Top Scientists Ask Medical Journal Science To Retract Original AIDS Papers

Rethinking AIDS ^ | December 9, 2008

[memer]

Try and get this through your head....EVEN GALLO didn’t find any virus. Go look at his papers.

The drug manufacturers make NO claim that their drugs are helping anyone with aids. I already posted some of the disclaimers. You can ignore them if you it makes you feel better.

If you feel suspicious about what I posted go to the drug manufacturers websites and see for yourself. By law they have to disclose.

I am not going to respond to the typical attacks of the viral theory of aids..i.e. ad hominem, emotional blackmail, etc.

if it makes you feel better to do that rather than ask questions and look into it then I can’t stop you but I have better things to do.

[memer]

I am not misrepresenting anything. I already answered that question. You have to read the whole study and not just the abstract.

[memer]

Direct all claims that I’m misrepresenting the article over here. I’m done

http://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2006/08/more_on_african.html

or here

http://groups.msn.com/AIDSMythExposed/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=1&ID_Message=36631

I can’t keep saying the same thing over and over again.

[allmendream]

All I have to read is the abstract to tell you that the 19% man to woman and the 2.4% woman to man HIV transmission rate observed among condom using heterosexuals is not and never will be a ZERO transmission rate.

Are you claiming that a 19% and 2.4% transmission rate was not observed? What then does “Zero transmission” mean to you?

“I already answered that” is the typical ploy of someone who doesn’t have the answer.

[allmendream]

Cant keep repeating the same untruthful statements over and over again?

A 19% and 2.4% transmission rate is not and never will be a zero transmission rate.

Why do you feel the need to misrepresent these data?

[js1138]

You can't take ZERO transmissions "out of context"--------

Sure you can. For example, you can imply that couples were followed for ten years, which would be a lie.

[js1138]

But TOP SCIENTISTS dispute the HIV/AIDS hypothesis:

Kofi Ababio. Assistant Professor of Anthropology, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Folarin Abimbola. Medical student, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile Ife, Nigeria.

Jotham Achineku. Engineer, Ikeja, Nigeria.

Leonardo Acosta. Journalist, Author of more than a dozen books, Havana, Cuba.

‘Ayo Adeboye. Physician, Nigeria.

Martin Adjuik. MSc, Biostatistician, WHO Fellow, Navrongo Health Research Centre, Ghana.

Sina Ahmadi. Medical Student, Tehran, Iran

Syed Masud Ahmed. Physician, MBBS, MPH, Senior Medical Officer, Research and Evaluation Division, BRAC Centre, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Dr Yele Akinrolabu. Lagos, Nigeria

Morris Alexander. Senior Public Prosecutor, Pietermaritzburg Magistrate’s Court, South Africa

Anita Allen. Journalist, former Science Writer, The Star, Johannesburg, South Africa

Karin Wiedmer Aebersold. Homeopathic doctor, Hefenhofen, Switzerland.

Mabili Ajani. Broadcast Journalist, Tampa, Florida

To be fair, there are some people with actual qualifications on the list. But when you eliminate the unqualified, the list is pretty short.

[memer]

How do reconcile the statements in the abstract with the statements on page 356? You DO have to read more the abstract---------- "We followed up 175 HIV-discordant couples [one partner tests positive, one negative] over time, for a total of approximately 282 couple-years of follow up NO transmission [of HIV] occurred among the 25% of couples who did NOT use their condoms consistently, nor among the 47 couples who intermittently practiced unsafe sex during the entire duration of follow-up We observed NO seroconversions AFTER entry into the study" [NOBODY became HIV positive] Padian page 356 ------ The people in the abstract were + BEFORE the study began. Nobody who wasn't + became + AFTER the study began. Don't be lazy, go read it.

[memer]

You are attacking the messengers instead of looking at what they’re saying. You are also leaving out the signatories with caucasian names and those that are intimately involved in hiv/aids, like Kary Mullis who won the Nobel prize for inventing the PCR which is a cornerstone of the viral theory of aids.

GO LOOK at Gallo’s original “proof” instead of looking for ways to shoot the messengers.

http://fearoftheinvisible.com/fraud-in-key-hiv-research-background

[js1138]

You argue as if nothing has been done or learned since 1994.

There’s a reason why you and GGG show charts and graphs and quote studies that cut off in 1996. That was just prior to effective antiviral therapy. You don’t dare show data comparing AIDS mortality before and after the availability of multi-drug therapy.

