A reader passed along a link to this post on Short memories: AIDS denialism and vaccine resistance. The author learned that a friend had dated an AIDS denialist:

This was absolutely the wrong thing to say to our friend, who had been an AIDS activist since the early days of the epidemic, had nursed several beloved friends through the illness, had seen way too many of those friends die… and had seen others come back from the brink of death when the protease inhibitors and combination therapies finally came out.

So Ingrid and I were talking, not only about how ignorant AIDS denialism is and what a perfect example of the Galileo Fallacy it’s proving to be… but also about how profoundly insensitive and clueless it was for this woman to talk this way to someone who’d been through the worst days of the epidemic. Doesn’t she remember? we said. Doesn’t she know what AIDS was like before the drug cocktails came along?

And it occurred to both of us:

No. She doesn’t remember.

She argues that the same thing has happened with vaccination–that people simply don’t remember the havoc vaccine-preventable diseases used to wreak–an attitude that leads to apathy. As she notes, the best public health is invisible–preventing disease rather than responding to outbreaks, so it’s difficult for the average individual to realize how important it is until it’s broken.

I won’t summarize everything; she makes a number of excellent points that readers here will appreciate, so go check it out.

Comments

  1. #1 coturnix
    October 10, 2007

    They should read the International Carnival of Pozitivities. The new edition came out today – read the very first entry, by Ron Hudson:
    http://ogresview.mu.nu/archives/243135.php

  2. #2 apy
    October 10, 2007

    Thanks Tara

  3. #3 apy
    October 10, 2007
  4. #4 SLC
    October 10, 2007

    Once again, I wonder how long it will take for the HIV/AIDS deniers to hijack this thread. Counting one, two, three, …

  5. #5 noreen Martin
    October 10, 2007

    Apy, if the subject is AIDS, don’t we rethinkers have a right to voice our opinions too or are is this blog like CNN and Foxx News,which are both slanted favoring their political parties. How else can we learn or make informed dicisions without both sides of the story being heard?

  6. #6 noreen
    October 10, 2007

    Excuse me, I meant SLC instead of Apy.

  7. #7 6EQUJ5
    October 10, 2007

    My dad was born in 1916 and he grew up amid polio scares. My sister and I were born before 1952 and had heard of people with polio when we were little. Then came the vaccinations, and Jonas Salk displaced Albert Schweitzer as the most admired doctor in the world.

    A guy on our high school basketball team had one leg shorter than the other thanks to polio.

    By the time our baby brother came along, nobody talked about polio anymore.

    I still remember whooping cough and how badly it scared parents. How many people now even know what it is? Or that it can kill?

    I think the point about not remembering is a good one. With a whole host of deadly diseases now safely at bay, a lot of people can get away with being dilettantes about issues that used to be life-or-death.

    When water fluoridation began, people opposed it for stupid reasons — only because they could: our nation’s water supplies had become so good and reliable that people soon took clean water for granted.

  8. #8 apy
    October 10, 2007

    You have a right to voice your opinion, but it would seem like when you are shown that your opinion does not represent the facts you would correct your opinion or simply stop voicing it.
    I cannot help but remember all of the various studies that you and the others have pasted here, only to find out that they really state the opposite of what you are claiming, only for you (the plural here) respond by saying the studies are wrong, shills, etc, and seemingly forget that you are the ones that brought the study up in the first place. Stepping back for a second, regardless of if the conclusion reached by those studies is correct or not, the very fact that dissidents claim it says one thing, then find out it says the opposite, only to respond by blaming the mainstream and study, sounds a lot like denial to me. You seem to think that we should all agree with you irrelevant of the fact that the evidence you give us disagrees with what you are saying.

    I’m apologize for turning yet another thread into a battle.

  9. #9 Tara C. Smith
    October 10, 2007

    noreen, perhaps you’re familiar with the sentiment that “you’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts?” Y’know, like denier Al-Bayati redefining what it means to be HIV+?

  10. #10 trrll
    October 10, 2007

    They also don’t remember the scientific history of AIDS/HIV. The standard HIV Denialist narrative goes like this:

    Gay men were getting sick. And then Gallo came along and saw the opportunity to make his career by fraudulently identifying HIV as the cause of AIDS. And other scientists saw this as a source of research funds, and immediately jumped on the bandwagon to get a piece of the action. And the drug companies saw this as a chance to make a lot of money by selling toxic drugs that actually caused the disease they were supposed to prevent, and they paid scientists a lot of money to support the HIV “myth.” And then brave Duesberg stood up to point out the obvious flaws in the entrenched HIV dogma and to bring new ideas to the AIDS field. More and more people are coming around to Duesberg’s way of thinking, and the HIV “myth” is about to collapse Real Soon Now.

    What they’ve forgotten, of course, is that Duesberg’s ideas are not new–they go back to the earliest days of thinking about AIDS, and were once widely considered to be plausible by much of the scientific community. Far from being a “rethinker,” Duesberg is a holdout, doggedly clinging to a pet hypothesis that other scientists discarded, one by one, over a period of years, in the face of steadily accumulating scientific evidence identifying HIV as the causative agent of AIDS.

  11. #11 apy
    October 10, 2007

    Many of the denialist ‘movements’ remind me of the final chapter in The Fifty-Minute Hour, where the patient is completely mad and living in a fantasy world which he believes to be real and the only way the therapist is able to get him out is to completely enter the fantasy and work on it together. Eventually the patient comes out of it, but at that time the therapist is quite enthralled in the entire thing and almost has to get help of his own.

  12. #12 cooler
    October 10, 2007

    tara. instead of condescendingly sneering at people that dont agree with you why dont you provide me with the scientific paper that proves hiv causes AIDS? It should read like this.

    “in 1984 Robert Gallo claimed hiv was the cause of AIDS, because of the lack of a relaible model and an ever extending window period we are going to follow 20 hiv positive people for 10-15 yrs with no other risk factors such as AZT, severe mental illness, other infections like mfi, drug abuse and compare them to matched hiv negative controls to prove or falsify gallo’s hypothesis”

    this study should have been done a while ago, soon after the press conference, by people truly seeking an answer, not by people who view dissidents as nazis. It shouldnt be to hard to find this study on pub med right?, or did all the studies assume Gallo 100% right and assumed hiv already caused AIDS because the medical/government/ industry complex would not dare allow such a study to take place?

    Waiting………..afterall this is the only way to test a microbe that does not induce disease in nearly every animal and that has such a long window period. Please give this reference, if you dont provide it than its a debatble issue. maybe hiv does cause aids but more research is needed, waiting…..

  13. #13 Tara C. Smith
    October 10, 2007

    cooler, did you bother to read the essay?

  14. #14 apy
    October 10, 2007

    Now who’s being a denialist Tara…

  15. #15 cooler
    October 10, 2007

    “what they dont remember”
    is psychobabble by an armchair psychologist who does not beleive its possible for the government to lie to them. Please provide with the study I mentioned above.

  16. #16 Pope
    October 10, 2007

    Good morning Trrll,

    I liked that history lesson, that was really clever. Touche! If I may say so. And I know you’re doing it all for free too, cuz that’s the kind of guy you are. But I wouldn’t want literary talent such as yours to go unappreciated, so why don’t you publish your views somewhere… like Sceptical Enquirer. Maybe you can score a scientific point on the denialists, like Nicoli Nattrass here. See how she caught Val Turner saying “reverse transcription” when he should have said “reverse transcriptase”, according to Gallo:

    Valendar Turner, testified that HIV had not been
    isolated because it had been identified only through the detection of reverse transcription (the process of writing RNA into DNA), an activity not unique to retroviruses (Turner 2006, 4). In subsequent testimony for the prosecution, Robert Gallo (the discoverer of retroviruses and codiscoverer of HIV) pointed out that HIV had been identified as a retrovirus through the detection of reverse transcriptase, which is an enzyme unique to retroviruses, not the activity of reverse transcription, per se. He added that “only a fool” would mistake the two (Gallo 2007b, 1310, 1313-1314).

    But even more importantly, Val turner says the activity of reverse transcription is not unique to retroviruses, Gallo says reverse transcriptase is and that’s how he identified HIV. What say you Trrll, do you think Val Turner was mistaken?

    Feel like going for a bonus point Trrll? Who discovered retroviruses?

    http://aidstruth.org/AIDS-Denialism-vs-Science.pdf

  17. #17 apy
    October 10, 2007

    do you think Val Turner was mistaken?

    He’s obviously Duesbergs butt-boy! A shill for the anti-pharma industry. I wonder how much he was paid off for that testimony, obviously a fraud.

  18. #19 SLC
    October 10, 2007

    Re noreen Martin

    11 minutes.

  19. #20 Pope
    October 10, 2007

    Ah Dr. Noble, peeved because there’s no question for you?

    I recognize, as does Nicoli Nattrass, that you’re an authority almost on the level og Dr. Gallo, and Aetiology a publication well worth quoting from. In fact in that whole piece the only example she gives of a scientific prediction borne out by HIV/AIDS theory comes from you:

    Well, we seem to have drifted a long way from the famous
    Padian study which according to Harvey Bialy “demonstrated so well that sexually transmitted HIV was a figment.”
    I note that Bialy never once made a comment that was relevant to the study. These are the people that claim that HIV cannot possibly cause AIDS. You ask them for justification and they give you the “Padian study.” You demonstrate that this study cannot be used to conclude
    that HIV is not sexually transmitted and they go all silent, bring up other studies or in Bialy’s case proceed to insult everyone that doesn’t worship Peter Duesberg.I predict that in the future the exact same people will again
    cite the “Padian study” as proof that HIV is not sexually transmitted. (Noble 2006)

    That is truly remarkable and quoteworthy don’t you think Dr. Noble? Quite possibly the cleverest thing anybody has ever written in support of the surrogate marker theory of HIV infection. Unfortunately, when you click on the link to the source of this supremely convincing example of scientific reasoning it comes up blank. But we gads are always resourceful, so instead I went straight to Gallo himself, the same place where he really showed what an uncientific fool Val Turner (or what say you Trrll, surely “particle associated” reverse transcriptase was isolated from fresh culture by both Montagnier and Gallo, right?) Dr. Gallo has this explanation for why the Padian study, as you say, Dr. Noble, “cannot beused to conclude that HIV is not sexually transmitted”:

    … a lot of material is out of context or material that is stopped in time. A good example is Padian, a woman who has done epidemiology who is quoted as refuting heterosexual transmission because she found heterosexuals not with AIDS and heterosexuals who have got AIDS. What is not said is she never looked for HIV. (p. 1253)

    Wow! that man has a way with words, here revealing clearly the rub of the matter in just one sentence: “she found heterosexuals not with AIDS and heterosexuals who have got AIDS”. No wonder Bialy and the other denialists went silent after that well placed correction. Imagine the fools really thought that a study titled, Heterosexual Transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) in Northern California: Results from a Ten-Year Study. would have anything to do with looking for HIV.

  20. #21 carter
    October 11, 2007

    Ah, the proverbial absentminded professor raises yet another redundant thread and here referencing “Galileo Fallacy” the Team Virus Tara’s Clan needs reminded of the myriad of common fallacies dispersed with religious like fervor over and over again from them.

    Ad Hominem:
    If you don’t believe that HIV causes AIDS, well, you suck.

    Appeal To False Authority:
    The NIH has a great government website, which explains why HIV Causes AIDS

    Appeal To Emotion:
    Look, millions of poor Africans are gonna die, if you don’t immediately start believing that HIV causes AIDS!!!

    Appeal to Fear:
    Did you see what we did to Duesberg? If you don’t accept that HIV causes AIDS, we will strip away your funding and ostracize you. Now, get smart, will ya?

    Appeal To Force:
    If you don’t agree that HIV causes AIDS, we will call CPS and take away your children.

    Appeal To Majority:
    C’mon, everybody’s wearing a red ribbon, why not you?

    Appeal to Novelty:
    Yeah, I know that retroviruses historically haven’t been show to kill cells, but this is a NEW retrovirus from a Chimpanzee in Cameroon via the Castro!

    Appeal To Numbers:
    Thousands of scientists think that HIV causes AIDS, why not you?

    Appeal To Tradition:
    Traditionally, viruses are very bad things, causing many different ailments, why not this virus, too?

    Appeal To Pharmaceuticals:
    You must stay on these toxic drugs all your life, even though you have no clinical symptoms.

    Appeal To Money:
    We’ve spent hundreds of billions on research, therefore HIV has to cause AIDS.”

    Appeal to Dilbertism:
    When humorless pedants who know little of the subject matter are enlisted by FRANKLIN for uninteresting critiques.

  21. #22 Chris Noble
    October 11, 2007

    Carter, like everything else you regurgitate we’ve been over this before.

    A Straw Man gets AIDS

  22. #23 Pope
    October 11, 2007

    The linked article is excellent! It unambiguously makes the point that, until they stopped AZT monotherapy, life expectancy upon diagnosis was less than two years – in many instances only months.

  23. #24 Chris Noble
    October 11, 2007

    The linked article is excellent! It unambiguously makes the point that, until they stopped AZT monotherapy, life expectancy upon diagnosis was less than two years – in many instances only months.

    Brilliant. Nobody was dying from AIDS before AZT was introduced. Let’s forget about the people that were dying months after being diagnosed with AIDS in the period before AZT. Lets forget about the 19 people that died in the placebo arm of the Fischl et al AZT trial after only a few weeks.

  24. #25 Pope
    October 11, 2007

    Dr. Noble, I take it you mean nobody died of HIV before they started prescribing heavy doses of chemotherapy for it.

  25. #26 carter
    October 11, 2007

    Oh for Pete’s sake…. Evidence evidence evidence… AIDS AIDS AIDS…

    It’s all about science isn’t it? Untill you guys wake up and see what’s happening in the real world it aint gonna get any better. But thats alright, in the meantime lets just get numbers of unsuspecting people walking right up to be tested so they can be indoctinated into AIDS religion. Isn’t that how it works for you.

  26. #27 Benjamin Franz
    October 11, 2007

    noreen Martin: How else can we learn or make informed dicisions without both sides of the story being heard?

    The problem is not that “both sides” haven’t been heard. The problem is that when AIDS denialists were presented with the clear and overwhelming evidence linking HIV and AIDS, their reaction was to put their fingers in their ears and say “What?! Can’t Hear You! Train Coming! *Ding* *Ding* *Ding* *Ding* *Ding*

  27. #28 Peter Barber
    October 11, 2007

    Pope:

    Dr. Noble, I take it you mean nobody died of HIV before they started prescribing heavy doses of chemotherapy for it.

    Since Chris mentions directly in the preceding comment the people dying of AIDS before AZT, and since people don’t die of HIV infection per se, but of the resulting opportunistic infections, I’m guessing this is a word-game playing on HIV vs. AIDS. Am I right?

    carter,

    Isn’t that how it works for you.

    No.

  28. #29 Dale
    October 11, 2007

    cooler asked tara … why dont you provide me with the scientific paper that proves hiv causes AIDS?

    I don’t know about tara but it was reading Duesberg that did it for me. Particularly his 2003 J. Biosci. review. The arguments he used to support his own position were nonsensical and the data in the literature he cited clearly failed to support his views. So I asked myself if this is the very best evidence that Duesberg can find against the hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS and that evidence actually supports the hypothesis, am I not pretty much forced to conclude that HIV causes AIDS?

  29. #30 Joe
    October 11, 2007

    @ Dale,

    You are exactly right. About ten years ago, Duesberg published two, thick volumes that argued his side. Not only did none of it make sense; but I got the impression that he was a bit unbalanced because every scrap of information that contradicted him was met with increasingly shrill post-hoc rationalization.

  30. #31 jspreen
    October 11, 2007

    Denialism: “they don’t remember”

    This title, Tara ! The stroke of genius !

    They don’t remember!

    Exit Denialists, they’re just a bunch of senile Alzheimer-ridden human debris.

    But will it work? I doubt it. I mean, well, yes, maybe it’s fine for those who badly need to get rid of dissenters gnawing at their conscience, those who can’t get to sleep too well thinking “What will become of me if there’s something in the deniers’ sayings ?”

    What precisely do you think deniers don’t remember, Tara? Do you really think I forgot what has happened in the eighties and nineties? For almost twenty years I’ve been swallowing main stream information. I had absolutely no reason whatsoever to doubt the official version. My wife was a social assistant, she has worked with Aids patients (almost all were junkies…) for a couple of years, we had the red ribbon pinned on all our sweaters. We’ve been talking for hours/days/weeks/months/years about the disaster that hit whole families all around.

    But then came a day I stumbled upon some different information, away from main stream. It seemed interesting right from the start and I followed the thread. I’m curious, you know. And I have a scientific background. Enough to know how and where to look, not enough to be dependent on how other people judge what I think.

    You self proclaimed scientists, you should start to lend an ear to people who dare to defend ideas different from what everybody thinks is true. Denialist know what you know Tara, they read the same newspapers, watch the same TV, study the same publications. One cannot possibly get away from the official HIV=Aids version, Tara, not unless one moves over to another galaxy. And it’s impossible to not remember. That is one reason why you should lend an ear to alternative information. Deniers know what you know, but they also know about things you never even considered.

    Denialists, it’s not that they don’t remember, Tara. Denialist, they simply didn’t forget. About the importance of freedom and independent thought. You’ve lost both, Tara. It has nothing to do with one’s convictions. It has to do with people praising themselves into being scientists and accusing others of being denialists.

  31. #32 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    funny all my life i beleived in hiv, I got tested several times, and I heard of A duesberg guy when I was 20 and I thought he was totally nuts. I even brought it up in class one day that this guy was a complete lunatic ( I never bothered reading his papers)

    many years later I saw the film hiv fact on fraud on google, i was so mad before wtaching it, cause I thought it was BS, but after it totally changed me, that more research is needed.

    This same thing thing happened with me and 9/11, thought no way it could be a false flag operation, then we all saw loose change and it blew us all away in our college dorm room.

    Weird how much thought control there is in America, and how millions of people are getting exposed to these alternative theories and they are beliveing them, not because they are crazy, but they seem to make more sense to any open minded intelligent person.

  32. #33 apy
    October 11, 2007

    Well I guess all HIV theorists have to do is put together some poor ‘documentary’, put it on the intertubes and make cooler watch it.

  33. #34 AK
    October 11, 2007

    cooler asked tara … why dont you provide me with the scientific paper that proves hiv causes AIDS?

    To save Tara the time of reposting something she’s posted before:

    Pathogenesis of human immunodeficiency virus infection. by J A Levy, Department of Medicine, University of California School of Medicine, San Francisco 94143-0128. (Microbiol Rev 1993;57:183)

    This is referenced in The Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS

    To save lazy people a click, the abstract is pasted in below:

    The lentivirus human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) causes AIDS by interacting with a large number of different cells in the body and escaping the host immune response against it. HIV is transmitted primarily through blood and genital fluids and to newborn infants from infected mothers. The steps occurring in infection involve an interaction of HIV not only with the CD4 molecule on cells but also with other cellular receptors recently identified. Virus-cell fusion and HIV entry subsequently take place. Following virus infection, a variety of intracellular mechanisms determine the relative expression of viral regulatory and accessory genes leading to productive or latent infection. With CD4+ lymphocytes, HIV replication can cause syncytium formation and cell death; with other cells, such as macrophages, persistent infection can occur, creating reservoirs for the virus in many cells and tissues. HIV strains are highly heterogeneous, and certain biologic and serologic properties determined by specific genetic sequences can be linked to pathogenic pathways and resistance to the immune response. The host reaction against HIV, through neutralizing antibodies and particularly through strong cellular immune responses, can keep the virus suppressed for many years. Long-term survival appears to involve infection with a relatively low-virulence strain that remains sensitive to the immune response, particularly to control by CD8+ cell antiviral activity. Several therapeutic approaches have been attempted, and others are under investigation. Vaccine development has provided some encouraging results, but the observations indicate the major challenge of preventing infection by HIV. Ongoing research is necessary to find a solution to this devastating worldwide epidemic.

    Since this is all very technical, some readers may need an overview of the immune system:

    Immunology from CELLS alive! A graphics heavy site.

    Immunology from The Biology Project. Fewer pictures, more detail, may be a few years old.

    Immune System from a Multiple Sclerosis website. No pictures, and no HIV/AIDS discussion, but not very technical.

    Infection & Immunity: from MicrobiologyBytes. This site has a good overview of “helper” T-cells: Role of CD4-positive T cells in Bacterial Killing.

    For a detailed discussion of how B-cells and helper and killer T-cells differentiate and become specific to one antigen: The Exception to the Rule: Immunoglobulin Genes from DevBio, a companion to Developmental Biology, Eighth Edition by Scott F. Gilbert.

    Three of the above sites have discussion of HIV/AIDS.

  34. #35 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    or you could provide me for that study I asked for before

  35. #36 Joe
    October 11, 2007

    @ Cooler,

    I think the evidence is well-summarized in the “Evidence that HIV Causes AIDS” link, just above (posted by AK).

    So now, tell me where is the article that supports each of Duesberg’s claims that AIDS is caused by 1- recreational drugs (e.g., cocaine), 2- blood factors used to treat hemophilia, 3- AZT. That’s just for starters, because Peter has a really long list.

    Consider that cocaine was around for decades before the first cases of AIDS. Also, hemophilia treatment was safe before HIV and is safe now that blood products are screened for HIV. And people who already have AIDS get better when treated with AZT.

    If you can’t understand; maybe it’s you: http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf This is an article about how people with no background in a field become so, ridiculously, certain of their mis-understandings.

  36. #37 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    I want the study that I mentioned at the beggining of this thread, not faucis propaganda page, or levy’s book which already assumes hiv is the cause of AIDS, which is the very question at issue.

    “in 1984 Robert Gallo claimed hiv was the cause of AIDS, because of the lack of a relaible model and an ever extending window period we are going to follow 20 hiv positive people for 10-15 yrs with no other risk factors such as AZT, severe mental illness, other infections like mfi, drug abuse and compare them to matched hiv negative controls to prove or falsify gallo’s hypothesis”

    is this too much to ask?

    you should study history to see how many “experts” tend to go along with the states propaganda, like in russia and germany during communism and fascism.

    Besides the “consensus” you guys talk about can only exist when you prevent scientists from hearing the other side of the argument, once scientists not tied to the aids industry look at the evidence your consensus shrinks by the day.
    There will always be scientists who think its impossible for the government to lie to them, if a study came out tommorrow that proved hiv didnt cause AIDS, they would ignore it. Luckily more are coming out, and I know from talking one professor they are many more that are too afraid to speak out.

    scientists that have questioned hiv at some time
    margulis
    pollock(both very recently)
    shyh ching lo army highest ranking scientist/pathologist
    kary mullis nobel prizw winner
    duesberg retroviral expert
    walter gilbert nobel prize winner mcb
    many more

  37. #38 apy
    October 11, 2007

    Why are you even wasting our time asking for a paper then? Your response to any evidence given to you is that there is a conspiracy, so even if I found you some mind blowingly amazing paper about HIV causing AIDS you will just respond by saying it’s propaganda. So what is the point? What do you want?

  38. #39 Joe
    October 11, 2007

    @ Cooler

    I take it, you can’t provide definitive articles proving Duesy’s claims; as opposed to the definitive article you demand (and have been provided).

    Did you even read the article about ignoramuses who think they have it right?

  39. #40 jspreen
    October 11, 2007

    This is referenced in The Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS

    Ha! Ha! Ha! The famous fact sheet. Man, it’s the most fabulous piece of publicity I’ve ever seen. Selling what? Disease!
    It’s a crazy world, man. Some years ago I was still very naive and thought that people would be interested to find out that HIV=AIDS is a lie. Now I know better. They’re not interested at all, they even very badly want it to be true. I can’t get it man. Interested? They rather throw stones to the person who dares to question.

    Well, that’s the impression one gets when hanging around on this “science” blog. Of course, most people here are dependend on disease to earn their living. They wear coloured glasses they can’t live without.

  40. #41 Joe
    October 11, 2007

    @ jspreen,

    Can you provide the definitive articles supporting Duesy that I requested?

    Did you read the article about ignoramuses who think they figured it out? What makes you think you are not still naive?

  41. #42 trrll
    October 11, 2007

    in 1984 Robert Gallo claimed hiv was the cause of AIDS, because of the lack of a relaible model and an ever extending window period we are going to follow 20 hiv positive people for 10-15 yrs with no other risk factors such as AZT, severe mental illness, other infections like mfi, drug abuse and compare them to matched hiv negative controls to prove or falsify gallo’s hypothesis”

    is this too much to ask?

    Yes, it is too much to ask. Essentially, you are demanding a modern equivalent of the Tuskegee study, a study in which HIV infected people are denied medications that have been well established (to the satisfaction of everybody except HIV denialists) to be effective in delaying or preventing progression to AIDS. No ethical scientist would conduct such an experiment. No hospital review committee would approve it. And it would be a waste of time, anyway. Everybody capable of rational thought is already convinced, and the HIV denialists would find some kind of flaw in the study (every study has a flaw if you look hard enough) that they could point to as an excuse for discarding its conclusions, just as they have done with the many previous studies that demonstrate the connection between HIV and AIDS.

    As an aside, the obsession with Gallo is quite typical of denialist thinking. Evolution denialists are similarly obsessed with Darwin. This seems to be rooted in a misunderstanding of science such that they imagine that all of the hundreds of thousands of studies that have been done since then somehow depends upon Gallo (or Darwin), and if they can find a flaw in that initial study, then they can somehow bring down the entire field of study. To real scientists, this comes across as very weird. To a modern scientist, Gallo and Darwin are purely of historical interest. Gallo got the field started, but the tools available at the time were so limited compared to modern scientific methodology, and his findings have been so far surpassed by later studies, that Gallo’s initial paper is completely insignificant in terms of the weight of evidence supporting the modern understanding of the role of HIV in AIDS.

  42. #43 Jim
    October 11, 2007

    “It’s a crazy world, man. Some years ago I was still very naive and thought that people would be interested to find out that HIV=AIDS is a lie. Now I know better. They’re not interested at all, they even very badly want it to be true.”

    You know jspreen, almost anyone else would begin to question if what they were saying was true if it was consistently met by indifference or resistance. Nobody wants HIV=AIDS to be true (not even those evil, coloured glasses wearing scientists), but that’s just the way it is and believing otherwise isn’t going to change it.

    “I can’t get it man. Interested? They rather throw stones to the person who dares to question.”

    No they don’t. They throw stones at people who drag out tired, refuted arguments over and over and over and over because they ignore the answers given to them. Genuine questions asked in good faith are never met with stone throwing.

  43. #44 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    well then youve made your hypothesis “unfalsifiable”, meaning the only way to prove it, (since most every species of animal doesnt get AIDs when inoculated) according to you the study I mentioned would be unethical

    Even though the drugs like AZT are far from life saving, and theres plenty of denialists who are hiv positive that would agree to take part in that study, theyre not going to take the medicine anyways, so theres no ethics problem.

    youve just admitted it, the only study that can prove/disprove hiv cannot be conducted, therefore youve made your hypothesis unfalsifiable, therefore unscientific.

  44. #45 trrll
    October 11, 2007

    well then youve made your hypothesis “unfalsifiable”, meaning the only way to prove it, (since most every species of animal doesnt get AIDs when inoculated) according to you the study I mentioned would be unethical

    It is only denialists who hold the convenient belief that the link between HIV and AIDS can only be proved by conducting studies that are manifestly unethical. Scientists recognize many ways of testing a hypothesis. A tiny sampling of the many studies confirming the HIV/AIDS connection can be found here and here.

    Even though the drugs like AZT are far from life saving, and theres plenty of denialists who are hiv positive that would agree to take part in that study, theyre not going to take the medicine anyways, so theres no ethics problem.

    Your notion of ethics is considerably more “flexible” than that of most scientists and all human subjects review boards. It is not considered ethical to knowingly provide substandard treatment for a life-threatening illness to a cohort of patients, whether or not they consent to it, or even request it. To qualify to be enrolled in a study, every patient must agree to accept treatment that meets the accepted standard of care for his condition.

  45. #46 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    oh yeah, the nih fact sheet! the mention that chimpanzees get aids, what they fail to say is that hundereds were inoculated and only a couple had immunosupression, the rest were fine, what else would you expect if you lived in a cage for 20 yrs?

    Lies by ommission

  46. #47 Joe
    October 11, 2007

    I take it that cooler cannot provide the definitives studies that support Duesy’s claimed causes of AIDS.

