PREP IS POISON
We are gay men who built this website to help other gay men gain a better understanding that what they've been told by gay media, corporate media, government institutions, the biomedical establishment, and so-called AIDS Service organizations about PrEP, HIV Testing, and HCV testing is neither true nor in the interest of the gay community. We recommend starting with our ten-page white paper, representing hundreds of hours of research into flaws in the PrEP approval process and clinical trials.
Our one word of advice: Don't Take the Tests. This was the original advice of then-grassroots organizations such as Project Inform, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, and the Gay Men's Health Crisis. They changed their recommendations when they started taking money from Big Pharma. A positive test will not change your life for the better, U=U is a drug marketing myth, there is no evidence that asymptomatic HIV positives have any clinical benefit from taking AIDS drugs, and HCV "cures" actually cause net harm.
Infectious disease science went off the rails in the 1980's, and HIV/AIDS became a giant biomedical establishment consuming over $535 Billion in taxpayer dollars over four decades. Worldwide, AIDS is a trillion-dollar industry, and PrEP's flawed FDA-approval in 2012 created a multibillion-dollar new drug market. We believe HIV and Hepatitis C testing is predatory on the health of gay men and that PrEP is only the later iteration of what is a giant biomedical fraud: informing clinically healthy people they will become sick unless they take the magic pills. This does not mean that frontline health professionals are malicious, but they unquestioningly follow guidelines promoted by advocacy agencies such as the CDC and Oregon Health Authority who have agendas rooted in behavior modification and regulatory capture by Big Pharma.
In ten years of PrEP uptake, we have seen no change in annual new HIV incidence in high PrEP uptake states, indicating it is completely ineffective as a public health intervention.
Our Position on Hepatitis C
"Hepatitis C" was a marketing term created by a Japanese subsidiary of the Chiron corporation in 1988, which managed to sell an experimental test for post-transfusion hepatitis to the Japanese Health Ministry. Earning $60M/quarter, Chiron managed to gain screening orders worldwide, and there is evidence a pharmaceutical cartel known as the Dolder Group divided up worldwide "Hepatitis C" market share. The Chiron team admitted at the time that they had not isolated a pathogenic Hepatitis C virus, and to this day there does not exist a single scientific study proving HCV seropositivity to be pathogenic.
HCV was officially isolated in vitro in 2005 by a Taiwanese team, and even the Oregon Health Authority admits that from 1988-2005 the existence of HCV was "inferred." The first HCV drug, Shering Plough's Rebertron, was FDA approved in 1997 on the basis of a "surrogate marker" called "Sustained virological response" - a PCR test. Our position is that HCV has still not been isolated in vivo, as acute cases of viral post-transfusion hepatitis should have resulted in viremia. We are also concerned that HAV and HBV antibody serology can distinguish between types of cases, but HCV serology is limited to a single antigen and the chronic state is determined by a PCR test that has never been validated by a gold standard. We also observe that HCV seropositivity often occurs in individuals with no known transmission risk and that post-transfusion "acute" cases were historically symptomatic, but now the definition of "acute" is simply an elevated ALT level (with no observed viremia and uncorrelated to "viral load").
It appears then, that "Hepatitis C" started as a medical mistake that evolved into a surrogate marker scam to sell expensive drugs. If there was truly a pathogenic HC-virus following the official latency model, then we would expect to see progressive liver disease as a historic occupational exposure of healthcare workers. It is not.
Our Position on HIV and AIDS
The currently available data in terms of scientific predictive power best follows the work of the Perth Group of the University of Western Australia.