Posted on 05/01/2005 10:00:15 AM PDT by TapTheSource
I think that's true. It's frightening to think that a plague like AIDS, which has sucked up immense amounts of government funding and medical research funds, is mostly politicized, with very little done to stop its spread.
I think a lot of the research money may be usefully spent on related matters, like immunodeficiency and cancer, so the money's not entirely wasted. I don't say Duesberg is wrong, I just don't know if he's right. Normally his work would either be confirmed or refuted by other researchers, but I'm afraid I don't believe anyone has really done either. They just condemn him out of hand.
And incidentally, I can read and it is a reflection on your troubled state that you find it necessary to ping me twice just because you forgot something in your breathless haste to sound informative.
That statement is total vomit!
It is the prescribed drugs that are doing the killing, long before the disease itself can. AIDS is not a viral disease, and 'HIV' is a harmless passenger virus, if it is a virus at all. Magic Johnson and Christine Magiore are perfect living evidence of that fact. They both have been 'HIV-positive' for fifteen years, drug-free, and are in perfect health.
Peter Duesberg's book is fully factual, but he did miss the cause of AIDS. The cause of AIDS has been established by Dr. Lawrence Broxmeyer. AIDS is essentially tuberculosis. It is curable, and many people have been cured.
Go to New Century Press and get the book and open your eyes.
"It is the prescribed drugs that are doing the killing"
SO TRUE.
"ONLY 1% TAKING HAART IN 1996" - FOUR YEARS AFTER DRAMATIC DECREASE IN MORTALITIES STARTED.
The proportion of patients receiving HAART changed significantly over the
course of VATS…In January 1996, only 1% of 83 active patients were taking
HAART. This proportion increased to 52% on 1 January 1997, 69% on 1
January 1998, and 79% on 1 January 1999. At the time of enrollment, 31% of
patients were taking no antiretroviral medication, 44% were taking
antiretroviral medication other than HAART, and 24% were taking HAART. "
Murphy EL et al. Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Decreases Mortality
and Morbidity in Patients with Advanced HIV Disease. Ann Intern Med. 2001
Jul 3;135(1):17-26 .
_________
“These long-term nonprogressors [Hiv+ people who remained healthy] are a heterogeneous group with respect to viral load and HIV-1 responses…none had been treated with antiretroviral agents.”
AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses, 12: 585 (1996)
– Harrer, Thomas, et al, Aids Researchers
________
“Subjects: homosexual men in Amsterdam. “None of the LTAs [long-term asymptomatics–people who remained healthy]…received any antiviral drugs during the study [7 years].”
Journal of Infectious Diseases, 171:811 (1995)
– Hogervorst E, et al, Aids Researchers
_______
Only 38% of the HLP [Healthy long-term positives] had ever used zidovudine [AZT]
“…588 men; 42 were 10-15 year non-progressors. Only 38% of the HLP [Healthy long-term positives] had ever used zidovudine [AZT] or other nucleoside analogues, compared with 94% of the progressors [those who
developed AIDS].”
AIDS, 8:1123 (1994)
– Buchbinder, Susan, et al, Aids Researchers
_________
Haart free
“Seven of 112 hemophiliacs infected with human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) before 1986 through contaminated plasma products are currently healthy, with CD4 T-cell counts above 500 cells/microL, and have never received antiretroviral therapy.”
Blood 1997 Jan 1;89(1):191-200
– Vicenzi E, Bagnarelli P, et al, Aids Researchers
"143 Sudden Deaths Did Not Stop Approval"..
(143 deaths represents MORE deaths then the total of 1999 mortalities in Cororado, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Washington, New Mexico, Northand South Dakota, Oklahoma, W. Virgina, NJ, Delaware and Alaska combined)
A damning and horrifying accounts of how the US Food and Drug Administration acts in anything but good faith or the public interest. A blistering seven-page expose that points a finger at AIDS activist efforts to speed up the approval process.
