Reitze look. There is no conspiracy.

"Proved" because it's published in an Italian medical journal?

We're talking a country where penicillin is considered an OTC drug.

The article discusses the opinion of "real scientists". Why do you think there's some kind of conspiracy? You didn't read any of the article or even what I pasted.

#3 you mean penacillin isnt otc? Now thats a conspiracy. Next theyll outlaw blue cheese.

Oh God, this thread will be a real winner.

If they wanted the truth they'd post their own paper answering the unknowns Deuesburg so nicely articulates

Duesberg has been answer over and over and over again.

Besides, peer reviewed literature is not the place for a DR-style tit for tat argument over a topic that is as thoroughly researched as HIV.

as he did in "House Of Numbers" (here on DR) -

That documentary was a pile of shit and you showed yourself to be the epitome of ignorance on the topic.

and similar to the shit-storm I got from pontificating "experts" in pathology with a pathological hostility toward the necessary statistics.

I showed more restraint and patience than you deserved given your abysmal lack of knowledge and refusal to actually read anything.

And I wasn't "pontificating" you loony pile of shit, I was stating basic virology and immunology principles as simply as possible and you still didn't have a clue.

And there was no hostility against your beloved statistics (Jesus H. Christ you're a fucking moron). The statistics are there for anyone to read in any HIV epidemiology study. You're not as smart as you think and you're not onto anything that someone smarter and better informed than you hasn't already thought of.

Sadly the FDA and the journals are political more than scientific. It takes commitment by "real scientists" to cut through the profitable bullshit.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about (and no that isn't denying politics. Politics exist if there's more than two people in the same room).

And fuck you and your "real scientist" shit. You wouldn't know real science if it kicked you in the balls.

Here cum the bullies! Think they got proof without evidence. That's their religion$.

We're talking a country where penicillin is considered an OTC drug.

It's not so much the country where it's published but the Journal's impact factor.

And I'm having trouble actually finding the impact factor, indicating it may not even have one.

Submission: Original research or review papers dealing with the entire field of anatomy, histology and embryology of vertebrates, with special regard to human and veterinary medicine and including medical education in those fields...

From the instructions to authors.

The paper doesn't even fit the stated field of the journal.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is withdrawn as well in the fairly near future when the journal realizes it doesn't want to remain a joke.

Think they got proof without evidence.

You're so grossly ignorant of the topic you have no room to make such a statement.

Sorry reitze, ignorant ramblings will always be called such.

JPW you prove nothing by calling me names. The questions Duesberg asked in that other thread were the same questions I asked - with my own perspectives of science, proof, statistics, and so-on. All you're proving is that Duesburg and anyone who doesn't believe what you say they should pisses you off.

"Think they got proof without evidence. "

Stupidity like yours is dangerous: you're the Faith Healer in the cancer ward.

And civil rights were not infringed when there were only a few dozen deaths from AIDS.

Reitze:

Seriously, you're beginning to sound like the kind of person who thinks Newt Gingrich sounds like a smart guy.

I mean seriously.

JPW you prove nothing by calling me names.

I have no illusions that it does.

It just shows my contempt for you and your ridiculously overly-confident sense of your own knowledge.

The questions Duesberg asked in that other thread were the same questions I asked - with my own perspectives of science, proof, statistics, and so-on.

You proved anyone can ask a question.

You also show quite well that many who ask those questions show no inclination for educating themselves but instead demand others do the work for them, all the while spouting their nonsense as if it's anything more than a stupid, ignorant opinion.

All you're proving is that Duesburg and anyone who doesn't believe what you say they should pisses you off.

No, dangerously over-confident ignorance pisses me off.

BTW reitze, have you actually read the paper? The actual manuscript? Do you have a clue what it even says?

Clearly YOU LIE JPW. I've done more reading than 99% of people without a need to research the topic to a depth more than most do - as that other thread documents. At least you admit that you're angry - but the FDA is the agency who deserves that anger. They SHOULD have answers to such questions or at least have organized research to answer the unknowns rather than having such a festering easy to pick apart bullshit story.

The HIV to AIDS story is worst than some bullshit some guy would make up to string along more than one woman. A few simple questions and it falls apart. That's not fair to people being asked to drug themselves with AIDS inducing drugs.

#15 jpw, I've read the article at the link - I didn't see a link to the actual paper but if you got one I'd read it.

Reitze:
Seriously, you're beginning to sound like the kind of person who thinks Newt Gingrich sounds like a smart guy.
I mean seriously.
#13 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore at 2012-01-09 09:37 PM | Reply | Flag: ?

Newt appears to be intelligent/smart but he applies his brainpower to making money rather than representing people with interest in smaller govt. That problem extends to most of the GOP but Newt appears smarter than the others. Ron Paul has better values IF he could be trusted not to go after Row v Wade. Thus I'll prolly vote for Gary Johnson.

#15 - that's what gets me here. I posted this to show that the research got a fair shake and was considered incompatible with the current state of knowledge. He doesn't bother to read any of it even though he claims such passion on the topic. It's like I'm trying to teach a man to fish and he hangs himself with the fishing wire. It's not working.

as that other thread documents

That thread documents your glaring ignorance, reitze.

Really it does.

And we barely even scratched the surface of the topic.

So even if you have read more than 99% of people, it hasn't helped and you need to not only read much much more but higher quality material as well.

They SHOULD have answers to such questions or at least have organized research to answer the unknowns rather than having such a festering easy to pick apart bullshit story.

Money and effort are spent where they should-actually forwarding our knowledge on a virus that represents a serious public health risk.

It's a waste of time to address the "concerns" of Duesberg et al because a. they're shit b. they've already been addressed and c. did I mention they're shit?

And you haven't picked a damn thing apart. You've asked a question and refused to seek the answer unless it's given to you on a silver platter replete with a neat explanation. In other words you're lazy and by some bizarre twist of reality think your laziness indicates you're correct.

A few simple questions and it falls apart. That's not fair to people being asked to drug themselves with AIDS inducing drugs.

Ugggghhhh. So I guess since I'm largely ignorant of special relativity and still have questions that someone hasn't answered for me and explained in gory detail at the expense of their own time special relativity is an easily picked apart pile of nonsense that is indicative of a conspiracy amongst physicists to keep their grants from drying up?

That's essentially what you're claiming on this topic.

Stupidity like yours is dangerous: you're the Faith Healer in the cancer ward.
#11 | Posted by Danforth at 2012-01-09 09:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

IDK if I'd go that far but my wife did avoid major operations over false cancer diagnosis - and that was dangerous. Instead dietary changes eliminated her problems - and she's not alone having positive "alturnative" experiences while having negative "mainstream" experiences. I had a similar one with type 2.

So as for HIV - lets see the proof-post rather than the bullies. Or the poor people suffering would do best contacting duesburg - at least his patients say his approach works. More than I hear here from others suffering. And even Magic quit the AIDS Czar role Reagan gave him (while appearing annoyed by some sort of bullshit).

You might trust big pharma, insurance, drs, fda, and the govt. I don't - and that's how me and several friends/family have survived.

"my wife did avoid major operations over false cancer diagnosis - and that was dangerous. Instead dietary changes eliminated her problems"

You've proven my point by that dumbass false equivalency.

"I had a similar one with type 2. "

We've been over this. YOU LOST WEIGHT, something that will pull diabetic symptoms back (renal symptoms, too). That's the sum total of your medical miracle: you lost weight.

"So as for HIV - lets see the proof-"

As soon as you find one person with AIDS who does not have HIV. Like I said: stupidity like yours is dangerous.

"at least his patients say his approach works"

This moron asks for "proof", and his is "patients say his approach works"???

"So even if you have read more than 99% of people, it hasn't helped and you need to not only read much much more but higher quality material as well."

If you had a good link I'd read it but instead you focus on putting me down. Maybe I should just return fire with "FUCK YOURSELF ASSHOLE"! After all that prevents any questions from being answered or any good quality materials from being shot down. Instead there's 1000s of them but none answer the statistics and instead focus on pathological bullshit. Just like JPW and several other here.

"but none answer the statistics "

You're a moron. How about this statistic: what percentage of folks with AIDS have HIV?

As soon as you find one person with AIDS who does not have HIV. Like I said: stupidity like yours is dangerous.
#23 | Posted by Danforth at 2012-01-09 10:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

2 close personal friends died of cancer and had chemo-induced AIDS before they died. Mal-nutrition also causes aging of the immune system - and the American diet isn't all that nutritious. Africa has more serious nutrition problems and associated AIDS.

Found this unposted on my nook...

Bruce the proof of causality isnt publicly available. Ive searched and that was our previos thread. There should be proof if its the reason to say drugs would help and go on 20 years without double blind statistical proof, etc. The noise of the drug pushers though is ver loud... calling opponents names rather than comung up with better results looks likely to be another profitible set of lies and bs.

So as for HIV - lets see the proof-post rather than the bullies.

Reitze, there isn't a "proof post". There isn't a short, sweet, easy answer to this one. You're being disingenuous by maintaining this stance.

Or the poor people suffering would do best contacting duesburg - at least his patients say his approach works. More than I hear here from others suffering.

"Africa has more serious nutrition problems and associated AIDS."

Great. So now it's malnutrition, and not someone with HIV fucking some virgin girl because Dark Age leftovers have lied to them about condoms and transmittable diseases, abetted by ignoramuses who prove how dangerous misinformation can be.

#20 jpw, yea about special relativity. There are parts you can verify and religion beyond that. Big bangers get pissed at me too.

#28 i succeded because of info quest plus bulk purchase of test strips... in other words... scientific hypothesises and tests to prove truths to self. Cheers... Miller light and about 2500 cals with good nutrition. The info from dr pusher was harmful if followed compared with what i did. Mcculley did similar but hes become a crash course program pusher. Medical truth matters imho. So asking for the proof evven to a summRy pathology would help people... its why its worth pissin ya off too.

So asking for the proof evven to a summRy pathology would help people... its why its worth pissin ya off too.

I don't even know what this means...

