HIV is a harmless virus and does not cause AIDS

Monty Burnz · 09-05-2011 11:18pm

uprising2 wrote: »

maybe I'll send you a PM when it hits the floor and you can advise me, although where I'll actually get a mortgage is a mystery at the moment, hopefully when I need it you will put me on to a bogey accountant who will invent a p60 and paperwork to go along with it.

Don't ask me or anyone else - always beware of gurus who claim to know stuff. I have a lot more time for people who tell you what they don't know. If you really want to buy, yhe only advise I'd have for you is to hold your fire for a few years, and consult widely. DYOR - the investor's mantra. Do Your Own Research. If more people had done this in the noughties...that's a whole other thread...

CiaranMT · 09-05-2011 11:51pm

The lack of knowledge and coherent thinking on the part of 2wsxcde3 here continues to be staggering.

The connection between HIV and AIDS is a fact. If there were any doubt about this then said doubt would be acknowledged by the medical community. But they don't doubt it.

One Dr. Neusberg contending with this fact does not make the whole house fall down.

You seriously think that the mountains and mountains of evidence for the link between HIV and AIDS is wrong? Seriously?

On your rather convoluted questions about why certain segments of the population are more at risk of HIV than others.... Really? You would (I hope) accept that young children and the elderly are more at risk of cold/'flu than other population categories? It's because they are more susceptible to the illnesses. Same with the people more likely to get HIV.

I can't believe Dr. Neusberg really said that if HIV caused AIDS (which it does), then the disease would be evenly spread worldwide. Does he really say that? If he does then he needs to check into a retirement home.

Your comparison of economics and it's recent failure to evidence for a HIV/AIDS link is laughable, really, for the reasons pointed out by Monty.

Now, could you please explain how HIV is harmless? Explain away nearly 7,000 HIV/AIDS patients in Ireland alone?

2wsxcde3 · 10-05-2011 4:01pm

CiaranMT wrote: »

Dr. Neusberg

Its Dr. Deusberg ...if you did your research.

CiaranMT wrote: »

I can't believe Dr. Neusberg really said that if HIV caused AIDS (which it does), then the disease would be evenly spread worldwide. Does he really say that?

Why are you asking me? Go find out what he says yourself. It's one of main principals discounting the HIV=AIDs hypotheses ...which you would have known if you actually looked into the topic in discussion instead of coming on here and pretending to know what you're talking about without bothering to actually examine the issue.

CiaranMT wrote: »

Your comparison of economics and it's recent failure to evidence for a HIV/AIDS link is laughable

Experts have been wrong on plenty of occasions throughout history. If you think experts nowadays are different for some reason and not prone to getting things wrong occasionally, take a look at your paycheck at the end of this month.

Brown Bomber · 10-05-2011 4:05pm

CiaranMT wrote: »

The lack of knowledge and coherent thinking on the part of 2wsxcde3 here continues to be staggering...One Dr. Neusberg... Dr. Neusberg

:P

Monty Burnz · 10-05-2011 4:08pm

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Experts have been wrong on plenty of occasions throughout history. If you think experts nowadays are different for some reason and not prone to getting things wrong occasionally, take a look at your paycheck at the end of this month.

Do you know who is wrong even more often than 'experts'? People who say all the experts are wrong. 99.99% of the time they are talking out of their behinds.

You haven't addressed a lot of the points put to you here. If you don't want to, just tell us that, it's fair enough, and we'll stop asking questions.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 10-05-2011 4:16pm

clever_name wrote: »

Maybe Africans have higher instances of AIDs due to a lack of sexual education? or because condoms are uncommon there?

There's another big reason. A lot of Africans have genetic resistance to malaria. Unfortunately what's responsible for this resistance has a side effect of making you more likely to catch HIV.

HIV rates are higher in all malaria zones - South East Asia/South America

Bottle_of_Smoke · 10-05-2011 4:19pm

robtri wrote: »

so gay men are more at risk of aids because they engage in anal sex....

there are a lot of women who go brown as well as pink.... so how come women arent at greater risk????

Men are also more promiscuous than women.

CiaranMT · 10-05-2011 4:22pm

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Its Dr. Deusberg ...if you did your research.

Why are you asking me? Go find out what he says yourself. It's one of main principals discounting the HIV=AIDs hypotheses ...which you would have known if you actually looked into the topic in discussion instead of coming on here and pretending to know what you're talking about without bothering to actually examine the issue.

Experts have been wrong on plenty of occasions throughout history. If you think experts nowadays are different for some reason and not prone to getting things wrong occasionally, take a look at your paycheck at the end of this month.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

:P

A pedant like me making such a glaring spelling mistake - oh dear

@2wsxcde3, so he does say that the disease should be spread evenly worldwide?

He definitely needs to think about retiring.

RoboClam · 10-05-2011 4:34pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

There's another big reason. A lot of Africans have genetic resistance to malaria. Unfortunately what's responsible for this resistance has a side effect of making you more likely to catch HIV.