"Once a wary watchdog, the Food and Drug Administration set out to become a 'partner' of the pharmaceutical industry. Today, the public has more remedies, but some are proving lethal."
By DAVID WILLMAN, Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON--For most of its history, the United Food and Drug Administration approved new prescription medicines at a grudging pace, daily homage to the physician's creed, "First, do no harm." Then in the early 1990s, the demand for AIDS drugs changed the political climate. Congress told the FDA to
work closely with pharmaceutical firms in getting new medicines to market more swiftly. President Clinton urged FDA leaders to trust industry as "partners, not adversaries..."
Choice headlines:
"Drug After Drug, Warnings Ignored...danger signs present...even so, top admistrators moved ahead often leaving doctors to assume the risks."
"Warning on Label Omits Deaths...heart problems were mentioned in fine print, not in key dosage data"
"143 Sudden Deaths Did Not Stop Approval...study results kept secret"
"Official Foresaw Deadly Effects..remedy pulled after of death and surgeries"
Find the whole article at
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/reports/fda/
Why people live longer now
To address the claim "that the new meds extends (sic) many of the lives who are hiv+ or have
aids", one need look no further than that bastion of orthodox "AIDS" think, The Journal of the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes and Human Retrovirology.
Publishing their
data in 1997, orthodox "AIDS" researchers claimed that "combination antiretroviral therapy with protease inhibitors clearly improves survival", yet they also state
that their own analysis showed "that San Francisco would have experienced a significant decline in AIDS cases, due to the decrease in HIV seroconversions,
even if combination antiretroviral therapy had not been developed." (J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1997, 16(3):182-189.)
The changed definition of AIDS is also a major factor.
For further verification
the 1993 revision of the definition of "AIDS" skewing survival data, please click onhttp://healtoronto.com/rrsurvival.html
In short, when the changing definition of "AIDS" (see the CDC's MMWR 1992; 41:1-19)
was compared to the old pre-1993 version of the definition in which people were diagnosed SOLELY upon clinical considerations (i.e. ACTUAL sicknesses), researchers found, lo and behold, an increase in survival of almost 2.5 times just by controlling
for the revised definition!
They published their findings in the VERY mainstream Journal of the American Medical Association
in 1994 (Vella S, et al. JAMA 1994; 271:1197-9).
So much for making "AIDS" a "managed disease" through "better" medications!
"Just let me know when Duesberg gets the Nobel and I'll re-evaluate the facts as known which are to date that he is a flake, a fluke, a flounder and no amount of sycophantic hoopla will change that."
Well, you are unable to answer any of the questions I posed to you.
How does that reflect on you?
Nobel... in the company of greats like Yassir Arafat and Jimmy Carter.
You didn't ask any questions worthy of a response. You posted a spin not at all credibel. Move along.
Please point me to 2 things
1) the study which isolates HIV
2) the study that shows it causes "AIDS"
I have heard hinckley bussard's vitriolic non-arguments before. They emanate from the likes of the Log Cabin Club, gay/AIDS lobby groups, the various AIDS foundations, the Hollywood left, not to mention CDC/NIH/WHO, etc.
He is the silliest kind of tenured nut.
You're most welcome!!! Please spread the word!!!
In any case Duesberg is only one of nearly 4,000 leading scientists and doctorsWHO ALL SAY 'AIDS' is a myth.
The list grows about 10 per week.
If in doubt see: -
http://groups.msn.com/Dissidents-WhosWho
In any case Duesberg is only one of nearly 4,000 leading scientists and doctors who ALL say 'AIDS' is a myth and a scam.
If in doubt take a look at: - http://groups.msn.com/Dissidents-WhosWho
The list grows by around ten a week.
That's good you acknoledge Duesberg is only one of the scientists questioning the HIV=AIDS mumbo jumbo. We shouldn't place all our eggs in one basket should any of these guys be coopted by the AIDS/Public Health Establishment--TTS
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.