"i succeded because of info quest plus bulk purchase of test strips... in other words... scientific hypothesises and tests to prove truths to self."

And had you done none of that, and lost the same weight (via "Miller light and about 2500 cals with good nutrition"), you would have seen the same results.

"The info from dr pusher was harmful if followed compared with what i did. "

Then you got a bad doctor. Everything else is self-delusion.

#32 you tried in #28. But obviosly thats not showing data. Just anecdotes and there are pleanty counter ones as discussed b4.

But obviosly thats not showing data. Just anecdotes and there are pleanty counter ones as discussed b4.

I thought you were a fan of anecdotes?

Besides, the ultimate point is that there is a long list of folks that were active in the AIDS denialist community because they believe quacks like Duesberg.

And paid with their lives.

The only people who don't admit that they died from AIDS-related illnesses are those convinced AIDS doesn't exist.

#33 i didnt like that dr. I had better info than he did. A friend is in pharma sales and dad teaches bio. Ive met a few better docs on medweb and dtd.

Raphael Lombardo

#35 i never said aids doesnt exist. Whether or not hiv causes it and whether or not the drugs work seem unproven and saying that seems to piss off many. Idk the answers though just like idk about electrons from magic or strange quarks. I do think better answers to all those questions are important.

I have to say that I have followed Reitze and his posts regarding this AIDS HIV thing. Very interesting.

I agree, in principle, that Big Pharma has done some real damage along with lazy MDs and hooked this country on more drugs than people realize.

But that malnutrition and diet related to HIV and AIDS?

wow.....

Whether or not hiv causes it and whether or not the drugs work seem unproven and saying that seems to piss off many.

Because it's patently absurd.

And dangerous.

THAT at least is documented.

#37 anecdote wars and theories can get nasty. Thats why better public info helps. Like if there were aids v nutrition v hiv v ... v ... then it might be possible to confirm some of the theories we have, deny others. Thats science. The fight is the religion of truth or money.

"Whether or not hiv causes it and whether or not the drugs work seem unproven"

GFY. I've served on health committees since we referred to AIDS as "new cancer". What you're saying isn't just idiocy, it's recklessly irresponsible. God help anyone who believes your crap.

I have to say that I have followed Reitze and his posts regarding this AIDS HIV thing. Very interesting.

#39 | Posted by eberly

Interesting how?

Deep contemplation or new material for your comedy show interesting?

rwd

"God help anyone who believes your crap."

On the positive side the terminally stupid will be dead sooner than later.
What I find curious is why you even attempt to engage an obviously uneducated, lying idiot in conversation.

"material for your comedy show"

I think the Firesign Theater covered it ~1970.

Black Cross volunteers, pausing now and then to touch a child's head.

"What I find curious is why you even attempt to engage an obviously uneducated, lying idiot in conversation."

I find medical misinformation abhorrent, especially the lethal type.

"What I find curious is why you even attempt to engage an obviously uneducated, lying idiot in conversation."

Yeah, everybody with a difference of opinion in your world is a "liar".

Thats why better public info helps. Like if there were aids v nutrition v hiv v ... v ... then it might be possible to confirm some of the theories we have, deny others. Thats science.

Ignoring an extremely well documented cause of a disease to please a few kooks and loons is unethical science.

Plus I'm pretty sure Duesberg has been rebutted before in published literature.

I'm trying to find the articles now.

HIV causes AIDS. That isnt a secret.

-Interesting how?

I've never seen the argument.

On the positive side the terminally stupid will be dead sooner than later.

Normally that'd be fine.

In this case they get to be infectious until they keel over.

Sort of takes the luster off it being positive.

There is very little actual research cited in “House of Numbers.” It is shocking that Leung so radically misrepresented the only legitimate “evidence” for his HIV denialist theory, and that his source in fact affirms that HIV destroys T cells in humans, causing AIDS.

So how does it feel finding out your source of information is a lying pile of shit?

"So how does it feel finding out your source of information is a lying pile of shit?"

Posted by jpw at 2012-01-10 01:32 AM | Reply

Seriously, why do you bother to attempt to communicate with ignorant, stupid, lying, retarded, insane excuses for conscious beings?

Well normally it's because I feel an obligation to point out to others why the ignorant, stupid, lying, retarded, insane excuses for conscious beings are exactly that.

But the past few posts were really just about rubbing his nose in it.

I'm not disciplining to teach, I'm disciplining because I'm ANGRY!!! *hulk smash*

Jpw you fail to prove anything but rage. Your links were anecdotes not proof. We all know your mainstreme theory. But please if u can come up with more perswasive evidence it could help someone some day. If not well imho that helps others see the real truth rather than $$$.

Jpw you fail to prove anything but rage.

If you think that's rage you've never seen rage.

That's me rubbing your nose in your own shit.

Your links were anecdotes not proof.

What?!?!?! The previous several posts show the premise of House of Cards to be shit and a major denialist turned AIDS victim either ignorant or dishonest.

None of which constitutes an anecdote.

Besides, I thought you were into anecdotes as being more powerful than actual scientific research?

We all know your mainstreme theory.

Beyond an extremely simplistic form you don't know a thing. Hell, I think I'm even stretching it to say your understand it on a simplistic level.

But please if u can come up with more perswasive evidence it could help someone some day.

You didn't listen to me when I tried to explain basic virology and immunology before, what makes you think I'd believe you now? You're not interested in learning anything here and you never were.

If not well imho that helps others see the real truth rather than $$$.

LOL that sort of shallow "truth" seems well suited to you.

I got over angry over half a century ago.

One of the great things about a Physics BA after 175 semester hours is a real liberal arts education.
Then I went to graduate school and had a Fortune 50 career simultaneously. Now I have a retirement job that keeps me in the show. Party on!

It does no good to be angry at a hamster because it can't solve differential equations.

Right zat and dif eqs dont build a rocket. Want to fly you need to apply the diff eqs to the right questions and use statistical testing to verify they work. Youd never try an algorithm in a real time system without testing it. Same here but the drugs cause aids like chemo does. I am curious of any statistical population data beyond what duesberg had. Nobody here seems to have it for the hiv causality.

Solo on my own dime.

Same here but the drugs cause aids like chemo does.

Link?

What I find curious is why you even attempt to engage an obviously uneducated, lying idiot in conversation.

#44 | POSTED BY ZATOICHI AT 2012-01-09 10:59 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Because he's not just an idiot, he's a soldier of evil.

Thirty years and billions of $$$$$ later and medical
science cannot explain the process in which HIV morphs
into AIDS. They are so invested in this scientifically
flawed theory, they are incapable of even considering
alternatives.

Between big Pharma and all of the AIDS related charities,
anyone who suggests considering a different perspective is
shouted down as a charlatan or a madman. Well, so was Galileo.

I don't pretend to know much about medical science but I have a question, if the medical establishment is so wrong about what causes AIDS then why has the death toll dropped so dramatically and why do people with HIV live for so many years now but faced almost a guarantee of death from AIDS only about 20 years ago?

Once they dropped AZT as a treatment, the death rate dropped. AIDS is strongly tied into drug use, especially IV drugs and inhalants like amyl nitrate. Needle exchange programs and drug education programs have helped.

This thread = hilarious.

Well, so was Galileo.

#65 | POSTED BY TIGER150 AT 2012-01-10 02:05 PM | REPLY | FLAG

I guess you also believe Einstein failed math in school?

I guess you also believe Einstein failed math in school?

#69 | Posted by soheifox at 2012-01-10 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

...and your point is? Any time people of science challenge the orthodoxy, they have their credibility challenged-was my point. Are you saying that Galileo did not meet resistance?

HIV attacks your T cell count to a point where they number so low your body is unable to defend itself from other viruses and bacteria. This stage of the sickness is called AIDS, not because HIV had turned into AIDS but because HIV causes AIDS.

AIDS - Auto Immune Deficiency Syndrome. AIDS is not a sickness, it's a lack of T Cells to protect your body, the lack of T cells is caused by HIV.

this is in responce to a few misinformed poster wondering "when does HIV morph into AIDS". The answer is it doesn't. One is a cause for the other to occur.

"HIV attacks your T cell count to a point where they number so low your body is unable to defend itself from other viruses and bacteria. This stage of the sickness is called AIDS, not because HIV had turned into AIDS but because HIV causes AIDS."

That's how it has been explained to me. AIDS is actually a symptom (or a collection of symptoms) not a disease.

HIV is in a family of retro viruses-none of which kills its host. Perhaps morph was an unfortunate choice of words. However, the scenario you describe has never been scientifically proven. There are patients who display all of the symptoms of AIDS and are HIV negative. There are others who have lived with HIV for 20-30 years who never develop AIDS-even without medication.

Duesberg doesn't question whether or not HIV or AIDS exists. He questions the linkage of the two.

Tiger, do you doubt that HIV attacks its host's T Cells?

"There are others who have lived with HIV for 20-30 years who never develop AIDS-even without medication."

I've known people who tested positive for HIV, went on medication, and then they couldn't find evidence of HIV in their system later.

"There are others who have lived with HIV for 20-30 years who never develop AIDS-even without medication."

I've known people who tested positive for HIV, went on medication, and then they couldn't find evidence of HIV in their system later.

Tiger150 is an expert on getting AIDS.

That what's attacking the T Cells is HIV-yes. HIV is a dormant virus that for 10 years or more has no impact on the immune system. Then, for a reason still not scientifically explained, begins to attack T cells and continues to do so until death.

Isn't it possible that these are two separate conditions that are not connected beyond coincidence. The medical establishment says no, but they cannot explain what triggers the T cell attack after so many years of dormancy.

If they're correct, why are they no closer to a cure or an effective vaccine as we enter AIDS' fourth decade? Consider the possibility that the linkage between HIV and AIDS is incorrect.

***"And even Magic quit the AIDS Czar role Reagan gave him (while appearing annoyed by some sort of bullshit)."***

How did Reagan appoint him "AIDS Tzar"? Magic didn't admit he had HIV until '91 or '92.

BTW, I don't claim to be an expert, but then again you don't need to be an expert to realize that the current orthodoxy is lacking.

How did Reagan appoint him "AIDS Tzar"? Magic didn't admit he had HIV until '91 or '92

It was Bush 41.

So much that's so wrong.

Too bad I'm no at my comp.

#82 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2012-01-10 04:07 PM | REPLY | FLAG:
Not to worry.
AIDS cures stupid.

I know, was waiting for him to update the time-line to his little story.

I don't claim to be an expert

#80 | Posted by tiger150 at 2012-01-10 04:01 PM

Thanks for proving my point. Challenge the orthodoxy and you get shouted down.

I heard that high doses of vitamin C is the cure for HIV, but since corporations can't make money from felling an OTC vitamin it keeps you pumped on its experimental drugs.

Please be aware the person that told me this isn't a doctor or scientist, and he didn't have solid evidence for his statement.

But since this seems to be a thread for any theory regarding HIV, I thought I would share.

Its ok tiger. Better they out their problems in their rants than go on killing with a false assessment of correlations that sells drugs, docs, ins, and death. Insured death is next,, obamanation of lies.

#87 the american diet is baaad for nutrition. Many variations in deficiency or toxic chemicals can weeken immun sys. For diabetes it became easy to improve. What ive found interesting is the similarities of diet for such a wide range of ailments. Like in Fat, Sick, & Nearly Dead.

diabetes

#89 | Posted by reitze at 2012-01-10 04:48 PM

"What ive found interesting is the similarities of diet for such a wide range of ailments."

Something those of use studying health have known for a long time: the majority of chronic ailments are based on lifestyle choices.

Let'em follow the crowd-over the cliff.

HIV is in a family of retro viruses-none of which kills its host.

Wrong. HIV is a member of the Lentivirus genus (which are all in the same family obviously) that also contains other immunodeficiency virsus such as simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) and feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV). Both of these can cause AIDS in the infected animals, who subsequently die of opportunistic infections (boy that sounds familiar).

There are patients who display all of the symptoms of AIDS and are HIV negative.

It's funny, the only places I find this sort of statement are denialist websites? Do you have any actual stats for this claim? I can't find any.

What I can find, however, are statistics of AIDS defining illnesses in HIV- and + individuals and surprise suprise, they show a massive increase in individuals that are HIV positive.

There are others who have lived with HIV for 20-30 years who never develop AIDS-even without medication.

I don't know about 20-30 years, but there are people who are HIV+ and don't progress to AIDS in the normal time line. They're called long term non-progressors and they constitute a tiny minority of HIV+ cases.

HIV is a dormant virus that for 10 years or more has no impact on the immune system. Then, for a reason still not scientifically explained, begins to attack T cells and continues to do so until death.

This is absolutely not true.

HIV isn't dormant for the duration of the incubation period. It's the onset of AIDS is what usually occurs around 10 years or so after infection.

During that time, though, the virus is replicating (it can measured) and killing T cells (much of the T cell death occurs in the intestines/gut which is why monitoring circulating T cells in the blood doesn't show as much of a drop as what occurs). A double whammy eventually occurs whereby not only have you lost a lot of T cells to virus-mediated death but your immune system finally craps out from the constant cycles of mounting immune responses to HIV (this is called T cell exhaustion).

The mechanisms by which the virus kills cells isn't completely known but a large amount is due to either direct killing by the virus or a process called apoptosis (the cell commits suicide), which occurs in both infected and uninfected cells (death of uninfected cells by suicide is a key part of T cell exhaustion).

Isn't it possible that these are two separate conditions that are not connected beyond coincidence.

It would have to be the biggest coincidence of all time.

The medical establishment says no,

Because it's not...

but they cannot explain what triggers the T cell attack after so many years of dormancy.

Absolutely untrue.

If they're correct, why are they no closer to a cure or an effective vaccine as we enter AIDS' fourth decade?

Several reasons.

1. No cure because the virus, by its nature, integrates into the host cell genome. Certain cell types that are infected go into a dormant state where the virus isn't replicating (most cell processes are shut down) and these cells act as reservoirs that reactivate viral replication when they're stimulated by an immune response. As of yet, these trojan horses can't be gotten rid of.

2. No cure or vaccine because the virus has a nasty trick up its sleave called a quasi-species. The virus is not a singular entity, it is a cloud of individuals (called clones) that are all slightly different. When a selective pressure is applied (ie drugs or vaccine), the clones that are not susceptible to the treatment or vaccine replicate to a greater extent and fill the void. This is also the same reason why your body can't clear the virus normally-everytime the immune system responds to the virus, another clone of the virus side steps the response, causing a constant cycling of HIV replication, immmune response, replication, immune response.

Consider the possibility that the linkage between HIV and AIDS is incorrect.

Only if you're uninformed or just want to be different.

This is one of the most thoroughly researched virus systems and disease on the planet. That it's all incorrect is extremely unlikely.

Between big Pharma and all of the AIDS related charities,
anyone who suggests considering a different perspective is
shouted down as a charlatan or a madman. Well, so was Galileo.

Galileo complexes are always amusing. Sad, but amusing.

Being told you're wrong by everyone who knowns anything about what you're talking about more often indicates you're actually wrong.

Let'em follow the crowd-over the cliff.

#92 | POSTED BY TIGER150 AT 2012-01-10 05:06 PM | REPLY | FLAG

It's everyone who has followed YOUR crowd who fell off the cliff and died, while those who stayed on the drugs are still alive today.

Scumfuck murderers.

Science 23 December 2011:
Vol. 334 no. 6063 p. 1628
DOI: 10.1126/science.334.6063.1628

Breakthrough of the Year
HIV Treatment as Prevention

Jon Cohen

#59 | Posted by Zatoichi
"It does no good to be angry at a hamster because it can't solve differential equations."

FF!

zat does no good pointing to some bullshit that's not public and talks about a different subject than the causality while we here havent had the opportunity to scrutinize what it does say. That was what we thought the last time is was posted here too.

So it is the HIV drugs that cause AIDS? And it is just a coincidence that there are HIV virus in everyone who has aids.

right...just because YOU don't understand something doesn't mean there is a conspiracy.

It means you don't understand something.

Right boy. And when good questions are met with bullies the chances that there IS a conspiracy are much higher, especially when there are multiple vested interests in the popularly re-enforced story.

And when good questions are met with bullies the chances that there IS a conspiracy are much higher

Only if you're self-confidence is misplaced and you refuse to admit to your ignorance.

And it means nothing of the sort. In this case, there is no conspiracy and your being met with "bullies" (boohoo) is because you're spouting dangerous nonsense with not backing in reality.

especially when there are multiple vested interests in the popularly re-enforced story.

Right. So all those other scientists and doctors, virologists, immunologists, infectious disease specialists all, who don't specifically work on HIV are just hoodwinked morons that have lacked the capacity to ask simplistic questions that you've "figured out" (I don't think any of your ideas here are original, are they?).

I didnt claim my questions were original. Plus they are questions to a theory, not really theories. More like reasons to ask for the sake of sick people. And yea your hoodwinked if it matters that much to you but you cant even prove your theory. Instead you just express your blind faith... if an observer like me gets this shit here imy guess is a patient would be treated even more disrespectfully like my type 2 diabetes rx dr pusher...

So yea you appear to be hoodwinked into drug pushing.

You're such a God damned retard I don't have a large enough vocabulary to properly describe it.

I can describe to you how the virus kills T cells.

I can describe to you how the presence of the virus kills T cells.

I can tell you how T cell depletion results in immunodeficiency.

I can show you stats on the massive increases in incidences of opportunistic infections in HIV positive individuals.

I can show you stats on how drugs designed to target the virus reverse the symptoms of HIV infection and that stopping the drugs results in the reappearance of the symptoms associated with HIV.

I can show you a list of people who thought as you do with the same ignorant confidence that paid with their lives for doing so.

But that's all just blind faith because I've been hoodwinked into drug pushing.

It makes me almost puke to know you say this shit in public (please tell me you don't say any of this claptrap to actual people IRL) and have the gall to claim you're a "real scientist".

Posted by jpw at 2012-01-10 10:02 PM | Reply

It's a hamster.
It can't derive the quadratic equation.
I did that in high school during some class out of boredom.
It apparently trolled you.
Chill.

The incredible beauty of the mathematics of physics is it allows one to think things they could not possibly have thought before.

When I was a student I owned a little fishing shack on Lake Travis and would often work on math problems for days without interruption. Now the place is a fucking marina with hundreds of sailboat rigging flapping in the breeze.

It apparently trolled you.
Chill.

Trolling would indicate he doesn't believe it. I don't think that's the case.

And do you tell random stories to random people in random conversations all the time IRL too?

And yes I used 'one' and 'they' in the same sentence, I minored in Oriental Philosophy on my rambling physics BA.

"Trolling would indicate he doesn't believe it. I don't think that's the case."

So why bother?

So why bother?

Naive optimism? Boredom?

#106 | Posted by jpw at 2012-01-10 10:19 PM | Reply
It's a blog.

Why do you expect hamsters to pass 5th grade science?

I got past the anger at the stupid a long time ago here.

As far as the real world goes I simply armed my kids as best I could.
They are autonomous and debt free.

The Spring semester of 1970 when I took Psychology 319K Introduction to Social Psychology I had no idea I would end up the following Summer at Tektite II in the Virgin Islands.

Since then the path has always been interesting.
I have never looked for work or been fired, and I've always been employed.

#110 | POSTED BY ZATOICHI AT 2012-01-10 10:36 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Did you also have an onion tied to your belt?

#106 idk what to "believe" regarding hiv vs the many causes of aids. Azt is 1 cause. There are also a high number of anectdotes with strong opinions but lack of statistical data.

Like sure jpw can describe hiv to t cells but if people survive that for 10 yoears then nfw does that prove much. Pointing to it or a cloud of similar bullshit pushes the dope.

Like sure jpw can describe hiv to t cells but if people survive that for 10 yoears then nfw does that prove much. Pointing to it or a cloud of similar bullshit pushes the dope.

So your response is to simply ignore reality for your fantasy world.

Have fun.

Your accusation fits yourself jpw.

Reality is if the incubation is 10 years then the antibodies worked and the body handled that harmless virus. If you had statistics of 100000 HIV+, HIV- with and without drugs and knowledge of their own conditions without them knowing anything you'd have a chance. But people don't sit still when they learn things so the data it takes to prove the hiv theory is difficult at best - and in some other ways has to date exceeded our technologies.

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

Like sure jpw can describe hiv to t cells but if people survive that for 10 yoears then nfw does that prove much. Pointing to it or a cloud of similar bullshit pushes the dope.

#112 | POSTED BY REITZE AT 2012-01-10 11:32 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Your assumptions are flawed. People are not isogenetic. They fit more into a normal curve with outliers. Your lack of understanding of the real world is astounding. Your logic is this: A) A virus is supposedly deadly B) The virus does not kill everyone C) Therefore the virus is not dangerous.

You lack an understanding that all people do not share the same genetic make up. All people do not share the same immunity.

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

And scams like these are why i oppose obamacare, INSURED DEATH!

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

And scams like these are why i oppose obamacare, INSURED DEATH!

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

And scams like these are why i oppose obamacare, INSURED DEATH!

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

And scams like these are why i oppose obamacare, INSURED DEATH!

for example, the indians got the bad end of that deal when the europeans came.

you would conclude that viruses are not deadly because the settlers didn't die?

Sorry on repeat posts. The nook gets stuck sometimes.

Reality is if the incubation is 10 years then the antibodies worked and the body handled that harmless virus.

Go reread what I said about cycles of replication and immune responses to the replicating virus.

AIDS takes ten years to set in because it's a slow grinding away of the T cell population, not some fell swoop that wipes everything out.

If you had statistics of 100000 HIV+, HIV- with and without drugs and knowledge of their own conditions without them knowing anything you'd have a chance.

You can't create that sort of situation. It unethical and you've been told that before.

However, there have been plenty of people who've opted out of treatment and died from diseases we would have predicted them to die from based on their HIV+ status. People who are HIV+ but on HAART don't die from opportunistic illnesses. It's rather simple, actually.

Flu shots are bullshit too. I was the one here in the last hiv thread who found the dflu shot research data and seperated its facts from spin.

You did? I seem to remember your post indicating there was a 60% reduction in flu cases amongst people who received the vaccine.

Sounds pretty good to me.

#27 that was at the cost of arm pain and a cold for 2 days in 90%. That sounds like spin saying it works at all.

Like if 100 people have 8% chance of flu mor than 3 days,
If no shots 8 get flu (prolly only 6 for 3 days)... OR???
Flu shots to 100 then 6 still get flu! 90 GET COLDS AND SOAR ARMS.

THE CURE IS WORSE THAN THE DISEASE.

#27 that was at the cost of arm pain and a cold for 2 days in 90%.

What kind of pussy complains about pain in the arm from a needle prick? And there's no physiological way a deactivated flu vaccine injected in the arm can lead to a respiratory infection.

Also, I'm thinking your 90% number is BS.

That sounds like spin saying it works at all.

Well yeah, when you completely make up the measurement by which you measure if it "works".

Forget the fact that it reduces incidences of influenza infection (note I didn't say flu which is often used to refer to any vague upper respiratory infection people contract during the winter).

The 90% cold suffering was in that paper I linked in that other thread - yea its real. And as for which measure used to determine if it "works" yea that's clearly subjective and I've chosen what I believe is a more appropriate standard than the authors of the study and the promotors of the flu-shot sales.

Basically its mostly given to those at risk of flu being deadly - but if reducing a 8% risk entails another risk that's 90% certain and the individual is already weekened... IMHO lower-risk option makes more sense in this case. And THAT's what that Bob Livingston conspiracy article was about - it happens - the side effects are minimized explained and not discussed while the benefits are trumpeted to sell the drugs. Dr Pushers and "sick care" for profit!

So if you care about your health buyer beware around Drs - they're more deadly than guns (that's not hard to link if you don't believe it - google it I've gotta go for now).

How many of these stupid fucks would be willing to infect themselves with HIV to make their point?

Deusberg? Reitze? Anybody?

I wonder why no one will step forward to make this great contribution to science?

How many of these stupid fucks would be willing to infect themselves with HIV to make their point?
Deusberg? Reitze? Anybody?
I wonder why no one will step forward to make this great contribution to science?
#132 | Posted by Dr_Icepick at 2012-01-11 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Dr Ice - a person's self-infection is just stupid. All it would do is provide just 1 more anecdote to whichever side they landed on - and even that could be misleading. Like they could still get aids from another cause and not know it wasn't hiv... or they could stay hiv positive for 30 years like we're told is common - so that would be truly stupid.

Instead what would you say to someone who learned THEY were infected with HIV when they ask similar questions as Duesberg? Their life is at stake and if they take or don't take the recommended drugs it could result in their life or death (either way depending on where the TRUTH really is). Similarly so could their seemingly unrelated decisions on such things as recreational drugs, sex, and especially nutrition.

From what I've seen (mostly just here), such people aren't getting good answers to such critical questions:

What are the likelihood and risks of:
1. HIV+/HIV- without knowing
2. HIV+/HIV- false diagnosed via test-result
3. HIV+/HIV- without treating
4. HIV+/HIV- with treatment (the hiv- would be false treatment, needed to fill in the statistical picture).

From MY PERSONAL type 2 diabetes experience that lack of good answers to similar questions WAS INDICATIVE that the Doc was an money grubbing pig who would have watched me die slowly so he could have profited a bit more - I walked out and healed myself via diet.

EG: I got these: what are the likelihood and risks of:
1. Type2diabetes+/Type2diabetes- without knowing
--- he couldn't answer but I was able to figure I had T2 for over 10 years before that so the likelihood for me was high and the risk was no where near the "you'll be dead in 5 years" bullshit

2. Type2diabetes+/Type2diabetes- false diagnosed via test-result
--- easier to test/confirm than HIV causality to AIDS

3. Type2diabetes+/Type2diabetes- without treating
--- told in most possible scary way "you'll be dead in 5 years", "irreversible", and then in 3 registered letters. OMFG that was rude.

4. Type2diabetes+/Type2diabetes- with treatment (the hiv- would be false treatment, needed to fill in the statistical picture).
--- the treatment plan offered was pathetic. Drugs 1st and the diet-coaching was crap miss-info featuring bread, honey and incredibly stupid shit.
--- my own treatment plan worked - bulk purchase test-strips and analyze foods for myself - made adjustments, reversed the condition.

So do you advocate continued bullying with partial information and highly educated people providing their best links to more BULLSHIT?

Or would it be better to let Duesberg have his day via publication and let others address the premiss of his paper with their own research. Things like establishing the virus rather than just indicates antibodies, as well as risk/benefit studies of the treatments like we discussed here about the Flu Shot (imho way better here via Drudge than what the Dr Pushers pass out - trying to get everyone to get a shot as big pharma encourages them to do).

No link between HIV and AIDS at all. - www.youtube.com
Leave it to our resident homosexual BruceyBanner to start another thread that sucks.
#133 | Posted by dr_dude2 at 2012-01-11 03:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Pathological bullshit since the people with the 30 year incubation period obviously don't succumb to death that way.

Like they could still get aids from another cause and not know it wasn't hiv...

There's no other cause with as tight an association with developing AIDS as HIV. Sorry reitze.

or they could stay hiv positive for 30 years like we're told is common

Liar. You were by no means told it's common. One poster stated it occurs and I gave a link pegging the number at 1-5% of HIV+ individuals. That's far from common.

Instead what would you say to someone who learned THEY were infected with HIV when they ask similar questions as Duesberg? Their life is at stake and if they take or don't take the recommended drugs it could result in their life or death (either way depending on where the TRUTH really is).

Indeed their lives would be at stake.

So you tell them the truth, that HIV causes AIDS and that current HAART regimens are very effective at controlling the infection and prolonging life.

From what I've seen (mostly just here), such people aren't getting good answers to such critical questions:

They're getting the correct answer.

You just disagree with it (because it makes you feel smart!) and therefore don't think it "good".

What are the likelihood and risks of:

If you read the page I linked above they have a section where they discuss fold increase in death rates and such between HIV+ and HIV- populations.

From MY PERSONAL

No one gives a shit about your personal story dumbass. You're not as special as you think you are.

So do you advocate continued bullying with partial information and highly educated people providing their best links to more BULLSHIT?

LOL evidently bullshit=I don't understand it.

All you've done is cover your eyes and ears while still spewing the same shit.

Do everyone a favor and cover your mouth too.

Things like establishing the virus rather than just indicates antibodies,

Already done. There's methods to measure viral copy numbers in serum.

You could also isolate virus from infected cells from patient's serum if you chose.

as well as risk/benefit studies of the treatments like we discussed here about the Flu Shot

Again, you can't ethically do this sort of study. Your continued insistence on it makes you one f'ed in the head asshole.

trying to get everyone to get a shot as big pharma encourages them to do

Or because vaccines are one of the most powerful preventative treatments available to modern medicine.

Pathological bullshit since the people with the 30 year incubation period obviously don't succumb to death that way.

Yeah, who are outside of the statistical norm.

I thought you loved stats? Yet you don't seem to get a basic statistical point here.

#136 you ref the 1 to 5% living 30 years hiv+... do you have more to back thst up and compare to demographics like the risk groups, etc????

Imho that would help get to not only truth now but also root causes and solutions rather than more peoplike me saying iy doesnt add up right. Like that recent sci mag report on treatment vs transmission. If iy really is good and is web published without cru style manipulated peer reviews (once were a good thimg but now are political and ive been a peer and had peer reviews, thiugh enginerring domain,... politics does trump science including the mag.

#137 yea stats are what im saying would answer my curiosity of deusbergs points.

The only data on the subject ive seen is along our dialog here. So i found better data about flu but not hiv. So far nobodys come up with that. Just anecdotes.

#138 like does that report on treatment vs tx have some persuasine evidence or is in only a hint with so much spin it cums off pusing drugs? It wasnt free so idk.