Uploaded on Jan 8, 2010
(NaturalNews) Brent Leung's myth-shattering AIDS documentary, House of Numbers continues to roil conventional AIDS propagandists who cannot tolerate anyone questioning their "scientific" theories. (They're not exactly "scientific" if they can't stand up to a little questioning, are they?)
Adding to the searing-hot debate, Brent Leung has released exclusive interview footage to NaturalNews that calls into question conventional thinking about so-called "AIDS tests" (which don't accurately detect HIV infections in the first place).
Here's part of the exchange that takes place in this footage, in which Dr. Constantine tells filmmaker Brent Leung that the AIDS test he took is meaningless:
"I'm gonna ask you one last question that pertains to my HIV test that I took in Africa," Brent Leung says.
"And you want this on air?" asks Dr. Constantine.
Brent answers, "Yes. I tested negative. It's okay."
"Now what if I tell you that the test you took was lousy and doesn't mean a thing, does that make any difference for everybody to hear?" replies Dr. Constantine.
Also in this clip, Leung interviews Dr. Robin Weiss who reveals the diagnostic failure of the so-called "Western Blot" test, which remains the mainstay "AIDS test" to this day.
"I don't think the Western Blot is a useful diagnostic test, "says Dr. Weiss. "I don't think it's worth doing. Western Blots have been ... promoted into some sort of Holy Grail."
This exclusive, unedited footage was released to NaturalNews in response to accusations leveled against Brent Leung by both of these scientists who claimed their words were taken out of context. So Leung released this footage which contains the greater context of the conversation, demonstrating these scientists were not taken out of context when shorter cuts were used in the film.
Why AIDS propagandists cannot tolerate scientific questions
The conventional AIDS propagandists are predictably lashing out violently against Brent Leung's myth-shattering documentary. One critic, Jeanne Bergman, went so far as to accuse Leung of propagating "lies" about HIV even while she pressured ScienceDaily.com to retroactively change the headline of a story the website published in 2007. That story originally reported on a study in primates that showed a sudden loss of T cells is not a trigger for AIDS.
The original headline read, "Sudden Loss Of T Cells Is Not Trigger For AIDS, New Study Suggests". But after being pressured by Bergman, ScienceDaily changed the headline (nearly two years after the original publication date) to: "Progression Of SIV Infection In Monkeys Points To Differences Between Human And Simian Forms Of AIDS."
That's a fairly radical title change. It repositions the entire store and takes away credibility from anyone who had quoted the story as a piece of evidence dismantling conventional AIDS theories. That was the whole point of pressuring ScienceDaily to change their story, of course.
ScienceDaily even engaged in some fairly unusual back-pedaling with an editor's note that was added to the story: "The purpose of the story was NOT meant to suggest that the sudden loss of T cells is not the trigger of AIDS in humans, nor was there any intent to support the erroneous belief that HIV somehow does not cause AIDS. We regret any confusion that this may have caused."
Gee, wouldn't want to challenge conventional AIDS theories now, would we?
Standard YouTube License