Posted on 10/08/2009 8:38:04 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
October 7, 2009
Evidence Offered with Respect to Historical Events Concerning Consensus and Dissent on the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis
Darin Brown Ph.D.
Introduction
For many people, doubt of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis is associated with one individual, a German-American biochemist, Peter Duesberg, a professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley. However, Duesberg is not alone in his dissent from AIDS orthodoxy. Many prominent and distinguished scientists and academics either agree with his position on HIV or support dissent from the HIV-AIDS hypothesis in some fashion. Several of these have either conducted research on retroviruses (the class of viruses to which HIV belongs), treated AIDS patients, helped developed HIV antibody tests, worked on drugs in the same class as those used to treat HIV, or made fundamental contributions to the theoretical scientific grounding upon which the hypothesis rests. (See Appendices A and B below.) Nevertheless, the mainstream media and AIDS propagandists continue to spread the false claim that only a “tiny minority” or “handful” of “fringe” scientists disagree with the HIV consensus. This document will present a brief synopsis of historical events concerning consensus and dissent on the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, exposing this claim as wholly unsubstantiated by fact. It will also show that dissent from the hypothesis is a very real and growing global phenomenon...
(Excerpt) Read more at rethinkingaids.com ...
|
|
Had to change the title because it didn’t fit, and it didn’t make any sense to abbreviate it. Actual title is in the body of the post. Hope that’s ok—GGG
PING! It’s been a while...hope everybody is still FReeping :o)
GGG, is there an issue out there that you're right on? Surely, there must be something.
GGG — why don’t you put this issue to rest finally by injecting yourself with HIV. See what happens!
What an effing dick
I’m sure I have quite accurately summed up what a closed minded, anti-science, Luddite, evo-cretin you are many times d:op
Just inject yourself GGG. When you don’t get aids you’ll win the Nobel prize. Just do it.
I’ve heard of this before, knew that the mainstream had pretty much pooh poohed it, but never kept track where it went. How do you google for such an anti-hypothesis?
If HIV doesn’t mean AIDS... well what does mean AIDS and why?
cat fight. cat fight. a cat fight we really don’t need right now.
Well, I had heard some believed it was a side effect of drug addiction.
But that is a really MEAN thing to say to GGG, and especially in the middle of the hell we are going through.
If it were the objective of someone — Russian intelligence service, DNC, dummies — to discredit the conservative movement, what better way than to post cr*p on conservative blog sites like FR and suggest that it is typical of the membership? I’d suggest some blatantly ridiculous, anti-scientific posts that any half-awake person would reflexively disagree with — articles opposing evolution or dismissing AIDS research. You get the idea.
Your website was started by a homo AIDS alarmist that wants to convince America that we are all equally at risk so they can separate you from your wallet and otherwise push their homosexual agenda. I thought you might be interested in some of the other issues they are pushing over at your website:
“October 11th is National Coming Out Day in America. This is a day for raising awareness and encouraging discussion about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues. AVERT has more about what it means to ‘come out’ and the ‘coming out’ process.”
And so it might be. But we can’t help if someone with malice in mind looks at 1% of the discussions and ignores the other 99%. That’s how you get things like trolls who say they loved Reagan but are absolutely dismayed with Sarah Palin.
+1 for guts. Illegitimi non carborundum.
For good layman’s explanation to get you started, see my profile page. If you want to get into the science after you’re done with that, feel free to PM me.
All the best—GGG
“That” website, I don’t know if devere was promoting it or not.
==GGG — why don’t you put this issue to rest finally by injecting yourself with HIV. See what happens!
Spoken like a true homosexual AIDS alarmist.
I'll answer for GGG. He is right on this issue. Duesberg is right and the HIV/AIDS Lobby is wrong. Period.
Ignore those waxing mean spirited. It is a time of great devilment, it appears. I mean I don’t think I have seen LESS good news on FR in an evening, for a LONG time.
Provide an alternate disease model that fits the data. You can't. There isn't one. And throwing up a pseudo-learned smokescreen only shows how little you really care for the backbreaking science that went into this.
I'm off the thread. Enjoy your little fantasy and hope to God that those of us who actually do know something about the topic solve it despite you.
Seconded.
Well kind of looks like an enumerated manifesto, but the kernel seems to be the assertion that HIV need not necessarily mean AIDS. So there would presumably be some other factor needed before it would mean AIDS.
I am not going to get mean and ask you try it on yourself! But I think very few would. I would not want to gamble that I didn’t also have this mysterious extra agent X or whatever.
It’s even hotter now, as prediction after prediction by Duesberg et al are validated by empirical science, whereas the AIDS alarmists are having about the same amount of success as their global warming alarmist counterparts.
Not even close to what this growing body of scientists and MDs are saying. Like I said, take the time to educate yourself by reading the layman’s articles in the “Conservative Press” section of my profile page.
I was in the field. You are categorically wrong on every count.
“pushing over at your website”
not my website.
They make a compelling logical argument that HIV causes AIDS.
Answer their argument, point by point, if you can.
My guess is you cannot.
What would... HYPOTHETICALLY!... bring you to the point that you would believe it possible to get a dose of HIV yourself without turning up with AIDS too? What would you look for?
It's easy.
"George W. Bush started the AIDS crisis to distract from his failed, illegal, immoral war in Iraq which was only to benefit his Big Oil friends and Cheney's payments from Halliburton." /DU mode>
"Oh, yes. And Reagan helped because he hates black people and gays." /Daily KOS mode>
Cheers!
I don’t care where you worked, you are an AIDS alarmist, and you are wrong.
I don’t care what you choose to believe, I earned my conclusions and you’re playing at them like an amateur. Good evening.
LOL, your post is nothing but a "pseudo-learned smokescreen." Duesberg debunked the HIV theory with genuine "backbreaking science" and he has never - never - been refuted. The article posted to this thread links to a site which describes this debunking in detail and the dozens of peer-level scientists who go into detail examining and agreeing with the debunking.
It is not up to Duesberg to proved a disease model that fits the data - it is up to proponents of any particular disease model to successfully defend it, and that is what Duesberg has shown cannot be done with the HIV/AIDS model.
Learn some real science, and save your absurdly spiteful wrath for something you understand.
HIV is a common occurance when immune activity is involved. Getting the common flu will test a person positive for HIV until the flu is over.
I don’t know about “alarmist” but even the old guard has been adamant that without getting infected bodily fluids from another HIV or AIDS sufferer, you won’t get AIDS. That’s a rather uncommon kind of contact unless buggery or other reception of sexual fluids is involved. The gays are screaming about contagions that they could solve 99.99% by stopping the buggery. They are the alarmists and they yank the alarm while tossing the Molotov cocktail, hardly fair.
Don’t let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.
Actually I understand this quite a bit better then you do. I met Duesberg. You’re working him into some sort of antiestablishment scientific hero. Believe it if you like, I’m not going to try to talk you out of it. But he’s using you.
And yet... without the “conventional” means of transmission of AIDS occurring... this “positive to HIV test” status doesn’t ever progress to AIDS. Or does it?
I won’t. Thanks for your concern. Now play your little games and tell yourselves how much smarter you all are than the people who came up with protease inhibitors. And an 85% decrease in mortality. Oh, but that never happened, did it? Duesberg says so... I shouldn’t be angry, and I won’t be. I’m laughing at you.
But did you read his work, and can you debunk it, and if so, please do - I'm waiting to be educated, right here, right now, in detail, with specifics, by you.
Go for it.
You want twenty years of education posted to you on an internet forum with you fighting it every step of the way? Can’t be done and it’s useless to try. Have a great evening.
There seems to be a number of other events that have to occur for AIDS to happen, and it's not at all clear that HIV ever "proceeds" to AIDS even when it is found with AIDS, since HIV occurs under several other conditions. In other words, HIV may simply be concurrent with AIDS, and not causitive - especially since no causation has ever been found.
Two theories being explored concerning AIDS creation, that I know of, are drug use (especially amyl nitrate), and anal reception of semen. Both seem to have a particularly damaging effect on the immune system, the first through adrenal exhaustion and direct chemical damage, the latter through the reception of semen outside of normal immune protection. Women are protected through vaginal mucosa, but that doesn't exist in anal and rectal areas, and so the semen gets into the body literally as an invader. And of course, there's also genetic alterations and predispositions that are being researched.
So it's not like a lot of work isn't being done in the field. But the simplistic "HIV creates AIDS" formula has been scientifically debunked for over 20 years.
Well, Einstein managed to spit out E=mc2 as a general concept. I just thought that maybe, in your vast study of this subject, you could point to something - anything - anywhere - that would show Duesberg is in error.
After all, Duesberg isn't hiding anything. In particular, on the very article this thread is linked to, he points out: "the low annual incidence of AIDS, the inconsistency of a long clinical "latency" period with the short period of virus replication, the low levels of active virus, the fact that retroviruses do not kill cells, and the lack of an animal model."
So like I said, let's hear something for your 20 years of work. Some little thing that addresses these issues. All of Duesbergs work is easily found. So just give us some statements, and a link where we can read about their background.
Surely in 20 years, you know of such things, especially since you feel so strongly about the subject.
C’mon, man, is there no end to the kinds of crank ideas you’re willing to believe? Give it a rest!
Remember when the big drive was on for Congress to give virtually every govt. research dollar to AIDS research because it was not a respecter of persons and was the primary killer of certain age groups, and was going to decimate heterosexuals as well as homosexuals? Just didn't happen. I went to CDC statistics and found it was only the highest killer for certain age groups of males. The numbers were fudged and manipulated to cater to "Gays".
The only thing that makes me wonder about this hypothesis of drug abuse being causal is the spread in Africa. Of course, once someone has it, it is sexually spread; also I have no idea about African abuse of native drugs.
I think this is a very interesting article. Certainly Dr. Duesberg is imminently qualified. I do not think a new light being shined on an old subject should ever be dismissed out of hand. Look at all the "imminent" scientists touting global warming and ecos and media refusing to hear thousands of other scientists.
vaudine
Stick to AIDS and global warming alarmist threads, Snarks. These threads are about genuine science, and will therefore go right over your boring little head.
Give the following a read re: African AIDS. As you will see, AIDS Rethinkers think something else is going on in Africal altogether.
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/pdafrica.htm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.