  47. #48 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    I dont agree with duesy’s claims, I think the multifactorial hypothesis makes the most sense, other infections might be involved like shyh ching lo’s mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe that kills every animal inoculated. Catstrophic stress, AZT, severe drug abuse who knows?
    there were only about 4,000 deaths a year early on in 1984-85, it skyrocketed to 50k when people were given monster doses of AZT, seems like the more attention and funding the disease gets the more people die.

    more research is needed, does hiv cause AIDS? maybe, but more research is needed. Funny thing is in Garth nicolsons book Project day lily he claims to have uncovered through informants in the Pentagon that mycoplasma incognitus was part of the bioweapons program and the people in charge of it are laughing their asses off on how stupid doctors are not to discover this, how hiv is harmless and mycoplasma incognitus is the only microbe people need to worry about it.

    Although nicolson does not claim who his sources are, it is clear from reading the slightly fictionilized version of true events Project Day Lily that it was shyh ching lo himself, the army scientist. This would make sense bc Lo in peer reviewed journals and patents incoulated chimps, monkeys, mice, embryos and they all sickened/died, and he didnt find it in over a hundered healthy controls.(refrences in lonliness thread)

    When the nicolsons found it in the blood of gwi vets armed intelligence agents threatened them to stop their research. wonder why?

    What a crackup, could it be that hiv is some harmless retrovirus while mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans is the only microbe to worry about? seems like it, Its being found in many patients with complex multi organic symptoms like that have been misdiagnosed with CFS/ALS/AIDS etc. Sad but true that this genocide has been perpetrated by closed minded scientists.

  48. #49 trrll
    October 11, 2007

    oh yeah, the nih fact sheet! the mention that chimpanzees get aids, what they fail to say is that hundereds were inoculated and only a couple had immunosupression, the rest were fine, what else would you expect if you lived in a cage for 20 yrs?

    And here we have another very typical denialist behavior. From two web sites listing dozens of studies, he chooses to cherry-pick one result and nitpick it. A scientist unfamiliar with the contorted arguments of the denialists would find it quite bizarre that he chose this particular report to attack. After all, from a scientific point of view, there is no particular reason to expect chimps to get AIDS from HIV. Many viruses produce different pathology in different species, and if simians are the natural reservoir of the virus, they are probably better adapted to it, and even humans can fight off HIV for years. But the chimp has special significance to denialists, because they’ve harped for years on the irrelevant fact that no HIV-infected chimps have progressed to AIDS. Now a couple have, so it’s time to move the goalposts–not enough chimps have progressed to AIDS.

    And as for those that have, well, it must be a coincidence. That’s the ticket!

    Denialists are very big on coincidence. Association of HIV with AIDS? Coincidence! Reduced AIDS mortality after the introduction of drugs designed to attack HIV? Coincidence! Epidemic of immunosuppression in gays, IV drug users, and hemophiliacs? Coincidence! AIDS in drug-free sexual partners of IV drug users? Coincidence! AIDS after accidental HIV needlestick? Coincidence! AIDS-like diseases produced by related viruses in simians? Coincidence! And on, and on…

  49. #50 apy
    October 11, 2007

    cooler, you seem very stuck on this animal model thing, but I find that somewhat confusing. Are you saying SIV does not exist? Some of the papers that various denialists claim invalidates HIV causes AIDS theory seem to use SIV as the basis of the calculations in it. The most recent one that comes to mind is the study that says HIV + some other factors cause AIDS, not just the CD4+ depletion. This was done by studying SIV, and excuse me but I do not recall if it was you, carter, or another person that posted that. But on top of that you might respond by saying: SIV is not HIV, when you give HIV to animals they don’t die. But I’m not sure that logic works, many viruses have a species barrier, which is good because I don’t want to get a number of diseases animals have. Are you saying that HIV should not be victim to this same rule? Or are you saying HIV should live outside this and pass between species without issue? Could you please be more specific on what yoru problem is with HIV and animals?

  50. #51 cooler
    October 11, 2007

    so chimps dont get aids bc theyve adapted to it, why dont mice get aids? what ad hoc excuse do you have for that?

    im not denying that some microbes are species specific, but the only way to make that distinction is the study I mentioned above.

    apy, siv is not hiv, siv only occurs in labratory maqacue monkeys, not in the wild, to condemn a whole generation to death bc of siv and macaque monkeys, seems to be unfair considering most every animal does not get AIDS.

  51. #52 apy
    October 11, 2007

    I’m not sure what that proves cooler? How lethal a virus is often depends on its ability to get between hosts. A disease like SIV in the wild, it would seem, most likely would not be traveling between hosts as HIV in humans could, but I am unsure as I don’t know much about SIV.

    On top of this, I’m not sure how good other monkeys are at diagnosing disease in their friends, nor am I aware of what the monkey healthcare system is like, is it possible that some monkeys do die from SAIDS in the wild and we are unaware of it? Or would you mark that off as completely impossible?

    On top of that, when monkeys are given SIV in captivity they do acquire SAIDS, I did not notice in your previous statements that you a required the animal model to be in the wild. Are you saying that because monkeys get SAIDS when given SIV in captivity that SIV does not exist? Or that SIV is not causing them to have SAIDS?

    I’m also unsure of what you mean by “considering most every animal does not get AIDS”, do you know this for fact? It seems most animals are not researched in this way and would most likely succumb to a predator prior to any useful external diagnosis. Many animals live a rather short lifespan next to humans as well. On top of that, I know of very few animals that have the healthcare to live to a ripe old age. Finally, it is well known that FIV does exist, HIV for felines. So we seem to have SIV, HIV, and FIV. Again, I would not necessarily expect a monkey to get sick after injecting it with FIV, given that viruses seem to have a species barrier, but these animals, when infected wiht their corresponding viruses do appear to get sick in much the same way, so there does appear to be some animal model here.

    Could you please explain why captivity matters and what point you are making with that statement? Could you please give some information on the FIV and if there are any studies which contradict the existences of FIV? Are there any studies showing that FIV is a product of poor diet? Drug use? Lack of attention? Finally could you please explain how you know most every animal does not get AIDS and why you would expect every animal to get AIDS if HIV does exist, as well as why which species of animals get which diseases is relevant to whate disease humans get?

  52. #53 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Another good morning for you I see Dr. Trrll. Since you were unwilling – surely not unable – to explain what Robert Gallo was talking about regarding reverse transcriptase/transcription, perhaps you could tell me where you’ve got the thing from about freethinkers and coincidence?

    I’m also interested in your theory of chimps and HIV. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that chimps are adapted to HIV so they don’t get AIDS – except in a couple of cases where they do get AIDS. So both the chimps who(allegedly) do get AIDS and those who don’t support your theory. Likewise, people who are unfortunate enough to test positve on the tests manufactured to identify predetermined risk groups and get AIDS confirm you theory. But those who do not progress also confirm your theory.

  53. #54 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    apy, siv is not hiv, siv only occurs in labratory maqacue monkeys, not in the wild, to condemn a whole generation to death bc of siv and macaque monkeys, seems to be unfair considering most every animal does not get AIDS.

    SIV and HIV are all related viruses. In fact HIV-1 is closer to SIV-cpz than to HIV-2. In addition some of the SHIV are basically HIV with only small parts of SIV added and these cause SAIDS in susceptible animals.

    SIV does occur in the wild in African monkeys and primates. It does not cause disease in these animals. However, it does cause disease in Asian monkeys.

    Duesberg argues that retroviruses do not kill cells and that retroviruses cannot cause AIDS. These are blatantly untrue. SIV and SHIV reproducibly cause SAIDS in macaques.

  54. #55 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    I’m also interested in your theory of chimps and HIV. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that chimps are adapted to HIV so they don’t get AIDS – except in a couple of cases where they do get AIDS. So both the chimps who(allegedly) do get AIDS and those who don’t support your theory. Likewise, people who are unfortunate enough to test positve on the tests manufactured to identify predetermined risk groups and get AIDS confirm you theory. But those who do not progress also confirm your theory.

    It’s difficult to express just how stupid this is. The fact that a proportion of both chimpanzees and humans that are infected with HIV do not progress to AIDS does not confirm the theory that HIV causes AIDS. It is, however, entirely consistent with the theory. Viruses do not cause disease and death in 100% of infected animals.

    The various tests for HIV are not manufactured to identify predetermined risk groups. They are manufactured to detect antibodys to HIV proteins, HIV proteins, HIV RNA and HIV DNA.

    Coincidentally they just happen to predict who is going to progress to AIDS.

    Coincidentally HIV just happens to specifically infect the exact type of T-cells that are depleted in AIDS patients.

    Coincidentally treating people with AIDS with drugs that are designed to specifically interfere with HIV enzymes just happens to reduce HIV viral loads, increase CD4+ counts, and dramatically reduce mortality and morbidity.

  55. #56 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    On top of that, when monkeys are given SIV in captivity they do acquire SAIDS, I did not notice in your previous statements that you a required the animal model to be in the wild. Are you saying that because monkeys get SAIDS when given SIV in captivity that SIV does not exist? Or that SIV is not causing them to have SAIDS?

    The bit about captivity and in the wild is a red herring.

    SIV is prevalent in monkeys and primates in Africa. It is not present in Asian monkeys.

    If you give Asian monkeys SIV they get AIDS and die.

    Is cooler suggesting that we have to introduce SIV into wild populations of Asian monkeys to personally convince him? Doing this under controlled conditions in captivity isn’t enough?

  56. #57 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    so chimps dont get aids bc theyve adapted to it, why dont mice get aids? what ad hoc excuse do you have for that?

    I don’t know whether evolutionary adaptation to the virus is why chimps don’t get AIDS more often, although it is certainly true that when a disease coevolves with a species it often gets less damaging. But that is only one of many reasons why chimps might respond differently to the virus than humans. And since there are more differences between mice and humans than between apes and humans, there are even more reasons why mice might respond differently to the disease.

    The point is that whether chimps get AIDS from HIV tells you very little about how the virus affects humans, because theory provides no strong basis to predict one way or another. And whether mice get AIDS tells you even less. The reason scientists are interested in AIDS in animals has nothing at all to do with proving that HIV causes AIDS in humans, which is already firmly established. It would, however, be very convenient to have an animal model for AIDS, because it would help in testing prospective treatments.

  57. #58 Michael
    October 12, 2007

    Apy, you asked about FIV. The following is from:

    http://www.theanimalspirit.com/Questions.html#test

    Should I Test Feral Cats For FIV and FeLV?
    Testing is not necessary for feral cats who are going to remain within their colony and do not show signs of serious illness. Positive test results are not always accurate and it’s necessary to rule-out false-positives. The funds that would have been used for testing can be used toward sterilization. Moreover, killing a cat who is not suffering is unethical. The tests normally administered to ferals are not reliable enough to make life or death decisions. Euthanasia is defined as the mercy killing of a suffering individual. Killing for any other reason is not euthanasia. Cats who show no active sign of serious illness should be returned to their colony.
    Many will try to make you feel guilty for not testing. They feel that feral cats lead short, miserable lives and you are choosing to allow them to suffer and die from horrible diseases. We know that this is not accurate.

    Amazing. Feral cats are treated more intelligently than human beings!

    Ahhhh, but to laugh, as they say the tests should not be used to make life/death decisions for cats. Ahhhh, but to laugh even more as the tests used on cats ARE the very same as those claimed to be 99% accurate and then used to diagnose humans and to put them on expensive, fast-tracked, little studied, unproven to relieve anything but intense fear and panic of the diagnosed, to be taken for a lifetime, lipodystrophy causing, neuropathy causing, bone marrow and liver killing, and quite often death dealing super toxic HIV drugs.

    Apy, you asked: Are there any studies showing that FIV is a product of poor diet?

    Now why, Apy, why would they ever want to do that? You know damn well that if they did, it would be the end of the highly profitable HIV and FIV business.

    Gee, Apy, I really wonder why FIV is such a great concern and so often found in the often malnourished starving wild feral cats. Could it be because stressed wild feral cat poplations quite often suffer from starvation and POOR DIETS and that when such is the case, the starvation is usually affecting nearly the entire colony of cats???

    Could the poor diets of some wild feral cats leave them open to many OIs and infections and cellular destruction that causes the FIV tests to blow off false poz just the same as the HIV tests do when humans are run down from drug abuse, stress, and malnutrition?

    The well known retrovirologist that JP Moore used to buddy around with is famous for having said the line: “Its the virus, stupid!”

    As a dissident who has intensely investigated the HIV and the dissident stuff for years, FIV turning up ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY in malnourished and also at times in other heavily stressed out cats shows me once again that

    “IT AIN”T THE VIRUS, STUPID!”

    It’s the stress and malnourishment and toxed out bodies, that leaves ones immune system unable to fight off common OI’s, just as it has been in EVERY AIDS CASE that I have ever seen in my 35 years of living exclusively in the highly affected gay community. And I have personally known and befriended and lived with plenty of them.

    That is why I continue to drill it into the heads of the know-it-all HIV promoters, that AIDS is about toxins, stress, emotions, and drugs. Yet, for whatever reason, the HIV pushers just won’t wake up and smell the coffee. Much of the gay community is still too paralyzed by panic and fear to smell the coffee, let alone think with any degree of healthy scepticism.

    The mainstream HIV pushers and researchers also most always do not even personally know a single person who is or has been an AIDS case on any kind of a personal level. They may know some casually or know of some, but they certainly do not KNOW these people on any intimate or long term personal friendship level as I have with many of them over the last 25 years. I know many who died, and I know the stress and lifestyles they lived. I know the stress that many were under prior to any diagnosis or illness. Many had been disowned by their families for being gay. Many even had their own internal death wishes. I watched as some slowly declined in health due to their mindset and stress and drug habits, etc, and finally came down as HIV or AIDS.

    And in knowing so many of these people close up and personally for many years, and in knowing their stresses and fears and problems and habits and addictions, and eating habits, I also know what a crock it is to believe that these peoples main problem was ever any single virus. HIV could be completely removed from the equation and these people would still have been quite ill.

    Chris Noble, the biggest mouth on these threads does not even personally know a single HIV positive on any kind of personal level.

    Neither does Tara. Neither does franklin, elkmountain, adele, trrll, etc, etc, etc. Neither do you, and neither do 99.99% of the HIV hypothesis promoters and believers who bellow out their programmed beliefs on these threads.

    Yet they all certainly profess to know-it-all when it comes to HIV and this supposed disease, even though they don’t even know anybody who was ever diagnosed other than some of the dissidents that they argue with in these threads.

  58. #59 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    Another good morning for you I see Dr. Trrll. Since you were unwilling – surely not unable – to explain what Robert Gallo was talking about regarding reverse transcriptase/transcription, perhaps you could tell me where you’ve got the thing from about freethinkers and coincidence?

    Unwilling is right. I have zero interest in humoring HIV denialist obsessions regarding Robert Gallo. From a scientific perspective, Gallo is ancient history, with little relevance to the modern understanding of HIV. I have, however, followed the AIDS story since the beginning. I remember when Duesberg’s theory of AIDS was taken seriously by much of the scientific community. I’ve seen support for Duesberg’s ideas drop away as study after study supported the causative role of HIV and not Duesberg’s “drugs and sex” theory. And I’ve seen Duesberg and his disciples repeatedly appeal to coincidence in their hopeless struggle to explain away the steadily accumulating mountain of evidence supporting the role of HIV.

  59. #60 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    …why dont mice get aids?

    HIV enters CD4+ cells by binding to specific receptors on the surface of the cells. Mice CD4+ cells do not have the same receptors.

    However, if you take SCID mice with no immune system and give them human thymus tissue they produce human CD4+ cells.

    Now if you infect these SCIDhu mice with HIV guess what happens. Active HIV infection, CD4+ cell depletion and AIDS!

    This is an animal model for AIDS, you know the animal models that the denialists deny exist.

  60. #61 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Dr. Noble, really now, “if you take mice with no immune system”. Yes or monkeys for that matter. As you said yourself, “It’s difficult to express just how stupid this is.” Anyway I think you managed splendidly, Dr. Noble:

    The fact that a proportion of both chimpanzees and humans that are infected with HIV do not progress to AIDS does not confirm the theory that HIV causes AIDS. It is, however, entirely consistent with the theory. Viruses do not cause disease and death in 100% of infected animals.

    Why not? We are not talking about a hyothetically mutagenic virus here, but a good old infect-and-deplete killer microbe. So what’s up with those 2 chimps out of, 150 or however many? Or should I say what’s up with the 148 anomalous chimps?

    The various tests for HIV are not manufactured to identify predetermined risk groups. They are manufactured to detect antibodys to HIV proteins, HIV proteins, HIV RNA and HIV DNA.
    Coincidentally they just happen to predict who is going to progress to AIDS.

    Coincidentally Drs. Noble and Trrll they just happen to “predict”, Ceteris paribus, who is black and who is white with an amazing accuracy.

    Coincidentally HIV just happens to specifically infect the exact type of T-cells that are depleted in AIDS patients.

    Coincidentally, HIV supposedly depletes a lot of T-cells it never infects, so what’s you point?

    Gallo is ancient history, with little relevance to the modern understanding of HIV.

    Couldn’t agree more Trrll. I’ll make sure to let him know you feel that way as well. Are you tenured by the way? There’s a high correlaton between belittling Gallo and sudden loss of job you know.

  61. #62 Joe
    October 12, 2007

    Cooler wrote “I dont agree with duesy’s claims, I think the multifactorial hypothesis makes the most sense”

    Okay, cite the paper that proves this.

  62. #63 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    Coincidentally Drs. Noble and Trrll they just happen to “predict”, Ceteris paribus, who is black and who is white with an amazing accuracy.

    I guess your contention is that HIV antibody tests, HIV antigen tests and HIV nucleic acid tests are all somehow rigged to make black Americans test positive. If this is so then I’m sure you can explain how this is done. I also presume that this is definitely not a conspiracy theory. HIV “dissidents” aren’t conspiracy theorists are they?

    If the HIV tests are rigged then so are the tests for gonorrhea.
    Where are the gonorrhea denialists?

    The only place that racism comes into the discussion is the continued social disadvantage that is still present in society as reflected by differing levels of education and economic prosperity.

    I look forward to your scholarly critique of this paper: The SCID-hu mouse: a small animal model for HIV infection and pathogenesis

  63. #64 David Marjanović, OM
    October 12, 2007

    funny all my life i beleived in hiv, I got tested several times, and I heard of A duesberg guy when I was 20 and I thought he was totally nuts. I even brought it up in class one day that this guy was a complete lunatic ( I never bothered reading his papers)

    many years later I saw the film hiv fact on fraud on google, i was so mad before wtaching it, cause I thought it was BS, but after it totally changed me, that more research is needed.

    This same thing thing happened with me and 9/11, thought no way it could be a false flag operation, then we all saw loose change and it blew us all away in our college dorm room.

    You are very easy to impress.

    I, too, have watched the whole of Loose Change. I, too, have found it very impressive. But there’s one thing that clearly wasn’t right. When the towers were collapsing, clouds of smoke came out of storeys just below the collapse front. Loose Change says this indicates explosions — it was a controlled demolition. But think about it. All that stuff coming down presses air out of the building, bursting windows and blowing stuff out. We must expect to see these “explosions” simply due to the fact that the building is collapsing top-down!

    There is a scandal and a cover-up in the whole issue, but that is the fact that, because the WTC was on the land of the NY Port Authority and not technically in NYC, it didn’t need to have 4 cm of insulating foam around the steel, but only 1.5 or something. And even that was very carelessly done — in the places where it was difficult to spray on, notably the junctions between the walls and the floors, there often was no foam altogether! This had been known for a long time, but nobody wanted to evacuate the entire building to get the foaming right — too expensive.

    You have made a big mistake: you have assumed malice where incompetence is an entirely sufficient explanation.

    Now, why don’t mice get AIDS? Because mice and apes are too different. The HI virus is not capable of infecting mouse cells. That’s why. Why can’t you get foot-and-mouth disease? Same reason. Why can’t you get rinderpest? Same reason. Why can’t you get psittacosis? Same reason. Sure, not all viruses have the same narrow host range — you can get avian flu –, but still all have some — I’d be surprised if you could infect a frog with avian flu, and I’d bet money you can’t infect an insect with it.

    And if you want to invent a scientific name, get the grammar right: Mycoplasma is neuter, not masculine, so it would be Mycoplasma incognitum.

    Margulis is quite a sad case. She found the idea of endosymbiosis, took it, and ran with it right into a wall of opposition that was much stronger than it should have been, for decades. And she was right. (Well, probably not about the cilia, but about everything else, AFAIK.)

    The lesson she seems to have taken home is that if she’s convinced of any idea and encounters strong opposition, she must be right again. That’s where the woo comes in, like the metaphysical version of the Gaia hypothesis and AIDS denialism. Imagine Galileo himself committing the Galileo fallacy — that’s what we’re seeing. Again, it’s sad to watch.

    I don’t know whether evolutionary adaptation to the virus is why chimps don’t get AIDS more often, although it is certainly true that when a disease coevolves with a species it often gets less damaging.

    This is very easy to explain. AIDS susceptibility is inheritable because it depends on the precise sequence of a few proteins. This means natural selection can act. And wherever it can act, it does — inevitably.

    1. Those chimps who got AIDS have already died out.
    2. Those viruses that were so virulent that they killed their host before it could spread them have also already die out.

    Keep southern Africa as it is, do nothing, and in a few generations it will have a (very sparse) population that consists only of “long-term non-progressors” (i. e. people with a mutation that renders them immune or nearly so), most of whom will carry a very benign version of HIV, the way most of us carry the Epstein-Barr virus or whatever it is, and HPV, and I don’t know what else.

    This seems to have happened lots of times already over the last few hundred million years (at least). Over half of our genome consists of retrovirus corpses in various stages of decay.

    Apy, you asked: Are there any studies showing that FIV is a product of poor diet?

    Now why, Apy, why would they ever want to do that? You know damn well that if they did, it would be the end of the highly profitable HIV and FIV business.

    “The complete lack of evidence is a sure sign the conspiracy is working.”

    That is why I continue to drill it into the heads of the know-it-all HIV promoters, that AIDS is about toxins, stress, emotions, and drugs.

    Does living in Africa count as “stress”?

    The mainstream HIV pushers and researchers also most always do not even personally know a single person who is or has been an AIDS case on any kind of a personal level. They may know some casually or know of some, but they certainly do not KNOW these people on any intimate or long term personal friendship level as I have with many of them over the last 25 years. I know many who died, and I know the stress and lifestyles they lived. I know the stress that many were under prior to any diagnosis or illness. Many had been disowned by their families for being gay. Many even had their own internal death wishes. I watched as some slowly declined in health due to their mindset and stress and drug habits, etc, and finally came down as HIV or AIDS.

    There are no “risk groups” in Africa. Hey, there aren’t even “risk groups” in the First World anymore. The 1970s, when AIDS was “gay cancer”, are long over.

    Your sample is too small for statistics. Get a bigger one.

    The only place that racism comes into the discussion

    are the fucking US of A! Over here, everybody is gleaming white, and some people still get AIDS. What a coincidence that they’re all HIV-positive. But most denialists, in my experience, start from the assumption that any country other than the USA exists — they are in denial about most of the world.

  64. #65 David Marjanović
    October 12, 2007

    Oops, I forgot to mention my source for the 9/11 stuff. It was an interesting documentary on, IIRC, this channel. I don’t think it has been aired in the USA yet.

  65. #66 jspreen
    October 12, 2007

    I find it fascinating that so many people still take that official 911 version for granted.

    Almost as insane that:

    - Bush went to Irak because of the mass destruction weapons
    - But there were no mass destruction weapons!
    - So Bush&Co have been lynched for their lies?
    - No, Bush was reelected.

    Or like the hole in the Pentagon. 20 feet across or something. No traces of debris on the lawn… The plane completely disappeared through a hole 4 times too small.

    Or the way the twin towers’ came down. And also, first hit falls second although second hit not nearly as effective as the first.

    It’s proof of the fact that not only kids are ready to believe anything they’re told.

    HIV=Aids. 911. Dig a spade deep and you know. Lies, lies, lies.

  66. #67 noreen
    October 12, 2007

    My sentiments exactly Michael! It’s one thing to play the game and quite a different thing to sit in the spectator seats. I want to introduce you to Brenda Powell, who is the organizer of the 2007 LDN conference. She had progressive MS, took LDN 4.5mg for 4 years, disease progression halted for 4 years. Her mom is on LDN 31/2 years for breast cancer (refused chemo) and is cancer free for 31/2 years. Her grandma has been on LDN 2 years for squamous cell carcinoma and Alzheimer’s, she too took no chemo or radiation and is cancer free 2 years on LDN, no progression of Alzheimer’s for 2 years. Her dad takes LDN as a disease preventative. Many more miracle reports are out there for this wonder drug!

  67. #68 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    This is very easy to explain. AIDS susceptibility is inheritable because it depends on the precise sequence of a few proteins. This means natural selection can act. And wherever it can act, it does — inevitably.

    1. Those chimps who got AIDS have already died out.
    2. Those viruses that were so virulent that they killed their host before it could spread them have also already die out.

    Yes, I agree with this. My point is that the theory that HIV causes AIDS in humans makes no strong predictions as to whether HIV will cause disease in chimps. It does, however, bear on the hypothesis that HIV originated as a chimp virus that crossed over into the human population relatively recently, because there are two possible results that would have excluded that hypothesis–if (a) HIV did not infect chimps at all, or (b) HIV were rapidly lethal in chimps (for example ebola virus rapidly kills gorillas, so nobody believes that gorillas are the natural reservoir of ebola).

  68. #69 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    The only place that racism comes into the discussion is the continued social disadvantage that is still present in society as reflected by differing levels of education and economic prosperity.

    Dr. Noble, the operative words were “ceteris paribus”. I have a hard tme believing that slipped your attention.

    A black lawyer from a glossy hood is not at the same risk of testing positive as a black junkie from the ghetto. He is, however, 4 times as likely to test positive as is his white lawyer neighbour.

    http://hivnotaids.homestead.com/RACE.html

    And the book:

    http://www.failingsofhivaidstheory.homestead.com/

    Trrll: (a) HIV did not infect chimps at all, or (b) HIV were rapidly lethal in chimps (for example ebola virus rapidly kills gorillas, so nobody believes that gorillas are the natural reservoir of ebola).

    HIV can hardly be aid to be rapidly lethal in humans. Does that mean we are a long established natural reservoir of it?

  69. #70 jspreen
    October 12, 2007

    This: Over half of our genome consists of retrovirus corpses in various stages of decay.

    Together with this: 2. Those viruses that were so virulent that they killed their host before it could spread them have also already die out.

    is fantastic bullshit.

    But if you put it otherwise, after carefuly having read Antoine Bechamp for instance, you suddenly understand that viruses, which are are necessary for such or such process, like tissue reconstruction, are handily included in the genes of the host. And suddenly, after having read about Ryke Geerd Hamer’s New Medicine, the mechanisms of nature start to make sense.
    Nature is not about war between mammals, microbes, insects and all that, but about symbiosis. We forgot, which is why people elect warmongers like George W. Bush. The “Double You” was included but nobody noticed.

  70. #71 AK
    October 12, 2007

    trrll said:

    It does, however, bear on the hypothesis that HIV originated as a chimp virus that crossed over into the human population relatively recently

    As I recall, it’s supposed to have originated from a recombination of two different strains of SIV endemic in two different monkey species, both of which are hunted and eaten by chimps. (Note that HIV-1 is supposed to have spread to humans who were eating chimp meat with sores in their mouths.)

    I came across this while Googling for recombination in HIV, so I didn’t really read the article, and I’m not going to go searching again for references. But it’s out there somewhere if you’re interested.

  71. #72 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    HIV can hardly be aid to be rapidly lethal in humans. Does that mean we are a long established natural reservoir of it?

    It sounds as if you have some difficulty following the logic of scientific reasoning. The fact that a particular theory is not excluded does not automatically make it true.

    So the fact that HIV is not rapidly lethal in humans means that one cannot exclude out of hand the possibility that HIV has been endemic in some human subpopulation for a long time, and has only recently “broken out” into the larger population (and indeed, this was one of the hypotheses considered in the early days of investigating the origin of AIDS). That means that one must turn to other kinds of evidence to decide between these two competing hypotheses, such as sequence comparison of HIV from different human isolates, as well as chimp viruses. It is on the basis on such studies that the chimp hypothesis has now become the favored one.

  72. #73 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    Nature is not about war between mammals, microbes, insects and all that, but about symbiosis. We forgot, which is why people elect warmongers like George W. Bush. The “Double You” was included but nobody noticed.

    Nature does not seem to be “about” anything. Evolution uses whatever happens to work, with no evident moral or ethical bias. “War” and “symbiosis” are human concepts; in nature, the boundaries are fuzzy. Species interactions that look like “war” and “symbiosis” can be identified, as well as a whole lot of stuff in-between.

