You guys are all nuts. Magic Johnson is the cure…Jon is right…
just watch some south park.
has nayone besides me listened to the new Erykah Badu album yet?( new amerykah) pretty dope!
…i love the direction that this thread is taking:woot:
Deusberg has a theory. He’s proved quite perfectly what led him to the theory and that’s that. It’s not on him, his statements have been since the beginning for Gallo to compensate for the many holes in his initial document. You should read that actually, and read what the exact reasons are that led them to conclude HIV=AIDS. It’s not scientific, it’s logic based and a teenager could provide a situation which breaks the absolution of the conclusion.
Gallo is a fraud on many levels. The dude even attempted to take full credit (although not on his own) for the discovery of HIV when he clearly (and documented) stole it from the French Pasteur Institute. When they screamed out, he and his buddies made an agreement and that’s where the final acronym HIV was made to be (he originall called it HTLV and they called it LAV).
His papers aren’t very convincing, constantly have been shown to take from others and never ever offered anything strongly conclusive with the exception of how it should be treated (and guess what that fed into).
The guy is an FDA poster child and has defended, created and attended their many means of mass media infliction since the beginning.
There’s so much out there against him it’s hilarious. You should hear him answer questions and talk - he’s essentially a politician.
Derogatory terms encompassing the entirity of the AIDS truth movement is crazy man. These aren’t would-be doctors. Many of them are scientists. Scientists. Many of them are doctors (and I mean many). Many of them worked for the AIDS awareness commities.
A couple of them are Noble Prize winning. Dr. Kary Mullis, the very person who invented the PCR (polymearse chain reaction) technology, which is ironically used to determine the ‘viral load’ in an HIV patient is one of them. This guy’s done interview crying about how fucked up the whole situation is and how many needless deaths have been caused.
Spook =>I may be down for 3s. Please post up the specifics.
I want this one.
the whole reason we believe HIV causes AIDS is right here in this book:
if you skip to “HIV Infection and its Epidemiology (33-56)”
and read this page: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=771&page=34
you’ll notice some really fishy numbers.
- the study was done exclusively on homosexual men
- 3/36 and 53/399 HIV positive homosexual men developped AIDS (8% and 13% respectively)
- the definition for AIDS is the bullshit definiton from the CDC (disease + HIV= AIDS; disease - HIV = disease) http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=771&page=202
This is the next that the US government and all the pharmaceutical companies used to convince us that HIV = AIDS and nobody bothered to read it and ask questions.
Did I mention this book also recommends AZT as the cure?
How did this get through? We’re going make a causation statement based on 8-13% results?
I’m learning a lot from you guys…
As for the 3s tonight, we can probably get started as soon as 6 or 7:00 and go pretty late
^
Sick. PM your address.
[media=youtube]_IRUV6UAYfs&feature=related"[/media]
There is very good reasoning behind the presence of HIV and the acquisition of AIDS symptoms. You have to realize that AIDS at this point is not a virus, it’s the lack of immune system. AIDS patients die from a whole variety of different virii, whereas HIV positive people may not show any symptoms.
What you have to take from the arguments of the pro HIV -> AIDS side is that a much higher percentage of people with AIDS symptoms have HIV than not. If you wish to question the research that has come up with these findings, that’s a whole other can of worms. But the research is there identifying a dependent set of statistics.
What isn’t so prevalent is that some HIV+ individuals never develop AIDS symptoms. This in itself does not disprove the HIV±>AIDS theorem.
Khiem, you have to account for an HIV- targetted group, and read the development of AIDS within that group, and compare. This is called the Control group. Without this, there really is no research done, and the numbers are meaningless.
By the way, I am aware that the AIDS Cocktail kills your immune system, effectively giving you AIDS anyways. And Magic Johnson uses retroviral inhibitors extracted from HIV+ patients.
i can only rep every 100 reps… so if i rep you once i cant rep you till i rep 100 more people. (it’s UBER lame, i know) but i’ll get there eventually hahaha
the only number I’ve ever seen about this is the following: Less than 1% of HIV positive individuals have AIDS.
That was from the video that was taken down.
I’d love to hear more recent/stronger statistics for otherwise. But nobody wants to publish that kind of number. Even in the '88 report I posted, AIDS existed in 8% and 13% of the two test groups of purely HIV postive individuals. And these were biased test groups (exclusively homosexual).
The correlation logic used by all pro HIV=AIDS supporters is that a large percentage of AIDS victims/patients have HIV. I’ll even accept their number (which something like 97%). But when I’m told, and nobody has told me any better that less than 1% of the population with HIV develops AIDS; I can’t rationally buy into the theory. Correlation =/= Causation.
Even smoking causation of lung cancer is kinda shaky. I was told 50% of all smokers develop lung cancer/emphesima/lung and throat related illnesses.
If I said that 100% of all muslim suicide bombers owned/reads a qu’ran would that mean that the qu’ran causes people to become suicide bombers?
Think about how they’re playing the facts when you read the data.
Ninja Edit: There seems to be people in the world who are trying to fight AIDS and not HIV and aren’t completely blind. Check this: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010521/stillwaggon
“Among all low- and middle-income countries, HIV prevalence is strongly correlated with falling protein consumption, falling calorie consumption, unequal distribution of national income and, to a lesser extent, labor migration?. Poverty not only creates the biological conditions for greater susceptibility to infectious diseases, it also limits the options for treating disease.” - Eileen Stillwaggon
arun, lemme know if you’re driving to spooks, cause i thnk it’s gonna start raining and i don’t have any windows
Ahmed, what time is it? [media=youtube]BZ3W6xQxr2Y[/media]
That’s the thing about data. You can take whatever data you want to emphasize your point, and leave out something that is of equal import to further your point. You ever see the documentary LooseChange? This is the exact thing I’m talking about, someone diclosing images, but not the full picture, to accredit their theory. It happens on both ends, but in this case, I’m specifically defending the thought that HIV causes AIDS.
If you take your argument into perspective, you’ll never agree that anything causes anything. Take your tobacco argument, or alcohol consumption with liver cirrhosis. You can’t guarantee that consuming 500ml of ethyl alcohol daily will give you 100% chance of developing liver cirrhosis, but does that mean that alcohol is not a leading cause of it?
What percentage of people die from gunshot wounds? Does this mean guns don’t kill people because it’s not 100%? I know this is a ridiculous argument, just as ridiculous as your relation to muslim suicide bombers. Seriously man, you’re starting with a set that already has 100% of the people reading the Qu’Ran, then extracting suicide bombers out of this set. My previous point was you need a control group to compare to.
What I’m trying to say is that whatever percentage of the HIV+ population that acquires AIDS is not the important figure. What’s important is the statistical comparison between the percentage of HIV+ people developing AIDS against the percentage of HIV- individuals contracting AIDS. Once this is done you can see if AIDS is probabilistically dependent on HIV within a certain confidence interval.
Yo Roble hows the arcade stick going?
[media=youtube]d-rVFc0itk4&NR=1[/media]
^
… I have a feeling its fake tho.
new south park tonight!!1
that crazy Ippo [media=youtube]EtO7MGnRaOw[/media]
^ lol…
Truth.
The Definition of HIV will have to change for that to happen.