SAMANTHA W. DEDICATION
Alison "ALI" Gertz
Bubbles FromThe Heart!
PROFORMATIVE! 2 Examples
Proof of SYPHILIS, CAUSE!
SCHEDULE, for COMPLETION
Too Sweet Enterprises
Nuggets Of SCAM & COVERUP
No DBA RegistrationLEADER
SCOOP on Leaderspecialty!
Putting To Rest ALIASES
SCAM! Documents EXPLAINED
Is It a "Trick" or "Treat
The DISSOLVEMENT PROCESS
Bradham's 5 Laws!
Bradham's 1st Law
Bradham's 2nd Law
Bradham's 3rd Law
Bradham's 4th, 5th Laws
"Common Rule Of Law"
The P Sweetie Revolution!
The"Too Sweet" Trademark!
Home Of Book
New York Times 1988-91
AIDS Landscape, 1984
Doctor Of Divinity Degree
Attack on HIV Capability!
Proof Of Syphilis Connect
What Formed AIDS Disease?
Major Questions About HIV
Stating My Case!
Theorized, For Sure!
HIV Infection Rate!
Methodology Of Cure!
What's Lem Bradham About?
Tribute To The Coach!
16 Member Board Advisors
The Journey, Lem Bradham
Prep School/And Parents!
Prophecy Of My Teacher!
Table Of Contents
Too Sweet Enterprises/Bubbles From The Heart
Your Web Site's Slogan
Exponential Comparisons Of
the latter 1970's and early
When AIDS Was Festering!
We are well aware that it may take sometime for
individuals to accept the news that it is syphilis
which is the ultimate cause of AIDS, rather than
HIV. But this is o'kay. When the Principles Of
Relativity were introduced by Albert Einstein, it
took 2 years for people to start to accept them.
This is certainly a lot better than what Nicolas
Corpernicus had to go through in toppling
Claudius Ptolemy's theory of the "earth being
the center of our solar system." "The Corper-
nican System placed the sun at the center."
It took nearly 1300 years to even formally
announce such a thing, and more time
for people to accept it. It was an outright
struggle to change people once they've
been indoctrinated to think a certain way.
We'll be glad to accept 2 years, if people will
finally come around.
The important thought to remember is when syphilis cases
were on a decline during this time, "this is when
AIDS was being formally announced." "The creation of
AIDS disease," or at least this is what was being
summoned as the starting point. We think that "it
is very possible that what was being called AIDS
was headed our way, a long time before then."
Time period of the invitation of AIDS. It was 1981.
The first mention of AIDS, formally.
Never-the-less AIDS cases were on the rise.
Remember the "missing cases of syphilis" I told
you about? Well, keep this thought in mind.
"How is it possible that AIDS cases be increasing,
while syphilis cases be on an abrupt decline, when
both diseases are transmitted the same?" "Through
sexual contact, and through the blood?" This surely
doesn't make sense!
If AIDS cases were on a sharp increase, then syphilis
cases should've done the same. Especially if the
disease of syphilis has nothing to do with AIDS at all.
"To stand alone," as the talking heads want you to
believe. That syphilis is its own disease, and nothing
more. This surely doesn't make sense.
Some of the medical practitioners were only getting
1 or 2 cases of syphilis per year. In the big cities.
This trend went on for several years. In cities such
as New York, and states like California. Numbers
which were very abnormal. In the meantime,
here comes a multitude of AIDS cases, steam
rolling itself into medical history.
Do you see my point? Both should've been increasing.
The same manner of transfer. Through sexual contact
and through blood transfer.
This is the "exponential factor" I'm talking about.
If one didn't have anything to do with the other, being
that both are transmitted in the same manner (through
sex and by blood transfer), they both should've been
on the increase. Not just one, if they are independant
of each other.
Do you see my point once again?
Consider another important observation:
Some of the drugs used on syphilis (antibiotics, etc.,)
were used on some of the AIDS patients and the dis-
ease went away. Kaposi sarcoma was one such dis-
sease. This was when the disease was being formally
treated as the AIDS classification suggested. They
were using antibiotics which worked. I think that
"the disease, just hadn't picked up sufficient speed
in the early years. Once the disease got to rolling,
the antibiotics no longer worked."
Just a matter of picking up speed!
But an attempt to separate the 2 diseases,
that of syphilis and AIDS. How do you figure?
Especially, when syphilis shows up, anyway.
The facts are that 70 to 75% of AIDS patients
eventually show signs of syphilis.
Either before they get full-blown AIDS, or
How do you figure?
"Exponentially speaking," that is?
It just doesn't make sense.
Website: A Continuous Work In Progress!