  73. #74 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    I look forward to your scholarly critique of this paper: The SCID-hu mouse: a small animal model for HIV infection and pathogenesis.

    Dr Noble, here’s my scholarly critique: It’s an inbred f-ing freak (not) of nature. http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4ADBR_enHK211HK211&q=MOUSE+EAR+photo&btnG=Search&meta=

  74. #75 Shiritai
    October 12, 2007

    Reading the recent posts by AK, trrll, and David Marjanović, I had a mini-revelation. When was the last time you saw denialists work to improve their own clarity or understanding? For example, Micheal thinks stress causes AIDS, cooler thinks it’s a bacteria, and they don’t care that they’re contradicting themselves. It’s like they’re afraid that any critique of another denialist’s views would be a show of weakness or something. I mean, cooler’s views are really far out there (AIDS denial, 911 conspiracy, support for every woo), but I’ve never seen anyone else say “Yeah, I agree with A, but B is just nuts” to him, or anything similar to that. It’s like they don’t care about any truth except the one they’re focusing on now.

  75. #76 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    It sounds as if you have some difficulty following the logic of scientific reasoning. The fact that a particular theory is not excluded does not automatically make it true.
    So the fact that HIV is not rapidly lethal in humans means that one cannot exclude out of hand the possibility that HIV has been endemic in some human subpopulation (and indeed, this was one of the hypotheses considered in the early days of investigating the origin of AIDS). That means that one must turn to other kinds of evidence to decide between these two competing hypotheses, such as sequence comparison of HIV from different human isolates, as well as chimp viruses. It is on the basis on such studies that the chimp hypothesis has now become the favored one.

    Gee Dr. Trrll, I seem to still have some difficulty following the logic of your scientific reasoning. Are you saying that analyses of chimp and human “HIV isolates” tells us that the jump to humans happened within the last 100 years? Sure? So when did “HIV” enter chimps?

    On a slightly related topic, I don’t want you to forget this in a hurry:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070906214854.htm

  76. #77 Adele
    October 12, 2007

    What a fun discussion, reminds me of all discussion with deniosaurs for past twenty years.

    Carter don’t you get it doesn’t matter who puts out the information sheet? No one says, this is from the NIH so it has to be true! Its not who puts it out its the studies based on! You don’t read them so you can’t say if they’re good or not you just read a sentence on aras. maybe not that.

    Our on-line gaming buddy and 911 fluoride Ron Paul boy is the guy for you carter he’s the one whos saying, oh, a Nobel Prize winner says this and 2500 scientists say this and Genius Dr. Joe says this and blah blah. All your locical fallacies from another deniosaur. YEHA like cooler says.

  77. #78 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    Gee Dr. Trrll, I seem to still have some difficulty following the logic of your scientific reasoning. Are you saying that analyses of chimp and human “HIV isolates” tells us that the jump to humans happened within the last 100 years? Sure? So when did “HIV” enter chimps?

    Sequence comparison is best at determining the order in which things happened. Exact timing is more difficult to figure out, because that requires estimates of the mutation rate over time. Is there some reason why you are particularly concerned with the precise date? It does look like HIV related viruses have existed in simians for a very long time.

    On a slightly related topic, I don’t want you to forget this in a hurry:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070906214854.htm

    And this is relevant to what?

  78. #79 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    Reading the recent posts by AK, trrll, and David Marjanović, I had a mini-revelation. When was the last time you saw denialists work to improve their own clarity or understanding? For example, Micheal thinks stress causes AIDS, cooler thinks it’s a bacteria, and they don’t care that they’re contradicting themselves. It’s like they’re afraid that any critique of another denialist’s views would be a show of weakness or something. I mean, cooler’s views are really far out there (AIDS denial, 911 conspiracy, support for every woo), but I’ve never seen anyone else say “Yeah, I agree with A, but B is just nuts” to him, or anything similar to that. It’s like they don’t care about any truth except the one they’re focusing on now.

    Yes, this is another thing that distinguishes denialists from scientists. Scientists would be arguing with one another over the merits of their particular theories, but for denialists, it is all about rejection of the accepted theory. So anybody who agrees that the accepted theory is wrong is accepted as an ally, even if his reasoning is totally incompatible.

    Witness how global warming denialists have embraced Bjorn Lomborg, even though Lomborg accepts that global warming is real, due to CO2, and the result of human activity, all of which is anathema to AGW denialists. But Lomborg thinks that CO2 emissions standards are not a cost effective approach to controlling global warming, so that makes him an ally.

  79. #80 Adele
    October 12, 2007

    apy,
    wow I can’t believe they put my name in there now everyone will know about you and me. Just like everyone knows all ready about pope and elisa!

  80. #81 apy
    October 12, 2007

    Dr Noble, here’s my scholarly critique: It’s an inbred f-ing freak (not) of nature.

    Wow Pope, you really showed us your excess of knowledge here. Inbred? Was the mouse a hill billy? Do you have an actual scientific statement to make about the study or are you just planing on wow’ing us with your usage of words inside parenthesis?

  81. #82 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Is there some reason why you are particularly concerned with the precise date?

    Dr. Trrll, you may remember the point at which my grasp of scientific reasoning broke down was when I asked you if people were a long established natural reservoir of HIV. You then referred me to something that “determines in which order things happen”. That doesn’t tell me when HIV jumped to humans or chimps, so I had to ask.

    Btw, do you have an example of another hyperactive microbe less than 100 years old that takes more than 10 years on average to kill a reasonably healthy person?

    And this is relevant to what?

    Just didn’t want you to forget.

  82. #83 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Apy, here’s my actual scientific statement: It’s an inbred f-ing freak (not) of nature.

  83. #84 David Marjanović
    October 12, 2007

    This: Over half of our genome consists of retrovirus corpses in various stages of decay.

    Together with this: 2. Those viruses that were so virulent that they killed their host before it could spread them have also already die out.

    is fantastic bullshit.

    Why? Put up or shut up.

    viruses, which are are necessary for such or such process, like tissue reconstruction, are handily included in the genes of the host.

    The other way around: those that happened to have integrated their genome in an interesting place in our genome have had interesting effects due to their strong promoters. One such virus corpse is involved in the formation of the placenta.

    Most, however, just lie around as junk.

    Nature is not about

    I agree with trrll here. And I regard any attempts to paint me as a Bushevik as an incredible insult.

    So the fact that HIV is not rapidly lethal in humans means that one cannot exclude out of hand the possibility that HIV has been endemic in some human subpopulation for a long time, and has only recently “broken out” into the larger population

    Yes, but aren’t lentiviruses always, as their name says, slow?

    I want to introduce you to Brenda Powell, who is the organizer of the 2007 LDN conference.

    What is LDN, how can anything possibly have an effect on both cancer and Alzheimer’s, and what has that got to do with AIDS?

    Or like the hole in the Pentagon. 20 feet across or something. No traces of debris on the lawn… The plane completely disappeared through a hole 4 times too small.

    You should have seen the documentary I was talking about. Plenty of plane pieces, and corpses, have been found on the lawn and inside the building. That’s all on film. The FBI confirms having the plane pieces — though it doesn’t let anyone look at them. Clearly they have something to hide, but it must be something different from what you suppose.

    Or the way the twin towers’ came down. And also, first hit falls second although second hit not nearly as effective as the first.

    Precisely as expected from their construction, the way the planes hit, the time for which the fires burnt, and the illegally missing insulation foam.

    Again: I agree there is a scandal which has been covered up. But it’s not the destruction of the towers, it’s their construction.

    Now, people: Does HIV exist? Is it sufficient to cause AIDS? Does “Mycoplasma incognitum” exist? Is it sufficient to cause AIDS? Is stress sufficient to cause AIDS? Is cocaine sufficient to cause AIDS? Are any emotions sufficient to cause AIDS? Is any of these things necessary to cause AIDS? I’d like to know what I’m arguing against.

  84. #85 apy
    October 12, 2007

    Apy, here’s my actual scientific statement: It’s an inbred f-ing freak (not) of nature.

    You could have just saved the repeating of this and said

    “no I have no knowledge of why this study is meaningful and I lack the necessary knowledge to properly critique it”

  85. #86 Adele
    October 12, 2007

    trrll says,
    So anybody who agrees that the accepted theory is wrong is accepted as an ally, even if his reasoning is totally incompatible.

    Also people who say Tara or Franklin or someone is a homophobe, no proof, are just fine aobut Duesberg and Henry Bauer and other deniosaurs saying stuff in print about how being gay is wrong illegal against nature they should get silenced whatever.

    Popeylisa says phylogentetics is crap.
    Umm popeylisa did you read the article in science daily?
    Maybe just the headline you didn’t get to the part,

    Identifying a link between viruses from two people on its own says nothing about who infected whom. Other difficulties include the unlikelihood that all sexual contacts of all HIV infected people will be available for viral testing, co-infection with genetically diverse strains, and similarities in two virus genomes as a result of convergent or parallel evolution.

    You don’t understand this stuff we know so go ahead and ask questions about it well help you out. or try any way.

  86. #87 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    Btw, do you have an example of another hyperactive microbe less than 100 years old that takes more than 10 years on average to kill a reasonably healthy person?

    What argument are you trying to make? Something isn’t real until there are two of it? That’s pretty lame, don’t you think?–as the saying goes, there’s a first time for everything.

    You can’t really assign an “age” to a microbe, but as it happens there are plenty of examples of microbes that can take years to kill a healthy person. Off the top of my head, I can think of tuberculosis, leprosy, and syphilis.

  87. #88 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Nonono, Dr. Trrll, I said a hyperactive microbe, not a dormant one.

  88. #89 John Moore
    October 12, 2007

    I read through some of this string because I was so impressed by the article (Short memories….) that triggered it. I recommend that anyone who has not already done so should also read the articles posted on http://www.aidstruth.org that record just how many of the AIDS denialists themselves die of AIDS (of course their surviving friends persist in denying the obvious, but such denials are as foolish as Maggiore denying that her daughter died of AIDS). Also posted on the AIDSTruth site are various revealing articles about some of the more vocal AIDS denialists and how they conduct themselves; the reality is shocking when the internet illusions are peeled away for all to see what lies beneath. Overall, the entire site contains valuable information on the entire subject of AIDS denialism, and its lethal consequences. Remember, in the real world beyond the internet, the denialists cause real people to die real deaths. For this reason, we will continue to do everything we can to stop them.
    John Moore

  89. #90 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Forguve me Dr. Trrll, I meant a microbe taking 10 years to cause disease There ar eobviously a few who don’t kill right away or at all.

    NAybody interestedd in revealing examples o fhow John moore conducts himself can go to this address among many. many others:

    http://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2006/11/the_moore_manif.html

  90. #91 Braganza
    October 12, 2007

    Dear Prof. J Moore,

    I would like to know if you are supporting the treatments for AIDS promoted by the Kurosawa Grouppe, or if you consider them to be some quacks.

    Thanks in advance for answering me,

  91. #92 cooler
    October 12, 2007

    john moore does not beleive in informed consent, you must not hear another side of a issue bc you might believe it! Can you imagine if you were a juror and you heard that ?

    This is straight out of Orwells 1984, get over it, people are not as dumb as you make them to be, the reason they beleive Duesberg etc is bc they see vailidity in some of his criticisms, so do many other scientists, they are many more who are getting sick of your intimidation.

    Why are you so obsessed with “denialists”. People are not stupid, If a group of people claimed the moon was made of cheese, do you think astrophysicists would start a group called “moontruth”, this is not the way experts respond to absurd arguments, they realize that they are laughable and wouldnt care about it.

    For all we know you guys could be responsible for deaths in real life, monster doses of AZT, ignoring shyh ching Lo’s mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe that killed every animal injected and is being found in many people with complex multi organic illnesses, people and scientists should hear all sides of an argument and then make their personal choice when it comes to their health. And more experiments should be conducted to resolve ambiguities.

    I don’t need gatekeepers like John moore and Mark wainberg telling me what I can and can not hear and beleive. And if I do make a decision based on my own health, as long as I’ve had informed consent, not only hearing one side of an issue, then Its all on me and no one else. You people insist on people only being exposed to your side of the argument and no one elses, and thats very telling in itself. A good prosecutor with a good case would not care if a jury heard an absurd defense, it would help them actually, yet you are dedicating your entire career to silence/fire anyone that disagrees with you, much like a prosecutor with a very weak case that would do everything to silence the opposition.

  92. #93 John Moore
    October 12, 2007

    Dear Braganza, Alternative medicines are a foolish and quite possibly dangerous way to treat HIV infection, particularly if individuals choose to rely on them rather than taking the various FDA-approved, safe and effective therapies for HIV infection that are available.

    Pope, I hope that readers do follow the link you provide, so that they can learn how serious my colleagues and I are about crushing AIDS denialism in all its manifestations, and thereby saving the lives of innocent yet so often gullible people. By the way, do learn how to spell and type! The style of your posting is as illiterate as your arguments, something that is sadly characteristic of AIDS denialists.

  93. #94 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    illustioruyus prof. mooore, id make aneffort atyping if othought you wereworth it,but u r a seriously wude wabbit.

    However,I’ll give you the benefit of doubt, just as your “FDA-approved, safe and effective therapies for HIV” infection decribed thus in the authoritative October 2006 NIH fact sheet:

    “However, the use of antiretroviral therapy is now associated with a series of serious side effects and long-term complications that may have a negative impact on mortality rates. More deaths occurring from liver failure, kidney disease, and cardiovascular complications are being observed in this patient population.”

    That NIH is obliged to report this, only a decade after introduction of the cocktails, speaks volumes for how prevalent these “side” effects must be. There is no regular mechanism for reporting such things–the FDA has no rules for reporting problems with drugs after they’ve been approved, so it took a decade or two to withdraw seldane and hismanal, for example, so if it becomes generally known that a drug has serious problems, it is rather by chance and takes a long time–unless, of course, the bad effects occur very frequently.

    Prof Moore, I take your anticipated silence as meaning you are highly embarrased.

  94. #95 Carter
    October 12, 2007

    Dear Professor Moore,

    I cannot for the life of me understand why someone of your stature cannot see that your failed drug regimes you continue to drown out lives with can make any sense to you. Why must you continue along the wrong path?

    Carter
    Los Angeles

  95. #96 Adele
    October 12, 2007

    this is not the way experts respond to absurd arguments, they realize that they are laughable and wouldnt care about it.

    Great point cooler. So when you fly on a plane you don’t care who flies it right? Your saying it doesn’t matter who flies the plane I should here all sides and decide and if it crashes its my problem. Just a facist country like you say “stalins germany hitlers russia orwells 1984″ tells people only licenced pilots get to fly planes. Just Wainberg and Moore say people who pretend to be pilots and get people killed should go to jail.

    So I can get a pilot and a video game obsessed freak like cooler and a cashier from the grocery and Peter Duesberg and interview em all and the one I like most I can ask them to fly my plane. And I like PEter Duesberg because I like his theory you can fly a plane with your mind control who cares he never tried it out and what if he crashes me into the ocean and like two hundred other people. Too bad we made our choice, “informed consent.”

    Problem is, cooler that’s not informed consent its just wishfull thinking consent. I know you don’t like it since you think the gov is under the Zionists and everything but some times the government has to protect you from yourself. Like a license to drive a car or fly a plane or practice medicene.

  96. #97 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Anybody wondering what really attracted the illustwious pwofessor to this thread can read the twuth here:

    http://groups.msn.com/aidsmythexposed/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=31585&LastModified=4675643437172859197

  97. #98 trrll
    October 12, 2007

    Nonono, Dr. Trrll, I said a hyperactive microbe, not a dormant one.

    Hyperactive? So far as I know, that term has no scientific meaning when applied to microbes. Are you talking about a microbe with attention deficit disorder?

  98. #99 Dr. Duke
    October 12, 2007

    Cooler writes:

    ” john moore does not beleive in informed consent, you must not hear another side of a issue bc you might believe it! Can you imagine if you were a juror and you heard that ?”

    Wrong! The http://www.aidstruth.org site says nothing about “silencing” or “censoring” the denialists. It only points out that the denialists tell lies, that many of them have died of AIDS, that others are professed homophobes, etc.

    Juries in courts of law not only get to hear two sides (from the prosecution and the defense) of the story; they also get some assurance that there are rules in the telling of those stories. Blatant lying in a court of law can be punished with perjury charges. Blatant lying on the internet is perfectly legal, as long as the topic is medical and not financial. Even with illegal lies about financial matters (Nigeria scam anyone? Pyramid schemes?) the internet is mush less regulated than a court of law.

    So, on the internet it pays to think just a little bit about the credibility of people who give information and disinformation.

  99. #100 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Dr. Trrll,

    The hyper activity and attention deficit disorder is more on the part of the T-cells and failed microbicide researchers. But never mind it’s a denialist thing you wouldn’t understand it:

    1. Although infected cells do not die as a result of HIV replication, HIV replication is hyperactive. Infected cells churn out huge numbers of new HIV, resulting in a large portion of T4 cells in the lymph nodes becoming infected.
    2. T8 cells, which kill any host cell harboring an active (virus-producing) infection, kill the T4 cells that are actively producing HIV.
    3. Uninfected T4 cells replicate quickly in order to replace those killed by the T8 cells.
    4. Because this process occurs quickly, few infected cells ever get a chance to make it to the general circulation. As a result, clinicians drawing blood samples had previously concluded, erroneously, that only a low percentage of T4 cells are HIV-infected.
    5. Although few infected cells ever make it out of the lymph nodes, lots of HIV does, and it is this HIV that Ho and Shaw claim to count with their new technique.
    6. Over time — about a decade — the T4 population wears down trying to replace all of its members killed by the T8 cells.
    7. There is no latency period for HIV. From the moment of initial infection, there is hyperactive HIV replication that quickly spreads to a large portion of T4 cells in the lymph nodes. This “massive covert infection,” and the hyperactive “turnover” of T4 cells and HIV, continues unabated throughout a decade or more of clinical latency (no symptoms), into AIDS, and ultimately causes the patient to die.

    http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/chjppcrap.htm

  100. #101 John Moore
    October 12, 2007

    Cooler is very welcome to take any decisions that lead to his or her own death, whether that be standing under a collapsing skyscraper or refusing safe and effective antiretroviral therapies for HIV infection. He or she is not, however, entitled to do what the likes of Duesberg do, and take actions that lead to the death of others, as recorded on AIDSTruth.org.

    Neither Pope or Carter should expect any reply to any point he or she cares to make, as to do so would breach our policy of never debating or discussing any issues with AIDS denialists, as stated on AIDSTruth.org. There, we present information that can help prevent vulnerable people from following the path of the denialists and dying from AIDS as a result of untreated HIV infection in the same way that, for example, EJ Maggiore did.

  101. #102 apy
    October 12, 2007

    Considering denialists appear to be quick to call an attack on them some logical fallacy I’m unsure of what to make of:

    As everybody knows, Tara Smith has no writing skills, so she linked to the article of a layperson who on the original site says she doesn’t want to enter into debate with “denialists” because she isn’t knowledgeable enough.

  102. #103 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    The http://www.aidstruth.org site says nothing about “silencing” or “censoring” the denialists. (Duke)

    Since the illustwious pwofessor doesn’t wish to correct his mindless follower here’s his underwritten words on a previous occasion:

    We live in an time when information is available and disseminated to society, including our children, in myriad ways. In the absence of an effective filter to protect the vulnerable, disinformation can kill. And while we spend billions of dollars worldwide in public service announcements educating our children about the perils of drug use and unsafe sex, we do little or nothing to counter the bewildering chorus of voices arguing that HIV, a virus that has killed more than 25 million people around the world in the course of a single generation, is utterly harmless.
    People who argue that HIV does not cause AIDS have formed clubs, published newsletters and freely disseminated terribly harmful information on this subject through the Internet and other widely available channels. Attempts to shut down these sites or to prevent the dissemination of denialist literature are routinely dismissed on the grounds that dissenters have a right to express their views and that the public interest is better served by the defence of freedom of expression.The latter sentiment appears in a letter to us – researchers on the front lines of the global AIDS crisis – from the provost and vice-president of a well-known U.S. university, after we complained that one of his faculty members had written a book based on an HIV-AIDS denialist position. The university should have shown leadership on the issue and dismissed the faculty member from her position, rather than hiding under the cloak of academic freedom.

    http://aidstruth.org/AIDS-and-the-dangers-of-denial.pdf

  103. #104 Dr. Duke
    October 12, 2007

    Yes, Pope. It is legal to tell lies about medical conditions, such as lying about HIV not being isolated etc. However, it is not ethical to tell such lies, and Universities should not employ people who tell lies.

  104. #105 Dr. Duke
    October 12, 2007

    It is one think to tell lies as a private individual. It is quite another to use a University affiliation, or other link to a respectable institution, to lend a false sense of support or credibility to those lies.

    In a few cases (none of them medical as far as I know), Universities have been sued over the content of their professor’s web sites.

  105. #106 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    One more time for the mindless:

    The http://www.aidstruth.org site says nothing about “silencing” or “censoring” the denialists.(Duke)

    Attempts to shut down these sites or to prevent the dissemination of denialist literature are routinely dismissed on the grounds that dissenters have a right to express their views (AIDStruth)

    Nothing about universities in here Duke. It’s not only unethical to lie, it’s also stupid to persist whenyou;ve beencalled on it, so I suggest you quit while you’re behind. Go do some genetic sequencing or sumtin’

  106. #107 jre
    October 12, 2007

    Tara — An excellent post, and a great link.
    Boomer that I am, I can remember a time when measles, mumps, chickenpox, rubella and whooping cough were routine childhood diseases that everyone, or almost everyone, got. I had most of them myself. I have known, and know, several people who suffered from polio. I have met an adult cochlear implant recipient most of whose hearing was taken from him (and a sizable cohort of others) by rubella.
    I hear about parents who reject vaccines, or even hold chickenpox parties, and my jaw drops. I can assure you from personal experience that shingles is no fun. If my parents had deliberately infected me with chickenpox, I would have a bone to pick with them today.

    Here in Boulder, we have a Waldorf school — where the belief that high fevers are good for kids, propounded by Rudolf Steiner, is celebrated and put into practice. As a result, Boulder is a hot spot for whooping cough. Some of those Waldorf parents, as they heard their children fight for breath, no doubt convinced themselves that it was all for the best. After all, what else can you do? Admit that you put your child’s life at risk unnecessarily? That takes an honesty and a steeliness of nerve few of us have.

    In the early 1980s, when the cause of AIDS was still mysterious, there was an atmosphere of almost tangible fear. A Chicago Tribune columnist wrote that AIDS should be the only front page story every day. Political fringe groups advocated (as some still do) the internment of people with AIDS. I remember talking with an infectious disease specialist who was in professional shock over the disease’s toll. “It’s more horrible than you can imagine.” he told me. “It takes everything from you, bit by bit. I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy.” With the introduction of antiretroviral drugs, starting with AZT, all that changed. AIDS became a manageable chronic infection, and not a death sentence. The threat that innocent people would be swept up in a tide of public hysteria receded. It turned out that the world wasn’t going to come to an end after all.

    And now, only twenty-three years after HIV was identified, we have a population that doesn’t believe in it. Caught up in a frenzy of self-satisfied paranoia, they have absolutely no idea how ugly this epidemic could have become, were it not for the drugs they so despise. It’s nuts. It’s a triumph of self-delusion. Tara, I can’t tell you how much I admire your sang froid in the face of this lunacy. If I had to listen to these nutcases every day, I would lose my cool pretty quickly.

  107. #108 jspreen
    October 12, 2007

    Plenty of plane pieces, and corpses, have been found on the lawn and inside the building.

    How full of s**t or how totally lost must one be to back up that statement?
    Might it be you simply missed this?

    Or maybe we should interpret the way people look at the 911 pictures as just another illustration of the principal that reality if forged according to one’s convictions and not the other way around.

    Ok, I know, I know. This is not a place for 911. Sorry. I’ll do my best the next time. See John P Moore dropped a line too. Interesting. Maybe that will give me some inspiration. But not now. Awl that readdingg makez my eyyes hurdtt

  108. #109 jspreen
    October 12, 2007

    dying from AIDS as a result of untreated HIV infection in the same way that, for example, EJ Maggiore did.

    John Pee Moore, like all other Aids apologists coming up with the case of Eliza Jane Scovill to defend the cause of HIV=Aids, you are just a filthy scumbag. You know very well that Aids has nothing to do with EJ’s death and, even if there was something in, you should have tried to find some dignity in your little black heart to leave child’s death and parents’ pain out of it.

    Hey, that reminds me of that cute little letter I wrote you last year. Remember? That was some fun, wasn’t it?

  109. #110 apy
    October 12, 2007

    And remember folks, the germ theory is part of a world wide multi generational conspiracy that only the likes of jspreen has been able to uncover.

  110. #111 jspreen
    October 12, 2007

    Ha Ha Ha! apy can only think of the world as mainstream truths on one side and conspiracy nuts on the other.

    It intrigues me though, the eternal return of the term conspiracy. Who started that shit? Wasn’t it right after the Kennedy assassination? If so, the concept has long since blown up into the face of its conceivers.

    Hey! Makes me think of Bill Hicks. One of my favorites!

    Here, an extract of the Arizona Bay CD. Hicks on Kennedy assassination:

    Kennedy, I love talking about the Kennedy assassination because to me it’s a great example of, er, a totalitarian government’s ability to, you know, manage information and thus keep us in the dark any way they… Oh sorry wrong meeting… Ah shit. That’s the meeting we’re having tomorrow at the docks. [winks] I love talking about Kennedy. I was just down in Dallas, Texas. You know you can go down there and, er, to Dealey Plaza where Kennedy was assassinated. And you can actually go to the sixth floor of the Schoolbook Depository. It’s a museum called… ‘The Assassination Museum’. I think they named that after the assassination. I can’t be too sure of the chronology here but… Anyway they have the window set up to look exactly like it did on that day. And it’s really accurate, you know, cos Oswald’s not in it. “Yeah, yeh so wow that’s cool.” Painstaking accuracy, you know. It’s true, it’s called the ‘Sniper’s Nest’. It’s glassed in, it’s got he boxes sitting there. You can’t actually get to the window as such but the reason they did that of course, they didn’t want thousands of American tourists getting there each year going [Mimes looking out of window] “No fucking way! I can’t even see the road. Shit they’re lying to us. Fuck! Where are they? There’s no fucking way. Not unless Oswald was hanging by his toes, upside down from the ledge. Either that or some pigeons grabbed onto him, flew him over the motorcade… Surely someone would have seen that. You know there was rumours of anti-Castro pigeons seen drinking in bars… Someone overhead them saying ‘coup, coup’ Coo.

  111. #112 Dale
    October 12, 2007

    As I recall, jspreen, at least on the websites that I frequent, there was very little reference to EJ Scovill’s death from AIDS apologists until after the oh-so-obviously flawed ‘analysis’ of the coroner’s report from Al Bayati, followed by Christine Maggiore’s and many other dissidents’ very public support of Al Bayati’s analysis. Had dissidents not publically challenged the coroner’s report, competence and impartiality, I expect that most AIDS apologists would have been perfectly happy to respect the parents pain and leave EJ and them out of it.

  112. #113 Dr. Duke
    October 12, 2007

    I think Dale is right. Notice that nobody mentions Nikolas Emerson in these types of discussions, for a counterexample.

  113. #114 John Moore
    October 12, 2007

    My sympathy is with the dead girl who was never given the chance to grow up to make her own informed decisions about how to live her life, and whose death has been used by AIDS denialists, including her mother, for political propaganda and the promotion of a perverse agenda that is antithetical to public health. My sympathy is also with the other children in the USA and South Africa who acquired HIV infection and died of AIDS as a result of Maggiore’s proselytising against the use of AZT and other anti-retrovirals (such as nevirapine) to prevent perinatal HIV transmission. The infamous photograph of Maggiore’s pregnant belly with a red-painted “No AZT” symbol on it has a poignant irony associated with it, considering that the use of AZT during that pregnancy would most probably have saved Eliza Jane Scovill from the HIV infection that led to her death from AIDS, as would the use of AZT-containing terapeutic regimens after her birth. Does Maggiore deserve any sympathy? No. She deliberately chose to make political capital out of her daughter during her gestation, then after her sad, untimely and unnecessary death, and she is still doing it. Those are actions that merit condemnation, not sympathy. Still, the inevitable failure of her lawsuit against the LA Coroner’s Office will finally bring “Justice for EJ”, and thereby help prevent the deaths of other children placed in similar situations by irresponsible parents and unprofessional physicians.

  114. #115 David Marjanović, OM
    October 12, 2007

    How full of s**t or how totally lost must one be to back up that statement?

