What a utterly disgusting film. Surely, with the younger members of society being naive about HIV/AIDS this doesn’t help. Facts need to be made not myth. It is a duty to everyone to report on what’s happening not scaring people senselessly. Some of the comments of the film echos of what African governements were trying to kid themselves with. This kind of film is also dating from the 80′s when maybe little was known but absolutely no excuse for it’s relevance it the 21st century! These film makers should be ashamed of themselves.
I would call on all HIV charities in the UK to, at the very least, put on their websites information that refutes denialist myths in an attempt to counter the damaging information that newly diagnosed people may come into contact with. This could be easily done, at very little cost and save people from the false hope that denialism offers.
Great article exposing AIDS Denialism and the fraud of House of Numbers. The movie has fooled many people into thinking there is actually a debate among scientists about the cause of AIDS. This article exposes the AIDS Deniers. There is a new book readers might be interested in called “Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy.” All royalties are donated to buy HIV meds in Africa.
“He added that the film did not explicitly state that HIV and AIDS do not exist and did not state that there is no link between them.”
Disingenuous bullsh*t. Leung explicitly claims at the end of the film that HIV tests “prove nothing.” You also missed that when Maggiore’s death is mentioned in the credits in tiny letters, it claims her death was “unrelated to HIV” (yet Leung has stated in writing “I am not an AIDS denialist”). His film is Executive Produced by someone who has been on a list of supporters of AIDS denial since 2007 and the same person also sponsored a recent AIDS denial conference in the US (where House of Numbers was featured). Someone is now paying for Leung and his producer David Syner to travel to universities around the US to have showings at student unions, propagandizing AIDS denial to young people who may not be familiar with its miserable history of deception and death. Another HIV positive denialist in the film, Kim Bannon, is now reported to be ill, possibly with the very serious opportunistic infection PML.
Film-makers have a right to masquerade fiction as fact if they wish in a free society
I completely disagree. This film should be banned immediately. This is completely irresponsible and very dangerous. Freedom of speech does not extend to the promotion of harmful “therapies”, especially when the public is being manipulated into believing this quackery is scientifically sound.
As Christine Maggiore’s private investigator, I worked closely with her until she died. A soon-to-be-released forensic report will scientifically prove that Maggiore’s death was clearly not AIDS-related.
Like her daughter, Maggiore’s death is vital to the pharmaceutical industry’s ongoing marketing effort to promote the mythology that HIV is something more than a political disease. It is now clear that corrupt officials from within the LA County Department of Health pressured officials into making false claims that Maggiore and her daughter died of HIV so that pharmaceutical marketers could induce useful media idiots to perpetuate the myth on their behalf.
I’m not surprised that websites like PinkNews personally attack those who ask questions related to HIV and the pharmaceutical industry. Not only is PinkNews publisher Benjamin Cohen a known propagandist and gay pornographer, but his website relies on advertisers who profit from the scam that corrupt scientists have unwittingly exposed in House of Numbers.
If HIV was real as breast cancer, heart disease and diabetes, propagandists would not need to exploit, celebrate and promote non-AIDS-related deaths like Maggiore’s as AIDS-related. The fact that this myth is so routinely promoted raises a red flag for career criminal investigators like me. If their SCIENTIFIC arguments are sound, why must they issue POLITICAL attacks like this one to defend it.
Like HERESY, epithets like DENIALIST and DENIALISM are commonly used to attack those who ask questions. Like Galileo and Ignaz Semmelweis, Maggiore was attacked for raising SCIENTIFIC questions about profitable POLITICAL myths.
It is now apparent that individuals like Cornell’s John P. Moore use their academic positions to propagandize and politicize what are medical, scientific and criminal matters. It’s also clear that if propagandists like Moore stopped lying tomorrow, millions of dollars of pharmaceutical funding for universities like Cornell and propagandists like Benjamin Cohen would immediately dry up.
Congratulations, Jessica Geen, on this excellent article which will hopefully warn some vulnerable people and prevent them being wrongly sidetracked and wrongly misinformed by this glossy piece of trash.
This film is just another attempt by a young guy not long out of the film-school to make an impact at whatever cost! What he appears not have taken much note of is the massive difference between responsible film-making and totally irresponsible film-making. There is such a thing as journalistic integrity and I suspect that at this Leung’s film school not much emphasis was given to this aspect.
Brent Leung has unfortunately started out on his career by putting an unfortunate big fat blot on his film-making CV! He will now always be referred to as the young guy who produced “that AIDS-denialist documentary”. In time he will be sorry about that. I wonder though if he will ever be sorry about influencing vulnerable young people not to fear HIV or not to take HIV medications?
Let’s be clear: this guy will most certainly have other people’s deaths on his hands. Their deaths, their acquiring HIV, will be HIS responsibility.
I note Lisa Power’s convenient use of the Holocaust with which to tar AIDS denialists, much like the environment movement does to discredit climate change deniers. But when the T. Higgins Trusts’ paymasters are the government and pharmaceutical industries what else do you expect?
Clark Baker, your post above, at #9, has revealed to all and sundry a great deal of unfortunately deeply undisciplined and unschooled thinking. One senses you have never really been challenged by a really good teacher – though you, of course, may well think you have! Sorry to tell you, but no, you haven’t.
Let us just take ONE of the statements you have written above. Let us just look at the following HOWLER:
“Like her daughter, Maggiore’s death is vital to the pharmaceutical industry’s ongoing marketing effort to promote the mythology that HIV is something more than a political disease.”
The above sentence indicates to us all that you very clearly believe that having HIV is no more than “a political disease”.
If HIV were no more than “a political disease”, then anti-retroviral medications would not have been created by legions of decent hard-working and dedicated scientists (people who have applied themselves for years to rigorous scientific and mental discipline), anti-retroviral medications would not exist, and anti-retroviral medications would not have saved hundreds of thousands of HIV+ people from death to date!
Christine Maggiore was a clearly deluded woman who by denying her own HIV caused her own early death and who by denying the HIV of her young daughter was responsible for her daughter’s early death as well. So one would be rather foolish to put store on the opinion of a person grandly announcing himself to us as having been employed by Christine Maggiore as her “Private Investigator”. LOL! Instead, your post only reveals that you clearly have an extremely poor grasp of science, logic, or rationality – despite your loud and bullish self-assurance.
Clark Baker, it appears you think of yourself as akin to the do-good All-American Yee-haa Cowboy! A likeness of Mr. Tom Cruise, himself! The All-American boy-next-door! Top-Gun! Mr. Private Investigator! Episode 45! (Yes, rather too many episodes of the ilk of “The Fugitive” or “The Untouchables” as a little lad, methinks, instead of getting down to some diligent homework!)
Readers, this is what our All-American Yee-Ha Cowboy AIDS-DENIALIST says amongst rather too much in his very me-me-me autobiography!
“I attended public school, which I found extremely boring. I paid attention in class but rarely did homework. . . After graduating from Reseda High School in 1975, I enlisted in the Marine Corps primarily to optimize my chance of being accepted into the Police Academy. After completing infantry training school (top center), I was assigned to the 9th Marine Regiment (Weapons – E 2/9) at Camp Schwab, Okinawa. In September (1976), our battalion deployed aboard the USS Dubuque, which took us to training facilities in Japan, the Philippines, Hong Kong, and a joint training exercise with the Korean Marines in Pusan, Korea. . . Fearing that I’d say something dumb, I kept my comments short and polite. . . I thrived in the challenge of the street’s random unpredictability. There was no intoxication like it. . . Instead of driving around looking for a broken window or waiting for a shoplifter call, my partners and I hung around known drug dens where addicts regularly traded their loot for drugs and a place to rest. By staking out these dens, burglars and robbers came to me. And since these hard core addicts required constant doses of cocaine and heroin to avoid withdrawal, they were usually under the influence when I stopped them. During those four years, my partners and I arrested more than 2700 addicts. . . I accompanied my motor squad to protect City Hall from rioters. . . Standing in the glow of the sunset, I listened for the distant riot and surveyed the street. Except for a tipped kiosk, there was little evidence that they’d been there and I was a little disappointed. . . The problem is that the LAPD, as a law enforcement agency, is no longer in the business of protecting and serving. Except for individual officers who take their oath of office seriously, the LAPD exists to reflect LA’s demographics and to promote Democrat Party candidates and their misguided liberal ideas. . . Marked by what is known as “little man’s syndrome,” Sotelo graduated from one of America’s most leftist universities, and joined the DA’s Special Investigations Division specifically to target white LAPD officers. . . no one wanted to hire an ex-cop who was convicted of assaulting a jaywalker. I sent more than 100 unanswered resumes and worked jobs as a studio extra . . . The best job I found was working as an unarmed security guard for $10/hour . . . Although I had arrested thousands of career criminals, junkies, felons, and drunks before 1994, I successfully avoided criminal suspects and arrested no one between 1992 until I retired in 2000. . . I figured that if jurors, prosecutors, judges, politicians, and my police department refused to support my efforts that arresting predators was pointless. As far as I was concerned, LA’s residents would get the gangs, crime, and declining quality of life that they deserved. . . 43 and Retired . . . Although I enjoy retirement more than I can say, I have never been busier. I have enjoyed friends, family, travel, diving, flying, photography, protests, and parties. Most importantly, I enjoy preying on predators. . . With advances in Internet technology, finding work as a PI was as easy as building a website and advertising on Google. When I want work, I simply modify my Google or Yahoo ad campaign to become the #1 search response and wait by the phone. Once I have a few cases and PayPal deposits, (many clients were from outside of the US) I would shut down the ad and do the work – usually from my computer at home.”
So I think we all now have a pretty good idea of just who this boy Clark Baker is, wouldn’t you say? Just another scientifically untrained and academically undisciplined wannabe, like Brent Leung, desperately seeking admiration and recognition . . . daring to make grand medical statements, daring to stand against thousands of the world’s greatest scientists, but unfortunately completely and pathetically ill-equipped to do so. In fact, just another yee-ha all American cowboy! Finger-lickin’ good-lookin’, full of struttin’ confidence, and desperately ambitious, but unfortunately a very very loose cannon without a shred of intellectual substance.
That book you’re dreaming will make you the famous Top-Gun All-American hero? Forget it, Clark. We’re already laughing.
But if you don’t mind selling copies to uneducated vulnerable nobodies in the back suburbs of mid-western America, the sort of people who will swallow any old crap . . . then you just keep on dreaming in your own little world of imaginings.
The really appalling thing is that Maggiore’s death certificate clearly states that she had disseminated herpes simplex for two weeks before she died (in addition to bilateral pneumonia and thrush, all opportunistic infections resulting from severe immune deficiency). Herpes simplex targets nerves endings and causes excruciating pain, it must have been an agonizing and horrible death. And what happens to those of us who live in the reality-based community and strive to PREVENT people going through that? We get insulted and attacked by morons like Clark Baker, who actually spent his entire LAPD career in the traffic division as far as I can tell.
Perhaps Clark Baker can tell us how Kim Bannon is doing. Or Noreen Martin, who was scheduled to speak at the AIDS denial conference but did not.
Darren Main, the one HIV positive person interviewed in House of Numbers who is apparently healthy and alive, started antiretroviral treatment in 2007. The film does not tell you that.
“Kim is suffering serious neurological issues including Parkinson-like tremors and slurred speech. She is unable to bathe or dress herself and requires 24-hour care. She weighs 105 pounds and looks pretty bad in her pictures. She was told a while back that if she took her medicine (it is not made clear whether this is ARVs) she had a 20% chance of recovering mostly and living a fairly normal life. Apparently she is not responding to the drugs, whatever they are.”
This is a picture of Kim with House of Numbers producer David Syner a month ago:
And this is what Syner wrote: “slowly i think you will be hearing more and more from Kim”
The combination of stupidity and cynicism is unbelievable. A few years ago Syner was COO of a company called “Specialty Drinks” that made a red bull alternative that it marketed to the gay community as “Gay Fuel” – part of the promotion was that they’d donate 5% of profits to AIDS charities. Scum seems too complimentary to do him justice.
“‘WOW! I thought God had sent me an angel, and I prayed and prayed about how could I continue a sexual relationship with Don when I was killing an angel sent to me by God! And God answered”
and
“My trek with Scientology is a story in itself, but I want you to know that I spent over $100,000 from 1994 to 1998 with this group in an effort to find peace in my marriage.”
and
“In February 2000 I heard of a group of ex-Scientologists in Texas who were using some of the Scientology techniques but were expanding them and using them in a more ethical manner. They called this practice Knowledgism, and a friend of mine from Scientology highly recommended them. It was at the Knowledgism Ranch in October 2000 that I began to regain my self-esteem;”
and
“a friend of mine emailed a link to Nexus Magazine, asking me to check out an article about the benefits of coconut oil. As I scanned the magazine index for the title, I noticed another article entitled “The Yin and Yang of HIV”, and I clicked on it. It was long, it was technical, it was heavily referenced and footnoted. I decided to print it out after reading only a few paragraphs, and settled myself onto the sofa in the lodge to study it.”
and
“When you combine this with the fact that heterosexual, white females who don’t use IV drugs do not get AIDS unless they take AIDS meds, it does ease my mind to know I will never get AIDS since I don’t take AIDS drugs.”
and
“I am not a doctor or scientist or even a lawyer. I am merely an average citizen who is making a conscious decision to be informed and responsible for her own health”
Yep that’s about it I reckon, Kim Bannon is just another person terrified of accepting that they have HIV but when she gets ill, and she most likely will, hopefully she’ll beg for the meds.
Are you completely out of your mind? Do you realize how uneducated and downright stupid you sound now, and how uneducated and downright stupid you will sound to future generations? You’re nuts!
In fact, I was going to ask you to repeat your comment in language that the average person could understand, but our own exceptional Eddy has interpreted your nonsense for us, and replied quite intelligently, and probabbly right over your head.
And to think you would have the unmitigated gall of coming onto PinkNews, which has international readership, and insult our benefactor, Mr. Ben Cohen, and disregard the carefully written story by Jessica Geen has convinced me that whatever drugs you are on have been tainted with camel dung.
“AIDS denialism is a movement that believes HIV either does not exist or is harmless; that therapies for HIV infection are themselves the cause of AIDS; that drug abuse causes AIDS; that HIV was created by the US government to kill Africans and African-Americans as an act of genocide; and that diagnostic tests for HIV infection do not work.”
Speaking of camel dung!!!
Moreover Pumpkin Pie has it spot on in his post 8:
“‘Film-makers have a right to masquerade fiction as fact if they wish in a free society.’
I completely disagree. This film should be banned immediately. This is completely irresponsible and very dangerous. Freedom of speech does not extend to the promotion of harmful “therapies”, especially when the public is being manipulated into believing this quackery is scientifically sound.
Comment by Pumpkin Pie — November 18, 2009 @ 17:54″
Somebody (you) is obviously trying to make more than $10 an hour, and you should be reported to the Police as a dangerous and quite insane, anti-social maniac.
You’ve had your 2 minutes worth of the spotlight, now go fly a kite on the edges of the Grand Canyon, you dunderhead.
So, Clark, do you have any proof whatsoever for your claims? After 18 doctors came forward to say they’d been decieved, how many does that leave you with? You do realise that in order to reveal medical truths, some of you actually have to have medical training, right?
Also, I noticed you using “atheist” and “homosexual” as derogatory terms on your little blog. More proof of you being a quack.
Also, oh-my-goodness, Eddy was totally right about you, Clark. You are completely delusional. Your entire blog is filled to the gills with superiority complexes, delusions of grandeur, and the firm belief that you are some sort of lone ranger protecting the world from the evil baddies that prey on it. …Well, saving those you consider saving, of course.
You have serious psychological issues and are a thoroughly sinister and chilling person. Brr!
Sorry, Jean-Paul (hello again), but I get more right wing as I grow older. Although what you say makes sense I’m beginning to feel that we simply don’t need in the gene pool, or in Gay society (or, for that matter, in Straight society) the sort of lame-brain who could fall for the irrationalities of the HIV/Aids connection deniers.
However, let’s make a few other connections here. Baker is a denialist himself – or, at least, he purports to be – and is a self-avowed right wing homophobe. He belongs with the now deeply discredited Mullis and Duesberg school of reasoning(?) but he simply fails to see that the anti-viral drugs work and prolong life but chooses, instead, to say that those very drugs are inducing the problem which they purport to, and obviously do, solve. That’s just back to front logic for no Doctor prescribes drugs until he, or she, is reasonably certain of his, or her, diagnosis. In other words, the drugs cannot be the cause of the problem because no Doctor will prescribe such medications until the problem becomes apparent.
No, let’s be honest here. What we are facing in the whole HIV/Aids denialist movement is yet another opportunistic attack on Gay people. Because Gay people were primarily responsible, probably but it can’t be proved, for introducing HIV/Aids into the West then those people who are inclined, often on the bases of religious beliefs, to hate and loath Gay people can use that apparent fact and twist it into unnatural routes of hatred and denial. But they can only do that for as long as HIV/Aids is seen as something special, as something outwith the ordinary, as something mysterious and strange and as something that rational science cannot integrate into our sensible world-view.
This man has a vested interest in denying the commonplace existence of HIV as just another disease because he perceives it, still, as being an homosexual disease. Deep within him is some smidgeon of belief that homosexuals are somehow not human, not capable of naturally conforming to scientific facts, of merely being animal, mammal and human as he is. His denial of the obvious connection between HIV and Aids is simply a denial of the humanity of Gay people and is, what is more, a complete denial of the Aids epidemic in African heterosexual societies. He doesn’t want to believe, or know and understand, that HIV causes Aids because understanding that fact would disturb his belief worldview to such an extent that he couldn’t cope with the changes necessary for his rational continuance.
Seemingly Baker has no understanding of scientific methodology – randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, peer-reviewed, balanced scientific methodology. Or the way that, if a scientist gets something wrong, it is very often other scientists who point this out because they are the only ones who understand the mistake. Or the way that science is not a monolithic body – conservative, ignoring evidence, resistant to change, oblivious of the ‘real world’ and condemning anyone who dares to challenge orthodox views. That would be religion, wouldn’t it (see httpcolon slashslashwwwdotlayscience.net/node/723) and something that Baker – with his extreme right-wing Christian beliefs – is well-aware of.
Denialism, in Baker’s case, is nothing more that Gay-hatred, hatred of the different, and one has to ask why. Why does he hate so. What drives him? Methinks that the man doth protest too much!
This whole thing sucks. I was recently told by a gullible friend who takes this kind of crap at face value that a shaman he encountered in Peru had told him that he had a therapy for HIV/Aids. This involved being stuck in an isolation hut for more than a year and existing off a strict diet of nothing except bananas and rice.
I know of one other person who attempted a diet like this to save money to spend on student drinking binges who became the first reported case of scurvey in something approaching 50 years.
What next, curing HIV with leaches?
If you’re not medically trained you have no experience to start pulling theories out of your ass and selling the resulting snake-oil to the public. Take note Clark Baker.
Claiming that everything you don’t understand about medicine and haven’t put in the time to learn is some kind of Big Pharma conspiracy is not just lazy reasoning, it’s potentially fatal for anyone stupid enough to take your word for it. It’s like claiming to be a better brain surgeon than the trained professionals based on the fact that you know how to use a cordless drill and a mallet.
“You are completely delusional. Your entire blog is filled to the gills with superiority complexes, delusions of grandeur, and the firm belief that you are some sort of lone ranger protecting the world from the evil baddies that prey on it”
Yep, Pumpkin, just too many episodes of “The Lone Ranger!” for our little Clark, I guess! Yee-ha!
Jean-Paul Bentham, I totally agree with you that this film is completely irresponsible and very dangerous. I think that national censors, of all countries where it is shown, should be urged to insist that a static warning notice of about 15 seconds’ duration be screened immediately before it – so that the vulnerable are very clearly and very strongly forewarned.
John M-J wrote: “Denialism, in Baker’s case, is nothing more than Gay-hatred, hatred of the different, and one has to ask why. Why does he hate so? What drives him? Methinks that the man doth protest too much!”
John M-J, I don’t think I have read you before. Great to meet you! Thanks for a very interesting posting! I think your theory could well be sound! Our “Lone Ranger”, this Mr. “Top Gun”, Clark Baker, may indeed be protesting too much!
Flap-Jack, right on! I think we’re seeing the dangers of just too many years a-struttin’ around in the Marines and the LAPD! LOL! Honestly, isn’t it hilarious, this a-swaggering John-Wayne wannabe (and let him remember Mr.Wayne was gay), got so self-important playing with his guns and his weaponry in the Marines and the LAPD that he actually actually BELIEVES he has the authority to pontificate on matters of scientific and intellectual complexity!!!!!!! LOL!!!!!!
Just before posting a direct quote from ONE International, I’d like to point out that Clark hasn’t posted since Nov 18 @ 18.05.
I wonder if we shouldn’t send a Ranger to check the Grande Canyon on the off-chance that Clark actually did take my advice. Tee-hee.
“Discoveries: New Strain of HIV and Origins of Malaria
Aug 12th, 2009 4:36 PM EST
By Rena Pacheco-Theard
The month of August has seen two important scientific discoveries, including a new strain of HIV found in humans, and the identification of malaria’s origins.
As reported in the weekly journal Nature Medicine, scientists have discovered a new strain of HIV (the virus that causes AIDS), and have linked its origins to gorillas. The other three known variants of HIV have all been linked to chimpanzees. Scientists believe the new virus was probably transmitted from gorillas to humans through the handling or eating of ape meat, though it could have been transmitted from chimpanzees to gorillas, and then to humans (or directly to humans and then gorillas).
Additionally, research on malaria’s origins by a team of scientists was published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Researchers identified chimpanzees as the source of the P. falciparum malaria parasite which entered the human population approximately 10,000 years ago via mosquitoes. Researchers emphasized the importance of understanding the origin and genetic behavior of pathogens like malaria, especially when trying to create a vaccine.
These discoveries are part of the continuous effort to monitor how viruses and parasites jump from species to species and emerge in human populations. If emerging infectious diseases are detected early enough, hopefully pandemics can be prevented.
These aids-denialists are just unbelievable. I think JOHNMJ is right – it must be something like homophobia that motivates them. I mean, scientists now know the structure of the HI virus, they can see the difference between the different strains. Here’s a pic of a budding HIV particle.
Interestingly, and also depressingly, one of these women was an ex-scientology “survivor”. Out of the frying pan and into another bloody frying pan. Makes you think some people are just pathologically paranoid and gullible. Must be terrible to live such a miserable life.
Hello,
I’m not here to convince the negative aggressive people on this blog. I see so many of the ones that are constantly slamming the AIDS rethinkers and lying about us. Ask yourself why a small band of internet bloggers make it their main mission in life to silence the HIV questioners? Could it be the money? I’m here to let HIV positives know that they do have a choice. Don’t let the detractors here talk you out of using your mind to think for yourself. They don’t tell you about my wife Karri Stokely, although I’m sure they will be here soon to slam us too. There are so many more of us but not all are very public about it because they know that they will be lied about and HIV is just not that big of an issue for them anymore. Make up your own mind and think for yourself. Read between the lines folks and follow the money.
Read our story at our link and watch the pictures in the interview links below: (Thank you very much for your time, Joe)
“According to producer and director Brent Leung, House of Numbers is an objective and unbiased look at the question of what causes AIDS.”
Brent Leung is lying through his teeth. The film was conceived, financially backed and produced by individuals connected with a US/Candian based AIDS denialist cult called “Rethinking AIDS”, as part of a carefully structured and well funded “public relations” disinformation campaign. Notorious denialist and “Rethinking AIDS” board member Henry Bauer has made their strategy explicit:
“At any rate, AIDStruthers [ie the scientific mainstream] are not the audience to be courted. Their arguments must be countered with answers directed to the media and the general public in terms that are understandable by and clearly convincing for unengaged observers. That means the points cannot be too technical.”
Another RA board member, David Rasnick, appears in the film with his face cropped out, but is clearly identifiable participating in and supervising the production in “behind the scenes” shots from the HoN website.
Clark Baker is a thug and disgraced former cop hired by RA to “clean out” a somewhat dysfunctional support group for whistleblowers in the US, so that the organisiation could present a “clean hands” award to uber-denialist Peter Duesberg and his idiot mouthpiece Celia Farber in a similar PR exercise which quickly turned to farce.
Baker’s views on gays are made clear on his blog, including his opinion that AIDS began when “a small group of promiscuous, addicted, nitrite-huffing, gonorrheal and syphilitic bath house veterans began to get sick… Faced with the imminent loss of funding, Gallo and his goons needed a new virus that they could frighten Americans with. At the same time, gay activists wanted the world to believe that their lifestyle had nothing to do with their symptoms. If lifestyle was blamed, individuals would be responsible.”
Baker has since assumed the role of Chief Executive of the grandly named “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice” located in Studio City, California. A Google Earth image of their address is here:
Nice to see that when North American nutcases try to spread their idiocy across the pond, the British Blogosphere is ready and waiting to give them the spanking they so thoroughly deserve. Kudos.
“Baker has since assumed the role of Chief Executive of the grandly named “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice” located in Studio City, California.”
LOL! ONLY IN AMERICA! And that this jumped-up gun-toting ex-marine’s “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice” should be located in STUDIO CITY and in CALIFORNIA . . . well, all my fears about how far off-beam a lot of Yankees can get are now completely confirmed!
Will, yes, there are people out there trying to inform others that AIDS is not caused by HIV and that HIV medications are therefore nothing but one great big conspiracy! How’s that for gratefullness and respect to those extraordinary scientists who developed them and so emptied thousands of hospitals of their AIDS wards!
Anybody reading this thread who has been convinced, or is being convinced, that HIV does not caused AIDS or that HIV meds are useless . . . just go and read http://worldaidsday.org/hivreality/your-stories.aspx
After having read most of the comments here, I have to say I am feeling so ashamed of my own community here. I am gay in London. YES! I cruise in Old Comptons St, and get pissed in Bar Code and Vauxhall! YES!
It is so incredible how homophobic you sound to your own selves, and how obvious it is that you’ve probably put barely any research if any into researching objectively what these so-called dissidents actually say.
Sweeties darlings!! If you thought we could spend our whole lives taking ecstasis, MDMA, carpet cleaner …, and tons of unprotected sex – therefore real STDs – you were OBVIOUSLY WRONG!!! You don’t need to be a doctor or a scientist to foresee that!
Is it apoptosis induced? Is it by T-Cell burst by HIV itself? HOW IS IT THAT HIV REALLY KILLS T-CELLS therefore causes immune suppression? I don’t think anyone knows it as in November 2009!!
So why treat that common factor in these immune suppressed – or not – patients if we don’t know it is the one thing causing it? We just know it happens or is said to be there, somehow, some way.
If you know what Sensitivity and Specificity of a test means, you may want to check what they say in the INSTI Test insert. Yes! The one test we take when we go to this new fashionable cutting-edge clinic we’ve got in Soho now, isn’t it cool?
Here’s a present from me to you with so much love:
Ok, I can copy and paste for you, too. I’m feeling generous today:
‘There is NO STANDARD for detecting the sensitivity or specificity of an antibody test for HIV in human sera, plasma or whole blood. However, the generally accepted method to express the sensitivity and specificity of a given test in terms of the detection rate is to compare results to approved supplemental assay results, such as ELISA and Western Blot. Based on these criteria, the sensitivity and specificity of the INSTI HIV-1/HIV-2 assay were determined using matching fingerstick blood, EDTA whole blood, serum and EDTA-plasma samples, which were also analyzed for anti-HIV-antibodies using ELISA and Western Blot.’
With tests such as these is where we consider whether individuals are infected with the retrovirus.
Summing up:
1. Science does not know how HIV kills T-Cells – or whether it actually does such thing.
2. Tests aren’t specific to determine the presence of such retrovirus in plasma.
Of course, this does not make any money for our lovely magazines supporters, without them we wouldn’t have all these free condoms we have. I haven’t let myself drive by ignorance and stupidity. It just makes common sense, whereas the actual HIV hypothesis I’ve been told for so many years has many wholes.
You were calling these people homophobes, but for some 25 years now, it is so obvious the biggest campaigns for HIV testing have been pointed at us – the gay community. Which has subsequently made us more likely to test positive than those who don’t take them.
All of a sudden, our only enemy is HIV, and it seems like AIDS (severe immune suppression) is forgotten. Medicine has cured NO ONE with the HIV as the causative AIDS agent hypothesis after 25 years despite BILLIONES being invested – and nowadays apparently isn’t enough money!
You need to try and keep a lot of different factors in your head all at the same time.
Yes, considering a lot of different data in your head all at the same time is NOT easy. Not a lot of people can do it. A comparatively small number of people are AIDS-Denialists because (1.) they have trouble doing it, or (2) they have personal, psychological, or political motivations for denying the reality.
You wrote: “If you thought we could spend our whole lives taking ecstasis, MDMA, carpet cleaner …, and tons of unprotected sex – therefore real STDs – you were OBVIOUSLY WRONG!!!”
Your statement has shown that you have clearly believed that AIDS is caused by all the indulgences of a hedonistic life-style EXCEPT those practices which enable the passing on of HIV.
You have failed to remember that people with AIDS are not only found in your Old Compton Street stamping-ground but in all sorts of situations and environments in every country that exists on the planet, from superficial plasticky down-town sex-clubs right the the way through a spectrum to a sun-burnt poverty-stricken African village hundreds of miles from the nearest city.
You have failed to remember that millions of people have been caught by the AIDS virus without their ever having indulged in the hedonistic indulgences which you have described.
You have failed to remember that all those people, all over the world, straight or gay, in whatever situation, who have AIDS (whether “full-blown” or of the initial stages) respond to anti-retroviral therapy. Anti-retroviral therapy is highly effective.
The anti-retroviral therapy is highly effective at dramatically reducing the levels of HIV in the body and thus allowing the immune system to regain ground.
Now try to memorise all of the above and try to keep it all in your head at the one time.
And next time you come across an AIDS-Denialist, on Old Compton Street or anywhere else, give them ALL of the above facts and try to encourage them, in turn, to keep them all in their mind at the same time.
And if you know an AIDS-Denialist who has AIDS, even if only low-level AIDS, urge them to seek treatment for it as soon as possible.
It’s a Jockumentary. Before this Leung was editing videos for the Country & Western and Gospel TV channels (see his CV). And take a look at the website of Omada Films, run by his mate Jason Cunningham:
“Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” — Paul, 57 A.D
! I guess in some people’s eyes, it serves the glory of god to encourage people with HIV to avoid treatment and succumb to horrible opportunistic infections. If you look around on the Facebook pages you see the same sort of stuff, links to bible.org and The Media Research Center (“a conservative media watchdog group dedicated to bringing balance to the news media.”).
Brent Leung was also involved in an earlier documentary film project about how HIV/AIDS was created as a bioweapon by evil scientists (including both Robert Gallo and Peter Duesberg) in a US government lab.
This particular conspiracy theory was popularised by Boyd Graves and Lenny Horowitz, among others. The film, it seems, was never completed, but you can still find plenty of “AIDS as a bioweapon” sites in some of the kookier corners of the internet.
One final comment to the readers here. I want to point out that a good many of the HIV rethinkers I know of are gay and are not homophobic. We are from all walks of life and we are all over the world. We have dealt with this issue personally, professionally or with loved ones. We are just real people, thats all. We have asked the tough questions from the authorities and they insult our intelligence with their answers. This is not the first time the “authorities” have been wrong in this world we live in. If you notice, some of the HIV proponents posting here are extremely mean spirited and are here to squelch anything to the contrary of their agenda. Anybody can post on the internet so please don’t take anything I say or anyone else’s comments without doing your own research on this subject. I’m not here to convince anyone of anything. Come to your own conclusions by doing your own due diligence. I also want to add that friends and loved ones need our support if they are faced with this terrible stigmatizing diagnosis. Please do you part in supporting these people in the methods they choose whether you agree with them or not.
Thank You,
Joe
“I am gay in London. YES! I cruise in Old Comptons St, and get pissed in Bar Code and Vauxhall! YES!”
Sweetie darling! Have you thought of sobering up before using your keyboard?
Feel so ashamed of your own gay community, do you?
Why don’t you move, sweetie dah-link?
There’s Peurto Rico, Brazil, Mexico, Jamaica, Uganda, Iraq, Iran and India.
You can just as easily get pissed and f*kced there as in London, and with your talent for cutting and pasting, you can put up a shingle with the letters PhD after your name, charge 5 cents for your medical advice, and 10 cents for a bottle of snake oil.
Joe Stokely –
I can’t offer a better retort to that than to quote Scott Adams’ book “The Joy of work” in which he lists the many ways people can get stuck in a logical black hole. “#3 I am the world:
Example: I don’t listen to country music. Therefore country music is not popular
#10: Anything you don’t understand is easy to do:
Example: If you have the right tools how hard can it be to generate nuclear fission at home?
#11: Ignorance of statistics:
Example: I’m putting ALL of my money on the lottery this week because the jackpot is so big.
#12. Ignoring the Downside risk:
Example: I know that bungee jumping could kill me but it’s 3 seconds of great fun.
#17: Ignoring the advice of experts without a good reason:
Example: Sure the experts think you shouldn’t ride a bicycle into the eye of a hurricane, but I have my own theory.
#18: Following the advice of known idiots:
Example: Uncle Billy says pork makes you smarter. That’s good enough for me.
#20: Faulty pattern recognition:
Example: His last 6 wives were murdered mysteriously. I hope to be wife number 7.
#26: Judging the whole by one of it’s characteristics.
Example: The sun causes sunburns. Therefore the planet would be better off without the sun.”
For my money extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and when I weigh up your claims against the many HIV cases, some of whom I know personally who’ve benefited from combination therapy with a reduced viral load and increased CD4 count, you’ve got a long way to go to make your argument even halfway convincing.
What you propose would require nothing less than a global conspiracy encompasing all GUM staff in every clinic around the world providing misleading data, drug companies, world governments, laboratories etc.etc.etc. They would all have to be in on it. It reads like a crackpot conspiracy theorist’s wet dream because that’s precisely what it is. You are proposing that the entire global medical profession is effectively willfully committing mass murder to line the drug companies’ bank accounts. How likely does that sound?
“Joe Stokely” says in Comment #40 “I also want to add that friends and loved ones need our support if they are faced with this terrible stigmatizing diagnosis.”
Well, at least, “Joe Stokely”, you have acknowledged the “terrible stigmatizing diagnosis” of AIDS. You have acknowledged the MOUNTAINS of research by disciplined hard-working and dedicated doctors and scientists of all kinds that led to and allows a diagnosis of “AIDS”.
Now what is your problem with the MOUNTAINS of research by the same disciplined hard-working and dedicated doctors and scientists of all kinds that has shown that HIV causes that diagnosis of AIDS?
And what is your problem with the MOUNTAINS of research by the same disciplined hard-working and dedicated doctors and scientists of all kinds that has produced a range of anti-retrovirals that has demonstrably emptied the vast majority of the hospitals of the world of their AIDS wards?
Is your problem actually one of belief in Jesus, maybe? Or a deep internalised hatred of your own or others’ homosexuality, maybe?
“Flapjack”! Brilliant. By typing out those quotes from that book that highlights fuzzy thinking you have put your FINGER on the problem these AIDS-Denialists have. And, don’t you just smile when little “Joe Stokeley” comes over all meek and mild and holy, with his humble little style that implikes “please, don’t shout at me I’m just a decent and reasonable human being!” !!!!!
Jean-Paul Bentham. Beautiful! What a sense of humour you have. I have to paste again your brilliant three lines:
“Why don’t you move, sweetie dah-link? There’s Peurto Rico, Brazil, Mexico, Jamaica, Uganda, Iraq, Iran and India. You can just as easily get pissed and f*kced there as in London, and with your talent for cutting and pasting, you can put up a shingle with the letters PhD after your name, charge 5 cents for your medical advice, and 10 cents for a bottle of snake oil.”
Snout, you are an investigator up to making that little wannabe Top Gun over there in California, Clark Kent – er. sorry, Clark Baker, go and sh*t in his pants!
TAKE NOTE EVERYONE!!!!!! Snout has dug out evidence that this Brent Leung, director of the sinister “House of Numbers” also believes that HIV did NOT cross over into humans from monkeys in Africa AS HAS BEEN DISCOVERED AND VALIDATED BY PEER-REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. No, this cocky little god-believing kid with his camera, believes that HIV was cooked up and bottled in an American lab! LOL!
Here’s what Snout’s research has dug up:
‘”Few people are aware that the Manhattan project of the 1940′s is the true birthplace of the AIDS virus,” said Graves. . . We can affirmatively demonstrate a federal program (plot) seeking to “create,” “produce” and “proliferate” a virus.” said Graves. In 1977, the U.S. government produced 15, 000 gallons of AIDS (Special Virus). Earlier this year, Graves research was validated when top officials from the NIH and NCI confirmed the existence of the secret virus program. Independent film producer, Brent Leung is heading up the Nashville film crew.’
Yep, it seems that if there’s a loony conspiracy theory to put on film, little Brent is there with his high-tech camera!
Well done, Snout!
BLBS! Excellent. Brent Leung is now revealed as associated with Jesus-Lovin’ daleks spouting “Paul, 57 A.D: ‘Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God!’
Dennis Connelly, thanks for the pic of Brent Leung with his big tool up on his shoulder! What a big man! “Shootin’ for Jesus!”, of course! Hallelujah!
I love you guys!
Now what we’ve gotta do (see, I’m talkin’ like our Mr. LAPD ex-Marine, Clark Baker, fiercesome boy-buddy of Brent Leung) is post links to this Comment page on other web-pages on the internet, so that these twats will be revealed for who they really are. Hopefully the danger they pose and the damage they can do can be lessened.
Eddy – With due respect, I think Joe Stokely is sincere in his beliefs, but hasn’t mastered the art of debate or critical analysis.
His idea of debate is “If you disagree with me I’ll be personally upset, along with others who gave up their pills and you wouldn’t want that on your concience”.
I’m not interested in how Joe or his mates feel about whether I agree with him or not. I want cold empirical facts, anything else is irrelevant to a debate. The truth is not a democracy, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Medical facts have to be empirically tested in laboratories and peer reviewed.
If you’re going to put out the idea that there’s a global conspiracy to push toxic drugs on people who don’t need them for a condition you claim doesn’t exist, and that AIDS isn’t a natural progression from a depleted immune system brought about by HIV you’d better have a pretty watertight argument.
Otherwise, I’m sorry Joe but you can expect as much flak as we can chuck at you.
The salient point here is that the so called poster girl of the AIDS denialist movement and her 3 year old daughter are now both deceased, from AIDS as predicted by “Big Pharma” and the majority of medical experts in the field.
I don’t wish to gloat about that as it’s a personal tragedy, however it does beg the question, if they’d stuck to their pill regime would they now be pushing up the daisies?
‘The truth is not a democracy, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.’
So true, Flapjack. I’m so glad Richard Dawkins boldly entitled his book “The God DELUSION”. In their deluded world these god-believers have their own set of “facts” – except that in reality they are DELUSIONS.
Some say the deluded should be locked up. I’d say the deluded who foist their nonsense on others as it is reality should be locked up.
being hiv+ for 23 years i appluad brent leung for this film. the aids industry has nothing to show for after nearly 30 years of failed science. no cure, yet they are using billions of our tax money to fund research for a virus that is yet to be isolated.
i escaped the aids trap some 15 years ago, thanks to professor duesberg. neither the pharma industry, nor all these ngo’s have an interest in discoveing the truth: it will leave them out of a job.
hiv+ people are discriminated against, locked up, prevented from travel or work in nanby countries, poisened with arv;s and have their children taken into custody if they disagree with arv treatment. we are humiliated against every day – this must stop! hiv does not cause aids – goodle karey stokely, the nagel family, aidsmyth exposed, alive and well, hiv and henry bauer to find out the truth.
Clark Baker, Joe Stokely, Charles, whatsthetruth….you guys are all the one and same person just having some fun with us ‘queer’ guys, eh.
Well, the joke’s on you cause you are dropping your bucket down a dry well on PinkNews.
The HIV film is dangerous and misleading, and you guys are geting all this free publicity.
Yea, I am keeping my eye on the money, honey, and so are you but in the most unscrupulous way, and the least of your concerns is a civilized debate.
Fact is, sweetie darling, you have been losing points all along and “we”, who are just ordinary people from all walks of life and all over the world, have been gaining credibility because “we” are aware of the facts while “you” are making them up as you go.
Anything for publicity. That’s show business, just ask Mae West and Ethel Merman!
Exit left, please. Spotlights are off you guys, sweetie dah-links.
M-m-m-m-m-m-X! And watch your step; we wouldn’t want you stepping in your own bullsh*t. Shall I call you a taxi? OK, you’re a taxi!
Whatsthetruth – are you claiming that you have actually been cured and that you have gone from being HIV+ to HIV-?
On what basis do you a layperson make that call? Independantly verified test results? Or is it just a gut instinct?
I would love it if it were true, but I’m not going to put in that call to the World Health Organisation just yet as there’s something lacking from your testimony. Something I like to call emperical evidence.
And I would add that the same argument you use against the medical establishment that they haven’t found a cure for HIV is the same argument you could level against doctors finding a cure for cancer. Are all doctors and research scientists just cynical sociopathic bean counters milking the system for every cent they squeeze from it?
Because if somebody actually found a cure they could get a lot more accolades and plaudits (and by extension cold hard cash if that floats their boat) than they would if they just kept it to themselves.
We just need to take three sets of (fraudulent, unspecific) test kits in order to verify the presence of the deadly retrovirus.
First, one a Rapid Test (INSTI being the one in the UK, but I posted some info already on it in the comment earlier):
’6. Limited studies were conducted to determine the potential effect of interfering substances and unrelated medical conditions on the performance
of the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test.
(is it due to lack of funds??? I hope not…) (so what if I have it done after a crazy weekend i.e ?? or while I’m sick??)
7. The SPECIFICITY of the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test for serum specimens in low-risk populations HAS NOT BEEN EVALUATED.
(So, are you telling me if my friend Emily has the test done, there’s absolutely NO WAY TO KNOW THE ACCURACY OF THE TEST???)
8. Limited studies were conducted to determine the performance of the Reveal™ G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test on fresh serum and plasma
specimens.
9. A Reactive test result using the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test suggests the presence of anti-HIV-1 antibodies in the specimen. The
Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test is intended to be used as an aid in the diagnosis of infection with HIV-1. AIDS and AIDS-related
conditions are clinical syndromes and their diagnosis can only be established clinically. Results of the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test should not be used in isolation, but in conjunction with the clinical status, history, and risk factors of the individual being tested.’
(Wait a moment! So does it change the criteria from one test to another depending on the manufacturer???)
You can tell me some inserts are dated 2006 … this ‘pandemic’ has been going on for 25 years now!!!
Oh! Was it Apoptosis? T-Cell blast?? A bloody battle between the two?? Uuuhhhmmm How was it that HIV is killing T-Cells ??? UUUuhhhhmmmmm
Maybe it’s them who need to hold more than one single idea in their brain – that of HIV being the only and main reason for immune suppression (AIDS) – in order to really deal with this problem effectively.
Jean-Paul Bentham !!! This one message is specially dedicated to you my dear. I know you appreciate my cut’n’paste skills ☺ I take for granted you won’t read the quotations, but if you do – and actually understand what they mean, which I don’t expect you to either – don’t panic, obviously you don’t have to be moral to keep your job in this magazine, if you work for them, at all.
Once again, you sound pretty inaccurate to me, let alone you feed this whole hypothesis with unproven sensationalism. Don’t forget we’re posting right in a gay-scene magazine, that is why I’ve directed my comment to that part of the society, which is sadly enough for us, the most affected by the HIV hypothesis in the Western World.
According to the WHO, ‘world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over’!! So there you go! Out of a very defined part of Africa, AIDS is only to be feared by us, drug addicts … HOW UNFAIR?????
It looks like all of a sudden (after some of us sweeties fell so ill in the USA in the mid 80s), the main reason why people are dying throughout the globe is a sexually transmitted retrovirus (virus that depends on the host-cell in order to live and reproduce).
Whatever ! Im sick of trying to get my posts in now !!!!! Get a competent web-designer please !! I can give you some telephones … (Or stop censuring me)
XxX
It looks like all of a sudden (after some of us sweeties fell so ill in the USA in the mid 80s), the main reason why people are dying throughout the globe is a sexually transmitted retrovirus (virus that depends on the host-cell in order to live and reproduce). No matter whether they live in a filthy-whole full of opportunistic diseases, don’t have clean water or a basic, decent medical service to treat them from those, or even FOOD TO EAT. The reason why they’re dying is a STD!!! Sure….
And so are we gays in the developed countries…!! Get f***ing trashed every week at TRADE (which I loved), but wear a condom, it’s the only way to avoid immune depression!!! LMAO
and Im NOT PROMOTING UNPROTECTED SEX !!!! We need to be safe ALWAYS in order to avoid so many other diseases such as Chlamydia, Syphilis, etc, etc !!! Which do in fact get passed through sexual contact !
People, just ignore this prat calling himself “Charles”. He’s has a mental problem, possibly low-level, possibly early dementia, but whatever his problem is he’s not capable of rational thought.
“Charles” has written: “We need to be safe ALWAYS in order to avoid so many other diseases such as Chlamydia, Syphilis, etc, etc !!! Which do in fact get passed through sexual contact!” This implies that “Charles” believes that HIV CANOT be passed through sexual contact.
Enough said about “Charles”.
The Pink News Forum is completely open . . . so obviously from time to time a complete nutter or someone with a mental problems walks in and spouts crap. It’s like having stall downtown. Some people will say “Thank you” when you hand them their hot-dog. A small number will screw their eyes up and tell you they can see an aura emanating from your body!
If being mentally ill means being able to write – or read and copy and paste – for longer than a sentence without insulting, and harassing people, then yes, I consider myself a very happily mentally ill individual.
You’d better read what I’ve posted and try say why it is like that, instead of attacking me/us like an angry kid. I have no expectations here, though.
You could be sure that if iI did work for PinkNews that you would never have posted your very first comment.
In Jessica Geen’s excellent article, she wrote:
‘Since the film’s release, 18 of the doctors interviewed have released a statement saying they had been “deceived” and that the film “perpetuates pseudo-science and myths”.
The statement, signed by all 18, added: “[The film] presents the AIDS denialist agenda as being a legitimate scientific perspective on HIV/AIDS, when it is no such thing.”‘
That is good enough for me, lad.
Nobody here is interested in what you have to say; I thought I made it clear that the spotlights are turned off as far as you are concerned.
So, by all means, go and get your free publicity somewhere else, sweetie darling, and let me worry about my “morality”, dearie.
“It looks like all of a sudden (after some of us sweeties fell so ill in the USA in the mid 80s), the main reason why people are dying throughout the globe is a sexually transmitted retrovirus (virus that depends on the host-cell in order to live and reproduce).”
Now honestly, what the hell are you talking about? Put that hash pipe away for a few days and try again.
“It’s the first homophobe virus in history ! Or is it that straight people don’t have sex ???? I suppose in Brazil they’re all knitting in the beach ….”
Is that supposed to enlighten us in some way? How so? Pearl one, drop one?
Well, the only way to break the deadlock on this argument is to look for the evidence… this is the best guide I can find to evaluating what constitutes evidence and what constitutes baloney: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU
Any thoughts on all that?
I have absolutely no doubt that if you worked for Pink Magazine I wouldn’t have been able to post right from the beginning. It’s so obvious you’re such a prejudice full kinda guy, which only see what you want in order to fit your beliefs.
By the way, good video. I mostly agree with it. Here’s one from me. If you’ve ever investigated the beginnings of AIDS, it may make you think. Plus the guy is funny, and kinda cute ! ☺
Have a look at the supposedly letter signed (it’s a list of names, no signatures) by the scientists who are the real stars in House of Numbers. Can you see the Nobel Laureate for the HIV discover 25 years later Luc Montaigner in that list?? … Maybe I’m blind or something …
AND! I’ve you’ve ever done academic writing, you’ll know Wikipedia is straight FAIL if used as a source. Have a look at the FIRST reference given in this letter… WOW! Impressive for leading scientists!
Yes, thank you for the publicity. The objective and factual reader, you’re giving me the case, or at least, probably after reading you, they’ll have a second look and the info I’ve posted.
Have a good evening lads!
Xxx
P.S LMAO = Laughing my ass off !!! Now you know one more thing! ☺
OK Charles thanks for passing us the hammer and nails from inside your own coffin. Hope you’re comfortable in there. Here we go. As Jean-Paul Bentham has said, “Bye sweetie, dah-link!”
I looked at your PROOF, your video of some self-promoting young Yankee guy gurning in front of his video camera. He’s not Brent Leung’s brother, is he? Could be.
Anyway, people, this spokesperson of alternative theory offered to us by Charles states that “there are VERY FEW facts in science”!
“There are very few facts in science”. Yes, that sounds the sort of totally inane belief that AIDS-Denialists accept as truth.
I agree with NY Gay Activist’s comment that these people are dangerous. They need care. They BELIEVE that science is not responsible for having unearthed countless facts. Because of their skewed vision, their delusions, they choose to believe that science has not unearthed countless facts and that it is just a lot of unproven theorising.
These people are nutters.
Charles holds high some kid performing to his camera and declaring to the world that “There are very few facts in science”.
OK so you won’t be throwing yourself on your knees in front of a doctor ever again then. OK so you won’t ever be going near a hospital. And no way will you ever be steeping near an aircraft or even a car. Science produced all that and science is just all dangerous theories.
No, do yourself a favour Charles and go to your local psychiatric department and beg them to help you find the real world!
“1. Science does not know how HIV kills T-Cells – or whether it actually does such thing.
2. Tests aren’t specific to determine the presence of such retrovirus in plasma.
Of course, this does not make any money for our lovely magazines supporters, without them we wouldn’t have all these free condoms we have. I haven’t let myself drive by ignorance and stupidity. It just makes common sense, whereas the actual HIV hypothesis I’ve been told for so many years has many wholes.”
Now I never said I was poifect, but check your syntax and spelling, the “whole” of it.
Karri Stokely is the pinup girl of the denialist movement. Allegedly she gave up taking ARVs after several years following a +ve diagnosis. Her T-Cell count , as reported by her, is scarily low yet somehow she looks in good shape. She’ll be dead in a few years if she continues to refuse treatment judging by her latest lab results. Her and her “husband” parade around the internet as role models for denlialists claiming amongst other things that ARVs are responsible for AIDS! I think she’s a fake. Has anyone seen her lab test results ? She has the audactity to persuade other people with HIV that they shoudl come off their meds – they will be “cured”. Denialists are pretty screwed up but they are dangerous and their websites, postings and views cost lives.
I found the post I was looking for. Thid is David Ross on Facebook. A can sympathise to some extent because I did go through a process of questioning HIV-AIDS but I realised after a while that denialism has to be a logical fallacy, and a classic one at that. I feel genuinely sorry for this David guy and seriously hope that he changes his mind and sees that he’s been caught up in a web of conspiracy theories that simply don’t stack up.
“eah thebody.com seems extremely guarded and vicious at the mere whiff of an alternative questioning mind!
We’ve been learning over a little over a year. Up until recently I’ve been questioning every specialist I could come across and not one of them felt they were knowledgeable enough about the very disease they were trusted to give opinions about. So I asked to see a virologist and when told there wasn’t one to see under the NHS my mind locked on. The most prevalent and increasingly dangerous virus on the planet and we couldn’t see a virus specialist to discuss our growing questions?! Even the Doc thought that was ‘weird’.
So despite this the docs kept trying to get my partner on precautionary antibiotics to guard against PCP. Turns out on researching that drug (Septrin) it was banned in the 90′s due to deaths and even further degrades the bone marrow making it near impossible to manufacture white blood cells. Even with a basic anatomy & physiology understanding you realise you need white blood cells to fight diseases!! I truly appreciate investigative journalist Brian Deer’s work on this drug that’s disguised as a wonder-drug for HIV patients http://briandeer.com/septrin1.htm
Anyway flash forward to late September and I started reading another amazing investigative journalist Janine Roberts’ “Fear of the Invisible” and everything started to finally make sense. Then along came ‘House of Numbers’ we could FINALLY see that we weren’t the only ones dissatisfied with governmental statistics that purged out of officials mouths like election soundbite lies. Combined they managed to answer most of those niggling questions.
