpretations of the significance or "accuracy" of HIV test kits are scientifically valid or correct. Tomás Brewster
  • Score: 0

2:16pm Sun 25 Nov 12

Raul Palma says...

Absolutely right, Mr. Tomas Brewster, to recommend some one to take the "HIV test", first one should have had a profound research to see if it's a good idea at all, and one of the advantages of being the "HIV infection" on stage for the last 31 years, is that we know more and have much more detailed data and information ever before, obvious. Lots of things have been said since, for example, where did Robert Gallo take the alleged HIV proteins from?

In an interview, Gallo was asked «why did you use hydrocortisone in your cell cultures» and he said «because we need it to stimulate the cell culture growth» that was the first time he admitted publicly that he had to use hydrocortisone to stimulate the cell culture growth, and today we know that the hydrocortisone does not stimulate but suppress the cell activity, and that is how he produced a cell-stress situation, in which the stressed cells produce a sort of proteins that don't produce in normal circumstances. These stress-proteins are the ones used in the "HIV tests".

So, it's quite logical that the majority of people that tested positive for these inaccurate tests, are indeed people that are in some sort of persistent stress, for example, toxic (drugs, poppers, medicines -even anti-HIV drugs-, foreign proteins in factor VIII, etc.), psyco-emotional (the intense and continuous over-production of the inner drugs of our bodies), infectious (recurrent infections with STD's or others) or even nutritional (not healthy habits always go together with lack or wrong nutrition, also the case in Africa, Asia, ect.)

That explains very well the good state of health of some friends of mine that are living for more than 25 years, never taken any anti-HIV drugs, because they did question the given diagnose, they did their own personal research, and they did look to the right cause for explaining the diagnose: the stress-producing factor in their lives, and once they removed it, everything was over, never worried again.

Another big question to elucidate is: why so many HIV negative people to date have done the Viral Load test and have been given a result of any amount of copies per ml? and that can only be because the ARN or DNA that are found with this test are not specific to HIV, or from any other virus, but of course, the manufacture companies are giving a reasonable advise in their leaf-lets that nobody seems to be reading.
Absolutely right, Mr. Tomas Brewster, to recommend some one to take the "HIV test", first one should have had a profound research to see if it's a good idea at all, and one of the advantages of being the "HIV infection" on stage for the last 31 years, is that we know more and have much more detailed data and information ever before, obvious. Lots of things have been said since, for example, where did Robert Gallo take the alleged HIV proteins from? In an interview, Gallo was asked «why did you use hydrocortisone in your cell cultures» and he said «because we need it to stimulate the cell culture growth» that was the first time he admitted publicly that he had to use hydrocortisone to stimulate the cell culture growth, and today we know that the hydrocortisone does not stimulate but suppress the cell activity, and that is how he produced a cell-stress situation, in which the stressed cells produce a sort of proteins that don't produce in normal circumstances. These stress-proteins are the ones used in the "HIV tests". So, it's quite logical that the majority of people that tested positive for these inaccurate tests, are indeed people that are in some sort of persistent stress, for example, toxic (drugs, poppers, medicines -even anti-HIV drugs-, foreign proteins in factor VIII, etc.), psyco-emotional (the intense and continuous over-production of the inner drugs of our bodies), infectious (recurrent infections with STD's or others) or even nutritional (not healthy habits always go together with lack or wrong nutrition, also the case in Africa, Asia, ect.) That explains very well the good state of health of some friends of mine that are living for more than 25 years, never taken any anti-HIV drugs, because they did question the given diagnose, they did their own personal research, and they did look to the right cause for explaining the diagnose: the stress-producing factor in their lives, and once they removed it, everything was over, never worried again. Another big question to elucidate is: why so many HIV negative people to date have done the Viral Load test and have been given a result of any amount of copies per ml? and that can only be because the ARN or DNA that are found with this test are not specific to HIV, or from any other virus, but of course, the manufacture companies are giving a reasonable advise in their leaf-lets that nobody seems to be reading. Raul Palma
  • Score: 0

6:32pm Sun 25 Nov 12

Andrew:Oxford says...

Two individuals who are new to posting comments to this newspaper with the second posting agreeing with the first...

Google is a useful tool.
Two individuals who are new to posting comments to this newspaper with the second posting agreeing with the first... Google is a useful tool. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

7:03pm Sun 25 Nov 12

Pavinder Msvarensy says...

You mean you actually bothered to read them Andy.
You mean you actually bothered to read them Andy. Pavinder Msvarensy
  • Score: -81

9:41pm Sun 25 Nov 12

Tomás Brewster says...

Pavinder Msvarensy wrote:
You mean you actually bothered to read them Andy.
Yes no one usually reads "The Fine Print" and most just believe everything that they hear...

"The" "Truth" doesn't matter to you.. it's the Logo, The Brand Name, the image of the infamous "AID$ Ribbon that matters.
[quote][p][bold]Pavinder Msvarensy[/bold] wrote: You mean you actually bothered to read them Andy.[/p][/quote]Yes no one usually reads "The Fine Print" and most just believe everything that they hear... "The" "Truth" doesn't matter to you.. it's the Logo, The Brand Name, the image of the infamous "AID$ Ribbon that matters. Tomás Brewster
  • Score: 0

9:43pm Sun 25 Nov 12

Tomás Brewster says...

Andrew:Oxford wrote:
Two individuals who are new to posting comments to this newspaper with the second posting agreeing with the first...

Google is a useful tool.
and you're point?
[quote][p][bold]Andrew:Oxford[/bold] wrote: Two individuals who are new to posting comments to this newspaper with the second posting agreeing with the first... Google is a useful tool.[/p][/quote]and you're point? Tomás Brewster
  • Score: 0

1:02pm Mon 26 Nov 12

Andrew:Oxford says...

No, I'm Andrew.

Nobody with a pseudonym of "point" has commented so far.
No, I'm Andrew. Nobody with a pseudonym of "point" has commented so far. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

2:30pm Mon 26 Nov 12

Pavinder Msvarensy says...

Ah Tomás now I know where you are coming from, but this is England and not The Good old U.S. of A. We have the NHS here and not an Aids Industry as you call it. Bitter as you may be, always look on the bright side of life. Your kind of thinking, and the lies that you peddle has killed millions in S.E. Asia because the girls believed your HIV does not cause AIDS propaganda and did not use condoms. Quite what you get out of this I do not know, maybe it is just your way of getting kicks, but it is a pretty sick way. HIV leads to AIDS if untreated, and don't delude yourself or anybody else as you are playing with peoples lives.
Ah Tomás now I know where you are coming from, but this is England and not The Good old U.S. of A. We have the NHS here and not an Aids Industry as you call it. Bitter as you may be, always look on the bright side of life. Your kind of thinking, and the lies that you peddle has killed millions in S.E. Asia because the girls believed your HIV does not cause AIDS propaganda and did not use condoms. Quite what you get out of this I do not know, maybe it is just your way of getting kicks, but it is a pretty sick way. HIV leads to AIDS if untreated, and don't delude yourself or anybody else as you are playing with peoples lives. Pavinder Msvarensy
  • Score: -71

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree