I'll do my best.
I've spent the past nine months researching GcMAF. Yamamoto's work in this field goes back decades (he's 86 years old, in fact.) The theoretical underpinnings of what he's done are surprisingly solid, so those claiming that this "must be" a sham really need to step up to the plate and demonstrate some solid, reliable science that runs counter to what he's doing.
I handed the 2009 Virology paper to my own HIV specialist. He was very interested at the time, but he hasn't mentioned it since then, except for the beginning of March when I asked him if he had any objection to me starting the protocol (which I'm doing with my naturopath as I trust her much more than the specialist.) He didn't object.
It's difficult to obtain because the production method is covered by a patent (although the substance itself is not patented because it is naturally occuring.) I've been able to find four sources for it - one in the Bahamas (at a private clinic,) two in the Netherlands (I'm told, but have not confirmed, that this is due to the fact the US patent was not cross filed there,) and one in Israel (presumably licenced by Yamamoto himself to produce it.) I'm skeptical of private clinics in the Bahamas, and I've heard (indirectly) that the Israeli source is quite expensive. The two in the NL are comparably priced (at around 100 euros per dose) and at least one of them (gcmaf.eu) has published data indicating that their version is as potent as that used by Yamamoto himself.
I've spoken with one other person who has started GcMAF for HIV as well and we do compare notes. In early May I will get my standard blood work and at that point I will have been on the protocol for over a month so then the results will be telling. I'm not on ARVs, with a CD4 count around 420 (30%,) and a viral load around 20k.
If it is working, I would expect those numbers to change substantially after five weeks of full treatment (my last tests were done five days after I started the partial doses, so they aren't really definitive.) We shall see.
A couple of other observations:
- Yamamoto doesn't promise 100% eradication. He only reported 100% eradication in the patients he picked for his study. He WAS particular and DID screen people out. Thus, this isn't guaranteed to work for everyone (and there are reports of strong cases of IRIS in those that have been on ARVs for a while, but those are not the types of people Yamamoto picked for his trials.)
- I don't think there's a conspiracy per se, but I do think the system as it is presently set up is not really conducive to developing a cure. An NDA application in the US is $1.5 million, plus the cost of actual trials. Because GcMAF is naturally occurring, it will be difficult for companies to recoup those costs. That discourages them from making the investment necessary to investigate it further, as it does not give them the kind of exclusive marketing arrangement they need to generate sufficient profits to justify the high risk investment.
- I've been surprised at how much research there is on GcMAF - it's not as if this is a huge secret. But then again, there can be quite a delay between the time research is being done and the time that research is absorbed by industry. I couldn't understand why my own specialist didn't know anything about it (even though Yamamoto has been publishing papers about GcMAF and HIV since the mid-90s.)
I'm up for my fourth full dose today. I have noticed some differences already (the most surprising of which was that a very low grade swelling in the lymph node on the right side of my jaw is gone. I'd had that for so long I no longer gave it any thought.) So it seems it's doing something. I'll find out next month if it is doing something useful.