ALL THESE COMMENTS ARE BIASED. THE PROBLEM ALL ROUND IS THAT
1) THOSE PROFITING FROM THIS HYPOTHESIS, BECAUSE IT IS ONLY A HYPOTHESIS, WILL DEFEND IT AGGRESSIVELY – AIDS PAYS FOR THEIR MORTGAGE AND CHILDREN’S SCHOOLS. ANYTHING DIVERTING FROM THIS DOGMA (SOMETHING CREATED THROUGH MUTUAL CONSENT) WILL BE AGRESSIVELY DEFENDED. NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO QUESTION. IT HAS BECOME A RELIGION AND IS NOW LONGER SCIENCE. THE ELISA TESTS HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE FDA, SO ON WHAT CRITERIA DOES THE AIDS INDUSTRY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE THE QUALITY OR LENGTH OF LIFE OR TO PROPOGATE THIS PHYCHOLOGICAL TERRORISM? YOU HAVE TO ALSO UNDERSTAND THEM. IF YOU WORK FOR MICROSOFT, YOU WILL NOT CRITICIZE MICROSOFT IN ANY WAY……..
“People, just ignore this prat calling himself “Charles”. He’s has a mental problem, possibly low-level, possibly early dementia, but whatever his problem is he’s not capable of rational thought.”
Eddy, that is not a terribly helpful contribution to this debate. Charles has as much right as you or I to put his opinions across. You have no right to attempt to bully someone off this debate just because you do not agree with him. Charles is not advocating hate or violence so lay off. I usually respect your arguments on all manner of subjects but you are sorely trying my patience here. Nuff said.
Hi Charles, while I do not have enough conclusive information to decide either way what I believe on this issue, I want to reassure you that there are some on here who do retain an open mind and who will not attempt to harass you and insult you merely because they are too terrified to contemplate “What if we really have been conned all these years?” The implications are simply too terrible to contemplate for many of us, that is understandable and put it down to fear of the truth and try not to take this vilification personally. Certainly, until it has conclusively been scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the HIV virus has been isolated and that it does lead to AIDS, then I refuse to go along with the herd mentality. It is the same with global warming, now called climate change as the weight of evidence now leads most people to now believe we are being conned in order to foist more taxes upon us. It is for the same reason I will not take the Swine Flue vaccine: there are simply too many unanswered questions, and I know how easy it is to drum up a consensus on anything given that that are so many people like those on this thread who will agree with it in the absence of irrefutable evidence and effectively do the pusher’s bidding for them. The dictum “In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is revolutionary”. I know this world is becoming ever more corrupt and we are being lied to left right and centre, which is why it is so vital to maintain an open mind. I would advise each person on here to try and exercise one too before rushing to play amateur judge, jury and executioner.
If Karri Stokely was already on AVRs for several years, isn’t it possible to conjecture that it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her in the end? Just using my own logic to question things here…
No, Rob, sorry to have to disagree with you, but simply raising the distinct possibility that this individual calling himself “Charles” is suffering from a mental disability or a mental illness is NOT to bully him or anyone else. Many many people DO suffer from mental disabilities or mental illnesses and they are free and out there roaming in the world and very often sitting in their bedrooms typing ridiculous nonsense into Forums such as this.
I suggest you carefully study all that Charles has written in this thread and then you should see for yourself that he is not thinking rationally. His lack of rational thought is patently obvious.
We therefore should engage in further discussion with this individual. He has problems.
For you, or anyone else, to say otherwise, is the same as saying that in no mental hospital in the world should a psychiatrist or psychologist or other worker seek to assist those suffering from mental illness. Instead, your suggestion implies that those demonstrating clearly irrational thought processes should be believed and taken seriously. In other words, whatever they believe to be facts should be accepted as facts. That is of course absurd.
Rob at #88 wrote: “Certainly, until it has conclusively been scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the HIV virus has been isolated and that it does lead to AIDS, then I refuse to go along with the herd mentality.”
Kindly explain your belief as to how the infection spreads from one person to another.
You will need to refute the chains or networks of infection that have been documented.
You will need to refute the evidence that when one individual is found to have been infected with HIV, sexual partners with which he or she has had unprotected sex are more often than not found to be infected as well.
Rob wrote at #89: “If Karri Stokely was already on AVRs for several years, isn’t it possible to conjecture that it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her in the end? Just using my own logic to question things here… ”
Rob wrote the above after having read the following at #84:
“Karri Stokely is the pinup girl of the denialist movement. Allegedly she gave up taking ARVs after several years following a +ve diagnosis. Her T-Cell count , as reported by her, is scarily low yet somehow she looks in good shape. She’ll be dead in a few years if she continues to refuse treatment judging by her latest lab results.”
Thus, after reading in #84 that the woman is still alive, Rob wrote in #89 that she is dead, i.e. he wrote “it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her”.
We have here a perfect demonstration of the LAZY, MUDDLED or ILL thinking that is engaged in by AIDS-Denialists.
One suspects they subsist on an intellectual diet of day-time chat-shows, gutter-press newspapers, and all the paranoid rubbish posted by idiots on the internet.
OK, I confess I do not have time to read all of these responses in detail and I muddled her up with the woman who took herself and her daughter of meds and then died. My same point remains however.
Regarding why the partners of those infected sometimes (but not always) succumb to HIV, it could just be that they follow similar lifestyles and there may be other mitigating factors that contribute to the running down of their immune systems, not necessarily the, ahem, alleged HIV virus itself. There are some people who can be exposed during unprotected sex to someone who has been diagnosed with the virus but who never test positive themselves. Why is this? And until HIV has been scientifically proven to exist then I will not be beaten into consensus with the sheep and neither will I accept the denialists line. I will retain an open mind until anything is proven either way, that is all, and I know there are many out there who feel the same and resist choosing to believe whatever those in authority who are known to be corrupt and self-serving are pushing as the official line.
I am an HIV+ patient of the Harrison Wing at St. Thomas’s Hospital. For those who don’t know, the Harrison Wing is a large outpatients clinic dealing only with people who are HIV+.
Every three months when I attend the Harrison Wing this is what I see:
On average, about 15 to 20 people sitting in the waiting room, waiting to be seen by one of half-dozen HIV doctors.
Of the people I see each time I visit:
About 65% are black (African or Caribbean).
About 35% are white.
Of the 65% who are black, half are women and half are men.
Of the 35% who are white, 30% are male 5% are female.
I have observed that after people see a doctor almost everyone leaves the department carrying a little bag of HIV medications.
There used to be a number of large AIDS wards at St. Thomas’s but these no longer exist because of HIV medication.
Of the other patients whom I see each time I visit about 95% look all right. Of the other 5%, some look ill or very thin, and some are in wheelchairs or having to use sticks.
Obviously what I see reflects the population of South London. I suspect an HIV Clinic in Bath, for example, would not show the same spread.
Some people near the start of this thread have claimed that HIV is a virus that is homophobic, that it only targets homosexual men, and one person has claimed that AIDS is the result of a wild lifestyle involving drugs.
What I see every three months when I visit my HIV clinic completely contradicts these claims.
Sorry to anyone who already gunned down these claims. I haven’t read all the way down the thread due to the comments by denialists becoming more and more silly.
Rob mixed up two women and their medical histories. Christine Maggiore and her 3 year old daughter both were HIV+, both never took AZT or other ARVs, and both died terrible deaths from AIDS-related opportunistic infections. Karri Stokli says she tested positive and took HIV meds, then stopped–she says she is in good health. Many other HIV+ denialists are dead (see http://www.aidstruth.org/denialism/dead_denialists for a growing list) from AIDS related illnesses. The HIV positive denialists are actually providing confirming data that untreated HIV kills–they are essentially offering themselves as a control group for an experiment that would be entirely unethical if conducted by a scientist: don’t give people with a deadly pathogen medicine, and see what happens to them. Tuskeegee, anyone?
As for Maureen Jones: the FDA has approved a number of ELISA and Western Blot test kits from different manufacturers. The reason the inserts say there is no single standard is because different tests use slightly different versions of the same basic technology. But that doesn’t mean that what they are finding isn’t there. You can measure your weight in kilos or pounds–that doesn’t mean you don’t have a physical existence.
Ceteris Paribus
‘At present, there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence
of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.’
It would be nice IF YOU HAD THE DECENCY OF KEEPING OTHER PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY. That guy isn’t me. Please change your bias of harassment and fear. THAT ISN’T ETHIC.
Since I saw you’ll only comment on You Tube videos, none of the evidence I’ve posted, and I can’t post freely info somehow either – I just have no explanation for that -, I’ve decided to not post anymore. It’s useless, and prefer to be reading and educating myself while you swear at a screen.
JUST PLEASE! Have some DECENCY AND REPECT PEOPLE ! You’re being respected.
Someone has advised me that I don’t take this attacks personally. Thanks for the words, and don’t worry, I’m fairly confident for this meaningless language to get to me. Hard words don’t begin with f.
“Since I saw you’ll only comment on You Tube videos, none of the evidence I’ve posted”
What evidence Charles? I’ve seen nothing other than conjecture and misleading statements. You’re engaging in junk science and apophenia.
“Regarding why the partners of those infected sometimes (but not always) succumb to HIV, it could just be that they follow similar lifestyles and there may be other mitigating factors that contribute to the running down of their immune systems, not necessarily the, ahem, alleged HIV virus itself.”
Rob, HIV by sexual contact is not a simple vector, its quite complex, as you’re implying here. Yes there many are other influencing factors, not least the persons own genetics and immune system which affects transmission rates, but your argument here is based in confirmation bias. Show me a proven scientific study to back up your claims.
“And until HIV has been scientifically proven to exist then I will not be beaten into consensus with the sheep and neither will I accept the denialists line.”
Sorry, but where are you reading this nonsense? Science has more than proven the existence of HIV. You can actually SEE it, test for it, see its vectors, its probably one of the most studied virus in the world. Why on earth would anyone believe it doesn’t exists??? Keeping an “open mind” is not an option here, this isn’t a belief system, or a religion we’re talking about, this is a PROVEN virus. You make it sound like you have a choice, and that’s just downright foolish. What you in fact have here with your rational is a form of pareidolia… you perceive a pattern here that does not exists, but you see it because you want to, becuase you’re afraid to actually face up to the reality of HIV and its infection. I assume this is true of all denialists, as someone here already said, its why they end up with HIV…. and die from AIDS related illnesses believing they don’t have AIDS.
Its rather like this:- Just because you BELIEVE you’re immortal, doesn’t mean that falling off a tall building won’t splatter you across half the street.
Brent Leung doesn’t only edit material to misrepresent people–he also misrepresents one of the only articles he mentions in the film. A central point he makes in the movie is from a newsletter headline that says that loss of T-cells does not lead to AIDS. But the actual article says–loss of T cells doesn’t lead to AIDS in APES, the way it does in humans. Nothing about the article supports the Leung’s position. If there was any truth to his beliefs, why would he lie and manipulate to convince people? For documentation of this and other ugly facts about House of Numbers, see http://www.houseofnumbers.org/HoN_Lies_about_T_Cells.html.
Ceteris
‘ “I told another UK-based reporter that I do not believe that my film took any of the interviewees out of context – in fact, I am so confident of this that for any of the interviewees who are able to sufficiently able to support their claims against me, I would be willing to open up their footage as evidence.”
He added that the film did not explicitly state that HIV and AIDS do not exist and said that it did not state that there is no link between them.’
You may be interested in listening to what the Nobel Price for the discovery of HIV (25 years later. Why has that not made think to any one?) has to say in this film:
It depends on the way to look at things. You may see just a YouTube video – actually Facebook video -, while some other will see an interview with the Co-Discoverer of HIV Luc Montaigner. Here it comes also whether you see an authority, or someone irrelevant. If that is the case, you should really think about you beliefs about AIDS, since this ‘irrelevant’ person has carried out most of the research on this matter throughout these 25 years, and I presume he still is.
Good to see that people here will only comment on YouTube videos, even if it is only to degrade them just because of that fact.
Charles, if you listen to what Montagnier is actually saying, he’s talking about the factors involved when people are exposed to HIV without becoming chronically infected. “Chronically infected” means HIV positive.
There are lots of different factors influencing the chances you’ll get chronically infected with any single exposure to HIV – including the type of exposure, your own genetics and that of the virus, variations in cell-mediated and humoral immunity, the viral load in the partner, whether you have other infections or ulcers, whether you use post exposure prophylaxis with ARVs, etc etc. Montagnier thinks that your nutritional state at the time might be a factor too, particularly among populations where malnutrition is common. This isn’t proven as yet, but there’s nothing implausible about his suggestion.
The House of Numbers publicity machine have twisted Montagnier’s words to make it seem he’s saying that you can clear a chronic infection (HIV positive status) through nutrition.
He’s not saying that at all, and this is a great example of exactly how HoN misrepresents the genuine scientists they deceived into taking part.
“…this ‘irrelevant’ person has carried out most of the research on this matter throughout these 25 years, and I presume he still is.”
@Charles, there are around 200,000 research papers on HIV and AIDS on the PubMed index, most of them representing the collaborative efforts of many thousands if not millions of scientists and clinicians from all over the world.
Very few of them publish on youtube.
I don’t want to diminish his very real contribution the the field, but Montagnier didn’t do “most of the research”.
In fact, he wasn’t even the lead author on the seminal 1983 paper from the Pasteur Institute. That was Françoise Barré-Sinoussi. You might have heard of her – she also shared the 2008 Nobel for medicine/physiology with her then boss.
I’m so happy that although it has taken a hundred posts, it seems we’re coming to a civilized conversation here. THANKS !
Hopefully, I’ll be able to post everything I want. Not that I accuse of being censored, but somehow I can’t always post.
I hear what you say, but my thinking from that then is, chronic HIV infection depends on multiple factors, among which are humoral immunity, malnutrition, and genetics. Viral load in my opinion shouldn’t count. It’ll be more likely or less likely that you get the so-called retrovirus in your organism, but we’re talking about fighting it once it is presumed to be inside.
So, it is then in fact possible for individuals’ organisms to somehow not develop HIV and its ‘lethal’ attack, and it may not affect everyone or anyone as it depends on multiple factors after each exposure.
I try to be objective and look at things from all the sides I can, and precisely that excerpt from the movie is one of the most shocking ones. There are some parts of the movie which you could debate certain things, but not this one …
Not much to twist there. Pretty straight forward.
Luc Montaigner: ‘We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will GET RID OF THE VIRUS within a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.’
Interviewer: ‘If you have a good immune system, then your body can actually get rid of HIV’?
Luc Montaigner: ‘YES’
Interviewer: ‘If you take poor Afrincans who’s been infected and you build up their immune system, is it possible for them to also naturally GET RID OF it?
Luc Montaigner: ‘I would think so. It’s an important knowledge, which is completely NEGLECTED. People always think of drugs and vaccine.’
Interviewer: ‘There;s no money in nutrition, right?’
Luc Montaigner: ‘There;s no profit, yes.’
If you add that to what it is published in this article about the director offering to open up the footage for the scientists to say where they’ve been misquoted, it gets quite real. Plus as I’ve said earlier, Luc Montaigner IS NOT in that supposedly letter by different scientists.
Let’s just try to be more factual. WE ALL WANT THIS AIDS SYNDROME TO END!! and so far, there are not a single person, according to orthodox medicine ever cured. May there be something wrong with the approach we’ve taken towards it?
Excuse me for my ignorance, but don’t HIV tests test for HIV antibodies as there is no meaningful way to identify the virus itself? Also, why is Aids so rife in Africa? I just don’t understand. If you are telling me it is because they all take it up the bum I have a hard time believing that compared to imagining it is their poor sanitary conditions and chronic malnutrition that could be running down the population’s immune systems. Listen, today George Monbiot – yes, George Monbiot! – issued an apology on The Guardian web site for being taken in by the new religion known as climate change in light of the recent email scandal that revealed that scientists involved have deliberately talked up the theory and massaged their evidence or lied about the calibre of those who have signed a motion supporting the theory. This after having written article after article castigating and ridiculing all non-believers. Climate change is now being exposed to having almost succeeded as being the biggest fraud unleashed on mankind by governments to tax our planet back into the dark ages, so again, until I have irrefutable proof either way on the Aids issue I will not be told what to believe thank you very much and my mind remains open to all possibilities.
@Charles, leaving aside the question of whether nutrition is an important factor here, is Montagnier talking about “getting rid of HIV” before or after the person becomes “HIV positive”? I think we have to clarify your understanding of this before we can go any further.
@Rob, no there are numerous meaningful ways to identify the virus including antigen testing, culture and and nucleic acid testing by PCR. The reason antibody testing is the usual method for diagnosis is that for most people it is quick, inexpensive, and has a sensitivity and specificity as good if not better than methods used to detect the virus itself in most circumstances.
Antibody testing is the diagnostic method of choice for a wide range of different viral infections – there’s nothing unusual about HIV in this respect.
@Rob Well, you tell me. I think that question is pretty irrelevant. Once you have the virus in your blood flow, it’s a matter of your immune system being able to fight it or not. Regardless of what you consider ‘HIV positive’.
Regarding the whole HIV Testing system, I think you should have a thorough look at the inserts of most tests. The antigen test isn’t identifying the virus itself either, as antigen is a liquid that provokes immune response, therefore antibodies. You say the rapid tests have a sensitivity and specificity as good or even better than methods that detects the virus itself – not being the antigen test, I hope -, but if you read many inserts in those tests, it says differently. I posted those original inserts in this blog further up.
I have now compared these HIV kits to other diseases that are detected in the same way, such as syphilis, and in NO TEST does it say such things as no standards for sensitivity and specificity. Despite HIV tests, another antibody-response tests do have been tested and studied to know whether cross-reaction with other illnesses or substances can happen.
Read this tittle, at least you’ll feel somehow shocked without the need to punish yourself reading … and will see it’s not just me who says it, but this very magazine:
@Charles, I realise I’m probably flogging a dead horse here, but Montagnier was talking about clearing the virus during the time between exposure and seroconversion to HIV positive status, not after.
HIV is not an infection primarily of the blood, but of the lymphoid tissues. Once the lymphoid organs become seeded (which is what happens around the time of seroconversion) the infection becomes permanent and cannot be cleared by the immune system.
If, however, a person is lucky enough that their immune system clears the HIV before this has happened, then the person doesn’t develop the HIV antibodies that are detected with a positive diagnosis. They remain “HIV negative”.
The issue is relevant because HoN misrepresents Montagnier as claiming that good nutrition can clear HIV from HIV positive people (people with chronic infection), when he is not saying this at all and certainly does not believe this. This is only one of a number of examples of where HoN misrepresents the scientists they deceived into taking part.
As for the test inserts, if you read the Abbott kit insert past the quote mined ‘At present, there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood’ you will notice this is the opening sentence of a detailed explanation of precisely how they did calculate sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a ‘recognised standard’. Using a reference standard is one way of doing this, but there are other ways. Read the insert to find out how.
This sums it up nicely, Charles. Only a fool would consider the overwhelming scientific proof on HIV/AIDS to be a “belief”. Tell you what, walk in from of a fast moving car with the belief you’re immortal and we’ll see how stupid a belief system when it comes to something that has overwhelming proof to the contrary.
“Also, why is Aids so rife in Africa? I just don’t understand.”
Smartest thing you’ve said all day, Rob. Then go understand. Its not our job to educate you, that’s your job. There is ample scientific proof out there. And as I said before, you can believe what you want, it doesn’t make it true.
The error in your reasoning is an argument from incredulity:- becuase I don;t understand it, it can;t be true, when in fact the reality is your acceptance or denial has no bearing on the truth what so ever.
So, keep going about the un-safe practices, in denial of the overwhelming scientific evidence for HIV and its vectors, and soon we’ll see you writing your comments form a hospital bed with a tube up your nose.
@ Snout
I’ve just realized you put a link in my name. Hahaha. Look, this is a completely made up name guys, just for this blog, so stop trying to spot me down, because you’re just exposing people who’s got nothing to do with this post.
I’m here to talk, THAT’S IT.
Snout, I do have read the inserts. I do know that having ‘no recognized standards’, sensitivity and specificity of all tests is quantified by matching results between them all. But 1000 similar tests results do not make them real, or accurate to whether someone is really infected with the retrovirus, if there isn’t a standardized criteria for sensitivity and specificity.
Sensitivity: ‘is the ability of a test to detect truly infected people.’
Specificity: ‘is the ability of a test to identify all non-infected individuals.’
‘There is no single standard for detecting the sensitivity or specificity of an antibody test for HIV in human sera, plasma or whole blood. However, the generally accepted method to express the sensitivity and specificity of a given test in terms of the detection rate is to compare results to approved supplemental assay results, such as ELISA and Western Blot.’
As I said, other diseases detected through immune responses capturing tests like syphilis also compare results between different tests, but also have criteria for sensitivity and specificity, among other hanging points that HIV tests have in their literature.
Charles, you cannot see the woods form the trees. Splitting hair about testing methods is not proof that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. The reality and overwhelming scientific evidence is that people with HIV, unless treated, are more likely to develop symptoms, diseases, and infections associated with an acquired deficiency of the immune system caused by HIV.
You have yet to provide any proof to the contrary except for the fallacy of your false dichotomy logic. Nothing more.
A great deal is known about the pathogenesis of HIV disease, even though important details remain to be elucidated. However, a complete understanding of the pathogenesis of a disease is not a prerequisite to knowing its cause.
Lets look at ONE example of your “believers”:- In 2008, activist Christine Maggiore died at the age of 52 while under a doctor’s care for pneumonia. Maggiore had founded an organisation to help other HIV-positive mothers avoid taking antiretroviral drugs that reduce the risk of HIV transmission from mother to child. After her three-year-old daughter died of AIDS-related pneumonia in 2005.
Its an obvious, and sad example that denial will not prevent you from dying of AIDS. All you are doing to spreading lies to cover your own fears, as if the majority believing this nonsense will somehow make it true and validate your nonsense. It won’t.
As for you Charles, the vast majority of scientific consensus is against you and your foolish “belief”, and beliefs are all your statements are when and you have provided no proof what’s so ever of their validity.
And like all religious believers, you have a similar approach to any fact put to you: you ignore it.
The internet is dramatically changing human thinking and ease of access to information. Via the “Information Super-Highway” (as it was heralded back in the early 90s) one can access the highest quality literature and results of university research in the most far-flung corners of the globe. However, the WorldWideWeb is also so open and so “free” that any individual on earth can create a website and post the most juvenile and idiotic nonsense on it.
Now, most of us recognise the latter type of site instantly. However, a great number of people do not have the educational background or the expertise to distinguish between the two types, the rubbish from the quality. To them they seem them all as one, i.e. they see loony sites as being as authoritative as sound ones.
Some of the people who cannot make this distinction fail to do so not because they are poorly educated but because they suffer from some degree of Paranoid Schizophrenia. Paranoid Schizophrenia is more common than most people think. I have lost a dear friend to PS. He is very intelligent, a brilliant teacher, and fluent in five languages. However, he began to suffer from this illness several years ago and while continuing to this day to be a good teacher etc., he now sleeps every night wrapped in tin-foil because he is convinced there is an international conspiracy of “perps” who are out to get him by beaming laser beams at him through the walls, floor, and ceiling of wherever he happens to sleep. Friends, family, and doctors: we have all failed to convince him otherwise. He’s simply very seriously mentally ill.
There are other Paranoid Schizophrenics around who are convinced that AIDS is not a reality but a conspiracy. No amount of reasoning with these people, no amount of putting information before them, will convince them otherwise. Their mental illness means they NEED to believe in the conspiracy.
You can feel sometimes that if you just provide them with this bit of evidence or that bit of evidence, they’ll see the light and give up the conspiracy theory. But, no, their illness means they will cling to it. With regard to those Denialists who believe that poor Africans would no longer suffer from AIDS if only they had decent nutrition, pointing them to the wards full of Western gay men who died of AIDS though they had enjoyed the very best of nutrition . . . will simply not convince them. The Paranoid Schizophrenic’s illness doesn’t allow them to accept logical proof: instead they leap to some other spurious thought and demand you deal with that. It can drive you crazy.
Many Paranoid Schizophrenics manage to deal with their illness. They have to keep repeating to themselves, “My worst fears and imaginings are not facts!”
It is entirely reasonable to assume that the pages of PinkNews are visited by the odd Paranoid Schizophrenic.
“It is entirely reasonable to assume that the pages of PinkNews are visited by the odd Paranoid Schizophrenic.”
Eddy, unfortunately you are quite right. Its been proven that there is a very tangible link between schizophrenia and religious beliefs that are based in conspiracy or doomsday scenarios, and denial of fact that disputes this belief system is a classic trait of schizophrenia.
One such scientific paper paper outlining this damaging link [Mohr S, Huguelet P. Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Département de Psychiatrie, Genève] outlines an ongoing study about religiousness and spiritual coping conducted among outpatients with chronic schizophrenia. It was very clear that religion is salient in the lives of many people suffering from schizophrenia. Another by Sylvia Mohr & Philippe Huguelet outlined that 36% of religious delusions was observed
among inpatients with schizophrenia in the USA and in the case of paranoid delusion, the persecutors were more often supernatural beings or conspiracies.
You just may be right that our friends Charles here is a sufferer, either known to himself or not. But given his rather out of context emotional pleas for understanding of his “beliefs” and the lack of clear evidence he has, its certainly plausible.
Will, thanks for the above very interesting information. My friend with PS was certainly raised in a very superstitious atmosphere, in a remote corner of our “British Isles”!
Debating with him for months on end about “the little midget” who he believes lives in a hidden basement under his house and ascends up into the attic every night via passageways INSIDE THE WALLS bore strong similarities to our reasoning with the AIDS-Denialists who have appeared in this thread.
“Debating with him for months on end about “the little midget” who he believes lives in a hidden basement under his house and ascends up into the attic every night via passageways INSIDE THE WALLS bore strong similarities to our reasoning with the AIDS-Denialists who have appeared in this thread.”
Eddy, yeah, You are quite rigth to sopt the similarities in the “reasoning”, its is very similar indeed:- ignoring any facts that go against their belief, focusing on inconsequential granular aspects of something to disprove the whole and using an argumentum ad ignorantiam to dispel the entire reasoning.
But its a sad situation when you are faced with the futility of arguing rational with someone suffering schizophrenia. The AIDS denial is a very disturbing and worrying thing indeed, especially for people trying to educate on reason and proof, rather then histeria and “belief”. You are right that people who are denying such massive body of evidence on HIV/AIDS are more then likely seeking to validate a conspiracy theory, or at the very least, looking for a validation that they can continue with unsafe sex practices, perhaps even to downgrade the seriousness and potential fatality of this virus to remove any fear they have of it.
None of these reasons of course validate the ignoring of the proof available for all to see.
Here is an example of the selective “reasoning” of AIDS-Denialists – and, as Will has succinctly put it, their “focusing on inconsequential granular aspects of something to disprove the whole”.
Rob, #108 wrote: “Listen, today George Monbiot – yes, George Monbiot! – issued an apology . . . for being taken in by the new religion known as climate change”
However, on his blog on November 23 2009 George Monbiot we find that what George Monbiot actually thinks and has expressed is the following:
“But do these revelations justify the sceptics’ claims that this is ‘the final nail in the coffin’ of global warming theory? Not at all. They damage the credibility of three or four scientists. They raise questions about the integrity of one or perhaps two out of several hundred lines of evidence. To bury manmade climate change, a far wider conspiracy would have to be revealed. . . The hacked emails are a hard knock, but the science of global warming withstands much more than that.”
I apologise. I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed. I would have been a better journalist if I had investigated their claims more closely.”
George Monbiot, 23/11/09
Seems those determined to prove an unproven theory will dodge and swerve all they can to maintain their stand. And how many more times? How does maintaining an open mind make me an Aids denialist? I neither agree with Charles’ theories but choose to keep an open mind until the truth either way is proven categorically. And truth, it seems, is a quality that is fast disappearing in this world. Well I won’t be bullied or intimidated into submission until my mind is made up by ‘my self’. I don’t need you or anyone to tell me what to believe, thanks all the same; I will decide that to myself based on irrefutable evidence. And if you think resorting to low down tricks like inferring I have some form of mental disorder is the way to go, then you are scraping the bottom of the barrel. Why not just accept that people are entitled to question things, and if they choose to sit on the fence until something is conclusively proven beyond all reasonable doubt, to just let them be? Btw Eddy, you do come over like a religious nutter that long ago lost his marbles but I won’t hold that against you either ;-)
Having been challenged, Rob at #124 NOW quotes George Monbiot as having said “I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed.”
And, yes, THIS, the above, is what George Monbiot actually said, i.e. that out of thousands of scientists who corroborate the evidence of climate-change he, George Monbiot, had been too trusting of three or four dodgy scientists.
But before Rob was challenged, he claimed in Comment #108 that George Monbiot had publically apologised in a national newspaper for having been TOTALLY “taken in by the new religion known as climate change”. Here in this thread at #108 Rob wrote:
“Listen, today George Monbiot – yes, George Monbiot! – issued an apology . . . for being taken in by the new religion known as climate change”.
After they have been challenged, isn’t pathetic to observe people like Rob trying to play the martyr! After having been shown up, Rob writes “I won’t be bullied or intimidated into submission”!
Furthermore, Rob self-righteously pleads “Why not just accept that people are entitled to question things?”
Rob needs to learn that everyone is entitled to question things, but ONLY and IF they apply their full, capable, disciplined, and educated mental powers to the task. A person is not entitled to challenge the veracity of things, if he or she has not examined the evidence logically, objectively, and with integrity.
Unfortunately, some people are simply unable to do so.
Some people, however, can humbly learn how to do it. First of all, they need to go back to school.
“I don’t need you or anyone to tell me what to believe”
There you go again! Believe?????? What’s there to believe? Either read the facts, or don’t. This isn’t a ecclesiastical debate, its science. And you haven’t read anything by the sound of it. You say you’re questioning, but where EXACTLY are you actually questioning anything??? All I can see is you just making silly statement like you will keep an “open-mind” to see if you believe in AIDS is caused by HIV. WTF?
Well good for you! What else do you chose to believe, the tooth fairy? Maybe she causes AIDS?
Do yourself a favour, get an education. Please. Then you can enter into a debate on your “belief” in AIDS. So far, you just sound stupid to someone who actually IS a scientist like me.
And Eddy is the only sane voice I can see on this thread in a while. Charles is just a fruit case with “theories” akin to shaman witchcraft. You’d do better to listen to Eddy than the nonsense you’re clearly reading.
Oh,. and Rob, your attack on scientists over an IRRELEVANT AND UNRELATED global warming incident, in science is called an association fallacy, and is an fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association.
I’d strongly recommend you make an effort to read more.
Will wrote “I’d strongly recommend you [Rob] make an effort to read more.” So right, Will, so true.
The problem though is that Rob, and people like him, need someone to discipline their reading. At the moment Rob’s reading like mad. (Well done, Rob!) But unfortunately he’s largely reading a lot of very easy (and cheaply exciting) nonsense, mainly, I suspect, on the internet.
Rob needs to be in a situation where a professor at a decent university tells him he has to read and understand a tome by the end of the month at which point Rob must present a precis of it to the professor and a seminar group of fellow students and be prepared to be torn to pieces if he shows evidence of not having carefully studied, analysed, and comprehended what he has read. Otherwise, I am afraid, Rob will continue to take the easy route: just switching on his computer each morning to wander aimlessly around the internet reading utter crap by utter nutters on utterly rubbishy websites that any fool can launch into the ether.
The internet is truly changing the nature of society. On the one hand, superb first-rate information is being communicated instantly round the world, while on the other millions are being encouraged into mental laziness and believing any cheap thrill.
“Rob will continue to take the easy route: just switching on his computer each morning to wander aimlessly around the internet reading utter crap by utter nutters on utterly rubbishy websites that any fool can launch into the ether.”
Agreed Eddy, the reality is that titillating conspiracy theories on badly written blogs make more interesting reading to some people than something actually true. Its the “Sun Newspaper” over “The Times” all over again….
I have to say, I never really heard that much about the whole “AIDS Denial” until I started reading with some disbelief to the nonsense put forward by Charles/Rob, and I am truly shocked (and a little appalled)…. Is this the sum total of people’s arrogance these days, then they think they have the option to “choose” to deny the very existance one of the most dangerous infections ever on the basis of some internet crackpot’s selective interpretation of pseudo-science?!?!?
Truly disturbing. And how embarrassing for these people to flaunt this staggering ignorance in public.
I have looked at all the facts objectively, while you always sweep what doesn’t fit in your conceptions and edit it. You’ve mentioned again Christine Maggiore. I won’t go into depth here, just the very fact that you seem to forget about his husband, who was in the relationship with her, and they always admitted to have sex as a normal married couple.
You seem to only mention again what fits you agenda here. You can only think of Christine, but seem to completely forget about the Lindsay’s daughter. She tested HIV positive when she was only months old and put on AZT. Following medical advice, she was taken off the medication, SHE IS 19 YEARS OLD TODAY, AND A PERFECTLY HEALTHY LOOKING GIRL! Apparently, so is that guy that posted here before, apparently so are several people throughout the world. Why do you deny those facts? Apparently to some, Christine is a featured star in House of Numbers, when in fact she’s on no more than 4 minutes altogether. Orthodoxy scientists are the real stars.
It seems I’ve got to repeat the same thing every single time. I haven’t posted ANYTHING from any dissident web site. Everything I’ve shown here are official documents. Inserts from probably the three most used HIV Tests !!
Why can’t I find sentences such as ‘there is no recognized standard ….’ in any other antibodies-response test for other diseases ????
Why ???
If the methods by which we’re considering someone HIV positive or negative aren’t reliable, what’s all the following research worth ????
Laughing OUT LOUD at the message above from “Charles”. Oh, the poor wounded little martyr! He runs from exception to rarity and back to exception again and somehow thinks he is honourable in denying one of the most dangerous and potentially deadly infections ever known to the human race!
This is probably a case of mental ill-health somewhere along the spectrum, from excessive egotism at one extreme to full-blown paranoid schizophrenia at the other. On the other hand, it might just be that belief in “good ‘ole Jesus” is his problem.
Give me proof that AIDS is not caused by HIV. Surely with all your histrionics you have ONE scientifically recognised paper to support your claims. Just one.
Until you produce that, your irrelevant conclusion to divert attention away from a fact is nothing more then what Eddy has already concluded: as you have no proof, so logically your more than likely suffering from a mental condition which leads you to believe in conspiratorial persecutions.
Here’s a paper for you to read. Charles, something to think abut in between your Clozapine medications:
Confronting AIDS: Update 1988, a report from the Institute of Medicine of the United States National Academy of Sciences, published in 1988. On page 2 of the Executive Summary, the panel writes that “…the evidence that HIV causes AIDS is scientifically conclusive.”
Can you produce something similar, from a scientific source? A paper, not a random internet quote?
No. I dare say you can’t.
This is not a debate, its called wiping the floor with your stupid so called argument.
1. Why have the “HIV proteins” used for antibody tests (in particular, the Western blot test) remained unchanged for 20 years (1-3), given the enormous “genetic variability/mutation rate” of HIV (4-6)?
Nearly twenty years after the advent of HIV Western blot testing, the major proteins considered to be “HIV proteins” remain as follows: p17/18, p24/25, p31/32, gp41, p53/55, gp120, and gp160 (1, 2). Yet genomic studies report 10^9 to 10^10 virions produced each day, and a mutation rate of approximately 3 x 10^-5 per nucleotide base per cycle of replication, leading to many variants of HIV in a single infected patient in the course of a single day (4). Many authors describe HIV as a “quasispecies” (4-6). It is anomalous that this “huge range of genetic configurations” (5) of “HIV quasispecies” which has developed over the past 20 years has always been detectable by antibody tests using the same core proteins, having sensitivity and specificity supposedly exceeding 99.7% (7).
You sent a Wikipedia article ??? Are you pulling my leg ???
Here’s some medical arguments:
Ronald B. Reisler, MD, MPH, Cong Han, PhD, William J. Burman, MD, Ellen M. Tedaldi, MD, and
James D. Neaton, PhD
It basically says side effects from HAART are killing as many people as AIDS itself. What’s the point in taking the meds then ? Profiting I suppose then … AIDS patients have been taking these extremely toxic medicines since the beginning of the hypothesis. Before that hypothesis. people dying from AIDS were people who were having extreme life-styles !!
current as of November 25, 2009. Online article and related content . 2006;296(12):1498-1506 (doi:10.1001/jama.296.12.1498) JAMA Benigno Rodríguez; Ajay K. Sethi; Vinay K. Cheruvu; et al.
This one says that there has to be another factors other than HIV which do cause the decline of CD4.
E. REMOR1, F. J. PENEDO2, B-J. SHEN2, & N. SCHNEIDERMAN2 1 Universidad Auto´ noma de Madr id, Spain, and 2University of Miami, USA
this one talks about how stress cause cd4 decline. If you look at it objectively, such thing will also be likely to happen in negative people
From the
*
Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
02139; the
‡
Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts 02115;
§
The Rockefeller
University, New York 10021; the
the last article is about the apoptosis hypothesis, but it clearly says ‘the mechanism by which HIV-1 induces CD4+ T cell death is not known. A fundamental issue is whether HIV-1 primarily induces direct killing of infected cells or indirectly causes death of uninfected bystander cells.’
BASICALLY THEY HAVEN’T SEEN THE RETROVIRUS KILLING THE CELL. JUST ASSUMED IT’S THE RETROVIRUS THAT’S KILLING IT. IN 10 YEARS TIME AT LEAST, OF COURSE !!! plenty of time for another things to happen, can’t it ?
I know you’ll just say this is quackery research … But I’m fine with it guys ! I’m not the uptight here.
“Why have the “HIV proteins” used for antibody tests”
You’re picking fault with a test. This is NOT proof that HIV does not lead to AIDS.
“You sent a Wikipedia article ??? Are you pulling my leg ???”
Wikipedia may have referenced the article I used, but its a VALID scientific paper. Are you saying it isn’t? Please, enlighten me. You have produced no proof so far. Also, your attack on the paper is just that:- an attack. No evidence to disprove it.
“people dying from AIDS were people who were having extreme life-styles”
This is rubbish. Again:- No proof.
So, on to the ONE paper you provided: E. REMOR1, F. J. PENEDO2, B-J. SHEN2, & N. SCHNEIDERMAN2 1 Universidad Auto´ noma de Madr id, Spain, and 2University of Miami, USA
This paper is NOT proof that AIDS does not derive form HIV! Are you even capable of reading the paper???? You are an idiot.
wWhat this paper states, is that it is also possible that psychological and social variables, such as depression, social
support or coping style, may mediate or moderate the relationship between stress and CD4 cell count. Clearly whatever meds you’re taking distort reality, but you’ll have to do better with us.
This does NOT prove your wild statements about AIDS. Ergo, not only do you not understand what you are reading, your are engaging in an argumentum ad ignorantiam, selective thinking, and shoehorning so called evidence to fit your theories.
You are truly pathetic.
“I know you’ll just say this is quackery research … But I’m fine with it guys ! I’m not the uptight here.”
Obviously you’re not, or you wouldn’t insist in using long histrionic sentences in block capitals. And actually, they have seen the virus killing the cell, HIV infected cells have been clearly observed. So, either you’re a fool or a liar, which one is it?
So, lets recap:
(1) You don’t read the papers you claim back up your position, so clearly you have no scientific knowledge or education.
(2) You STILL have no proof to your statements.
(3) You engage in fallacy logic to bend the truth to suit you and make attacks on fact rather then address the issue.
(4) You engage in conspiratorial theories as “logical conclusions”
Conclusion: Eddy is right, your behaviour and thoughts are not rational…. you certainly aren’t clever, that’s for sure.
The more you type, the more I agree with Eddy:- You’re schizophrenic. Perhaps you need some medical help?
Oh, and in case that lunatic Charles comes back with another snotty but uninformative retort, here is my proof:
“HIV infected cells have been clearly observed”
Paper: Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres (2009, November 16). No-entry zones
Abstract: “Like all retroviruses, the AIDS virus (HIV) integrates its DNA into the genome of the infected cell. As integration sites, HIV usually prefers active genes that are transcribed frequently. This is advantageous for the virus, because this is where it finds large amounts of enzymes which are responsible for transcription. The virus abuses this cellular equipment for its own replication.”
I’m still waiting on Charles to produce ONE paper which is scientifically recognised where I can see the actual data that outlines that HIV does not cause AIDS. Just one paper. Not shoehorned quotes.
I live in hope that the poor fool can see beyond the darkness…. sigh.
Eddy, Jean-Paul and co., if it’s any consolation to you, 500 years ago similar lynch mobs like you could have had me hung, drawn and quartered for refusing to believe that the earth was flat as no evidence existed to prove it was. Hope you feel even more smug and self-satisfied now!
Actually, Rob, its people like you and Charles, who refuse to accept evidence on the basis that science is some kind of “belief” system, that accused Galileo of heretical science.
You stupidly think you can pick and choose to “believe” what scientific evidence is out there, rather then actually taking the time to evaluate the proven data.
Lets look at this objectively: There is overwhelming (and I really mean overwhelming) body of data and evidence, proven by scientific methods, that HIV causes AIDS. You on the other hand, think in your staggering ignorance and arrogance, you can pick and choose which ones you “believe” in without any insight??? Please, the very notion is absurd!
And your arrogance to condemn those who actually take the time to understand these scientific studies is truly offensive to the intellect.
Hope you feel even more educated then you are self-satisfied now!
Only getting to read this thread now, and I am reading some of these comments with utter shock!!!!
@Rob – what exactly are you basing your selection on? As Will has rightly pointed out there is a huge amount of scientific research which show the correlation between HIV/AIDS, and on the other hand, there is not one shred of scientific proof (other than a few deranged websites) that HIV is unrelated to AIDS. The fact you’re making it out that you’re so carefully and intellectually weighing up the evidence is laughable! Grow up, mate!
@Charles – All I can say is. Oh. My. God. You’re frickin nuts! You haven’t one shred of proof for what youre saying and the others are running circles around you!!!!
Well done Eddy and Will for standing up to this clown, but I think he’s out of his depth here.
‘Wikipedia may have referenced the article I used, but its a VALID scientific paper. Are you saying it isn’t? Please, enlighten me. You have produced no proof so far. Also, your attack on the paper is just that:- an attack. No evidence to disprove it.’
Most people in this blog have only attacked the proofs I’ve provided, instead of giving logical explanations and evidences to refute them
‘wWhat this paper states, is that it is also possible that psychological and social variables, such as depression, social support or coping style, may mediate or moderate the relationship between stress and CD4 cell count. Clearly whatever meds you’re taking distort reality, but you’ll have to do better with us.’
Remember how we gays were psychologically punished in the eighties and throughout history ? Do you know at all why the Gay Pride takes place on the last weekend of June ? Maybe the word Stonewall doesn’t mean anything to you after all … For decades we have been harassed and attacked by society, plus in the eighties we begun to have this super-fast lifestyle. Drugs, unprotected sex, steroids, ect, ect. I don’t think we needed back then a tiny virus for our immune system to collapse given the circumstances. But that’s something hard to acknowledge.
‘And actually, they have seen the virus killing the cell, HIV infected cells have been clearly observed. So, either you’re a fool or a liar, which one is it?’
They have seen the infected cells. But I dare you to post here the one paper stating the official process by which all the scientific body agree that HIV is killing T Cells.
Of course, I won’t be able to show you an official orthodox paper stating exactly that HIV does not cause AIDS. But you can choose to deny all the facts that suggest that statement.
1) Unreliable Tests
a. They’re not specific.
b. They are cross-reactive.
2) Lack of evidence that the virus is actually killing T Cells
3) Evidence that other factors do bring the immune system down
4) Evidence that HIV is only MINIMALLY affecting the CD4 (read the paper I posted)
Reference:
Daniel Halperin, an HIV epidemiology researcher at the Harvard Medical School of Public Health, said: “There has generally been a misalignment from the donors. It is time for a rethink. Many people in the west believe all Africans are impoverished and infected with HIV. Yet the reality is that most countries have stable HIV prevalence of less than 3%. What most people really need are things such as clean water and family planning. Even tuberculosis and malaria get far less money than HIV. In some cases these sectors have inadvertently been hurt by the focus on HIV.”
“Most people in this blog have only attacked the proofs I’ve provided, instead of giving logical explanations and evidences to refute them”
No, we have given evidence. What you have given is shoehorned quotes and misinterpretation of selective works. And STILL you didn’t address the points made in the paper, just a plea of martyrdom. How uninspiring.
“What this paper states, is that it is also possible that psychological and social variables, such as depression, social support or coping style, may mediate or moderate the relationship between stress and CD4 cell count.”
Did you address this piece either? No. Why? You can’t understand it, and have no proof to make a counter debate. Just a rant about persecution. Something I’m sure you’re well versed in persecution theories, Charles, given your conspiratorial delusions you’ve embarrassingly bandered about in public here.
“They have seen the infected cells.”
You said earlier there is no scientific proof of this. Now you’re saying there is? Can’t you make up your mind? If this isn’t a demonstration of how feeble your rationale is with regards to this, I don’t know what is.
“Of course, I won’t be able to show you an official orthodox paper stating exactly that HIV does not cause AIDS”
Why not? If this is so glaringly obvious, then it should easy to prov! Proving something isn’t in science is infinitely easier then proving it is, and yet I have manager to show you the science to prove the link, and you have shown me none. Why is that, do you think? Oh, wait, its becuase you’re making it up as you go along.
Let me go again, for the benefit of other readers, a scientific appproach:-
Proof of HIV causing AIDS:- Koch’s postulates, as listed below, have served as the litmus test for determining the cause of any epidemic disease:
1. Epidemiological association: the suspected cause must be strongly associated with the disease – numerous studies from around the world show that virtually all AIDS patients are HIV-seropositive.
2. Isolation: the suspected pathogen can be isolated – and propagated – outside the host – modern culture techniques have allowed the isolation of HIV in virtually all AIDS patients, as well as in almost all HIV-seropositive individuals with both early- and late-stage disease. In addition, the polymerase chain and other sophisticated molecular techniques have enabled researchers to document the presence of HIV genes in virtually all patients with AIDS, as well as in individuals in earlier stages of HIV disease.
3. Transmission pathogenesis: transfer of the suspected pathogen to an uninfected host, man or animal, produces the disease in that host – for example, transmission of HIV from a Florida dentist to six patients has been documented by genetic analyses of virus isolated from both the dentist and the patients. The dentist and three of the patients developed AIDS and died, and at least one of the other patients has developed AIDS. Five of the patients had no HIV risk factors other than multiple visits to the dentist for invasive procedures (O’Brien, Goedert. Curr Opin Immunol 1996;8:613; O’Brien, 1997; Ciesielski et al. Ann Intern Med 1994;121:886).
This is science. Basically, Charles, you can’t produce any scientific proof. Ergo, you are one of the following: a liar, a fool, or a madman.
You go get the help you need, its glaringly obvious now you’re not a rational person. You’ve convinced no-one here of your mumbo jumbo conspiracies, only furthered the case of true science that HIV is the cause of AIDS. Thank you.
“I don’t think we needed back then a tiny virus for our immune system to collapse given the circumstances”
Ah, I almost missed this one! This is quite revealing. So, AIDS is something you see as personal attack on being gay or gay people… perhaps you’ve been diagnosed as HIV positive? And let me guess, you refuse to accept it will give you AIDS.
This is not about science at all, is it? This is about your denial of your condition! Don’t bother to deny it. You see HIV from a personal vendetta point of view and you in denial about your infection, possible a little angry towards the scientific community for the lack of cure?
Bingo Will. Fantastic observation mate, you have a skilled mind indeed.
Also, to add my own piece to back up AIDS & HIV case:
Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
And I calculate this to be 99.98% of AIDS sufferers had HIV.
“Charles” in #135 stated “people dying from AIDS were people who were having extreme life-styles!!” “Charles” appears incapable of keeping in his mind that hundreds of thousands of adults and children, male and female, who most certainly have never indulged in any “extreme life-styles” have died from AIDS.
“Charles” in #136 wrote “I know you’ll just say this is quackery research … But I’m fine with it guys!”
“Charles” clearly IS “fine” with his own extraordinary “quackery research”.
Would “Charles” like to tell us what scientific pedigree he has that enables me to correctly read and interpret highly complex medical papers?
Would “Charles” like to admit to us that he has never written, nor is he equipped to write, a paper accepted by a reputable medical journal?
Re. the paper from “E. REMOR1, F. J. PENEDO2, B-J. SHEN2, & N. SCHNEIDERMAN2″, thanks, Will, for checking it out. I suspected as much. Again, “Charles” reveals paranoid selectivity and, thus, an inability to interpret a scientific paper, nor any paper for that matter, with accuracy. “Charles” is a tadpole floundering around in a sea of snapper!
Rob at #139 wrote: “Eddy, Jean-Paul and co., if it’s any consolation to you, 500 years ago similar lynch mobs like you could have had me hung, drawn and quartered for refusing to believe that the earth was flat as no evidence existed to prove it was. Hope you feel even more smug and self-satisfied now!”
Bloody hell! “Rob” has publicly identified himself with the great martyrs of history! We are clearly talking about a disturbed ego-inflated personality here. Rather than present indisputable evidence when challenged, he simply propels himself up onto plinth! In your dreams, Rob, in your sad deluded little dreams.
But there’s a terrible sadness here, everybody. The Paranoid Schizophrenic is so easily laughed at and mocked. One can so easily lose sight of the fact that these people are suffering from a serious mental illness. Nothing can be done for them until they admit it. In some countries, they can forcibly be taken into care by the state, as being a danger to themselves and others, but I understand this is not the case in England. Unless a paranoid schizophrenic actually does physical or bodily harm to another person he must finally admit that he is ill before he can be treated. Treatment consists of powerful drugs (which do help) and regular Behavioural Therapy. Paranoid Schizophrenia is a mental illness which the patient has to deal with on a daily basis for the rest of their lives. It’s a tragic situation.
Jonny, thanks for coming in, reviewing the state of the debate, and giving your objective opinion, . . . and for telling Rob and “Charles” how totally weak they appear.
“Charles” at #142 wrote: “in the eighties we begun to have this super-fast lifestyle. Drugs, unprotected sex, steroids, ect, ect. I don’t think we needed back then a tiny virus for our immune system to collapse given the circumstances. But that’s something hard to acknowledge.”
The above extraordinary statement from “Charles” proves that what he cannot acknowledge is that HE and his immediate circle (i.e., those on the hard drug-crazed North American club circuit) do not represent the entire cohort of people worldwide who have been infected by HIV. “Charles” has therefore manifested the egocentricity of the young child. Like the young child “Charles” thinks he is the centre of the universe. As children develop they learn that (unfortunately for them) they are NOT the centre of the universe, that there are other people out there with egos as well. It would appears that “Charles” writes from some fast gay-ghetto situation which he simply cannot see beyond.
“Charles” #142 wrote: “Of course, I won’t be able to show you an official orthodox paper stating exactly that HIV does not cause AIDS.”
Extraordinary! “Charles” has thus publicly admitted he cannot produce ONE SINGLE reputable medical paper proving that HIV does not cause AIDS and yet elsewhere we have all seen him very clearly claim (with all the fervour of the deluded and delirious religious) that AIDS is NOT caused by HIV.
Will “Charles” cringe and hide under rock at this exposition of his bare-faced foolery? Probably not. Only the rational individual, with a sense of integrity, can do that.
“Charles” quotes in #142 a Daniel Halperin who apparently wrote that “Many people in the west believe all Africans are impoverished and infected with HIV. Yet the reality is that most countries have stable HIV prevalence of less than 3%. What most people really need are things such as clean water and family planning. Even tuberculosis and malaria get far less money than HIV.”
“Charles” has here demonstrated his inability to rationally comprehend a fairly simple piece of text. “Charles” does not see that Halperin is NOT saying in the above quote that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, but that Halperin is saying Africa still retains its traditional and quite separate health problems, generated by malnutrition, starvation, lack of hygiene, etc., and that overall these problems affect more people than Africa’s HIV/AIDS does.
Will, at #143, bravo for producing Koch’s postulates. If “Charles”, or Rob, has a shred of rationality left, this will have turned their faces utterly beetroot-red with shame. I suspect, however, that in sad, sick, arrogance, they will both simply shrug their shoulders, stick their noses in the air, and choose to continue to believe what gives them their thrill . . . rather than the truth – which is not about cheap conspiratorial thrills. Maybe they’ll now just switch off their computers and go settle in front of their tellies and watch re-runs of LAPD and 24 – cause that’s the kind of stuff that, in their view, real life is all about.
Jonny, at #145, well done! “Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).”
I think we’re pretty well done here, guys. These vacuous air-headed lightweights have been flattened.
Unfortunately though, if there is no integrity or if there is serious mental illness, that won’t mean they won’t be popping again . . . like bodies/corpses in those ridiculous Hollywood B horror movies!
“I think we’re pretty well done here, guys. These vacuous air-headed lightweights have been flattened.”
Yep, totally agree, Eddie. And you spotted that bit about lifestyle too? Yeah, I’m sure the unfortunate masses in Africa have contracted AIDS from their lavish lifestyles of drugs and all night parties! How insulting can this man be to those dying of this terrible disease?
Jonny, thanks for the vote of confidence *blush* :) and nice bit of research you found. As you said, 99.98% correlation is fairly conclusive.
I believe the final statement should be: quod erat demonstrandum.
And “Charles”, Rob, and any others inclined to the foolishness of AIDS-Denialism, “quod erat demonstrandum” (or “QED”) is written at the end of an argument to show the completion of the proof.
Will, Jonny, and others. There’s an equally deluded individual over on this thread. His name is Rahman. He’s another extremist with blinkered vision and total lack of objectivity. This one’s a Muslim.
“And “Charles”, Rob, and any others inclined to the foolishness of AIDS-Denialism”
Er, Eddy, where have I denied that HIV causes Aids? Again, I have to reitertae I sit on the fence as an open minded person until the proof, however already persuasive, is 100% conclusive. That is why I sat on the fence about so-called “global warming”, which has now been proven to be false by its very propagators who now call it “climate change”, which itself is fast becoming debunked as this week’s events testify. If anyone is pathologically or schizophrenically afflicted it bullies with closed minds who refuse to allow the alternative viewpoint to be heard. That is why the climate change pushers are now looking oh so stupid and are scurrying around like lost sheep trying to find a piece of evidence that actually stands up to put their agenda back on course. Poor misguided luvvies!
Kindly explain what you think are the facts as to how HIV infection spreads from one person to another.
(You will need to refute the chains or networks of infection from one person to another that have been documented.)
(You will need to refute the evidence that when one individual is found to have been infected with HIV, sexual partners with which he or she has had unprotected sex are more often than not found to be infected as well.)
Rob wrote at #89: “If Karri Stokely was already on AVRs for several years, isn’t it possible to conjecture that it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her in the end? Just using my own logic to question things here… ”
Rob wrote the above after having read the following at #84:
“Karri Stokely is the pinup girl of the denialist movement. Allegedly she gave up taking ARVs after several years following a +ve diagnosis. Her T-Cell count , as reported by her, is scarily low yet somehow she looks in good shape. She’ll be dead in a few years if she continues to refuse treatment judging by her latest lab results.”
Thus, after reading in #84 that the woman is still alive, Rob wrote in #89 that she is dead, i.e. he wrote “it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her”.
We have here a perfect demonstration of the LAZY, MUDDLED or ILL thinking that is engaged in by AIDS-Denialists.
One suspects they subsist on an intellectual diet of day-time chat-shows, gutter-press newspapers, and all the paranoid rubbish posted by idiots on the internet.
Rob had nothing to say to the posting by “G” at #94. Just another example of ignoring the evidence that refutes the idiocy of the AIDS-Denialist’s position.
Rob has also ignored the information provided by Snout at #109: “Rob, no there are numerous meaningful ways to identify the virus including antigen testing, culture and and nucleic acid testing by PCR. The reason antibody testing is the usual method for diagnosis is that for most people it is quick, inexpensive, and has a sensitivity and specificity as good if not better than methods used to detect the virus itself in most circumstances.”
Considering the fact that there are many, many men who have sex with men probably more than gay-identified men) but who do not identify as gay but have girlfriends and wives, where is the crossover of HIV into the heterosexual population that was predicted? There are married men being shagged senseless at Chariots, Hampstead Heath, by escorts and so on on a near weekly basis who are then going home and shagging their girlfriends/wives senseless. Why is this phenomenon not showing up in the HIV statistics? “Straight”-identified men are not developing AIDS symptoms and dropping dead due to not having come forward for testing in time, so what is going on here? HIV has remained a more or less gay thing, although it has had the opportunity to become a mainstream epidemic in the UK but hasn’t, thanks also to the fact that unlike Africa we are a developed nation with sanitary conditions and food for all. I do find that extremely odd, and is one of the reasons I sit on the fence until a persuasive argument either way can convince me to make up my mind.
Unhindered by any formal medical education; a couple of observations:
The pharmaceutical industry generally buys it’s way out of trouble, however they have been convicted of fraud on at least one occasion. Anyone who takes their word for anything is a fool.
In house of numbers one of the co-discoverers of HIV, Luc Montagnier admits that HIV is easily cured within weeks with a good diet without HIV drugs.
The other, Gallo has been found to be a fraud. http://www.fearoftheinvisible.com/fraud-in-key-hiv-research-background
They might still have a case if anyone could claim the reward for proving the existence of HIV, and providing documentary evidence of the validity of the HIV tests. http://www.heallondon.org/win-p50000.html
And it would help if in 25 years and billions of dollars some scientist could show how HIV causes aids!
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.” Kary Mullis.
Need I say more?
Seth Kalichman say’s: The movie has fooled many people into thinking there is actually a debate among scientists about the cause of AIDS.
Quite right, the orthodoxy won’t sit and debate with the so called denialists because they don’t even have a pair of deuces to debate with.
“Luc Montagnier admits that HIV is easily cured within weeks with a good diet without HIV drugs.”
He says nothing of the kind, bob. Please see comment 114.
And thanks for demonstrating the futility of trying to “debate” denialists. You go to the trouble of carefully and patiently refuting a denialist claim from someone who is clearly unhindered by any relevant education, let alone “formal medical education”.
Then someone else pops up a few posts later and spouts exactly the same denialist canard.
Luc Montaigner: ‘We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will GET RID OF THE VIRUS within a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.’
Interviewer: ‘If you have a good immune system, then your body can actually get rid of HIV’?
Luc Montaigner: ‘YES’
Interviewer: ‘If you take poor Afrincans who’s been infected and you build up their immune system, is it possible for them to also naturally GET RID OF it?
Luc Montaigner: ‘I would think so. It’s an important knowledge, which is completely NEGLECTED. People always think of drugs and vaccine.’
Interviewer: ‘There;s no money in nutrition, right?’
Luc Montaigner: ‘There;s no profit, yes.’
doesnt sound like “nothing of the kind” to me snout.
I am afraid I don’t understand your next paragraph, but I assume you are saying that I am without any relevant education. This is what I have come to expect from fools who believe the pharmaceutical industry and their shills; insults and gobledook, anything but address the salient points.
Another observation: Hasn’t anyone else noticed that the only people suffering from AIDS (outside of Africa of course) are the ones who get tested and have treatment? If it was only half as infectious as what has been claimed, after 25 years the hospitals would be full and we would be tripping up over AIDS victims in the street. Does anybody know anyone or knows anyone who knows anyone who hasnt been tested and suddenly goes down with fully blown AIDS?
You want more?
Bob, I can’t make it any clearer than I already have. Montagnier was talking about the factors involved when someone who is exposed to HIV clears the virus out of their system before it seeds the lymphoid tissues and becomes chronic and cannot be cleared by the immune system. Once this has happened a person becomes “HIV positive”. There are lots of factors involved, and Montagnier thinks that nutritional status might be one of them. He thinks that if a person suffering significant malnutrition is exposed to HIV it is more likely that this will result in lymphoid tissue seeding and chronic infection (HIV positive status) than if a well-nourished person has the same type of exposure.
Montagnier is saying that he thinks this hypothesis deserves more attention, rather than depending on things like post exposure prophylaxis with antiretrovirals to prevent exposure progressing to seroconversion to HIV positive status. He may be right about this, but it is still a hypothesis that has not been demonstrated.
What he is most definitely NOT saying is that people can clear chronic HIV infection through diet AFTER they have seroconverted to HIV positive status.
This is now the third time I have explained this same point on this thread.
I’ll ask you the same question I asked Charles. Do you think Montagnier is talking about people clearing HIV from their bodies through nutrition before or after seroconversion to HIV positive?
I’m quite happy to deal with your subsequent “points” but one at a time, please.
“Just out of interest, Rob, just what kind of evidence is it that you require to convince you that HIV causes AIDS?”
@Bob:
“They might still have a case if anyone could claim the reward for proving the existence of HIV, and providing documentary evidence of the validity of the HIV tests. http://www.heallondon.org/win-p50000.html
And it would help if in 25 years and billions of dollars some scientist could show how HIV causes aids!
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.” Kary Mullis.
Need I say more?”
PS: That is not to say HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, I just need to be satisfied by concrete clinical evidence that it does, and for that reason – and for similar reasons why I refused to buy into the now disintegrating argument for global warming – I remain sitting, sore-arsed, on the fence.
“Another observation: Hasn’t anyone else noticed that the only people suffering from AIDS (outside of Africa of course) are the ones who get tested and have treatment? If it was only half as infectious as what has been claimed, after 25 years the hospitals would be full and we would be tripping up over AIDS victims in the street. Does anybody know anyone or knows anyone who knows anyone who hasnt been tested and suddenly goes down with fully blown AIDS?”
That is exactly the point I was making about men who have sex with men but do not identify as gay. Where are the masses of non-gay men suddenly developing full-blown AIDS and dropping dead like flies, and their girlfriends and wives? Nearly all heterosexual cases in the UK are African asylum seekers. It just ain’t happening!
Rob, the £50,000 “prize” was made through the AIDS denialist magazine Continuum which was edited by Jody Wells – until he died from AIDS. Then it was edited by Huw Christie – who also died from AIDS. The magazine has folded, for obvious reasons.
The $50,000 prize offered by Christine Maggiore’s Alive and Well organisation expired on 29th April 2009, unlike Maggiore herself who expired on 27th December 2008 from – you guessed it – AIDS.
These kinds of “awards” are not offered in good faith. The existence of HIV or the validity of tests do not hinge on now-deceased individuals conceding they were wrong and handing over large amounts of cash. In fact these kinds of awards are a pretty reliable indicator that the persons “offering” them are doing so as a rhetorical device to promote pseudoscience. Another good example is “Dr Dino’s” (Kent Hovind’s) offer of $250,000 to anyone who can “prove evolution”.
No serious scientist believes these are bona fide, even leaving out the fact that Hovind is serving a ten-year sentence for tax fraud, and Wells, Christie and Maggiore have all since died of AIDS.
Perhaps I’m overly skeptical, but I don’t think they are a good guide to scientific reality.
Another unscientific observation: How is it when the worlds foremost expert on retroviruses makes the claim that HIV cannot be the causes of AIDS (and backs it up with an unprecedented 6 peer reviewed paper) We don’t get to hear about it in the media? Prof Gordon Stewart predicted to within 500 the number of new AIDS cases, far more accurately that the orthodoxy,on that alone he must be given credence. Then throw in another 2000 plus academics from rethinking aids http://rethinkingaids.com/ And yet not a mention in the press? You know, if someone is throwing the fear of death into me I believe I have a basic human right to know if there is a difference of scientific opinion, and then I can make up my own mind,thank you very much, as to whether or not they are all nutters,heretics or sensation seekers or whatever. In fact why does not the orthodoxy sit down and debate the issue if they are so sure of themselves? If P Duesberg is responsible for untold deaths in Africa, as has been claimed,why not arrest or sue him? Something is clearly wrong here.
snout I was actually talking about the healondon prize which I believe is still unclaimed. And of course they would say its not bona fide if they can’t prove the existence of HIV. I never mentioned maggiore and I find it sickening how you people can gloat over someones death and no, I don’t want to debate her cause of death. I don’t particularly want to get bogged down in what Luc M said but meant or meant but didn’t say either.I would rather stick with the bigger picture.
If denialists are so certain that public debates can settle scientific questions, why don’t they hold debates among themselves?
Duesberg could debate de Harven on whether HIV is exogenous or endogenous.
The winner could then debate the Perthians on whether HIV even exists.
Henry Bauer could debate his claim that epidemiology proves AIDS cannot be sexually transmitted with Margulis who suggests it’s really caused by syphilis.
And then any of them could debate Lenny Horowitz on whether HIV was created in a US government lab, and what precisely was Duesberg’s role in this.
I’m not sure which “foremost expert on retroviruses” you are talking about, but if you’re thinking of Duesberg then it’s worth mentioning that he has never done any practical work with HIV or on AIDS. He has no expertise in these areas at all.
His theories, which are based largely on his misunderstandings of epidemiology and medicine – two other fields in which he is utterly unqualified – did in fact get some coverage in the press. But that was over 20 years ago. Perhaps you missed it.
They have long since been discredited. I’d call this an “argument from authority” double-fail.
And “2000 plus academics”? You are kidding me. Have you ever looked at the list? It is made up mostly of homeopaths, students and bored retirees. Very few are “academics”, and those few who are mostly work in fields entirely unrelated to HIV or AIDS.
nuff said, thanks for that Rob and may I recommend http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm
An excellent site very easy to navigate and pick and choose from respectable Drs and scientists from every background connected with AIDS. Microbiology,epidemiology,immunology,toxicology etc as well as a section from investigative journalists including gay activist John Lauritsen. Plenty for the layperson like myself and if there are minor difference between them they are all united in one thing HIV (if it exists) cannot possibly be the cause of AIDS. I can tell you one single cause of immune system breakdown and that is AZT,(see John Laritsen http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/censorship.htm) it kills everything; T cells, B cells, red blood cells, anyone who takes enough of that stuff will die a slow wasting death with the exact same identical symptoms as fully blown AIDS. It is highly likely that that is what killed Freddie Mercury, Kenny Everret etc. Nureyev certainly didn’t die of AIDS he suffered from,I think, pericarditis, which is a heart thing and not on the list of 29 AIDS defining conditions. But don’t worry,”now they only prescribe a small amount of AZT… and the patients are living longer” You couldn’t make it up.
You see Snout,in science you have to have evidence that can be peer reviewed,otherwise I could say that x=y coz my mother told me. And what we have here is a multibillion dollar criminal organization promoting an unpeer reviewed and unproven hypothesis. And I think I’ll let people go to rethinking aids and virus myth and see for themselves good night all
HIV/AIDS denialists can’t even agree if HIV exists or not. That’s how wacky the denialist project is.
In fact, they’re going through a hilariously messy divorce over the subject right now. It’s hard to work out which denialist faction is nuttier than the other. Judean People’s Front anyone?
Snout says I’m not sure which “foremost expert on retroviruses” you are talking about, but if you’re thinking of Duesberg then it’s worth mentioning that he has never done any practical work with HIV or on AIDS. He has no expertise in these areas at all.
He was the first person to map all the different gene strands that make up a retrovirus. http://www.duesberg.com/media/ebhiv.html
This by Gallo:
“He began working with retroviruses around 1966, and he was among the first, or perhaps even the very first, to characterise their structural proteins. He was involved in the first work that provided a genetic map of retroviruses…http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/rgintropd.htm
Snout says: His theories, which are based largely on his misunderstandings of epidemiology and medicine – two other fields in which he is utterly unqualified – did in fact get some coverage in the press. But that was over 20 years ago. Perhaps you missed it.
Here is his education:
University of Wurzburg, Germany
1956-1958: Vordiplom (Chemistry)
University of Basel, Switzerland
1958-1959
University of Munich, Germany
1959-1961: Diplom (Chemistry)
University of Frankfurt, Germany
1961-1963: Ph.D. (Chemistry)
Research & Professional Experience:
Max Planck Institute for Virus Research, Tubingen Germany
1963: postdoctoral Fellow
Department of Molecular Biology and Virus Laboratory; since 1959 Dept. of Molecular & Cell Biology University of California, Berkeley CA
1964: Assistant research Virologist and Postdoctoral Fellow
1968: Assistant Professor in Residence and Research Biochemist
1970: Assistant Professor
1971: Associate Professor
1973 to present Professor
And Honors:
1969: Merck Award
1971: California Scientist of the Year Award
1981: First Annual American Medical Centre Oncology Award
1986: Outstanding Investigator Award National Institute of Health
1986: Elected National Academy of Sciences
1986-1987: Fogarty Scholar-in-Residence at the National Institutes of Health Bethesda MD
1988: Wissenschaftspreis, Hannover Germany
1988: Lichtfield Lecturer, Oxford England
1990: C.J. Watson Lecturer, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis MN
1992: Fisher Distinguished Professor, University of North Texas, Denton TX
1992: Shaffer Alumni Lecturer, Tulane University, New Orleans LA
None of Duesberg’s education or accomplishments are in medicine or epidemiology. He has never done so much as a minute’s productive work on HIV or AIDS. He has no medical training or qualifications. His epidemiology, which comprises the basis of his discredited arguments, is woeful – sub-undergraduate level.
If you are going to make an argument from authority (and I strongly suggest you don’t – it’s a kind of informal logical fallacy) then you shouldn’t choose an “authority” who has no credibilty in the field you are citing him in.
His expertise in the area of AIDS is zilch. And it shows. Yes I have read “AIDS ACQUIRED BY DRUG CONSUMPTION AND OTHER NONCONTAGIOUS RISK FACTORS”. It’s pathetic. I’ve also read most of his other publications. They are similarly woeful.
If you’re interested, I even did a critique of his latest bit of drivel, which was ignominiously withdrawn from Medical Hypotheses a couple of months ago, it was so bad. Medical Hypotheses is not exactly the most reputable scientific outlet – they’ll basically publish anything. But not even they will stoop to Duesberg. Here’s the critique (the comments thread is even more scathing):
Rob at #152: wrote “There are married men being shagged senseless at Chariots, Hampstead Heath, by escorts and so on on a near weekly basis who are then going home and shagging their girlfriends/wives senseless. Why is this phenomenon not showing up in the HIV statistics? “Straight”-identified men are not developing AIDS symptoms and dropping dead due to not having come forward for testing in time, so what is going on here?”
Rob, please provide hard evidence of your vast numbers of heterosexual married men who you imply are being sexually passive and having anal intercourse without the use of condoms.
Honestly, your assertions and your assumptions are breathtakingly foolish!
Excellent article about these AIDS-denying loonies here:
Science, pseudoscience and professional responsibility
24.11.2009
Surveys have consistently shown that over 40% of Americans do not believe in evolution. It is not surprising, then, that our society is vulnerable to being fooled by people who misrepresent scientific or historical facts. By Dr. J.P. Moore, PHD.
We are now all too familiar with the crazed activities of the ‘Birthers’, an ad hoc, right wing political group refusing to accept President Obama was born in the United States. Earlier this year, we saw media coverage of the insane views of a clique that refuses to accept American astronauts walked on the moon 40 years ago. The “9/11 Truth Movement” flourishes on the internet, arguing that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not hit by hijacked jetliners, but were blown up by the CIA at the behest of Israeli intelligence. Conspiracy groups like these usually do little real damage to society, although the activities of the “9/11 Truth Movement” foster anti-Semitism and insult the memories of the nearly 3000 Americans who died on 9/11. Unfortunately, other equally bizarre and factually unfounded, internet-based conspiracy groups can, and do, harm, even kill, significant numbers of people. This is not just an American problem, as the ripple effects of conspiracy theories spread worldwide via the internet. Indeed, the most serious consequences of one such group’s actions have been felt in Africa.
A small group of misguided and, in some cases malicious, individuals have long promoted the view that HIV does not cause AIDS or, in an even more bizarre twist of the truth, that HIV does not even exist. An even nastier variation of the theme is that HIV was created by the US government as a device to kill “undesirables”, such as people with black skins or who are gay. None of these opinions is true, and there is not a shred of credible scientific or historic evidence to support them. Unfortunately, the Mbeki administration in South Africa put in place policies based around the premises that HIV is harmless but anti-retroviral drugs are dangerous. This decision caused over 330,000 unnecessary deaths during the first half of this decade. And yet the “AIDS Denialists” even question this death toll, a tactic no different from Holocaust Deniers asking “Did six million really die”. Many Americans and Europeans have also died, persuaded by the “AIDS Denialists” that they did not need to take anti-retroviral drugs to treat their HIV infections. Distrust of the federal government and the medical establishment among African American communities has adversely affected AIDS prevention and treatment programs in the USA, in no small measure due to the crazy belief that HIV was created as a weapon of selective genocide. Indeed, this particular rumor even re-surfaced in the last Presidential election campaign. Real people die real deaths as a direct result of the pseudo-science promoted by the “AIDS Denialists”.
In a similar vein, groups that claim vaccination is harmful have harmed global immunization programs, and thereby caused avoidable deaths worldwide. A conspiracy theory group often called “The Mercuries” has been particularly vociferous in its argument that a mercury-containing preservative found in some vaccines causes autism. There is less mercury in a vaccine shot than in a tuna fish sandwich, and the mercury present in the fish is in a more dangerous chemical form. Overall, a now vast body of solid scientific evidence has proven that autism has no connection whatsoever to any vaccine or vaccine component. This is now settled science within the professional community, which understands that the cause of autism is based in human genetics. But despite the facts, the distrust of vaccines that has been created by “The Mercuries” and other anti-vaccine conspiracy groups is now damaging efforts to counter swine flu by vaccination, both in America and, increasingly, elsewhere. The polio vaccine eradication campaign has been harmed, notably in Nigeria, by rumors that the vaccine is contaminated with dangerous chemicals, or even with HIV, or that it was designed by “white people to sterilize black people”. As a result, this dangerous infection has still not been eradicated from Africa, where it lingers on, killing and paralyzing yet more people.
The mindsets of the “AIDS Denialists” and “The Mercuries” are similar to each other. Both groups are irrational on the science, twisting the facts to a perverse extent and stubbornly ignoring and rejecting all the evidence that speaks against their views. Each group is bolstered by a very small number of scientists whose paper qualifications provide them with a superficial, wafer-thin veneer of academic credibility. The two conspiracy groups contain individuals who will resort to threats of violence and who harass those who dare to speak up against them. A common tactic of both groups is to smear scientists and physicians who recommend AIDS drugs or the use of vaccines as being nothing more than paid tools of the pharmaceutical industry. Yet both the “AIDS Denialists” and “The Mercuries” are supported by promoters of “alternative (i.e., quack) therapies” who have a financial interest in damning approved anti-HIV drugs or licensed vaccines. “Ambulance-chasing” lawyers have also been heavily involved with the anti-vaccine groups, fostering the hopes of grieving parents that they (and the lawyers) might receive a payout from a scientifically ill-informed jury.
The conspiracy theory groups also receive the support of a small, but noisy, subset of media professionals who seem attracted to the personalities involved, smelling stories in the controversies. This has been particularly problematic recently in the anti-vaccine arena, where some American chat shows and right wing news programs have given undue attention to “The Mercuries”. Bizarre as it may seem, the views of medically unqualified Hollywood celebrities are given equal, or even greater, weight on these shows than those of expert physicians and scientists. Science and pseudoscience should never be “balanced” in this way. To make an analogy: if a film star claimed that we should not fly on a jetliner because mercury contamination could make the wings fall off, we would simply laugh, preferring to listen to the views of qualified aeronautical engineers and metallurgists (and to our own experience as travelers). Yet, nowadays, film stars’ views on vaccine composition are given huge weight by some chat show hosts.
The “AIDS Denialists” and “The Mercuries” are no different from the “Birthers”, the moon-landing hoaxers, the “9/11 Truth” members and the Holocaust Deniers in the irrationality of their views and their belief in government conspiracies and cover-ups. Indeed, some members of the various groups flit from one conspiracy-themed web site to another, seeking and finding solace in a variant form of irrationality. One of the very few academic supporters of the” AIDS Denialism” movement also investigates the Loch Ness Monster, Alien Crop Circles and other such fringe or paranormal themes. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.
What can be done about dispelling this kind of damaging nonsense? America has a strong tradition of free speech, so dangerous views will continue to be promoted, however harmful they are to public health and the best interests of society. The internet is the territory of the conspiracist, and it is likely to remain so. But media professionals should not be so unquestioning of the science when they provide airtime or column inches to those with fringe views. Controversy may help sell advertising, but at what cost?
A particular concern is that the ideas that HIV is harmless and that vaccines cause autism have been underpinned by a very few academics or physicians working in American or European universities or hospitals. These “thought leaders” for the conspiracy groups should now be made to face the professional consequences of their scientifically unsupportable actions. Is academic freedom such a precious concept that scientists can hide behind it while betraying the public so blatantly? When the facts are so solidly against views that kill people, there must be a price to pay. Post-tenure review of the progress of academic careers is something the university system could put in place if it chose to. How can bona fide universities justify their employees teaching students, even medical students, that HIV is harmless? How can academic and medical institutions still employ people whose views lead to the deaths of over 330,000 South Africans? Shielding the proponents of pseudoscience by doing nothing is a dereliction of a duty to the public. It is also moral cowardice. It is now time for Africa to speak out and demand action against those who have been responsible for so many deaths on this continent.
Hi Snout. My, you’ve been doing well with these loonies. Congratulations. Bravo! There’s been quite a bunch of us over on another thread dealing with some other loony called Rahman, a Muslim who thinks all homosexuals are evil, blah, blah, blah. So that’s where I’ve been. I have to say that just coming back here to see if anything else had been posted I was surprised at my reaction to finding there had. In comparison to the Muslim loony, these AIDS-Denialists seem so babyish. They’re clearly in the grip of a mental obsession, almost like the blind-faith of a religious person.
They’re sick, Snout, and they’re woefully uneducated. I wouldn’t waste any more time on them. In this long thread, if they had any shred of rationality, they would have “seen the light”, the error of their thinking. They’ve been flattened this way and that, but still like zombies in a horror movie they rise from the dead still believing their inane hypothesis.
It’s sick.
The only good reason I can see for continuing to challenge them is the utterly irresponsible way they influence HIV+ people who need access to medication.
“The only good reason I can see for continuing to challenge them is the utterly irresponsible way they influence HIV+ people who need access to medication.”
So true Eddy…. this infection is awful enough for the suffers without being led to their deaths by these lunatics telling them not to take the medication. They’re also a danger as they try to confuse the message to people on the proven vectors for HIV, to prevent the next generation hopefully not having spread this disease.
Given the overwhelming scientific proof, why do the do this? What possible purpose do they have in denying the reality of HIV/AIDS?
Will, your last line above caused me to google “psychology of aids-denialism” and of course interesting things come up. No time to look at all, but here’s one piece of analysis:
“If there’s one thing that purveyors of pseudoscientific medical modalities crave, probably above all else, it’s legitimacy. They want to be taken seriously as Real Scientists. Of course, my usual reaction to this desire is to point out that anyone can be take seriously as a real scientist if he is able to do science and that science actually shows that there is something to his claims. In other words, do his hypotheses make testable predictions, and does testing these predictions fail to falsify his hypotheses? That’s what it takes, but advocates of so-called “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM) or “integrative medicine” (IM, or, as I like to refer to it: “integrating” quackery with scientific medicine) want their woo to be considered science without actually doing the hard work of science.
There are several strategies that pseudoscientists use to give their beliefs the appearance of science, a patina of “science-y” camouflage, if you will. One, of course, is the cooptation and corruption of the language of science, which has been a frequent topic on this blog, particularly in posts written by Drs. Atwood and Sampson. Another is to produce journals that appear to be science, but are anything but. I’ve discussed one example, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and Medical Acupuncture, but others include Homeopathy, the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, and Medical Hypotheses, which recently was forced to retract a horrible paper by arch-HIV/AIDS denialist Peter Duesberg. What’s worse is that some of these journals are even published by what are considered major publishers, such as Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., and Elsevier.
There is, however, a third strategy. How do scientists communicate their findings to other scientists, as well as meeting and mingling with other scientists? Why, they hold scientific meetings, of course! These meetings can be small or even as large as the American Association for Cancer Research meeting, which is attended by around 15,000 cancer researchers each year. So, too, do cranks hold meetings. These meetings often have all the trappings of scientific meetings, with plenary sessions, smaller parallel sessions, poster sesssions, and an exhibition hall, complete with exhibits by sponsoring companies. Sometimes these meetings can even appear so much like the real thing that they take in legitimate researchers and legitimate universities. ”
This is interesting. “3D Video images of HIV transfer between T cells through virological synapses” from “Science Magazine”. ” A virological synapse between two T cells starts with a transmitted light image of two cells with a synaptic button between them. The movie then shows the movement of the fluorescent viral protein (Gag) into the synaptic button, followed by transfer of material from the button into the target cells. Maximum intensity projection shown first, followed by a 3D reconstruction of the same images. Elapsed time is depicted in minutes:seconds.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=480aOFFiNBY
snout say’s He has no medical training or qualifications.
1969: Merck Award
1971: California Scientist of the Year Award
1981: First Annual American Medical Centre Oncology Award
1986: Outstanding Investigator Award National Institute of Health
1986: Elected National Academy of Sciences
1986-1987: Fogarty Scholar-in-Residence at the National Institutes of Health Bethesda MD
1988: Wissenschaftspreis, Hannover Germany
1988: Lichtfield Lecturer, Oxford England
1990: C.J. Watson Lecturer, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis MN
1992: Fisher Distinguished Professor, University of North Texas, Denton TX
1992: Shaffer Alumni Lecturer, Tulane University, New Orleans LA
Bob, you make an error in logical reasoning to focus on the person, rather then the science. I you have a point to make, make it with proof, and verifiable scientific sources, and proper controlled studies. i.e. a paper or study
So far, a list of “credentials” is not proof of anything other than a weak argument, and in logic no more than an appeal to authority where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.
There is undeniable proof that HIV causes AIDS, and a small sample of this was given to you on this site already. I you are incapable of understanding it, that’s fine, but your understanding is not a prerequisite for its validity.
Please, by all means, impress me with some REAL studies, I AM a scientist and I’m sure I will be able to understand it.
Now you’re just being silly, bob. Have you even been reading this thread?
The “Semmelweis Society” was a small support group of disaffected medicos in the US (some with legitimate complaints) who were taken over by Clark Baker and his mates in a bizarre coup a year or so ago with the express purpose of generating PR for Duesberg and Farber. It quickly turned into farce and lawsuits, as you might expect.
Clark who? See post number 9 on this thread. He’s the guy who posted on the Semmelweis website that AIDS began when:
“a small group of promiscuous, addicted, nitrite-huffing, gonorrheal and syphilitic bath house veterans began to get sick… Faced with the imminent loss of funding, Gallo and his goons needed a new virus that they could frighten Americans with. At the same time, gay activists wanted the world to believe that their lifestyle had nothing to do with their symptoms. If lifestyle was blamed, individuals would be responsible.”
You gotta laugh at the cluelessness of someone coming on to a gay newspaper and calling an “award” engineered by Clark Baker and his thug mates as “prestigious”.
re. #181, well done, Snout! And good to turn the focus back on to our all-American strutting ex-marine ex-LAPD and self-styled “Private Investigator” Clark Baker who is responsible to a large extent for driving all this irresponsible nonsense.
I sit on the fence regarding the HIV causes Aids hypothesis, but what has struck me throughout this entire debate is how rational, calm and reasoned people like Charles and Bob have remained even in the onslaught of unwarranted insults, bullying, smears and intimidation by those who disagree with their views. Only those who have something to fear would resort to such shameful tactics, and it is my belief that the likes of Eddy, Will, Jean-Paul et al NEED to believe in the HIV = Aids hypothesis even to the point where they rubbish anything and everything that steps in the way of that orthodoxy because the implications of it not being true are too horrible and devastating to contemplate. So instead they close their minds and stick come what may to the programmed consensus, just as climate change believers cling to theirs even when the evidence supports global cooling, not warming, because it is unthinkable to consider that they may have been lied to to line the pockets of a few corporations, and they bought that lie hook, line and sinker.
I would also add that what do people like Charles and Bob and untold accredited scientists have to gain by opposing the consensus view? Financially absolutely nothing, while those pushing the accepted world view that HIV causes Aids suffers to lose billions of dollars in research funding and drug sales. And neither are renowned for being paragons of virtue.
“and it is my belief that the likes of Eddy, Will, Jean-Paul et al NEED to believe in the HIV = Aids hypothesis”
Then you’re an idiot if you think this. This isn’t a belief, you fool. Its science. And all you’ve done, like all fools, is to assume that belief in something changes its reality. It doesn’t. If you don’t understand the science behind the proof that HIV leads to AIDS, then frankly, that’s down your lack of education, not mine. Please don’t associate my knowledge in this area with your lack of.
And your associating climate change proof with HIV/AIDS proof, is utter nonsense!!! Your argument is a fools one, as it employs an association fallacy. In science an association fallacy is an inductive formal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. This is your argument??? An irrelevant association, in lieu of any proof of your statements??? Daft.
What’s more disturbing that your lack of proof and your lack of understanding of science, is your character assassination on others because you stupidly assert a “belief” in HIV doesn’t cause AIDS where none is required. Science is not a belief system. If you can’t see that, then you shouldn’t have left school so early.
“I would also add that what do people like Charles and Bob and untold accredited scientists have to gain by opposing the consensus view”
Untold accredited scientists???? Don’t make me laugh!!!! A few fringe lunatics on a website is not the 99.99% of the scientific world who do see the proof, credentials or not, so this is just a lie. A fools lie at that.
This makes you an idiot, not open minded. Sorry, but that’s pretty much the bottom line here.
The only reason I quoted Duesberg’s achievments was to highlight snouts arrogance and egotisticy in claiming he knows better and that Duesberg knows nothing about retroviruses and has no medical training or qualifications.
Speaking of arrogance what you appear to be saying is that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is an idiot! Hmm. And no doubt you can supply us with evidence that these honourable scientists who stand up for the truth are lunatics?
Other than that I have tried to start a discussion on the followin:
Anyone who invests their life savings with a convicted fraudster is a fool.
No one has claimed the prize for proving the existence of HIV or documentary proof of the validity of the tests.
That Gallo is a fraud.
Responded to S Kalichman’s post.
I also made the point that the only people suffering from AIDS in the west are those that get diagnosed and have treatment. And no I don’t believe it’s because everyone is using condoms, in fact in the latest condom adverts they don’t even mention HIV anymore. I’m sure any readers of this magazine who are sexually active, will have a good idea of how much people are using condoms. But this so called virus which is supposed to lay dormant for 2 to 3 years, then 5 then 10 then 15 then 30 now back to 10 years, but which can still be passed on, should have decimated half the planet by now.
I mentioned Prof Gordon Stewart who predictions were some 70% more accurate than the AIDS orthodoxy.
This from the Independant http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/aids-the-pandemic-is-officially-in-decline-1826914.html
They should have asked Prof G Stewart.
Freddie Mercury etc and AZT poisoning.
You say there is undeniable proof that HIV causes AIDS. WHERE?
K Mullis (Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry) spent 2 to 3 years looking for scientific evidence that HIV causes AIDS, I’m sure if he couldn’t find it, neither you nor I can either. Think about it, every scientists dream to win the nobel prize and all one has to do is to prove how HIV causes AIDS in order to win one and other brownie points. No such person has come forward!
28 years and billions of research money, no cure, no vaccine and no plausible explanation of how HIV causes AIDS. Hmm.
All I’ve had back is the inference that because I am not a scientist I’m too thick too understand. Hmm. I’ll let the discerning reader judge for him/herself.
“Speaking of arrogance what you appear to be saying is that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is an idiot!”
Again, I suggest you read what I say. I am suggesting that anyone who makes an assessment of scientific evidence, gained by using scientific methods, based on nothing more then a BELIEF is an idiot.
That assessment still stands.
When you produce any evidence, any at all, I will listen. Until then, all I see are histrionics and an avoidance of fact. Character assassinations and a list of so-called credentials of some internet extremist is not evidence. Clearly you are here to validate your own agenda, not analyse the facts. Ergo, an idiot. Sorry, but that’s basically the obvious truth.
“Think about it, every scientists dream to win the nobel prize and all one has to do is to prove how HIV causes AIDS in order to win one and other brownie points. No such person has come forward!”
Oh, and on this, this is another cop out statement. It’s called Demanding Negative Proof Fallacy, attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim.
If you know what you were talking about, you’d know that in science, its infinitely easier to prove a non-correlation, than a correlation.
Therefore it should be a walk in the park to prove that AIDS is not caused by HIV. But there isn’t any proof. Why is that, do you think? If it was so obvious, as it is to you, then it should be easy? But there is not ONE scientific paper that even hints to the proof that HIV is not the cause of AIDS! Not one. (Notice I said “scientific paper” here, not a lunatics website, or your assertion that you have a choice to “believe” the facts – that’s just idiocy)
Therefore, picking fault at all the scientific data to date which says almost unambiguously that HIV is the cause of AIDS, because you seek a perfect solution, is in fact another fallacy of yours.
You seem to deal only in fallacies. Its the recourse of the uninformed, the stupid, and the desperate.
Why not try address this piece of data, lets see how you do:
Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
Go, on, address this. I’m sure it will be as enlightening as it is amusing.
Will says: I am suggesting that anyone who makes an assessment of scientific evidence, gained by using scientific methods, based on nothing more then a BELIEF is an idiot.
By your own definition you are an idiot. It’s your BELIEF that HIV causes AIDS. For the third time I repeat, where is the evidence? You ain’t got none son. Anymore than you have evidence to back up your “fringe lunatics” claim! This is what gets me; everyone is saying there is mountains of evidence…Show me it. I’ll warrant that after 28 years and billions there is a mountain of paperwork, but where is the bit that says how hiv causes aids????
In 1984 U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler announces at a press conference that an American scientist, Dr. Robert Gallo, has discovered the PROBABLE cause of AIDS…source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_AIDS
Note the PROBABLE bit, because the mainstream press missed that bit out. It’s an unproven hypothesis!
…”When you produce any evidence, any at all, I will listen. Until then, all I see are histrionics and an avoidance of fact”. That’s a bit rich from someone who hasn’t answered any of my points. Methinks you can’t, your’e legless you are reduced to asking me for evidence that something that no one can even prove exists doesn’t cause aids! I say if someone is saying that I am going to die a slow horrible death unless I take extremely toxic (and expensive) drugs, then they ought to have proof and be able to back up that claim! I would have thought that was only reasonable.
OK then try this http://www.duesberg.com/quiz.html
Another little point I’d like to make,as a layman, hiv does not pass the first law of virology (koch’s postulates) You don’t need to be a scientist to see this.
“By your own definition you are an idiot. It’s your BELIEF that HIV causes AIDS”
My god, man, do you have any brain at all??? I KNOW there is a link between HIV and AIDS. I’ve seen the studies, and made my mind up based on the evidence. Its nothing to do with belief!!!! For the love of god, get an education, you’re embarrassing yourself.
“Note the PROBABLE bit, because the mainstream press missed that bit out. It’s an unproven hypothesis!”
LOL! Again, you demonstrate your vast ignorance of science here. The word “probable” is always used in science, as noting is 100% proven and certain. Statistically, nothing is impossible, just highly improbable. If you have any knowledge in this area, you’d know that. The correlation between HIV and AIDS is so strong, that the probability of it not being the case, is extremely small. This is what you base your theory on???? Seriously???? This tiny, tiny probability??? Your are a joke.
And as for Koch’s postulates, as listed below, it does pass the Epidemiological association (as well as isolation, and transmission pathogenesis)
Epidemiological association: the suspected cause must be strongly associated with the disease – numerous studies from around the world show that virtually all AIDS patients are HIV-seropositive, such as the one you obvious decided to ignore above. Why is that? Why can’t you address the study which shows epidemiological association? You can’t, that’s why.
Nice try, but you’ll have to do better, but next time try addressing the facts and the study I gave you, and maybe I might think you have the IQ higher than that of a banana!
And next time, please enlighten us as to why you need to believe the opposite of what is proven on HIV/AIDS? Are you HIV positive, and this is some desperate belief that it wont cause AIDS for you? Is this the core motivation of your silly “belief” system?
What a load of toss! This is your proof??? Lets take one statement:
“And all this happened, in the absence of a vaccine! Thus AIDS is not contagious.”
AIDS isn’t contagious, HIV is. HIV is the virus. This whole stupid article is based on AIDS being contagious and AIDS being the issues. AIDS is a collection of symptoms that is caused by the HIV virus destroying the immune system. The article then goes on to basically lie about infection rates – “Not one doctor or nurse has ever contracted AIDS” – which is utter rubbish, there are ample documented cases! Mother of god, talk about grasping at straws!!!! Is this it??? Your great proof??? LOL!
I could go on, that “article” is riddled with inconsistencies and half truths, its a joke basically.
I’m sorry, you’re less than an idiot, Bob, an idiot can usually see their own failings.
bob, I’m getting really confused here. First of all you are proposing Peter Duesberg as some kind of expert on HIV and AIDS, despite the fact he has done exactly zero original reasearch into either of these fields and has never treated an AIDS patient (for the simple reason that he is not a medical doctor and has no medical training).
He does, however, know a little about the isolation of retroviruses, since he trained as a cell chemist and has some genuine achievements in this area.
Then you tell us all that you refuse to believe in the existence of HIV because “No one has claimed the prize for proving the existence of HIV or documentary proof of the validity of the tests.”
The who the frickin’ hell is this guy, who claimed the award saying “HIV has been isolated by the most rigorous method science has to offer.”?
There is a very wise saying in my mother tongue, which translating says as follows:
‘The thief always thinks everyone around is just like him’
Maybe you didn’t listen, although you didn’t need to, it’s written in the subtitles:
LM: ‘So there are many ways which are not the vaccine, the magic name, the vaccine, many ways to decrease the transmission JUST BY SIMPLE MEASURES OF NUTRITION, giving antioxidants — hygiene measures, fighting the other infections.’
Is Montagnier talking about preventing exposure progressing to chronic infection (HIV positive status) or is he talking about treating HIV positive people?
I asked you this before, but you evaded the question, trying to pass it off as “pretty irrelevant.” It’s not. Fudging this issue is precisely how the HoN disinformationsts have misrepresented Montagnier.
“Professor Luc Montagnier, 2009 Nobel Laureate for the discovery of HIV, reveals his views on the treatment of HIV and its relationship to nutrition and profit…”
Well done everybody we are finally getting somewhere snouts starting to come round though I never actually said I didn’t believe in the existence of hiv I merely said it would help your cause if someone had claimed the prize! It is no surprise to me that P Duesberg has that honour, after all he is the pre-eminent virologist in the world today and one of the top, if not the top, molecular biologists. No wonder you are confused when the one person you use to make an argument is the same person you have been slagging off. Still, from utterly unqualified, talking drivel to “he has some genuine achievements in this area”. Is progress, keep it up son. And as I know you like epidemiology so much perhaps you would like to study the work of Prof Gordon Stewart professor emeritus of public health at Glasgow University, and a former WHO adviser on AIDS. http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/gsgenetica.htm
I believe his projected aids figures were about 70% more accurate than the aids orthodoxy. Personally I haven’t read it, not being a scientist it’s a bit hard work for me but I look forward to snout’s “critique”.
Will as well, bang on the nail mate! AIDS IS NOT CONTAGIOUS so glad you are coming round to some sense. As for hiv being sexually transmitted check out the Padian study 1997. And does anybody know or know of anyone who knows of a nurse,or a policeman (thousands of addicts get searched each and every day for the last 28 yrs) Who has caught aids from a needle?
Koch’s first postulate THE MICROORGANISM MUST BE FOUND IN ABUNDANCE IN ALL ORGANISMS SUFFERING FROM THE DISEASE, BUT SHOULD NOT BE FOUND IN HEALTHY ANIMALS.(note the ALL bit)
1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch's_postulates
It’s quite simple, if you are going to blame a disease on a germ then the germ must be present in “all organisms suffering from the disease” Perfectly reasonable and logical.
– numerous studies from around the world show that VIRTUALLY all AIDS patients are HIV-
2 virtually is not ALL! ALL is unambigous,it means everyone, it doesn’t say nearly everyone, nor does it say all but there can be exceptions.
3 “In abundance”. Hardly surprising no one mentions the abundance bit seeing as how they can’t even find the virus, only the antibody:)
As for Luc Montagnier I’d let people judge for themselves, here Brent Leung is interviewed by Robert Scott Bell: http://askrsb.podbean.com/
Here can be found the uncut footage and an article by the excellent and courageous Celia Farber: http://deanesmay.com/2009/12/01/montagniers-mea-culpa-a-healthy-immune-system-can-handle-hiv/
And here is another video blowing the whole hiv aids paradigm out of the window:http://www.disclose.tv/forum/hiv-does-not-cause-aids-top-scientists-say-t12482.html
nite nite everybody see you tommorrow:)
‘The thief always thinks everyone around is just like him’
What an excellent saying Charles! I totally agree! Just like the way you assume we’re all as stupid as you in blindly accepting your “theory” of denialism on HIV/AIDS, a theory with no proof, no backing and no basis in reality.
Maybe time for you to grow up and accept a certain dose of reality here…. maybe then you won’t end up dead before your time as you’re body collapses before your very eyes. It’ll be too late then to see how bloody wrong and stupid you were.
And Snout, well said. But that’s been Charles/Bob/Rob’s game all along, misrepresent and twist the truth to suit their own disturbing neurosis. Same as on another thread where Bob/Rob (what ever his shifting name is) tried to convince us that AIDS not being contagious implies that HIV has no correlation to AIDS…. of course AIDS is not contagious, and this is a false correlation between a fallacy which is trying to prove something that has no bearing on it, in science its referred to as ‘cum hoc ergo propter hoc’, or correlation does not imply causation. Another example of the “slight of hand” they’re pulling to confuse the uninformed.
Makes you wonder why? I mean, its every ones right to refuse medical treatment, but why insist others take the same suicidal route? Validation? Insanity?
“Will as well, bang on the nail mate! AIDS IS NOT CONTAGIOUS so glad you are coming round to some sense.”
Bob, you’re a fool.
So, you imply that AIDS is not contagious, therefore HIV has no correlation with AIDS???? LOL! Are you retarded or soemting? Really, did you miss all your basic science classes in school, or did you even bother to attend? I never said that AIDS was contagious.
Read my last comment, it relates to your stupidity:
Of course AIDS is not contagious, no one is saying that, and this is a false correlation between a fallacy which is trying to prove something that has no bearing on it, in science its referred to as ‘cum hoc ergo propter hoc’, or correlation does not imply causation.
Is a fallacy all you can muster here as proof???? Seriously?
HIV is contagious. HIV is the virus, not AIDS. This only shows you are grossly uneducated in this area, you cannot tell the difference between symptoms and a virus????? Is it really that hard for you? You’re laughable! LOL!
This is the proof of Koch’s 1st Postulate: Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
You’re understanding of Wikipedia not withstanding, you clearly don’t understand Koch’s Postulates in any form. If you did, you wouldn’t be so keen to ignore that study, or spout that nonsense you have in poublic.
Rob, you a bigger buffoon than I though. Please, do yourself a favour, take your silliness and go. You’re embarrassing yourself, and its shameful how proud you are of your ignorance. Thankfully, for you, you have the blanket of the internet to shield you in this farce you call you proof.
THE MICROORGANISM MUST BE FOUND IN ABUNDANCE IN ALL ORGANISMS SUFFERING FROM THE DISEASE, BUT SHOULD NOT BE FOUND IN HEALTHY ANIMALS.What part of the word ALL don’t you understand?
“THE MICROORGANISM MUST BE FOUND IN ABUNDANCE IN ALL ORGANISMS SUFFERING FROM THE DISEASE, BUT SHOULD NOT BE FOUND IN HEALTHY ANIMALS.What part of the word ALL don’t you understand?”
What???? What micro-organism? The HIV Virus? Yes. It is found in people suffering form AIDS. I have shown you the study. Can you not read it? Hence Koch’s 1st Postulate is met. What part of that do YOU not understand?
God lord, man, are you dyslexic? Again, I ask you:- go educate yourself, this is like watching a car crash.
Look, this is pointless.
There’s obviously something wrong with you, you seem to lack the mental agility to grasp the most basic of concepts. Either show me ONE scientific paper where HIV is proven not to be the cause of AIDS, or shut up. JUST ONE SCIENTIFIC PAPER. And don’t bander about that http://www.duesberg.com/quiz.html page, its utter rubbish. Its about as scientific as tarot card reading.
So you don’t understand the word ALL or the word ABUNDANCE and you call yourself a scientist, hmm, I don’t know what science school you went to but I certainly wouldn’t reccommend it LOL.
I’m still waiting for your “undeniable proof”
28 YEARS NO CURE NO VACCINE AND NO SCIENCE
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.”
Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.
See Kary Mullis , P Duesberg and D Rasnick (PHD and inventor of the protease inhibitors)
here: (2 five minute clips): http://hgsistock.blogspot.com/2009/11/light-on-hiv-aids-myth.html
And another excellent article from Clark Baker here :http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/making-of-denialist.html
Keep it up Clark, the truth is finding out these murderous criminals and their useful idiots by the day.
LOL! Ah, Bob. You’re consistent, if nothing else! Consistent, but not very bright though.
“28 YEARS NO CURE NO VACCINE AND NO SCIENCE”
So, no vaccine? Does that mean HIV doesn’t case AIDS? No. It doesn’t. Look up ‘post hoc ergo propter hoc’ for your error here.
Clark Baker is your “scientific source”????? The ex-cop and homophobic right-wing blogger????? Ha Ha HA Ha Ha! IS this your idea of a joke???? You fool!
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.”
Yes there is. Can’t you read? We’ve give it to you.
It takes no effort to prove you wrong, Rob, but your understanding is disturbingly limited, so I doubt you will fully grasp that I am about to say.
But let me try, as I would to a child. Ear’s and mind open, now, Bobby. Read over again and again anything you can’t understand….
AIDS:- defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as the presence of a positive HIV antibody test and one or more of the illnesses known as opportunistic infections (OIs) or a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3
Ergo, AIDS is not a virus, it’s the resulting symptoms of a virus infection, proven to be the HIV virus. Recent improvements in laboratory testing, particularly polymerase chain reaction testing, allow detection of HIV genetic material in people with AIDS or a positive HIV antibody test result. These results show, there is extremely high probability that HIV is the single factor cause of AIDS.
Koch’s Postulates: The scientific research community widely accepts that fulfilment of these postulates demonstrates causality. Even scientists such as Peter Duesberg Ph.D., who says he believes that HIV does not cause AIDS, accept that the postulates put forth by Robert Koch are sufficient to establish causality. While in 1987 Dr. Duesberg noted that HIV did not fit all of Koch’s criteria, developments in HIV/AIDS research in the 13 years since that statement have shown that HIV does indeed fulfil Koch’s postulates as the cause of AIDS.
Ergo, your data, and information are not only wrong, but grossly out of date. Quoting Dr. Duesberg from 1987 is not proof of anything other then you are desperate.
Sources for all the above? As below
- Burnett, M. and White, D.O. Natural History of Infectious Disease. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1972.
- Cohen, J. Fulfilling Koch’s postulates. Science 2666(5191): 1647. December 1994.
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Fact Sheet. The evidence that HIV causes AIDS. July 1995.
- Novembre, F.J. and others. Development of AIDS in a chimpanzee infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Journal of Virology 71(5): 4086-4102. May 1997.
- Weiss, R.A. and Jaffee, H.W. Duesberg, HIV, and AIDS. Nature 345(6277): 659. June 1990.
Now, as you can’t even produce ONE scientific paper, I will assume you either can’t, or won’t. I will not debate my understand of science with a fool such as yourself, as it belittles my own abilities. I will now only argue with you on any point you can produce proof of scientifically.
What’s more interesting is why you NEED to believe this rubbish you spout. You claim to be “sitting on the fence”, but your protestations and straw man arguments clearly shoe a desperate need to believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS.
I never claimed to be sitting on the fence, you’re thinking of someone else. Also I never claimed to be a scientist. I started off saying that I was unhindered by a formal medical education. The reason I said that was because I’m fed up with so called scientists referring to us laypersons and seekers of the truth as being stupid because we don’t have scientific background. I was trying to start discussions based on common sense.For too long the whole hiv aids paradigm has been clouded over with fear. Now the truth is emerging. Darkness can’t hide in the light. Have a look at a personal story: http://www.myspace.com/rethinkaids then ask my why I believe what I do
Enough chit chat. So this is your undisputable evidence? Let,s take the NIAID fact sheet. For a start it’s anonymous! How unscientific is that? My mother could have written it.
Here’s a rebuttal:http://www.healtoronto.com/nih/NIH%20Rebuttal2-bw.pdf
I’ll leave it with you.
“What???? What micro-organism? The HIV Virus? Yes. It is found in people suffering form AIDS.”