    I’ve seen the movie. You haven’t. Watch it, and then come back and tell me I’m full of shit.

    And if it isn’t aired in the USA for another year or two, well, then you will have to stay silent on the issue for another year or two. In my papers I never cite publications I haven’t read…

    Now, back to the topic. Won’t a single of you “rethinkers” answer my questions on which of the proposed factors exist, are necessary, and are sufficient?

  115. #116 cooler
    October 12, 2007

    John moore wants to protect “vulnerable” people, by firing professors that dont agree with him, bc somebody intelligent person might believe what Duesberg has to say!

    I know of hunderds of people that graduated from stanford, Harvard, UCLA that once exposed to the other side of the issue thinks more research is needed, you dont need to be a scientist to see that aids inc is out of control, go away john we dont need you to protect us by sabotaging academic freedom and the first amendment.

    Youre your own worst enemy, all this name calling you are engaging in is making you look like a fool. Youve just insulted Professor Pollock from university of Washington, Im sure the staff there doesnt think too highly of you.

    And who gets to judge what is debatable or not? Drug company hacks? The CDC? Deal with it its america, and if some professors disagree with you, and a whole lot of intelligent people think something doesnt make sense, we are not going to mindlessly follow a small cadre of experts who are bought off by special interests and drug companies.

  116. #117 cooler
    October 12, 2007

    bc many intelligent people

  117. #118 cooler
    October 12, 2007

    Pretty disgusting that Moore keeps bringing up the death opf a child whos death remains unclear, she had 10,000 WBC count, and she probably died of an allergic reaction to an antibiotic, there has been no hiv positive antibody test for her, wonder why?

  118. #119 Alan Kellogg
    October 12, 2007

    As the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness advances we can expect to see threads like this one shrink dramatically. More effective treatments for paranoid ideation alone is going to make a huge change in many lives.

    But expect denialists to oppose such research and implementation, claiming that findings are erroneous at best, and fraudulent at worst. Attempts at anti-mental health legislation will clog legislatures around the world.

    Civil actions will also proliferate, leading to the passage of vexatious litigant laws in places that do not currently have such, and the wider application of such laws in places that do. We may even see the criminalization of behavior that leads people to avoid medical treatments because of bad advice.

    It’s going to be an interest half century coming up.

  119. #120 apy
    October 12, 2007

    Yes, the alternative explanation of the poor girls death was given by a person that is surprised at someone developing a weakened immune system after being given immunosuppressants. I don’t know what she died off but it seems pretty clear Al-Bayati is not qualified to say either.

  120. #121 John Moore
    October 12, 2007

    Alan Kellogg is correct: paranoid delusions or other forms of mental illness underlie the conduct of many, but not all, of the more vociferous AIDS denialists. However, a significant subset of the denialists is motivated by profit and greed, namely those individuals associated with, funded by or owners of businesses within the “alternative medicine” industry. Moreover, some of the very few academics who are active AIDS denialists have very dubious personal motivations for their conduct, and promote extraordinarily eccentric (and often shameful) views on various subjects (for example, Henry Bauer’s and Harvey Bialy’s homophobia and Bauer’s long-standing interest in the Loch Ness Monster, crop circles and other fringe topics). Readers are encouraged to consult some of the essays and other postings on http://www.aidstruth.org to learn more on this aspect of the subject. A recent essay on Duesberg contains particularly informative material.

  121. #122 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    A black lawyer from a glossy hood is not at the same risk of testing positive as a black junkie from the ghetto. He is, however, 4 times as likely to test positive as is his white lawyer neighbour.

    You have statistics on HIV prevalence in black lawyers and white lawyers? Or are you just pulling these factoids out of a bodily orifice?

    Well not too far off.
    http://hivnotaids.homestead.com/RACE.html

    Henry Bauer’s fantasies fail to offer a vaguely plausible explanation of how the HIV tests are supposedly rigged to make blacks and gays test positive.

    Bauer conveniently forgets to ask similar rhetorical questions such as “Why does gonorrhea discriminate by race?” and “Why does diabetes discriminate by race?”. The answers have nothing to do with tests being rigged.

  122. #123 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    Gee Dr. Trrll, I seem to still have some difficulty following the logic of your scientific reasoning.

    Never would have guessed!

  123. #124 cooler
    October 12, 2007

    Hey john,
    Since youve badmouthed so many scientists like Duesberg,mullis, bialy etc and recently told Professor Pollock that you would never talk to him bc his favorable review of Bialy’s book, I was wondering if you could badmouth another scientist on the record.

    His name is Shyh-Ching Lo, MD, PhD, chief,. Division of Molecular Pathobiology,. Department of Infectious and Parasitic. Diseases Pathology of the Armed Forces of institute of Pathology.

    He and his staff applauded Duesberg for speaking out in 1990. Lo said “There is no good explanation for why and how the virus breaks out of the antibody protection,” says Lo. “I’m not saying that HIV plays no role in AIDS-the data shows a clear correlation with disease. But AIDS is much more complicated than HIV.”
    miami herald 1990

    He has not recanted his statement since 1990, can you please badmouth him as well publicly as well, waiting………..

  124. #125 Chris Noble
    October 12, 2007

    Dr Noble, here’s my scholarly critique: It’s an inbred f-ing freak (not) of nature.

    Brilliant analysis. Did you bother to read the article? Or did the cognitive dissonance activate early?

  125. #126 Jim
    October 12, 2007

    “I know of hunderds of people that graduated from stanford, Harvard, UCLA that once exposed to the other side of the issue thinks more research is needed”

    First of all, I doubt you know hundreds of people that have graduated from top schools. Second, if you have in fact talked to anyone who has, my guess would be they are simply humoring you and your suggestions by saying something as vague as “it needs more research” as most, even here, agree. They certainly are not validating your claims.

    “And who gets to judge what is debatable or not? Drug company hacks? The CDC?”

    You’re right cooler, someone working at the CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL probably are unfamiliar with the HIV/AIDS data and are just drug company hacks.

    “Deal with it its america, and if some professors disagree with you, and a whole lot of intelligent people think something doesnt make sense, we are not going to mindlessly follow a small cadre of experts who are bought off by special interests and drug companies.”

    Those intelligent people are also more than capable of attending meetings and conducting proper research to back up their points. Instead, they “publish” it on websites and in non-peer reviewed formats. Oh, that’s right, because everyone is against them. Sorry I forgot.

    There is no “small cadre” of experts, Cooler. There are thousands of researchers currently conducting actual RESEARCH (something the denialists lack) that follow the evidence and agree that HIV causes AIDS.

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v406/n6791/full/406015a0.html

    Why don’t you give them any credence? Because their conclusions don’t match your own? You’re so willing to fall in line with Duesburg et al but dismiss these 5,000 signatories with a wave of your hand with ZERO basis in evidence. Get a life cooler, you’re not as intelligent as you think. You’re not as clever as you think.

  126. #127 Jim
    October 12, 2007

    “There is no good explanation for why and how the virus breaks out of the antibody protection”

    Cooler do you ever read anything newer than mid-1990′s? You do realize that HIV research didn’t end then don’t you? Update yourself and stop mindlessly toting quotes from people that are decades old. The answer to the quote you post is old enough that I learned it in my general immunology and virology classes.

    http://www.callutheran.edu/BioDev/omm/jmol/hiv_gp120/gp120.html

  127. #128 cooler
    October 12, 2007

    nothing changed since 1990, they were called charlatans then and still are by the small cadre of drug company hacks.

    The durban declaration was sent out like an evite, many signers either had ties to AIDS inc or were never exposed to “denialists” arguments, its called manufactured consent fool.

    You dont know anybody anywhere, youre just a militant geek that couldnt get laid to save your life. LOL

  128. #129 Pope
    October 12, 2007

    Good morning to you too Dr. Noble. I see the poodle gets awfully busy barking when its master is around.

    “You have statistics on HIV prevalence in black lawyers and white lawyers? Or are you just pulling these factoids out of a bodily orifice?

    Well not too far off.
    http://hivnotaids.homestead.com/RACE.html

    Dr. Noble, you are welcome to call whoever is responsible for the official HIV stats a “bodily orifice” if you think that makes you sound adult and reponsible. Maybe your ADStruth master could organize a letter writing campaign to boycot the CDC, NIH and whoever else employs the liars that dream these kinds of things up?

    “Henry Bauer’s fantasies fail to offer a vaguely plausible explanation of how the HIV tests are supposedly rigged to make blacks and gays test positive.”

    Again, Dr. Noble, we couldn’t agree more, except of course the fantasies do not belong to Prof. Bauer. That’s a blatant lie from you. Why do you feel you have to lie Dr. Noble?

    Bauer conveniently forgets to ask similar rhetorical questions such as “Why does gonorrhea discriminate by race?” and “Why does diabetes discriminate by race?”. The answers have nothing to do with tests being rigged.”

    Well, if it has nothing to do with the tests, please don’t keep us suspended, do tell us what it has to do with, assuming that you didn’t just pull this out of a bodily orifice.

    Here’s the review of Prof. Bauer’s book from
    “International Journal of STD & AIDS” 2007.

    http://www.failingsofhivaidstheory.homestead.com/IntJstdAIDSreview.pdf.

    Do you have a scientific comment Dr. Noble, or would you prefer to call them names? Perhaps someone should organize a letter writing campaign to shut down this publication as well, considering how they shamelessly publish reviews of scholarly literature.

  129. #130 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    Dr. Noble, you are welcome to call whoever is responsible for the official HIV stats a “bodily orifice” if you think that makes you sound adult and reponsible. Maybe your ADStruth master could organize a letter writing campaign to boycot the CDC, NIH and whoever else employs the liars that dream these kinds of things up?

    Are you trying to tell me that the CDC keeps statistics of the prevalence of HIV in black lawyers and white lawyers?

    You made a statement. Where is your evidence?

    A black lawyer from a glossy hood is not at the same risk of testing positive as a black junkie from the ghetto. He is, however, 4 times as likely to test positive as is his white lawyer neighbour.

    Why not just admit that you made this factoid up?

    Do you have a scientific comment Dr. Noble, or would you prefer to call them names? Perhaps someone should organize a letter writing campaign to shut down this publication as well, considering how they shamelessly publish reviews of scholarly literature.

    The review is hardly supportive.

    Not only does Bauer ignore contrary evidence but he also selectively interprets the observations of others.

    Bauer’s interpretations of the data are bizarre.

    Take Figure 2 in his book. For a start the graph is terrible. The lines appear to be hand drawn. There is no y-scale. I presume Bauer drops the scale because the data he uses has 4% of male babies being HIV positive. The real data that he uses is not continuous but is really tabulated in intervals of 0-4, 5-12, 13-19, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49 and more than 50. The real data does not pretend to be the prevalence of HIV in the total US population as Bauer implies. There are no error bars. This makes Bauer’s arguments about the male-to-female ratio ludicrous.

    But it’s his interpretation that is by far the most stupid of all. He concludes that the age distribution of HIV prevalence is inconsistent with HIV being a sexually transmitted microbe.

    Hello Earth to Bauer. Anyone there?

    What exactly would you expect from a virus that is spread perinatally and sexually? There are babies that are born with HIV or are infected with HIV shorly after birth. Life expectancy for these children is very short. Then we see a dramatic increase in prevalence starting at the time where people become sexually active. Another coincidence?

    Bauer’s conclusions do not follow from the data. The data is not only perfectly consistent with HIV being spread both perinatally and sexually it is also strong evidence for this conclusion.

  130. #131 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    Cooler do you ever read anything newer than mid-1990′s? You do realize that HIV research didn’t end then don’t you?

    Actually it was known from research on EIAV from the 70′s that antigenic variation was one of the mechanisms used in persistent viral infections.

    Denialists not only forget work done after 1990 but they also forget research done before 1984.

  131. #132 Pope
    October 13, 2007

    Dr. Noble, I appreciate your attempt at engaging – if only you would engage on the issue you’d be perfect.

    “Are you trying to tell me that the CDC keeps statistics of the prevalence of HIV in black lawyers and white lawyers?”

    Darn!! you got me there, Dr. Noble. I thought I could pretend there were published studies of large cohorts of black and white lawyers who are next door neighbors. But I guess nothing of real relevance gets past the AISDtruth watch poodles. Here you go, happy now? I am because every time you pull one of those wilful stupidity stunts I get to link Prof. Bauer’s work and show everybody you don’t have an answer.

    “These intricate technicalities can be side-stepped by looking strictly at the demography of HIV, at how POSITIVE HIV tests VARY IN A REGULAR WAY

    among social groups

    geographically

    over time

    with age

    with sex

    with race

    This points to “HIV” being something endemic, not a contagious infection. It also indicates that positive HIV tests measure something quite general about health, not specifically about AIDS. And the data even show that HIV and AIDS are not connected; for example, Black Americans in every tested group are HIV-positive about 5 times more often than White Americans, and that has not changed for twenty years; but the relative proportions of Black and White victims of AIDS has changed by a factor of more than 6 over that time”

    http://hivnotaids.homestead.com/

    Chris Noble said: “The review is hardly supportive”

    “Not only does Bauer ignore contrary evidence but he also selectively interprets the observations of others.” (International Journal of STD&AIDS, quoted by Chris Noble)

    Tsktsk Dr. Noble, have you not yet learned to be wary of taking what is offered? Why do yo think I linked this specific review? Because it’s a rare attempt at an evenhanded discussion in the scientific spirit as opposed to,

    “We will not: Engage in any public or private debate with AIDS denialists or respond to requests from journalists who overtly support AIDS denialist causes.”

    How about the illustrious Prof. Moore, does he get the point now?

    What you so predictably did, Dr. Noble, was to cherry pick from the review article and misrepresent the conclusions of the author. Does that sound familiar to you?

    Of course nobody from the orthodoxy is going to publicize a review saying, “Prof. Bauer is right, the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is a mistake”. However, the reviewer goes as far as he possibly can without risk of having a gang of AIDStruth poodles barking up his tree in his CONCLUSIONS as opposed to the obligatory orthodoxy appeasing introductory remarks:

    “[Prof. Bauer's book] can be used as a mirror for some of the major failings of HIV epidemiology during the first quarter century of its existence . . . HIV/ AIDS researchers and health workers . . . should take a hard look at the weak quality of evidence supporting the views of HIV propagation appearing in their pages . . . richly documented . . . asking good questions and . . . detailing how ‘competent and qualified people who questioned the orthodoxy have been largely excluded from the leading journals’ . . . and, consequently, the media . . .Readers should ask the HIV/AIDS establishment, especially the health agencies entrusted with monitoring and intervening in HIV epidemics, why they have settled for evidence from a lesser god when the stakes for getting the picture right are so high. Bauer, Epstein and Chin ought to be thanked for providing us with such a (regretfully unflattering) mirror. Our task ought to be to recognize the serious weaknesses in the available evidence and to insist on rigorous studies that can supply the strong, direct evidence needed for epidemiologic validity”.

    Gee, Dr. Noble, with this kind of reckless disregard for the truth and/or inability to read plain prose, how can we trust you to read technical papers about inbred mice correctly?

    As for your last point about a missing Y axis or whatever, I refer to my previous observation: you’d be so goddam perfect if you would only address the issues – the issue at hand being. . .

    “Black Americans in every tested group are HIV-positive about 5 times more often than White Americans, and that has not changed for twenty years.”

  132. #133 franklin
    October 13, 2007

    Hey Pope,

    You got a refernce for this factoid?

  133. #134 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    Of course nobody from the orthodoxy is going to publicize a review saying, “Prof. Bauer is right, the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is a mistake”. However, the reviewer goes as far as he possibly can without risk of having a gang of AIDStruth poodles barking up his tree in his CONCLUSIONS as opposed to the obligatory orthodoxy appeasing introductory remarks:

    Oh, of course. You know what Potterat really thinks. He might say publicly that the evidence Bauer presents is weak, and that Bauer ignores evidence that contradicts his ideas and misrepresents the observations of others but in secret Potterat really thinks Bauer is correct. Who are you trying to fool?

    Potterat is hardly holding back on his own ideas about HIV being transmitted predominantly spread by dirty needles in Africa rather than by sexual transmission. He doesn’t sound like somebody who is afraid of expressing disagreemen with the consensus.

    “Black Americans in every tested group are HIV-positive about 5 times more often than White Americans, and that has not changed for twenty years.”

    There is a lot of variation in this about 5 times.

    The difference in HIV prevalence in different demographic groups is entirely consistent with HIV being a sexually transmitted virus. The conclusions that Bauer tries to draw simply do not follow from the data. Just like Duesberg, Bauer invents his own laws of epidemiology thatbare supposed to describe how a “real” sexually transmitted disease should behave.

  134. #135 Pope
    October 13, 2007

    There is a lot of variation in this about 5 times

    Haha, Dr Noble, who are YOU trying to fool? Yep, there certainly is variation, like sometimes blacks are 3 times more likely to test positive within a certain demographic, sometimes the are 7 times more like to test postive. What does not vary, however, is that blacks are consistently much more likely to test positive than whites across the demographic spectrum.

    I absolutely do not try to pretend that Potterat is a “denialist”. That would ruin my point that people representing conscientious mainstream science rather than the Holy Order of AIDStruth Crusaders can fruitfully snf fearlessly try to engage with Prof. Bauer’s critique.

    Potterat’s stated point was that Prof. Bauer’s evidence is “weak” because it mirrors the weakness of the evidence presented by the HIV/AIDS establishment. I realize this may be hard to grasp for a paid moral crusader such as yourself and the Resident Summum Bonum, Prof. John Moore, but Potterat is not nearly as interested in identifying and torching heretics as he is in discovering what is wrong in the world of HIV science. This makes for civil and contructive dialogue.

  135. #136 jspreen
    October 13, 2007

    I’ve seen the movie. You haven’t. Watch it, and then come back and tell me I’m full of shit.

    OK, I’ll watch the movie asap. But I may not have the opportunity to do so within years, also because I live in France. So, to help me out of my ignorance, can you please tell me how and where to look at those pictures so I can also see the airplane debris and corpses?

    Maybe it’s a way of looking at things comparable to the hilarious interpretation of that Rodney King beating tape, introduced by the great Bill Hicks:

    This guy, Officer Coon–is life too f—in’ weird or what?–Officer Coon looks in the camera and actually says: “Oh, that Rodney King beating tape…it’s all in how you look at it.”

    Courtroom murmurs: Jesus, what balls! I’ve never seen balls of this magnitude! You must have a specially fitted uniform…in which to place these large testicles. “That’s incredible. All in how you look at it, Officer…Coon. *ahem*”

    “That’s right. It’s how you LOOK at the tape.”

    “Well, would you care to tell the court…how you’re lookin’ at that?”

    “Yeah, okay, sure. It’s how you look at it…the tape. For instance, well, if you play it backwards, you see us help King up and send him on his way!”

  136. #137 jspreen
    October 13, 2007

    David Marjanović, I can’t get enough of this phrase, you know. To me it represents to core of all stubborn clinging onto an interpretation of reality because if things weren’t like that, the world would fall apart.

    The FBI confirms having the plane pieces — though it doesn’t let anyone look at them. Clearly they have something to hide, but it must be something different from what you suppose.

    Can you explain your use of the verb MUST, please?

  137. #138 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    Haha, Dr Noble, who are YOU trying to fool? Yep, there certainly is variation, like sometimes blacks are 3 times more likely to test positive within a certain demographic, sometimes the are 7 times more like to test postive. What does not vary, however, is that blacks are consistently much more likely to test positive than whites across the demographic spectrum.

    Actually, according to Bauer it varies between 1.5 and 14.

    The statistics for gonorrhea in the US show a racial disparity between black americans and whites of about 20:1. For some reason that totally escapes me nobody (except perhaps spreen) appear to be arguing that gonorrhea is not a sexually disease. Racial disparity is seen in many sexually transmitted diseases.

    Racial Disparities in Nationally Notifiable Diseases — United States, 2002

    The causes for this disparity is not because the tests are somehow rigged. Socioeconomic factors play a large role in determining the demographics of disease prevalence.

    I absolutely do not try to pretend that Potterat is a “denialist”. That would ruin my point that people representing conscientious mainstream science rather than the Holy Order of AIDStruth Crusaders can fruitfully snf fearlessly try to engage with Prof. Bauer’s critique.

    I didn’t claim that you did. Your contention was that Potterat was afraid to support Bauer because he feared reprisal from the evil orthodoxy. This is totally at odds with his publicly stated disagreements with the consensus opinion. While Potterat does not deny that HIV exists and causes AIDS he is hardly representative of the “orthodoxy”.

    You keep on trying to spin Potterat’s review of Bauer’s book as being positive. It isn’t.

  138. #139 Pope
    October 13, 2007

    Socioeconomic factors play a large role in determining the demographics of disease prevalence

    Dr. Noble, if you keep wilfully misrepresenting, I shall keep plugging Bauer’s work which means it will be demonstrated again and again that you don’t have an answer. Don’t forget to read the italicized part:

    Abstract — Racial ancestry influences the frequency of positive HIV-tests, F(HIV), as an independent variable. In every occupational, social, or other group tested in the United States, at all ages and for both sexes, F(HIV) increases in the order Asian -> white -> Native American -> Hispanic -> black. Data from South Africa display a similar sequence, white/Asian-Indian -> Colored -> black. This constant relation among the racial categories calls for an explanation in terms of genetic polymorphisms of the kind used in tracing human migration patterns. That Native Americans are closer to whites than to blacks also points to a physical cause and not a socioeconomic or behavioral one. The relative circumstances of black and white Americans as to AIDS, by contrast to HIV ”infection”, serve as a further demonstration that HIV does not cause AIDS: Between 1981 and 2000, the ratio of black Americans to white Americans reported with AIDS trebled, while the ratio of positive HIV-tests in the two groups remained the same. As shown in Part II of this series, F(HIV) signals a response to some sort of health challenge. The intensity of that response is evidently modified by genes associated with the immune system. Polymorphisms among these genes are well known and have been correlated with racial disparities in a variety of diseases. This view explains the peculiar and constant geographic distribution of F(HIV) in the United States as well as the extraordinary fact that Hispanics show characteristically different F(HIV) in the East and in the West. On the other hand, HIV/AIDS theory has no explanation for those, and official explanations for racial disparities as to HIV ”infection” are plainly racist.

    http://hivnotaids.homestead.com/HIViiiJSE255..288.pdf

  139. #140 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    That Native Americans are closer to whites than to blacks also points to a physical cause and not a socioeconomic or behavioral one.

    The rate of gonorrhea in native americans (96.1/100,000) is closer to that in whites (23.6/100,000) than blacks (570.4/100,000).

    The rate of syphilis in native americans (2.3/100,000) is closer to that in whites (1.1/100,000) than blacks (9.4/100,000).

    Does that mean that gonorrhea and syphilis aren’t sexually transmitted diseases?

    Why isn’t Bauer going on about the “regularities” in the prevalence of gonorrhea and syphilis?

    There are differences between urban and rural regions which have nothing to do with some hypothetical genetic polymorphisms that supposedly make people test positive on tests for HIV antibodies,antigens,DNA and RNA. Or are white males in rural America genetically different to white males in urban America?

    Bauer ignores data that refutes his theory. The evidence that he does provide is completely underwhelming.

  140. #141 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    A black lawyer from a glossy hood is not at the same risk of testing positive as a black junkie from the ghetto. He is, however, 4 times as likely to test positive as is his white lawyer neighbour.

    Still no reference for this factoid?

  141. #142 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Dear Prof. Moore,

    Thanks for the clarification of your position on alternative medicines.

    Could you define what is really a denialist, is it only the scientist who say “IV is not the cause of AIDS”, or is it also the people who thinks that HAART is dangerous but who either accept that HIV is the cause of AIDS or is it the people who thinks that HAART is dangerous but does not know what causes AIDS.

    In the first group we would have the famous Perth Group/ Duesberg and friends while in the second we would have Stephen Martin and Mathias Rath while in the third I could see Cooler or Noreen.

    It looks to me clear that both Stephen Martin and Mathias Rath are in the same group are they both accept HIV as the cause of AIDS but are looking to promote FDA non-accepted systems of treatment.

  142. #143 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    It looks to me clear that both Stephen Martin and Mathias Rath are in the same group are they both accept HIV as the cause of AIDS but are looking to promote FDA non-accepted systems of treatment.

    I agree with you on this one. Stephen Martin’s personal recollections of Duesberg are interesting but he’s hardly a scientific authority.

  143. #144 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Dear Chris/ Prof. Moore,

    What matters to me is that dealings with each subgroup should be different.

    I dont think you should mistreat the subgroup of Cooler/Noreen, but deal with the fear of toxicity (justified or not) of the drugs.

    Calling them denialists / deniosors/ whatever/
    and treatening to crush them would not help in having fruitfull dialogue with them, but would only polarize the discussion.

    One way of dealing with the question of toxicity, is to show that less toxic drugs or drugs systems are being developed.

  144. #145 Chris Noble
    October 13, 2007

    I dont think you should mistreat the subgroup of Cooler/Noreen, but deal with the fear of toxicity (justified or not) of the drugs.

    I think everyone has a) expressed their hope that Noreen remains well and b) expressed support for her right to make decisions about her own health. If Noreen decides that the harm caused by antiretroviral drugs outweigh the benefits for her then this is her decision. She may well be right regarding her own health. If she remains well then I would say she is making the right decision.

    Where I draw the line is the regurgitation of mistruths that she has read on “dissident” websites. Various people have gone to the trouble of explaining exactly why the material she cpies and pastes from “dissident” websites is inaccurate. Noreen doesn’t seem to take any notice. She just keeps on going.

    and cooler? Seriously, with all the 911 truther project daylily conspiracy crap the guy is a nutcase.

  145. #146 noreen Martin
    October 13, 2007

    Actually, I am in another group. I DON’T believe that HIV causes AIDS. I do believe that the meds may help when someone is deathly ill and is being attached by numerous viruses/diseases as they did in my case. That being said, I do not believe that they should be a long-term fix for health. The doctors could use them when the person has symptoms and then ween the patient off of them when the patient has restored one’s health. At the same time, the patient could be given an immune enhancing drug such as LDN and I feel that this scenario would be a win/win for everyone.

  146. #147 Seth Kalichman
    October 13, 2007

    Thanks for the clarification Noreen.
    Someone in denial about their HIV infection becomes a denialist when they ‘spread the gospel’ that HIV does not cause AIDS.

  147. #148 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Instead of cooler I wanted to say carter. carter also paste things, but never is speaking of personal experiences, nobody knows why he (she) is really doing that, except that he (she) is scary of secondary effects of drugs.

    does carter have a personal story to say ? something like ” a friend had a major problem with liver” ?

  148. #149 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen,

    If you dont believe that HIV causes AIDS, why do you believe that medicines (I assume HAART) help if somebody is very ill? This looks a non-sense, but I may be wrong.

    Each one of HAART constituents is designed to inhibit specific enzymes from HIV, i.e. integrase inhibitor works against the integrase etc…

    Thanks for clarifying me,

  149. #150 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen,

    I would like to thank you for bringing the discussion on LDN.

    It looks to me that Franklin made a major mistake in his analysis of the potential of the treatment, because he didnt realize that the first communication from Dr. Bihari was referent to a process to be develloped.

    At the begining of a devellopment of either a product or a process nothing is perfect.

    It is true, as Franklin said, that in the 1988 reported experiment, 44.7% of the patients died, BUT at this time the amount of LDN was only 1.75 mg per day. I guess that mortality would fell and benefits increase as he also increased the LDN to 3.5-4 mg/day, and am waiting to see the results of the present major trial.

    However for me the most interesting question is that Bihari managed to show that if when HIV+ decreased the (virus) induced alpha IFN to values of 8 i.u., HIV+ mortality was hudgely decreased.

    This first study and some theoretical explanation can be seen at:

    http://www.lowdosenaltrexone.org/ldn_aids_1988.pdf

    I cannot find any more recent study that suggest that the indicated results were misleading. Subsequent studies performed by others show that LDN indeed reduce alpha-IFN.

    This show that :

    a) Noreen may well be safe, if she has her alpha IFN lower than the above indicated value, AND THIS without putting her liver/kidney/etc.. in danger as it would be if she was on HAART.

    b) The technology may be improved by looking to others ways to modulate the immune system and may have wide interest for others HIV+ people, mainly the ones not using HAART but that dont want to see the fall of their CD4.

    Thank you very much and keep me informed on the LDN conference,

  150. #151 noreen
    October 13, 2007

    I only know that they helped me and some will say then it is because you had HIV. Well, then if that is the case, I still have >100,000 HIV for almost two years and without incident and without retroantivirals. I suspect two possible scenarios, HIV is harmless and I was sick due to known diseases and causes or if HIV is real, then obviously, LDN has kept it at bay.

    I think what puzzles me the most about the HIV theory is that it should be 50% males vs. 50% female in the states. Nevertheless, actual AIDS cases are still predominately in the male population in America.

  151. #152 noreen
    October 13, 2007

    Meant to say, antiretrovirals, I am sometimes dyslexic.

  152. #153 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen,

    You said

    I think what puzzles me the most about the HIV theory is that it should be 50% males vs. 50% female in the states. Nevertheless, actual AIDS cases are still predominately in the male population in America.

    How accurate are these data ? I was thinking that no testing has been done with all population, so data are extrapolated from small studies. Is this correct ?

    How representative are the people in these small studies of all the population ?

  153. #154 Braganza
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen,

    You said

    I think what puzzles me the most about the HIV theory is that it should be 50% males vs. 50% female in the states. Nevertheless, actual AIDS cases are still predominately in the male population in America.

    Sorry I was sleeping, I wanted to say that AIDS cases may predominantly in the male (homosexual) population because this is were is the virus. Could this be correct ?

  154. #155 cooler
    October 13, 2007

    dont listen to noble, hes just an insecure loser that pretends to be a scientist, and gets insecure when I mention scientists much more accomplished than him, hes just a crybaby. I mean why does this guy keep arguing on this blog endlessly, doesnt he have anything else to do?

    then theres misery women (adele) just ignore her. Shes totaly miserable, and her posts are meant to get attention. Brazanga, talk to real scientists, not these frauds, get out of these blogs, I know their addictive, but your dealing with a small cadre of complete lunatics. I talk to hot intelligent girls/guys that just graduated with me at a really good school, not rejects like these guys and they know the issues I bring up are not “woo” these guys/girls here are all losers who are just pissed off miltiant rejects that no one wants to be around.

    . jspreen, micheal, carter, forget these losers, we should stop using this blog, if we really want to talk to intelligent people, talk to professers not tied to the AIds industry, use facebook as well, the people on facebook are much more intelligent and well rounded then these deranged rejects that think its impossible for the governemnt to lie to them and are hated by everyone they meet.

  155. #156 noreen
    October 13, 2007

    Yes, that is correct. Yet, the military recruits for entering into the military, test 50% male to 50% female for HIV. If HIV causes AIDS, then the AIDS cases should not be lop-sided, yet they are. Yes, according to the CDC’s statistics, it is broken down by sexual preference. I believe this information comes from reports across the U.S., health departments, etc.

  156. #157 franklin
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen,

    If you are in “perfect health,” why do you need to take LDN?

    If you have no symptoms then you need no medicines, right?

  157. #158 franklin
    October 13, 2007

    Braganza,

    I have not argued that there is no basis for saying that naltrexone has immunomodulatory activity. I just stated that there is no evidence that LDN is an effective therapy for AIDS patients. These two statements are very different.

    In the work of Bihari to which you referred, all of the patients received LDN and 45% of the patients died. Not a great track record.

    This is the work in which Bihari looked at alpha-interferon levels. 61% of the patients showed a drop in alpha-interferon, and 39% of the patients showed no significant change in alpha-interferon. All of these patients received LDN–the ones with no change in alpha-interferon as well as the ones with a decrease in alpha-interferon.

    There is no reason to assume that the drop in alpha-interferon in a subset of the patients is related to LDN, just as there is no reason to assume that the continued high levels of alpha-interferon in the rest of patients is due to LDN.

    The other studies that you referred to about alpha-interefron and naltrexone are not relevant. One shows that naltrexone can counteract the side effects of alpha-interferon treatments for hematological malignancies. This result in no way suggests that naltrexone will lower secretion of alpha- interferon in AIDS patients (Bihari’s model), it only suggests that in the presence of pharmacologic doses of alpha-interferon, naltrexone reduces some of the side effects.

    The other study suggests that alpha-interferon can act as an agonist of certain opioid receptors. This result is irrelevant to the question of whether LDN is an effective therapy in AIDS patients.

    Bihari has provided no evidence that LDN is an effective therapy for AIDS.

  158. #159 noreen
    October 13, 2007

    Franklin, I take it due to the fact that I had AIDS, an immune deficiency disease and cancer. I take it for preventive reasons and to increse my body’s endorphin levels so to prevent O.I.’s

  159. #160 David Marjanović
    October 13, 2007

    Jim wrote:

    Cooler do you ever read anything newer than mid-1990′s? You do realize that HIV research didn’t end then don’t you? Update yourself and stop mindlessly toting quotes from people that are decades old. The answer to the quote you post is old enough that I learned it in my general immunology and virology classes.

    cooler replied:

    nothing changed since 1990, they were called charlatans then and still are by the small cadre of drug company hacks.

    You just don’t want to believe it, eh?

    You dont know anybody anywhere, youre just a militant geek that couldnt get laid to save your life. LOL

    And being a militant geek makes him wrong? How does that work?

    I am truly in awe of the amazing critical thinking skills of your towering intellect, cooler.

    ——————-

    jspreen:

    David Marjanović, I can’t get enough of this phrase, you know. To me it represents to core of all stubborn clinging onto an interpretation of reality because if things weren’t like that, the world would fall apart.

    No world would fall apart for me. I do not think the Busheviki are morally above blowing up the WTC. (Keyword: WMD.) They just happen not to have done it.

    Can you explain your use of the verb MUST, please?

    Sure. You implied there was no plane. But we have photos of plane fragments and corpses all around the impact site, inside and outside the building. It follows that there was a plane. In short: you’re wrong.

    It goes without saying that I know President MORON was warned by the CIA in July 2001 that Bin Laden would try to send someone to hijack planes and fly them into important buildings. This is criminal negligence at best. But, no, the Pentagon really was hit by a plane, and no, the assumption the WTC was destroyed by controlled demolitions is completely unnecessary.

    So, to help me out of my ignorance, can you please tell me how and where to look at those pictures so I can also see the airplane debris and corpses?

    These were all taken from far away. Just wait for the movie. If you’re in France, you should get arte, perhaps they’ll send it again.

    —————

    cooler again:

    Why are you so obsessed with “denialists”. People are not stupid, If a group of people claimed the moon was made of cheese, do you think astrophysicists would start a group called “moontruth”, this is not the way experts respond to absurd arguments, they realize that they are laughable and wouldnt care about it.

    1. The other way around: you folks are obsessed with this blog.
    2. People have tried laughing. It doesn’t seem to work. Look at the evolution denialists in the USA.
    3. There is, in fact, a site that debunks the “the 1st moon landing was a hoax” myth, another that debunks astrology, and another that debunks the face on Mars. There is also one that debunks the many different versions of Global Warming denial.

    —————–

    Oh, of course. You know what Potterat really thinks. He might say publicly that the evidence Bauer presents is weak, and that Bauer ignores evidence that contradicts his ideas and misrepresents the observations of others but in secret Potterat really thinks Bauer is correct. Who are you trying to fool?

    To be fair, he could fool every single cre_ti_nist quote-miner. Because that’s what he did, quote-mining.

    —————–

    Pope quoting Bauer:

    Abstract — Racial ancestry influences the frequency of positive HIV-tests, F(HIV), as an independent variable. In every occupational, social, or other group tested in the United States, at all ages and for both sexes, F(HIV) increases in the order Asian -> white -> Native American -> Hispanic -> black. Data from South Africa display a similar sequence, white/Asian-Indian -> Colored -> black.

    Hmmmmm. Why does the gradient go from richest to poorest both times? Could it be that race is (like elsewhere) a red herring?

    —————–

    And finally, let me quote myself.

    Now, back to the topic. Won’t a single of you “rethinkers” answer my questions on which of the proposed factors exist, are necessary, and are sufficient?

    <crickets>

    <tumbleweed>

    Hello? Anyone at home?

  160. #161 jspreen
    October 13, 2007

    jspreen, micheal, carter, forget these losers

    I’ve tried so many times but I can’t, really. Arguing with these people is like shooting fish in a barrel, you know, I just love it! And even more so now John Pee Moore himself has joined the ranks, he beats them all.
    True enough, a discussion with clever people is infinitely more interesting but every once in a while I need to feel clever myself, so I come over here where it’s so easy to rise and shine.

  161. #162 jspreen
    October 13, 2007

    My sympathy is with the dead girl who was never given the chance to grow up to make her own informed decisions about how to live her life
    writes John Moore, thus trying to convince people suffering from Aids to take their daily AZT dose, as we can read some lines beneath his declaration of sympathy:
    considering that the use of AZT during that pregnancy would most probably have saved Eliza Jane Scovill from the HIV infection that led to her death from AIDS

    Since only newborn babies do not yet know that AZT is a very toxic chemical, only the mentally disturbed do not immediately understand that Mr Moore would be nothing but a vulgar drug-pusher, weren’t it for the fact that John Pee Moore is the same person as professor John P. Moore. Which means that his drug-pushing is not vulgar at all but a legal activity covered by the holy flag of science.

    Well, what the heck. Whether AZT is a deadly poison or not, opinions seems to differ and don’t want to get into that everlasting fight again. But there’s one thing in Pee Moore’s writings that clearly shows us that the man may belong to the group of people, refered to above, who do not immediately understand the evidence.

    to grow up to make her own informed decisions about how to live her life

    What’s do you babble there, John? One’s own informed decisions. Can you please describe me what I should understand there? I mean, the phrase is written by a scumbag who not only pretends, by pushing his drugs, that he cares more about the well being of a little girl than the little girl’s mother herself, but who also, to top it all, repeatedly rattles nonsense about a war against people who dare say drugs may be bad for one’s health. By a man who would like to wipe the heritics from the face of the earth. How can one possibly take one’s own informed decision if a guy with a gun starts to shoot each time a person reaches a conclusion he doesn’t agree with? Can you explain that to me, please, prof Moore?

    And you dare to write something like …My sympathy is with …? Cut out the shit John. Be a man, show that you do have some balls in your pants and write what you really think: My sympathy is with all those who push the killer drugs and who, due to the damned Aids Denialists, are never given the opportunity to push in peace.

    I’ve always thought that professors and the like were highly gifted people who have passed plenty very difficult exams before they got their title. But when I read your poor writings, Mr Moore, I cannot get around the idea that money and/or obedience, or whatever else, might perform the job of getting within reach of being called professor, each time cleverness is running short.

  162. #163 tourettist
    October 13, 2007

    If evil ecientists really wanted to get rich off the misfortunes of people suffering, I doubt they’d pick a disease that disproportionately afflicts the stigmatized, the outcast, the desperate, the poor, the powerless, and let’s not forget Africa where the streets are paved with gold. Sheesh, lots of money to be made there. I’d think rather that Evil Scientists(TM) would target some other “fake disease” with deeper pockets.

  163. #164 David Marjanović
    October 13, 2007

    Whether AZT is a deadly poison or not

    As everyone except you has known since Paracelsus (16th century), that depends on the dose.

    AZT is certainly brutal. It switches DNA replication off. When you’re infected with HIV, by far most of your DNA replication is replication of the virus genome, so this gets hit first and hardest. This is where the impressive success of AZT comes from: as long as you take it, you are virus-free and don’t progress to AIDS. Of course, DNA replication happens elsewhere in the body, too — wherever cell division happens, such as in the liver and the skin. This is where the side effects come from. AZT is very effective, although it’s not very efficient.

    Question to those in the know: How commonly is AZT used nowadays, as opposed to much more “surgical strikes” like integrase inhibitor?

  164. #165 franklin
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen,

    So even though you consider yoursel to be in “perfect health,” you feel that you require LDN to prevent opportunistic infections.

    I don’t think I know anyone else who considers himself in “perfect health” but who feels the need to take medications to prevent opportunistic infections.

    By definition, opportunistic infections almost never affect people in “perfect health” but opportunistically infect those who have dysfunction of the immune system.

    Are you sure you consider your health to be “perfect”.

  165. #166 Jim
    October 13, 2007

    “I’ve tried so many times but I can’t, really. Arguing with these people is like shooting fish in a barrel, you know, I just love it”

    Except you’ve never EVER come close to remotely disproving anything discussed on this site. So far all I’ve learned from you that breast cancer is caused by bad emotions a few months before diagnosis. When pressed for further disucssion you either ignored questions or gave hand waving, question dodging responses about starting at “the beginning of the path.” Shooting fish in a barrel? Please, jspreen, you’ve done nonthing of the sort and are truely delusional and in need of professional help if you truly think that is the case.

    “True enough, a discussion with clever people is infinitely more interesting”

    You mean a conversation with people who agree (I have trouble believing there are too many more who think like you) makes you feel rightous in your opinions. However, rightousness does not come from approval from like minded individuals, but from a successful defense of ones positions by those who disagree, something you denialists have yet to achieve.

  166. #167 noreen
    October 13, 2007

    Franklin, if LDN helps me to maintain my health, then what’s the problem? AIDS persons die from O.I.’s not HIV nor AIDS. And if I haven’t had any problems since being on LDN, then it must have some good effect on my health. Healthy people take supplements, etc. to maintain health. So do I along with this immune enhancing drug. Yes, considering all the problems that I have had in life, my good health now is a miracle.

  167. #168 Michael
    October 13, 2007

    Hello David.

    You pointed out some of the problems with AZT. You are correct that one of the major ones is that it inhibits cellular division and that both the skin and the liver rely on cell division. But consider this: Other places in the body that rely on rapid cell division are in the intestines and in the bone marrow. Hence food is not digested well which contributes to and even causes what is called “AIDS wasting”. The immune system cells that are created in bone marrow also are not generated at peak performance thusly contributing to the destruction of the immune system itself.

    Though there are some HIV docs who will not prescribe it, as the name itself has a bad rap in the HIV diagnosed community, and among some of the docs, there are still many docs who do prescribe it or prescribe other combo drugs that have AZT in them. AZT had been renamed and many “patients” do not even know they are taking it. It is also called Retrovir and Zidovudine. It is still in some of the triple drug “cocktail” drugs and is also still given to many patients, though in two thirds lesser dosage than the ghastly days of 1987 to 1995. The younger the individual, usually the more they can tolerate this. The older they get and the longer they have been on it, the less the liver is able to process the drugs, which seems to lead to most of the HIV deaths by liver failure.

    The patients given this stuff longterm often end up needing what is now termed “salvage therapy” drugs. The salvage therapy drugs are also quite toxic.

    Note also that many are diagnosed eventually with hep C. Hep C, just like HIV, does not pass Kochs postulates. Note that health care workers do not get hep C from needle sticks or from contact with patients. Hep C is only hitting those whose livers are screwed up from drugs, alcohol, or toxic meds. Hep C seems to me to be perhaps another imaginary virus, whose tests are simply finding markers of a screwed up dying liver that is caused by toxicities, not from anything viral. Or perhaps it is a mere correlation to liver failures, and not a cause.

    Though certainly a liver on decline is far more likely to harbor many pathogens than a healthy nontoxed liver.

    A recent event brought this clearly to my attention. A friend of mine whom I have known for about 4 years, has been long term taking AIDS drugs and was recently diagnosed as Hep C after a serious bout with jaundice, though he has not even had sexual contact with anyone for years. So how did he suddenly acquire the very difficult to transfer Hep C virus?

    But big pharma and its champions such as those gainfully employed in finding drugs for viruses, have no intention of ever finding out. The well connected to pharma virologists and the HIV and Hep C researchers who are associated with HIV/Hep C research and drug grants to support big pharma have no intention of finding they are way off track. Chiron makes quite a bundle from the sale of hep C tests, and others as well from the supposed treatments for Hep C, which cost tens of thousands per patient.

    Back to AZT and the other AIDS treatments:

    It is unfortunate that even after 25 years of AIDS supposedly being such a top priority, there is still no FDA tracking, nor national database of any of these fast tracked drugs that are given, nor of what the long term health effects overall have been. Therefore, all of the docs themselves are still totally in the dark as to what causes what or results in life or death.

    One of the FDA stipulations of allowing fast tracked drugs is that the manufacturers promise to do long term studies. These studies have yet to have been carried out with any of the HIV drugs. The “fast track” system continues to be quite broken and unsalvageable.

    http://www.newstarget.com/008363.html

    A recent congressional report calls the Food and Drug Administration’s fast-track drug approval process “broken.” The study says drug companies have used the fast-track process to get quick approval for drugs to treat life-threatening illnesses and failed to follow through with additional, full studies after the drug’s release. Since the fast-track program’s inception in 1992, 91 drugs have gained approval using the fast process. Forty-one companies with fast-approved products have not completed additional testing, and 21 of those have not started the testing process yet. Experts say this is unsafe for the public, which is unaware the products they are taking may still be in the testing process. The FDA says because its recall rate has not increased since the fast-track program’s introduction, there is no reason to believe the system should change.

  168. #169 Michael
    October 13, 2007

    Tourettist said:

    “let’s not forget Africa where the streets are paved with gold. Sheesh, lots of money to be made there”

    T made this statement in reference to why scientists seeking funding would pursue HIV since there is no money for the disease from Africans. But T is blind to many facts. Hundreds, if not thousands of HIV researchers have been quite well paid for their time and studies and grant projects and pharma drug projects in Africa.

    Bush put 15 billion dollars toward AIDS in Africa, not to mention that a large percentage of funds from our NIH Department of NIAIDS has spent many billions on projects there.

    Tourettist, you are ignorantly blind to the reality of the HIV/AIDS goldmine that Africa has been for AIDS Incorporated and its researchers.

  169. #170 trrll
    October 13, 2007

    jspreen, micheal, carter, forget these losers, we should stop using this blog, if we really want to talk to intelligent people, talk to professers not tied to the AIds industry, use facebook as well, the people on facebook are much more intelligent and well rounded then these deranged rejects that think its impossible for the governemnt to lie to them and are hated by everyone they meet.

    One of the signature characteristics of the type of delusional thinking that we refer to as “denialism” is conspiratorial thinking. To rationalize the fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists disagree with them, denialists are compelled to impute ignoble, usually pecuniary, motives to those who persist in pointing out the irrational nature of their obsession. So it is worth reminding you all where we are. This is Tara’s blog. Tara is an epidemiologist. Her particular expertise is in identifying the causes of disease, and she is not personally involved in HIV research or treatment. Orac, who also blogs in opposition to HIV denialism, is a surgical oncologist. Not much HIV-related money in that. For the record, I am a neuroscientist, and I am not involved in HIV/AIDS research or treatment. I believe that Chris Noble is a statistician. Not much AIDS money in that, either.

    So why do we bother to argue about it? Getting back to the topic of this thread, many of us do remember what it was like before ARV therapy. We remember when our friends were dying miserable, protracted deaths from AIDS. We saw the fall in AIDS deaths that followed the introduction of ARV therapy. And we find it disturbing to see people spreading misinformation that if believed could condemn others, unnecessarily, to that kind of lingering death.

    And as for the people involved in what HIV denialists like to call the “AIDS industry,” I’ve known some of those people. And whatever you may believe about HIV, I can tell you that the people actually doing HIV research do believe that they are working with an incurable infectious agent, where one slip or moment of inattention could mean a lifetime of taking (on a rigid schedule) ARV drugs that are not curative, and (as denialists love to remind us) are not without side effects or hazards, with the alternative being a miserable death from AIDS. Not to mention putting a major crimp in their sex lives. You may not believe this, but they do–and they choose to work with it anyway. HIV is far from the only research direction that a scientist could choose–there are many other topics that will bring in the grant funds and that do not require working with infectious agents. Most of the people that I’ve met who do HIV research chose that direction because they saw it as the way to apply their skills to help the most people. These are heroes, folks. And whether you agree with them or not, they are deserving of a certain level of respect.

  170. #171 ElkMountainMan
    October 13, 2007

    Dear Braganza,

    You have asked what the term “denialist” means, and to whom we apply this title (by “we,” I mean myself and other individuals who work with HIV and/or have studied the virus and AIDS and who value scientific evidence over wishes and feelings). A denialist is simply a person who denies the existence of evidence. In this forum, i.e. aetiology, “denialist” is short-hand for “HIV/AIDS denialist.” When a writer uses this term on this site, it does not mean “holocaust denier” or anything else (although denialists of one sort often do tend to embrace other types of denial).

    Most denialists fall into one or more of these three camps (although there are certainly others):

    Some denialists state that HIV does not exist. They deny the overwhelming scientific evidence, accepted even by Peter Duesberg, that an exogenous retrovirus called “HIV” has been isolated and characterized.

    Some denialists believe that AIDS does not exist. Some say that HIV does not cause AIDS. They deny that an immunodeficiency allowing susceptibility to OIs and other AIDS-defining conditions arises from HIV infection. They deny the overwhelming evidence that AIDS is not caused by malnutrition, emotions, drug abuse, or HAART.

    Some denialists deny that HAART has been central to the remarkable reduction in HIV-related mortality and morbidity in every population into which it has been introduced.

    When is a person not a denialist?

    A vitamin advocate or other alternative medicine practitioner is not a denialist if he or she sees alternative forms of treatment as potentially helpful additions to the medical standard of care. See the case of Linus Pauling, who never allowed his Vitamin C theories to overwhelm his recognition that HIV causes AIDS and must be treated by conventional means unless and until Vitamin C or another treatment proved better. Noreen would not be a denialist if she simply insisted that, in her experience, LDN works, and that the drug should be investigated further. Noreen is a denialist because she refuses to accept the evidence that HIV causes AIDS, that HIV tests monitor the presence of a virus, and much more.

    Similarly, pointing out that some individuals suffer toxic effects from some antiviral drugs does not, on its own, make one a denialist. Every doctor and scientist I know acknowledges that drugs can have toxic effects. This universally-recognized truth must be measured against the reductions in mortality and morbidity achieved by the drugs, and each patient must make a decision to take or not to take drugs in consultation with his/her physician. I probably speak for every representative of the biomedical world who visits this site when I voice my hopes (and predictions) that better and more effective drugs will be found, whether these are money-makers or cheap and effective mushroom derivatives.

  171. #172 franklin
    October 13, 2007

    Noreen writes:

    “Franklin, if LDN helps me to maintain my health, then what’s the problem? AIDS persons die from O.I.’s not HIV nor AIDS.”

    If you beleive that your immune system does not function normally, then it makes perfect sense to take medications that can prevent opportunistic infections.

    However, there is no evidence that the medication you have chosen to take, Low Dose Naltrexone, is effective in preventing opportunistic infections in people with AIDS.

    Furthermore, given that while you have been on LDN, your CD4 T-cell counts have progressively declined, there is no reason to think that LDN has been effective in maintaining your immune function.

    You seem to place a lot of weight on the work of Dr. Bihari, yet the very results from Dr. Bihari to which you directed us included a discussion of patients whose CD4 counts had dropped despite LDN. When Bihari gave these patients 3TC and AZT he found that they had dramatic increases in their CD4 cell counts. He seemed to think this was a good thing.

    Amazing, but true.

    You might consider sending an email to Bihari to see if he beleives LDN is doing enough on its own to maintain your immune function. He seems to place a little more weight on CD4 Cell counts than you do, and he’s your recognized expert in LDN.

  172. #173 Ed Darrell
    October 14, 2007

    Cooler said:

    It should read like this.

    “in 1984 Robert Gallo claimed hiv was the cause of AIDS, because of the lack of a relaible model and an ever extending window period we are going to follow 20 hiv positive people for 10-15 yrs with no other risk factors such as AZT, severe mental illness, other infections like mfi, drug abuse and compare them to matched hiv negative controls to prove or falsify gallo’s hypothesis”

    10 to 15 years? Without drugs?

    What sort of craziness is that? We ran at least 40,000 of those tests. Nobody made it to two years. That’s 20,000 times as many people followed as you asked for. It’s time for you to let reality sink in, Cooler.

    Look, this is 2007. You’re at least 24 years behind in reading the journals. How did you miss all of that?

    Have you even bothered to read the journals?

    Santayana’s ghost bothers me a lot. I’ll send him your way. The only way to get him off your back is to stop being stupid; learn the mistakes once, then don’t do them again.

  173. #174 Ed Darrell
    October 14, 2007

    What was the name of the guy who countermanded Semmelweiss’s suggestion that physicians in the hospital wash their hands?

    We need an award named after that fool, to be given out probably monthly, to the person who best exemplifies such blindness in the face of evidence, in AIDS denial.

    Or maybe just call it the “Bagdad Bob” award. “What disease? What virus? We have you all surrounded! Saddam’s counterattack will wipe AIDS from the face of the Earth by exposing it as lies by [Roswell aliens /the Cardiff Giant / Ludd / the bathtub Millard Fillmore installed at the White House / the six million people who were thought killed by the Nazi death machine but who were really just away for the season in St. Tropez / Judge Crater / Bigfoot / Nessie / take your pick].”

  174. #175 noreen
    October 14, 2007

    Franklin, until I see different changes, I do not place the greatest importance to CD4′s. How can one have low CD4′s and be extremely sick and one have high CD4′s and be healthy? It doesn’t add up! By the way, there are many HIV+’s in the same boat, that’s one reason we question all of this too. I need not agree with every rethinker such as Bihari or the world reknown one from Berkeley. I am a Republican but I no longer support this war. Nevertheless, more of what the rethinker side has to say makes much more sense.

    So, which is it, HIV is harmless or LDN works? This drug has been helping people for over twenty years and some of you folks pooh pooh it. I think that you might talk to those who take this drug and see how they feel, afterall, you might need it some day!

  175. #176 noreen
    October 14, 2007

    Correction, have LOW CD4′s and be extremely healthy?

  176. #177 cooler
    October 14, 2007

    according to a recent interview with Dr. andrew maniotis, they all tried in their cancer lab to induce cancer in cells with HPV, and how the whole dept knows the hpv causes cancer is just a big money making scheme by big pharma, another microbe that fails every single one of kochs postulates naturally only Dr. maniotis has the guts to to speak the truth, but there are many more like him who dont speak out.

    As for you, orac, tara, and the noble, you guys are just ignorant sycophants, if you were living in stalins russia, or hitlers germany you would mindlessly go along with the “consensus” of that time. If heckler came out and said mycoplasma or drugs were the cause of AIDS, you idiots would beleive it.

    Its called thought control, Orwell talked alot about how dumb many experts can be in how they mindlessly except authority. You guys are such morons its not funny, you guys do not represent the consensus at all, you guys are the people in those psychology studies, where the man in a white coat kept saying press the button, and in response, you heard loud screaming, you would continue to keep pushing bc you are obsequious to certain forms of authority.

    Duesberg, maniotis, shyh ching lo, strohman, mullis, etc are just more intelligent and can think independently, they would not mindlessly press the button just bc some authority figure said so. Thats why you cowards would never debate them, bc youd get blown away. You guys are not fit to shine their shoes.

    conversation with an aids apologist.

    CAn you give the paper that was designed confirm/ falsify the theory hiv positive people with no other risk factors such as AZT, severe mental illness, mycoplasmas, severe drug abuse die any quicker than hiv negative matched controls since most animals like chimps dont get AIDS?

    answer

    siv macaque monkeys! siv macaque monkeys! siv Macaque monkeys! denier! Study too dangerous! macaque monkeys! Look at the mouse that had an immune transplant, he got sick! (what do you expect if you have an immune transplant) siv macaque monkeys………3 lab workers! yeah but would about the the thousands of LTNP’s…….ummmmmmmmmmmmm ohhhhhhh they must have special genes!

    Maybe we should loook at ltnp’ers and see if maybe hiv is just not as virulent as gallo said?

    no , more research? nonononononononononnnn
    woo wooo woo crank crank to that!

    this is aids science in a nutshell LOL

    You guys are being laughed at by the people in charge of the biological weapons program, they know that mycopolasma incognitus is the microbe to worry about, kills/sickens every animal inoculated as shyh lo showed

    From the book Project Day Lily, slightly fictionlized story of true events, based on garth nicolsons sources within the Penatagon.

    “most physicians are so stupid theyll never figure out that these diseases can be caused by an infection”
    DR. duetschman……………..names slightly changed……..sound familiar? Sounds like a high ranking member of the DOD in 1990 or so.

    Thanks for proving him right.

  177. #178 David Marjanović
    October 14, 2007

    Healthy people take supplements, etc. to maintain health.

    Only if they are paranoid/into woo or live in unusual conditions.

    It is unfortunate that even after 25 years of AIDS supposedly being such a top priority, there is still no FDA tracking, nor national database of any of these fast tracked drugs that are given, nor of what the long term health effects overall have been. Therefore, all of the docs themselves are still totally in the dark as to what causes what or results in life or death.

    All of the docs worldwide depend on the FDA of the USA? Methinks not.

    Regarding your other points — you’re of course right about cell division being necessary in gut and bone marrow, but if AZT alone is to blame for AIDS wasting and liver failure, why did such things occur in AIDS patients before AZT was invented? And why do millions of people who can’t afford AZT die from AIDS every year?

