Rico Nagel Martinez, HIV+, was born in Dec 2012 & taken from his parents when they questioned the necessity of antiretroviral therapy. The saverico.com site was created to document his family’s troubles as they dealt with the medical establishment over his ‘care’.
Bravo to the Nagels for the courage of their convictions, strength of character in taking this event ‘viral’, and ability to sift through the chaff of strident unscientific nonsense upon using the cogent advice of Peter Duesberg & removed young Lindsey off AZT (a potent chemotherapy/antiretroviral)- and thereby avoided the “AIDS by prescription” life model.
Thx, of course, to the collective insights & efforts of Celia, Gary Null, Brian Leung, Kary Mullis, Perth Group, OSMJ, etc.
The ruse that an HIV-antibody positive newborn, whose immunity is undeveloped and passively acquired from his mother, requires AZT at this time, seems unconscionable. Why was he HIV-positive? Well, according to the unreliable PCR technology for HIV which was never intended for assessing viral loads (insert Kary Mullis quote) his mother is HIV positive. Thus, as a newborn, likely _ANY_ current antibody test would reflect his mother’s immune status & not necessarily that of the child with an underdeveloped immune system. To hear that Rico was forcibly taken from home & force-fed this bizarre concoction of pain killers, antibiotics & antiretroviral drugs seems such an abomination of the Medical Oath.
Rico will be 2 yrs before his _true_ HIV status (whatever that is nowadays) is known and his natural immunity developed-provided that he survives that long.
Given that his grandparents were able to raise his HIV-positive mother without anti-HIV compounds provides the medical community & the rest of us a real life example and protocol of what it takes to overcome the complex, perverse web of “what is HIV and AIDS and the state of modern Western medicine?” .
In my view, the forced AZT treatment of this newborn represents the latest manifestation of killing a very vulnerable representation of the HIV =AIDS denialist messenger.
Who are the messengers? They’re listed in the article. What is the message? Partially, HIV doesn’t necessarily lead to AIDS, unless an HIV-positive individual is prescribed a mandated potent cocktail of these antiretrovirals. Why? Because Lindsey Nagel, and by proxy her infant, represents what the HIV=AIDS orthodoxy can’t have: a highly visible surviving HIV-positive and non-antiretroviral-taking individual who, in her 20+ yrs of post-AZT treatment life, has not only survived but reproduced.
Thx Steve et al for posting the YouTube video- it was a very viscerally potent documentation of what we’re becoming as a society.
Wow, even in Minnesota…
March 10, 2013 at 6:54 pm