Even I, the most unscientific person I know, know that is not true. It’s the anti-bodies that are found, not the virus itself, right?
Will, you have so convinced me in this argument, what with your rabidly unrestrained ranting and hurling of abuse, that I will be first in line when House of Numbers reaches these shores. You and others on here have done your cause no good whatsoever, and although I still sit on the fence my curious is now piqued to investigate the opposing viewpoint. Well done lads!
Dr. Rasnick:
AIDS is not contagious. For example, not even one healthcare worker has been documented in the scientific literature to have contracted AIDS from over 800,000 AIDS patients in the USA and Europe. The CDC reports in a footnote in the latest HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report year end edition (1998) that there has been a total of 25 healthcare workers in the USA who have contracted AIDS on the job over the 18 years of AIDS. However, this claim is not referenced as to where the CDC got this information or what other risk factors those 25 individuals may have had.
from; http://www.healtoronto.com/durban/koch.html
and here is Dr Rasnick’s own website: http://www.davidrasnick.com/David_Rasnick/Home.html
“The reason I said that was because I’m fed up with so called scientists referring to us laypersons and seekers of the truth as being stupid because we don’t have scientific background”
But you accept that a computer works without understanding it. Or a TV. Or a aeroplane. These are all based on science and engineering principles, and entirely on the same mathematical concepts. Yet you trust these? Clearly you do, you’re here on the internet. How do you make a judgement?
“Even I, the most unscientific person I know, know that is not true. It’s the anti-bodies that are found, not the virus itself, right?”
Wrong. Genetic markers, or polymerase chain testing, can identify retrovirus core RNA in the T-Lymphocytes. A scanning electron microscope can actually see the HIV virus. A search on Wikipedia will even show you the photo, you don’t actually have to look that far for proof, but you do have to open your eyes.
“You and others on here have done your cause no good whatsoever, and although I still sit on the fence my curious is now piqued to investigate the opposing viewpoint.”
Then you will be a small minority, and if infected because of your ignorance, you will die. Survival of the fittest is usually survival of the smartest, in this case at least.
“Have a look at a personal story”
One case does not prove the whole, this thinking is a fallacy. I do not need to say any more. The OVERWHELMING evidence that HIV causes AIDS speaks for itself to those who take the time to understand it.
“AIDS is not contagious”
Why do you keep saying this? WE. KNOW. Can’t you see the difference between AIDS and HIV? The difference between symptoms and a virus? Cause and effect? No? Its quite a simple concept, but you keep missing the point. Over and over again. And you seem offended that I call you an idiot? I simply am making a valid observation.
AIDS is not contagious, as AIDS is a condition that progressively reduces the effectiveness of the immune system and leaves individuals susceptible to opportunistic infections and tumours.
HIV on the other hand is lentivirus that causes AIDS, leading to life-threatening opportunistic infections.
Virus’s are infectious, symptoms are not. Incredibly simplified here, but I doubt you’ll get it. You only hear what you want to hear.
Look, at the end of the day, if you have HIV, I’m sorry. Really I am. But that doesn’t forgive stupidity, or forgive ignorance. If you chose to think you have the option to “believe”, and ultimately reject, the science that might prolong your life, then by all means, do so. Go an die. It will stop you inflicting lies on others and killing them too.
If it was me, I wouldn’t be so closed minded, I’d want to live, but hey, that’s what 8 years of University gave me:- an advanced understanding of science and a sharper mind.
So far, you given no proof of anything you said.
You cannot, or chose not to, argue against the staggering and overwhelming proof available that HIV causes AIDS (websites and idiot homophobic ex-cops bloggers don’t count)
And yet you still don’t answer the question put to you: you clearly show a desperate need to believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. Why?
I would never leave my health or well-being relying on you, or anyone just like you. Someone whose methods are just fear attacks. That’s what the HIV campaign is all about. FEAR. And that’s all you’ve just thrown at me, without even knowing whether I am positive or not, FEAR.
I’m telling you, I’m soooooo sure I’ll be walking on this planet far longer than you, my dear. And very healthy, too. I have NOT A SINGLE WRINKLE, and my ass is pretty dam tight without going to any gym, love !!
I won’t bother to ask you what’s yours like … grrrr
1. No reliable tests
2. Unknown process by which HIV actually kills T Cells
3. As you posted in several articles earlier, NOT EVERYONE SUFFERING FROM AIDS HAS HIV, therefore it is impossible to fulfill Kock’s postulates.
4. HIV produces multiple errors in its genetic material, making endless different kinds of strains any given day – therefore different proteins – yet the ARVs and Tests are said to be highly SPECIFIC. How come they are able to attack, or detect the virus at all? Do they change meds and tests every single day, too, in order to be able to combat them and detect them? I don’t think so …
What an homophobe I am by saying GIVE PROPER NUTRITION, CLEAN WATER AND TREAT EXISTING DISEASES TO PEOPLE ! And maybe we gay guys could stop constantly taking drugs for both recreational and sexual activities!! Such an evil thing to say !!
“I’m telling you, I’m soooooo sure I’ll be walking on this planet far longer than you, my dear. And very healthy, too. I have NOT A SINGLE WRINKLE, and my ass is pretty dam tight without going to any gym, love !!”
Protesting way too much. Clearly you are not as healthy as you think, its a delusion, like the rest of your lunatic assertions on HIV/AIDS. Poor you. And if you have HIV (which I strongly suspect you do), I assure you, without the medication, I’ll be here long after your painful death, “love”.
“And maybe we gay guys could stop constantly taking drugs for both recreational and sexual activities!!”
Ah, yes, here we get to it. The homophobic statement. You have exhumed the oldest and most stigmatizing lie about HIV disease: that gay men and other people get it not from an infectious pathogen but because they lead immoral, irresponsible lives.
Utter rubbish. Laughable, in fact. But the homophobia of your statement is just tragic.
Of course there is reliable tests, can’t yu read? Testing involves detecting anti-HIV antibody and the HIV p24 antigens. Its proven and reliable. I will not cover the other rubbish you state, I have already proven them a fallacy and lies. Lying, after all, is the recourse of a weak mind.
I hope the “vitamins and clean water” help the Pneumocystis Pneumonia and the Kaposi’s Sarcoma! Let us know how that goes for you… if you are healthy enough to use a keyboard, that is.
I know what I’m talking about when I say we gays should stop taking these huge amounts of roxic substances, meaning re recreational and sexual ones now. If you do, too, then you’re being extremely unethical by suggesting we can keep on going in this track.
I promote healthy living, while you approve drug taking.
Keep harassing and seeding fear, that’s what you do best, of course. But go elsewhere, because I’m quite out your league for that, darling.
Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all. P24 is a vital conserved molecule made by our cells and used in the construction of our essential vesicles …. It’s just not everyone creates antibodies to their own bodies proteins.
“Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all.”
LOL! So? Do you even know what you’re saying here???? This is laughable! Proves nothing other than you are a desperate moron grasping at straws, and with zero understanding of testing.
Please. I’m not even going to address this, this is preceless. You’re an idiot.
Will, well done you, for throwing these mental cripples against the wall time and again, though the zombies simply won’t die, but keep getting back to repeat their utter nonsense.
I have read only the dozen or so posts following my last and just couldn’t be bothered to keep reading more of their utter crazed nonsense.
Time and again they claim HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. How does it cause AIDS, they ask! No one knows they say!
They are unbelievable.
Listen gay-hating kiddies, I will try to put it really simply for you. It’s the explanation that the rest of the world understands and you don’t.
Your immune system has different kinds of cells that work together to fight infections. CD4 T-cells are one kind of immune cell. They are like little “factories” that make things that your body needs to fight germs and infections. These cells are found in your blood, lymph nodes, and other places in your body.
After HIV enters the body, it uses the CD4 T-cells to make more copies of itself. When this happens, the CD4 T-cells that have been taken over by HIV no longer help your body fight infections, and instead produce more HIV.
At first, the body is able to make enough CD4 T-cells to keep up with those lost due to HIV. Over time, as the virus copies itself over and over, there are fewer and fewer CD4 T-cells. Eventually, your immune system is weakened and your body is less able to fight germs. That when you start getting “opportunistic infections”. Lots of these different opportunistic infections all happening at the same time is what used to be known as “full-blown AIDS”.
We don’t have “full-blown AIDS” anymore here in the West because people now receive medications which counter the activity of HIV. But people who deny that the medications are effective at countering HIV and therefore refuse to take them, DO still develop “full-blown AIDS”.
don’t want to change the subject back to climate change, but evidence the earth is cooling at the moment does not conflict with climate change!!!!!!!!
climate change works like this: (climate change for dummies!)if you keep pumping out noxious gases and if you keep reducing earth’s green lungs, then without any doubt at all you’re gonna screw up the atmosphere …………………. and if you screw up the atmosphere you screw up climate.
what i keep noticing is the number of opinionated people with there noses stuck in the air who just aren’t up to holding all of the data in their poor little heads at once – nobody can do it perfectly but some people are just soooooooooooo pathetic at it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry if you suffer from a disability)
I actually observed the birth of this one. It originates with a half-witted English “journalist” called Janine Roberts, who thinks that the HIV-1 core protein p24 and the golgi transport protein p24 must be the same thing because they’re both referred to as “p24″. I even wrote to her and explained that the designation “p24″ simply means “a protein of roughly 24 kiloDaltons”. But it’s too late – the meme has infected the internet, and is endlessly reproduced on threads like this one.
“who thinks that the HIV-1 core protein p24 and the golgi transport protein p24 must be the same thing because they’re both referred to as “p24″.”
Precisely Snout… and our learned friend Charles made the same ignorant mistake. And all this time I was “debating” not with a lunatic, but an idiot lunatic. And to flaunts that gross stupidity like some revelation like some kind of revelation, is cringe worthy!
Great blog by the way, Snout!
“Time and again they claim HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. How does it cause AIDS, they ask! No one knows they say!”
Yeah, Eddy, I think you were right about this Charles, something fairly broken in that man’s mind…. more and more I remember your post on schizophrenia, and how you might have hit the nail on the head, with this one at least. What I love is the staggering stupidity and lack of understanding lauded about like something to be proud of:- “AIDS isn’t contagious”, “Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all”… I’d just be too embarrassed to show publicly that I was that uneducated. But no, these ones seem proud of it. How utterly embarrassing.
Thanksfully these foolish denialist will never be more than few fringe lunatics…. and as I already said, survival of the fittest is usually survival of the smartest, in this case at least. But I will say, this whole chat has been an eye opener…. its a lesson that some people are truly lacking in something. Brains, I’d say.
Simple observation: I’ll warrant no one here KNOWS ANYONE, OR EVEN KNOWS OF SOMEONE WHO KNOWS SOMEONE,who has developed FULLY BLOWN AIDS other than those in high risk groups OR recieving treatment???
Anyhow you do the figures: (28 years and 10 year incubation period) we should be tripping over fullyblown AIDS victims!!!
The WHO has already admitted “the threat of a heteresexual epidemic is over”.
If it remains in same high risk groups, how is it contagious?
Bob the layman’s hypothesis on what is HIV. It’s a BACK UP JOB
For immidiate peer review.
Seeing as how the only scientist to have actually isolated HIV is Peter Duesberg (as I
think we’ve agreed)? Would it therefore not be fair and logical to assume he’s right when he say’s that HIV is a harmless passenger virus that sits compatibly in about 1 in every 1000 to 2000 T-Cells and that it changes itself from DNA into a “more readable” RNA once every 24 to 48 hours?
And seeing as how, accolades apart,(too many to go through all again) Peter Duesberg has spent at least twenty years of his life going to work each day studying retroviruses?
And there’s no evidence he’s a lunatic or anything else other than a man of outstanding moral integrity (judge for yourselve’s GoogleVideo etc)?
That being so it’s obvious…HIV is mother natures way of doing a back up job; A blueprint in case another virus comes along? It’s an antibody right?
I’m sure if I can do a simple back up job on my PC then mother nature knows how to do one and, btw, has been doing so for a few billion years!
Anyone see anything wrong with my logic or reasoning? Comments,critiques and insults welcome:)
“If it remains in same high risk groups, how is it contagious?”
How is what contagious? AIDS? Are you retarded, or something? Seriously, its embarrassing you keep saying this. Even a stupid person can grasp the basic differences between symptoms and virus.
“HIV is mother natures way of doing a back up job; A blueprint in case another virus comes along? It’s an antibody right?”
What on earth are you talking about here? Mother nature? A “backup job”???? Evolution isn’t a computer disk, Bob. You sound like you should be seeking professional help Bob, seriously, surely you realise these are to normal things to be saying in public?
“Bob the layman’s hypothesis on what is HIV. It’s a BACK UP JOB”
What is it (what ever “it” is) “backing up” exactly, Bob? Please, enlighten me, this should be a right giggle.
“Anyone see anything wrong with my logic or reasoning?”
What’s wrong with your logic, is that there is NO logic to it. Its just a jumble of words and nonsensical statements. What freak website did you cut and paste this garbage from, not that “ex-cop” bigot Clarke again?
Eddy, Snout, is this the best that these denialist can come up with? A backup job????? Is this all they are, a few lunatics who can’t even construct the most basic argument or demonstrate a simple understanding between AIDS and HIV? Its truly astounding the level of ignorance and lack of even the most rudimentary education these people have….
Example of FRAUD: The NIAID factsheet that Will offered as his “undeniable proof”
Page 1
A rebuttal to the NIAID/NIH document“The Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS”
Science is normally advanced through publicationsthat are:
are signed by its authors;
include a comprehensive list of citations;
include contact information for at least one author;
are modifiable only through additional publications (includ-ing errata);
are open to rebuttal through published letters in the samejournal;
are peer reviewed rely largely upon other peer-reviewed literature to back up their assumptions
Wills undeniable evidence is riddled with fraud; notice how he doesn’t address it…But resorts to kindergarten level in an attemp to deflect?
…you accept that a computer works without understanding it…Will of course I accept the pc works that’s because I CAN SEE WITH MY OWN EYES THAT IT WORKS
But you don’t understand it, do you? Curious. You don’t understand the rudimentary basics of virus propagation, yet you feel education enough to call proven science a ‘fraud’.
Lunacy? Perhaps.
Stupidity? Definitely.
“Wills undeniable evidence is riddled with fraud; notice how he doesn’t address it”
I addressed it plenty. If you’re retarded in some way, I’m sorry, but that’s not my fault. I gave you scientific papers, assuming you had half a brain, but you failed even that task. And what did you give me?
You give me a “backup job” theory????
A homophobic fool of a many who claims to be an “investigator” on a random blog????
It works like this: virus comes along then immune system develops antibody.
Antibody fights off virus.
Antibody no longer needed but makes a simple back up job of itself in case virus ever returns. You see? It’s simple.
But then you are not a scientist are you Will?
All you have been doing is avoiding,deflecting and showing your ignorance with childish name calling.
Classic symptoms of denial!
Outside of HIV testing and treatment, doe’s anyone know of anyone or even know of anyone who knows anyone who has gone down with fully blown AIDS?
Because after 28 years and a 10 year incubation period we should all personally know someone?
My HIV back up theory is as solid as anything else.
One thing for sure and that is HIV ain’t the causitive agent of FULLY BLOWN AIDS
There are 5 main reasons for immune system failure.
Half of them you get from the clinic…physchological stress, trauma,and the medication.
Others being drugs and malnutrition.
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens.
“All you have been doing is avoiding,deflecting and showing your ignorance with childish name calling.”
No, I say what I see. You have shown yourself to be quite stupid. You confuse symptoms of a virus with the pathogen itself. Classic failure in understanding, but what compounds this is your refusal to educate yourself in even the most basic concepts of biology.
A stupid person is made stupid, not by lack of intelligence, but by a refusal to learn.
I am merely stating a fact. You the one who chose not to produce any evidence, other than stupid theories about “backup”. HIV was mother natures backup plan? Yes, indeed. How scientific of you to say so. I do notice how you can’t elaborate on that.
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here, you seem to be (1) in need of an education (2) enjoy being embarrassed as a fool in public.
In HIV, viral RNA has a protein called reverse transcriptase that is crucial for viral replication inside T-cells. T-cells are white blood cells that help coordinate activities of the immune system. Once inside the cell, the capsid dissolves, liberating the viral RNA and the reverse transcriptase, transforming DNA into RNA, and sending it out of the nucleus. Because it hijacks the “coordinator” T cells that help keep the immune system working, HIV is particularly devastating to immune health. In the process of replication, the virus destroys increasing numbers of T cells. The coordinator cells of an important part of the immune system are annihilated, leaving the body open to opportunistic infections. i.e. The symptoms we recognise collectively as AIDS.
This is proven. And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science, and propose infantile “backup” theories.
This is what 8 years of a university, and two science degrees, gets you these days Bob:- a REAL education. Hence I am perfectly qualified to read the evidence and understand it, and to prove you the idiot you are so proud of being.
(Although, secretly, you make me laugh, I find stupid people and their desperate attempts to understand the world around them very amusing)
Now, please, enlighten me as to your need to believe denialist claims, are you HIV+? Are you desperate to believe in unproven theories to make you think you will survive. Go on, enlighten me.
Who do you believe?
Peter Duesberg,untold awards and scientific achievments,man of outstanding courage and moral integrity,lifetime’s experience working in the field,even Gallo said he knows more about retroviruses than any man alive…..Or these clowns?
What clowns? The entire scientific community? No, I don’t “believe” them, I understand their research. Do you?
Oh, and Duesberg, is your sole argument? The man who’s sole claim that HIV is not the basis for AIDS was that it didn’t meed Koch’s 1st Postulate, and then in the end had to admit he was wrong, and that it does? Yeah, great example of ONE paranoid schizophrenic to prove your non-point there, Bob! You’re a joke, man. A living, walking, talking joke.
Besides, Duesberg’s HIV/AIDS claims are rejected as disproven and incorrect by the scientific community.
Note the word, “disproven”. Ego he’s a lair. And someone who believes a liar, Bob? Why, a fool, of course!
Now, please, enlighten me as to your need to believe denialist claims, are you HIV+? Are you desperate to believe in unproven theories to make you think you will survive?
Or are you incapable of answering those questions too?
“YOUR HEAD STUCK UP YOUR ARSE with your own arrogance”
Sigh. The reaction of the confused and the angry. Poor Bob, didn’t go to school and now he’s upset that I coudl affortd to do.
Don’t worry Bob, with your stupid theories on life and lack of any education, you wont have to worry about AIDS, you’ll be knocked down by a car or electrocuted from washing your face with a toaster long before then.
Please, enlighten me as to your need to believe denialist claims, are you HIV+? Are you desperate to believe in unproven theories to make you think you will survive?
What’s wrong Bob, can’t answer that one? Too much truth to focus your dull mind on, eh?
I went to watch House Of Numbers at the Cambridge film festival with a few guys from Heal London. And we met with Brent Leung after the film for coffee, and a long chat. In my opinion, having met him personally, he’s a genuine guy just trying to bring this debate to the public attention. The film is, neither dangerous nor a fraud, and nothing in the film can be taken out of context, as some of the first comments suggest.
Every man, woman and teenager has the RIGHT to see this film and come to their OWN conclusions. It’s a FACT that, there is a debate going on, and has been going on for, as long as HIV its self, and people who say, there is no debate, are simply foolish because, if there was no debate, we wouldn’t be leaving comments.
Now, I’ve been so called HIV+ for nearly 21yrs. Was diagnosed in 89 and told back then, nothing will happen for 7yrs, how did they know that then?? I went 6yrs without 3 monthly check ups, so was lucky not to be an AZT victim, until the day in 97 when I was told. “if I don’t take the medication, I will be dead in 12 months” I wasn’t ill with any AIDS defining illness, but was really depressed and fearful for my life, as it was the 7th year coming up when the doctor said “nothing will happen for 7yrs”. My CD4 count then was apparently 54. I took the first lot of medication, and it made me so violently ill, I thought I was dying and they gave me shingles, so the doctor said “stop the drugs immediately as the drugs aren’t working” I was put on another therapy, which my body tolerated for 10yrs, but could only eat one meal a day and that was a struggle. After 10yrs on drugs, they started to give me liver damage. In August 2007 I stopped the medications, and I now have a healthy liver and no other organ problems ie heart problems nor kidney problems and I look healthy again.
I would like a so called expert scientist to explain, why aren’t I dead or getting all these opportunistic infections and i’ve been off the meds for 2yrs 5 months and my last CD4 count back in March 2009 was apparently only 40. So, in a year and a half, my CD4 count went from 550 to 40, so I must now have a 0 CD4 count???
How is the virus replicating if I have no CD4 cells???
How can it be that, when I had some normal blood test done at my normal doctors, they came back giving me a clean bill of health and all my white blood cells were good???
Am I a denialist or in denial, because Im living a happy life with out HIV drugs?? Am I a medical miracle?? Is my mates brother from the same town as me a medical miracle because he took AZT for one week 20yrs ago and has never taken meds again and is alive and well to this day???
Sorry, Daz, your appearance to back up this moron Bob, than that lunatic Charles is just way to convenient for my liking. I think you’re a fabrication, and other alter ego to make spurious claims about HIV.
I don’t believe in Miracle cures, and I don’t believe in timely coincidences.
Show me scientific proof, not a fabricated sob story. I only deal in facts.
Well, Will, I can prove, based on the mainstream orthodox view, that I am for a FACT, so called HIV+. All you have to do, is to accompany me to either my doctors, my local gum clinic or at the Kobler clinic at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital. Will you take my offer up?? so I can show you my medical records. At the moment, you think! my story is all fabrication, and you say, you want Facts. So, let me show you the Facts.
People have nothing to gain by saying, HIV is not the cause of AIDS, but have everything to loose. People who attack, like a dog that is cornered, in my view, have something serious to hide and defend. MY story is true, so I don’t need to be offensive nor defensive, because I can prove it. The question is, will you let me prove it?
For over 30 years I have been and on and off IV drug user.In those 30 years I shared a lot of needles. I could stop for a while but always I would return. The fear of an HIV test haunted me. I now know it was more the fear of the stigma. Being stigmatized until I die a slow horrible wasting death…I would rather stay on the gear.
Then a few years ago I discovered Peter Duesberg. It took a while, studying virusmyth.com and cross referencing etc…And I found that when I went to the drug clinic to tell them about Peter Duesberg they were all in denial and wouldn’t even look at any of his work or of his peers.And just like an alcoholic who screams and shouts how pissed he ain’t, I found the same attitude from the so called counsellors every time I put any questions to them. Either that or they would just walk away and ignore me. So I thought I would have a test as I was bound to be positive what with all the needles I shared plus the fact that I had had a lot of sex with a another IV user who was also a prostitute, unprotected and oral (and I thoroughly enjoyed it btw) and then when they found me positive I would be in a stronger position to challenge them.
Unfortunately I was tested NEGATIVE.
Ever since then I haven’t used and I live a full and productive life. I take responsibilty for my own health, eat nutritously, work out and I’m discovering what a truly wonderful person I am.
I think it’s fair to say that I owe my life to Peter Duesberg.
Anyone got a problem with that?
You’re not showing me any facts, you’re telling em a story. Your story is no more proof of your this denialist “theory” than Harry Potter is proof of witchcraft. Sorry, but try science next time.
All I see here is two people trying the “appeal to emotion” argument in lieu of logic, proof, and evidence. And it’s pathetic.
Bob, I had an idea you were HIV+. You keep your denial and self delusion. It was what I suspected about you all along. Now your nonsense makes sense, you are no different from the brain washed “born again” Christian, the “found-Jesus” recovered alcoholic, or the deluded “ex-gay”.
For every so called “miracle” denial story, I can provide you with literally hundreds of thousands of PROVEN cases where HIV, left untreated, let to an awful death from AIDS related illness.
And very few of these people who dies had “drug fuelled gay party lifestyles”. The very suggestion of that cheapens their lives and demeans you as people to nothing more then cockroaches for even suggesting that.
This is the reality.
Not your silly self delusional stories. If you’re “cured” good for you. That’s is not the reality for millions who are dying
You people sicken me. You truly do. As you sicken many decent people. Not only are you happy to accept your own self deluded lies, you need to perpetuate them to others as so to validate yourself and your own foolish choices/beliefs.
Great story Bob. I hope House of Numbers comes to the UK! My interest now in the alternative view is really piqued! How ironic that in denying you your opinions to which you are as entitled to as anyone else that Will, Eddy et al become that which they are ranting and foaming at the mouth about!!!!
Rob, nice little emotional heart plucking, but don’t insult my intelligence by making out that you are “on the fence” here with an “open mind”… you’re already a denialist, you are a supporter of this nonsense, you’re just pretending to be a clever about it. Notice I say pretending.
Your belief in a choice here, given the overwhelming evidence that HIV causes AIDS, and the ZERO evidence that it doesn’t, is actually like training you have a choice in believing the earth is flat or it isn’t.
In short, its stupidity and ignorance. And I abhor stupidity and ignorance.
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
Wow. If only your scientific understanding of HIV was nearly as good as your cut and pasting skills, you’d have half a brain, and probably avoid a tragic death.
Nice try. But it doesn’t remove the fact you have no evidence of your statements, and all you can muster is a lame ass’ed defence based on insults and emotional dribble.
And still no proof! Even after all this time, you can’t muster one shred of scientifically verifiable proof of your statements. LOL, well done!!!! How pathetic. And predictable.
Maybe you should “stay on the gear” as you put it, you were probably more based in reality then, than you are now.
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
and I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
“And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL”
What a delightfully witty line. No, well done. Well done indeed. very impressive, isn’t lads? Did you make that up yourself?
I find insults to my obviously superior intellect from worn out ex-trade junkies not very impacting, for obvious reasons. Nice try though.
If this is all you can muster as proof of your idiotic theories, then by all means go ahead, demean yourself in public. It only shows you for what you are – worn out gutter trash – and proves me right.
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
Still we agree one thing…Fully blown AIDS isn’t infectious is it will?
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
love the “coudl affortd” bit LOL
Tell the truth will how much did you pay for your degree? LOL
You mean you are finally bored looking at your own arrogance? Good well piss off then LOL
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
love the “coudl affortd” bit LOL
Tell the truth will how much did you pay for your degree? LOL
Will says “IQ higher than that of a banana!”
Hey will i’ve found a beetroot that says she wants to meet you LOL
I can’t believe how offensive eveyone is being!
It completely invalidates your argument when all you can do is personally attack your opponent.
Can’t you just accept that people believe different things?
Its better that information from both sides of the argument is in the public domain so people can make their ‘own’ minds up.
Almost all the information we receive (about everything) is from third parties (mainly the press) and we just accept it without question even though we ourselves, do not have any proof of its truth.
I think it is better for people to have to process all of the information and to think for themselves. Generally the truth will prevail.
But these childish ‘digs’ at each other will only be detrimental to everyones health!
Okay, I’m going to assume Nat you not ANOTHER person who thinks the scientific proof is lacking, and that there is a valid reason to have a “choice” between overwhelming independent scientific evidence and, well, none.
But lies cannot never be tolerated as proof of anything, otherwise we get no where. Its akin to bringing us back to the dark ages where superstition ruled over reason. So far, as zero proof was offered, and misinformation were put where reason should be, so then there is no “choice” of sides to pick from.
These people have something wrong with them, as seen by Bob’s somewhat deranged responses. And Charles, another one that is just baffling. If someone advocated stupidity, then they must accept the label that goes with that, and I will not apologise for that.
This isn’t a debate, its s slaughtering of a few lunatics with reason.
I have already tried to reason with these people, and that failed. So apologies if I chose not to be ridiculed for MY education by some deluded ex-trade ex-junkie…. what’s next, the guy begging at the bus-stop debating on socio-economics factors that cause recessions?
Bob say’s “unhindered as I am by a formal medical education”
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
Will says: “MY education…example of wills education: “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
Sorry Nat but I think will is being paid to disrupt this blog and disrupt any attempt at sensible dialogue. But I shall try again.
What evidence do you have will, that Peter Duesberg is anything other than a man of outstanding professional and moral integrity? Why should we believe you rather than him?
Now that’s fairly straightforward.
When you answer my questions, I’ll be sure to answer yours.
You seem more obsessed with the person and his “mmoral integrity”, rather then the proof.
What the hell has “moral integrity” got to do with scientific proof???? Either his theories are proven scientifically or they’re not. “Now that’s fairly straightforward” given he and his theories has been disproven many times. He’s even admitted being wrong himself.
Perhaps less idolatry of Mr. Duesberg, and more dealing in fact.
You mean you can’t will say’s… When you answer my questions, I’ll be sure to answer yours…You can’t!!!
will say’s…What the hell has “moral integrity” got to do with scientific proof???…You wouldn’t understand.
Tell me Nat, do you know or have you heard of anyone (apart from the press) I mean personally, like a friend, relative or someone in your neighbourhood, outside of testing and treatment, who’s gone down with fully blown aids? Because I’m not a mathmetician but I say that however you do the figures, 28 years of an incurable, undetectable contagious virus with a long incubation period? You should know plenty?
How long has it been since anyone but Will has kept an eye on Jess Geen’s superb article?
Here is a direct quote:
“But HIV charities and health experts have told PinkNews.co.uk it misrepresents the scientists featured and the ideas promoted perpetrate medical “myths”.
And that is part of the reason that “House of Numbers” is considered to be a dangerous and misleading film. It is a dangerous and misleading film, and it will always be a dangerous and misleading film…like a balloon tied to a housebrick. A no-go! Nyet!
As far as I’m concerned, denialists can blow it out their ear.
Denialists are just wasting people’s time to get free publicity for the film, but they haven’t noticed that nobody is listening to them let alone believing them; in fact everyone has lost interest in reading about this denialist business.
Speaking of business, is it possible that those on this thread who are denialists have invested some money in this film?
Denialists are clearly mistaken, and denialists could be applying their intelligence to much better use.
Tell me Jean-Paul Bentham, do you know or have you heard of anyone (apart from the press) I mean personally, like a friend, relative or someone in your neighbourhood, outside of testing and treatment, who’s gone down with fully blown aids? Because I’m not a mathmetician but I say that however you do the figures, 28 years of an incurable, undetectable contagious virus with a long incubation period? You should know plenty?
First they use fear, picking on vulnerable minorities of society, especially those they can shame. When that wears off a bit and we ask questions they’ll make it out that we are a crappy piece of lowlife and we should be grateful for these expensive meds they want to give us. And off course they’ll use science but us mere crappy mortals wouldn’t understand because it’s obviously above our intellectual head,(sound familiar)
When we take away the fear and start asking the questions, from any starting point,we soon start to see that the emperor has no clothes.Be it virology,immunology,epidemiology,toxicology,AZT poisoning,AIDS in Africa,it’s all rotten same as that NIAID factsheet which is touted as the definitive evidence, all I say is see for yourselves.
The Royal College of Nursing said in 1985 that there would be a million Aids cases in Britain by 1990. It’s 2009 and I still haven’t heard of anyone getting aids outside of treatment
“Tell me Jean-Paul Bentham, do you know or have you heard of anyone (apart from the press) I mean personally, like a friend, relative or someone in your neighbourhood, outside of testing and treatment, who’s gone down with fully blown aids”
Yes, I have one friend who dies of AIDS, back in 1998. That’s the “full blown” type you seem obsessed with. He didn’t take any anti-viral drugs. He never smoked, or had a “wild drug fuelled lifestyle”. His death was awful to watch. And you denial is an affront to his death and an insult to his life.
“and why should we believe you instead of Peter Duesberg”
No ones asking you to believe us, go do your own research. But you need an open mind to understand. A closed mind is cannot learn. The reason why you don’t understand it is because you refuse to accept the evidence, even when it is in front of you. You are so obsessed with Peter Duesberg you can’t fault him, like a religion. Of course, an education would help too.
“It’s 2009 and I still haven’t heard of anyone getting aids outside of treatment”
Have you seen the news on Africa recently? They’re not getting any treatment, and millions have AIDS…. yeah, the “full blown” type.
Open your eyes. You denial is lies and it costs lives. Possibly even your own.
“incurable, undetectable contagious virus with a long incubation period”
Oh, and this is the most ridiculous statement you have come up with yet.
Incurable? So is cancer.
Undetectable? It IS detectable. There are even electron microscope photos of the bloody thing. Talk about head in the sand. What, the photo is lying???? How utterly stupid.
Contagious virus with a long incubation period? Yeah, so does variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. As long as thirty years incubation period. So?
And so you base your theory on this????????
Look this is pointless, you’re mentally damaged in some way. There is no other explanation. The refusal to see evidence under your nose, the refusal to accept anything that anyone else says other then this one man with so called “moral integrity”, and what he said is treated like he is god himself!
You’re a one man farce, with schizophrenic paranoia and worship issues.
Will, I don’t think you are a scientist, and your probably younger than HIV. Your comments are filled with lies and hate, all you can do is attack people, like a dog trapped into a corner. like I said, meet me, so I can show you my medical records. My blood and viral load tests results are based on the scientific evidence, and based on the science, with a CD4 count of 40 and a viral load in the 1000′s back in march 2009, which dropped from a CD4 count of 550 in just 18 months, I should be coming down with all kinds of infections, I should be weak, unhealthy looking, and laid up in a AIDS ward in hospital, but as you should know, we don’t have any AIDS wards in our hospitals. So for you to say, “you know millions of people who have come to full blown AIDS” so show me the AIDS wards in this country. I’m not going to lower myself by using insulting words, which I enjoyed using in the play grounds of my schools.
You say! you are a scientist, so you must of read a lot of Albert Einstein’s work and quotes. didn’t he say, “the most important thing in science, is to never Stop Questioning” So at what point in your 8yrs of scientific studying, did you Stop Questioning???
Did your lecturers attack you for asking Questions?? and did they teach you that, you have to Attack people who disagree with you??
So, Will, will you meet me, to prove to you, my scientifically based CD4 count and viral load tests??
“Your comments are filled with lies and hate, all you can do is attack people”
Find the lies then.
And yes, I hate blind stupidity. Sorry, but its offensive to progress.
“Will, I don’t think you are a scientist, and your probably younger than HIV”
Couldn’t care less. I know my academic education, and that’s all that matters. As for my age, that’s irrelevant. Like saying you have to be over 100 years old to understand the light bulb. Stupid suggestion.
“the most important thing in science, is to never Stop Questioning”
Why do you people like you, desperate to prove something proven as false, seek to twist words? Is it desperation? I have seen the evidence. HIV is almost certainly (see my comment on statistically probability to under stand this) the cause of AIDS. All denialist theories have been PROVEN false and wrong. The real question is why you ignore the evidence? I have seen your claims, and they are nothing but aspirational beliefs. Yet, you still cling to them. Is this a neurosis? A desperation aching to a religious need?
No AIDS wards? LOL! Yeah. What about San Francisco General Hospital’s Ward 86. That’s an AIDS ward.
Daz, your comments are noting but fabrications. All through this thread people have been asking for ONE SCIENTIFIC PIECE OF PROOF that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. What have we seen? Lunatic ramblings about a god like figure with “moral integrity”, lies, half truths, misunderstanding about science, stupid statements that your cannot backup or answer questions on, insults and character assignations by way of “evidence”.
You, like Bob, are a joke. Which is why the entire scientific community laughs are your claims. Which is why I pity you lot. You’re desperate for hope, any hope, no matter how false it is:- I suggest you turn to religion for that, but don’t insult my superior knowledge in the field. I have clearly run circles around your so called arguments. And I will not apologise for that, or your stupidity.
I tire of this. You people are little more then fringe lunatics desperate for salvation, and as such I will no longer address any of you in a civilised format until you have scientific proof of any statements.
So if I’ve got fairies in my garden,you can disprove me? If so where is your scientific evidence?
N1 Daz like the bit about Einstein, he reminds me of Peter Duesberg. Got one for you…Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear. Mohandas Gandhi
See you later take care
“But HIV charities and health experts have told PinkNews.co.uk it misrepresents the scientists featured and the ideas promoted perpetrate medical “myths”.
Ooh, so it must be a lie then!! Honestly Will, you are so self-righteous in your belief that that alone tells me there must be something in all of this. If you were reasonable and restrained in your argument you might have won me over, but your seemingly desperate need to be right clouds all your arguments. I will be keeping a close eye on this new film…
“AIDS denialism is a movement that believes HIV either does not exist or is harmless; that therapies for HIV infection are themselves the cause of AIDS; that drug abuse causes AIDS; that HIV was created by the US government to kill Africans and African-Americans as an act of genocide; and that diagnostic tests for HIV infection do not work.
It has been widely discredited and it was estimated that 350,000 people died unnecessarily of AIDS in South Africa between 2000 and 2005 as a result of government policy based on AIDS denialism.”
350,000 people died in Africa as a result of government policy based on AIDS denialism…
Is it possible that AIDS denialists will say anything to avois taking responsibility for these deaths?
You denialists have been ranting long enough; nobody is listening to you. Can’t you see that??
Ok, ok, so you’ve got all the free publicity you’re going to get at PinkNews for your movie. Frankly, if I were Will, I would just ignore you; he has already given you too much of his time.
Here is an article written by Celia W. Dugger for “Global Gayz” which states that the advice of the WHO was ignored in South Africa, and that President Thabo Mbeki and his Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang promoted indigenous remedies icluding garlic, beetroot, and African potatoes:
This is another credible report by a credible source, and there are a number of scientists named in this article, as well as the previous one, who would be willing to dialogue with you.
Why are you here wasting our time and yours? Free publicity, that’s all; and you’ve had all of it that you are going to get here because nobody is here commenting. We are all commenting on dozens of more interesting and relevant stories than this one.
Will wrote in #223: “Eddy, Snout, is this the best that these denialists can come up with? A backup job????? Is this all they are, a few lunatics who can’t even construct the most basic argument or demonstrate a simple understanding between AIDS and HIV? Its truly astounding the level of ignorance and lack of even the most rudimentary education these people have….”
Will, Snout, Jean-Paul, have just visited on the off-chance and have been astounded at what I have read. This guy has a deep problem.
Bob at #227 wrote: “Outside of HIV testing and treatment, does anyone know of anyone or even know of anyone who knows anyone who has gone down with fully blown AIDS?”
What kind of stupid and idiotic question is the above? Yes, yes, yes, is the answer. As the 80s progressed I made a list of friends, acquaintances, or work colleagues who “went down” with “full-blown AIDS”. The list totalled 23. But who needs to cite personal experience? Literally 100s of high-profile creative gay men “went down” with full-blown AIDS and were listed as having done so in the papers. They were all young or youngish and they died horrible deaths of much the same symptoms. But that was before anti-retroviral treatments were, thankfully, developed by science in the mid-90s. And only a complete IDIOT would now suggest, as Bob has done in #228 that the real reason for their deaths was not AIDS but “psychological stress, trauma,and the medication, . . . drugs and malnutrition.” WHY do you have this BLIND foolish INABILITY to accept the truth?
Why MUST you demand that AIDS is caused by stress, trauma, medication, recreational drugs, and malnutrition? WHY? Where are you REALLY coming from? Is it a hatred of gays? Is it a refusal to accept the real reason why YOU yourself are HIV+? Can you not accept that you contracted the virus through sex? Why can’t you accept that? Do you feel so guilty about this fact that you must deny it? Are you intensely religious? Are you ridden with guilt? Do you dwell in a world of gothic horror where all is not as it seems? What do you read for pleasure – apart from websites which are rubbishy?
Bob at #231 wrote: “Peter Duesberg: untold awards and scientific achievments, man of outstanding courage and moral integrity, lifetime’s experience working in the field”
I don’t believe the above. Duesberg is a lone wolf, discredited and isolated. Bob get this into your crazy denying SKULL: it is Duesberg who is the clown, not the 1000s of scientists who have made extraordinary progress in combating HIV/AIDS.
Will, #234, I notice you have asked the same question as has occurred to me: what is Bob’s REAL motivation, unless he is actually Paranoid Schizophrenic – which is completely feasible. Is he HIV+ and he has somehow sunk into a chasm of fear of ARV medications?
Daz at #237 wrote: “After 10yrs on drugs, they started to give me liver damage. In August 2007 I stopped the medications, and I now have a healthy liver and no other organ problems ie heart problems nor kidney problems and I look healthy again.”
OK, so you are telling us that for two years you have had no ARVs. You are implying that throughout that time you have been in excellent health. And you say that you look healthy again. I would prefer the opinion of a doctor as to how healthy you actually are. And your opinion as to how healthy you look is, of course, subjective. One thing is sure: unless you are an extremely rare “non-progressor” (and there are a few), it won’t be long, my friend, before opportunistic infections get the better of you. Whether your sudden dashing to the clinic for ARVs will then help you, I am afraid we can’t be sure. Tell us, Daz, honestly, what the doctors at the Kobler clinic at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital think of your current behaviour and beliefs. I am astounded to hear you referring to them as if they are your mates. Clearly, you are keeping your safety net open beneath you. You can’t have that much faith in your Denialism.
Ah, so finally at #240 Bob tells us his history. Presumably this Bob is also our “Rob”. He says he was an injector for years and that he had unsafe sex for years and that after this he found he was negative upon having an HIV test and therefore he REFUSES to accept that HIV causes AIDS! How ridiculous is this “logic”! HIV is very difficult to catch. Perhaps you were extremely lucky. Accept that! Don’t say, “I SHOULD BE HIV, I’m not, therefore HIV does not cause AIDS!” What kind of crazy thinking is that!
As Will suggests it is the crazy thinking of someone who has admitted he has been a drug addict for years! This is who we have been fighting with in this thread and in other threads for so long, guys. A drug addict with all his silly deluded irrational baggage. A complete nutter!
You’re delusional bob/Rob. And by the way, all your posting under different names in order to advance your devil-possessed theory is so transparent and has been for quite some time!
You seem to think that the world is some kind of place out of a gothic tale, the world of horror and imagination. Well, I’m tell you that you are mistaking the real rational world with your world of cheap comic-horror. The world that you exist in is a MILLION LIGHT-YEARS from the rational world of sound and rational people, like Will, and me, and millions of others.
Who do you work with, bob/Rob? Are you a lone cannon? Are you self-employed? Are you on benefits? How many normal rational people do you interact with on a daily routine basis?
Will, Jean-Paul, Snout, this multi-named individual is simply mentally ill.
He says that he is not HIV, that he tested negative, but I am not sure that we should accept that as being true, given all the nonsense that he has spoken. If he is positive and continues not to place himself in the care of specialists, it is likely he will deteriorate. If he is positive and he is what is known as a “non-progressor” then he ought to be offering himself to his doctors as a subject of research for the benefit of all those who are not so lucky.
I think we have now worked out where this sad individual is actually from.
The tragic thing is that the arrogance he possesses means that he has the power of influence others who are vulnerable and THAT is seriously worrying.
Hey Eddy, JP… yeah, I agree. These are probably all the same people, no more then two individuals at best… the line “I will be keeping a close eye on this new film…” gives it away, they all seem to sat that. Curious, don’t you think. Lying seems to be a particular MO, so alter ego’s are not a stretch of the imagination.
“Don’t say, “I SHOULD BE HIV, I’m not, therefore HIV does not cause AIDS!” What kind of crazy thinking is that!”
This sums it up perfectly, well said Eddy. Its like surviving a car accident and then walking blindfolded across a 6 lane motorway thinking you’re immune to cars!
“The tragic thing is that the arrogance he possesses means that he has the power of influence others who are vulnerable and THAT is seriously worrying.”
You said it Eddy, and quite right. And thats why I kept to going on this thread…. how insulting to those who battle to cure this disease, and those who suffer from it, having to listen to Rob/Bob/Charles/Daz/Rodger (granted they’re probably all the same person) and their false theories to make them feel that one bit better about themselves and their deluded lives. Reminds me of that line ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’.
Well, Eddy, I’m telling you that I am healthy, based on my blood tests which I had taken at my normal doctors, also in March 2009 for general health checks, which test your, heart, liver, kidneys and white blood cells, which basically tell me my immune system is fine. I say to you, meet me and I’ll take you to my doctors to get that opinion answered.
As to what my HIV so called doctor, at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, who is the head of the largest HIV clinic in northern Europe, the kobler centre, Dr M.N. He teaches undergraduates, goes around the world, promoting HIV drugs and he’s a consultant for 10 drug companies. I did question him and show him a letter from a Gordon Stewart MD only to be told to leave, and his only scientific evidence, that HIV was the cause of AIDS, was to say, ” Peter Duesberg, wouldn’t inject himself with some infected blood, so that’s proof enough for me, that HIV causes AIDS”
You can’t call me a rare non-progessor, because based on the science, the virus was progressing and that’s why I was advised to go on the meds. From August 2007 to march 2009 my CD4 count dropped from 550 to 40, so the orthodox science suggest I’m in progression and should be dead or very close to death. You totally contradict yourself, by saying, ” One thing is sure: unless you are an extremely rare “non-progressor” (and there are a few) ” Are you using the word few, as to say, there are quite a few, suggesting there are many, so not rare?? or are you using the word few, as in very few, suggesting very rare??
No one has been homophobic, so why try to drop that into the debate, if you can call it that, because all you do is use insulting words. You wont see me using insulting words. Why do you hate on people, who are living very well without HIV drugs for 5 10 15 and 20yrs? Would you hate on a cancer victim, if they decided to stopped chemo and survived?
shocking!
What a utterly disgusting film. Surely, with the younger members of society being naive about HIV/AIDS this doesn’t help. Facts need to be made not myth. It is a duty to everyone to report on what’s happening not scaring people senselessly. Some of the comments of the film echos of what African governements were trying to kid themselves with. This kind of film is also dating from the 80′s when maybe little was known but absolutely no excuse for it’s relevance it the 21st century! These film makers should be ashamed of themselves.
A denialist swarm will be along any minute…
I would call on all HIV charities in the UK to, at the very least, put on their websites information that refutes denialist myths in an attempt to counter the damaging information that newly diagnosed people may come into contact with. This could be easily done, at very little cost and save people from the false hope that denialism offers.
Great article exposing AIDS Denialism and the fraud of House of Numbers. The movie has fooled many people into thinking there is actually a debate among scientists about the cause of AIDS. This article exposes the AIDS Deniers. There is a new book readers might be interested in called “Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy.” All royalties are donated to buy HIV meds in Africa.
Sounds like this film is of the hot showers, beetroot and garlic variety in terms of usefulness.
Dumb b*stard
“He added that the film did not explicitly state that HIV and AIDS do not exist and did not state that there is no link between them.”
Disingenuous bullsh*t. Leung explicitly claims at the end of the film that HIV tests “prove nothing.” You also missed that when Maggiore’s death is mentioned in the credits in tiny letters, it claims her death was “unrelated to HIV” (yet Leung has stated in writing “I am not an AIDS denialist”). His film is Executive Produced by someone who has been on a list of supporters of AIDS denial since 2007 and the same person also sponsored a recent AIDS denial conference in the US (where House of Numbers was featured). Someone is now paying for Leung and his producer David Syner to travel to universities around the US to have showings at student unions, propagandizing AIDS denial to young people who may not be familiar with its miserable history of deception and death. Another HIV positive denialist in the film, Kim Bannon, is now reported to be ill, possibly with the very serious opportunistic infection PML.
Film-makers have a right to masquerade fiction as fact if they wish in a free society
I completely disagree. This film should be banned immediately. This is completely irresponsible and very dangerous. Freedom of speech does not extend to the promotion of harmful “therapies”, especially when the public is being manipulated into believing this quackery is scientifically sound.
As Christine Maggiore’s private investigator, I worked closely with her until she died. A soon-to-be-released forensic report will scientifically prove that Maggiore’s death was clearly not AIDS-related.
Like her daughter, Maggiore’s death is vital to the pharmaceutical industry’s ongoing marketing effort to promote the mythology that HIV is something more than a political disease. It is now clear that corrupt officials from within the LA County Department of Health pressured officials into making false claims that Maggiore and her daughter died of HIV so that pharmaceutical marketers could induce useful media idiots to perpetuate the myth on their behalf.
I’m not surprised that websites like PinkNews personally attack those who ask questions related to HIV and the pharmaceutical industry. Not only is PinkNews publisher Benjamin Cohen a known propagandist and gay pornographer, but his website relies on advertisers who profit from the scam that corrupt scientists have unwittingly exposed in House of Numbers.
If HIV was real as breast cancer, heart disease and diabetes, propagandists would not need to exploit, celebrate and promote non-AIDS-related deaths like Maggiore’s as AIDS-related. The fact that this myth is so routinely promoted raises a red flag for career criminal investigators like me. If their SCIENTIFIC arguments are sound, why must they issue POLITICAL attacks like this one to defend it.
Like HERESY, epithets like DENIALIST and DENIALISM are commonly used to attack those who ask questions. Like Galileo and Ignaz Semmelweis, Maggiore was attacked for raising SCIENTIFIC questions about profitable POLITICAL myths.
It is now apparent that individuals like Cornell’s John P. Moore use their academic positions to propagandize and politicize what are medical, scientific and criminal matters. It’s also clear that if propagandists like Moore stopped lying tomorrow, millions of dollars of pharmaceutical funding for universities like Cornell and propagandists like Benjamin Cohen would immediately dry up.
Congratulations, Jessica Geen, on this excellent article which will hopefully warn some vulnerable people and prevent them being wrongly sidetracked and wrongly misinformed by this glossy piece of trash.
This film is just another attempt by a young guy not long out of the film-school to make an impact at whatever cost! What he appears not have taken much note of is the massive difference between responsible film-making and totally irresponsible film-making. There is such a thing as journalistic integrity and I suspect that at this Leung’s film school not much emphasis was given to this aspect.
Brent Leung has unfortunately started out on his career by putting an unfortunate big fat blot on his film-making CV! He will now always be referred to as the young guy who produced “that AIDS-denialist documentary”. In time he will be sorry about that. I wonder though if he will ever be sorry about influencing vulnerable young people not to fear HIV or not to take HIV medications?
Let’s be clear: this guy will most certainly have other people’s deaths on his hands. Their deaths, their acquiring HIV, will be HIS responsibility.
I note Lisa Power’s convenient use of the Holocaust with which to tar AIDS denialists, much like the environment movement does to discredit climate change deniers. But when the T. Higgins Trusts’ paymasters are the government and pharmaceutical industries what else do you expect?
Clark Baker, your post above, at #9, has revealed to all and sundry a great deal of unfortunately deeply undisciplined and unschooled thinking. One senses you have never really been challenged by a really good teacher – though you, of course, may well think you have! Sorry to tell you, but no, you haven’t.
Let us just take ONE of the statements you have written above. Let us just look at the following HOWLER:
“Like her daughter, Maggiore’s death is vital to the pharmaceutical industry’s ongoing marketing effort to promote the mythology that HIV is something more than a political disease.”
The above sentence indicates to us all that you very clearly believe that having HIV is no more than “a political disease”.
If HIV were no more than “a political disease”, then anti-retroviral medications would not have been created by legions of decent hard-working and dedicated scientists (people who have applied themselves for years to rigorous scientific and mental discipline), anti-retroviral medications would not exist, and anti-retroviral medications would not have saved hundreds of thousands of HIV+ people from death to date!
Christine Maggiore was a clearly deluded woman who by denying her own HIV caused her own early death and who by denying the HIV of her young daughter was responsible for her daughter’s early death as well. So one would be rather foolish to put store on the opinion of a person grandly announcing himself to us as having been employed by Christine Maggiore as her “Private Investigator”. LOL! Instead, your post only reveals that you clearly have an extremely poor grasp of science, logic, or rationality – despite your loud and bullish self-assurance.
Your biography at http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2005/05/whats-in-name.html is very revealing . . . and very self-indulgent.
Clark Baker, it appears you think of yourself as akin to the do-good All-American Yee-haa Cowboy! A likeness of Mr. Tom Cruise, himself! The All-American boy-next-door! Top-Gun! Mr. Private Investigator! Episode 45! (Yes, rather too many episodes of the ilk of “The Fugitive” or “The Untouchables” as a little lad, methinks, instead of getting down to some diligent homework!)
Readers, this is what our All-American Yee-Ha Cowboy AIDS-DENIALIST says amongst rather too much in his very me-me-me autobiography!
“I attended public school, which I found extremely boring. I paid attention in class but rarely did homework. . . After graduating from Reseda High School in 1975, I enlisted in the Marine Corps primarily to optimize my chance of being accepted into the Police Academy. After completing infantry training school (top center), I was assigned to the 9th Marine Regiment (Weapons – E 2/9) at Camp Schwab, Okinawa. In September (1976), our battalion deployed aboard the USS Dubuque, which took us to training facilities in Japan, the Philippines, Hong Kong, and a joint training exercise with the Korean Marines in Pusan, Korea. . . Fearing that I’d say something dumb, I kept my comments short and polite. . . I thrived in the challenge of the street’s random unpredictability. There was no intoxication like it. . . Instead of driving around looking for a broken window or waiting for a shoplifter call, my partners and I hung around known drug dens where addicts regularly traded their loot for drugs and a place to rest. By staking out these dens, burglars and robbers came to me. And since these hard core addicts required constant doses of cocaine and heroin to avoid withdrawal, they were usually under the influence when I stopped them. During those four years, my partners and I arrested more than 2700 addicts. . . I accompanied my motor squad to protect City Hall from rioters. . . Standing in the glow of the sunset, I listened for the distant riot and surveyed the street. Except for a tipped kiosk, there was little evidence that they’d been there and I was a little disappointed. . . The problem is that the LAPD, as a law enforcement agency, is no longer in the business of protecting and serving. Except for individual officers who take their oath of office seriously, the LAPD exists to reflect LA’s demographics and to promote Democrat Party candidates and their misguided liberal ideas. . . Marked by what is known as “little man’s syndrome,” Sotelo graduated from one of America’s most leftist universities, and joined the DA’s Special Investigations Division specifically to target white LAPD officers. . . no one wanted to hire an ex-cop who was convicted of assaulting a jaywalker. I sent more than 100 unanswered resumes and worked jobs as a studio extra . . . The best job I found was working as an unarmed security guard for $10/hour . . . Although I had arrested thousands of career criminals, junkies, felons, and drunks before 1994, I successfully avoided criminal suspects and arrested no one between 1992 until I retired in 2000. . . I figured that if jurors, prosecutors, judges, politicians, and my police department refused to support my efforts that arresting predators was pointless. As far as I was concerned, LA’s residents would get the gangs, crime, and declining quality of life that they deserved. . . 43 and Retired . . . Although I enjoy retirement more than I can say, I have never been busier. I have enjoyed friends, family, travel, diving, flying, photography, protests, and parties. Most importantly, I enjoy preying on predators. . . With advances in Internet technology, finding work as a PI was as easy as building a website and advertising on Google. When I want work, I simply modify my Google or Yahoo ad campaign to become the #1 search response and wait by the phone. Once I have a few cases and PayPal deposits, (many clients were from outside of the US) I would shut down the ad and do the work – usually from my computer at home.”
So I think we all now have a pretty good idea of just who this boy Clark Baker is, wouldn’t you say? Just another scientifically untrained and academically undisciplined wannabe, like Brent Leung, desperately seeking admiration and recognition . . . daring to make grand medical statements, daring to stand against thousands of the world’s greatest scientists, but unfortunately completely and pathetically ill-equipped to do so. In fact, just another yee-ha all American cowboy! Finger-lickin’ good-lookin’, full of struttin’ confidence, and desperately ambitious, but unfortunately a very very loose cannon without a shred of intellectual substance.
That book you’re dreaming will make you the famous Top-Gun All-American hero? Forget it, Clark. We’re already laughing.
But if you don’t mind selling copies to uneducated vulnerable nobodies in the back suburbs of mid-western America, the sort of people who will swallow any old crap . . . then you just keep on dreaming in your own little world of imaginings.
The really appalling thing is that Maggiore’s death certificate clearly states that she had disseminated herpes simplex for two weeks before she died (in addition to bilateral pneumonia and thrush, all opportunistic infections resulting from severe immune deficiency). Herpes simplex targets nerves endings and causes excruciating pain, it must have been an agonizing and horrible death. And what happens to those of us who live in the reality-based community and strive to PREVENT people going through that? We get insulted and attacked by morons like Clark Baker, who actually spent his entire LAPD career in the traffic division as far as I can tell.
Perhaps Clark Baker can tell us how Kim Bannon is doing. Or Noreen Martin, who was scheduled to speak at the AIDS denial conference but did not.
Darren Main, the one HIV positive person interviewed in House of Numbers who is apparently healthy and alive, started antiretroviral treatment in 2007. The film does not tell you that.
It sounds like pernicious rubbish. Pursue it and hound it everywhere.
I found an update on Kim Bannon:
http://forums.aidsmythexposed.com/main-forum/5992-kim-bannon-gravely-ill.html#post37651
“Kim is suffering serious neurological issues including Parkinson-like tremors and slurred speech. She is unable to bathe or dress herself and requires 24-hour care. She weighs 105 pounds and looks pretty bad in her pictures. She was told a while back that if she took her medicine (it is not made clear whether this is ARVs) she had a 20% chance of recovering mostly and living a fairly normal life. Apparently she is not responding to the drugs, whatever they are.”
This is a picture of Kim with House of Numbers producer David Syner a month ago:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=2744736&o=all&op=1&view=all&subj=40491054861&aid=-1&id=680293660&oid=40491054861
And this is what Syner wrote: “slowly i think you will be hearing more and more from Kim”
The combination of stupidity and cynicism is unbelievable. A few years ago Syner was COO of a company called “Specialty Drinks” that made a red bull alternative that it marketed to the gay community as “Gay Fuel” – part of the promotion was that they’d donate 5% of profits to AIDS charities. Scum seems too complimentary to do him justice.
Thanks BLBS for the links. That Kim Bannon is off ‘er rocker! Here’s a few quote from her story at http://www.aras.ab.ca/articles/popular/200506-KimMarieBannon.html
“‘WOW! I thought God had sent me an angel, and I prayed and prayed about how could I continue a sexual relationship with Don when I was killing an angel sent to me by God! And God answered”
and
“My trek with Scientology is a story in itself, but I want you to know that I spent over $100,000 from 1994 to 1998 with this group in an effort to find peace in my marriage.”
and
“In February 2000 I heard of a group of ex-Scientologists in Texas who were using some of the Scientology techniques but were expanding them and using them in a more ethical manner. They called this practice Knowledgism, and a friend of mine from Scientology highly recommended them. It was at the Knowledgism Ranch in October 2000 that I began to regain my self-esteem;”
and
“a friend of mine emailed a link to Nexus Magazine, asking me to check out an article about the benefits of coconut oil. As I scanned the magazine index for the title, I noticed another article entitled “The Yin and Yang of HIV”, and I clicked on it. It was long, it was technical, it was heavily referenced and footnoted. I decided to print it out after reading only a few paragraphs, and settled myself onto the sofa in the lodge to study it.”
and
“When you combine this with the fact that heterosexual, white females who don’t use IV drugs do not get AIDS unless they take AIDS meds, it does ease my mind to know I will never get AIDS since I don’t take AIDS drugs.”
and
“I am not a doctor or scientist or even a lawyer. I am merely an average citizen who is making a conscious decision to be informed and responsible for her own health”
Yep that’s about it I reckon, Kim Bannon is just another person terrified of accepting that they have HIV but when she gets ill, and she most likely will, hopefully she’ll beg for the meds.
PML is horrible and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone, even the people who made this malevolently evil propaganda film.
Clark Baker (9):
Are you completely out of your mind? Do you realize how uneducated and downright stupid you sound now, and how uneducated and downright stupid you will sound to future generations? You’re nuts!
In fact, I was going to ask you to repeat your comment in language that the average person could understand, but our own exceptional Eddy has interpreted your nonsense for us, and replied quite intelligently, and probabbly right over your head.
And to think you would have the unmitigated gall of coming onto PinkNews, which has international readership, and insult our benefactor, Mr. Ben Cohen, and disregard the carefully written story by Jessica Geen has convinced me that whatever drugs you are on have been tainted with camel dung.
“AIDS denialism is a movement that believes HIV either does not exist or is harmless; that therapies for HIV infection are themselves the cause of AIDS; that drug abuse causes AIDS; that HIV was created by the US government to kill Africans and African-Americans as an act of genocide; and that diagnostic tests for HIV infection do not work.”
Speaking of camel dung!!!
Moreover Pumpkin Pie has it spot on in his post 8:
“‘Film-makers have a right to masquerade fiction as fact if they wish in a free society.’
I completely disagree. This film should be banned immediately. This is completely irresponsible and very dangerous. Freedom of speech does not extend to the promotion of harmful “therapies”, especially when the public is being manipulated into believing this quackery is scientifically sound.
Comment by Pumpkin Pie — November 18, 2009 @ 17:54″
Somebody (you) is obviously trying to make more than $10 an hour, and you should be reported to the Police as a dangerous and quite insane, anti-social maniac.
You’ve had your 2 minutes worth of the spotlight, now go fly a kite on the edges of the Grand Canyon, you dunderhead.
So, Clark, do you have any proof whatsoever for your claims? After 18 doctors came forward to say they’d been decieved, how many does that leave you with? You do realise that in order to reveal medical truths, some of you actually have to have medical training, right?
Also, I noticed you using “atheist” and “homosexual” as derogatory terms on your little blog. More proof of you being a quack.
Also, oh-my-goodness, Eddy was totally right about you, Clark. You are completely delusional. Your entire blog is filled to the gills with superiority complexes, delusions of grandeur, and the firm belief that you are some sort of lone ranger protecting the world from the evil baddies that prey on it. …Well, saving those you consider saving, of course.
You have serious psychological issues and are a thoroughly sinister and chilling person. Brr!
Sorry, Jean-Paul (hello again), but I get more right wing as I grow older. Although what you say makes sense I’m beginning to feel that we simply don’t need in the gene pool, or in Gay society (or, for that matter, in Straight society) the sort of lame-brain who could fall for the irrationalities of the HIV/Aids connection deniers.
However, let’s make a few other connections here. Baker is a denialist himself – or, at least, he purports to be – and is a self-avowed right wing homophobe. He belongs with the now deeply discredited Mullis and Duesberg school of reasoning(?) but he simply fails to see that the anti-viral drugs work and prolong life but chooses, instead, to say that those very drugs are inducing the problem which they purport to, and obviously do, solve. That’s just back to front logic for no Doctor prescribes drugs until he, or she, is reasonably certain of his, or her, diagnosis. In other words, the drugs cannot be the cause of the problem because no Doctor will prescribe such medications until the problem becomes apparent.
No, let’s be honest here. What we are facing in the whole HIV/Aids denialist movement is yet another opportunistic attack on Gay people. Because Gay people were primarily responsible, probably but it can’t be proved, for introducing HIV/Aids into the West then those people who are inclined, often on the bases of religious beliefs, to hate and loath Gay people can use that apparent fact and twist it into unnatural routes of hatred and denial. But they can only do that for as long as HIV/Aids is seen as something special, as something outwith the ordinary, as something mysterious and strange and as something that rational science cannot integrate into our sensible world-view.
This man has a vested interest in denying the commonplace existence of HIV as just another disease because he perceives it, still, as being an homosexual disease. Deep within him is some smidgeon of belief that homosexuals are somehow not human, not capable of naturally conforming to scientific facts, of merely being animal, mammal and human as he is. His denial of the obvious connection between HIV and Aids is simply a denial of the humanity of Gay people and is, what is more, a complete denial of the Aids epidemic in African heterosexual societies. He doesn’t want to believe, or know and understand, that HIV causes Aids because understanding that fact would disturb his belief worldview to such an extent that he couldn’t cope with the changes necessary for his rational continuance.
Seemingly Baker has no understanding of scientific methodology – randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, peer-reviewed, balanced scientific methodology. Or the way that, if a scientist gets something wrong, it is very often other scientists who point this out because they are the only ones who understand the mistake. Or the way that science is not a monolithic body – conservative, ignoring evidence, resistant to change, oblivious of the ‘real world’ and condemning anyone who dares to challenge orthodox views. That would be religion, wouldn’t it (see httpcolon slashslashwwwdotlayscience.net/node/723) and something that Baker – with his extreme right-wing Christian beliefs – is well-aware of.
Denialism, in Baker’s case, is nothing more that Gay-hatred, hatred of the different, and one has to ask why. Why does he hate so. What drives him? Methinks that the man doth protest too much!
This whole thing sucks. I was recently told by a gullible friend who takes this kind of crap at face value that a shaman he encountered in Peru had told him that he had a therapy for HIV/Aids. This involved being stuck in an isolation hut for more than a year and existing off a strict diet of nothing except bananas and rice.
I know of one other person who attempted a diet like this to save money to spend on student drinking binges who became the first reported case of scurvey in something approaching 50 years.
What next, curing HIV with leaches?
If you’re not medically trained you have no experience to start pulling theories out of your ass and selling the resulting snake-oil to the public. Take note Clark Baker.
Claiming that everything you don’t understand about medicine and haven’t put in the time to learn is some kind of Big Pharma conspiracy is not just lazy reasoning, it’s potentially fatal for anyone stupid enough to take your word for it. It’s like claiming to be a better brain surgeon than the trained professionals based on the fact that you know how to use a cordless drill and a mallet.
“You are completely delusional. Your entire blog is filled to the gills with superiority complexes, delusions of grandeur, and the firm belief that you are some sort of lone ranger protecting the world from the evil baddies that prey on it”
Yep, Pumpkin, just too many episodes of “The Lone Ranger!” for our little Clark, I guess! Yee-ha!
Jean-Paul Bentham, I totally agree with you that this film is completely irresponsible and very dangerous. I think that national censors, of all countries where it is shown, should be urged to insist that a static warning notice of about 15 seconds’ duration be screened immediately before it – so that the vulnerable are very clearly and very strongly forewarned.
John M-J wrote: “Denialism, in Baker’s case, is nothing more than Gay-hatred, hatred of the different, and one has to ask why. Why does he hate so? What drives him? Methinks that the man doth protest too much!”
John M-J, I don’t think I have read you before. Great to meet you! Thanks for a very interesting posting! I think your theory could well be sound! Our “Lone Ranger”, this Mr. “Top Gun”, Clark Baker, may indeed be protesting too much!
Flap-Jack, right on! I think we’re seeing the dangers of just too many years a-struttin’ around in the Marines and the LAPD! LOL! Honestly, isn’t it hilarious, this a-swaggering John-Wayne wannabe (and let him remember Mr.Wayne was gay), got so self-important playing with his guns and his weaponry in the Marines and the LAPD that he actually actually BELIEVES he has the authority to pontificate on matters of scientific and intellectual complexity!!!!!!! LOL!!!!!!
Just before posting a direct quote from ONE International, I’d like to point out that Clark hasn’t posted since Nov 18 @ 18.05.
I wonder if we shouldn’t send a Ranger to check the Grande Canyon on the off-chance that Clark actually did take my advice. Tee-hee.
“Discoveries: New Strain of HIV and Origins of Malaria
Aug 12th, 2009 4:36 PM EST
By Rena Pacheco-Theard
The month of August has seen two important scientific discoveries, including a new strain of HIV found in humans, and the identification of malaria’s origins.
As reported in the weekly journal Nature Medicine, scientists have discovered a new strain of HIV (the virus that causes AIDS), and have linked its origins to gorillas. The other three known variants of HIV have all been linked to chimpanzees. Scientists believe the new virus was probably transmitted from gorillas to humans through the handling or eating of ape meat, though it could have been transmitted from chimpanzees to gorillas, and then to humans (or directly to humans and then gorillas).
Additionally, research on malaria’s origins by a team of scientists was published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Researchers identified chimpanzees as the source of the P. falciparum malaria parasite which entered the human population approximately 10,000 years ago via mosquitoes. Researchers emphasized the importance of understanding the origin and genetic behavior of pathogens like malaria, especially when trying to create a vaccine.
These discoveries are part of the continuous effort to monitor how viruses and parasites jump from species to species and emerge in human populations. If emerging infectious diseases are detected early enough, hopefully pandemics can be prevented.
-Rena Pacheco-Theard”
www dot one.org/international/blog/?P=951
Deny that, you egregious ass
TAGS: HIV/AIDS, Malaria, Policy News, Spotlight
These aids-denialists are just unbelievable. I think JOHNMJ is right – it must be something like homophobia that motivates them. I mean, scientists now know the structure of the HI virus, they can see the difference between the different strains. Here’s a pic of a budding HIV particle.
http://www.avert.org/aids-photo-gallery.php?photo_id=508&gallery_id=4
Here are other pictures of the HI virus
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/2/2f/20060414220038!HIV-budding.jpg
or better still (colourised):
http://diamonddusted.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/39602.jpg
Interestingly, and also depressingly, one of these women was an ex-scientology “survivor”. Out of the frying pan and into another bloody frying pan. Makes you think some people are just pathologically paranoid and gullible. Must be terrible to live such a miserable life.
Hello,
I’m not here to convince the negative aggressive people on this blog. I see so many of the ones that are constantly slamming the AIDS rethinkers and lying about us. Ask yourself why a small band of internet bloggers make it their main mission in life to silence the HIV questioners? Could it be the money? I’m here to let HIV positives know that they do have a choice. Don’t let the detractors here talk you out of using your mind to think for yourself. They don’t tell you about my wife Karri Stokely, although I’m sure they will be here soon to slam us too. There are so many more of us but not all are very public about it because they know that they will be lied about and HIV is just not that big of an issue for them anymore. Make up your own mind and think for yourself. Read between the lines folks and follow the money.
Read our story at our link and watch the pictures in the interview links below: (Thank you very much for your time, Joe)
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtnCdbmNv7s
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjKsHjw05YY
Am I reading some of these comments right??? Are some people suggesting that ignoring HIV will prevent AIDS?
Joe – And your medical background is what exactly?
Their blood… your hands. Nuff said.
“According to producer and director Brent Leung, House of Numbers is an objective and unbiased look at the question of what causes AIDS.”
Brent Leung is lying through his teeth. The film was conceived, financially backed and produced by individuals connected with a US/Candian based AIDS denialist cult called “Rethinking AIDS”, as part of a carefully structured and well funded “public relations” disinformation campaign. Notorious denialist and “Rethinking AIDS” board member Henry Bauer has made their strategy explicit:
“At any rate, AIDStruthers [ie the scientific mainstream] are not the audience to be courted. Their arguments must be countered with answers directed to the media and the general public in terms that are understandable by and clearly convincing for unengaged observers. That means the points cannot be too technical.”
Another RA board member, David Rasnick, appears in the film with his face cropped out, but is clearly identifiable participating in and supervising the production in “behind the scenes” shots from the HoN website.
Clark Baker is a thug and disgraced former cop hired by RA to “clean out” a somewhat dysfunctional support group for whistleblowers in the US, so that the organisiation could present a “clean hands” award to uber-denialist Peter Duesberg and his idiot mouthpiece Celia Farber in a similar PR exercise which quickly turned to farce.
Baker’s views on gays are made clear on his blog, including his opinion that AIDS began when “a small group of promiscuous, addicted, nitrite-huffing, gonorrheal and syphilitic bath house veterans began to get sick… Faced with the imminent loss of funding, Gallo and his goons needed a new virus that they could frighten Americans with. At the same time, gay activists wanted the world to believe that their lifestyle had nothing to do with their symptoms. If lifestyle was blamed, individuals would be responsible.”
Baker has since assumed the role of Chief Executive of the grandly named “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice” located in Studio City, California. A Google Earth image of their address is here:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Ux5t-vRXzeI/SoCarlJ3ARI/AAAAAAAAAGU/kdTcsv3uybA/s1600-h/bakerOMSJ.jpg
Nice to see that when North American nutcases try to spread their idiocy across the pond, the British Blogosphere is ready and waiting to give them the spanking they so thoroughly deserve. Kudos.
Clark Baker/ Joe Stokely – maybe you should both check this out…
http://www.badscience.net/2009/10/aids-denialism-at-the-spectator/
Snout, a thousands thanks to you!
“Baker has since assumed the role of Chief Executive of the grandly named “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice” located in Studio City, California.”
LOL! ONLY IN AMERICA! And that this jumped-up gun-toting ex-marine’s “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice” should be located in STUDIO CITY and in CALIFORNIA . . . well, all my fears about how far off-beam a lot of Yankees can get are now completely confirmed!
Will, yes, there are people out there trying to inform others that AIDS is not caused by HIV and that HIV medications are therefore nothing but one great big conspiracy! How’s that for gratefullness and respect to those extraordinary scientists who developed them and so emptied thousands of hospitals of their AIDS wards!
Anybody reading this thread who has been convinced, or is being convinced, that HIV does not caused AIDS or that HIV meds are useless . . . just go and read http://worldaidsday.org/hivreality/your-stories.aspx
After having read most of the comments here, I have to say I am feeling so ashamed of my own community here. I am gay in London. YES! I cruise in Old Comptons St, and get pissed in Bar Code and Vauxhall! YES!
It is so incredible how homophobic you sound to your own selves, and how obvious it is that you’ve probably put barely any research if any into researching objectively what these so-called dissidents actually say.
Sweeties darlings!! If you thought we could spend our whole lives taking ecstasis, MDMA, carpet cleaner …, and tons of unprotected sex – therefore real STDs – you were OBVIOUSLY WRONG!!! You don’t need to be a doctor or a scientist to foresee that!
Is it apoptosis induced? Is it by T-Cell burst by HIV itself? HOW IS IT THAT HIV REALLY KILLS T-CELLS therefore causes immune suppression? I don’t think anyone knows it as in November 2009!!
So why treat that common factor in these immune suppressed – or not – patients if we don’t know it is the one thing causing it? We just know it happens or is said to be there, somehow, some way.
If you know what Sensitivity and Specificity of a test means, you may want to check what they say in the INSTI Test insert. Yes! The one test we take when we go to this new fashionable cutting-edge clinic we’ve got in Soho now, isn’t it cool?
Here’s a present from me to you with so much love:
http://www.pasante.com/Content/Website/Products/Insti/Updated%20userguide.pdf
Read the Specificity and Sensitivity section.
Ok, I can copy and paste for you, too. I’m feeling generous today:
‘There is NO STANDARD for detecting the sensitivity or specificity of an antibody test for HIV in human sera, plasma or whole blood. However, the generally accepted method to express the sensitivity and specificity of a given test in terms of the detection rate is to compare results to approved supplemental assay results, such as ELISA and Western Blot. Based on these criteria, the sensitivity and specificity of the INSTI HIV-1/HIV-2 assay were determined using matching fingerstick blood, EDTA whole blood, serum and EDTA-plasma samples, which were also analyzed for anti-HIV-antibodies using ELISA and Western Blot.’
With tests such as these is where we consider whether individuals are infected with the retrovirus.
Summing up:
1. Science does not know how HIV kills T-Cells – or whether it actually does such thing.
2. Tests aren’t specific to determine the presence of such retrovirus in plasma.
Of course, this does not make any money for our lovely magazines supporters, without them we wouldn’t have all these free condoms we have. I haven’t let myself drive by ignorance and stupidity. It just makes common sense, whereas the actual HIV hypothesis I’ve been told for so many years has many wholes.
You were calling these people homophobes, but for some 25 years now, it is so obvious the biggest campaigns for HIV testing have been pointed at us – the gay community. Which has subsequently made us more likely to test positive than those who don’t take them.
All of a sudden, our only enemy is HIV, and it seems like AIDS (severe immune suppression) is forgotten. Medicine has cured NO ONE with the HIV as the causative AIDS agent hypothesis after 25 years despite BILLIONES being invested – and nowadays apparently isn’t enough money!
Will the earth not be flat after all????
Charles,
You need to try and keep a lot of different factors in your head all at the same time.
Yes, considering a lot of different data in your head all at the same time is NOT easy. Not a lot of people can do it. A comparatively small number of people are AIDS-Denialists because (1.) they have trouble doing it, or (2) they have personal, psychological, or political motivations for denying the reality.
You wrote: “If you thought we could spend our whole lives taking ecstasis, MDMA, carpet cleaner …, and tons of unprotected sex – therefore real STDs – you were OBVIOUSLY WRONG!!!”
Your statement has shown that you have clearly believed that AIDS is caused by all the indulgences of a hedonistic life-style EXCEPT those practices which enable the passing on of HIV.
You have failed to remember that people with AIDS are not only found in your Old Compton Street stamping-ground but in all sorts of situations and environments in every country that exists on the planet, from superficial plasticky down-town sex-clubs right the the way through a spectrum to a sun-burnt poverty-stricken African village hundreds of miles from the nearest city.
You have failed to remember that millions of people have been caught by the AIDS virus without their ever having indulged in the hedonistic indulgences which you have described.
You have failed to remember that all those people, all over the world, straight or gay, in whatever situation, who have AIDS (whether “full-blown” or of the initial stages) respond to anti-retroviral therapy. Anti-retroviral therapy is highly effective.
The anti-retroviral therapy is highly effective at dramatically reducing the levels of HIV in the body and thus allowing the immune system to regain ground.
Now try to memorise all of the above and try to keep it all in your head at the one time.
And next time you come across an AIDS-Denialist, on Old Compton Street or anywhere else, give them ALL of the above facts and try to encourage them, in turn, to keep them all in their mind at the same time.
And if you know an AIDS-Denialist who has AIDS, even if only low-level AIDS, urge them to seek treatment for it as soon as possible.
This Brent Leung guy is just such an irresponsible opportunist! Nothing more than a cocky young kid with a camera! Look at his pic!
http://www.houseofnumbers.com/about-house-of-numbers/about-brent-leung
It’s a Jockumentary. Before this Leung was editing videos for the Country & Western and Gospel TV channels (see his CV). And take a look at the website of Omada Films, run by his mate Jason Cunningham:
http://www.omadafilms.com/
“Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” — Paul, 57 A.D
! I guess in some people’s eyes, it serves the glory of god to encourage people with HIV to avoid treatment and succumb to horrible opportunistic infections. If you look around on the Facebook pages you see the same sort of stuff, links to bible.org and The Media Research Center (“a conservative media watchdog group dedicated to bringing balance to the news media.”).
Brent Leung was also involved in an earlier documentary film project about how HIV/AIDS was created as a bioweapon by evil scientists (including both Robert Gallo and Peter Duesberg) in a US government lab.
http://www.devvy.com/aids_20001206.html
This particular conspiracy theory was popularised by Boyd Graves and Lenny Horowitz, among others. The film, it seems, was never completed, but you can still find plenty of “AIDS as a bioweapon” sites in some of the kookier corners of the internet.
One final comment to the readers here. I want to point out that a good many of the HIV rethinkers I know of are gay and are not homophobic. We are from all walks of life and we are all over the world. We have dealt with this issue personally, professionally or with loved ones. We are just real people, thats all. We have asked the tough questions from the authorities and they insult our intelligence with their answers. This is not the first time the “authorities” have been wrong in this world we live in. If you notice, some of the HIV proponents posting here are extremely mean spirited and are here to squelch anything to the contrary of their agenda. Anybody can post on the internet so please don’t take anything I say or anyone else’s comments without doing your own research on this subject. I’m not here to convince anyone of anything. Come to your own conclusions by doing your own due diligence. I also want to add that friends and loved ones need our support if they are faced with this terrible stigmatizing diagnosis. Please do you part in supporting these people in the methods they choose whether you agree with them or not.
Thank You,
Joe
Charles (34):
You said:
“I am gay in London. YES! I cruise in Old Comptons St, and get pissed in Bar Code and Vauxhall! YES!”
Sweetie darling! Have you thought of sobering up before using your keyboard?
Feel so ashamed of your own gay community, do you?
Why don’t you move, sweetie dah-link?
There’s Peurto Rico, Brazil, Mexico, Jamaica, Uganda, Iraq, Iran and India.
You can just as easily get pissed and f*kced there as in London, and with your talent for cutting and pasting, you can put up a shingle with the letters PhD after your name, charge 5 cents for your medical advice, and 10 cents for a bottle of snake oil.
Sweetie darling indeed!
Joe Stokely (39):
You’re starting to sound an awful lot like our old friend Monkeychops. Thank you for a fresh approach.
Joe Stokely –
I can’t offer a better retort to that than to quote Scott Adams’ book “The Joy of work” in which he lists the many ways people can get stuck in a logical black hole. “#3 I am the world:
Example: I don’t listen to country music. Therefore country music is not popular
#10: Anything you don’t understand is easy to do:
Example: If you have the right tools how hard can it be to generate nuclear fission at home?
#11: Ignorance of statistics:
Example: I’m putting ALL of my money on the lottery this week because the jackpot is so big.
#12. Ignoring the Downside risk:
Example: I know that bungee jumping could kill me but it’s 3 seconds of great fun.
#17: Ignoring the advice of experts without a good reason:
Example: Sure the experts think you shouldn’t ride a bicycle into the eye of a hurricane, but I have my own theory.
#18: Following the advice of known idiots:
Example: Uncle Billy says pork makes you smarter. That’s good enough for me.
#20: Faulty pattern recognition:
Example: His last 6 wives were murdered mysteriously. I hope to be wife number 7.
#26: Judging the whole by one of it’s characteristics.
Example: The sun causes sunburns. Therefore the planet would be better off without the sun.”
For my money extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and when I weigh up your claims against the many HIV cases, some of whom I know personally who’ve benefited from combination therapy with a reduced viral load and increased CD4 count, you’ve got a long way to go to make your argument even halfway convincing.
What you propose would require nothing less than a global conspiracy encompasing all GUM staff in every clinic around the world providing misleading data, drug companies, world governments, laboratories etc.etc.etc. They would all have to be in on it. It reads like a crackpot conspiracy theorist’s wet dream because that’s precisely what it is. You are proposing that the entire global medical profession is effectively willfully committing mass murder to line the drug companies’ bank accounts. How likely does that sound?
“Joe Stokely” says in Comment #40 “I also want to add that friends and loved ones need our support if they are faced with this terrible stigmatizing diagnosis.”
Well, at least, “Joe Stokely”, you have acknowledged the “terrible stigmatizing diagnosis” of AIDS. You have acknowledged the MOUNTAINS of research by disciplined hard-working and dedicated doctors and scientists of all kinds that led to and allows a diagnosis of “AIDS”.
Now what is your problem with the MOUNTAINS of research by the same disciplined hard-working and dedicated doctors and scientists of all kinds that has shown that HIV causes that diagnosis of AIDS?
And what is your problem with the MOUNTAINS of research by the same disciplined hard-working and dedicated doctors and scientists of all kinds that has produced a range of anti-retrovirals that has demonstrably emptied the vast majority of the hospitals of the world of their AIDS wards?
Is your problem actually one of belief in Jesus, maybe? Or a deep internalised hatred of your own or others’ homosexuality, maybe?
“Flapjack”! Brilliant. By typing out those quotes from that book that highlights fuzzy thinking you have put your FINGER on the problem these AIDS-Denialists have. And, don’t you just smile when little “Joe Stokeley” comes over all meek and mild and holy, with his humble little style that implikes “please, don’t shout at me I’m just a decent and reasonable human being!” !!!!!
Jean-Paul Bentham. Beautiful! What a sense of humour you have. I have to paste again your brilliant three lines:
“Why don’t you move, sweetie dah-link? There’s Peurto Rico, Brazil, Mexico, Jamaica, Uganda, Iraq, Iran and India. You can just as easily get pissed and f*kced there as in London, and with your talent for cutting and pasting, you can put up a shingle with the letters PhD after your name, charge 5 cents for your medical advice, and 10 cents for a bottle of snake oil.”
Snout, you are an investigator up to making that little wannabe Top Gun over there in California, Clark Kent – er. sorry, Clark Baker, go and sh*t in his pants!
TAKE NOTE EVERYONE!!!!!! Snout has dug out evidence that this Brent Leung, director of the sinister “House of Numbers” also believes that HIV did NOT cross over into humans from monkeys in Africa AS HAS BEEN DISCOVERED AND VALIDATED BY PEER-REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. No, this cocky little god-believing kid with his camera, believes that HIV was cooked up and bottled in an American lab! LOL!
Here’s what Snout’s research has dug up:
‘”Few people are aware that the Manhattan project of the 1940′s is the true birthplace of the AIDS virus,” said Graves. . . We can affirmatively demonstrate a federal program (plot) seeking to “create,” “produce” and “proliferate” a virus.” said Graves. In 1977, the U.S. government produced 15, 000 gallons of AIDS (Special Virus). Earlier this year, Graves research was validated when top officials from the NIH and NCI confirmed the existence of the secret virus program. Independent film producer, Brent Leung is heading up the Nashville film crew.’
Yep, it seems that if there’s a loony conspiracy theory to put on film, little Brent is there with his high-tech camera!
Well done, Snout!
BLBS! Excellent. Brent Leung is now revealed as associated with Jesus-Lovin’ daleks spouting “Paul, 57 A.D: ‘Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God!’
Dennis Connelly, thanks for the pic of Brent Leung with his big tool up on his shoulder! What a big man! “Shootin’ for Jesus!”, of course! Hallelujah!
I love you guys!
Now what we’ve gotta do (see, I’m talkin’ like our Mr. LAPD ex-Marine, Clark Baker, fiercesome boy-buddy of Brent Leung) is post links to this Comment page on other web-pages on the internet, so that these twats will be revealed for who they really are. Hopefully the danger they pose and the damage they can do can be lessened.
Eddy – With due respect, I think Joe Stokely is sincere in his beliefs, but hasn’t mastered the art of debate or critical analysis.
His idea of debate is “If you disagree with me I’ll be personally upset, along with others who gave up their pills and you wouldn’t want that on your concience”.
I’m not interested in how Joe or his mates feel about whether I agree with him or not. I want cold empirical facts, anything else is irrelevant to a debate. The truth is not a democracy, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Medical facts have to be empirically tested in laboratories and peer reviewed.
If you’re going to put out the idea that there’s a global conspiracy to push toxic drugs on people who don’t need them for a condition you claim doesn’t exist, and that AIDS isn’t a natural progression from a depleted immune system brought about by HIV you’d better have a pretty watertight argument.
Otherwise, I’m sorry Joe but you can expect as much flak as we can chuck at you.
The salient point here is that the so called poster girl of the AIDS denialist movement and her 3 year old daughter are now both deceased, from AIDS as predicted by “Big Pharma” and the majority of medical experts in the field.
I don’t wish to gloat about that as it’s a personal tragedy, however it does beg the question, if they’d stuck to their pill regime would they now be pushing up the daisies?
‘The truth is not a democracy, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.’
So true, Flapjack. I’m so glad Richard Dawkins boldly entitled his book “The God DELUSION”. In their deluded world these god-believers have their own set of “facts” – except that in reality they are DELUSIONS.
Some say the deluded should be locked up. I’d say the deluded who foist their nonsense on others as it is reality should be locked up.
sorry, that was meant to read ‘the deluded who foist their nonsense on others as it is reality should be locked up’.
sorry again! ‘the deluded who foist their nonsense on others as IF it is reality should be locked up. ‘
being hiv+ for 23 years i appluad brent leung for this film. the aids industry has nothing to show for after nearly 30 years of failed science. no cure, yet they are using billions of our tax money to fund research for a virus that is yet to be isolated.
i escaped the aids trap some 15 years ago, thanks to professor duesberg. neither the pharma industry, nor all these ngo’s have an interest in discoveing the truth: it will leave them out of a job.
hiv+ people are discriminated against, locked up, prevented from travel or work in nanby countries, poisened with arv;s and have their children taken into custody if they disagree with arv treatment. we are humiliated against every day – this must stop! hiv does not cause aids – goodle karey stokely, the nagel family, aidsmyth exposed, alive and well, hiv and henry bauer to find out the truth.
Clark Baker, Joe Stokely, Charles, whatsthetruth….you guys are all the one and same person just having some fun with us ‘queer’ guys, eh.
Well, the joke’s on you cause you are dropping your bucket down a dry well on PinkNews.
The HIV film is dangerous and misleading, and you guys are geting all this free publicity.
Yea, I am keeping my eye on the money, honey, and so are you but in the most unscrupulous way, and the least of your concerns is a civilized debate.
Fact is, sweetie darling, you have been losing points all along and “we”, who are just ordinary people from all walks of life and all over the world, have been gaining credibility because “we” are aware of the facts while “you” are making them up as you go.
Anything for publicity. That’s show business, just ask Mae West and Ethel Merman!
Exit left, please. Spotlights are off you guys, sweetie dah-links.
M-m-m-m-m-m-X! And watch your step; we wouldn’t want you stepping in your own bullsh*t. Shall I call you a taxi? OK, you’re a taxi!
Whatsthetruth – are you claiming that you have actually been cured and that you have gone from being HIV+ to HIV-?
On what basis do you a layperson make that call? Independantly verified test results? Or is it just a gut instinct?
I would love it if it were true, but I’m not going to put in that call to the World Health Organisation just yet as there’s something lacking from your testimony. Something I like to call emperical evidence.
And I would add that the same argument you use against the medical establishment that they haven’t found a cure for HIV is the same argument you could level against doctors finding a cure for cancer. Are all doctors and research scientists just cynical sociopathic bean counters milking the system for every cent they squeeze from it?
Because if somebody actually found a cure they could get a lot more accolades and plaudits (and by extension cold hard cash if that floats their boat) than they would if they just kept it to themselves.
flapjack:
There you go talking my language again!
We just need to take three sets of (fraudulent, unspecific) test kits in order to verify the presence of the deadly retrovirus.
First, one a Rapid Test (INSTI being the one in the UK, but I posted some info already on it in the comment earlier):
’6. Limited studies were conducted to determine the potential effect of interfering substances and unrelated medical conditions on the performance
of the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test.
(is it due to lack of funds??? I hope not…) (so what if I have it done after a crazy weekend i.e ?? or while I’m sick??)
7. The SPECIFICITY of the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test for serum specimens in low-risk populations HAS NOT BEEN EVALUATED.
(So, are you telling me if my friend Emily has the test done, there’s absolutely NO WAY TO KNOW THE ACCURACY OF THE TEST???)
8. Limited studies were conducted to determine the performance of the Reveal™ G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test on fresh serum and plasma
specimens.
9. A Reactive test result using the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test suggests the presence of anti-HIV-1 antibodies in the specimen. The
Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test is intended to be used as an aid in the diagnosis of infection with HIV-1. AIDS and AIDS-related
conditions are clinical syndromes and their diagnosis can only be established clinically. Results of the Reveal® G3 Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test should not be used in isolation, but in conjunction with the clinical status, history, and risk factors of the individual being tested.’
http://medmira.com/images/Reveal%20PDFs/g3_insert.pdf
Then, you get a ‘confirmatory’ Test:
‘Sensitivity and Specificity
At present, there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.’
http://www.abbottdiagnostics.com/webapp/index.cfm?event=getPDF&controlNumber=344038
And finally you get the so-called Viral Load Test (PCR RNA):
‘Assay Performance: The testing for the validation was performed according to the MANUFACTURER’s guidelines for each HIV RNA assay performed’
http://www.retroconference.org/2009/PDFs/1001.pdf
(Wait a moment! So does it change the criteria from one test to another depending on the manufacturer???)
You can tell me some inserts are dated 2006 … this ‘pandemic’ has been going on for 25 years now!!!
Oh! Was it Apoptosis? T-Cell blast?? A bloody battle between the two?? Uuuhhhmmm How was it that HIV is killing T-Cells ??? UUUuhhhhmmmmm
Maybe it’s them who need to hold more than one single idea in their brain – that of HIV being the only and main reason for immune suppression (AIDS) – in order to really deal with this problem effectively.
Jean-Paul Bentham !!! This one message is specially dedicated to you my dear. I know you appreciate my cut’n’paste skills ☺ I take for granted you won’t read the quotations, but if you do – and actually understand what they mean, which I don’t expect you to either – don’t panic, obviously you don’t have to be moral to keep your job in this magazine, if you work for them, at all.
Somehow, It’s not letting me post all I want
Eddy,
Once again, you sound pretty inaccurate to me, let alone you feed this whole hypothesis with unproven sensationalism. Don’t forget we’re posting right in a gay-scene magazine, that is why I’ve directed my comment to that part of the society, which is sadly enough for us, the most affected by the HIV hypothesis in the Western World.
(more to come when it actually allows me to…)
more to come when it actually allows me to
According to the WHO, ‘world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over’!! So there you go! Out of a very defined part of Africa, AIDS is only to be feared by us, drug addicts … HOW UNFAIR?????
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/threat-of-world-aids-pandemic-among-heterosexuals-is-over-report-admits-842478.html
It’s the first homophobe virus in history ! Or is it that straight people don’t have sex ???? I suppose in Brazil they’re all knitting in the beach ….
It looks like all of a sudden (after some of us sweeties fell so ill in the USA in the mid 80s), the main reason why people are dying throughout the globe is a sexually transmitted retrovirus (virus that depends on the host-cell in order to live and reproduce).
Whatever ! Im sick of trying to get my posts in now !!!!! Get a competent web-designer please !! I can give you some telephones … (Or stop censuring me)
XxX
It looks like all of a sudden (after some of us sweeties fell so ill in the USA in the mid 80s), the main reason why people are dying throughout the globe is a sexually transmitted retrovirus (virus that depends on the host-cell in order to live and reproduce). No matter whether they live in a filthy-whole full of opportunistic diseases, don’t have clean water or a basic, decent medical service to treat them from those, or even FOOD TO EAT. The reason why they’re dying is a STD!!! Sure….
And so are we gays in the developed countries…!! Get f***ing trashed every week at TRADE (which I loved), but wear a condom, it’s the only way to avoid immune depression!!! LMAO
and Im NOT PROMOTING UNPROTECTED SEX !!!! We need to be safe ALWAYS in order to avoid so many other diseases such as Chlamydia, Syphilis, etc, etc !!! Which do in fact get passed through sexual contact !
People, just ignore this prat calling himself “Charles”. He’s has a mental problem, possibly low-level, possibly early dementia, but whatever his problem is he’s not capable of rational thought.
“Charles” has written: “We need to be safe ALWAYS in order to avoid so many other diseases such as Chlamydia, Syphilis, etc, etc !!! Which do in fact get passed through sexual contact!” This implies that “Charles” believes that HIV CANOT be passed through sexual contact.
Enough said about “Charles”.
The Pink News Forum is completely open . . . so obviously from time to time a complete nutter or someone with a mental problems walks in and spouts crap. It’s like having stall downtown. Some people will say “Thank you” when you hand them their hot-dog. A small number will screw their eyes up and tell you they can see an aura emanating from your body!
If being mentally ill means being able to write – or read and copy and paste – for longer than a sentence without insulting, and harassing people, then yes, I consider myself a very happily mentally ill individual.
You’d better read what I’ve posted and try say why it is like that, instead of attacking me/us like an angry kid. I have no expectations here, though.
Love
Charles:
You could be sure that if iI did work for PinkNews that you would never have posted your very first comment.
In Jessica Geen’s excellent article, she wrote:
‘Since the film’s release, 18 of the doctors interviewed have released a statement saying they had been “deceived” and that the film “perpetuates pseudo-science and myths”.
The statement, signed by all 18, added: “[The film] presents the AIDS denialist agenda as being a legitimate scientific perspective on HIV/AIDS, when it is no such thing.”‘
That is good enough for me, lad.
Nobody here is interested in what you have to say; I thought I made it clear that the spotlights are turned off as far as you are concerned.
So, by all means, go and get your free publicity somewhere else, sweetie darling, and let me worry about my “morality”, dearie.
Try the National Enquirer.
oh, and my comments are being rejected, boo-hoo.
Charlie:
You said:
“yes, I consider myself a very happily mentally ill individual.”
Hello, la-la land!
Charlie:
You said:
“It looks like all of a sudden (after some of us sweeties fell so ill in the USA in the mid 80s), the main reason why people are dying throughout the globe is a sexually transmitted retrovirus (virus that depends on the host-cell in order to live and reproduce).”
Now honestly, what the hell are you talking about? Put that hash pipe away for a few days and try again.
Charles:
You said;
“It’s the first homophobe virus in history ! Or is it that straight people don’t have sex ???? I suppose in Brazil they’re all knitting in the beach ….”
Is that supposed to enlighten us in some way? How so? Pearl one, drop one?
THE HIV FILM IS ‘DANGEROUS AND MISLEADING’.
Are you deaf, sweetie dah-link?
XxX
Charles:
You said:
“Get f***ing trashed every week at TRADE (which I loved), but wear a condom, it’s the only way to avoid immune depression!!! LMAO”
Are you trying to make us believe you’re gay, sweetie darling?
Oh, and just give me a minute for my psychic powers to kick in so I’ll guess what WTF “LMAO” means.
The House of Cards indeed. poppyCOCK!
My, look at the time. Green tea and hot bath coming up. Join me, sweetie darling?
Oh and Charles,
You really should meet Monkeychops. Look in the mirror!
Well, the only way to break the deadlock on this argument is to look for the evidence… this is the best guide I can find to evaluating what constitutes evidence and what constitutes baloney:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU
Any thoughts on all that?
Jean-Paul Bentham,
I have absolutely no doubt that if you worked for Pink Magazine I wouldn’t have been able to post right from the beginning. It’s so obvious you’re such a prejudice full kinda guy, which only see what you want in order to fit your beliefs.
By the way, good video. I mostly agree with it. Here’s one from me. If you’ve ever investigated the beginnings of AIDS, it may make you think. Plus the guy is funny, and kinda cute ! ☺
The Scientific Method:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKFanG5s01M
Have a look at the supposedly letter signed (it’s a list of names, no signatures) by the scientists who are the real stars in House of Numbers. Can you see the Nobel Laureate for the HIV discover 25 years later Luc Montaigner in that list?? … Maybe I’m blind or something …
AND! I’ve you’ve ever done academic writing, you’ll know Wikipedia is straight FAIL if used as a source. Have a look at the FIRST reference given in this letter… WOW! Impressive for leading scientists!
Yes, thank you for the publicity. The objective and factual reader, you’re giving me the case, or at least, probably after reading you, they’ll have a second look and the info I’ve posted.
Have a good evening lads!
Xxx
P.S LMAO = Laughing my ass off !!! Now you know one more thing! ☺
Yawn.
OK Charles thanks for passing us the hammer and nails from inside your own coffin. Hope you’re comfortable in there. Here we go. As Jean-Paul Bentham has said, “Bye sweetie, dah-link!”
I looked at your PROOF, your video of some self-promoting young Yankee guy gurning in front of his video camera. He’s not Brent Leung’s brother, is he? Could be.
Anyway, people, this spokesperson of alternative theory offered to us by Charles states that “there are VERY FEW facts in science”!
“There are very few facts in science”. Yes, that sounds the sort of totally inane belief that AIDS-Denialists accept as truth.
I agree with NY Gay Activist’s comment that these people are dangerous. They need care. They BELIEVE that science is not responsible for having unearthed countless facts. Because of their skewed vision, their delusions, they choose to believe that science has not unearthed countless facts and that it is just a lot of unproven theorising.
These people are nutters.
Charles holds high some kid performing to his camera and declaring to the world that “There are very few facts in science”.
OK so you won’t be throwing yourself on your knees in front of a doctor ever again then. OK so you won’t ever be going near a hospital. And no way will you ever be steeping near an aircraft or even a car. Science produced all that and science is just all dangerous theories.
No, do yourself a favour Charles and go to your local psychiatric department and beg them to help you find the real world!
flapjack (76):
Touché! C’est si bon! Bravo!
Charles (34):
You said:
“1. Science does not know how HIV kills T-Cells – or whether it actually does such thing.
2. Tests aren’t specific to determine the presence of such retrovirus in plasma.
Of course, this does not make any money for our lovely magazines supporters, without them we wouldn’t have all these free condoms we have. I haven’t let myself drive by ignorance and stupidity. It just makes common sense, whereas the actual HIV hypothesis I’ve been told for so many years has many wholes.”
Now I never said I was poifect, but check your syntax and spelling, the “whole” of it.
Freudian slip, or what?
You’re a taxi!
“Charles” may be the english guy om facebook who is very active in the House of Numbers group: http://www.facebook.com/areyoufitenough?ref=mf. His story is particularly sad.
Karri Stokely is the pinup girl of the denialist movement. Allegedly she gave up taking ARVs after several years following a +ve diagnosis. Her T-Cell count , as reported by her, is scarily low yet somehow she looks in good shape. She’ll be dead in a few years if she continues to refuse treatment judging by her latest lab results. Her and her “husband” parade around the internet as role models for denlialists claiming amongst other things that ARVs are responsible for AIDS! I think she’s a fake. Has anyone seen her lab test results ? She has the audactity to persuade other people with HIV that they shoudl come off their meds – they will be “cured”. Denialists are pretty screwed up but they are dangerous and their websites, postings and views cost lives.
I found the post I was looking for. Thid is David Ross on Facebook. A can sympathise to some extent because I did go through a process of questioning HIV-AIDS but I realised after a while that denialism has to be a logical fallacy, and a classic one at that. I feel genuinely sorry for this David guy and seriously hope that he changes his mind and sees that he’s been caught up in a web of conspiracy theories that simply don’t stack up.
“eah thebody.com seems extremely guarded and vicious at the mere whiff of an alternative questioning mind!
We’ve been learning over a little over a year. Up until recently I’ve been questioning every specialist I could come across and not one of them felt they were knowledgeable enough about the very disease they were trusted to give opinions about. So I asked to see a virologist and when told there wasn’t one to see under the NHS my mind locked on. The most prevalent and increasingly dangerous virus on the planet and we couldn’t see a virus specialist to discuss our growing questions?! Even the Doc thought that was ‘weird’.
So despite this the docs kept trying to get my partner on precautionary antibiotics to guard against PCP. Turns out on researching that drug (Septrin) it was banned in the 90′s due to deaths and even further degrades the bone marrow making it near impossible to manufacture white blood cells. Even with a basic anatomy & physiology understanding you realise you need white blood cells to fight diseases!! I truly appreciate investigative journalist Brian Deer’s work on this drug that’s disguised as a wonder-drug for HIV patients
http://briandeer.com/septrin1.htm
Anyway flash forward to late September and I started reading another amazing investigative journalist Janine Roberts’ “Fear of the Invisible” and everything started to finally make sense. Then along came ‘House of Numbers’ we could FINALLY see that we weren’t the only ones dissatisfied with governmental statistics that purged out of officials mouths like election soundbite lies. Combined they managed to answer most of those niggling questions.
The only thing left for me to have answered is the risks involved in anal sex. Heal London has a great article on intestinal dysbiosis that I thoroughly recommend
http://www.heallondon.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74
Unlike those still hiding behind the pharmaceutical companies I never stop learning. Isn’t that what true science is about?”
Link: http://www.facebook.com/pages/House-of-Numbers/40491054861
ALL THESE COMMENTS ARE BIASED. THE PROBLEM ALL ROUND IS THAT
1) THOSE PROFITING FROM THIS HYPOTHESIS, BECAUSE IT IS ONLY A HYPOTHESIS, WILL DEFEND IT AGGRESSIVELY – AIDS PAYS FOR THEIR MORTGAGE AND CHILDREN’S SCHOOLS. ANYTHING DIVERTING FROM THIS DOGMA (SOMETHING CREATED THROUGH MUTUAL CONSENT) WILL BE AGRESSIVELY DEFENDED. NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO QUESTION. IT HAS BECOME A RELIGION AND IS NOW LONGER SCIENCE. THE ELISA TESTS HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE FDA, SO ON WHAT CRITERIA DOES THE AIDS INDUSTRY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE THE QUALITY OR LENGTH OF LIFE OR TO PROPOGATE THIS PHYCHOLOGICAL TERRORISM? YOU HAVE TO ALSO UNDERSTAND THEM. IF YOU WORK FOR MICROSOFT, YOU WILL NOT CRITICIZE MICROSOFT IN ANY WAY……..
@ Eddy
“People, just ignore this prat calling himself “Charles”. He’s has a mental problem, possibly low-level, possibly early dementia, but whatever his problem is he’s not capable of rational thought.”
Eddy, that is not a terribly helpful contribution to this debate. Charles has as much right as you or I to put his opinions across. You have no right to attempt to bully someone off this debate just because you do not agree with him. Charles is not advocating hate or violence so lay off. I usually respect your arguments on all manner of subjects but you are sorely trying my patience here. Nuff said.
Hi Charles, while I do not have enough conclusive information to decide either way what I believe on this issue, I want to reassure you that there are some on here who do retain an open mind and who will not attempt to harass you and insult you merely because they are too terrified to contemplate “What if we really have been conned all these years?” The implications are simply too terrible to contemplate for many of us, that is understandable and put it down to fear of the truth and try not to take this vilification personally. Certainly, until it has conclusively been scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the HIV virus has been isolated and that it does lead to AIDS, then I refuse to go along with the herd mentality. It is the same with global warming, now called climate change as the weight of evidence now leads most people to now believe we are being conned in order to foist more taxes upon us. It is for the same reason I will not take the Swine Flue vaccine: there are simply too many unanswered questions, and I know how easy it is to drum up a consensus on anything given that that are so many people like those on this thread who will agree with it in the absence of irrefutable evidence and effectively do the pusher’s bidding for them. The dictum “In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is revolutionary”. I know this world is becoming ever more corrupt and we are being lied to left right and centre, which is why it is so vital to maintain an open mind. I would advise each person on here to try and exercise one too before rushing to play amateur judge, jury and executioner.