But since you’re back you can answer my yes or no question.

Is anal sex safe and not capable of transmitting AIDS?

[allmendream]

One again you misrepresent the data. You claimed the authors observed NO transmission. Their abstract shows a transmission rate of 19% and 4%.

This is what the quote your trying to lift out of context says. They followed up 175 couples with one partner infected and the other not infected. 25% of these did not use condoms consistently, that is 44 couples. 47 couples intermittently practiced unsafe sex. That is only a subset of 91/175 couples, or only 52% of the sample that is covered under these two subsets of people among whom they observed no transmission of HIV.

Among ALL the couples studies they did not, as you erroneously claimed, observe a ZERO transmission rate, they observed a 19% transmission rate for male to female infection and a 4% transmission rate for female to male infection.

[memer]

I already posted some of the drug disclaimers. Go and check the manufaturers’ web sites if you doubt what I posted. Even the drug manufacturers don’t claim the drugs are helping anyone.

If you choose ignore that that’s up to you.

I already answered your question. You keep pretending I haven’t. I don’t know why but it probably has to do with the same reason you choose to ignore the disclaimers the manufacturers put on their own products.

[memer]

I already said you have to read more than the abstract. If you choose not to that’s up to you.

How do you reconcile Padian’s claims of transmission when she herself observed NO transmission?

We observed NO seroconversions AFTER entry into the study” [NOBODY became HIV positive] Padian page 356

[memer]

I already said you have to read more than the abstract. If you choose not to that’s up to you.

How do you reconcile Padian’s claims of transmission when she herself observed NO transmission?

We observed NO seroconversions AFTER entry into the study” [NOBODY became HIV positive] Padian page 356

[allmendream]

That you have taken it out of context and wish to only discuss a subset of the group in the paragraph you took out of context. There was no transmission among that subset of 52% of the experimental group, but clearly not ‘no transmission’ among all subjects.

In the abstract Padian’s group clearly shows that there is a 19% transmission rate from male to female and a 4% transmission rate from female to male.

How do you reconcile the clear observation in the abstract with your erroneous claim that there was no transmission?

You claimed she observed no transmission. Why do you feel the need to misrepresent these data? Clearly she observed a 19% and 4% transmission rate, as anyone who reads the abstract of the study can observe. Clearly your out of context excerpt only covered a subset of the experimental population, the part YOU want to talk about because they observed no transmission among those 52% of the experimental group.

But why do you feel the need to claim erroneously that she observed no transmission? Why do you need to misrepresent that data and claim a 19% and 4% observed transmission rate in this study was a zero transmission rate?

[js1138]

I already answered your question. You keep pretending I haven’t.

Then you will no doubt be able to supply the post number where you answered the yes or no question: Is anal sex safe and not capable of transmitting AIDS?

[js1138]

But why do you feel the need to claim erroneously that she observed no transmission? Why do you need to misrepresent that data and claim a 19% and 4% observed transmission rate in this study was a zero transmission rate?

I hate to keep bringing this up, but there is something really odd about HIV denial. The original HIV deniers were militant gays, but most of them died. I can't quite figure the motives of the current crop.

[allmendream]

Really odd. What is their motivation? Why do they feel the need to misrepresent the data at every step?

I can see believing something based upon good data, but when you have to misrepresent the data, shouldn’t that tell you something about how untenable and unsupportable the belief is?

[js1138]

I just find it really odd that someone like GGG should devote his life to hurting or attempting to hurt other people.

I mean, I don’t really care if he thinks the earth is 6000 years old or that gold will reach $1600 in the summer of 2008, or that DNA is unrelated to phenotypes. These are just delusions.

But I have trouble with people who use the forum to promote dangerous medical advice.

Notice that neither GGG nor his buds will answer a straight question about the sexual transmission of AIDS, nor will they or anyone in their circle take the risk of infecting themselves with the “harmless” HIV virus.

But they’re happy to run websites telling other people HIV is harmless.

[memer]

The mortality rate was going down BEFORE the drugs were introduced. I’m looking for the reference now, I haven’t seen it in awhile. In the mean time...

“The most common cause of death among HIV positive people (being treated with AIDS meds) is liver failure.”

— Amy Justice, Aids Researcher, 14th International AIDS Conference in Barcelona, 2002

more studies re: the drugs can be found here

http://www.jpands.org/jpands1204.htm

Questioning HIV/AIDS: Morally Reprehensible
or Scientifically Warranted?

AAPS Winter 2007