    Again, AZT is brutal, but still, a lower dose is needed to knock the HIV out than to knock you out. Don’t you think?

    Regarding Koch’s postulates, the HI virus fulfills them, except probably the second — is it possible to make a pure culture of CD4+ cells? If not, it is automatically impossible to grow HIV in pure culture.

    T made this statement in reference to why scientists seeking funding would pursue HIV since there is no money for the disease from Africans. But T is blind to many facts. Hundreds, if not thousands of HIV researchers have been quite well paid for their time and studies and grant projects and pharma drug projects in Africa.

    I don’t understand what you even mean by “paid”. Sure, a salary and tenure are nice, but if you want to get rich, get another job. Grants go to labs for specific purposes. They are not the private property of any researcher. You can’t buy a yacht from a grant, no matter how large the grant is.

    Might it be that you have never seen a university lab/office from the inside?

    Ed Darrell about cooler:

    Have you even bothered to read the journals?

    Of course not. He already knows everything. Learning is for losers!

    Correction, have LOW CD4′s and be extremely healthy?

    Freudian slip, eh? ;-) Maybe you have just successfully avoided infections, or at least infections against which you don’t already have antibodies. Be careful not to cut yourself too often or to travel too far.

    CAn you give the paper that was designed confirm/ falsify the theory hiv positive people with no other risk factors such as AZT, severe mental illness, mycoplasmas, severe drug abuse die any quicker than hiv negative matched controls since most animals like chimps dont get AIDS?

    Go get swine fever.

    Hint: you can’t.

    I also note that you simply deny the fact that millions of people die every year in poor countries around the world. No AZT, no fictitious mycoplasmata, no drugs, no mental illness. The mental illness part must be projection.

    0.4 Timecubes at least. What do you people think?

  178. #179 jspreen
    October 14, 2007

    David Marjanović, help me please. I’ve been trying all night to find out how to look at the pictures to see what you see in them, but I got nowhere. Can you please answer one of my previous posts to this thread?

    And while you’re at it, can you include a hit explaining the use of the verb MUST, just below the entry I linked to.

    Thanks a lot.

  179. #180 Rob Knop
    October 14, 2007

    I saw Magic Johnson’s picture in the paper the other day, and had to catch myself: “He’s still alive???” I remember back in 1991 or thereabouts that he came public as HIV-positive.

    I had at least three of my junior high and high school teachers die (after I’d left the school) from AIDS; I was in high school 1986-1990. There was a time when learning that you had AIDS meant that you had at best several years left to live. It’s boggling to me that people don’t remember that.

  180. #181 Rob Knop
    October 14, 2007

    P.S. Tara : I have to admit that I haven’t read any of your long comment threads before, but man alive you are beset by quite a crowd of nutters! My condolences.

  181. #182 noreen
    October 14, 2007

    David, with all of my negative, health issues from the past, I am not “luckily” avoiding infections. Someone on the mainstream side, please explain to us why HIV has become dormant in my body. Afterall, I do have all of the criteria that most of you consider so important to AIDS, meaning high viral load and extremely low CD4′s. Someone explain this math as we are all waiting to hear.

  182. #183 jspreen
    October 14, 2007

    There was a time when learning that you had AIDS meant that you had at best several years left to live. It’s boggling to me that people don’t remember that.

    Why do you think people forgot? Nobody forgot that. What people don’t think about though, is that the predictions of at best several years to live, well, quite often they were not fulfilled. Of course, sometimes a prediction showed to be acurate but each time AZT was around, predicting was not that difficult. Nowadays people like Magic Johnson as well as the untold healthy HIV+ people remind us of the fact that HIV=AIDS=Death_at_best_only_a_couple_of_years_ahead was a lie from the beginning.

  183. #184 jspreen
    October 14, 2007

    So far all I’ve learned from you that breast cancer is caused by bad emotions a few months before diagnosis. When pressed for further disucssion you either ignored questions or gave hand waving, question dodging responses about starting at “the beginning of the path.”

    Well, I’m very happy to know now that you have at least learned that from me. But, talking about being pressed for further discussion, I do not remember having read, anywhere on this blog, a message coming within miles of the smallest interest in digging a bit deeper. As soon as I dare write the of name Ryke Geerd Hamer, rotten eggs and tomatos are fired in my direction. Which made me decide, years ago, to fire back, not with tomatos or rotten eggs, but with humor and … what would you call it… common sense statements maybe.

    Anyway, you want to know more? Then, if you’re willing to start from the beginning and to hear me out, I have some fabulous ideas for you.
    Well, no, that’s not a way to proceed. Maybe you should try to read this first and, if you appreciated what you read, we can go further from there.

  184. #185 John Moore
    October 14, 2007

    A response to Braganza. Dear Braganza: By and large AIDS professionals do not interact with AIDS denailists such as some of the mentally disturbed people who post on this site. And I am not going to get into a discussion about sub-categories of AIDS denialists, and who believes what. However, I will address, fairly briefly, your point about those who believe in Alternative Therapies (sic) because of the fear of the toxicities associated with HAART. One can draw a reasonable analogy between HAART and cancer chemotherapy; there are often severe side-effects to chemotherapy that cancer patients tolerate because the alternative – death – is worse. The same applies to HAART; whatever the side-effects, they are preferable to dying from AIDS. It’s also worth pointing out that, as so often, the AIDS denialists operate in a time-warp; just as they don’t understand that the scientific literature has evolved over the past 25 years, they recycle old anecdotes from the early days of HIV therapies, and pretend that such stories represent the state of HIV treatment nowadays. Some individuals react relatively poorly to some particular anti-HIV drugs, just as some people can’t tolerate aspirin as well as others can. Some of the early protease inhibitors did have particularly unpleasant side-effects in a subset of the people who took them in the mid-1990′s (which was why the treatment guidelines were changed, to delay therapy initiation). But the more recent protease inhibitors are much more tolerable than the first generation compounds, and very few serious side-effects have been reported to date in trials of the Merck integrase inhibitor. Given the muticiplicity of drugs now available, and the accumulated experience of prescribing physicians, it’s almost always possible nowadays to identify a therapeutic regimen that an HIV-infected person can tolerate. The AIDS denialists don’t care about these medical and scientific advances, because it does not suit their perverse political agendas to move with the times.

    And don’t underestimate the links between the classic AIDS denialists and the alternative medicine industry. Money talks, and some of the denialists are nothing but shills for quacks. They try to disguise this, of course, but the truth’s there if one looks hard enough.

    As well as being utterly ineffective, Alternative Therapies are a waste of money. Western consumers can often afford the cost, but think about what is happening in South Africa, where residents of townships who live in serious poverty are encouraged to throw away their very limited financial resources on junk that is concocted in garages and garden sheds. Also note the activities of Matthias Rath, who peddles vitamin pills for profit, money sucked out of poor South African townships and into a western bank account. That’s robbing the poor to enrich the wealthy. Note also that Duesberg’s accolyte Rasnick helped him do this by conducting non-approved “clinical trials” (sic) and publishing the “results” in that well-known peer-reviewed journal, the advertising pages of the New York Times. I don’t see a lot of criticism of that sort of conduct by the AIDS denialists who operate on this site. Gee, I wonder who that is?

    I’ll also address the issue of academic freedom, as some comments have been made on this point. Yes, AIDS researchers, and quite a lot of them, have written to the University of Texas, Tyler, and the University of Illinois, Chicago, about the activities of Rebecca Culsham and Andrew maniotis, and rightly so. Different people make different points in their letters, and I’ll only reiterate here what I have said in mine. The issue, to me, is not those individuals’ rights to express an opinion on any subject, including HIV/AIDS. It’s about the atrocious quality of the scholarship that underlies those stated opinions, and whether those opinions should be expressed in the name of the universities that employ them (there are generally accepted rules on such conduct that academic professionals should understand and follow). In Maniotis’s case, it’s also about whether he should be allowed to launch slanderous, and inaccurate attacks on AIDS scientists, using his university affiliation, and whether he should be allowed to lie about his own professional qualifications and academic stature in correspondence posted on the internet. Again, there are rules about such behavior that are well understood in the academic world.

    Lest it be thought we are using sledgehammers to crack nuts here, professional academics have a responsibility to the public. Misleading the public, while using a university title to provide the illusion of authority, is behavior that cannot be ignored. And AIDS professionals are no longer willing to ignore it.

    I’ll also note that many letters of complaint have been sent to my institution about me by AIDS denialists, letters intended to stop me speaking out on HIV/AIDS and fighting the denialists. And at least one letter was sent by an AIDS denialists to Tara Smith’s university, complaining about this very Blog and attempting to have her fired. It appears that freedom of speech is only skin-deep in the ranks of AIDS denialism. Funny that, isn’t it?

  185. #186 Dale
    October 14, 2007

    noreen wrote Someone on the mainstream side, please explain to us why HIV has become dormant in my body. Afterall, I do have all of the criteria that most of you consider so important to AIDS, meaning high viral load and extremely low CD4′s. Someone explain this math as we are all waiting to hear.

    noreen, probability is not the same as certainty. What the medical literature says is that HIV seropositive individuals with high viral loads and low CD4s are at higher risk for certain opportunistic infections than are seropositive individuals with low viral loads and high CD4s. “Higher risk” and “lower risk” are probabilities that apply to populations which means that among a large group of HIV+ individuals with high viral loads and low CD4 counts, more of them are likely to develop AIDS related opportunistic infections than among a similar sized group of individuals with high CD4s and low viral counts. But within both groups there will be healthy people, people with AIDS related infections and people who die.

  186. #187 Braganza
    October 14, 2007

    Dear Prof. Moore,

    Personally I don’t believe that there is a “normal medicine” and an “alternative medicine”. There is only one “medical science”, which should provide basic understanding of conditions underlying diseases.

    Different treatments may exist for one medical condition. However treatments would also vary from country to country due to a range of factors, one of them being the existence of suitable funding for the national system of health.

    And there is one of my questions, what kind of solution can be provided in very poor countries (not South Africa, which by African standards is rich, but countries like Malawi/ Sierra Leone/Mozambic/ Swaziland etc..) where an important percentage of the population are HIV+ but the national economies/ local system of health cannot afford to pay for HAART treatments?

    Would it also be your opinion that it is unlikely that international AID could be seen as a sustainable solution, and therefore that low cost treatment alternatives that could be affordable in these countries (possibly not so efficient than the ones used in the US), need urgently to be found ?

    P.S. On Tara blog, I think she is making a great job, and manifest here my support, I dont know her and her other academic activities to comment on that.

  187. #188 trrll
    October 14, 2007

    Its called thought control, Orwell talked alot about how dumb many experts can be in how they mindlessly except authority. You guys are such morons its not funny, you guys do not represent the consensus at all, you guys are the people in those psychology studies, where the man in a white coat kept saying press the button, and in response, you heard loud screaming, you would continue to keep pushing bc you are obsequious to certain forms of authority.

    Duesberg, maniotis, shyh ching lo, strohman, mullis, etc are just more intelligent and can think independently, they would not mindlessly press the button just bc some authority figure said so. Thats why you cowards would never debate them, bc youd get blown away. You guys are not fit to shine their shoes.

    And once again, cooler proves the point of this thread–that the denialists have no recollection of history. But some of us did not come to the party as late as cooler did, and some of us still remember how it started. We remember when AIDS was a mysterious cluster of opportunistic illnesses among homosexuals, when Gallo was nobody special, and when the authority…was Peter Duesberg.

    So how did things turn around so completely that even people like cooler now think of Gallo as the establishment, while Duesberg is thought of as a senile crackpot by pretty much everybody except a handful of followers?

    What happened, of course, is that the results of people like Gallo and Montagnier were confirmed and extended in hundreds of independent laboratories, while Duesberg’s theories were not. What happened is that the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches predicated on discoveries made in the laboratories of Gallo and Montagnier turned out to work, as judged by the ultimate jury–the physicians and health care workers treating AIDS patients. Whereas the clinics once were packed with AIDS patients with only a year or two to live–and not good years, at that–today the classic presentation of full-blown AIDS is uncommon, and it has been transformed into a chronic illness that can be managed to yield many good years of life and relative health.

  188. #189 Braganza
    October 14, 2007

    Noreen,

    I understand that LDN is modulating your immune system and counteracting the negative influence of HIV, who in the absence of the drug would lead you to AIDS.

    However I may be wrong. Results of the trial in Mali would provide us more answers, if the people are going also to measure the cytokines of the treated people and not only the VL and CD4. Do you know something of their protocol of assay ?

    Are you presently measuring your alpha IFN ? Bihari study suggest that this is a critical parameter.

    Are you measuring any other cytokine ?

    Thanks in advance for answering me, this is helping me to understand LDN.

  189. #190 Braganza
    October 14, 2007

    Franklin,

    Thanks for looking to my post, and for pointing some irrelevant studies and underlying preliminary studies with poor outcome. But do you agree that these were just the first step in a research ?

    Just to go a little bit further I have made some additional statements :

    1.Are the HIV induced the reduction of endorphin/ increase of alpha interferon/ or others cytokines critical parameters in determining likeliness to reach AIDS ?

    Bihari seems to think that yes. He strongly suggested that controling alpha interferon to less than 8 i.u. would stop the progression. Unfortunatly nobody has repeated his experiments.

    It is accepted that HIV infection is associated in NON-HIV CONTROLERS with a gradual dysfunction of the immune system.
    “It is known that HIV controlers maintained potent HIV-specific CD4 responses, T cells (…) preserved IL-2 secretion (…)”. “IL-2 secretion was lost in viremic patients.” Potter SJ, et al , J Virol. 2007 Oct 10; abstract in PubMed.( there are many more studies and reviews on cytokine patterns in HIV AIDS patients).

    I therefore deduce that any drug/mechanism which would help the patient to modulate his immune system to counter-act the negative cytokine evolution induced by HIV could allow normal HIV+ to be an HIV controler.

    2. Is there any information (independent of Bihari work) suggesting that alpha-IFN or a range of others cytokines relevant to HIV/AIDS pathogenesis, can be modulated by an increase of endorphins and that these can be manipulated by LDN ?

    Endorphin levels in autoimmune diseases- Sacerdote measured low beta-endorphin levels in two animal examples of autoimmune disease — a mouse strain with a lupus-like syndrome and a strain of chicken with an autoimmune thyroiditis. In each case, the low levels of beta-endorphin were found well before the expression of autoimmune disease. This indicate a role for endorphins in regulating immune responses and suggests a therapeutic pathway. Sacerdote P, Lechner O, Sidman C, et al. Hypothalamic beta-endorphin concentrations are decreased in animals models of autoimmune disease. J Neuroimmunol. 1999;97(1-2):129-33.

    Endorphins have been reported to stimulate the immune system. Information is quite old, can be seen at United States Patent 4537878

    Endorphins can be modulated by LDN. A lot of animal studies by Zalgon (I didnt copy all available references, but you can find them in PUBMED), additional studies in vivo (previously posted) on MS and Crohn diseases.

    One unfortunate limitation in Bihari first published study was to measure only HIV-induced alpha interferon, and not all relevant cytokines involved in AIDS.

    It is obvious that the action of LDN on HIV+ should also be seen as the action on other cytokines, like IL-2, which is a known marker in HIV infection, and is also found depressed in others conditions coincidently treated with LDN (reumathoid arthritis, MS, Crohn disease)

    For info on IL2 in these diseases, see for example:

    Kogure T, Niizawa A, Hai LX, Fujinaga H, Shimada Y, Ochiai H, Terasawa K Ann Rheum Dis. 2001 Feb;60(2):166-9. Effect of interleukin 2 on killer cell inhibitory receptors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis;
    Lopez E, Racadot E, Bataillard M, Berger E, Rumbach L.Autoimmunity. 1999;29(2):87-92. Interferon gamma, IL2, IL4, IL10 and TNFalpha secretions in multiple sclerosis patients treated with an anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody

    interleukin-2 scintigraphy for in vivo assessment of intestinal mononuclear cell infiltration in Crohn’s disease.Signore A, Chianelli M, Annovazzi A, Bonanno E, Spagnoli LG, Pozzilli P, Pallone F, Biancone L.J Nucl Med. 2000 Feb;41(2):242-9

    3.Conclusions

    I understand that there are data that suggest that LDN can modulate the immune system. These has been now proven “in vivo” with a range of autoimmune diseases with cytokine paterns similar to AIDS, HOWEVER I AGREE THAT FURTHER EVIDENCE IS NEEDED TO ENDORSE THE LDN NOVEL AIDS TREATMENT, as there is only anecdotical evidence of the success of the 3.5-4 mg/day. This would be the reason for the trial in Mali.

    I understand that Noreen cannot wait for the results of the trial and rely on the above indicated anecdotical evidence. This evidence is not against basic HIV science- as I understand it, and it the absence of contrary evidence, it cannot be dismissed as a quakery.

    Modulation may provide a route to transform normal HIV+ in HIV controllers.

    The fact that :
    “(..) Cytokine production was 3 times higher in controllers than in HAART-treated patients with undetectable viral load, suggesting an intrinsically more efficient response in the former group.(..)” indicated in the above cited Potter study, and the potential of endorphine modulation by LDN is also an indication that, upon more research, HAART patients may benefit from LDN or others immune modulators to be found.

  190. #191 John Moore
    October 14, 2007

    Dear Braganza, I recommend you (and others) read Nicoli Nattrass’s book “Mortal Combat”, and her previous book that more specifically addresses the economics of HAART rollout in South Africa. These books will give you much information on what could and should be done by governments and the international community about HIV infection outside the developed world.

  191. #192 cooler
    October 14, 2007

    Go away John, youre whole premise is to protect the public from views from academics because they are many people who might beleive them, people that you believe are stupid.

    So your dedicating your career to protect people who you see as “gullible” aka stupid from beleiveing them. Keep in mind most of the people I know that think more research is needed in the hiv field have advanced degrees and would easily outscore you on any IQ test.

    Who are you to tell people they are stupid for beleiving something, and not allowing people to hear these views from many prominent scientists? People are not stupid John, and many intelligent people realize its a sham and that the gig is up once word gets out, stop patronizing the general population, and let people make descions based on informed consent, even if that information comes from scientists who teach at universities.

    Give it up, you tried to get Darin Brown Fired, you failed, you tried to get Culshaw fired you failed, they are not firing these professors because these schools know the hiv industry is out of control and these scientists have valid arguments. Stop making a fool of yourself, a good scientific argument can stand public scrutiny and open debate, especially when the science is so simple (kochs postulates) and the conflicts of interest are so obvious( Gallo announcing to the world before publishing, patenting tests the same day.) Nobody would believe an absurd argument like eating 20 pizzas a day is good for you, thats why youre so scared and need to try and get anyone fired that doesnt agree with you and your drug company hack pals. Not to protect stupid people from hearing an argument they might beleive, but to deny intelligent people to hear an argument that is more logical. Maybe hiv does cause AIDS, but I dont need gatekeepers telling me what my professors I can learn from.

    You are youre own worst enemy, get a life. I have every right to hear Culshaw’s/Duesbergs argument and your argument and make choices based on my own health.

  192. #193 John Moore
    October 14, 2007

    Yes “Cooler”, you have every right to kill yourself, by choosing to destroy your own health by not taking anti-retroviral therapy. Our interests are not in people like you, for you are already lost to society; our interests are in the people who are yet to be fooled into making similarly self-destructive choices, fooled not by you (for who would be fooled by someone who only dares to operate under a pseudonym, who cannot write coherent sentences, and who fails to understand the science about which he or she speaks), but by those AIDS denialist “academics” that we will continue to expose and counter.

  193. #194 Hajjar
    October 14, 2007

    Dr. Moore,

    Realistically speaking, I would think that such an endeavor to stop dissident academics may be akin to sweeping the ocean back with a broom, in that the more you sweep away, the more turn up to take their place. After all, the dissident issue has spread quite far from the handful of original dissenters. Nonetheless, I do commend you for your herculean efforts to turn this tide.

    Also, I realize this is the farthest thing from your own mind, but what if you actually have been mistaken about HIV being the cause of AIDS? What if it turned out that the dissidents were correct in that HIV was not the causative factor? What if it were proven and verified tomorrow?

    After having been one of the most public and most vocal of HIV researchers against Duesberg et al, what would you then do and what would you say?

  194. #195 cooler
    October 14, 2007

    hajjar, there is no reasoning with this man, what you just asked him is blasphemous in his deranged megalomanical mind, he is delusional.
    In fact, the very fact that you asked that question makes you a “denialist”, so expect this loony tune to start slinging insults at you like hes already done to far more competent scientists like Duesberg, mullis, Lo etc.

    Hes already lost all respect in the scientific community, two universities told him off when he tried to get people fired, he just told a well respected professor,Gerry Pollock, at the university of washington that he will never speak with him bc pollock beleived in open debate and was impressed by duesbergs arguments. His pal wainberg wants to abolish the first amendment, he needs to get a psychiatric evaluation. LOL

  195. #196 carter
    October 14, 2007

    Dear John,

    You said, “Given the muticiplicity of drugs now available, and the accumulated experience of prescribing physicians, it’s almost always possible nowadays to identify a therapeutic regimen that an HIV-infected person can tolerate.”

    So tell me, please if you would, how is that identified, determined nowadays? I mean now after the study in which Rodriguez, et al. PMID: 17003398 “Presenting HIV RNA level predicts the rate of CD4 cell decline only minimally in untreated persons.” Is there some newfangled reasons that we should follow or believe your deadly toxic intervention regimes?

  196. #197 John Moore
    October 14, 2007

    Hajjar, there are actually only a very few “academic” AIDS denialists that merit targeting by AIDS research professionals, and little prospect of others now joining their ranks. The hypothetical scenario you pose is impossible to take seriously, as the causative role of HIV is an established fact. One might as well ask a physicist what he or she would do if the law of gravity were found to be false.

    There is as little factual accuracy in the last post by “Cooler”‘ as there has been in anything else he or she has previously posted in this string.

    “Carter” is an AIDS denialist, and I and other AIDS professionals never answer any question these people pose, as per established policy, on the grounds that “debating” acknowledges that there is something to debate, when the facts are long-established and there for all competent individuals to see and understand (see http://www.AIDStruth.org).

  197. #198 Chris Noble
    October 14, 2007

    Carter, the paper by Rodriguez et al does not and cannot support the bizarre interpretations made by you and other denialists.

    What our work means

    On another thread you recently copied and pasted quotations from the aras website. These studies have been shown to you to provide extremely good evidence that HAART reduces mortality and morbidity in people infected with HIV.

    Why do you continue to make dishonest claims about these and other studies?

  198. #199 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    Illustrious Prof. Moore, first of all I will attempt to live up to your high standards of typing and spell checking in the following. Please let me know if you detect any progress.

    I see above you consider “Cooler” lost to society because he is not taking antiretroviral drugs. I find that an interesting measure of human worth; but also, being brought up in a Christian spirit, a little depressing. Is there really no way Cooler can be converted and saved, or at least forgiven for his sins? Perhaps he could still be put to good use since I have suggested elsewhere that AIDStruth could follow Stalin’s laudable example and introduce a special draft for denialists. Just as Stalin used to send criminals lost to the State in advance of the regular troops so the commanders could determine the enemy’s positions as the miscreants got shot to pieces, we could have special units of IED detecting drug-refusers driving ahead of the army patrols in Iraq.

    For less severe cases, like minors or girls who refuse the life-saving HPV innoculations, we could shame them by putting them on public display with T-shirts saying “I am lost to society”. Or “I will get cervical cancer in 50 years – and so will my parents”. Alternatively we could send them to labour camps for re-education. Who knows they may yet learn to love their meds.

    I also see Nicoli Nattrass is one of your favourite authors. I have read her latest article, “Denialism and Science”, published in the Sceptical Enquirer, posted on AIDStruth.org, and I have a few questions that have nothing to do with science, the way you prefer it.

    1. Does Sceptical Enquirer fact check?

    2. Does AIDStruth.org fact check anything “anti-denialist” before posting?

    3. Nicoli Nattras says among other things that denialists “recommended that ARVs be avoided and that all forms of immune deficiency be treated with vitamins and “alternative” and “complementary” therapies including “massage therapy, music therapy, yoga, spiritual care, homeopathy, Indian ayurvedic medicine, light therapy and many other methods” (PAAP 2001, 79, 86).” She calls all of those “alternative therapies” both
    “unproven and unregulated”.

    This is not correct. In the reference it says,
    “Encouraging the detoxification of the body through several inexpensive interventions, such as massage therapy, music therapy, yoga, spiritual care, homeopathy, Indian ayurvedic medicine, light therapy and many other methods”.

    Not all of these methods are unregulated, and they are recommended for detoxifying the body, not as “treatment for all kinds of immune deficiency”.

    Prof Moore, as responsible for the AIDStruth website and reresentative of a famous university, are you going to correct these and other falsehoods and unsubstantiated remarks appearing there? If you answer in the affirmative I offer to volunteer as editor of AIDStruth.org to help you ensure the contents of the site will meet strict criteria of professional academic standards in the future.

    If you wish to contact me privately concerning the details of such an arrangement, I know for a fact that Tara Smith does not mind sharing my email address or any other personal information she might possess.

  199. #200 Chris Noble
    October 15, 2007

    This is not correct. In the reference it says,
    “Encouraging the detoxification of the body through several inexpensive interventions, such as massage therapy, music therapy, yoga, spiritual care, homeopathy, Indian ayurvedic medicine, light therapy and many other methods”.

    Pope, as usual you can’t manage to get anything right.

    In the report the passage is prefaced by:The recommendations listed below were proposed as necessary and sufficient to combat all the risk factors that are the real cause of AIDS:

    Apparently “detoxification” is supposed to be necessary to “combat all the risk factors that are the real cause of AIDS”.

    None of the therapies have been proven to have any effect in “detoxification” let alone treating AIDS.

    It is ironic that people that argue that HIV has never been isolated promote homeopathy as a treatment for AIDS and those who argue that viral load and CD4+ counts are meaningless think that “detoxification” has any meaning.

    While providing clean drinking water to Africans is admirable, charging several dollars for small bottles of homeopathic water with zero active ingredients is despicable.

  200. #201 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    The recommendations listed below were proposed as necessary and sufficient to combat all the risk factors that are the real cause of AIDS:

    Dr. Noble, of course it says that: the report is about AIDS. What’s your point?

    The recommendation is not to be taken as saying that the therapies and remedies listed must be implemented all at once; neither that any one remedy is sufficient in itself.

    It is not to be taken as saying that all the panellists agree on the utility of all recommendations. It’s a working proposition.

    The suggestions for detoxifying procedures are merely to be seen as complement to other more direct measures such as clean water and “timely treatment of infections”

    Most medical doctors will recommend some of these alternative therapies, the difference being they willl not declare any therapy sufficient that doesn’t include ARVs.

    Your AIDStruth masters, however, carry out a policy that in effect says ARVs are sufficient to treat immune deficiency in th presence of a positive HIV test or absent a clinical AIDS diagnosis.

    “8.2.3 Recommendations from panellists who do not subscribe to the causal linkage between HIV and AIDS.
    It was recommended that the South African government commit to the following:

    a) Suspend the dissemination of the psychologically destructive and false message that HIV infection is invariably fatal and assist in reducing the ‘hysteria’
    around HIV and AIDS.
    b) Suspend all HIV testing until its relevance is proved especially in the African context, given the evidence of false positive results in a tropical setting and the
    fact that most assumptions and predictions about AIDS in Africa are based on HIV tests.
    c) Continue to improve social conditions in South Africa.
    d) Continue to decrease poverty.
    e) Continue to control infections and sexually transmitted diseases.
    f) Continue to increase the nutritional status of the population.
    8.2.4 Recommendations from panellists who subscribe to HIV as the cause of AIDS Dr Gayle and Prof Abdool-Karim, representing panellists who endorse the causal link between
    HIV and AIDS, reinforced the importance of the following initiatives for the South African
    government: a) Continue strengthening the surveillance of risk factors such as the behaviour of youth.
    b) Surveillance of HIV prevalence in antenatal clinics, blood banks and among workers.
    c) Conducting incidence surveys.
    d) AIDS surveillance at health facilities.
    e) Keeping death registers.
    f) Standardisation and evaluation of diagnostic criteria and their completeness for reporting purposes.
    g) Surveillance of antenatal syphilis.”

    P. 86 is this:

    “8.5.1 Recommendations on prevention of AIDS from the point of view of panellists who do not support the causal link between HIV and AIDS The recommendations listed below were proposed as necessary and sufficient to combat all the risk factors that are the real cause of AIDS:
    1. Improving sanitation and public health measures to decrease water-borne diseases.
    2. Strengthening health infrastructure.
    3. Reduction of poverty and improving general nutrition and implementing nutritional education and
    supplements for the general population.
    4. Improving screening for and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases.
    5. Promoting sex education based on the premise that many sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancies could be avoided.
    6. Implementing public education campaigns to destigmatise AIDS and reduce public hysteria surrounding the disease.
    7. Investigating the use of immune-boosting medications, such as interferons, growth factors, Bcomplex
    vitamins and herbs (such as ginseng, Chinese cucumber, curcumin, aloe vera, garlic and echinacea).
    8. Encouraging the detoxification of the body through several inexpensive interventions, such as massage therapy, music therapy, yoga, spiritual care, homeopathy, Indian ayurvedic medicine, light therapy and many other methods.
    9. Treating infections vigorously and timeously.
    10. Increased support for and promotion of research into the development of drugs against AIDS, its
    cofactors and risk factors.
    11. Encouraging the involvement of complementary medical and health practitioners, including
    indigenous healers, in research and clinical fields.
    12. Implementing aggressive programmes to empower women and change the power relations between men and women.”

  201. #202 cooler
    October 15, 2007

    John moore has just admitted that there is no experiment that would falsify his beliefs, therefore admitting his hypothesis unfalsifiable therefore unscientific.

    Say for example you followed 20 hiv positive people with no other risk factors, such as AZT, mycoplasmas, severe mental illness and severe drug abuse, a study designed to test gallo’s hypothesis (none exist they all had to assume it to be true) and none got AIDS, would that falsify aids apologists beleifs?

    If such a study was conducted that didnt already assume hiv was the cause of aids by independent scientists, and the people did get AIDS I would accept the hiv hypothesis.

    difference between rethinkers and aids apologists, our theories are falsifiable, therefore scientific, while yours are not.

    Kind of sad you dont have one epidemilogical study designed to test the hiv hypothesis, which is what you need when most every animal does not get AIDS. And then you claim questiong hiv is some kind of blasphemy?

    Scientists that have questiond the hiv hypothesis at some time
    duesberg retroviral expert
    kary mullis nobel prize winner
    shyh ching lo scientific genius from China brought over to head the armed forces of pathology
    margulis NAS member
    Walter gilbert nobel prize winner
    andrew maniotis harvard trained cancer specialist
    many more who are getting sick of moore’s intimidation

    vs.
    john moore
    mark wainberg(both recieve heavy funding from drug co’s)
    and all the people they solicited to sign the “durban declaration” which was sent out like an evite, either the signers had ties to AIDS inc, or they were never told the other side of the story, ie manufactured consent.

  202. #203 Chris Noble
    October 15, 2007

    The recommendation is not to be taken as saying that the therapies and remedies listed must be implemented all at once; neither that any one remedy is sufficient in itself.

    Stop playing silly word games.

    The denialist members of the panel recommended “detoxification” via a number of unproven “alternative” treatments as being necessary to “combat all the risk factors that are the real cause of AIDS”.

    It is morally inexcusable to deny people in Africa treatment with antiretroviral drugs that have been proven to reduce mortality and morbidity and offer homeopathy and other “alternative” treatments that are completely unsupported by any evidence.

  203. #204 Carter
    October 15, 2007

    John,

    The link you provided demonstrates Rodriguez clearly doesn’t know. Now I’d like to know from the horses mouth what new and ingenious ways should a person believe they must consume toxic HAART regimes, because Camp Team Virus says one thing and Rodriguez says another. Answer the question please and stop skirting around the issue.

    “Twenty-five years after AIDS was first recognized, we have made enormous scientific and medical progress in learning about this disease and how to treat it, but great uncertainty still remains about how HIV infection causes the progressive immune deficiency that results in AIDS.

    So to our view, the key important question to ask now is how does HIV infection result in the systemic immune activation that drives CD4 T cell losses? We think that this will soon be illuminated. Stay tuned.

    Levels of HIV in blood explain only a small portion of the variability in the rate at which CD4 T cells are lost. Therefore:
    a. For any one HIV infected person not receiving antiretroviral therapies it is difficult to predict the rate at which CD4 T cells will be lost.
    b. Expanded efforts to identify the other elements that drive CD4 cell losses in chronic HIV infection are needed.”

  204. #205 Chris Noble
    October 15, 2007

    The link you provided demonstrates Rodriguez clearly doesn’t know.

    John has enough intelligence not to respond to your demands.

    It appears that you have not read the paper by Rodriguez et al or that you are completely incapable of understanding what it demonstrates, what it does not demonstrate and what it cannot demonstrate.

    How many times do you have to be told? The paper by Rodriguez et al shows that on average the greater the presenting HIV viral load the faster the CD4+ depletion.

    You can repeat the lies that you have read on denialist websites as much as you want it will not change reality.

  205. #206 Braganza
    October 15, 2007

    Dear Franklin/ ElkMoutainMan, and all who work in the HIV/AIDS field (with HIV+, low CD4/ high viral load patients),

    I just found the following link,

    http://www.immun-therapie.net/nahrungserg-bei-aids.pdf

    where treatment of AIDS-retroviral naive patients was performed with a botanical rich in oligouronic acid in a nanocarrier.

    I would like to know if the results indicated in the Table are plausible, basically a VL >500,000 fell to <50 in 90 days, and the CD4+ grows from 50 to 400.

    In the introduction the authors suggested that the methodology improve the Th1/Th2 balance but they are not measuring it, do you think you can make any comments on the Th1/Th2 balance on the basis of the presented results ?

    Can we take the described use of nanocarrier as an useful lead in looking to formulate other materials ?

    Thanks in advance for any helpfull interpretation,

  206. #207 jspreen
    October 15, 2007

    John has enough intelligence not to respond to your demands.

    No, that’s not the way to put it, Noble. This is what reflects reality:

    John has not enough intelligence to respond to your demands.

    You were close though. It was just a matter of one word two words earlier.

  207. #208 Braganza
    October 15, 2007

    Dear all,

    I am providing a translation of the above indicated link, the data from the table can be seen in the original.

    I am just providing the translation and not subscribing to any result.
    ———————————————————-

    Application of a nutritional supplement for AIDS patients

    Abstract:

    40 AIDS patients with full-blown AIDS (women and men between 19 and 48 years of age) were given for 90 days an oral food supplement from botanicals in nano-carrier, together with oligouronic acid. Measurements were taken on days 12, 45 and 90: body weight, CD4+
    count, viral load, the general state of health as well as additional documented disorders.

    Two patients died, and two patients declined for unknown reasons to appear for follow-up examinations. On day 90, 28 patients (74% of 38) were over the limits of full-blown AIDS (on grounds of CD4+ cell count and viral load). In all cases, diarrhea resolved and the
    bodyweight normalized. In the remaining 10 cases, 8 patients improved in both their health
    status, as well as CD4+ and viral load counts. Six months after the start of the trial, 19 patients were well enough to return to normal work.

    Materials and Methods:

    All 40 patients with symptoms of full-blown AIDS received three tablets daily (each containing 450 mg) from botanicals in nano-carrier. The criteria for AIDS in full stage were used:
    CD4+ counts below 200/µl, viral load >500.000 copies/ml (PCR), weight loss under a Body Mass Index of 20. All three criteria were meet. Measurements were taken on days 12, 45 and 90: body weight, CD4+count, viral load, the general state of health as well as additional
    documented disorders.

    Results:

    Patient

    Gender
    M = Male
    W = female

    Age in years on exam. day

    weight kg

    CD4+ cells / µl

    PCR HIV-1 Copies / ml

    Fever > 38.5 °C

    Diarrhea *

    Other symptoms **

    Health status ***

    gestorben = died

    ausgescheiden = withdrew from study

    * Diarrhea:
    + + +: Very difficult;
    + +: Heavy;
    + Low;
    Without ==

    ** Other symptoms: TB: Tuberculosis
    TH: thrush
    VI: vaginal infection
    CMV: Cytomegalovirus
    PCP: Pneumocystis carinii Pneumonia
    T: toxoplasmosis

    *** Health:
    + + +: AIDS in full stage
    + +: HIV infection with severe symptoms
    +: With minor HIV infection symptoms
    0: Symptom-free

    mittelwerte = average [median?]

    Discussion

    1. Mode of action of the nutritional supplement

    AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) is not a general immunodeficiency. Full-blown AIDS only involves a blockage of the cellular immunity (TH1 mediated), while the humoral immunity (TH2 mediated) not only remains active, but is often increased (Thomas
    1984; Lucy et al. 1996; Klein et al. 1997). The drift from TH1 to TH2 can occur for many reasons. It seems that the redox balance of non-protein thiols plays a key role (Buhl et al. 1989; Eck 1989). It is possible to switch a Th2 reaction back towards a TH1 response by
    means of natural COX-2 inhibitors (Gradl 2004).

    The use of nanoparticles alone for immune stimulation was published by Pavelic^ et al. 2000, and for use with immunodeficiency by Ivkovic^ et al. 2004. It remains unclear whether it is an antioxidant effect, or a stimulation of macrophages in the lamina propria of the
    intestines, or a combination of both effects.

    Oligouronic acid in combination with divalent cations can bind to immune cells (Gradl et al. 2000; Mason et al. 2002) and can increase their activity by improving oxygen supply. This combination proved to be very effective in piglets suffering from Th1 immunodeficiency
    (post-weaning multi-systemic wasting syndrome).

    2. Relationship of this approach to other AIDS Therapies

    At present, most AIDS therapies aim to combat HIV. This is a fundamentally one-sided view of the process of infection. Any infectious disease implies a host-parasite relationship. In most
    cases the parasite, the Pathogen, plays a subordinate role. For example, leprosy (once widespread in Europe) is caused by the Mycobacterium leprae. However, it is so barely contagious that a nourished person with normal hygiene can work in a leper asylum
    without risk of infection. Even in the case of the Spanish flu of 1918, one of the largest pandemics in the last century with approximately 27 million victims, it may be assumed that the virulent virus and high contagiousness exposed 70-80% of the population of central Europe.

    Still only 20% become ill, of which only 5% died. For therapy and prophylaxis, the constitution of the afflicted person (based on the immune response) is much more important than the pathogen. This obviously applies also for the mildly-contagious HIV.

    3. Conclusion

    It was demonstrated that a special nutritional formula for the full- stage AIDS was highly effective. In only 90 days, 74% of the 38 patients were no longer in the full-blown stage of AIDS (based on CD4 + counts and viral load). The diarrhea stopped, and the body weight
    normalized. Of the remaining 10 cases, 8 showed improvement in both the health status and lab counts (CD4+ and viral load).

    Literature:

    Buhl R, Jaffe JA, Holroyd K, Mastrangeli A, et al.: Systemic glutathione deficiency in symptom free HIV seropositive individuals. Lancet 2:1294-1297, 1989

    etc….

  208. #209 Alan Kellogg
    October 15, 2007

    Who here has been to jspreen’s website? Chap most certainly has a vested interest in challenging evidence based medicine. He espouses a number of beliefs, all contradicted by scientific inquiry. Overall it’s indicative of his mind set and his need to be validated.

  209. #210 jspreen
    October 15, 2007

    He espouses a number of beliefs, all contradicted by scientific inquiry.

    Contradicted? What? Where? When? By whom? If those questions are too large, just answer wich scientific inquiry has contradicted Hamer’s New Medicine. I bet you will get exactly as far as dear David Marjanović trying to answer this.

  210. #211 noreen
    October 15, 2007

    This is an interesting artilce about treating HIV naturally in India by the Salvation Army:
    http://www.awakenedwoman.com/aids_wfsnews.htm

  211. #212 noreen
    October 15, 2007

    This is an interesting artilce about treating HIV naturally in India by the Salvation Army:
    http://www.awakenedwoman.com/aids_wfsnews.htm

  212. #213 apy
    October 15, 2007

    Excerpt from jspreens website:

    Statement:

    All allergies are caused by a traumatic event during which the allergen was present. The allergen can be anything: roses, wine, odor, dust, pollen, etc. Some people object that they totally ignored the existence of the allergen before they learned about their allergy. Get me well. The relation between allergen and traumatic event is totally unconscious. Even if you have no idea what sulfur dioxide stands for, the brain is perfectly able to recognize its odor and relate it to a traumatic event.
    Any contact with the allergen in the future recalls the traumatic event and causes a defensive and unconscious reaction of the organism. Definitive healing is generally easily obtained when the person recalls the event and talks about his or her traumatic experience.

    Example:

    A person is allergic to cats. If the allergic reaction was not already present at birth, it means that the person has experienced a traumatic event directly (the cat is the cause) or indirectly (a cat was present physically or imaginary) related to a cat. If he or she recalls the event or, in case of a child, if the event is narrated to the child by a parent for example, healing is obtained instantly and no allergic reaction will occur anymore when again in contact with a cat. If the person was already allergic at birth, a parent has experienced the traumatic event.

    I have to ask: what is the one paper which is independently verifiable that proves this?

  213. #214 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    Good morning Prof. Moore,

    I have noticed you mention Christine Maggiore and the Eliza-Jane Scovill case at any opportunity you get. I understand you have some important personal concerns regarding this case.

    As everybody can satisfy him- or herself by perusing your remarks here and elsewhere, you have staked your professional reputation as a professor and researcher at Weill Medical College on it that Eliza-Jane was HIV positive and that this was the cause of her early death as a result Pneumocystis Carinii Pneumonia (PCP).

    In connection with this the Maggiore family doctor, Paul Fleiss, has been under review for gross negligence as documented on your website AIDStruth.org.

    The review did not find Dr. Fleiss guilty of gross negligence and these charges had to be dropped. Similar charges against Eliza-Jane’s mother, Christine Maggiore, also had to be dropped.

    Prof. Moore, why do you not make this clear on your website? Do you accept that both Christine Maggiore and Dr. Fleiss have been cleared of all charges except for a minor matter of record keeping in the latter’s case?

    Part of the reason no charges could be brought is that it could not be shown from the medical record that Eliza-Jane had been diagnosed with AIDS defining Candidiasis. The charge was trumped up. Do you accept this?

    Part of the reason that no charges could be brought was that slides of Eliza-Jane’s lungs failed to show any indication of PCP. These slides have in fact been used as negative controls in two legal cases.

    Prof. Moore, do you accept this?

    The coroner, James K. Ribe, who examined Eliza-Jane post mortem and diagnosed her with AIDS upon learning her mother was HIV positive, has a long history of controversial testimony and have been instrumental in at least one wrongful conviction which was later reversed. He is now himself being charged with criminal neglect.

    On your website there are several News Items about Christine Maggiore and D. Fleiss’ cases. Why do the charges against Dr. Ribe not figure equally prominently?

    Above you state,

    Still, the inevitable failure of her lawsuit against the LA Coroner’s Office will finally bring “Justice for EJ”, and thereby help prevent the deaths of other children placed in similar situations by irresponsible parents and unprofessional physicians.

    Can I take your statement as meaning you stake your reputation and that of Weill College on it that Dr. Ribe has never made himself guilty of criminal neglect? What are your reasons for this certainty?

    http://www.justiceforej.com/20070827-RibeSuitTrialSet.pdf

    http://www.justiceforej.com/ribeflipflops.html

  214. #215 jspreen
    October 15, 2007

    I have to ask: what is the one paper which is independently verifiable that proves this?

    There’s not one single paper, apy, not one. So, this said, you can giggle and forget.

    Or… you can say to yourself, Hey, there may be not one single paper proving this independently but apart from that, the idea sounds interesting. Maybe I can do something with it in pratice.

  215. #216 apy
    October 15, 2007

    It sounds completely insane actually and I can’t see how anything can be done with it in practice. How do you suggest a traumatic event that happens to a parent can affect the child? What is a traumatic event? What do you do if the child has the allergy from birth? Talk the parent through it?

    Are you, like cooler/carter, after a single paper that demonstrates that HIV causes AIDS? Or, since your proposed hypothesis lacks any such evidence are you smart enough to not ask for what you cannot give?

  216. #217 Mr. Natural
    October 15, 2007

    “Alternative medicines are a foolish and quite possibly dangerous way to treat HIV infection, particularly if individuals choose to rely on them rather than taking the various FDA-approved, safe and effective therapies for HIV infection that are available.”

    Is this the best you can do, Professor Moore?

    Recite decades-old “quackbuster” slogans?

    It should now be clear to everyone why the good professor is terrified of accepting Christine Maggiore’s challenge and debating her in public.

    And like all cowards he continues to issue his threats to make war while remaining in a secure hiding place far from the front.

  217. #218 jspreen
    October 15, 2007

    What is a traumatic event?

    Okay, start from the bottom. Say you’re very much in love with your girlfriend. Then, one evening, during a cosy dinner, a great bottle of wine, etc., she suddenly tells you she loves someone else and goes away. That’s would be some kind of a traumatic event, apy, wouldn’t you agree? From there on many reactions are possible, one of which might be the association in your brain of wine and dreadful separation, resulting in an allergy to wine.

    And such exactly is the mechanism that causes allergies.

  218. #219 David Marjanović
    October 15, 2007

    David Marjanović, help me please. I’ve been trying all night to find out how to look at the pictures to see what you see in them, but I got nowhere. Can you please answer one of my previous posts to this thread?

    And while you’re at it, can you include a hit explaining the use of the verb MUST, just below the entry I linked to.

    Thanks a lot.

    A long post by me was held for approval on Saturday because it contained a few links. Has it still not appeared?

    Regarding the pentalawn pictures, wait till you see the movie.

    And such exactly is the mechanism that causes allergies.

    You act as if nothing about the immune system was known.

    Looks like nothing about the immune system is known to you.

    How could anyone possibly get a pollen allergy if you were right?

  219. #220 David Marjanović
    October 15, 2007

    Ryke Geerd Hamer was a despicable quack. Evidence? He told the poor girl and her gullible parents the cancer would just encapsulate itself, “turn to cheese” (verkäsen), and go away. It didn’t. It kept growing. Prediction falsified.

    You just want to believe, don’t you?

  220. #221 apy
    October 15, 2007

    That didn’t answer my question jspreen. I’m asking for a clear defintion of what a traumatic event is. Is skinning my knee a traumatic event that could cause an asphalt allergy? What about a splinter giving me a wood allergy? Where is the line between just something unpleasant and traumatic?

  221. #222 David Marjanović
    October 15, 2007

    Scientists that have questiond the hiv hypothesis at some time
    duesberg retroviral expert
    kary mullis nobel prize winner
    shyh ching lo scientific genius from China brought over to head the armed forces of pathology
    margulis NAS member
    Walter gilbert nobel prize winner
    andrew maniotis harvard trained cancer specialist
    many more who are getting sick of moore’s intimidation

    cooler, has it never occurred to you that the argument from authority is a logical fallacy?

    In order to be the next Galileo, it is not enough to be persecuted by an orthodoxy – you have to be right, too.

  222. #223 Adele
    October 15, 2007

    cooler is someone paying you to make fun of Dr. Shyh-Ching Lo? HE’s a respected scientist and you need to respect your scientific elders.

    shyh ching lo scientific genius from China brought over to head the armed forces of pathology

    Umm have some respect for Dr. Lo its “Shyh-Ching” and no such thing as “armed forces of pathology” there’s a “Armed Forces Institute of Pathology” and Lo’s not the “head” of it. Florabel Mullick, MD, SCD, FCAP is Director of it and beneath her there’s Colonel Pemble Dr. Noe, Colonel Perakh and Dr Owner. Dr. Lo is one lab chief in a department in the instittute he’s not the head of that department Infectious and Parasitic Diseases. HEad is Douglas Wear MD. But who cares? I’m not dising lo just telling you facts you never looked up. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology google it youtube it. Oh and guess what Dr. Lo doesn’t say HIV doesn’t exist doesn’t cause AIDS.

  223. #224 jspreen
    October 15, 2007

    Regarding the pentalawn pictures, wait till you see the movie.

    So I must ask the same question again. How full of shit are you really, David Marjanović? Since when does watching a movie unveil corpses and plane debris on a photograph which has no such things on it?
    I notice also that, as so many others, you find nothing else to do than throw some fistfulls of mud when you see the name Ryke Geerd Hamer on your screen.
    Ha, Ha, Ha, the guy wants to be scientific. You seem to ignore that the throwing of mud is not yet classified in the scientific arguments category.

  224. #225 cooler
    October 15, 2007

    john moore said
    “There is as little factual accuracy in the last post by “Cooler”‘ as there has been in anything else he or she has previously posted in this string.”

    on the way Moore treats scientists who dont agree w him
    Dear Prof. Moore,

    As a consultant to the National Science Board’s Task Force on Transformative Research, I’ve become intimately familiar with issues of orthodoxy and its challenges. In fact, the Task Force is now in the throes of piecing together a plan that opens the National Science Foundation to non-mainstream approaches. Those in the minority currently have little chance of success in winning grants. We are trying to right that wrong.

    One of the areas that we focus on is the arrogance of those in power. Members of the orthodoxy will off-handedly dismiss minority views as the work of crackpots. Sometimes this is true, but, in too many instances dismissal is based not on fact but on hearsay. Nevertheless, those in power are consistently unwilling to debate the minority opinion, dismissing such activity publicly as a waste of time, but too often masquerading the underlying issue: fear. This is some of what we’ve learned.

    In the case of AIDS, minority position support from two Nobel Prize winners suggests that this is not necessarily the views of crackpots. Yet, you swift-boat those scientists with ad hominem remarks that seem to have no place in science. In my view, this weakens your position.

    Why not be brave and take up the challenge? The opportunity would give you a chance to demonstrate to all and forever that Nobel-support notwithstanding, these guys are off their collective rockers? If you are unwilling to debate Bialy, why not go to the horse’s mouth and challenge Duesberg? If he’s not got something real, surely he’ll be unwilling to submit to the humiliation of debate, and you’ll come out on top.

    Best wishes,

    Jerry Pollack

    >>>Gerald H. Pollack, Ph.D.
    >>>Professor
    >>>Department of Bioengineering
    >>>Box 355061
    >>>University of Washington
    >>>Seattle WA 98195

    Sorry, I don’t agree with you, Jerry. The AIDS denialists have long craved respectability, so debating them gives them what they want but dignifies their position to an extent that is unwarranted. Our position is clearly stated on the AIDStruth.org website and it’s one I personally believe to be the correct one. You’re welcome to disagree, of course.

    You should also note that your internet-posted review of Bialy’s book on Duesberg reveals your sympathy with the AIDS denialist camp for all to see. I’ll therefore not be communicating with you any further.

    Regards
    John Moore

    I found Gerry Pollack’s final response to pretty much say it all:

    Dear John,

    This is the first time ever, in my 35-year scientific career, that a person said they refuse to communicate with me because I was impressed by the logic of a scientific argument, and hoped for a response from the other side.

    Is there more to say?,

    Best wishes,
    Jerry

    lol, reminds me of Stalins russia, this guy badmouths scientists, cant defend his views publicly, insults a respected professor Pollack by refusing to “communicate w him” bc he doesnt support the CDC/drug company mobs lies, propaganda and stifling of open debate and academic freedom.

  225. #226 Andrew Maniotis
    October 15, 2007

    Dear John (Moore),

    So good to hear from you indirectly again (I get all of my mail from you forwarded through my deans and chairmen), so it really is a distinct honor to see you are still thinking about my questions (but continue to refuse the 25 G to go to Christine’s invitation to sunny California for a simple, and courteous debate. Maybe you should think about her offer before you get up before the next International AIDS conference and make an absolute fool of yourself by stating that AIDS is a disease of too many lympycytes, as in the case of Eliza Jane, and that her mother, who never tested consistently positive is a menace to the world. For shame! I’m quite confident, that if you did engage Christine, or any of us, that you would perhaps be surprised to find that many of the questions we ask are legitimate, and deserve discussion.

    To briefly address your slanderous allegations against me, it was the result of merely quoting from at least 8 pieces of documentation regarding the Bethesda-Pasteur collaboration that had been written by others such as Crewdson and Dingell and others. Dr. Gallo corrected this confusing 5 year Dingell-HSS history, for all the good it did in convincing even a single AIDS apologists at my institution I frequently argue with that there was in fact no wrong doing. After Dr. Gallo sent me the material, and after numerous conversations, I apologized to him sincerely, and maintain his version of the correct facts. Since then, I have been reviewing and exploring the nature of the molecular signature found in his 48 of out 119 subjects, but that is another story you might soon hear about.

    Despite my in earnest attempts to discuss AIDS science with you more than a year or two ago, only to receive your typical response that AIDS denialists aren’t worthy of a response to an email, etc. Dr. Moore, when will you come clean and admit that your “HAIL MARY” experiments in which you described in Toronto smearing microbicides on monkey genitals and inseminating them 3-5 times with “SIV” is nothing more than a complete waste of time and money? Moreover, through your research, and foundation backers, you continue of course to exploit poor people who tend to be African Americans, or Africans, with your microbicide genital smearing campaigns, and as Lawrence Altman rightly recently pointed out, you increase the rates of “infection” in those to whom your genital microbicides are applied. How did you come down on the Tripoli 6, Dr. Moore? Do you agree with Montagnier and want to blame the 426 “infections” on blacks from “subsaharan Africa as well?” Have you heard of institutionalized racism, Dr. Moore?

    “It was completely clear scientifically since 2002 that they (the Tripoli 6) were not guilty,” said Vittorio Colizzi, a renowned AIDS expert who was invited by the Qaddafi family to study the hospital in Benghazi where the infections took place and was given wide access to wards and medical records. “But the nurses suffered for years from the incapacity of diplomacy and politics to free them in a timely manner.”

    “He and another expert, Dr. Luc Montagnier, the French virologist whose team discovered HIV, concluded that the AIDS virus was present in the hospital before the nurses arrived, probably brought to Libya by guest workers from countries in sub-Saharan Africa. (In other words, it the fault of the blacks ‘from subsaharan Africa’, if this quote from Montagnier is accurate).”

    We really aren’t in a time warp, Dr. Moore, as you claim-the negative reports about the toxicity of medications continue to appear in mainstream journals, and the irresponsible, I’d say criminal wholesale human experimentation your ilk continues to foist on unsuspecting persons continues. For example, your statements about the lack of toxicity about the CCR5, integrase, and other so-called “HIV” inhibitors are countered by recent reports in business magazines that report:

    “Some experts said they were a bit cautious about maraviroc, in part because it blocks a human protein instead of a viral one, with possible unknown long-term effects. One CCR5 inhibitor that was being developed by GlaxoSmithKline was dropped because it caused liver toxicity, and a second being developed by Schering-Plough appeared to possibly raise the risk of blood cancers.”

    Problem with “HIV-integrase,” it appears to have no chromatin remodeling activity or have any minor DNA groove-binding activity, according to some of our published work.

    Before criticising others for asking questions, you might try to swallow your pride a bit, and explain the failure of the Merck vaccine announced a week or two ago. That brings the failure(s) into the several dozens as far as I’m aware and which is documented on the Congressional Records I have obtained, of completed and reported and completely failed “HIV” vaccine trials that all have failed to evoke humoral, cellular, mucosal immunity, not to mention a failure to activate T-cells because the wrong toxic adjuvants continue to be used. What was so disgustingly downplayed, of course about the recent Merck failure, was not that the control group actually had less seroconversions than the vaccinated group (which is what was reported), but that there was a failure to show seroconversion in the vaccinated group (unless you want to claim of couse that the 21 out of 741 represents seroconversion due to the vaccine and not that it failed to protect more people in the vaccinated group.

    What it all means, Dr. Moore, is that although the template for the molecular signatures of “HIV” may derive from common endogenous DNA sequences whose proteins are expressed by normal uninfected yeast, insects, cows, goats, dogs, rhesus monkeys, chimps, mangabeys, and humans independent of T-cell numbers, neither “HIV’s proposed 9,150 bp molecular sequence, or its proteins have been isolated or identified without contaminating cellular components as was reported by Bess et al. Gelderblom, and others in 1997. For instance, and as confidence for this interpretation increases, it has been repeatedly shown more than 30 times in “HIV” vaccine trials that antibodies against “HIV” proteins aren’t evoked even when the so-called unique and diagnostic “HIV’” antigens are injected directly into the bloodstream of healthy humans (according to “experts,” no molecular entity associated with “HIV” sequences, proteins, or glycoproteins such as GP120, has been shown to be immunogenic in humans, perhaps because it is a case of self being challenged by self), and the Merck “HIV” vaccine was only the last utter complete and disappointing failure, not only in preventing acquisition of “HIV,” but in the failure to evoke anti-”HIV” antibodies in the 741 volunteers:

    “In a major setback, one of the leading experimental AIDS vaccines not only failed to prevent test subjects from becoming infected with HIV, but it didn’t offer any indication it might delay the onset of full-blown AIDS, which had been a key hope.”