If Karri Stokely was already on AVRs for several years, isn’t it possible to conjecture that it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her in the end? Just using my own logic to question things here…
No, Rob, sorry to have to disagree with you, but simply raising the distinct possibility that this individual calling himself “Charles” is suffering from a mental disability or a mental illness is NOT to bully him or anyone else. Many many people DO suffer from mental disabilities or mental illnesses and they are free and out there roaming in the world and very often sitting in their bedrooms typing ridiculous nonsense into Forums such as this.
I suggest you carefully study all that Charles has written in this thread and then you should see for yourself that he is not thinking rationally. His lack of rational thought is patently obvious.
We therefore should engage in further discussion with this individual. He has problems.
For you, or anyone else, to say otherwise, is the same as saying that in no mental hospital in the world should a psychiatrist or psychologist or other worker seek to assist those suffering from mental illness. Instead, your suggestion implies that those demonstrating clearly irrational thought processes should be believed and taken seriously. In other words, whatever they believe to be facts should be accepted as facts. That is of course absurd.
Rob at #88 wrote: “Certainly, until it has conclusively been scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the HIV virus has been isolated and that it does lead to AIDS, then I refuse to go along with the herd mentality.”
Kindly explain your belief as to how the infection spreads from one person to another.
You will need to refute the chains or networks of infection that have been documented.
You will need to refute the evidence that when one individual is found to have been infected with HIV, sexual partners with which he or she has had unprotected sex are more often than not found to be infected as well.
Rob wrote at #89: “If Karri Stokely was already on AVRs for several years, isn’t it possible to conjecture that it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her in the end? Just using my own logic to question things here… ”
Rob wrote the above after having read the following at #84:
“Karri Stokely is the pinup girl of the denialist movement. Allegedly she gave up taking ARVs after several years following a +ve diagnosis. Her T-Cell count , as reported by her, is scarily low yet somehow she looks in good shape. She’ll be dead in a few years if she continues to refuse treatment judging by her latest lab results.”
Thus, after reading in #84 that the woman is still alive, Rob wrote in #89 that she is dead, i.e. he wrote “it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her”.
We have here a perfect demonstration of the LAZY, MUDDLED or ILL thinking that is engaged in by AIDS-Denialists.
One suspects they subsist on an intellectual diet of day-time chat-shows, gutter-press newspapers, and all the paranoid rubbish posted by idiots on the internet.
OK, I confess I do not have time to read all of these responses in detail and I muddled her up with the woman who took herself and her daughter of meds and then died. My same point remains however.
Regarding why the partners of those infected sometimes (but not always) succumb to HIV, it could just be that they follow similar lifestyles and there may be other mitigating factors that contribute to the running down of their immune systems, not necessarily the, ahem, alleged HIV virus itself. There are some people who can be exposed during unprotected sex to someone who has been diagnosed with the virus but who never test positive themselves. Why is this? And until HIV has been scientifically proven to exist then I will not be beaten into consensus with the sheep and neither will I accept the denialists line. I will retain an open mind until anything is proven either way, that is all, and I know there are many out there who feel the same and resist choosing to believe whatever those in authority who are known to be corrupt and self-serving are pushing as the official line.
I am an HIV+ patient of the Harrison Wing at St. Thomas’s Hospital. For those who don’t know, the Harrison Wing is a large outpatients clinic dealing only with people who are HIV+.
Every three months when I attend the Harrison Wing this is what I see:
On average, about 15 to 20 people sitting in the waiting room, waiting to be seen by one of half-dozen HIV doctors.
Of the people I see each time I visit:
About 65% are black (African or Caribbean).
About 35% are white.
Of the 65% who are black, half are women and half are men.
Of the 35% who are white, 30% are male 5% are female.
I have observed that after people see a doctor almost everyone leaves the department carrying a little bag of HIV medications.
There used to be a number of large AIDS wards at St. Thomas’s but these no longer exist because of HIV medication.
Of the other patients whom I see each time I visit about 95% look all right. Of the other 5%, some look ill or very thin, and some are in wheelchairs or having to use sticks.
Obviously what I see reflects the population of South London. I suspect an HIV Clinic in Bath, for example, would not show the same spread.
Some people near the start of this thread have claimed that HIV is a virus that is homophobic, that it only targets homosexual men, and one person has claimed that AIDS is the result of a wild lifestyle involving drugs.
What I see every three months when I visit my HIV clinic completely contradicts these claims.
Sorry to anyone who already gunned down these claims. I haven’t read all the way down the thread due to the comments by denialists becoming more and more silly.
Rob mixed up two women and their medical histories. Christine Maggiore and her 3 year old daughter both were HIV+, both never took AZT or other ARVs, and both died terrible deaths from AIDS-related opportunistic infections. Karri Stokli says she tested positive and took HIV meds, then stopped–she says she is in good health. Many other HIV+ denialists are dead (see http://www.aidstruth.org/denialism/dead_denialists for a growing list) from AIDS related illnesses. The HIV positive denialists are actually providing confirming data that untreated HIV kills–they are essentially offering themselves as a control group for an experiment that would be entirely unethical if conducted by a scientist: don’t give people with a deadly pathogen medicine, and see what happens to them. Tuskeegee, anyone?
As for Maureen Jones: the FDA has approved a number of ELISA and Western Blot test kits from different manufacturers. The reason the inserts say there is no single standard is because different tests use slightly different versions of the same basic technology. But that doesn’t mean that what they are finding isn’t there. You can measure your weight in kilos or pounds–that doesn’t mean you don’t have a physical existence.
Ceteris Paribus
Sounds to me like Rob’s mind (88) is so open that his brains fell out.
Please don’t take that the wrong way.
It doesn’t say ‘SINGLE STANDARD’.
It says:
‘At present, there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence
of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.’
It would be nice IF YOU HAD THE DECENCY OF KEEPING OTHER PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY. That guy isn’t me. Please change your bias of harassment and fear. THAT ISN’T ETHIC.
Since I saw you’ll only comment on You Tube videos, none of the evidence I’ve posted, and I can’t post freely info somehow either – I just have no explanation for that -, I’ve decided to not post anymore. It’s useless, and prefer to be reading and educating myself while you swear at a screen.
JUST PLEASE! Have some DECENCY AND REPECT PEOPLE ! You’re being respected.
Someone has advised me that I don’t take this attacks personally. Thanks for the words, and don’t worry, I’m fairly confident for this meaningless language to get to me. Hard words don’t begin with f.
Once again:
LOVE
Yea, well you got the publicity you wanted for this ‘dangerous and misleading’ film. I’ll say that much for you.
What next, a film denying the Holocaust? Evolution? the Moon landing? There’s a market out there in cyberspace. Ain’t PayPal great.
Now don’t you go taking that the wrong way just because I agree with Eddy 100%.
“Since I saw you’ll only comment on You Tube videos, none of the evidence I’ve posted”
What evidence Charles? I’ve seen nothing other than conjecture and misleading statements. You’re engaging in junk science and apophenia.
“Regarding why the partners of those infected sometimes (but not always) succumb to HIV, it could just be that they follow similar lifestyles and there may be other mitigating factors that contribute to the running down of their immune systems, not necessarily the, ahem, alleged HIV virus itself.”
Rob, HIV by sexual contact is not a simple vector, its quite complex, as you’re implying here. Yes there many are other influencing factors, not least the persons own genetics and immune system which affects transmission rates, but your argument here is based in confirmation bias. Show me a proven scientific study to back up your claims.
“And until HIV has been scientifically proven to exist then I will not be beaten into consensus with the sheep and neither will I accept the denialists line.”
Sorry, but where are you reading this nonsense? Science has more than proven the existence of HIV. You can actually SEE it, test for it, see its vectors, its probably one of the most studied virus in the world. Why on earth would anyone believe it doesn’t exists??? Keeping an “open mind” is not an option here, this isn’t a belief system, or a religion we’re talking about, this is a PROVEN virus. You make it sound like you have a choice, and that’s just downright foolish. What you in fact have here with your rational is a form of pareidolia… you perceive a pattern here that does not exists, but you see it because you want to, becuase you’re afraid to actually face up to the reality of HIV and its infection. I assume this is true of all denialists, as someone here already said, its why they end up with HIV…. and die from AIDS related illnesses believing they don’t have AIDS.
Its rather like this:- Just because you BELIEVE you’re immortal, doesn’t mean that falling off a tall building won’t splatter you across half the street.
@Will – great stuff. To see who mad the denialists really are check out http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/what-is-pharmaslut.html.
Brent Leung doesn’t only edit material to misrepresent people–he also misrepresents one of the only articles he mentions in the film. A central point he makes in the movie is from a newsletter headline that says that loss of T-cells does not lead to AIDS. But the actual article says–loss of T cells doesn’t lead to AIDS in APES, the way it does in humans. Nothing about the article supports the Leung’s position. If there was any truth to his beliefs, why would he lie and manipulate to convince people? For documentation of this and other ugly facts about House of Numbers, see http://www.houseofnumbers.org/HoN_Lies_about_T_Cells.html.
Ceteris
READ your own Articles:
‘ “I told another UK-based reporter that I do not believe that my film took any of the interviewees out of context – in fact, I am so confident of this that for any of the interviewees who are able to sufficiently able to support their claims against me, I would be willing to open up their footage as evidence.”
He added that the film did not explicitly state that HIV and AIDS do not exist and said that it did not state that there is no link between them.’
You may be interested in listening to what the Nobel Price for the discovery of HIV (25 years later. Why has that not made think to any one?) has to say in this film:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=211724591170
Charles, let me get this right, you’re using a youtube video as evidence that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS? Are you serious?
The appeal to authority is a fallacy of irrelevance when the authority being cited is not really an authority.
It depends on the way to look at things. You may see just a YouTube video – actually Facebook video -, while some other will see an interview with the Co-Discoverer of HIV Luc Montaigner. Here it comes also whether you see an authority, or someone irrelevant. If that is the case, you should really think about you beliefs about AIDS, since this ‘irrelevant’ person has carried out most of the research on this matter throughout these 25 years, and I presume he still is.
Good to see that people here will only comment on YouTube videos, even if it is only to degrade them just because of that fact.
Charles, if you listen to what Montagnier is actually saying, he’s talking about the factors involved when people are exposed to HIV without becoming chronically infected. “Chronically infected” means HIV positive.
There are lots of different factors influencing the chances you’ll get chronically infected with any single exposure to HIV – including the type of exposure, your own genetics and that of the virus, variations in cell-mediated and humoral immunity, the viral load in the partner, whether you have other infections or ulcers, whether you use post exposure prophylaxis with ARVs, etc etc. Montagnier thinks that your nutritional state at the time might be a factor too, particularly among populations where malnutrition is common. This isn’t proven as yet, but there’s nothing implausible about his suggestion.
The House of Numbers publicity machine have twisted Montagnier’s words to make it seem he’s saying that you can clear a chronic infection (HIV positive status) through nutrition.
He’s not saying that at all, and this is a great example of exactly how HoN misrepresents the genuine scientists they deceived into taking part.
“…this ‘irrelevant’ person has carried out most of the research on this matter throughout these 25 years, and I presume he still is.”
@Charles, there are around 200,000 research papers on HIV and AIDS on the PubMed index, most of them representing the collaborative efforts of many thousands if not millions of scientists and clinicians from all over the world.
Very few of them publish on youtube.
I don’t want to diminish his very real contribution the the field, but Montagnier didn’t do “most of the research”.
In fact, he wasn’t even the lead author on the seminal 1983 paper from the Pasteur Institute. That was Françoise Barré-Sinoussi. You might have heard of her – she also shared the 2008 Nobel for medicine/physiology with her then boss.
I’m so happy that although it has taken a hundred posts, it seems we’re coming to a civilized conversation here. THANKS !
Hopefully, I’ll be able to post everything I want. Not that I accuse of being censored, but somehow I can’t always post.
I hear what you say, but my thinking from that then is, chronic HIV infection depends on multiple factors, among which are humoral immunity, malnutrition, and genetics. Viral load in my opinion shouldn’t count. It’ll be more likely or less likely that you get the so-called retrovirus in your organism, but we’re talking about fighting it once it is presumed to be inside.
So, it is then in fact possible for individuals’ organisms to somehow not develop HIV and its ‘lethal’ attack, and it may not affect everyone or anyone as it depends on multiple factors after each exposure.
I try to be objective and look at things from all the sides I can, and precisely that excerpt from the movie is one of the most shocking ones. There are some parts of the movie which you could debate certain things, but not this one …
Not much to twist there. Pretty straight forward.
Luc Montaigner: ‘We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will GET RID OF THE VIRUS within a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.’
Interviewer: ‘If you have a good immune system, then your body can actually get rid of HIV’?
Luc Montaigner: ‘YES’
Interviewer: ‘If you take poor Afrincans who’s been infected and you build up their immune system, is it possible for them to also naturally GET RID OF it?
Luc Montaigner: ‘I would think so. It’s an important knowledge, which is completely NEGLECTED. People always think of drugs and vaccine.’
Interviewer: ‘There;s no money in nutrition, right?’
Luc Montaigner: ‘There;s no profit, yes.’
If you add that to what it is published in this article about the director offering to open up the footage for the scientists to say where they’ve been misquoted, it gets quite real. Plus as I’ve said earlier, Luc Montaigner IS NOT in that supposedly letter by different scientists.
Let’s just try to be more factual. WE ALL WANT THIS AIDS SYNDROME TO END!! and so far, there are not a single person, according to orthodox medicine ever cured. May there be something wrong with the approach we’ve taken towards it?
Excuse me for my ignorance, but don’t HIV tests test for HIV antibodies as there is no meaningful way to identify the virus itself? Also, why is Aids so rife in Africa? I just don’t understand. If you are telling me it is because they all take it up the bum I have a hard time believing that compared to imagining it is their poor sanitary conditions and chronic malnutrition that could be running down the population’s immune systems. Listen, today George Monbiot – yes, George Monbiot! – issued an apology on The Guardian web site for being taken in by the new religion known as climate change in light of the recent email scandal that revealed that scientists involved have deliberately talked up the theory and massaged their evidence or lied about the calibre of those who have signed a motion supporting the theory. This after having written article after article castigating and ridiculing all non-believers. Climate change is now being exposed to having almost succeeded as being the biggest fraud unleashed on mankind by governments to tax our planet back into the dark ages, so again, until I have irrefutable proof either way on the Aids issue I will not be told what to believe thank you very much and my mind remains open to all possibilities.
@Charles, leaving aside the question of whether nutrition is an important factor here, is Montagnier talking about “getting rid of HIV” before or after the person becomes “HIV positive”? I think we have to clarify your understanding of this before we can go any further.
@Rob, no there are numerous meaningful ways to identify the virus including antigen testing, culture and and nucleic acid testing by PCR. The reason antibody testing is the usual method for diagnosis is that for most people it is quick, inexpensive, and has a sensitivity and specificity as good if not better than methods used to detect the virus itself in most circumstances.
Antibody testing is the diagnostic method of choice for a wide range of different viral infections – there’s nothing unusual about HIV in this respect.
@Rob Well, you tell me. I think that question is pretty irrelevant. Once you have the virus in your blood flow, it’s a matter of your immune system being able to fight it or not. Regardless of what you consider ‘HIV positive’.
Regarding the whole HIV Testing system, I think you should have a thorough look at the inserts of most tests. The antigen test isn’t identifying the virus itself either, as antigen is a liquid that provokes immune response, therefore antibodies. You say the rapid tests have a sensitivity and specificity as good or even better than methods that detects the virus itself – not being the antigen test, I hope -, but if you read many inserts in those tests, it says differently. I posted those original inserts in this blog further up.
‘At present, there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence
of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood’
http://www.abbottdiagnostics.com/webapp/index.cfm?event=getPDF&controlNumber=344038
I have now compared these HIV kits to other diseases that are detected in the same way, such as syphilis, and in NO TEST does it say such things as no standards for sensitivity and specificity. Despite HIV tests, another antibody-response tests do have been tested and studied to know whether cross-reaction with other illnesses or substances can happen.
‘dangerous and misleading’……………..yawn.
I don’t expect you to go past the title honey.
NIght night.
Xxx
Read this tittle, at least you’ll feel somehow shocked without the need to punish yourself reading … and will see it’s not just me who says it, but this very magazine:
‘New HIV infections down globally but rising for gay men in the uk.’
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/11/24/new-hiv-infections-down-globally-but-rising-for-gay-men-in-the-uk/
Brazilians will be knitting in the beach, after all …
Or is it us gays that take these HIV tests far more often than any other community??
@Charles, I realise I’m probably flogging a dead horse here, but Montagnier was talking about clearing the virus during the time between exposure and seroconversion to HIV positive status, not after.
HIV is not an infection primarily of the blood, but of the lymphoid tissues. Once the lymphoid organs become seeded (which is what happens around the time of seroconversion) the infection becomes permanent and cannot be cleared by the immune system.
If, however, a person is lucky enough that their immune system clears the HIV before this has happened, then the person doesn’t develop the HIV antibodies that are detected with a positive diagnosis. They remain “HIV negative”.
The issue is relevant because HoN misrepresents Montagnier as claiming that good nutrition can clear HIV from HIV positive people (people with chronic infection), when he is not saying this at all and certainly does not believe this. This is only one of a number of examples of where HoN misrepresents the scientists they deceived into taking part.
As for the test inserts, if you read the Abbott kit insert past the quote mined ‘At present, there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood’ you will notice this is the opening sentence of a detailed explanation of precisely how they did calculate sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a ‘recognised standard’. Using a reference standard is one way of doing this, but there are other ways. Read the insert to find out how.
“really think about you beliefs about AIDS”
This sums it up nicely, Charles. Only a fool would consider the overwhelming scientific proof on HIV/AIDS to be a “belief”. Tell you what, walk in from of a fast moving car with the belief you’re immortal and we’ll see how stupid a belief system when it comes to something that has overwhelming proof to the contrary.
“Also, why is Aids so rife in Africa? I just don’t understand.”
Smartest thing you’ve said all day, Rob. Then go understand. Its not our job to educate you, that’s your job. There is ample scientific proof out there. And as I said before, you can believe what you want, it doesn’t make it true.
The error in your reasoning is an argument from incredulity:- becuase I don;t understand it, it can;t be true, when in fact the reality is your acceptance or denial has no bearing on the truth what so ever.
So, keep going about the un-safe practices, in denial of the overwhelming scientific evidence for HIV and its vectors, and soon we’ll see you writing your comments form a hospital bed with a tube up your nose.
@ Snout
I’ve just realized you put a link in my name. Hahaha. Look, this is a completely made up name guys, just for this blog, so stop trying to spot me down, because you’re just exposing people who’s got nothing to do with this post.
I’m here to talk, THAT’S IT.
Snout, I do have read the inserts. I do know that having ‘no recognized standards’, sensitivity and specificity of all tests is quantified by matching results between them all. But 1000 similar tests results do not make them real, or accurate to whether someone is really infected with the retrovirus, if there isn’t a standardized criteria for sensitivity and specificity.
Sensitivity: ‘is the ability of a test to detect truly infected people.’
Specificity: ‘is the ability of a test to identify all non-infected individuals.’
‘There is no single standard for detecting the sensitivity or specificity of an antibody test for HIV in human sera, plasma or whole blood. However, the generally accepted method to express the sensitivity and specificity of a given test in terms of the detection rate is to compare results to approved supplemental assay results, such as ELISA and Western Blot.’
As I said, other diseases detected through immune responses capturing tests like syphilis also compare results between different tests, but also have criteria for sensitivity and specificity, among other hanging points that HIV tests have in their literature.
Charles, you cannot see the woods form the trees. Splitting hair about testing methods is not proof that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. The reality and overwhelming scientific evidence is that people with HIV, unless treated, are more likely to develop symptoms, diseases, and infections associated with an acquired deficiency of the immune system caused by HIV.
You have yet to provide any proof to the contrary except for the fallacy of your false dichotomy logic. Nothing more.
A great deal is known about the pathogenesis of HIV disease, even though important details remain to be elucidated. However, a complete understanding of the pathogenesis of a disease is not a prerequisite to knowing its cause.
Lets look at ONE example of your “believers”:- In 2008, activist Christine Maggiore died at the age of 52 while under a doctor’s care for pneumonia. Maggiore had founded an organisation to help other HIV-positive mothers avoid taking antiretroviral drugs that reduce the risk of HIV transmission from mother to child. After her three-year-old daughter died of AIDS-related pneumonia in 2005.
Its an obvious, and sad example that denial will not prevent you from dying of AIDS. All you are doing to spreading lies to cover your own fears, as if the majority believing this nonsense will somehow make it true and validate your nonsense. It won’t.
As for you Charles, the vast majority of scientific consensus is against you and your foolish “belief”, and beliefs are all your statements are when and you have provided no proof what’s so ever of their validity.
And like all religious believers, you have a similar approach to any fact put to you: you ignore it.
A few thoughts.
The internet is dramatically changing human thinking and ease of access to information. Via the “Information Super-Highway” (as it was heralded back in the early 90s) one can access the highest quality literature and results of university research in the most far-flung corners of the globe. However, the WorldWideWeb is also so open and so “free” that any individual on earth can create a website and post the most juvenile and idiotic nonsense on it.
Now, most of us recognise the latter type of site instantly. However, a great number of people do not have the educational background or the expertise to distinguish between the two types, the rubbish from the quality. To them they seem them all as one, i.e. they see loony sites as being as authoritative as sound ones.
Some of the people who cannot make this distinction fail to do so not because they are poorly educated but because they suffer from some degree of Paranoid Schizophrenia. Paranoid Schizophrenia is more common than most people think. I have lost a dear friend to PS. He is very intelligent, a brilliant teacher, and fluent in five languages. However, he began to suffer from this illness several years ago and while continuing to this day to be a good teacher etc., he now sleeps every night wrapped in tin-foil because he is convinced there is an international conspiracy of “perps” who are out to get him by beaming laser beams at him through the walls, floor, and ceiling of wherever he happens to sleep. Friends, family, and doctors: we have all failed to convince him otherwise. He’s simply very seriously mentally ill.
There are other Paranoid Schizophrenics around who are convinced that AIDS is not a reality but a conspiracy. No amount of reasoning with these people, no amount of putting information before them, will convince them otherwise. Their mental illness means they NEED to believe in the conspiracy.
You can feel sometimes that if you just provide them with this bit of evidence or that bit of evidence, they’ll see the light and give up the conspiracy theory. But, no, their illness means they will cling to it. With regard to those Denialists who believe that poor Africans would no longer suffer from AIDS if only they had decent nutrition, pointing them to the wards full of Western gay men who died of AIDS though they had enjoyed the very best of nutrition . . . will simply not convince them. The Paranoid Schizophrenic’s illness doesn’t allow them to accept logical proof: instead they leap to some other spurious thought and demand you deal with that. It can drive you crazy.
Many Paranoid Schizophrenics manage to deal with their illness. They have to keep repeating to themselves, “My worst fears and imaginings are not facts!”
It is entirely reasonable to assume that the pages of PinkNews are visited by the odd Paranoid Schizophrenic.
“It is entirely reasonable to assume that the pages of PinkNews are visited by the odd Paranoid Schizophrenic.”
Eddy, unfortunately you are quite right. Its been proven that there is a very tangible link between schizophrenia and religious beliefs that are based in conspiracy or doomsday scenarios, and denial of fact that disputes this belief system is a classic trait of schizophrenia.
One such scientific paper paper outlining this damaging link [Mohr S, Huguelet P. Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Département de Psychiatrie, Genève] outlines an ongoing study about religiousness and spiritual coping conducted among outpatients with chronic schizophrenia. It was very clear that religion is salient in the lives of many people suffering from schizophrenia. Another by Sylvia Mohr & Philippe Huguelet outlined that 36% of religious delusions was observed
among inpatients with schizophrenia in the USA and in the case of paranoid delusion, the persecutors were more often supernatural beings or conspiracies.
You just may be right that our friends Charles here is a sufferer, either known to himself or not. But given his rather out of context emotional pleas for understanding of his “beliefs” and the lack of clear evidence he has, its certainly plausible.
Will, thanks for the above very interesting information. My friend with PS was certainly raised in a very superstitious atmosphere, in a remote corner of our “British Isles”!
Debating with him for months on end about “the little midget” who he believes lives in a hidden basement under his house and ascends up into the attic every night via passageways INSIDE THE WALLS bore strong similarities to our reasoning with the AIDS-Denialists who have appeared in this thread.
“Debating with him for months on end about “the little midget” who he believes lives in a hidden basement under his house and ascends up into the attic every night via passageways INSIDE THE WALLS bore strong similarities to our reasoning with the AIDS-Denialists who have appeared in this thread.”
Eddy, yeah, You are quite rigth to sopt the similarities in the “reasoning”, its is very similar indeed:- ignoring any facts that go against their belief, focusing on inconsequential granular aspects of something to disprove the whole and using an argumentum ad ignorantiam to dispel the entire reasoning.
But its a sad situation when you are faced with the futility of arguing rational with someone suffering schizophrenia. The AIDS denial is a very disturbing and worrying thing indeed, especially for people trying to educate on reason and proof, rather then histeria and “belief”. You are right that people who are denying such massive body of evidence on HIV/AIDS are more then likely seeking to validate a conspiracy theory, or at the very least, looking for a validation that they can continue with unsafe sex practices, perhaps even to downgrade the seriousness and potential fatality of this virus to remove any fear they have of it.
None of these reasons of course validate the ignoring of the proof available for all to see.
Here is an example of the selective “reasoning” of AIDS-Denialists – and, as Will has succinctly put it, their “focusing on inconsequential granular aspects of something to disprove the whole”.
Rob, #108 wrote: “Listen, today George Monbiot – yes, George Monbiot! – issued an apology . . . for being taken in by the new religion known as climate change”
However, on his blog on November 23 2009 George Monbiot we find that what George Monbiot actually thinks and has expressed is the following:
“But do these revelations justify the sceptics’ claims that this is ‘the final nail in the coffin’ of global warming theory? Not at all. They damage the credibility of three or four scientists. They raise questions about the integrity of one or perhaps two out of several hundred lines of evidence. To bury manmade climate change, a far wider conspiracy would have to be revealed. . . The hacked emails are a hard knock, but the science of global warming withstands much more than that.”
Source:
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/11/23/the-knights-carbonic/
@Eddy
From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/nov/23/global-warming-leaked-email-climate-scientists
I apologise. I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed. I would have been a better journalist if I had investigated their claims more closely.”
George Monbiot, 23/11/09
Seems those determined to prove an unproven theory will dodge and swerve all they can to maintain their stand. And how many more times? How does maintaining an open mind make me an Aids denialist? I neither agree with Charles’ theories but choose to keep an open mind until the truth either way is proven categorically. And truth, it seems, is a quality that is fast disappearing in this world. Well I won’t be bullied or intimidated into submission until my mind is made up by ‘my self’. I don’t need you or anyone to tell me what to believe, thanks all the same; I will decide that to myself based on irrefutable evidence. And if you think resorting to low down tricks like inferring I have some form of mental disorder is the way to go, then you are scraping the bottom of the barrel. Why not just accept that people are entitled to question things, and if they choose to sit on the fence until something is conclusively proven beyond all reasonable doubt, to just let them be? Btw Eddy, you do come over like a religious nutter that long ago lost his marbles but I won’t hold that against you either ;-)
Having been challenged, Rob at #124 NOW quotes George Monbiot as having said “I was too trusting of some of those who provided the evidence I championed.”
And, yes, THIS, the above, is what George Monbiot actually said, i.e. that out of thousands of scientists who corroborate the evidence of climate-change he, George Monbiot, had been too trusting of three or four dodgy scientists.
But before Rob was challenged, he claimed in Comment #108 that George Monbiot had publically apologised in a national newspaper for having been TOTALLY “taken in by the new religion known as climate change”. Here in this thread at #108 Rob wrote:
“Listen, today George Monbiot – yes, George Monbiot! – issued an apology . . . for being taken in by the new religion known as climate change”.
After they have been challenged, isn’t pathetic to observe people like Rob trying to play the martyr! After having been shown up, Rob writes “I won’t be bullied or intimidated into submission”!
Furthermore, Rob self-righteously pleads “Why not just accept that people are entitled to question things?”
Rob needs to learn that everyone is entitled to question things, but ONLY and IF they apply their full, capable, disciplined, and educated mental powers to the task. A person is not entitled to challenge the veracity of things, if he or she has not examined the evidence logically, objectively, and with integrity.
Unfortunately, some people are simply unable to do so.
Some people, however, can humbly learn how to do it. First of all, they need to go back to school.
“I don’t need you or anyone to tell me what to believe”
There you go again! Believe?????? What’s there to believe? Either read the facts, or don’t. This isn’t a ecclesiastical debate, its science. And you haven’t read anything by the sound of it. You say you’re questioning, but where EXACTLY are you actually questioning anything??? All I can see is you just making silly statement like you will keep an “open-mind” to see if you believe in AIDS is caused by HIV. WTF?
Well good for you! What else do you chose to believe, the tooth fairy? Maybe she causes AIDS?
Do yourself a favour, get an education. Please. Then you can enter into a debate on your “belief” in AIDS. So far, you just sound stupid to someone who actually IS a scientist like me.
And Eddy is the only sane voice I can see on this thread in a while. Charles is just a fruit case with “theories” akin to shaman witchcraft. You’d do better to listen to Eddy than the nonsense you’re clearly reading.
Oh,. and Rob, your attack on scientists over an IRRELEVANT AND UNRELATED global warming incident, in science is called an association fallacy, and is an fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association.
I’d strongly recommend you make an effort to read more.
Will wrote “I’d strongly recommend you [Rob] make an effort to read more.” So right, Will, so true.
The problem though is that Rob, and people like him, need someone to discipline their reading. At the moment Rob’s reading like mad. (Well done, Rob!) But unfortunately he’s largely reading a lot of very easy (and cheaply exciting) nonsense, mainly, I suspect, on the internet.
Rob needs to be in a situation where a professor at a decent university tells him he has to read and understand a tome by the end of the month at which point Rob must present a precis of it to the professor and a seminar group of fellow students and be prepared to be torn to pieces if he shows evidence of not having carefully studied, analysed, and comprehended what he has read. Otherwise, I am afraid, Rob will continue to take the easy route: just switching on his computer each morning to wander aimlessly around the internet reading utter crap by utter nutters on utterly rubbishy websites that any fool can launch into the ether.
The internet is truly changing the nature of society. On the one hand, superb first-rate information is being communicated instantly round the world, while on the other millions are being encouraged into mental laziness and believing any cheap thrill.
“Rob will continue to take the easy route: just switching on his computer each morning to wander aimlessly around the internet reading utter crap by utter nutters on utterly rubbishy websites that any fool can launch into the ether.”
Agreed Eddy, the reality is that titillating conspiracy theories on badly written blogs make more interesting reading to some people than something actually true. Its the “Sun Newspaper” over “The Times” all over again….
I have to say, I never really heard that much about the whole “AIDS Denial” until I started reading with some disbelief to the nonsense put forward by Charles/Rob, and I am truly shocked (and a little appalled)…. Is this the sum total of people’s arrogance these days, then they think they have the option to “choose” to deny the very existance one of the most dangerous infections ever on the basis of some internet crackpot’s selective interpretation of pseudo-science?!?!?
Truly disturbing. And how embarrassing for these people to flaunt this staggering ignorance in public.
I have looked at all the facts objectively, while you always sweep what doesn’t fit in your conceptions and edit it. You’ve mentioned again Christine Maggiore. I won’t go into depth here, just the very fact that you seem to forget about his husband, who was in the relationship with her, and they always admitted to have sex as a normal married couple.
You seem to only mention again what fits you agenda here. You can only think of Christine, but seem to completely forget about the Lindsay’s daughter. She tested HIV positive when she was only months old and put on AZT. Following medical advice, she was taken off the medication, SHE IS 19 YEARS OLD TODAY, AND A PERFECTLY HEALTHY LOOKING GIRL! Apparently, so is that guy that posted here before, apparently so are several people throughout the world. Why do you deny those facts? Apparently to some, Christine is a featured star in House of Numbers, when in fact she’s on no more than 4 minutes altogether. Orthodoxy scientists are the real stars.
It seems I’ve got to repeat the same thing every single time. I haven’t posted ANYTHING from any dissident web site. Everything I’ve shown here are official documents. Inserts from probably the three most used HIV Tests !!
Why can’t I find sentences such as ‘there is no recognized standard ….’ in any other antibodies-response test for other diseases ????
Why ???
If the methods by which we’re considering someone HIV positive or negative aren’t reliable, what’s all the following research worth ????
Laughing OUT LOUD at the message above from “Charles”. Oh, the poor wounded little martyr! He runs from exception to rarity and back to exception again and somehow thinks he is honourable in denying one of the most dangerous and potentially deadly infections ever known to the human race!
This is probably a case of mental ill-health somewhere along the spectrum, from excessive egotism at one extreme to full-blown paranoid schizophrenia at the other. On the other hand, it might just be that belief in “good ‘ole Jesus” is his problem.
Eddy, I agree…. what a little tirade!
Charles, one word for you: proof.
Give me proof that AIDS is not caused by HIV. Surely with all your histrionics you have ONE scientifically recognised paper to support your claims. Just one.
Until you produce that, your irrelevant conclusion to divert attention away from a fact is nothing more then what Eddy has already concluded: as you have no proof, so logically your more than likely suffering from a mental condition which leads you to believe in conspiratorial persecutions.
“House of Numbers…dangerous and misleading.”
Bravo Eddy and Will!
Thank you JP!
Here’s a paper for you to read. Charles, something to think abut in between your Clozapine medications:
Confronting AIDS: Update 1988, a report from the Institute of Medicine of the United States National Academy of Sciences, published in 1988. On page 2 of the Executive Summary, the panel writes that “…the evidence that HIV causes AIDS is scientifically conclusive.”
Can you produce something similar, from a scientific source? A paper, not a random internet quote?
No. I dare say you can’t.
This is not a debate, its called wiping the floor with your stupid so called argument.
1. Why have the “HIV proteins” used for antibody tests (in particular, the Western blot test) remained unchanged for 20 years (1-3), given the enormous “genetic variability/mutation rate” of HIV (4-6)?
Nearly twenty years after the advent of HIV Western blot testing, the major proteins considered to be “HIV proteins” remain as follows: p17/18, p24/25, p31/32, gp41, p53/55, gp120, and gp160 (1, 2). Yet genomic studies report 10^9 to 10^10 virions produced each day, and a mutation rate of approximately 3 x 10^-5 per nucleotide base per cycle of replication, leading to many variants of HIV in a single infected patient in the course of a single day (4). Many authors describe HIV as a “quasispecies” (4-6). It is anomalous that this “huge range of genetic configurations” (5) of “HIV quasispecies” which has developed over the past 20 years has always been detectable by antibody tests using the same core proteins, having sensitivity and specificity supposedly exceeding 99.7% (7).
You sent a Wikipedia article ??? Are you pulling my leg ???
Here’s some medical arguments:
Ronald B. Reisler, MD, MPH, Cong Han, PhD, William J. Burman, MD, Ellen M. Tedaldi, MD, and
James D. Neaton, PhD
It basically says side effects from HAART are killing as many people as AIDS itself. What’s the point in taking the meds then ? Profiting I suppose then … AIDS patients have been taking these extremely toxic medicines since the beginning of the hypothesis. Before that hypothesis. people dying from AIDS were people who were having extreme life-styles !!
current as of November 25, 2009. Online article and related content . 2006;296(12):1498-1506 (doi:10.1001/jama.296.12.1498) JAMA Benigno Rodríguez; Ajay K. Sethi; Vinay K. Cheruvu; et al.
This one says that there has to be another factors other than HIV which do cause the decline of CD4.
E. REMOR1, F. J. PENEDO2, B-J. SHEN2, & N. SCHNEIDERMAN2 1 Universidad Auto´ noma de Madr id, Spain, and 2University of Miami, USA
this one talks about how stress cause cd4 decline. If you look at it objectively, such thing will also be likely to happen in negative people
From the
*
Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
02139; the
‡
Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts 02115;
§
The Rockefeller
University, New York 10021; the
the last article is about the apoptosis hypothesis, but it clearly says ‘the mechanism by which HIV-1 induces CD4+ T cell death is not known. A fundamental issue is whether HIV-1 primarily induces direct killing of infected cells or indirectly causes death of uninfected bystander cells.’
BASICALLY THEY HAVEN’T SEEN THE RETROVIRUS KILLING THE CELL. JUST ASSUMED IT’S THE RETROVIRUS THAT’S KILLING IT. IN 10 YEARS TIME AT LEAST, OF COURSE !!! plenty of time for another things to happen, can’t it ?
I know you’ll just say this is quackery research … But I’m fine with it guys ! I’m not the uptight here.
Night night
“Why have the “HIV proteins” used for antibody tests”
You’re picking fault with a test. This is NOT proof that HIV does not lead to AIDS.
“You sent a Wikipedia article ??? Are you pulling my leg ???”
Wikipedia may have referenced the article I used, but its a VALID scientific paper. Are you saying it isn’t? Please, enlighten me. You have produced no proof so far. Also, your attack on the paper is just that:- an attack. No evidence to disprove it.
“people dying from AIDS were people who were having extreme life-styles”
This is rubbish. Again:- No proof.
So, on to the ONE paper you provided: E. REMOR1, F. J. PENEDO2, B-J. SHEN2, & N. SCHNEIDERMAN2 1 Universidad Auto´ noma de Madr id, Spain, and 2University of Miami, USA
This paper is NOT proof that AIDS does not derive form HIV! Are you even capable of reading the paper???? You are an idiot.
wWhat this paper states, is that it is also possible that psychological and social variables, such as depression, social
support or coping style, may mediate or moderate the relationship between stress and CD4 cell count. Clearly whatever meds you’re taking distort reality, but you’ll have to do better with us.
This does NOT prove your wild statements about AIDS. Ergo, not only do you not understand what you are reading, your are engaging in an argumentum ad ignorantiam, selective thinking, and shoehorning so called evidence to fit your theories.
You are truly pathetic.
“I know you’ll just say this is quackery research … But I’m fine with it guys ! I’m not the uptight here.”
Obviously you’re not, or you wouldn’t insist in using long histrionic sentences in block capitals. And actually, they have seen the virus killing the cell, HIV infected cells have been clearly observed. So, either you’re a fool or a liar, which one is it?
So, lets recap:
(1) You don’t read the papers you claim back up your position, so clearly you have no scientific knowledge or education.
(2) You STILL have no proof to your statements.
(3) You engage in fallacy logic to bend the truth to suit you and make attacks on fact rather then address the issue.
(4) You engage in conspiratorial theories as “logical conclusions”
Conclusion: Eddy is right, your behaviour and thoughts are not rational…. you certainly aren’t clever, that’s for sure.
The more you type, the more I agree with Eddy:- You’re schizophrenic. Perhaps you need some medical help?
Oh, and in case that lunatic Charles comes back with another snotty but uninformative retort, here is my proof:
“HIV infected cells have been clearly observed”
Paper: Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres (2009, November 16). No-entry zones
Abstract: “Like all retroviruses, the AIDS virus (HIV) integrates its DNA into the genome of the infected cell. As integration sites, HIV usually prefers active genes that are transcribed frequently. This is advantageous for the virus, because this is where it finds large amounts of enzymes which are responsible for transcription. The virus abuses this cellular equipment for its own replication.”
I’m still waiting on Charles to produce ONE paper which is scientifically recognised where I can see the actual data that outlines that HIV does not cause AIDS. Just one paper. Not shoehorned quotes.
I live in hope that the poor fool can see beyond the darkness…. sigh.
Eddy, Jean-Paul and co., if it’s any consolation to you, 500 years ago similar lynch mobs like you could have had me hung, drawn and quartered for refusing to believe that the earth was flat as no evidence existed to prove it was. Hope you feel even more smug and self-satisfied now!
Actually, Rob, its people like you and Charles, who refuse to accept evidence on the basis that science is some kind of “belief” system, that accused Galileo of heretical science.
You stupidly think you can pick and choose to “believe” what scientific evidence is out there, rather then actually taking the time to evaluate the proven data.
Lets look at this objectively: There is overwhelming (and I really mean overwhelming) body of data and evidence, proven by scientific methods, that HIV causes AIDS. You on the other hand, think in your staggering ignorance and arrogance, you can pick and choose which ones you “believe” in without any insight??? Please, the very notion is absurd!
And your arrogance to condemn those who actually take the time to understand these scientific studies is truly offensive to the intellect.
Hope you feel even more educated then you are self-satisfied now!
Only getting to read this thread now, and I am reading some of these comments with utter shock!!!!
@Rob – what exactly are you basing your selection on? As Will has rightly pointed out there is a huge amount of scientific research which show the correlation between HIV/AIDS, and on the other hand, there is not one shred of scientific proof (other than a few deranged websites) that HIV is unrelated to AIDS. The fact you’re making it out that you’re so carefully and intellectually weighing up the evidence is laughable! Grow up, mate!
@Charles – All I can say is. Oh. My. God. You’re frickin nuts! You haven’t one shred of proof for what youre saying and the others are running circles around you!!!!
Well done Eddy and Will for standing up to this clown, but I think he’s out of his depth here.
‘Wikipedia may have referenced the article I used, but its a VALID scientific paper. Are you saying it isn’t? Please, enlighten me. You have produced no proof so far. Also, your attack on the paper is just that:- an attack. No evidence to disprove it.’
Most people in this blog have only attacked the proofs I’ve provided, instead of giving logical explanations and evidences to refute them
‘wWhat this paper states, is that it is also possible that psychological and social variables, such as depression, social support or coping style, may mediate or moderate the relationship between stress and CD4 cell count. Clearly whatever meds you’re taking distort reality, but you’ll have to do better with us.’
Remember how we gays were psychologically punished in the eighties and throughout history ? Do you know at all why the Gay Pride takes place on the last weekend of June ? Maybe the word Stonewall doesn’t mean anything to you after all … For decades we have been harassed and attacked by society, plus in the eighties we begun to have this super-fast lifestyle. Drugs, unprotected sex, steroids, ect, ect. I don’t think we needed back then a tiny virus for our immune system to collapse given the circumstances. But that’s something hard to acknowledge.
‘And actually, they have seen the virus killing the cell, HIV infected cells have been clearly observed. So, either you’re a fool or a liar, which one is it?’
They have seen the infected cells. But I dare you to post here the one paper stating the official process by which all the scientific body agree that HIV is killing T Cells.
Of course, I won’t be able to show you an official orthodox paper stating exactly that HIV does not cause AIDS. But you can choose to deny all the facts that suggest that statement.
1) Unreliable Tests
a. They’re not specific.
b. They are cross-reactive.
2) Lack of evidence that the virus is actually killing T Cells
3) Evidence that other factors do bring the immune system down
4) Evidence that HIV is only MINIMALLY affecting the CD4 (read the paper I posted)
Reference:
Daniel Halperin, an HIV epidemiology researcher at the Harvard Medical School of Public Health, said: “There has generally been a misalignment from the donors. It is time for a rethink. Many people in the west believe all Africans are impoverished and infected with HIV. Yet the reality is that most countries have stable HIV prevalence of less than 3%. What most people really need are things such as clean water and family planning. Even tuberculosis and malaria get far less money than HIV. In some cases these sectors have inadvertently been hurt by the focus on HIV.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/25/aids-hiv-africa-aid-scientists
“Most people in this blog have only attacked the proofs I’ve provided, instead of giving logical explanations and evidences to refute them”
No, we have given evidence. What you have given is shoehorned quotes and misinterpretation of selective works. And STILL you didn’t address the points made in the paper, just a plea of martyrdom. How uninspiring.
“What this paper states, is that it is also possible that psychological and social variables, such as depression, social support or coping style, may mediate or moderate the relationship between stress and CD4 cell count.”
Did you address this piece either? No. Why? You can’t understand it, and have no proof to make a counter debate. Just a rant about persecution. Something I’m sure you’re well versed in persecution theories, Charles, given your conspiratorial delusions you’ve embarrassingly bandered about in public here.
“They have seen the infected cells.”
You said earlier there is no scientific proof of this. Now you’re saying there is? Can’t you make up your mind? If this isn’t a demonstration of how feeble your rationale is with regards to this, I don’t know what is.
“Of course, I won’t be able to show you an official orthodox paper stating exactly that HIV does not cause AIDS”
Why not? If this is so glaringly obvious, then it should easy to prov! Proving something isn’t in science is infinitely easier then proving it is, and yet I have manager to show you the science to prove the link, and you have shown me none. Why is that, do you think? Oh, wait, its becuase you’re making it up as you go along.
Let me go again, for the benefit of other readers, a scientific appproach:-
Proof of HIV causing AIDS:- Koch’s postulates, as listed below, have served as the litmus test for determining the cause of any epidemic disease:
1. Epidemiological association: the suspected cause must be strongly associated with the disease – numerous studies from around the world show that virtually all AIDS patients are HIV-seropositive.
2. Isolation: the suspected pathogen can be isolated – and propagated – outside the host – modern culture techniques have allowed the isolation of HIV in virtually all AIDS patients, as well as in almost all HIV-seropositive individuals with both early- and late-stage disease. In addition, the polymerase chain and other sophisticated molecular techniques have enabled researchers to document the presence of HIV genes in virtually all patients with AIDS, as well as in individuals in earlier stages of HIV disease.
3. Transmission pathogenesis: transfer of the suspected pathogen to an uninfected host, man or animal, produces the disease in that host – for example, transmission of HIV from a Florida dentist to six patients has been documented by genetic analyses of virus isolated from both the dentist and the patients. The dentist and three of the patients developed AIDS and died, and at least one of the other patients has developed AIDS. Five of the patients had no HIV risk factors other than multiple visits to the dentist for invasive procedures (O’Brien, Goedert. Curr Opin Immunol 1996;8:613; O’Brien, 1997; Ciesielski et al. Ann Intern Med 1994;121:886).
This is science. Basically, Charles, you can’t produce any scientific proof. Ergo, you are one of the following: a liar, a fool, or a madman.
You go get the help you need, its glaringly obvious now you’re not a rational person. You’ve convinced no-one here of your mumbo jumbo conspiracies, only furthered the case of true science that HIV is the cause of AIDS. Thank you.
“I don’t think we needed back then a tiny virus for our immune system to collapse given the circumstances”
Ah, I almost missed this one! This is quite revealing. So, AIDS is something you see as personal attack on being gay or gay people… perhaps you’ve been diagnosed as HIV positive? And let me guess, you refuse to accept it will give you AIDS.
This is not about science at all, is it? This is about your denial of your condition! Don’t bother to deny it. You see HIV from a personal vendetta point of view and you in denial about your infection, possible a little angry towards the scientific community for the lack of cure?
Bingo Will. Fantastic observation mate, you have a skilled mind indeed.
Also, to add my own piece to back up AIDS & HIV case:
Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
And I calculate this to be 99.98% of AIDS sufferers had HIV.
Fairly impressive evidence to me.
“Charles” in #135 stated “people dying from AIDS were people who were having extreme life-styles!!” “Charles” appears incapable of keeping in his mind that hundreds of thousands of adults and children, male and female, who most certainly have never indulged in any “extreme life-styles” have died from AIDS.
“Charles” in #136 wrote “I know you’ll just say this is quackery research … But I’m fine with it guys!”
“Charles” clearly IS “fine” with his own extraordinary “quackery research”.
Would “Charles” like to tell us what scientific pedigree he has that enables me to correctly read and interpret highly complex medical papers?
Would “Charles” like to admit to us that he has never written, nor is he equipped to write, a paper accepted by a reputable medical journal?
Re. the paper from “E. REMOR1, F. J. PENEDO2, B-J. SHEN2, & N. SCHNEIDERMAN2″, thanks, Will, for checking it out. I suspected as much. Again, “Charles” reveals paranoid selectivity and, thus, an inability to interpret a scientific paper, nor any paper for that matter, with accuracy. “Charles” is a tadpole floundering around in a sea of snapper!
Rob at #139 wrote: “Eddy, Jean-Paul and co., if it’s any consolation to you, 500 years ago similar lynch mobs like you could have had me hung, drawn and quartered for refusing to believe that the earth was flat as no evidence existed to prove it was. Hope you feel even more smug and self-satisfied now!”
Bloody hell! “Rob” has publicly identified himself with the great martyrs of history! We are clearly talking about a disturbed ego-inflated personality here. Rather than present indisputable evidence when challenged, he simply propels himself up onto plinth! In your dreams, Rob, in your sad deluded little dreams.
But there’s a terrible sadness here, everybody. The Paranoid Schizophrenic is so easily laughed at and mocked. One can so easily lose sight of the fact that these people are suffering from a serious mental illness. Nothing can be done for them until they admit it. In some countries, they can forcibly be taken into care by the state, as being a danger to themselves and others, but I understand this is not the case in England. Unless a paranoid schizophrenic actually does physical or bodily harm to another person he must finally admit that he is ill before he can be treated. Treatment consists of powerful drugs (which do help) and regular Behavioural Therapy. Paranoid Schizophrenia is a mental illness which the patient has to deal with on a daily basis for the rest of their lives. It’s a tragic situation.
Jonny, thanks for coming in, reviewing the state of the debate, and giving your objective opinion, . . . and for telling Rob and “Charles” how totally weak they appear.
“Charles” at #142 wrote: “in the eighties we begun to have this super-fast lifestyle. Drugs, unprotected sex, steroids, ect, ect. I don’t think we needed back then a tiny virus for our immune system to collapse given the circumstances. But that’s something hard to acknowledge.”
The above extraordinary statement from “Charles” proves that what he cannot acknowledge is that HE and his immediate circle (i.e., those on the hard drug-crazed North American club circuit) do not represent the entire cohort of people worldwide who have been infected by HIV. “Charles” has therefore manifested the egocentricity of the young child. Like the young child “Charles” thinks he is the centre of the universe. As children develop they learn that (unfortunately for them) they are NOT the centre of the universe, that there are other people out there with egos as well. It would appears that “Charles” writes from some fast gay-ghetto situation which he simply cannot see beyond.
“Charles” #142 wrote: “Of course, I won’t be able to show you an official orthodox paper stating exactly that HIV does not cause AIDS.”
Extraordinary! “Charles” has thus publicly admitted he cannot produce ONE SINGLE reputable medical paper proving that HIV does not cause AIDS and yet elsewhere we have all seen him very clearly claim (with all the fervour of the deluded and delirious religious) that AIDS is NOT caused by HIV.
Will “Charles” cringe and hide under rock at this exposition of his bare-faced foolery? Probably not. Only the rational individual, with a sense of integrity, can do that.
“Charles” quotes in #142 a Daniel Halperin who apparently wrote that “Many people in the west believe all Africans are impoverished and infected with HIV. Yet the reality is that most countries have stable HIV prevalence of less than 3%. What most people really need are things such as clean water and family planning. Even tuberculosis and malaria get far less money than HIV.”
“Charles” has here demonstrated his inability to rationally comprehend a fairly simple piece of text. “Charles” does not see that Halperin is NOT saying in the above quote that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, but that Halperin is saying Africa still retains its traditional and quite separate health problems, generated by malnutrition, starvation, lack of hygiene, etc., and that overall these problems affect more people than Africa’s HIV/AIDS does.
Will, at #143, bravo for producing Koch’s postulates. If “Charles”, or Rob, has a shred of rationality left, this will have turned their faces utterly beetroot-red with shame. I suspect, however, that in sad, sick, arrogance, they will both simply shrug their shoulders, stick their noses in the air, and choose to continue to believe what gives them their thrill . . . rather than the truth – which is not about cheap conspiratorial thrills. Maybe they’ll now just switch off their computers and go settle in front of their tellies and watch re-runs of LAPD and 24 – cause that’s the kind of stuff that, in their view, real life is all about.
Jonny, at #145, well done! “Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).”
I think we’re pretty well done here, guys. These vacuous air-headed lightweights have been flattened.
Unfortunately though, if there is no integrity or if there is serious mental illness, that won’t mean they won’t be popping again . . . like bodies/corpses in those ridiculous Hollywood B horror movies!
“I think we’re pretty well done here, guys. These vacuous air-headed lightweights have been flattened.”
Yep, totally agree, Eddie. And you spotted that bit about lifestyle too? Yeah, I’m sure the unfortunate masses in Africa have contracted AIDS from their lavish lifestyles of drugs and all night parties! How insulting can this man be to those dying of this terrible disease?
Jonny, thanks for the vote of confidence *blush* :) and nice bit of research you found. As you said, 99.98% correlation is fairly conclusive.
I believe the final statement should be: quod erat demonstrandum.
And “Charles”, Rob, and any others inclined to the foolishness of AIDS-Denialism, “quod erat demonstrandum” (or “QED”) is written at the end of an argument to show the completion of the proof.
The matter has been concluded.
Will, Jonny, and others. There’s an equally deluded individual over on this thread. His name is Rahman. He’s another extremist with blinkered vision and total lack of objectivity. This one’s a Muslim.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/11/24/london-universities-invite-homophobic-preacher-to-speak/#
“And “Charles”, Rob, and any others inclined to the foolishness of AIDS-Denialism”
Er, Eddy, where have I denied that HIV causes Aids? Again, I have to reitertae I sit on the fence as an open minded person until the proof, however already persuasive, is 100% conclusive. That is why I sat on the fence about so-called “global warming”, which has now been proven to be false by its very propagators who now call it “climate change”, which itself is fast becoming debunked as this week’s events testify. If anyone is pathologically or schizophrenically afflicted it bullies with closed minds who refuse to allow the alternative viewpoint to be heard. That is why the climate change pushers are now looking oh so stupid and are scurrying around like lost sheep trying to find a piece of evidence that actually stands up to put their agenda back on course. Poor misguided luvvies!
Rob, as requested earlier
Kindly explain what you think are the facts as to how HIV infection spreads from one person to another.
(You will need to refute the chains or networks of infection from one person to another that have been documented.)
(You will need to refute the evidence that when one individual is found to have been infected with HIV, sexual partners with which he or she has had unprotected sex are more often than not found to be infected as well.)
Rob wrote at #89: “If Karri Stokely was already on AVRs for several years, isn’t it possible to conjecture that it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her in the end? Just using my own logic to question things here… ”
Rob wrote the above after having read the following at #84:
“Karri Stokely is the pinup girl of the denialist movement. Allegedly she gave up taking ARVs after several years following a +ve diagnosis. Her T-Cell count , as reported by her, is scarily low yet somehow she looks in good shape. She’ll be dead in a few years if she continues to refuse treatment judging by her latest lab results.”
Thus, after reading in #84 that the woman is still alive, Rob wrote in #89 that she is dead, i.e. he wrote “it is the result of being on these toxins that eventually killed her”.
We have here a perfect demonstration of the LAZY, MUDDLED or ILL thinking that is engaged in by AIDS-Denialists.
One suspects they subsist on an intellectual diet of day-time chat-shows, gutter-press newspapers, and all the paranoid rubbish posted by idiots on the internet.
Rob had nothing to say to the posting by “G” at #94. Just another example of ignoring the evidence that refutes the idiocy of the AIDS-Denialist’s position.
Rob has also ignored the information provided by Snout at #109: “Rob, no there are numerous meaningful ways to identify the virus including antigen testing, culture and and nucleic acid testing by PCR. The reason antibody testing is the usual method for diagnosis is that for most people it is quick, inexpensive, and has a sensitivity and specificity as good if not better than methods used to detect the virus itself in most circumstances.”
Considering the fact that there are many, many men who have sex with men probably more than gay-identified men) but who do not identify as gay but have girlfriends and wives, where is the crossover of HIV into the heterosexual population that was predicted? There are married men being shagged senseless at Chariots, Hampstead Heath, by escorts and so on on a near weekly basis who are then going home and shagging their girlfriends/wives senseless. Why is this phenomenon not showing up in the HIV statistics? “Straight”-identified men are not developing AIDS symptoms and dropping dead due to not having come forward for testing in time, so what is going on here? HIV has remained a more or less gay thing, although it has had the opportunity to become a mainstream epidemic in the UK but hasn’t, thanks also to the fact that unlike Africa we are a developed nation with sanitary conditions and food for all. I do find that extremely odd, and is one of the reasons I sit on the fence until a persuasive argument either way can convince me to make up my mind.
“Again, I have to reiterate I sit on the fence as an open minded person until the proof, however already persuasive, is 100% conclusive.”
Just out of interest, Rob, just what kind of evidence is it that you require to convince you that HIV causes AIDS?
Unhindered by any formal medical education; a couple of observations:
The pharmaceutical industry generally buys it’s way out of trouble, however they have been convicted of fraud on at least one occasion. Anyone who takes their word for anything is a fool.
In house of numbers one of the co-discoverers of HIV, Luc Montagnier admits that HIV is easily cured within weeks with a good diet without HIV drugs.
The other, Gallo has been found to be a fraud. http://www.fearoftheinvisible.com/fraud-in-key-hiv-research-background
They might still have a case if anyone could claim the reward for proving the existence of HIV, and providing documentary evidence of the validity of the HIV tests. http://www.heallondon.org/win-p50000.html
And it would help if in 25 years and billions of dollars some scientist could show how HIV causes aids!
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.” Kary Mullis.
Need I say more?
Seth Kalichman say’s: The movie has fooled many people into thinking there is actually a debate among scientists about the cause of AIDS.
Quite right, the orthodoxy won’t sit and debate with the so called denialists because they don’t even have a pair of deuces to debate with.
“Luc Montagnier admits that HIV is easily cured within weeks with a good diet without HIV drugs.”
He says nothing of the kind, bob. Please see comment 114.
And thanks for demonstrating the futility of trying to “debate” denialists. You go to the trouble of carefully and patiently refuting a denialist claim from someone who is clearly unhindered by any relevant education, let alone “formal medical education”.
Then someone else pops up a few posts later and spouts exactly the same denialist canard.
It’s not debate, bob. It’s wack-a-mole.
Luc Montaigner: ‘We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will GET RID OF THE VIRUS within a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.’
Interviewer: ‘If you have a good immune system, then your body can actually get rid of HIV’?
Luc Montaigner: ‘YES’
Interviewer: ‘If you take poor Afrincans who’s been infected and you build up their immune system, is it possible for them to also naturally GET RID OF it?
Luc Montaigner: ‘I would think so. It’s an important knowledge, which is completely NEGLECTED. People always think of drugs and vaccine.’
Interviewer: ‘There;s no money in nutrition, right?’
Luc Montaigner: ‘There;s no profit, yes.’
doesnt sound like “nothing of the kind” to me snout.
I am afraid I don’t understand your next paragraph, but I assume you are saying that I am without any relevant education. This is what I have come to expect from fools who believe the pharmaceutical industry and their shills; insults and gobledook, anything but address the salient points.
Another observation: Hasn’t anyone else noticed that the only people suffering from AIDS (outside of Africa of course) are the ones who get tested and have treatment? If it was only half as infectious as what has been claimed, after 25 years the hospitals would be full and we would be tripping up over AIDS victims in the street. Does anybody know anyone or knows anyone who knows anyone who hasnt been tested and suddenly goes down with fully blown AIDS?
You want more?
Bob, I can’t make it any clearer than I already have. Montagnier was talking about the factors involved when someone who is exposed to HIV clears the virus out of their system before it seeds the lymphoid tissues and becomes chronic and cannot be cleared by the immune system. Once this has happened a person becomes “HIV positive”. There are lots of factors involved, and Montagnier thinks that nutritional status might be one of them. He thinks that if a person suffering significant malnutrition is exposed to HIV it is more likely that this will result in lymphoid tissue seeding and chronic infection (HIV positive status) than if a well-nourished person has the same type of exposure.
Montagnier is saying that he thinks this hypothesis deserves more attention, rather than depending on things like post exposure prophylaxis with antiretrovirals to prevent exposure progressing to seroconversion to HIV positive status. He may be right about this, but it is still a hypothesis that has not been demonstrated.
What he is most definitely NOT saying is that people can clear chronic HIV infection through diet AFTER they have seroconverted to HIV positive status.
This is now the third time I have explained this same point on this thread.
I’ll ask you the same question I asked Charles. Do you think Montagnier is talking about people clearing HIV from their bodies through nutrition before or after seroconversion to HIV positive?
I’m quite happy to deal with your subsequent “points” but one at a time, please.
@ Snout:
“Just out of interest, Rob, just what kind of evidence is it that you require to convince you that HIV causes AIDS?”
@Bob:
“They might still have a case if anyone could claim the reward for proving the existence of HIV, and providing documentary evidence of the validity of the HIV tests. http://www.heallondon.org/win-p50000.html
And it would help if in 25 years and billions of dollars some scientist could show how HIV causes aids!
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.” Kary Mullis.
Need I say more?”
Nuff said.
PS: That is not to say HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, I just need to be satisfied by concrete clinical evidence that it does, and for that reason – and for similar reasons why I refused to buy into the now disintegrating argument for global warming – I remain sitting, sore-arsed, on the fence.
@ Bob
“Another observation: Hasn’t anyone else noticed that the only people suffering from AIDS (outside of Africa of course) are the ones who get tested and have treatment? If it was only half as infectious as what has been claimed, after 25 years the hospitals would be full and we would be tripping up over AIDS victims in the street. Does anybody know anyone or knows anyone who knows anyone who hasnt been tested and suddenly goes down with fully blown AIDS?”
That is exactly the point I was making about men who have sex with men but do not identify as gay. Where are the masses of non-gay men suddenly developing full-blown AIDS and dropping dead like flies, and their girlfriends and wives? Nearly all heterosexual cases in the UK are African asylum seekers. It just ain’t happening!
Rob, the £50,000 “prize” was made through the AIDS denialist magazine Continuum which was edited by Jody Wells – until he died from AIDS. Then it was edited by Huw Christie – who also died from AIDS. The magazine has folded, for obvious reasons.
The $50,000 prize offered by Christine Maggiore’s Alive and Well organisation expired on 29th April 2009, unlike Maggiore herself who expired on 27th December 2008 from – you guessed it – AIDS.
These kinds of “awards” are not offered in good faith. The existence of HIV or the validity of tests do not hinge on now-deceased individuals conceding they were wrong and handing over large amounts of cash. In fact these kinds of awards are a pretty reliable indicator that the persons “offering” them are doing so as a rhetorical device to promote pseudoscience. Another good example is “Dr Dino’s” (Kent Hovind’s) offer of $250,000 to anyone who can “prove evolution”.
No serious scientist believes these are bona fide, even leaving out the fact that Hovind is serving a ten-year sentence for tax fraud, and Wells, Christie and Maggiore have all since died of AIDS.
Perhaps I’m overly skeptical, but I don’t think they are a good guide to scientific reality.
Another unscientific observation: How is it when the worlds foremost expert on retroviruses makes the claim that HIV cannot be the causes of AIDS (and backs it up with an unprecedented 6 peer reviewed paper) We don’t get to hear about it in the media? Prof Gordon Stewart predicted to within 500 the number of new AIDS cases, far more accurately that the orthodoxy,on that alone he must be given credence. Then throw in another 2000 plus academics from rethinking aids http://rethinkingaids.com/ And yet not a mention in the press? You know, if someone is throwing the fear of death into me I believe I have a basic human right to know if there is a difference of scientific opinion, and then I can make up my own mind,thank you very much, as to whether or not they are all nutters,heretics or sensation seekers or whatever. In fact why does not the orthodoxy sit down and debate the issue if they are so sure of themselves? If P Duesberg is responsible for untold deaths in Africa, as has been claimed,why not arrest or sue him? Something is clearly wrong here.
snout I was actually talking about the healondon prize which I believe is still unclaimed. And of course they would say its not bona fide if they can’t prove the existence of HIV. I never mentioned maggiore and I find it sickening how you people can gloat over someones death and no, I don’t want to debate her cause of death. I don’t particularly want to get bogged down in what Luc M said but meant or meant but didn’t say either.I would rather stick with the bigger picture.
If denialists are so certain that public debates can settle scientific questions, why don’t they hold debates among themselves?
Duesberg could debate de Harven on whether HIV is exogenous or endogenous.
The winner could then debate the Perthians on whether HIV even exists.
Henry Bauer could debate his claim that epidemiology proves AIDS cannot be sexually transmitted with Margulis who suggests it’s really caused by syphilis.
And then any of them could debate Lenny Horowitz on whether HIV was created in a US government lab, and what precisely was Duesberg’s role in this.
When do the tickets go on sale?
I’m not sure which “foremost expert on retroviruses” you are talking about, but if you’re thinking of Duesberg then it’s worth mentioning that he has never done any practical work with HIV or on AIDS. He has no expertise in these areas at all.
His theories, which are based largely on his misunderstandings of epidemiology and medicine – two other fields in which he is utterly unqualified – did in fact get some coverage in the press. But that was over 20 years ago. Perhaps you missed it.
They have long since been discredited. I’d call this an “argument from authority” double-fail.
And “2000 plus academics”? You are kidding me. Have you ever looked at the list? It is made up mostly of homeopaths, students and bored retirees. Very few are “academics”, and those few who are mostly work in fields entirely unrelated to HIV or AIDS.
Make that a triple-fail.
nuff said, thanks for that Rob and may I recommend
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm
An excellent site very easy to navigate and pick and choose from respectable Drs and scientists from every background connected with AIDS. Microbiology,epidemiology,immunology,toxicology etc as well as a section from investigative journalists including gay activist John Lauritsen. Plenty for the layperson like myself and if there are minor difference between them they are all united in one thing HIV (if it exists) cannot possibly be the cause of AIDS. I can tell you one single cause of immune system breakdown and that is AZT,(see John Laritsen http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/censorship.htm) it kills everything; T cells, B cells, red blood cells, anyone who takes enough of that stuff will die a slow wasting death with the exact same identical symptoms as fully blown AIDS. It is highly likely that that is what killed Freddie Mercury, Kenny Everret etc. Nureyev certainly didn’t die of AIDS he suffered from,I think, pericarditis, which is a heart thing and not on the list of 29 AIDS defining conditions. But don’t worry,”now they only prescribe a small amount of AZT… and the patients are living longer” You couldn’t make it up.
You see Snout,in science you have to have evidence that can be peer reviewed,otherwise I could say that x=y coz my mother told me. And what we have here is a multibillion dollar criminal organization promoting an unpeer reviewed and unproven hypothesis. And I think I’ll let people go to rethinking aids and virus myth and see for themselves good night all
“Minor differences”, bob?
HIV/AIDS denialists can’t even agree if HIV exists or not. That’s how wacky the denialist project is.
In fact, they’re going through a hilariously messy divorce over the subject right now. It’s hard to work out which denialist faction is nuttier than the other. Judean People’s Front anyone?
http://snoutworld.blogspot.com/2009/11/seriously-dysfunctional-family-of_26.html
Snout says I’m not sure which “foremost expert on retroviruses” you are talking about, but if you’re thinking of Duesberg then it’s worth mentioning that he has never done any practical work with HIV or on AIDS. He has no expertise in these areas at all.
He was the first person to map all the different gene strands that make up a retrovirus. http://www.duesberg.com/media/ebhiv.html
This by Gallo:
“He began working with retroviruses around 1966, and he was among the first, or perhaps even the very first, to characterise their structural proteins. He was involved in the first work that provided a genetic map of retroviruses…http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/rgintropd.htm
HIV is a retrovirus isn’t it Snout?
Obviously you haven’t seen this:
AIDS ACQUIRED BY DRUG CONSUMPTION AND OTHER NONCONTAGIOUS RISK FACTORS
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/pdphth0.htm
Snout says: His theories, which are based largely on his misunderstandings of epidemiology and medicine – two other fields in which he is utterly unqualified – did in fact get some coverage in the press. But that was over 20 years ago. Perhaps you missed it.
Here is his education:
University of Wurzburg, Germany
1956-1958: Vordiplom (Chemistry)
University of Basel, Switzerland
1958-1959
University of Munich, Germany
1959-1961: Diplom (Chemistry)
University of Frankfurt, Germany
1961-1963: Ph.D. (Chemistry)
Research & Professional Experience:
Max Planck Institute for Virus Research, Tubingen Germany
1963: postdoctoral Fellow
Department of Molecular Biology and Virus Laboratory; since 1959 Dept. of Molecular & Cell Biology University of California, Berkeley CA
1964: Assistant research Virologist and Postdoctoral Fellow
1968: Assistant Professor in Residence and Research Biochemist
1970: Assistant Professor
1971: Associate Professor
1973 to present Professor
And Honors:
1969: Merck Award
1971: California Scientist of the Year Award
1981: First Annual American Medical Centre Oncology Award
1986: Outstanding Investigator Award National Institute of Health
1986: Elected National Academy of Sciences
1986-1987: Fogarty Scholar-in-Residence at the National Institutes of Health Bethesda MD
1988: Wissenschaftspreis, Hannover Germany
1988: Lichtfield Lecturer, Oxford England
1990: C.J. Watson Lecturer, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis MN
1992: Fisher Distinguished Professor, University of North Texas, Denton TX
1992: Shaffer Alumni Lecturer, Tulane University, New Orleans LA
But don’t worry folks Snout knows better.
Snout says: And “2000 plus academics”? You are kidding me. Have you ever looked at the list? It is made up mostly of homeopaths, students and bored retirees. Very few are “academics”, and those few who are mostly work in fields entirely unrelated to HIV or AIDS.
Make that a triplefail.
http://www.rethinkingaids.com/Content/TheBoard/tabid/60/Default.aspx
HIV/AIDS denialists can’t even agree if HIV exists or not.
Whether it exists or not they agree that it CANNOT POSSIBLY CAUSE AIDS. And no I am not going over to your blogspot so that you can censor me like these other creeps http://rhetoricallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2009/10/spectator-no-regrets.html?showComment=1256854563228#c6967029331669483961
None of Duesberg’s education or accomplishments are in medicine or epidemiology. He has never done so much as a minute’s productive work on HIV or AIDS. He has no medical training or qualifications. His epidemiology, which comprises the basis of his discredited arguments, is woeful – sub-undergraduate level.
If you are going to make an argument from authority (and I strongly suggest you don’t – it’s a kind of informal logical fallacy) then you shouldn’t choose an “authority” who has no credibilty in the field you are citing him in.
His expertise in the area of AIDS is zilch. And it shows. Yes I have read “AIDS ACQUIRED BY DRUG CONSUMPTION AND OTHER NONCONTAGIOUS RISK FACTORS”. It’s pathetic. I’ve also read most of his other publications. They are similarly woeful.
If you’re interested, I even did a critique of his latest bit of drivel, which was ignominiously withdrawn from Medical Hypotheses a couple of months ago, it was so bad. Medical Hypotheses is not exactly the most reputable scientific outlet – they’ll basically publish anything. But not even they will stoop to Duesberg. Here’s the critique (the comments thread is even more scathing):
http://snoutworld.blogspot.com/2009/07/coming-aids-denialist-civil-war-henry.html
Yes, Snout does know better, but that’s not saying much. 99% of the world does.
Rob at #152: wrote “There are married men being shagged senseless at Chariots, Hampstead Heath, by escorts and so on on a near weekly basis who are then going home and shagging their girlfriends/wives senseless. Why is this phenomenon not showing up in the HIV statistics? “Straight”-identified men are not developing AIDS symptoms and dropping dead due to not having come forward for testing in time, so what is going on here?”
Rob, please provide hard evidence of your vast numbers of heterosexual married men who you imply are being sexually passive and having anal intercourse without the use of condoms.
Honestly, your assertions and your assumptions are breathtakingly foolish!
Excellent article about these AIDS-denying loonies here:
Science, pseudoscience and professional responsibility
24.11.2009
Surveys have consistently shown that over 40% of Americans do not believe in evolution. It is not surprising, then, that our society is vulnerable to being fooled by people who misrepresent scientific or historical facts. By Dr. J.P. Moore, PHD.
We are now all too familiar with the crazed activities of the ‘Birthers’, an ad hoc, right wing political group refusing to accept President Obama was born in the United States. Earlier this year, we saw media coverage of the insane views of a clique that refuses to accept American astronauts walked on the moon 40 years ago. The “9/11 Truth Movement” flourishes on the internet, arguing that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not hit by hijacked jetliners, but were blown up by the CIA at the behest of Israeli intelligence. Conspiracy groups like these usually do little real damage to society, although the activities of the “9/11 Truth Movement” foster anti-Semitism and insult the memories of the nearly 3000 Americans who died on 9/11. Unfortunately, other equally bizarre and factually unfounded, internet-based conspiracy groups can, and do, harm, even kill, significant numbers of people. This is not just an American problem, as the ripple effects of conspiracy theories spread worldwide via the internet. Indeed, the most serious consequences of one such group’s actions have been felt in Africa.
A small group of misguided and, in some cases malicious, individuals have long promoted the view that HIV does not cause AIDS or, in an even more bizarre twist of the truth, that HIV does not even exist. An even nastier variation of the theme is that HIV was created by the US government as a device to kill “undesirables”, such as people with black skins or who are gay. None of these opinions is true, and there is not a shred of credible scientific or historic evidence to support them. Unfortunately, the Mbeki administration in South Africa put in place policies based around the premises that HIV is harmless but anti-retroviral drugs are dangerous. This decision caused over 330,000 unnecessary deaths during the first half of this decade. And yet the “AIDS Denialists” even question this death toll, a tactic no different from Holocaust Deniers asking “Did six million really die”. Many Americans and Europeans have also died, persuaded by the “AIDS Denialists” that they did not need to take anti-retroviral drugs to treat their HIV infections. Distrust of the federal government and the medical establishment among African American communities has adversely affected AIDS prevention and treatment programs in the USA, in no small measure due to the crazy belief that HIV was created as a weapon of selective genocide. Indeed, this particular rumor even re-surfaced in the last Presidential election campaign. Real people die real deaths as a direct result of the pseudo-science promoted by the “AIDS Denialists”.
In a similar vein, groups that claim vaccination is harmful have harmed global immunization programs, and thereby caused avoidable deaths worldwide. A conspiracy theory group often called “The Mercuries” has been particularly vociferous in its argument that a mercury-containing preservative found in some vaccines causes autism. There is less mercury in a vaccine shot than in a tuna fish sandwich, and the mercury present in the fish is in a more dangerous chemical form. Overall, a now vast body of solid scientific evidence has proven that autism has no connection whatsoever to any vaccine or vaccine component. This is now settled science within the professional community, which understands that the cause of autism is based in human genetics. But despite the facts, the distrust of vaccines that has been created by “The Mercuries” and other anti-vaccine conspiracy groups is now damaging efforts to counter swine flu by vaccination, both in America and, increasingly, elsewhere. The polio vaccine eradication campaign has been harmed, notably in Nigeria, by rumors that the vaccine is contaminated with dangerous chemicals, or even with HIV, or that it was designed by “white people to sterilize black people”. As a result, this dangerous infection has still not been eradicated from Africa, where it lingers on, killing and paralyzing yet more people.
The mindsets of the “AIDS Denialists” and “The Mercuries” are similar to each other. Both groups are irrational on the science, twisting the facts to a perverse extent and stubbornly ignoring and rejecting all the evidence that speaks against their views. Each group is bolstered by a very small number of scientists whose paper qualifications provide them with a superficial, wafer-thin veneer of academic credibility. The two conspiracy groups contain individuals who will resort to threats of violence and who harass those who dare to speak up against them. A common tactic of both groups is to smear scientists and physicians who recommend AIDS drugs or the use of vaccines as being nothing more than paid tools of the pharmaceutical industry. Yet both the “AIDS Denialists” and “The Mercuries” are supported by promoters of “alternative (i.e., quack) therapies” who have a financial interest in damning approved anti-HIV drugs or licensed vaccines. “Ambulance-chasing” lawyers have also been heavily involved with the anti-vaccine groups, fostering the hopes of grieving parents that they (and the lawyers) might receive a payout from a scientifically ill-informed jury.
The conspiracy theory groups also receive the support of a small, but noisy, subset of media professionals who seem attracted to the personalities involved, smelling stories in the controversies. This has been particularly problematic recently in the anti-vaccine arena, where some American chat shows and right wing news programs have given undue attention to “The Mercuries”. Bizarre as it may seem, the views of medically unqualified Hollywood celebrities are given equal, or even greater, weight on these shows than those of expert physicians and scientists. Science and pseudoscience should never be “balanced” in this way. To make an analogy: if a film star claimed that we should not fly on a jetliner because mercury contamination could make the wings fall off, we would simply laugh, preferring to listen to the views of qualified aeronautical engineers and metallurgists (and to our own experience as travelers). Yet, nowadays, film stars’ views on vaccine composition are given huge weight by some chat show hosts.
The “AIDS Denialists” and “The Mercuries” are no different from the “Birthers”, the moon-landing hoaxers, the “9/11 Truth” members and the Holocaust Deniers in the irrationality of their views and their belief in government conspiracies and cover-ups. Indeed, some members of the various groups flit from one conspiracy-themed web site to another, seeking and finding solace in a variant form of irrationality. One of the very few academic supporters of the” AIDS Denialism” movement also investigates the Loch Ness Monster, Alien Crop Circles and other such fringe or paranormal themes. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.
What can be done about dispelling this kind of damaging nonsense? America has a strong tradition of free speech, so dangerous views will continue to be promoted, however harmful they are to public health and the best interests of society. The internet is the territory of the conspiracist, and it is likely to remain so. But media professionals should not be so unquestioning of the science when they provide airtime or column inches to those with fringe views. Controversy may help sell advertising, but at what cost?
A particular concern is that the ideas that HIV is harmless and that vaccines cause autism have been underpinned by a very few academics or physicians working in American or European universities or hospitals. These “thought leaders” for the conspiracy groups should now be made to face the professional consequences of their scientifically unsupportable actions. Is academic freedom such a precious concept that scientists can hide behind it while betraying the public so blatantly? When the facts are so solidly against views that kill people, there must be a price to pay. Post-tenure review of the progress of academic careers is something the university system could put in place if it chose to. How can bona fide universities justify their employees teaching students, even medical students, that HIV is harmless? How can academic and medical institutions still employ people whose views lead to the deaths of over 330,000 South Africans? Shielding the proponents of pseudoscience by doing nothing is a dereliction of a duty to the public. It is also moral cowardice. It is now time for Africa to speak out and demand action against those who have been responsible for so many deaths on this continent.
http://www.health-e.org.za/news/article.php?uid=20032583
Hi Snout. My, you’ve been doing well with these loonies. Congratulations. Bravo! There’s been quite a bunch of us over on another thread dealing with some other loony called Rahman, a Muslim who thinks all homosexuals are evil, blah, blah, blah. So that’s where I’ve been. I have to say that just coming back here to see if anything else had been posted I was surprised at my reaction to finding there had. In comparison to the Muslim loony, these AIDS-Denialists seem so babyish. They’re clearly in the grip of a mental obsession, almost like the blind-faith of a religious person.
They’re sick, Snout, and they’re woefully uneducated. I wouldn’t waste any more time on them. In this long thread, if they had any shred of rationality, they would have “seen the light”, the error of their thinking. They’ve been flattened this way and that, but still like zombies in a horror movie they rise from the dead still believing their inane hypothesis.
It’s sick.
The only good reason I can see for continuing to challenge them is the utterly irresponsible way they influence HIV+ people who need access to medication.
“The only good reason I can see for continuing to challenge them is the utterly irresponsible way they influence HIV+ people who need access to medication.”
So true Eddy…. this infection is awful enough for the suffers without being led to their deaths by these lunatics telling them not to take the medication. They’re also a danger as they try to confuse the message to people on the proven vectors for HIV, to prevent the next generation hopefully not having spread this disease.
Given the overwhelming scientific proof, why do the do this? What possible purpose do they have in denying the reality of HIV/AIDS?
Will, your last line above caused me to google “psychology of aids-denialism” and of course interesting things come up. No time to look at all, but here’s one piece of analysis:
“If there’s one thing that purveyors of pseudoscientific medical modalities crave, probably above all else, it’s legitimacy. They want to be taken seriously as Real Scientists. Of course, my usual reaction to this desire is to point out that anyone can be take seriously as a real scientist if he is able to do science and that science actually shows that there is something to his claims. In other words, do his hypotheses make testable predictions, and does testing these predictions fail to falsify his hypotheses? That’s what it takes, but advocates of so-called “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM) or “integrative medicine” (IM, or, as I like to refer to it: “integrating” quackery with scientific medicine) want their woo to be considered science without actually doing the hard work of science.
There are several strategies that pseudoscientists use to give their beliefs the appearance of science, a patina of “science-y” camouflage, if you will. One, of course, is the cooptation and corruption of the language of science, which has been a frequent topic on this blog, particularly in posts written by Drs. Atwood and Sampson. Another is to produce journals that appear to be science, but are anything but. I’ve discussed one example, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and Medical Acupuncture, but others include Homeopathy, the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, and Medical Hypotheses, which recently was forced to retract a horrible paper by arch-HIV/AIDS denialist Peter Duesberg. What’s worse is that some of these journals are even published by what are considered major publishers, such as Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., and Elsevier.
There is, however, a third strategy. How do scientists communicate their findings to other scientists, as well as meeting and mingling with other scientists? Why, they hold scientific meetings, of course! These meetings can be small or even as large as the American Association for Cancer Research meeting, which is attended by around 15,000 cancer researchers each year. So, too, do cranks hold meetings. These meetings often have all the trappings of scientific meetings, with plenary sessions, smaller parallel sessions, poster sesssions, and an exhibition hall, complete with exhibits by sponsoring companies. Sometimes these meetings can even appear so much like the real thing that they take in legitimate researchers and legitimate universities. ”
This is interesting. “3D Video images of HIV transfer between T cells through virological synapses” from “Science Magazine”. ” A virological synapse between two T cells starts with a transmitted light image of two cells with a synaptic button between them. The movie then shows the movement of the fluorescent viral protein (Gag) into the synaptic button, followed by transfer of material from the button into the target cells. Maximum intensity projection shown first, followed by a 3D reconstruction of the same images. Elapsed time is depicted in minutes:seconds.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=480aOFFiNBY
snout say’s He has no medical training or qualifications.
1969: Merck Award
1971: California Scientist of the Year Award
1981: First Annual American Medical Centre Oncology Award
1986: Outstanding Investigator Award National Institute of Health
1986: Elected National Academy of Sciences
1986-1987: Fogarty Scholar-in-Residence at the National Institutes of Health Bethesda MD
1988: Wissenschaftspreis, Hannover Germany
1988: Lichtfield Lecturer, Oxford England
1990: C.J. Watson Lecturer, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis MN
1992: Fisher Distinguished Professor, University of North Texas, Denton TX
1992: Shaffer Alumni Lecturer, Tulane University, New Orleans LA
I forgot one, he and Celia Farber won the prestigous semmelweiss clean hands award
http://www.semmelweis.org/issues/
Perhaps prof snout would like to post his scientific achievments.
I give up, I am longer prepared to debate with an egotistical idiot.
Bob, you make an error in logical reasoning to focus on the person, rather then the science. I you have a point to make, make it with proof, and verifiable scientific sources, and proper controlled studies. i.e. a paper or study
So far, a list of “credentials” is not proof of anything other than a weak argument, and in logic no more than an appeal to authority where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.
There is undeniable proof that HIV causes AIDS, and a small sample of this was given to you on this site already. I you are incapable of understanding it, that’s fine, but your understanding is not a prerequisite for its validity.
Please, by all means, impress me with some REAL studies, I AM a scientist and I’m sure I will be able to understand it.
Until that point, you are not “debating”.
The “prestigious” Semmelweis award”?
Now you’re just being silly, bob. Have you even been reading this thread?
The “Semmelweis Society” was a small support group of disaffected medicos in the US (some with legitimate complaints) who were taken over by Clark Baker and his mates in a bizarre coup a year or so ago with the express purpose of generating PR for Duesberg and Farber. It quickly turned into farce and lawsuits, as you might expect.
Clark who? See post number 9 on this thread. He’s the guy who posted on the Semmelweis website that AIDS began when:
“a small group of promiscuous, addicted, nitrite-huffing, gonorrheal and syphilitic bath house veterans began to get sick… Faced with the imminent loss of funding, Gallo and his goons needed a new virus that they could frighten Americans with. At the same time, gay activists wanted the world to believe that their lifestyle had nothing to do with their symptoms. If lifestyle was blamed, individuals would be responsible.”
Heres’s the link:
http://www.semmelweis.org/2009/06/02/doctors-without-boundaries/
You gotta laugh at the cluelessness of someone coming on to a gay newspaper and calling an “award” engineered by Clark Baker and his thug mates as “prestigious”.
re. #181, well done, Snout! And good to turn the focus back on to our all-American strutting ex-marine ex-LAPD and self-styled “Private Investigator” Clark Baker who is responsible to a large extent for driving all this irresponsible nonsense.
I sit on the fence regarding the HIV causes Aids hypothesis, but what has struck me throughout this entire debate is how rational, calm and reasoned people like Charles and Bob have remained even in the onslaught of unwarranted insults, bullying, smears and intimidation by those who disagree with their views. Only those who have something to fear would resort to such shameful tactics, and it is my belief that the likes of Eddy, Will, Jean-Paul et al NEED to believe in the HIV = Aids hypothesis even to the point where they rubbish anything and everything that steps in the way of that orthodoxy because the implications of it not being true are too horrible and devastating to contemplate. So instead they close their minds and stick come what may to the programmed consensus, just as climate change believers cling to theirs even when the evidence supports global cooling, not warming, because it is unthinkable to consider that they may have been lied to to line the pockets of a few corporations, and they bought that lie hook, line and sinker.
I would also add that what do people like Charles and Bob and untold accredited scientists have to gain by opposing the consensus view? Financially absolutely nothing, while those pushing the accepted world view that HIV causes Aids suffers to lose billions of dollars in research funding and drug sales. And neither are renowned for being paragons of virtue.
“and it is my belief that the likes of Eddy, Will, Jean-Paul et al NEED to believe in the HIV = Aids hypothesis”
Then you’re an idiot if you think this. This isn’t a belief, you fool. Its science. And all you’ve done, like all fools, is to assume that belief in something changes its reality. It doesn’t. If you don’t understand the science behind the proof that HIV leads to AIDS, then frankly, that’s down your lack of education, not mine. Please don’t associate my knowledge in this area with your lack of.
And your associating climate change proof with HIV/AIDS proof, is utter nonsense!!! Your argument is a fools one, as it employs an association fallacy. In science an association fallacy is an inductive formal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. This is your argument??? An irrelevant association, in lieu of any proof of your statements??? Daft.
What’s more disturbing that your lack of proof and your lack of understanding of science, is your character assassination on others because you stupidly assert a “belief” in HIV doesn’t cause AIDS where none is required. Science is not a belief system. If you can’t see that, then you shouldn’t have left school so early.
“I would also add that what do people like Charles and Bob and untold accredited scientists have to gain by opposing the consensus view”
Untold accredited scientists???? Don’t make me laugh!!!! A few fringe lunatics on a website is not the 99.99% of the scientific world who do see the proof, credentials or not, so this is just a lie. A fools lie at that.
This makes you an idiot, not open minded. Sorry, but that’s pretty much the bottom line here.
The only reason I quoted Duesberg’s achievments was to highlight snouts arrogance and egotisticy in claiming he knows better and that Duesberg knows nothing about retroviruses and has no medical training or qualifications.
Speaking of arrogance what you appear to be saying is that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is an idiot! Hmm. And no doubt you can supply us with evidence that these honourable scientists who stand up for the truth are lunatics?
Other than that I have tried to start a discussion on the followin:
Anyone who invests their life savings with a convicted fraudster is a fool.
No one has claimed the prize for proving the existence of HIV or documentary proof of the validity of the tests.
That Gallo is a fraud.
Responded to S Kalichman’s post.
I also made the point that the only people suffering from AIDS in the west are those that get diagnosed and have treatment. And no I don’t believe it’s because everyone is using condoms, in fact in the latest condom adverts they don’t even mention HIV anymore. I’m sure any readers of this magazine who are sexually active, will have a good idea of how much people are using condoms. But this so called virus which is supposed to lay dormant for 2 to 3 years, then 5 then 10 then 15 then 30 now back to 10 years, but which can still be passed on, should have decimated half the planet by now.
I mentioned Prof Gordon Stewart who predictions were some 70% more accurate than the AIDS orthodoxy.
This from the Independant http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/aids-the-pandemic-is-officially-in-decline-1826914.html
They should have asked Prof G Stewart.
Freddie Mercury etc and AZT poisoning.
You say there is undeniable proof that HIV causes AIDS. WHERE?
K Mullis (Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry) spent 2 to 3 years looking for scientific evidence that HIV causes AIDS, I’m sure if he couldn’t find it, neither you nor I can either. Think about it, every scientists dream to win the nobel prize and all one has to do is to prove how HIV causes AIDS in order to win one and other brownie points. No such person has come forward!
28 years and billions of research money, no cure, no vaccine and no plausible explanation of how HIV causes AIDS. Hmm.
All I’ve had back is the inference that because I am not a scientist I’m too thick too understand. Hmm. I’ll let the discerning reader judge for him/herself.
“Speaking of arrogance what you appear to be saying is that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is an idiot!”
Again, I suggest you read what I say. I am suggesting that anyone who makes an assessment of scientific evidence, gained by using scientific methods, based on nothing more then a BELIEF is an idiot.
That assessment still stands.
When you produce any evidence, any at all, I will listen. Until then, all I see are histrionics and an avoidance of fact. Character assassinations and a list of so-called credentials of some internet extremist is not evidence. Clearly you are here to validate your own agenda, not analyse the facts. Ergo, an idiot. Sorry, but that’s basically the obvious truth.
“Think about it, every scientists dream to win the nobel prize and all one has to do is to prove how HIV causes AIDS in order to win one and other brownie points. No such person has come forward!”
Oh, and on this, this is another cop out statement. It’s called Demanding Negative Proof Fallacy, attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim.
If you know what you were talking about, you’d know that in science, its infinitely easier to prove a non-correlation, than a correlation.
Therefore it should be a walk in the park to prove that AIDS is not caused by HIV. But there isn’t any proof. Why is that, do you think? If it was so obvious, as it is to you, then it should be easy? But there is not ONE scientific paper that even hints to the proof that HIV is not the cause of AIDS! Not one. (Notice I said “scientific paper” here, not a lunatics website, or your assertion that you have a choice to “believe” the facts – that’s just idiocy)
Therefore, picking fault at all the scientific data to date which says almost unambiguously that HIV is the cause of AIDS, because you seek a perfect solution, is in fact another fallacy of yours.
You seem to deal only in fallacies. Its the recourse of the uninformed, the stupid, and the desperate.
Why not try address this piece of data, lets see how you do:
Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
Go, on, address this. I’m sure it will be as enlightening as it is amusing.
Will says: I am suggesting that anyone who makes an assessment of scientific evidence, gained by using scientific methods, based on nothing more then a BELIEF is an idiot.
By your own definition you are an idiot. It’s your BELIEF that HIV causes AIDS. For the third time I repeat, where is the evidence? You ain’t got none son. Anymore than you have evidence to back up your “fringe lunatics” claim! This is what gets me; everyone is saying there is mountains of evidence…Show me it. I’ll warrant that after 28 years and billions there is a mountain of paperwork, but where is the bit that says how hiv causes aids????
In 1984 U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler announces at a press conference that an American scientist, Dr. Robert Gallo, has discovered the PROBABLE cause of AIDS…source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_AIDS
Note the PROBABLE bit, because the mainstream press missed that bit out. It’s an unproven hypothesis!
…”When you produce any evidence, any at all, I will listen. Until then, all I see are histrionics and an avoidance of fact”. That’s a bit rich from someone who hasn’t answered any of my points. Methinks you can’t, your’e legless you are reduced to asking me for evidence that something that no one can even prove exists doesn’t cause aids! I say if someone is saying that I am going to die a slow horrible death unless I take extremely toxic (and expensive) drugs, then they ought to have proof and be able to back up that claim! I would have thought that was only reasonable.
OK then try this http://www.duesberg.com/quiz.html
Another little point I’d like to make,as a layman, hiv does not pass the first law of virology (koch’s postulates) You don’t need to be a scientist to see this.
“By your own definition you are an idiot. It’s your BELIEF that HIV causes AIDS”
My god, man, do you have any brain at all??? I KNOW there is a link between HIV and AIDS. I’ve seen the studies, and made my mind up based on the evidence. Its nothing to do with belief!!!! For the love of god, get an education, you’re embarrassing yourself.
“Note the PROBABLE bit, because the mainstream press missed that bit out. It’s an unproven hypothesis!”
LOL! Again, you demonstrate your vast ignorance of science here. The word “probable” is always used in science, as noting is 100% proven and certain. Statistically, nothing is impossible, just highly improbable. If you have any knowledge in this area, you’d know that. The correlation between HIV and AIDS is so strong, that the probability of it not being the case, is extremely small. This is what you base your theory on???? Seriously???? This tiny, tiny probability??? Your are a joke.
And as for Koch’s postulates, as listed below, it does pass the Epidemiological association (as well as isolation, and transmission pathogenesis)
Epidemiological association: the suspected cause must be strongly associated with the disease – numerous studies from around the world show that virtually all AIDS patients are HIV-seropositive, such as the one you obvious decided to ignore above. Why is that? Why can’t you address the study which shows epidemiological association? You can’t, that’s why.
Nice try, but you’ll have to do better, but next time try addressing the facts and the study I gave you, and maybe I might think you have the IQ higher than that of a banana!
And next time, please enlighten us as to why you need to believe the opposite of what is proven on HIV/AIDS? Are you HIV positive, and this is some desperate belief that it wont cause AIDS for you? Is this the core motivation of your silly “belief” system?
And I read that http://www.duesberg.com/quiz.html
What a load of toss! This is your proof??? Lets take one statement:
“And all this happened, in the absence of a vaccine! Thus AIDS is not contagious.”
AIDS isn’t contagious, HIV is. HIV is the virus. This whole stupid article is based on AIDS being contagious and AIDS being the issues. AIDS is a collection of symptoms that is caused by the HIV virus destroying the immune system. The article then goes on to basically lie about infection rates – “Not one doctor or nurse has ever contracted AIDS” – which is utter rubbish, there are ample documented cases! Mother of god, talk about grasping at straws!!!! Is this it??? Your great proof??? LOL!
I could go on, that “article” is riddled with inconsistencies and half truths, its a joke basically.
I’m sorry, you’re less than an idiot, Bob, an idiot can usually see their own failings.
You, Bob, are a buffoon.
bob, I’m getting really confused here. First of all you are proposing Peter Duesberg as some kind of expert on HIV and AIDS, despite the fact he has done exactly zero original reasearch into either of these fields and has never treated an AIDS patient (for the simple reason that he is not a medical doctor and has no medical training).
He does, however, know a little about the isolation of retroviruses, since he trained as a cell chemist and has some genuine achievements in this area.
Then you tell us all that you refuse to believe in the existence of HIV because “No one has claimed the prize for proving the existence of HIV or documentary proof of the validity of the tests.”
The who the frickin’ hell is this guy, who claimed the award saying “HIV has been isolated by the most rigorous method science has to offer.”?
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/pdreplyep.htm
Your arguments from supposed authority are stupid, contradictory, transparent and very, very confused.
Happy holocaust day to you all, sweety darlings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQoNW7lOnT4
Thankfully, it will come to an end anytime soon. You’ll just have to stop thinking subjectively.
How is it now that Montaigner has been misquoted? errmm….
LOVE
Charles, well done there for confirming our assessment as a schizophrenic.
Now, do run along and get the meds you need, freak, you’re embarrassing yourself.
There is a very wise saying in my mother tongue, which translating says as follows:
‘The thief always thinks everyone around is just like him’
Maybe you didn’t listen, although you didn’t need to, it’s written in the subtitles:
LM: ‘So there are many ways which are not the vaccine, the magic name, the vaccine, many ways to decrease the transmission JUST BY SIMPLE MEASURES OF NUTRITION, giving antioxidants — hygiene measures, fighting the other infections.’
Many ways of what, Charles?
Is Montagnier talking about preventing exposure progressing to chronic infection (HIV positive status) or is he talking about treating HIV positive people?
I asked you this before, but you evaded the question, trying to pass it off as “pretty irrelevant.” It’s not. Fudging this issue is precisely how the HoN disinformationsts have misrepresented Montagnier.
“Professor Luc Montagnier, 2009 Nobel Laureate for the discovery of HIV, reveals his views on the treatment of HIV and its relationship to nutrition and profit…”
- Official House of Numbers Website
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=211724591170
“… many ways to decrease the transmission…”
- What Montagnier actually said.
Spot the deliberate misrepresentation, folks.
Well done everybody we are finally getting somewhere snouts starting to come round though I never actually said I didn’t believe in the existence of hiv I merely said it would help your cause if someone had claimed the prize! It is no surprise to me that P Duesberg has that honour, after all he is the pre-eminent virologist in the world today and one of the top, if not the top, molecular biologists. No wonder you are confused when the one person you use to make an argument is the same person you have been slagging off. Still, from utterly unqualified, talking drivel to “he has some genuine achievements in this area”. Is progress, keep it up son. And as I know you like epidemiology so much perhaps you would like to study the work of Prof Gordon Stewart professor emeritus of public health at Glasgow University, and a former WHO adviser on AIDS. http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/gsgenetica.htm
I believe his projected aids figures were about 70% more accurate than the aids orthodoxy. Personally I haven’t read it, not being a scientist it’s a bit hard work for me but I look forward to snout’s “critique”.
Will as well, bang on the nail mate! AIDS IS NOT CONTAGIOUS so glad you are coming round to some sense. As for hiv being sexually transmitted check out the Padian study 1997. And does anybody know or know of anyone who knows of a nurse,or a policeman (thousands of addicts get searched each and every day for the last 28 yrs) Who has caught aids from a needle?
Koch’s first postulate THE MICROORGANISM MUST BE FOUND IN ABUNDANCE IN ALL ORGANISMS SUFFERING FROM THE DISEASE, BUT SHOULD NOT BE FOUND IN HEALTHY ANIMALS.(note the ALL bit)
1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch's_postulates
It’s quite simple, if you are going to blame a disease on a germ then the germ must be present in “all organisms suffering from the disease” Perfectly reasonable and logical.
– numerous studies from around the world show that VIRTUALLY all AIDS patients are HIV-
2 virtually is not ALL! ALL is unambigous,it means everyone, it doesn’t say nearly everyone, nor does it say all but there can be exceptions.
3 “In abundance”. Hardly surprising no one mentions the abundance bit seeing as how they can’t even find the virus, only the antibody:)
As for Luc Montagnier I’d let people judge for themselves, here Brent Leung is interviewed by Robert Scott Bell: http://askrsb.podbean.com/
Here can be found the uncut footage and an article by the excellent and courageous Celia Farber: http://deanesmay.com/2009/12/01/montagniers-mea-culpa-a-healthy-immune-system-can-handle-hiv/
And here is another video blowing the whole hiv aids paradigm out of the window:http://www.disclose.tv/forum/hiv-does-not-cause-aids-top-scientists-say-t12482.html
nite nite everybody see you tommorrow:)
‘The thief always thinks everyone around is just like him’
What an excellent saying Charles! I totally agree! Just like the way you assume we’re all as stupid as you in blindly accepting your “theory” of denialism on HIV/AIDS, a theory with no proof, no backing and no basis in reality.
Maybe time for you to grow up and accept a certain dose of reality here…. maybe then you won’t end up dead before your time as you’re body collapses before your very eyes. It’ll be too late then to see how bloody wrong and stupid you were.
And Snout, well said. But that’s been Charles/Bob/Rob’s game all along, misrepresent and twist the truth to suit their own disturbing neurosis. Same as on another thread where Bob/Rob (what ever his shifting name is) tried to convince us that AIDS not being contagious implies that HIV has no correlation to AIDS…. of course AIDS is not contagious, and this is a false correlation between a fallacy which is trying to prove something that has no bearing on it, in science its referred to as ‘cum hoc ergo propter hoc’, or correlation does not imply causation. Another example of the “slight of hand” they’re pulling to confuse the uninformed.
Makes you wonder why? I mean, its every ones right to refuse medical treatment, but why insist others take the same suicidal route? Validation? Insanity?
“Will as well, bang on the nail mate! AIDS IS NOT CONTAGIOUS so glad you are coming round to some sense.”
Bob, you’re a fool.
So, you imply that AIDS is not contagious, therefore HIV has no correlation with AIDS???? LOL! Are you retarded or soemting? Really, did you miss all your basic science classes in school, or did you even bother to attend? I never said that AIDS was contagious.
Read my last comment, it relates to your stupidity:
Of course AIDS is not contagious, no one is saying that, and this is a false correlation between a fallacy which is trying to prove something that has no bearing on it, in science its referred to as ‘cum hoc ergo propter hoc’, or correlation does not imply causation.
Is a fallacy all you can muster here as proof???? Seriously?
HIV is contagious. HIV is the virus, not AIDS. This only shows you are grossly uneducated in this area, you cannot tell the difference between symptoms and a virus????? Is it really that hard for you? You’re laughable! LOL!
This is the proof of Koch’s 1st Postulate: Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
You’re understanding of Wikipedia not withstanding, you clearly don’t understand Koch’s Postulates in any form. If you did, you wouldn’t be so keen to ignore that study, or spout that nonsense you have in poublic.
Rob, you a bigger buffoon than I though. Please, do yourself a favour, take your silliness and go. You’re embarrassing yourself, and its shameful how proud you are of your ignorance. Thankfully, for you, you have the blanket of the internet to shield you in this farce you call you proof.
THE MICROORGANISM MUST BE FOUND IN ABUNDANCE IN ALL ORGANISMS SUFFERING FROM THE DISEASE, BUT SHOULD NOT BE FOUND IN HEALTHY ANIMALS.What part of the word ALL don’t you understand?
More on montagnier: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/foye9.1.1.html
“THE MICROORGANISM MUST BE FOUND IN ABUNDANCE IN ALL ORGANISMS SUFFERING FROM THE DISEASE, BUT SHOULD NOT BE FOUND IN HEALTHY ANIMALS.What part of the word ALL don’t you understand?”
What???? What micro-organism? The HIV Virus? Yes. It is found in people suffering form AIDS. I have shown you the study. Can you not read it? Hence Koch’s 1st Postulate is met. What part of that do YOU not understand?
God lord, man, are you dyslexic? Again, I ask you:- go educate yourself, this is like watching a car crash.
Look, this is pointless.
There’s obviously something wrong with you, you seem to lack the mental agility to grasp the most basic of concepts. Either show me ONE scientific paper where HIV is proven not to be the cause of AIDS, or shut up. JUST ONE SCIENTIFIC PAPER. And don’t bander about that http://www.duesberg.com/quiz.html page, its utter rubbish. Its about as scientific as tarot card reading.
So far, you have be proven a liar and a fool.
So you don’t understand the word ALL or the word ABUNDANCE and you call yourself a scientist, hmm, I don’t know what science school you went to but I certainly wouldn’t reccommend it LOL.
I’m still waiting for your “undeniable proof”
28 YEARS NO CURE NO VACCINE AND NO SCIENCE
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.”
Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry.
See Kary Mullis , P Duesberg and D Rasnick (PHD and inventor of the protease inhibitors)
here: (2 five minute clips):
http://hgsistock.blogspot.com/2009/11/light-on-hiv-aids-myth.html
And another excellent article from Clark Baker here :http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/making-of-denialist.html
Keep it up Clark, the truth is finding out these murderous criminals and their useful idiots by the day.
LOL! Ah, Bob. You’re consistent, if nothing else! Consistent, but not very bright though.
“28 YEARS NO CURE NO VACCINE AND NO SCIENCE”
So, no vaccine? Does that mean HIV doesn’t case AIDS? No. It doesn’t. Look up ‘post hoc ergo propter hoc’ for your error here.
Clark Baker is your “scientific source”????? The ex-cop and homophobic right-wing blogger????? Ha Ha HA Ha Ha! IS this your idea of a joke???? You fool!
“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.”
Yes there is. Can’t you read? We’ve give it to you.
It takes no effort to prove you wrong, Rob, but your understanding is disturbingly limited, so I doubt you will fully grasp that I am about to say.
But let me try, as I would to a child. Ear’s and mind open, now, Bobby. Read over again and again anything you can’t understand….