HIV rates are higher in all malaria zones - South East Asia/South America

I assume the resistance you refer to is having non symptomatic sickle-cell amaemia. I've never heard of it making someone more likely to contract HIV though. Would you mind linking me so that I can read more about it?

Interestingly, patients with both sickle-cell and HIV seem to actually be more resistant to progressing to AIDS [Link]

amacachi · 10-05-2011 7:53pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Men are also more promiscuous than women.

I would have thought that in terms of heterosexuals the amount of sex would have to be more or less the same for each gender?

Monty Burnz · 10-05-2011 8:02pm

amacachi wrote: »

I would have thought that in terms of heterosexuals the amount of sex would have to be more or less the same for each gender?

Not necessarily. You could have 90% of the men having sex with 60% of the women, or whatever.

amacachi · 10-05-2011 8:02pm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Not necessarily. You could have 90% of the men having sex with 60% of the women, or whatever.

The mean still comes out the same.

Monty Burnz · 10-05-2011 8:08pm

amacachi wrote: »

The mean still comes out the same.

Indeed, but is the mean what we are concerned with? If you had 10 men and 10 HIV positive prostitutes, the mean for sexual encounters will be the same whether 5 men have sex with the ten (2 encounters for each man), or all 10 men have sex with the ten (one encounter each). Which situation leads to more HIV positive men?

amacachi · 10-05-2011 8:53pm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Indeed, but is the mean what we are concerned with? If you had 10 men and 10 HIV positive prostitutes, the mean for sexual encounters will be the same whether 5 men have sex with the ten (2 encounters for each man), or all 10 men have sex with the ten (one encounter each). Which situation leads to more HIV positive men?

The same no? Still the same number, 10, of possible infections.

EDIT: Though in that scenario the max number of infections possible is actually lowered if you assume that half of men are promiscuous and half aren't.

Monty Burnz · 10-05-2011 9:00pm

amacachi wrote: »

The same no? Still the same number, 10, of possible infections.

EDIT: Though in that scenario the max number of infections possible is actually lowered if you assume that half of men are promiscuous and half aren't.

Um - in one scenario 5 guys have no sex at all... :pac:

whisper83 · 14-05-2011 10:39pm

How about you look at some of these... they're brand new!

Forget white flags- would you be able to bring yourself to put your hands up if you actually watched these and thought perhaps 2wsxcde3 had a point regarding the need for further research, many flaws in the orthodox theory and many people dying on azt & co.? So many things cause autoimmunity generally even in those who test negative/unreactive on HIV tests. Every HIV test ever made also contains a disclaimer saying it cannot be used without a confirmatory test... all of which also have disclaimers. Don't think 2wsxcde3 is claiming to have all the answers just expressing a healthy dose of scepticism. If your really that sure there's no two ways about it then pperhaps you could watch these documentaries (particularly the first) and share your views.

As an aside with regard to AZT... the highest cause of death in AIDS patients on the meds is liver failure-from the drugs

House of Numbers

http://youtu.be/PSqqHVD2GtY

http://youtu.be/EgQzXWxi2P8

http://youtu.be/Nx_D3mzu4Jo

http://youtu.be/fPGKLnUvYf8

http://youtu.be/vOceFU39ESU

http://youtu.be/0O-oAzgkF6w

http://youtu.be/wjB-r_VFz1E

http://youtu.be/moxqzIiXfhk

http://youtu.be/sJR4EjOlTZc

http://youtu.be/FoxCtYBXNpc

http://youtu.be/Vq3QnlJqKO8

_________________________

The Other Side of AIDS

http://youtu.be/7x0FXsDD8lg

http://youtu.be/_V_zyKXGI38

http://youtu.be/MAatThtEscY

http://youtu.be/0I3LVkKLpBg

http://youtu.be/XoJ54gdpaf0

http://youtu.be/mArOHr1gxzc

http://youtu.be/6Eu54BuVZsk

http://youtu.be/knJ5t0A8p3o

http://youtu.be/msAtAiD6dbc

______________________________

What is AIDS

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/268.html

_____________________________________

http://youtu.be/4uC-ipFhqOA

http://www.howpositiveareyou.com/

______________________________

Channel 4 Dispatches: Aids in Africa

http://youtu.be/nt-oP9uqzfc
___________________________

A former AIDS patient speaks out

http://youtu.be/SXuYO0RJ9Xk

What Black Box Warning?

http://youtu.be/u5s4E56v0KQ

Lab_Mouse · 15-05-2011 12:46am

whisper83 wrote: »

How about you look at some of these... they're brand new!

Forget white flags- would you be able to bring yourself to put your hands up if you actually watched these and thought perhaps 2wsxcde3 had a point regarding the need for further research, many flaws in the orthodox theory and many people dying on azt & co.? So many things cause autoimmunity generally even in those who test negative/unreactive on HIV tests. Every HIV test ever made also contains a disclaimer saying it cannot be used without a confirmatory test... all of which also have disclaimers. Don't think 2wsxcde3 is claiming to have all the answers just expressing a healthy dose of scepticism. If your really that sure there's no two ways about it then pperhaps you could watch these documentaries (particularly the first) and share your views.

