In 1996, Stephen and I began writing Sanctuary: The Path to Consciousness. We wrote the book because certain information was being revealed to Stephen in his energetic consulting practice. What he found was that the subtle-energy frequency of HIV was becoming more and more common in people throughout the United States. We wrote:
“…an enormous number of people showed the frequency of HIV…” and “…at this rate, within five years this frequency will show up in more than half the country…and probably more than half the world…”
On February 10, 2005, the Los Angeles Times reported on two separate studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine under the page A9 headline: “Scientists Advise Screening All Adults for HIV Infection.” These separate studies both concluded that HIV is now so widespread that traditional risk groups are no longer relevant and that everyone should be tested for it. CNN.com reported on these articles as well under the headline “Experts urge HIV testing for almost everyone.”
Of course, there is always a counterpoint to scientific studies. An interesting example emerges on page A13 of the same Los Angeles Times under the headline “US Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Findings”. This particular article is about political pressure regarding US Fish and Wildlife scientists who are reportedly being pressured to alter findings in order to lessen protections for endangered species. But the point remains: You and I cannot rely on scientific studies as if they were based on pure research for its own sake. Most if not all so-called scientific research is done by and for special interests and results are often if not always skewed towards those special interests. Even if it is not done in a malicious way, skewed results are simply part of the process of setting up research with an eye towards seeking certain kinds of results.
Chicken Little may have claimed the sky was falling, but Chicken Little’s observations, as we now know, were biased. So perhaps we should take the New England Journal of Medicine studies with a grain of salt. For instance, if a connection were to emerge between the reporting scientists and the companies that manufacture HIV tests, there would be strong reason to suspect the validity of the research.
Nonetheless, there seems to be more and more emerging literature, scientific and otherwise, that corroborates and agrees with Stephen’s subtle-energy observations as reported in Sanctuary: The Path to Consciousness.
And it is important to remember that Sanctuary also reports: “…the good news is that, like everything else I find, we’re talking about an energetic imbalance. And energetic imbalances are totally erasable.”
(Please remember: Energetic balancing does not diagnose, treat, prevent or cure disease. From the point of view of the medical and scientific establishment, the presence or absence of a subtle-energy imbalance is not the same as the presence or absence of a disease.)