|
At least 75% of babies born to HIV positive mothers
will test HIV negative without medical intervention. (90) Studies
have shown that for properly nourished HIV positive expectant mothers
receiving regular prenatal care, over 90% of their children test
negative with no drug therapy. (91) Mainstream medical experts acknowledge
that children need up to 18 months to develop their own immune response
and discard the antibodies passed on to them from their mothers,
and note that HIV testing before 18 months of age does not yield
conclusive results. (92) Despite this widely accepted fact, several
states require mandatory HIV antibody testing for newborns in public
hospitals. (93)
As explained previously, HIV antibody tests
do not indicate the presence of actual virus and are unable to determine
if the antibodies it detects are even HIV antibodies. Newer "viral
load" tests do not detect actual virus and are not approved
for diagnostic use. Even when administered after 18 months of age,
neither test can determine if a child is actually infected with
HIV. Despite these facts, the tests are routinely used to diagnose
HIV infection in newborns and children. The results of these inaccurate
and improperly applied tests are the basis for all claims regarding
transmission rates of HIV from mother to child, and for declaring
that a baby "has HIV."
Expectant mothers who test HIV positive are commonly
advised to abort or to take AZT, a highly toxic chemical compound
originally created for use as a cancer treatment. AZT works by blocking
the formation of DNA -- a process essential to sustaining life --
and destroying all growing cells, particularly new cells produced
in the bone marrow where the immune system is generated. AZT is
a known , ,
and , and until recently it
was for use during pregnancy.
(94)
AZT was approved for expectant mothers based
on the conclusions of a single trial, ACTG076, a trial sponsored
by AZT's manufacturer. According to this study, transmission rates
of HIV were 25.5% for infants of untreated mothers and 8.3% for
children born to the AZT-treated women.
The results of ACTG076 have proved impossible
to duplicate in further studies on pregnant women treated with AZT.
In fact, other reports have shown that expectant mothers using prenatal
multivitamins experienced lower rates of transmission than the lowest
rate of those treated with AZT. One study determined that use of
vitamin A correlates with a transmission rate of 7.2%. (95)
The effects of AZT on expectant mothers include
muscle deterioration, severe anemia, nerve damage, liver damage,
muscle wasting, lymphoma, acute nausea, diarrhea and dementia. The
effects of AZT on developing infants include misshapen heads, extra
fingers, triangular faces, albinism, misplaced ears, cavities in
the chest, webbed fingers, anemia, spontaneous abortion, chromosomal
damage, and can result in the need for therapeutic abortions of
severely deformed fetuses. (96)
Routine HIV antibody testing for pregnant women
raises particular concerns as pregnancy itself can cause positive
HIV test results. (97) Although cross-reactions due to pregnancy
are documented in the medical literature and acknowledged by test
manufacturers, HIV antibody tests have become part of standard prenatal
screening, and are even mandatory in some states.
A fundamental problem of routine screening using
even the most accurate test is that low risk groups will have the
highest rates of false positives. This occurs because the accuracy
of a test deteriorates when administered to populations among which
the microbe being tested for is rarely found. Since the incidence
of HIV positivity among American women who describe themselves as
risk-free is 0.01%, a consequence of routine HIV screening of all
expectant women is widespread false positive results. (98) One study
of premarital HIV screening reported that HIV antibody tests with
an alleged specificity of 99.8% and sensitivity of 98.3% had an
accuracy of less than 15% when administered to this low risk group.
(99) And these figures are based on invalid and/or loose definitions
of specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy that do not involve tests
validated by identifying actual HIV infections.
Another troubling consequence of requiring HIV
tests for pregnant women is the emerging issue of obligatory drug
treatment. While CDC guidelines state that "discussion of treatment
options should be non-coercive, and the final decision to accept
or reject AZT for herself and her child is the right and responsibility
of the woman," such discussions rarely include objective data
on the toxic effects of AIDS drugs or any information that would
support a decision to reject them. (100) Most health practitioners
promote the notion that a positive test indicates infection with
a lethal virus, and portray AIDS medication as particularly urgent
and necessary for expectant women.
Although the CDC says that "a [mother's]
decision not to accept treatment should not result in punitive action,"
suggested standards of care have been legally mandated in some instances
and children have been taken from parents who choose not to accept
treatment. (100) In one recent case, public health officials in
Eugene, Oregon intervened when an HIV positive mother declined AZT
therapy for her HIV negative infant son. (101) As a result of her
decision, both parents were charged with neglect, and the state
took legal custody of their healthy newborn boy who was given six
weeks of AZT treatment. (102)
Another HIV positive mother in Bangor, Maine
faced charges of "serious parental neglect" for declining
to provide her son with AIDS drugs that had previously caused him
harm. (103) Her four-year-old boy, HIV positive since birth, had
become so anemic during 10 weeks of AIDS treatment as to require
blood transfusions, and experienced a host of adverse effects that
left him unable to walk and in almost continual pain. (104) His
mother discontinued treatment after noting that his health returned
when she stopped giving him the drugs. After a District Court found
in her favor, an appeal was brought before the State Supreme Court
challenging the decision. In this case, the mother was granted the
right to keep her son off AIDS medications and in her custody. (105)
As this book went to press, authorities in Montreal,
Canada seized the children of a woman who has been HIV positive,
healthy and unmedicated for 13 years after she declined HIV treatment
for her two boys. The Quebec Superior Court agreed to delay administration
of drugs to her sons, ages three and seven, pending the determination
of a custody hearing. The mother told the court that HIV treatments
are experimental and highly toxic, and that her family has been
healthy without using drugs. (106)
|