AIDS:- defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as the presence of a positive HIV antibody test and one or more of the illnesses known as opportunistic infections (OIs) or a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3
Ergo, AIDS is not a virus, it’s the resulting symptoms of a virus infection, proven to be the HIV virus. Recent improvements in laboratory testing, particularly polymerase chain reaction testing, allow detection of HIV genetic material in people with AIDS or a positive HIV antibody test result. These results show, there is extremely high probability that HIV is the single factor cause of AIDS.
Koch’s Postulates: The scientific research community widely accepts that fulfilment of these postulates demonstrates causality. Even scientists such as Peter Duesberg Ph.D., who says he believes that HIV does not cause AIDS, accept that the postulates put forth by Robert Koch are sufficient to establish causality. While in 1987 Dr. Duesberg noted that HIV did not fit all of Koch’s criteria, developments in HIV/AIDS research in the 13 years since that statement have shown that HIV does indeed fulfil Koch’s postulates as the cause of AIDS.
Ergo, your data, and information are not only wrong, but grossly out of date. Quoting Dr. Duesberg from 1987 is not proof of anything other then you are desperate.
Sources for all the above? As below
- Burnett, M. and White, D.O. Natural History of Infectious Disease. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1972.
- Cohen, J. Fulfilling Koch’s postulates. Science 2666(5191): 1647. December 1994.
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Fact Sheet. The evidence that HIV causes AIDS. July 1995.
- Novembre, F.J. and others. Development of AIDS in a chimpanzee infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Journal of Virology 71(5): 4086-4102. May 1997.
- Weiss, R.A. and Jaffee, H.W. Duesberg, HIV, and AIDS. Nature 345(6277): 659. June 1990.
Now, as you can’t even produce ONE scientific paper, I will assume you either can’t, or won’t. I will not debate my understand of science with a fool such as yourself, as it belittles my own abilities. I will now only argue with you on any point you can produce proof of scientifically.
What’s more interesting is why you NEED to believe this rubbish you spout. You claim to be “sitting on the fence”, but your protestations and straw man arguments clearly shoe a desperate need to believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS.
Why?
I never claimed to be sitting on the fence, you’re thinking of someone else. Also I never claimed to be a scientist. I started off saying that I was unhindered by a formal medical education. The reason I said that was because I’m fed up with so called scientists referring to us laypersons and seekers of the truth as being stupid because we don’t have scientific background. I was trying to start discussions based on common sense.For too long the whole hiv aids paradigm has been clouded over with fear. Now the truth is emerging. Darkness can’t hide in the light. Have a look at a personal story: http://www.myspace.com/rethinkaids then ask my why I believe what I do
Enough chit chat. So this is your undisputable evidence? Let,s take the NIAID fact sheet. For a start it’s anonymous! How unscientific is that? My mother could have written it.
Here’s a rebuttal:http://www.healtoronto.com/nih/NIH%20Rebuttal2-bw.pdf
I’ll leave it with you.
“What???? What micro-organism? The HIV Virus? Yes. It is found in people suffering form AIDS.”
Even I, the most unscientific person I know, know that is not true. It’s the anti-bodies that are found, not the virus itself, right?
Will, you have so convinced me in this argument, what with your rabidly unrestrained ranting and hurling of abuse, that I will be first in line when House of Numbers reaches these shores. You and others on here have done your cause no good whatsoever, and although I still sit on the fence my curious is now piqued to investigate the opposing viewpoint. Well done lads!
Dr. Rasnick:
AIDS is not contagious. For example, not even one healthcare worker has been documented in the scientific literature to have contracted AIDS from over 800,000 AIDS patients in the USA and Europe. The CDC reports in a footnote in the latest HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report year end edition (1998) that there has been a total of 25 healthcare workers in the USA who have contracted AIDS on the job over the 18 years of AIDS. However, this claim is not referenced as to where the CDC got this information or what other risk factors those 25 individuals may have had.
from; http://www.healtoronto.com/durban/koch.html
and here is Dr Rasnick’s own website: http://www.davidrasnick.com/David_Rasnick/Home.html
“The reason I said that was because I’m fed up with so called scientists referring to us laypersons and seekers of the truth as being stupid because we don’t have scientific background”
But you accept that a computer works without understanding it. Or a TV. Or a aeroplane. These are all based on science and engineering principles, and entirely on the same mathematical concepts. Yet you trust these? Clearly you do, you’re here on the internet. How do you make a judgement?
“Even I, the most unscientific person I know, know that is not true. It’s the anti-bodies that are found, not the virus itself, right?”
Wrong. Genetic markers, or polymerase chain testing, can identify retrovirus core RNA in the T-Lymphocytes. A scanning electron microscope can actually see the HIV virus. A search on Wikipedia will even show you the photo, you don’t actually have to look that far for proof, but you do have to open your eyes.
“You and others on here have done your cause no good whatsoever, and although I still sit on the fence my curious is now piqued to investigate the opposing viewpoint.”
Then you will be a small minority, and if infected because of your ignorance, you will die. Survival of the fittest is usually survival of the smartest, in this case at least.
“Have a look at a personal story”
One case does not prove the whole, this thinking is a fallacy. I do not need to say any more. The OVERWHELMING evidence that HIV causes AIDS speaks for itself to those who take the time to understand it.
“AIDS is not contagious”
Why do you keep saying this? WE. KNOW. Can’t you see the difference between AIDS and HIV? The difference between symptoms and a virus? Cause and effect? No? Its quite a simple concept, but you keep missing the point. Over and over again. And you seem offended that I call you an idiot? I simply am making a valid observation.
AIDS is not contagious, as AIDS is a condition that progressively reduces the effectiveness of the immune system and leaves individuals susceptible to opportunistic infections and tumours.
HIV on the other hand is lentivirus that causes AIDS, leading to life-threatening opportunistic infections.
Virus’s are infectious, symptoms are not. Incredibly simplified here, but I doubt you’ll get it. You only hear what you want to hear.
Look, at the end of the day, if you have HIV, I’m sorry. Really I am. But that doesn’t forgive stupidity, or forgive ignorance. If you chose to think you have the option to “believe”, and ultimately reject, the science that might prolong your life, then by all means, do so. Go an die. It will stop you inflicting lies on others and killing them too.
If it was me, I wouldn’t be so closed minded, I’d want to live, but hey, that’s what 8 years of University gave me:- an advanced understanding of science and a sharper mind.
So far, you given no proof of anything you said.
You cannot, or chose not to, argue against the staggering and overwhelming proof available that HIV causes AIDS (websites and idiot homophobic ex-cops bloggers don’t count)
And yet you still don’t answer the question put to you: you clearly show a desperate need to believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. Why?
@ Will
I would never leave my health or well-being relying on you, or anyone just like you. Someone whose methods are just fear attacks. That’s what the HIV campaign is all about. FEAR. And that’s all you’ve just thrown at me, without even knowing whether I am positive or not, FEAR.
I’m telling you, I’m soooooo sure I’ll be walking on this planet far longer than you, my dear. And very healthy, too. I have NOT A SINGLE WRINKLE, and my ass is pretty dam tight without going to any gym, love !!
I won’t bother to ask you what’s yours like … grrrr
1. No reliable tests
2. Unknown process by which HIV actually kills T Cells
3. As you posted in several articles earlier, NOT EVERYONE SUFFERING FROM AIDS HAS HIV, therefore it is impossible to fulfill Kock’s postulates.
4. HIV produces multiple errors in its genetic material, making endless different kinds of strains any given day – therefore different proteins – yet the ARVs and Tests are said to be highly SPECIFIC. How come they are able to attack, or detect the virus at all? Do they change meds and tests every single day, too, in order to be able to combat them and detect them? I don’t think so …
5. Extremely toxic medication …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQoNW7lOnT4
What an homophobe I am by saying GIVE PROPER NUTRITION, CLEAN WATER AND TREAT EXISTING DISEASES TO PEOPLE ! And maybe we gay guys could stop constantly taking drugs for both recreational and sexual activities!! Such an evil thing to say !!
LOVE TO EVERY ONE.
Even you guys.
“I’m telling you, I’m soooooo sure I’ll be walking on this planet far longer than you, my dear. And very healthy, too. I have NOT A SINGLE WRINKLE, and my ass is pretty dam tight without going to any gym, love !!”
Protesting way too much. Clearly you are not as healthy as you think, its a delusion, like the rest of your lunatic assertions on HIV/AIDS. Poor you. And if you have HIV (which I strongly suspect you do), I assure you, without the medication, I’ll be here long after your painful death, “love”.
“And maybe we gay guys could stop constantly taking drugs for both recreational and sexual activities!!”
Ah, yes, here we get to it. The homophobic statement. You have exhumed the oldest and most stigmatizing lie about HIV disease: that gay men and other people get it not from an infectious pathogen but because they lead immoral, irresponsible lives.
Utter rubbish. Laughable, in fact. But the homophobia of your statement is just tragic.
Of course there is reliable tests, can’t yu read? Testing involves detecting anti-HIV antibody and the HIV p24 antigens. Its proven and reliable. I will not cover the other rubbish you state, I have already proven them a fallacy and lies. Lying, after all, is the recourse of a weak mind.
I hope the “vitamins and clean water” help the Pneumocystis Pneumonia and the Kaposi’s Sarcoma! Let us know how that goes for you… if you are healthy enough to use a keyboard, that is.
You wished I was HIV+ve.
I know what I’m talking about when I say we gays should stop taking these huge amounts of roxic substances, meaning re recreational and sexual ones now. If you do, too, then you’re being extremely unethical by suggesting we can keep on going in this track.
I promote healthy living, while you approve drug taking.
Keep harassing and seeding fear, that’s what you do best, of course. But go elsewhere, because I’m quite out your league for that, darling.
Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all. P24 is a vital conserved molecule made by our cells and used in the construction of our essential vesicles …. It’s just not everyone creates antibodies to their own bodies proteins.
http://www.pnas.org/content/97/8/3783.full
“I promote healthy living, while you approve drug taking.”
Your lying makes you sound pathetic, and a little disturbed to be honest.
I have proven my case, you have proven to be an idiotic liar.
No need to address it again, Charles, eh?
“Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all.”
LOL! So? Do you even know what you’re saying here???? This is laughable! Proves nothing other than you are a desperate moron grasping at straws, and with zero understanding of testing.
Please. I’m not even going to address this, this is preceless. You’re an idiot.
Of course …
At last you’re shut !! It’s taken 215 comments ! gosh !
Will, well done you, for throwing these mental cripples against the wall time and again, though the zombies simply won’t die, but keep getting back to repeat their utter nonsense.
I have read only the dozen or so posts following my last and just couldn’t be bothered to keep reading more of their utter crazed nonsense.
Time and again they claim HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. How does it cause AIDS, they ask! No one knows they say!
They are unbelievable.
Listen gay-hating kiddies, I will try to put it really simply for you. It’s the explanation that the rest of the world understands and you don’t.
Your immune system has different kinds of cells that work together to fight infections. CD4 T-cells are one kind of immune cell. They are like little “factories” that make things that your body needs to fight germs and infections. These cells are found in your blood, lymph nodes, and other places in your body.
After HIV enters the body, it uses the CD4 T-cells to make more copies of itself. When this happens, the CD4 T-cells that have been taken over by HIV no longer help your body fight infections, and instead produce more HIV.
At first, the body is able to make enough CD4 T-cells to keep up with those lost due to HIV. Over time, as the virus copies itself over and over, there are fewer and fewer CD4 T-cells. Eventually, your immune system is weakened and your body is less able to fight germs. That when you start getting “opportunistic infections”. Lots of these different opportunistic infections all happening at the same time is what used to be known as “full-blown AIDS”.
We don’t have “full-blown AIDS” anymore here in the West because people now receive medications which counter the activity of HIV. But people who deny that the medications are effective at countering HIV and therefore refuse to take them, DO still develop “full-blown AIDS”.
don’t want to change the subject back to climate change, but evidence the earth is cooling at the moment does not conflict with climate change!!!!!!!!
climate change works like this: (climate change for dummies!)if you keep pumping out noxious gases and if you keep reducing earth’s green lungs, then without any doubt at all you’re gonna screw up the atmosphere …………………. and if you screw up the atmosphere you screw up climate.
what i keep noticing is the number of opinionated people with there noses stuck in the air who just aren’t up to holding all of the data in their poor little heads at once – nobody can do it perfectly but some people are just soooooooooooo pathetic at it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry if you suffer from a disability)
“Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all.”
Will, this is AIDS Denialist Canard/Argumentoid number 079 on my AIDS Denialist Bingo list. See:
http://snoutworld.blogspot.com/2009/03/aids-denialist-bingo.html
I actually observed the birth of this one. It originates with a half-witted English “journalist” called Janine Roberts, who thinks that the HIV-1 core protein p24 and the golgi transport protein p24 must be the same thing because they’re both referred to as “p24″. I even wrote to her and explained that the designation “p24″ simply means “a protein of roughly 24 kiloDaltons”. But it’s too late – the meme has infected the internet, and is endlessly reproduced on threads like this one.
“who thinks that the HIV-1 core protein p24 and the golgi transport protein p24 must be the same thing because they’re both referred to as “p24″.”
Precisely Snout… and our learned friend Charles made the same ignorant mistake. And all this time I was “debating” not with a lunatic, but an idiot lunatic. And to flaunts that gross stupidity like some revelation like some kind of revelation, is cringe worthy!
Great blog by the way, Snout!
“Time and again they claim HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. How does it cause AIDS, they ask! No one knows they say!”
Yeah, Eddy, I think you were right about this Charles, something fairly broken in that man’s mind…. more and more I remember your post on schizophrenia, and how you might have hit the nail on the head, with this one at least. What I love is the staggering stupidity and lack of understanding lauded about like something to be proud of:- “AIDS isn’t contagious”, “Oh ! It looks like EVERY MAMMAL has the p24 after all”… I’d just be too embarrassed to show publicly that I was that uneducated. But no, these ones seem proud of it. How utterly embarrassing.
Thanksfully these foolish denialist will never be more than few fringe lunatics…. and as I already said, survival of the fittest is usually survival of the smartest, in this case at least. But I will say, this whole chat has been an eye opener…. its a lesson that some people are truly lacking in something. Brains, I’d say.
Simple observation: I’ll warrant no one here KNOWS ANYONE, OR EVEN KNOWS OF SOMEONE WHO KNOWS SOMEONE,who has developed FULLY BLOWN AIDS other than those in high risk groups OR recieving treatment???
Anyhow you do the figures: (28 years and 10 year incubation period) we should be tripping over fullyblown AIDS victims!!!
The WHO has already admitted “the threat of a heteresexual epidemic is over”.
If it remains in same high risk groups, how is it contagious?
Bob the layman’s hypothesis on what is HIV. It’s a BACK UP JOB
For immidiate peer review.
Seeing as how the only scientist to have actually isolated HIV is Peter Duesberg (as I
think we’ve agreed)? Would it therefore not be fair and logical to assume he’s right when he say’s that HIV is a harmless passenger virus that sits compatibly in about 1 in every 1000 to 2000 T-Cells and that it changes itself from DNA into a “more readable” RNA once every 24 to 48 hours?
And seeing as how, accolades apart,(too many to go through all again) Peter Duesberg has spent at least twenty years of his life going to work each day studying retroviruses?
And there’s no evidence he’s a lunatic or anything else other than a man of outstanding moral integrity (judge for yourselve’s GoogleVideo etc)?
That being so it’s obvious…HIV is mother natures way of doing a back up job; A blueprint in case another virus comes along? It’s an antibody right?
I’m sure if I can do a simple back up job on my PC then mother nature knows how to do one and, btw, has been doing so for a few billion years!
Anyone see anything wrong with my logic or reasoning? Comments,critiques and insults welcome:)
See Duesberg here:http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/aids.htm
It’s in the article: AIDS and HIV: Lies, Cover-up, Deception, Profits and Genocide
“If it remains in same high risk groups, how is it contagious?”
How is what contagious? AIDS? Are you retarded, or something? Seriously, its embarrassing you keep saying this. Even a stupid person can grasp the basic differences between symptoms and virus.
“HIV is mother natures way of doing a back up job; A blueprint in case another virus comes along? It’s an antibody right?”
What on earth are you talking about here? Mother nature? A “backup job”???? Evolution isn’t a computer disk, Bob. You sound like you should be seeking professional help Bob, seriously, surely you realise these are to normal things to be saying in public?
“Bob the layman’s hypothesis on what is HIV. It’s a BACK UP JOB”
What is it (what ever “it” is) “backing up” exactly, Bob? Please, enlighten me, this should be a right giggle.
“Anyone see anything wrong with my logic or reasoning?”
What’s wrong with your logic, is that there is NO logic to it. Its just a jumble of words and nonsensical statements. What freak website did you cut and paste this garbage from, not that “ex-cop” bigot Clarke again?
Eddy, Snout, is this the best that these denialist can come up with? A backup job????? Is this all they are, a few lunatics who can’t even construct the most basic argument or demonstrate a simple understanding between AIDS and HIV? Its truly astounding the level of ignorance and lack of even the most rudimentary education these people have….
Example of FRAUD: The NIAID factsheet that Will offered as his “undeniable proof”
Page 1
A rebuttal to the NIAID/NIH document“The Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS”
Science is normally advanced through publicationsthat are:
are signed by its authors;
include a comprehensive list of citations;
include contact information for at least one author;
are modifiable only through additional publications (includ-ing errata);
are open to rebuttal through published letters in the samejournal;
are peer reviewed rely largely upon other peer-reviewed literature to back up their assumptions
Wills undeniable evidence is riddled with fraud; notice how he doesn’t address it…But resorts to kindergarten level in an attemp to deflect?
…you accept that a computer works without understanding it…Will of course I accept the pc works that’s because I CAN SEE WITH MY OWN EYES THAT IT WORKS
“I CAN SEE WITH MY OWN EYES THAT IT WORKS”
But you don’t understand it, do you? Curious. You don’t understand the rudimentary basics of virus propagation, yet you feel education enough to call proven science a ‘fraud’.
Lunacy? Perhaps.
Stupidity? Definitely.
“Wills undeniable evidence is riddled with fraud; notice how he doesn’t address it”
I addressed it plenty. If you’re retarded in some way, I’m sorry, but that’s not my fault. I gave you scientific papers, assuming you had half a brain, but you failed even that task. And what did you give me?
You give me a “backup job” theory????
A homophobic fool of a many who claims to be an “investigator” on a random blog????
LOL! Something. Wrong. With. Your. Mind.
It works like this: virus comes along then immune system develops antibody.
Antibody fights off virus.
Antibody no longer needed but makes a simple back up job of itself in case virus ever returns. You see? It’s simple.
But then you are not a scientist are you Will?
All you have been doing is avoiding,deflecting and showing your ignorance with childish name calling.
Classic symptoms of denial!
Outside of HIV testing and treatment, doe’s anyone know of anyone or even know of anyone who knows anyone who has gone down with fully blown AIDS?
Because after 28 years and a 10 year incubation period we should all personally know someone?
My HIV back up theory is as solid as anything else.
One thing for sure and that is HIV ain’t the causitive agent of FULLY BLOWN AIDS
There are 5 main reasons for immune system failure.
Half of them you get from the clinic…physchological stress, trauma,and the medication.
Others being drugs and malnutrition.
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens.
“All you have been doing is avoiding,deflecting and showing your ignorance with childish name calling.”
No, I say what I see. You have shown yourself to be quite stupid. You confuse symptoms of a virus with the pathogen itself. Classic failure in understanding, but what compounds this is your refusal to educate yourself in even the most basic concepts of biology.
A stupid person is made stupid, not by lack of intelligence, but by a refusal to learn.
I am merely stating a fact. You the one who chose not to produce any evidence, other than stupid theories about “backup”. HIV was mother natures backup plan? Yes, indeed. How scientific of you to say so. I do notice how you can’t elaborate on that.
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here, you seem to be (1) in need of an education (2) enjoy being embarrassed as a fool in public.
In HIV, viral RNA has a protein called reverse transcriptase that is crucial for viral replication inside T-cells. T-cells are white blood cells that help coordinate activities of the immune system. Once inside the cell, the capsid dissolves, liberating the viral RNA and the reverse transcriptase, transforming DNA into RNA, and sending it out of the nucleus. Because it hijacks the “coordinator” T cells that help keep the immune system working, HIV is particularly devastating to immune health. In the process of replication, the virus destroys increasing numbers of T cells. The coordinator cells of an important part of the immune system are annihilated, leaving the body open to opportunistic infections. i.e. The symptoms we recognise collectively as AIDS.
This is proven. And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science, and propose infantile “backup” theories.
This is what 8 years of a university, and two science degrees, gets you these days Bob:- a REAL education. Hence I am perfectly qualified to read the evidence and understand it, and to prove you the idiot you are so proud of being.
(Although, secretly, you make me laugh, I find stupid people and their desperate attempts to understand the world around them very amusing)
Now, please, enlighten me as to your need to believe denialist claims, are you HIV+? Are you desperate to believe in unproven theories to make you think you will survive. Go on, enlighten me.
“Outside of HIV testing and treatment, doe’s anyone know of anyone or even know of anyone who knows anyone who has gone down with fully blown AIDS?”
Yes, I do. Ergo, you’re wrong. My god, man, you demonstrate your stupidity over and over again…. don”t you get tired of being shown up as an idiot?
“One thing for sure and that is HIV ain’t the causitive agent of FULLY BLOWN AIDS”
This is your belief, not a proof, so wrong again. Sorry.
“My HIV back up theory is as solid as anything else.”
LOL! Yeah, right. You’re theory is garbage, there’s more proof of the tooth fairy! Get real, you moron! LOL!
Who do you believe?
Peter Duesberg,untold awards and scientific achievments,man of outstanding courage and moral integrity,lifetime’s experience working in the field,even Gallo said he knows more about retroviruses than any man alive…..Or these clowns?
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science…
…This is what 8 years of a university, and two science degrees, gets you…
YOUR HEAD STUCK UP YOUR ARSE with your own arrogance
What clowns? The entire scientific community? No, I don’t “believe” them, I understand their research. Do you?
Oh, and Duesberg, is your sole argument? The man who’s sole claim that HIV is not the basis for AIDS was that it didn’t meed Koch’s 1st Postulate, and then in the end had to admit he was wrong, and that it does? Yeah, great example of ONE paranoid schizophrenic to prove your non-point there, Bob! You’re a joke, man. A living, walking, talking joke.
Besides, Duesberg’s HIV/AIDS claims are rejected as disproven and incorrect by the scientific community.
Note the word, “disproven”. Ego he’s a lair. And someone who believes a liar, Bob? Why, a fool, of course!
Now, please, enlighten me as to your need to believe denialist claims, are you HIV+? Are you desperate to believe in unproven theories to make you think you will survive?
Or are you incapable of answering those questions too?
“YOUR HEAD STUCK UP YOUR ARSE with your own arrogance”
Sigh. The reaction of the confused and the angry. Poor Bob, didn’t go to school and now he’s upset that I coudl affortd to do.
Don’t worry Bob, with your stupid theories on life and lack of any education, you wont have to worry about AIDS, you’ll be knocked down by a car or electrocuted from washing your face with a toaster long before then.
Please, enlighten me as to your need to believe denialist claims, are you HIV+? Are you desperate to believe in unproven theories to make you think you will survive?
What’s wrong Bob, can’t answer that one? Too much truth to focus your dull mind on, eh?
I went to watch House Of Numbers at the Cambridge film festival with a few guys from Heal London. And we met with Brent Leung after the film for coffee, and a long chat. In my opinion, having met him personally, he’s a genuine guy just trying to bring this debate to the public attention. The film is, neither dangerous nor a fraud, and nothing in the film can be taken out of context, as some of the first comments suggest.
Every man, woman and teenager has the RIGHT to see this film and come to their OWN conclusions. It’s a FACT that, there is a debate going on, and has been going on for, as long as HIV its self, and people who say, there is no debate, are simply foolish because, if there was no debate, we wouldn’t be leaving comments.
Now, I’ve been so called HIV+ for nearly 21yrs. Was diagnosed in 89 and told back then, nothing will happen for 7yrs, how did they know that then?? I went 6yrs without 3 monthly check ups, so was lucky not to be an AZT victim, until the day in 97 when I was told. “if I don’t take the medication, I will be dead in 12 months” I wasn’t ill with any AIDS defining illness, but was really depressed and fearful for my life, as it was the 7th year coming up when the doctor said “nothing will happen for 7yrs”. My CD4 count then was apparently 54. I took the first lot of medication, and it made me so violently ill, I thought I was dying and they gave me shingles, so the doctor said “stop the drugs immediately as the drugs aren’t working” I was put on another therapy, which my body tolerated for 10yrs, but could only eat one meal a day and that was a struggle. After 10yrs on drugs, they started to give me liver damage. In August 2007 I stopped the medications, and I now have a healthy liver and no other organ problems ie heart problems nor kidney problems and I look healthy again.
I would like a so called expert scientist to explain, why aren’t I dead or getting all these opportunistic infections and i’ve been off the meds for 2yrs 5 months and my last CD4 count back in March 2009 was apparently only 40. So, in a year and a half, my CD4 count went from 550 to 40, so I must now have a 0 CD4 count???
How is the virus replicating if I have no CD4 cells???
How can it be that, when I had some normal blood test done at my normal doctors, they came back giving me a clean bill of health and all my white blood cells were good???
Am I a denialist or in denial, because Im living a happy life with out HIV drugs?? Am I a medical miracle?? Is my mates brother from the same town as me a medical miracle because he took AZT for one week 20yrs ago and has never taken meds again and is alive and well to this day???
Sorry, Daz, your appearance to back up this moron Bob, than that lunatic Charles is just way to convenient for my liking. I think you’re a fabrication, and other alter ego to make spurious claims about HIV.
I don’t believe in Miracle cures, and I don’t believe in timely coincidences.
Show me scientific proof, not a fabricated sob story. I only deal in facts.
Well, Will, I can prove, based on the mainstream orthodox view, that I am for a FACT, so called HIV+. All you have to do, is to accompany me to either my doctors, my local gum clinic or at the Kobler clinic at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital. Will you take my offer up?? so I can show you my medical records. At the moment, you think! my story is all fabrication, and you say, you want Facts. So, let me show you the Facts.
People have nothing to gain by saying, HIV is not the cause of AIDS, but have everything to loose. People who attack, like a dog that is cornered, in my view, have something serious to hide and defend. MY story is true, so I don’t need to be offensive nor defensive, because I can prove it. The question is, will you let me prove it?
For over 30 years I have been and on and off IV drug user.In those 30 years I shared a lot of needles. I could stop for a while but always I would return. The fear of an HIV test haunted me. I now know it was more the fear of the stigma. Being stigmatized until I die a slow horrible wasting death…I would rather stay on the gear.
Then a few years ago I discovered Peter Duesberg. It took a while, studying virusmyth.com and cross referencing etc…And I found that when I went to the drug clinic to tell them about Peter Duesberg they were all in denial and wouldn’t even look at any of his work or of his peers.And just like an alcoholic who screams and shouts how pissed he ain’t, I found the same attitude from the so called counsellors every time I put any questions to them. Either that or they would just walk away and ignore me. So I thought I would have a test as I was bound to be positive what with all the needles I shared plus the fact that I had had a lot of sex with a another IV user who was also a prostitute, unprotected and oral (and I thoroughly enjoyed it btw) and then when they found me positive I would be in a stronger position to challenge them.
Unfortunately I was tested NEGATIVE.
Ever since then I haven’t used and I live a full and productive life. I take responsibilty for my own health, eat nutritously, work out and I’m discovering what a truly wonderful person I am.
I think it’s fair to say that I owe my life to Peter Duesberg.
Anyone got a problem with that?
“So, let me show you the Facts.”
You’re not showing me any facts, you’re telling em a story. Your story is no more proof of your this denialist “theory” than Harry Potter is proof of witchcraft. Sorry, but try science next time.
All I see here is two people trying the “appeal to emotion” argument in lieu of logic, proof, and evidence. And it’s pathetic.
Bob, I had an idea you were HIV+. You keep your denial and self delusion. It was what I suspected about you all along. Now your nonsense makes sense, you are no different from the brain washed “born again” Christian, the “found-Jesus” recovered alcoholic, or the deluded “ex-gay”.
For every so called “miracle” denial story, I can provide you with literally hundreds of thousands of PROVEN cases where HIV, left untreated, let to an awful death from AIDS related illness.
And very few of these people who dies had “drug fuelled gay party lifestyles”. The very suggestion of that cheapens their lives and demeans you as people to nothing more then cockroaches for even suggesting that.
This is the reality.
Not your silly self delusional stories. If you’re “cured” good for you. That’s is not the reality for millions who are dying
You people sicken me. You truly do. As you sicken many decent people. Not only are you happy to accept your own self deluded lies, you need to perpetuate them to others as so to validate yourself and your own foolish choices/beliefs.
Great story Bob. I hope House of Numbers comes to the UK! My interest now in the alternative view is really piqued! How ironic that in denying you your opinions to which you are as entitled to as anyone else that Will, Eddy et al become that which they are ranting and foaming at the mouth about!!!!
Rob, nice little emotional heart plucking, but don’t insult my intelligence by making out that you are “on the fence” here with an “open mind”… you’re already a denialist, you are a supporter of this nonsense, you’re just pretending to be a clever about it. Notice I say pretending.
Your belief in a choice here, given the overwhelming evidence that HIV causes AIDS, and the ZERO evidence that it doesn’t, is actually like training you have a choice in believing the earth is flat or it isn’t.
In short, its stupidity and ignorance. And I abhor stupidity and ignorance.
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
Wow. If only your scientific understanding of HIV was nearly as good as your cut and pasting skills, you’d have half a brain, and probably avoid a tragic death.
Nice try. But it doesn’t remove the fact you have no evidence of your statements, and all you can muster is a lame ass’ed defence based on insults and emotional dribble.
And still no proof! Even after all this time, you can’t muster one shred of scientifically verifiable proof of your statements. LOL, well done!!!! How pathetic. And predictable.
Maybe you should “stay on the gear” as you put it, you were probably more based in reality then, than you are now.
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
and I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
“And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL”
What a delightfully witty line. No, well done. Well done indeed. very impressive, isn’t lads? Did you make that up yourself?
I find insults to my obviously superior intellect from worn out ex-trade junkies not very impacting, for obvious reasons. Nice try though.
If this is all you can muster as proof of your idiotic theories, then by all means go ahead, demean yourself in public. It only shows you for what you are – worn out gutter trash – and proves me right.
Brava!
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
Still we agree one thing…Fully blown AIDS isn’t infectious is it will?
“Still we agree one thing…Fully blown AIDS isn’t infectious is it will?”
How stupid are you? Its staggering.
Please. Enlighten me. Answer this:
- Who exactly is saying AIDS is contagious?
But you probably can’t answer that either… sounds like the methadone is affecting the learning and reasoning centre of your pre-frontal cortex.
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Ah, what’s wrong Bob, can’t answer the question? I kept it simple, but that wasn’t enough, was it? Too hard for you. I’m sorry.
Probably too long on the “gear” and the “game” were you? Affected your tiny mind?
What a joke you are ! LOL!
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
Yawn.
How boring.
Find your needle yet?
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
love the “coudl affortd” bit LOL
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
love the “coudl affortd” bit LOL
Tell the truth will how much did you pay for your degree? LOL
You mean you are finally bored looking at your own arrogance? Good well piss off then LOL
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
And the sad thing is, if will is a typical member of the scientific community that means all the scientific community has it’s head up it’s arse LOL
And he can’t even see his own arrogance LMAO
Think it’s fair with this level of discourse anything wills say’s has no real validity. I note even snout is too embarrassed to come back LOL
love the “coudl affortd” bit LOL
Tell the truth will how much did you pay for your degree? LOL
Will says “IQ higher than that of a banana!”
Hey will i’ve found a beetroot that says she wants to meet you LOL
I’m beginning to see now your comments are just lunatic scribbles.
You’re clearly suffering from some illness. I do apologise, Bob, and sorry for your loss.
I can’t believe how offensive eveyone is being!
It completely invalidates your argument when all you can do is personally attack your opponent.
Can’t you just accept that people believe different things?
Its better that information from both sides of the argument is in the public domain so people can make their ‘own’ minds up.
Almost all the information we receive (about everything) is from third parties (mainly the press) and we just accept it without question even though we ourselves, do not have any proof of its truth.
I think it is better for people to have to process all of the information and to think for themselves. Generally the truth will prevail.
But these childish ‘digs’ at each other will only be detrimental to everyones health!
“do not have any proof of its truth.”
Okay, I’m going to assume Nat you not ANOTHER person who thinks the scientific proof is lacking, and that there is a valid reason to have a “choice” between overwhelming independent scientific evidence and, well, none.
But lies cannot never be tolerated as proof of anything, otherwise we get no where. Its akin to bringing us back to the dark ages where superstition ruled over reason. So far, as zero proof was offered, and misinformation were put where reason should be, so then there is no “choice” of sides to pick from.
These people have something wrong with them, as seen by Bob’s somewhat deranged responses. And Charles, another one that is just baffling. If someone advocated stupidity, then they must accept the label that goes with that, and I will not apologise for that.
This isn’t a debate, its s slaughtering of a few lunatics with reason.
I have already tried to reason with these people, and that failed. So apologies if I chose not to be ridiculed for MY education by some deluded ex-trade ex-junkie…. what’s next, the guy begging at the bus-stop debating on socio-economics factors that cause recessions?
Bob say’s “unhindered as I am by a formal medical education”
Will says:
Allow me to demonstrate my superior scientific knowledge here…
And its not up for debate by people like you who know nothing about science …
Actually, I am a scientist. Hence my obvious better understanding of pathogens…
staggering stupidity …
half-witted English “journalist”…
desperate moron…
idiotic liar…
a fool such as yourself…
your stupidity…
are a buffoon…
insults and emotional dribble…
worn out gutter trash …
And I’m supposed to be jealous because he “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
POINT MADE
And we’re off again….
You have no point to make, so now you’re just having a hissy fit tantrum. Give it a rest Bob, seriously, its embarrassing.
Will says: “MY education…example of wills education: “coudl affortd”to go to school.LOL
Sorry Nat but I think will is being paid to disrupt this blog and disrupt any attempt at sensible dialogue. But I shall try again.
What evidence do you have will, that Peter Duesberg is anything other than a man of outstanding professional and moral integrity? Why should we believe you rather than him?
Now that’s fairly straightforward.
Oh, hit a rare moment of lucidity, have we?
When you answer my questions, I’ll be sure to answer yours.
You seem more obsessed with the person and his “mmoral integrity”, rather then the proof.
What the hell has “moral integrity” got to do with scientific proof???? Either his theories are proven scientifically or they’re not. “Now that’s fairly straightforward” given he and his theories has been disproven many times. He’s even admitted being wrong himself.
Perhaps less idolatry of Mr. Duesberg, and more dealing in fact.
You mean you can’t will say’s… When you answer my questions, I’ll be sure to answer yours…You can’t!!!
will say’s…What the hell has “moral integrity” got to do with scientific proof???…You wouldn’t understand.
Tell me Nat, do you know or have you heard of anyone (apart from the press) I mean personally, like a friend, relative or someone in your neighbourhood, outside of testing and treatment, who’s gone down with fully blown aids? Because I’m not a mathmetician but I say that however you do the figures, 28 years of an incurable, undetectable contagious virus with a long incubation period? You should know plenty?
How long has it been since anyone but Will has kept an eye on Jess Geen’s superb article?
Here is a direct quote:
“But HIV charities and health experts have told PinkNews.co.uk it misrepresents the scientists featured and the ideas promoted perpetrate medical “myths”.
And that is part of the reason that “House of Numbers” is considered to be a dangerous and misleading film. It is a dangerous and misleading film, and it will always be a dangerous and misleading film…like a balloon tied to a housebrick. A no-go! Nyet!
As far as I’m concerned, denialists can blow it out their ear.
Denialists are just wasting people’s time to get free publicity for the film, but they haven’t noticed that nobody is listening to them let alone believing them; in fact everyone has lost interest in reading about this denialist business.
Speaking of business, is it possible that those on this thread who are denialists have invested some money in this film?
Denialists are clearly mistaken, and denialists could be applying their intelligence to much better use.
Tell me Jean-Paul Bentham, do you know or have you heard of anyone (apart from the press) I mean personally, like a friend, relative or someone in your neighbourhood, outside of testing and treatment, who’s gone down with fully blown aids? Because I’m not a mathmetician but I say that however you do the figures, 28 years of an incurable, undetectable contagious virus with a long incubation period? You should know plenty?
First they use fear, picking on vulnerable minorities of society, especially those they can shame. When that wears off a bit and we ask questions they’ll make it out that we are a crappy piece of lowlife and we should be grateful for these expensive meds they want to give us. And off course they’ll use science but us mere crappy mortals wouldn’t understand because it’s obviously above our intellectual head,(sound familiar)
When we take away the fear and start asking the questions, from any starting point,we soon start to see that the emperor has no clothes.Be it virology,immunology,epidemiology,toxicology,AZT poisoning,AIDS in Africa,it’s all rotten same as that NIAID factsheet which is touted as the definitive evidence, all I say is see for yourselves.
and why should we believe you instead of Peter Duesberg
The Royal College of Nursing said in 1985 that there would be a million Aids cases in Britain by 1990. It’s 2009 and I still haven’t heard of anyone getting aids outside of treatment
seems to me that the best way to avoid aids is to avoid getting tested
“Tell me Jean-Paul Bentham, do you know or have you heard of anyone (apart from the press) I mean personally, like a friend, relative or someone in your neighbourhood, outside of testing and treatment, who’s gone down with fully blown aids”
Yes, I have one friend who dies of AIDS, back in 1998. That’s the “full blown” type you seem obsessed with. He didn’t take any anti-viral drugs. He never smoked, or had a “wild drug fuelled lifestyle”. His death was awful to watch. And you denial is an affront to his death and an insult to his life.
“and why should we believe you instead of Peter Duesberg”
No ones asking you to believe us, go do your own research. But you need an open mind to understand. A closed mind is cannot learn. The reason why you don’t understand it is because you refuse to accept the evidence, even when it is in front of you. You are so obsessed with Peter Duesberg you can’t fault him, like a religion. Of course, an education would help too.
“It’s 2009 and I still haven’t heard of anyone getting aids outside of treatment”
Have you seen the news on Africa recently? They’re not getting any treatment, and millions have AIDS…. yeah, the “full blown” type.
Open your eyes. You denial is lies and it costs lives. Possibly even your own.
“incurable, undetectable contagious virus with a long incubation period”
Oh, and this is the most ridiculous statement you have come up with yet.
Incurable? So is cancer.
Undetectable? It IS detectable. There are even electron microscope photos of the bloody thing. Talk about head in the sand. What, the photo is lying???? How utterly stupid.
Contagious virus with a long incubation period? Yeah, so does variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. As long as thirty years incubation period. So?
And so you base your theory on this????????
Look this is pointless, you’re mentally damaged in some way. There is no other explanation. The refusal to see evidence under your nose, the refusal to accept anything that anyone else says other then this one man with so called “moral integrity”, and what he said is treated like he is god himself!
You’re a one man farce, with schizophrenic paranoia and worship issues.
I pity you. Honestly, I do.
Will, I don’t think you are a scientist, and your probably younger than HIV. Your comments are filled with lies and hate, all you can do is attack people, like a dog trapped into a corner. like I said, meet me, so I can show you my medical records. My blood and viral load tests results are based on the scientific evidence, and based on the science, with a CD4 count of 40 and a viral load in the 1000′s back in march 2009, which dropped from a CD4 count of 550 in just 18 months, I should be coming down with all kinds of infections, I should be weak, unhealthy looking, and laid up in a AIDS ward in hospital, but as you should know, we don’t have any AIDS wards in our hospitals. So for you to say, “you know millions of people who have come to full blown AIDS” so show me the AIDS wards in this country. I’m not going to lower myself by using insulting words, which I enjoyed using in the play grounds of my schools.
You say! you are a scientist, so you must of read a lot of Albert Einstein’s work and quotes. didn’t he say, “the most important thing in science, is to never Stop Questioning” So at what point in your 8yrs of scientific studying, did you Stop Questioning???
Did your lecturers attack you for asking Questions?? and did they teach you that, you have to Attack people who disagree with you??
So, Will, will you meet me, to prove to you, my scientifically based CD4 count and viral load tests??
“Your comments are filled with lies and hate, all you can do is attack people”
Find the lies then.
And yes, I hate blind stupidity. Sorry, but its offensive to progress.
“Will, I don’t think you are a scientist, and your probably younger than HIV”
Couldn’t care less. I know my academic education, and that’s all that matters. As for my age, that’s irrelevant. Like saying you have to be over 100 years old to understand the light bulb. Stupid suggestion.
“the most important thing in science, is to never Stop Questioning”
Why do you people like you, desperate to prove something proven as false, seek to twist words? Is it desperation? I have seen the evidence. HIV is almost certainly (see my comment on statistically probability to under stand this) the cause of AIDS. All denialist theories have been PROVEN false and wrong. The real question is why you ignore the evidence? I have seen your claims, and they are nothing but aspirational beliefs. Yet, you still cling to them. Is this a neurosis? A desperation aching to a religious need?
No AIDS wards? LOL! Yeah. What about San Francisco General Hospital’s Ward 86. That’s an AIDS ward.
Daz, your comments are noting but fabrications. All through this thread people have been asking for ONE SCIENTIFIC PIECE OF PROOF that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. What have we seen? Lunatic ramblings about a god like figure with “moral integrity”, lies, half truths, misunderstanding about science, stupid statements that your cannot backup or answer questions on, insults and character assignations by way of “evidence”.
You, like Bob, are a joke. Which is why the entire scientific community laughs are your claims. Which is why I pity you lot. You’re desperate for hope, any hope, no matter how false it is:- I suggest you turn to religion for that, but don’t insult my superior knowledge in the field. I have clearly run circles around your so called arguments. And I will not apologise for that, or your stupidity.
I tire of this. You people are little more then fringe lunatics desperate for salvation, and as such I will no longer address any of you in a civilised format until you have scientific proof of any statements.
So if I’ve got fairies in my garden,you can disprove me? If so where is your scientific evidence?
N1 Daz like the bit about Einstein, he reminds me of Peter Duesberg. Got one for you…Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear. Mohandas Gandhi
See you later take care
“he reminds me of Peter Duesberg.”
Obsessed or what! Dear oh dear. I’d say you see this muppet in your tea leaves….
Ever hear of the concept of the cult of personality?
“But HIV charities and health experts have told PinkNews.co.uk it misrepresents the scientists featured and the ideas promoted perpetrate medical “myths”.
Ooh, so it must be a lie then!! Honestly Will, you are so self-righteous in your belief that that alone tells me there must be something in all of this. If you were reasonable and restrained in your argument you might have won me over, but your seemingly desperate need to be right clouds all your arguments. I will be keeping a close eye on this new film…
In her article, Jess Geen says:
“AIDS denialism is a movement that believes HIV either does not exist or is harmless; that therapies for HIV infection are themselves the cause of AIDS; that drug abuse causes AIDS; that HIV was created by the US government to kill Africans and African-Americans as an act of genocide; and that diagnostic tests for HIV infection do not work.
It has been widely discredited and it was estimated that 350,000 people died unnecessarily of AIDS in South Africa between 2000 and 2005 as a result of government policy based on AIDS denialism.”
350,000 people died in Africa as a result of government policy based on AIDS denialism…
Is it possible that AIDS denialists will say anything to avois taking responsibility for these deaths?
You denialists have been ranting long enough; nobody is listening to you. Can’t you see that??
Ok, ok, so you’ve got all the free publicity you’re going to get at PinkNews for your movie. Frankly, if I were Will, I would just ignore you; he has already given you too much of his time.
Here is an article published by the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission and dated 09/25/2008:
http://www.iglhrc.org/cgi-bin/iowa/article/takeaction/partners/207.html
It confirms that over 300,00o death could have been avoided in South Africa, and I believe it.
If you have something to say, Take it up with Zackie Achmut, not with us at PinkNews, please.
Here is an article written by Celia W. Dugger for “Global Gayz” which states that the advice of the WHO was ignored in South Africa, and that President Thabo Mbeki and his Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang promoted indigenous remedies icluding garlic, beetroot, and African potatoes:
http://www.globalgayz.com/country/Africa/view/ZAF/gay-rsa-news-and-reports-2008#article3
This is another credible report by a credible source, and there are a number of scientists named in this article, as well as the previous one, who would be willing to dialogue with you.
Why are you here wasting our time and yours? Free publicity, that’s all; and you’ve had all of it that you are going to get here because nobody is here commenting. We are all commenting on dozens of more interesting and relevant stories than this one.
Those are the facts, guys.
Will wrote in #223: “Eddy, Snout, is this the best that these denialists can come up with? A backup job????? Is this all they are, a few lunatics who can’t even construct the most basic argument or demonstrate a simple understanding between AIDS and HIV? Its truly astounding the level of ignorance and lack of even the most rudimentary education these people have….”
Will, Snout, Jean-Paul, have just visited on the off-chance and have been astounded at what I have read. This guy has a deep problem.
Bob at #227 wrote: “Outside of HIV testing and treatment, does anyone know of anyone or even know of anyone who knows anyone who has gone down with fully blown AIDS?”
What kind of stupid and idiotic question is the above? Yes, yes, yes, is the answer. As the 80s progressed I made a list of friends, acquaintances, or work colleagues who “went down” with “full-blown AIDS”. The list totalled 23. But who needs to cite personal experience? Literally 100s of high-profile creative gay men “went down” with full-blown AIDS and were listed as having done so in the papers. They were all young or youngish and they died horrible deaths of much the same symptoms. But that was before anti-retroviral treatments were, thankfully, developed by science in the mid-90s. And only a complete IDIOT would now suggest, as Bob has done in #228 that the real reason for their deaths was not AIDS but “psychological stress, trauma,and the medication, . . . drugs and malnutrition.” WHY do you have this BLIND foolish INABILITY to accept the truth?
Why MUST you demand that AIDS is caused by stress, trauma, medication, recreational drugs, and malnutrition? WHY? Where are you REALLY coming from? Is it a hatred of gays? Is it a refusal to accept the real reason why YOU yourself are HIV+? Can you not accept that you contracted the virus through sex? Why can’t you accept that? Do you feel so guilty about this fact that you must deny it? Are you intensely religious? Are you ridden with guilt? Do you dwell in a world of gothic horror where all is not as it seems? What do you read for pleasure – apart from websites which are rubbishy?
Bob at #231 wrote: “Peter Duesberg: untold awards and scientific achievments, man of outstanding courage and moral integrity, lifetime’s experience working in the field”
I don’t believe the above. Duesberg is a lone wolf, discredited and isolated. Bob get this into your crazy denying SKULL: it is Duesberg who is the clown, not the 1000s of scientists who have made extraordinary progress in combating HIV/AIDS.
Will, #234, I notice you have asked the same question as has occurred to me: what is Bob’s REAL motivation, unless he is actually Paranoid Schizophrenic – which is completely feasible. Is he HIV+ and he has somehow sunk into a chasm of fear of ARV medications?
Daz at #237 wrote: “After 10yrs on drugs, they started to give me liver damage. In August 2007 I stopped the medications, and I now have a healthy liver and no other organ problems ie heart problems nor kidney problems and I look healthy again.”
OK, so you are telling us that for two years you have had no ARVs. You are implying that throughout that time you have been in excellent health. And you say that you look healthy again. I would prefer the opinion of a doctor as to how healthy you actually are. And your opinion as to how healthy you look is, of course, subjective. One thing is sure: unless you are an extremely rare “non-progressor” (and there are a few), it won’t be long, my friend, before opportunistic infections get the better of you. Whether your sudden dashing to the clinic for ARVs will then help you, I am afraid we can’t be sure. Tell us, Daz, honestly, what the doctors at the Kobler clinic at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital think of your current behaviour and beliefs. I am astounded to hear you referring to them as if they are your mates. Clearly, you are keeping your safety net open beneath you. You can’t have that much faith in your Denialism.
Ah, so finally at #240 Bob tells us his history. Presumably this Bob is also our “Rob”. He says he was an injector for years and that he had unsafe sex for years and that after this he found he was negative upon having an HIV test and therefore he REFUSES to accept that HIV causes AIDS! How ridiculous is this “logic”! HIV is very difficult to catch. Perhaps you were extremely lucky. Accept that! Don’t say, “I SHOULD BE HIV, I’m not, therefore HIV does not cause AIDS!” What kind of crazy thinking is that!
As Will suggests it is the crazy thinking of someone who has admitted he has been a drug addict for years! This is who we have been fighting with in this thread and in other threads for so long, guys. A drug addict with all his silly deluded irrational baggage. A complete nutter!
You’re delusional bob/Rob. And by the way, all your posting under different names in order to advance your devil-possessed theory is so transparent and has been for quite some time!
You seem to think that the world is some kind of place out of a gothic tale, the world of horror and imagination. Well, I’m tell you that you are mistaking the real rational world with your world of cheap comic-horror. The world that you exist in is a MILLION LIGHT-YEARS from the rational world of sound and rational people, like Will, and me, and millions of others.
Who do you work with, bob/Rob? Are you a lone cannon? Are you self-employed? Are you on benefits? How many normal rational people do you interact with on a daily routine basis?
Will, Jean-Paul, Snout, this multi-named individual is simply mentally ill.
He says that he is not HIV, that he tested negative, but I am not sure that we should accept that as being true, given all the nonsense that he has spoken. If he is positive and continues not to place himself in the care of specialists, it is likely he will deteriorate. If he is positive and he is what is known as a “non-progressor” then he ought to be offering himself to his doctors as a subject of research for the benefit of all those who are not so lucky.
I think we have now worked out where this sad individual is actually from.
The tragic thing is that the arrogance he possesses means that he has the power of influence others who are vulnerable and THAT is seriously worrying.
And as Jess Geen says, it is dangerous and misleading, as is the movie “House of Numbers”.
Hey Eddy, JP… yeah, I agree. These are probably all the same people, no more then two individuals at best… the line “I will be keeping a close eye on this new film…” gives it away, they all seem to sat that. Curious, don’t you think. Lying seems to be a particular MO, so alter ego’s are not a stretch of the imagination.
“Don’t say, “I SHOULD BE HIV, I’m not, therefore HIV does not cause AIDS!” What kind of crazy thinking is that!”
This sums it up perfectly, well said Eddy. Its like surviving a car accident and then walking blindfolded across a 6 lane motorway thinking you’re immune to cars!
“The tragic thing is that the arrogance he possesses means that he has the power of influence others who are vulnerable and THAT is seriously worrying.”
You said it Eddy, and quite right. And thats why I kept to going on this thread…. how insulting to those who battle to cure this disease, and those who suffer from it, having to listen to Rob/Bob/Charles/Daz/Rodger (granted they’re probably all the same person) and their false theories to make them feel that one bit better about themselves and their deluded lives. Reminds me of that line ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’.
Well, Eddy, I’m telling you that I am healthy, based on my blood tests which I had taken at my normal doctors, also in March 2009 for general health checks, which test your, heart, liver, kidneys and white blood cells, which basically tell me my immune system is fine. I say to you, meet me and I’ll take you to my doctors to get that opinion answered.
As to what my HIV so called doctor, at the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, who is the head of the largest HIV clinic in northern Europe, the kobler centre, Dr M.N. He teaches undergraduates, goes around the world, promoting HIV drugs and he’s a consultant for 10 drug companies. I did question him and show him a letter from a Gordon Stewart MD only to be told to leave, and his only scientific evidence, that HIV was the cause of AIDS, was to say, ” Peter Duesberg, wouldn’t inject himself with some infected blood, so that’s proof enough for me, that HIV causes AIDS”
You can’t call me a rare non-progessor, because based on the science, the virus was progressing and that’s why I was advised to go on the meds. From August 2007 to march 2009 my CD4 count dropped from 550 to 40, so the orthodox science suggest I’m in progression and should be dead or very close to death. You totally contradict yourself, by saying, ” One thing is sure: unless you are an extremely rare “non-progressor” (and there are a few) ” Are you using the word few, as to say, there are quite a few, suggesting there are many, so not rare?? or are you using the word few, as in very few, suggesting very rare??
No one has been homophobic, so why try to drop that into the debate, if you can call it that, because all you do is use insulting words. You wont see me using insulting words. Why do you hate on people, who are living very well without HIV drugs for 5 10 15 and 20yrs? Would you hate on a cancer victim, if they decided to stopped chemo and survived?