As an aside with regard to AZT... the highest cause of death in AIDS patients on the meds is liver failure-from the drugs

House of Numbers

http://youtu.be/PSqqHVD2GtY

http://youtu.be/EgQzXWxi2P8

http://youtu.be/Nx_D3mzu4Jo

http://youtu.be/fPGKLnUvYf8

http://youtu.be/vOceFU39ESU

http://youtu.be/0O-oAzgkF6w

http://youtu.be/wjB-r_VFz1E

http://youtu.be/moxqzIiXfhk

http://youtu.be/sJR4EjOlTZc

http://youtu.be/FoxCtYBXNpc

http://youtu.be/Vq3QnlJqKO8

_________________________

The Other Side of AIDS

http://youtu.be/7x0FXsDD8lg

http://youtu.be/_V_zyKXGI38

http://youtu.be/MAatThtEscY

http://youtu.be/0I3LVkKLpBg

http://youtu.be/XoJ54gdpaf0

http://youtu.be/mArOHr1gxzc

http://youtu.be/6Eu54BuVZsk

http://youtu.be/knJ5t0A8p3o

http://youtu.be/msAtAiD6dbc

______________________________

What is AIDS

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/268.html

_____________________________________

http://youtu.be/4uC-ipFhqOA

http://www.howpositiveareyou.com/

______________________________

Channel 4 Dispatches: Aids in Africa

http://youtu.be/nt-oP9uqzfc
___________________________

A former AIDS patient speaks out

http://youtu.be/SXuYO0RJ9Xk

What Black Box Warning?

http://youtu.be/u5s4E56v0KQ

im so glad you dont know how to embed youtube clips:pac:

Bottle_of_Smoke · 15-05-2011 12:58am

RoboClam wrote: »

I assume the resistance you refer to is having non symptomatic sickle-cell amaemia. I've never heard of it making someone more likely to contract HIV though. Would you mind linking me so that I can read more about it?

Interestingly, patients with both sickle-cell and HIV seem to actually be more resistant to progressing to AIDS [Link]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7509210.stm

amacachi wrote: »

I would have thought that in terms of heterosexuals the amount of sex would have to be more or less the same for each gender?

Its far easier for a guy to have sex with a different guy every week than it is for him to get a different girl every week.

Girls have higher standards than guys so straight guys have less opportunity to have sex than a gay man would

Di0genes · 15-05-2011 1:49am

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7509210.stm

Its far easier for a guy to have sex with a different guy every week than it is for him to get a different girl every week.

Girls have higher standards than guys so straight guys have less opportunity to have sex than a gay man would

Never been to copperfaced jacks?

Brown Bomber · 15-05-2011 2:04am

Di0genes wrote: »

Never been to copperfaced jacks?

you don't have much luck with men there?

Seriously though can anyone tell me if HIV the virus has ever been isolated?

2Scoops · 15-05-2011 2:26am

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Seriously though can anyone tell me if HIV the virus has ever been isolated?

Yes. What makes you think that it hasn't?

HavingCrack · 15-05-2011 12:40pm

Brown Bomber wrote: »

you don't have much luck with men there?

Seriously though can anyone tell me if HIV the virus has ever been isolated?

Yes to an extent. HIV continuously mutates so no two samples are going to be exactly alike, from what I can see anyway.

Brown Bomber · 15-05-2011 1:18pm

2Scoops wrote: »

Yes. What makes you think that it hasn't?

Yes to an extent. HIV continuously mutates so no two samples are going to be exactly alike, from what I can see anyway.

???...But thanks for the answers.

Has anyone got any data they can link to where HIV has been isolated

2wsxcde3 · 19-05-2011 9:52am

It's never been proved scientifically that HIV causes AIDs. What we have is a lot of circumstantial evidence connecting the two but an actual scientific connection has never been established.
And while circumstantial evidence can be convincing - it doesn't necessarily prove guilt.

Monty Burnz · 19-05-2011 10:31am

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It's never been proved scientifically that HIV causes AIDs. What we have is a lot of circumstantial evidence connecting the two but an actual scientific connection has never been established.
And while circumstantial evidence can be convincing - it doesn't necessarily prove guilt.

I think this thread has started to loop.

CiaranMT · 19-05-2011 2:55pm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I think this thread has started to loop.

Started?

2wsxcde3 · 19-05-2011 6:58pm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I think this thread has started to loop.

I was starting a brand new argument if you had bothered to read my post properly. I was challenging the connection between HIV and AIDs becuase it's based on circumstantial evidence rather than scientific evidence which is the norm in disease research.
The fact that a scientific connection can't be found, and that the HIV=AIDs hypothesis has had to rely on circumstantial evidence should be enough to raise red flags on the issue.

HIV is a harmless virus and does not cause AIDS

Comments