NIAID paper : HIV causes AIDS | Africa | HIV-mortality | Ugandan study |

HIV AND MORTALITY IN AFRICA : Does it prove that HIV causes AIDS? | |||

Koliadin Vladimir | |||

(Mulder, D.W., Nunn, A.J., Kamali, A. et al. Two-year HIV-1-associated mortality in a Ugandan rural population. Lancet v.343, April 23 1994, pp. 1021-1023) "In this study, a rural population [in Uganda] of about 10,000 was screened for HIV infection using highly specific tests. The seroprevalence of HIV infection in those aged 13-44 was 9.6%. During follow up over two years, eight deaths were obserevd in 5,800 man-years among seronegatives in this age-group (1.4/1000 m-y), compared to 51 deaths in 534 man-years among the seropositives (96/1000 m-y). The age adjusted rate ratio was 60 ...". => 1) Alternative hypotheses regard HIV-seropositivity as a marker of compromised health or other disease-causing factors. Hence, the fact that mortality is much higher in seropositives than in seronegatives is explainable by the official as well as by the alternative hypotheses, and it cannot be an evidence that HIV causes AIDS. 2) If HIV is actually a new pathogen and causes additional mortality independently on other causes of death typical to this region, mortality in HIV-negative population should be about the same as before HIV-epidemic. Prediction of the "marker hypotheses" is radically different - mortality in seronegatives has to be lower than the death rate usual to this population : a great proportion of the individuals who were to have died from causes usual to this region and not related to HIV will fall into the HIV-seropositive group. 3) It is well known that usual mortality among young adults in many African countries, including Uganda, is much higher than that in developed countries - a great proportion of population die young, mainly from various parasitic and infectious diseases because of general poverty, malnutrition, lack of adequate medical service typical to many African countries. The annual mortality rate of 1.38/1000 (8 deaths in 5800 person-years of observation) observed in HIV-negative Ugandans is equivalent to 96% survival in 30 years (only 4% die during 30 years, say from age 13 to 44) and even lower than mortality in the USA observed in the pre-AIDS era (in 1980, 157,685 deaths were registered in the USA at ages 15-44, and the population at this age was 105,203,377 which gives general mortality rate of 1.5/1000). Hence, the observed mortality in HIV-seronegative population of Uganda is definitely much lower than the usual mortality rate typical to this population. In other words, most of the Ugandans who were to have died even without the hypothetical HIV epidemic, occurred to be HIV-seropositive when tested for "HIV-antibodies". 4) The "usual" deaths (not related to HIV) should be distributed between HIV-positive and HIV-negative groups in the same proportion as the sizes of these groups, and mortality in the HIV-negative group should be equal to the "usual" mortality. Let, for example, usual annual mortality is 3/1000 (that is about 2.2 times higher than mortality observed in HIV-seronegative Ugandans). The average expected number of "usual" deaths would be 1.6 (=534*0.003) in the HIV-positive group (534 person-years), and 17.4 (=5800*0.003) in the HIV-negative group (5800 person-years). The actual (observed) number of deaths in HIV-negative group is only 8. Hence, the remaining 9.4 (=17.4-8) deaths expected for "usual" mortality fell into the HIV-positive group, and the total number of "usual" deaths in this group is 11 (=1.6+9.4). Thus, "usual" deaths ratios would be 2,06% (11/534) in the HIV-positive group and 0,14% (8/5800) in the HIV-negative group. So, if "usual" mortality is only 2.2 times higher than the observed mortality in the HIV-negative group, the number of hiv + people dying a non hiv-related death is 15 times higher than normally expected (it is a natural consequence of the fact that size of the HIV-positive group is more than 10 times smaller than the size of the HIV-negative one.). 5) This estimate is conservative as it is reasonable to assume a) that usual mortality rate in young adults in Uganda is at least several times higher than in the USA, b) that the observed annual rate of overall mortality among HIV-negatives and HIV-positives combined (9.3/1000 person-years) differs from the usual death rate for this population. | |||

www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/vkafrica.html | 1998 | ||

1 | |||

1 | |||

(Mulder, D.W., Nunn, A.J., Kamali, A. et al. Two-year HIV-1-associated mortality in a Ugandan rural population. Lancet v.343, April 23 1994, pp. 1021-1023) 9,389 Ugandans with HIV antibody test results. Two years after enrolling in the study, 3% had died, 13% had left the area, and 84% remained. There had been 198 deaths among the seronegative people and 89 deaths in the seropositive ones. Medical assessment made prior to death were available for 64 of the HIV-positive adults. Of these, five (8%) had AIDS as defined by the WHO clinical case symptoms. The self-proclaimed "largest prospective study of its kind in sub-Saharan Africa" tested nearly 9400 people in Uganda, the so-called epicenter of AIDS in Africa. Yet of the 64 deaths recorded among those who tested positive for HIV antibodies, only five were diagnosed as AIDS-induced. | |||

1 | 1 | ||

AIDS in Africa, In Search of the Truth | |||

Malan Rian | |||

(Mulder, D.W., Nunn, A.J., Kamali, A. et al. Two-year HIV-1-associated mortality in a Ugandan rural population. Lancet v.343, April 23 1994, pp. 1021-1023) "In 1948, Uganda's British rulers attempted a rough census in the Masaka area and concluded that the annual death rate was a minimum of twenty-five to thirty per thousand." A second census, in 1959, put the figure at twenty-one deaths per thousand. By 1991, it had fallen to sixteen per thousand. Enter Daan Mulder with his blood tests, massive funding and armies of field workers. He counted every death over two years, and then five, and here is his conclusion: The crude annual death rate in Masaka, in the midst of a horrifying AIDS plague, was 14.6 per thousand - the lowest ever measured." | |||

RollingStone magazine, November 22, 2001 | 2001 |