    “24 of 741 volunteers who got the vaccine in one segment of the experiment later became infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. In a comparison group of volunteers who got dummy shots, 21 of 762 participants also became infected.”

    “The ultimate fear among researchers is that the whole theory underlying the Merck vaccine might be flawed, which, if true, could doom an entire class of experimental vaccines.”

    It may be more appropriate to say that the whole theory of “HIV=AIDS” is flawed, because there is no evidence that an exogenous “AIDS virus” has been isolated, and shown to evoke an antibody response in vaccine recipients or cause disease in either an animal model or a human being. Again, I strees that unless one would like to make unfounded assumptions that the 24 of the 741 volunteers that “became infected” in this last of more than 30 failed “HIV” trials actually represents an extremely low rate of seroconversion due to exposure of isolated “HIV” components to the human immune system (24/741), and that these 24 individuals are now immunized against “HIV” instead of having acquired an “HIV” infection, the similar rate of seroconversion in the control group (21/762) suggests that this cannot be the case, and it is more likely, that seroconversion in both groups represents mere testing artifacts.

    Hail Mary indeed!

    Cheers,

    andy
    Assitant Research Professor
    Director of the Greek Mafia
    Special Secret Agent and
    Black Helicopter pilot,
    Holocaust Denialist,
    and Flat Earther

    Posted by: Andrew Maniotis | October 15, 2007 2:44 PM

  226. #227 carter
    October 15, 2007

    Chris Noble,

    “The paper by Rodriguez et al shows that on average the greater the presenting HIV viral load the faster the CD4+ depletion.”

    But also in presence is as stated “For any one HIV infected person not receiving antiretroviral therapies it is difficult to predict the rate at which CD4 T cells will be lost.

    So, can you tell me if Mr. Moore cannot… why pray tell would any anyone dispense out toxic therapies if its proven that no one knows because of the difficulties of rate prediction? It’s touted that everyone falls pray to cd4 loss in the HIV realm, but shown there that they’re only still guessing… so why then must we still believe in HAART consumption?

  227. #228 Adele
    October 15, 2007

    Ha ha wonder if Andy wants to paste that thing any where else? and he forgot a title too “Supreme Genius Pathologist of the Armed Forces of Pathology”

    “Pope” says to Dr. Moore

    I have noticed you mention Christine Maggiore and the Eliza-Jane Scovill case at any opportunity you get.

    Well “Pope” you a wude wabbit yourself, I said before and Chris noticed it to it’s usually deniosauruses like you who talk about EJ first. This threads’ the first time I notice someone else gave an example and just in a sentence you make a book out of it yourselves. Very sad she died and too bad her mum didn’t let her see responsable doctors. And too bad jerks like you don’t leave her and her family alone your always using them for your little personal denialist thing. Maggiores don’t care sure because it helps them feel better, their kid died of something kids don’t die of any more if they have a good doctor.

    Any evidence for this stuff “Pope CJ the Paranoid”? OHH my GAWWD Tara’s giving my TAX INFO to the IRS!! I can HERE THE CHOPPERS NOW!!

    it could not be shown from the medical record that Eliza-Jane had been diagnosed with AIDS defining Candidiasis. The charge was trumped up.

    Were you at the trial PopeyLisa. Did they let off Fleiss with three years probation because of the autopsy. Maybe that’s what you like but is it true?

    slides of Eliza-Jane’s lungs failed to show any indication of PCP. These slides have in fact been used as negative controls in two legal cases

    Oh really PopeyLisa? What “legal cases” are those or i guess you just read it somewhere like noreen maybe a “university website”. were you at the trial. Did they show slides of lungs and thats how Fleiss “just” got a three yer probation and he has to do standard of care on HIV now. Is that dropping all charges to you ever hear of bargaining?

    Sad thing is, all this deniosaurs exhuming bodies doesn’t do anything, if EJ died of antibiotic in her Oxcar Meyer lunchables it doesn’t say HIVs harmless. There’s thousands thousands of babies die of AIDS, millions of people, if Maggiore isn’t positive and EJ died of carrot poisoning it doesn’t change it. Only reason I talk about this is DENIALISTS started using a dead baby who died of AIDS as a recruiting gimmic and its sick.

  228. #229 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    http://groups.msn.com/aidsmythexposed/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=1&ID_Message=31639

    Have you all heard there’s a new groove going round:

    THE BALLAD OF THE BRAVE SIR MOORE

    Brave Sir Moore ran away
    Bravely, ran away…away…
    When danger debate reared its ugly head
    He bravely turned his tail and fled
    Yes, brave Sir Moore turned about
    And gallantly he chickened out
    Bravely taking to his feet
    He beat a very brave retreat
    Bravest of the brave, Sir Moore

    http://www.guntheranderson.com/v/data/bravesir.htm

  229. #230 Mr. Natural
    October 15, 2007

    “he has to do standard of care on HIV now”

    Adele, speaking of medical endangerment of children, have you ever visited HIV believer Jonathan Fishbein’s website and read his detailed report on the safety protocols violated during the African Nevaripine trials.

    Do you really believe that parents must be compelled, as a result of what happened to Fleiss, to poison their children because of your belief that milllions of babies have died of AIDS?

    And it would be most helpful if you could calm down and address the biochemical arguments against antiretrovirals’ efficacy that have been raised numerous times here.

  230. #231 Chris Noble
    October 15, 2007

    Crank 101 – lesson 34.

    Challenge prominent scientific critics to a public debate. If anyone is silly enough to accept the offer then claim that this proves that the “orthodoxy” takes you seriously. If nobody takes up the offer claim that the “orthodoxy” is scared.

  231. #232 Janice Rael
    October 15, 2007

    Re: “people simply don’t remember the havoc vaccine-preventable diseases used to wreak” –

    Yes, I spoke this weekend with a woman about to turn 80 years old, who told me how scary polio was when she was a child. They would lie awake at night, worried that they’d wake up paralyzed. Vaccinations against polio have made this fear a thing of the past.

  232. #233 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    Brave Sir John,

    I have followed your repeated suggestions in this thread and read some articles on your AIDStruth.org. to find out more about “denialists”. Among other things Icame across a mini-article by your fellow Crusader, Martin Delaney, with the titillating title “Duesberg and Homophobia”.

    http://aidstruth.org/duesberg-homophobia.php

    The intellectually overwhelming argument in this none too short piece is that Duesberg has never said or done anything homophobic, but his theory of AIDS makes him a homophobe anyway. One can hardly blame Mr. Delaney if a slip should have occurred in the process of penning such a complex thesis, however, in the best interests of AIDStruth, I must say that I have now consulted several of the forbidden tracts of Prof. Duesberg, published in the most prestigious peer-reviewed journals, and nowhere can I find the basis for this statement:

    [Duesberg] clearly blamed AIDS on the gay men who contracted it, arguing that it was the product of a life of promiscuity and drug abuse.

    Sir John, it is my impression that it is not Duesberg but yourself and your fellow Moral Crusaders who have found a causal connection between promiscuity and AIDS. You have concluded that the reason why the “pandemic” has confined itself largely to homosexuals (and Africans) is that the pathogen is spread via their peculiar sexual practices. In contrast, Duesberg has never claimed that gay or African sexual practices explains the epidemiology of AIDS.

    Brave Sir John, now that you’ve been made aware of this error, I trust you will not gallantly chicken out but immediately make the necessary corrections to Mr. Delaney’s fascinating expose.

  233. #234 Adele
    October 15, 2007

    Popeylisa says

    Prof. Moore, why do you not make this clear on your website?

    Well Popeylisa last time I checked aidstruth like a week ago maybe they had the med board decision on pdf. So you can read it yourself. And they had the news article on it too. Or did they take it down since then? What do you want a strobe light.

    The review did not find Dr. Fleiss guilty of gross negligence and these charges had to be dropped.

    Nice try Pope-E-Lisa. See Dr. Fleiss knew what Dr. Moore knew he was in big trouble. So he did a plea deal. Maybe you didn’t read that part. Or the one about how they did revoke Fleiss license but they put it on suspension if he stays on probation three years. Did you see how he has to pay fines and go to classes and get monitored. Yeah see they don’t do that to someone when they just forget writing something down. Its because its a plea deal, pope Fleiss said yeah you got me and I don’t want a trial and their like yeah lets just punish you on a charge and move on but don’t try this ish again or we own your license.

    Similar charges against Eliza-Jane’s mother, Christine Maggiore, also had to be dropped

    Umm yeah that’s because no charges were filed!! They couldn’t file because Maggiore took her kid to the doctor and then she did what the doctor said. Nothing about autopsy report in there Ya know read the report Pope.

  234. #235 Chris Noble
    October 15, 2007

    Brave Sir John, now that you’ve been made aware of this error, I trust you will not gallantly chicken out but immediately make the necessary corrections to Mr. Delaney’s fascinating expose.

    Like the “error” in Nicoli Natrass’s essay? Despite your denials it is perfectly true that the denialisst on the Presidential advisory panel advocated homeopathy and other “alternative” nonsense as being necessary for the treatment of AIDS through “detoxification”.

    Next you’ll be trying to tell us that the Nathaniel Lehrman, one of the original AIDS “rethinkers”, isn’t really homophobic.

  235. #236 Adele
    October 15, 2007

    Popeylisa wrong again

    Duesberg has never said or done anything homophobic

    nowhere can I find the basis for this statement: [Duesberg] clearly blamed AIDS on the gay men who contracted it, arguing that it was the product of a life of promiscuity and drug abuse.

    Maybe you never read the Village Voice you know a little interview where Duesberg says AIDS comes from :lifestyle that was criminal twenty years ago”

    pope what could that be drug use? No I think drug use was criminal twenty years ago. could it be stress? No stress wasn’t criminal twenty years ago. Umm he was talking about homosexuality!! But that’s not homophobe is it? Because you say so.

    Wow kind of like Henry Bauer who wrote in his freaking auto biography I regard homosexuality as an aberration or illness and then he says and I think it’s very difficult to draw a line between free speech about civil rights for gays and the tendency for the life-style to be presented as something that it would be perfectly all right for anyone to choose

    Yeah so take away free speech for gay people sounds like something a nice LGBT ally would say right.

    Guess you didn’t read that either Popeylisa, check out aidstruth some time they got it all there. Your not a reader so maybe you can pay someone read it to you?

  236. #237 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    Brave Sir John,

    I am outraged at what I have just learned from the creature who has stepped in to desperately try and cover your brave retreat! At least one child is dead because of Dr. Fleiss and Christine Maggiore’s repeated gross negligence, but, according to this well-informed insider, the medical board struck a deal which lets both of them off with hardly a rap on the wrist, and Dr. Fleiss is still practicing!!

    This is a scandal no less; a corruption of medical science as well as justice. How could anyone allow such a cowardly deal to be struck? How cold YOU, Prof. Mooral, sit idle by and let this happen? Why are YOU not out there on the front lines using your the full weight of your position and that of your prestigious afilliation to spread the word about what really happened here? Murderers are at large because of their accusers’ lack of persistence. Prof. Mooral, surely you must be aware that after these revelations Dr. Fleiss’ and Christine Maggiore’s further crimes against humanity will forever weigh heavily on your conscience and reputation.

  237. #238 Adele
    October 15, 2007

    Hi Chris is that Nathanel S Lehrman MD from National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality? author from JPANDS the fave journal for dneiliasts?

    MAybe pope will say Dr. Lehrman just wanna help gays get over their “abberation or illness” like Henry BAuer said. Oh and tell every one Nazis were all “pederasts”

    Sheesh these people are sick! Where’s just one denialist to stand up and say ok everyone these homophobic sayings are sick and their a disgrace to denialism. Noreen carter cooler maniotis liversedge jensen mark spreen just one of you people or do you agree on bauers freespeech thing and duesbergs gayness causes aids and lehrmans gay people are nazis or they need “cured”

  238. #239 Pope
    October 15, 2007

    Adele and Chris both,

    I understand you are on your heels right now, but look, there are no extra points for getting answers in extra fast. You are quite frankly all over the place now, so, like Mr. Natural has already advised, take a deep breath, focus, try to compose something remotely coherent before you hit the “Post” button. – Another good thing would be to read and make sure you actually comprehend as a pre-requisite for answering. For example, Adele, this was not my comment but Martin Delaney’s as I make abundantly clear. Take it up with him and Brave Sir John if you think it is factually incorrect.

    Duesberg has never said or done anything homophobic

    Likewise I said I have looked in peer-reviewed literature after the basis for the alleged promiscuity component of Duesberg’s theory and I didn’t find it. I hope I’m not bursting your bubble when I say that your – especially your – exegesis of an old interview do not rank in that category.

    And Chris, one more time for the imagined gallery you are playing to, no those remedies were not for treating AIDS, detoxification wasseenas a possible way of dealing iwth the risk factors for AIDS. Prevention and complemntary therapy in other words. And now that I am repeating myself anyway, letmerepeat this: “you’d be so goddam perfect if you could ever stay on topic!”

  239. #240 Roy Hinkley
    October 15, 2007

    Problem with “HIV-integrase,” it appears to have no chromatin remodeling activity or have any minor DNA groove-binding activity, according to some of our published work.”

    Dr. Maniotis,

    Why do you continually bring this up?

    Topo II is a major DNA modifying enzyme and a constituent of the nuclear matrix.

    Is HIV integrase a constituent of the nuclear matrix?

    Does any viral integrase have the chromosome reconstituing ability you found for Topo II?

    Does lamda integrase reconstitute chromatin depleted chromosomes?

    Does Cre?

    Does Flp?

    Does AAV integrase?

    Then why would anyone expect HIV integrase to?

    And what’s more, whether it does, or doesn’t; whether you expect it to, or whether you don’t, what possible bearing could that have on the existence of HIV?

  240. #241 Chris Noble
    October 15, 2007

    And Chris, one more time for the imagined gallery you are playing to, no those remedies were not for treating AIDS, detoxification wasseenas a possible way of dealing iwth the risk factors for AIDS. Prevention and complemntary therapy in other words. And now that I am repeating myself anyway, letmerepeat this: “you’d be so goddam perfect if you could ever stay on topic!”

    You can repeat yourself as much as you want. It won’t change the fact that the denialists on the Presindential advisory panel regarded homeopathy and other “alternative” treatments as being necessary for necessary to “combat all the risk factors that are the real cause of AIDS”.

    Likewise I said I have looked in peer-reviewed literature after the basis for the alleged promiscuity component of Duesberg’s theory and I didn’t find it. I hope I’m not bursting your bubble when I say that your – especially your – exegesis of an old interview do not rank in that category.

    A lot of Duesberg’s more extreme views did not make it through peer review. He tones down a lot of his views to get it published. He says a lot of stuff in his books, interviews and public talks that is not in his peer reviewed articles.

  241. #242 Adele
    October 15, 2007

    Ok claus big difference.

    I give you real quotes and sources.

    You give us fiction and song lyrics.

    Pope Clausialysa says

    this was not my comment but Martin Delaney’s “Duesberg has never said or done anything homophobic”

    Umm earth to deniosaurus claus, Martin Delaney didn’t say that. any where. lets see where you got it. Oh you made it up. Nice.

    OK now Duesberg said AIDS comes from “lifestyle that was criminal twenty years ago” in village voice interview 1988. Not me being funny like Claus not my version of it his real words. google it like cooler says. Only way you get around it is, if Duesberg didn’t say it someone lied. So did he sue Village voice cause that’s a bad lie about Duesberg if so. If Chris is right he usually is then there’s more then the village voice thing out there.

    Another example Henry Buaer said in his book I think it’s very difficult to draw a line between free speech about civil rights for gays and the tendency for the life-style to be presented as something that it would be perfectly all right for anyone to choose He wrote it. He said in his book gay is “abberation or illness” I didn’t make it up. I don’t have the page number its on aids truth google it. Did Bauer write it. Maybe a boogy man wrote it right? Good kind Bauer, always so tolerant of everyone right. Nasty people writing bad things and making him think he wrote it right? Brain control rays like cooler. Poor kind bauer without tinfoil.

    Another one Nathanel S Lehrman MD from Chris, I found his name at a website for National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. Did someone make up that did a guy write his thing in JPANDS and make him look bad? Do you agree gay people need therapy, they should get ex-gay and “healthy”?

    Wow clausialy you must be so smart. You know how I know not just bc you know about Leda before me, because you have to be to convince us those peoples stuff is not homophobe!

  242. #243 Pope
    October 16, 2007

    Adele,

    Speaking of classical education, I hope it will be of some consolation to you that I think James Joyce should have used your epistles as model for his Penelope part in Ulysses.

    Now please go address yourself to Delaney and Brave Sir Chicken, preferably in the same style of prose – but watch the typos, the good Sir thinks they’re signs of low intelligence.

    I am not aware of explicit homophobic words on record by Duesberg (Martin Delaney)

    And you’re a real peach if you can tell me where Delaney has this piece of unreferenced slander from:

    (unlike his friend and business colleague Harvey Bialy, though both are known to use racial slurs)

    How about the brave Sir Tail-Between-His-Legs, does he know? He gave me the impression of being a very principled man in this respect just above when he expressed such indignation at something Maniotis is suposed to have said about Gallo.

  243. #244 Brian X
    October 16, 2007

    Tara, how in the world do you deal with these denialists without killfiling them the way PZ does?

  244. #245 Pope
    October 16, 2007

    Brave Prof. Mooral,

    I have just discovered I have in my possession a piece I think would interest the AIDStruth site. Have a read and see if you want to publish it.
    ————–

    THE METHOD OF THE ASSISTANT INQUISITOR

    Homophobia! Was there ever a topic lent itself better to bad manners and good gossip? The Small and continually diminishing Inquisitor Prof. J.P. Moore has of late rekindled this evergreen sensation, as it were, of sex, sin and prejudice. The initial campaign to expose homophobia among AIDS Denialists, and thus spread the ‘moral truth’ about AIDS, has now been joined by Martin Delaney who has truly sensational information to relay in “Duesberg and Homophobia”, his latest gossip headliner on AIDStruth.org:

    I am not aware of explicit homophobic words on record by Duesberg.

    Pretty damning testimony! But it gets even juicier: Martin Delaney remembers that Duesberg used to ‘hang around’ with gay men. The initial theory concerning this remarkable behaviour was formally introduced by Robert Gallo in Spy Magazine:

    Duesberg comes to meetings with guys with leather jackets and the hair and so on in the middle. I mean that’s a little bit odd. Doesn’t it speak of something funny?
    (1990 (June) Roberts, S. Lab rat: What AIDS researcher Dr. Robert Gallo did in pursuit of the Nobel Prize, and what he didn’t do in pursuit of a cure for AIDS . Spy , pp. 70-79.)

    Delaney has also noticed the tell-tale leather jackets, but he is not as easily fooled by appearances as Gallo. Although he is not a scientist, he presents an authoritative challenge to Gallo’s implied theory: These men may have been gay, but they were a different kind of gay men, they were – no not the horrible F word… but the much more politically correct D word:

    These men were simply the first wave of denialists among the gay community (…) Their presence in no way cleansed Duesberg of his homophobia

    In spite of the leather and long hair it seems clear Duesberg’s acquaintances were not bona fide, street cred. earning gay men; they were in reality closet denialists in the process of coming out. Thus, by singling out these leather-clad subversives for suspicion, isolating them, defining them as an exogenous element and calling them names, assistant Inquisitor Delaney cleverly lays bare the essence of homophobia as well as HIV science.

    So far Delaney has shown us the truth component of AIDS. The other half, the moral component, is argued with equally inescapable logic: I the Asistant Inquisitor’s words, Duesberg’s lifestyle theory of AIDS is,

    the same nonsense mouthed by right-wing fundamentalists, minus the religious overtones.

    Of course “right-wing fundamentalists minus the religious overtones” is like AIDS minus HIV – a contradiction in terms. So by the same semantic sleight of hand which imports HIV into the definition of AIDS, assistant Inquisitor Delaney imports the religious (moral) element into Duesberg’s theories by the very words he uses in acknowledging there are no such overtones in Duesberg’s language. Confused? Good! Then without further ado:

    Duesberg insists that AIDS is the fault of the immorality of the victims.

    The Assisstant Inquisitor method is simply to pronounce certain lifestyles immoral per definition – something he has just admitted Duesberg has never done – and in this admirably roundabout way he once again demonstrates what all prejudice really is about.

    But perhaps the windy ways of the Assistant Inquisitor has taken us too far from the really good gossip with which AIDStruth readers habitually have been spoiled. To make up, therefore, for any digressions from the real topic, let us sum up the moral truth of the affair in the profound words rumoured to have issued from the infallible mouth of Pope Gallo himself when once asked in which AIDS patient he had detected HTLV-1, the first retroviral candidate for AIDS, a Haitian or a haemophiliac:

    It was a fucking fag

    1990 (June) Roberts, S. Lab rat: What AIDS researcher Dr. Robert Gallo did in pursuit of the Nobel Prize, and what he didn’t do in pursuit of a cure for AIDS . Spy , pp. 70-79.

    It turned out not to be the right virus that time, but it was the certainly the right patient according to the moral method of Assistant Inquisitor Delaney.

  245. #246 Tara C. Smith
    October 16, 2007

    Tara, how in the world do you deal with these denialists without killfiling them the way PZ does?

    It’s a public service. No way can I make them look any worse than they do themselves.

  246. #247 Braganza
    October 16, 2007

    But is HAART, as presently provided, dangerous in countries with poor health facilities ?

    A study has found only 60% of Aids patients in Africa still take the drugs they need to stay alive two years after starting treatment – the rest have died.

    See more on:

    http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Aids_Focus/0,,2-7-659_2202735,00.html

    Is there another way ?

  247. #248 ElkMountainMan
    October 16, 2007

    Braganza,

    The Toni Gradl investigation to which you linked is certainly interesting but it is difficult to evaluate without further information. The study has not been peer-reviewed, and while that bothers me, I am even more concerned with the apparent absence of good experimental design. We, along with Dr. Gradl, cannot know whether the effects are due to the “nanocarrier,” one or more components of the “Pflanzenextract” (for which we are given no information), the supplementary acid, placebo effect, etc. This study seems to me more “faith-based” than scientific.

    Gradl’s explanation linking the “neutraceutical” to a cytokine-related mechanism is also interesting, but is not developed well and looks much like pure speculation to me. Cytokines balances are intricate and complicated and have frustrated scientists’ best attempts to reduce them into neat phrases. Gradl’s simplistic version of AIDS and the immune system reminds me of the writings of another German doctor, Heinrich Kremer. This all gives me further pause and strengthens my suspicions about this study.

    Most importantly of all, Gradl reports the deaths of two (out of 40) patients during the 90-day study period. Another two went “missing,” reducing the study size to 38 and placing the mortality rate at over 20 per 100 person-years. Patients with similar characteristics who take HAART do much better. The sample size may be too small for firm conclusions, but the death rate is cause for great concern.

    Also, Braganza, I could not find evidence to support your assertion that these patients were antiretroviral-naive. Was this contained in the account, something I missed, or do you know it from elsewhere?

  248. #249 Braganza
    October 16, 2007

    Dear ElkMontainMan,

    Thanks for your analysis.

    I also agree that HAART would have been better based on published studies discussed in this blog.

    On the cytokines I found strange that they were not measured in the experimental, I was unsure if the comments on their effect were just speculation or if others deductions could be made.

    “Also, Braganza, I could not find evidence to support your assertion that these patients were antiretroviral-naive. Was this contained in the account, something I missed, or do you know it from elsewhere?”

    I assumed it, because I tought that somebody on HAART would not have high viral load. See the viral load on day one of each patient.

    Nano-zeolites carriers are common in cosmetic industry, where it is claimed that they give better performance.

  249. #250 Braganza
    October 16, 2007

    Dear ElkMontainMan,

    “Cytokines balances are intricate and complicated and have frustrated scientists’ best attempts to reduce them into neat phrases.”

    Would this be a major technico-scientific challenge ? The modulation of cytokines…

  250. #251 David Marjanović
    October 16, 2007

    So I must ask the same question again. How full of shit are you really, David Marjanović? Since when does watching a movie unveil corpses and plane debris on a photograph which has no such things on it?

    Watch the movie. Look at the photos therein. Plane fragments (from the correct company), corpses, everything. Perhaps the pentalawn photos were taken after the place was cleaned up?

    I notice also that, as so many others, you find nothing else to do than throw some fistfulls of mud when you see the name Ryke Geerd Hamer on your screen.

    What else do you expect me to throw at someone who lies to his patients and in effect advocates just letting people die?!?

    Show me he was right. Show me tumors do such things as “encapsulating” themselves and “turning to cheese”. Show me the analogy he drew between tumors and pregnancies is worth anything. Go ahead, show me.

  251. #252 David Marjanović
    October 16, 2007

    jspreen, I’ve had a short look at your website. Can I trust my eyes? Together with Hamer, you deny the existence of metastases? That’s rich. That’s really rich. This is stupidity on the level of Sir Fred Hoyle declaring Archaeopteryx a forgery.

  252. #253 Braganza
    October 16, 2007

    Dear ElkMountainMan,

    There is another reason that you may have a look to the paper.

    The authors suggested that nanozeolites would stimulate the immune system. They give a reference that I could not cross-check because it was unavailable to me.

    There is no mention of such effects in the patent literature, at least I could not find it.

    If true this also can be applied to encapsulate others drugs, and could have a synergy on the immune system- therefore requiring less active ingredient.

    If true this may lead to smaller secondary effects, as these would be a function of the concentration of the active.

    Pushing more, in the case of HAART this would reduce the secondary effects.

    Others nano-zeolites and nano-clays may have similar effects.

    However somebody else may be investigating the idea,

  253. #254 jspreen
    October 16, 2007

    Go ahead, show me.

    How can I show you things you don’t want to see? Maybe you should trust your own eyes for starters…

    Perhaps the pentalawn photos were taken after the place was cleaned up?

    Sure man. Fire engins have just turned up, the upper floors haven’t collapsed yet but the place has already been cleaned up neatly.
    Of course, all the people looking… most important things first… clean up the place John, the whole world will be watching us soon…

  254. #255 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    “If anyone is silly enough to accept the offer then claim that this proves that the ‘orthodoxy’ takes you seriously.”

    Ah Chris, it’s exhilirating to engage your wonderful logic again. Isn’t Brave Sir John’s behaviour evidence enough that he takes denialists seriously? And are you and he prepared now to deploy your ingenious runaway style of argument against the entire field of alternative medicine?

    The issue at hand, in case you’ve forgotten, is medical endangerment, a risk to every child not within the “protective custody” of intelligent parents who take on the responsibility to evaluate the claims of quacks prescribing toxic drugs for non-existent viruses.

    If Brave Sir John wants to run away from defending the position that “informed consent” is impossible in the case of “HIV”, he’s leaving the field to the denialist propaganda stated above, and so cowardly ignoring his duty to prevent medical endangerment.

    You and Brave Sir John must document, once and for all, the biochemical evidence in AIDS patients of this killer virus. And how the antiretrovirals are specific to the killer and leave the innocent mitochondria alone.

    Love,
    Gene

  255. #256 Lee
    October 16, 2007

    AZT was approved for use in AIDS in March 1987.

    I have a good friend who was at the epicenter of the early AIDS epidemic in SF – I was personally aware of it from a distance at that time. He is the only survivor among the people he was friends with. He attended over 50 funerals for good friends in their twenties – he intentionally stopped couting in the mid-40s. ALL of them are dead. Every one of his friends. Most of those funerals were before March 1987 – they were people dying while waiting for any therapeutic, anything at all. You ratfucks trying to rewrite this history for your unfathomable denialist myth-making purposes can’t simply dismiss this. It is known, documented history – here is one review:

    http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb-03-01-04
    The rate of long-term survival after an initial AIDS diagnosis has been very low. Some persons, nearly all with a diagnosis of Kaposi’s sarcoma (KS), have survived for more than 5 years after diagnosis, but survival rates are significantly lower in patients with an OI or a neoplasm other than KS. Studies conducted early in the epidemic on persons diagnosed before 1986 showed a median survival time past an initial AIDS diagnosis of 10 to 13 months. An early study of the first 505 AIDS patients in San Francisco captured all reported cases from a city where surveillance was thought to be excellent (estimated at the time by the San Francisco Department of Health as 94% complete)(25). Mortality follow-up was obtained for 98% of these patients, and there was little possibility of bias from loss of follow-up. Of these 505 patients, 99% were homosexual or bisexual males. Overall median survival was 11 months. For patients with OIs, median survival was 9 months. Median survival after an initial KS diagnosis was 16 months. Survival time was significantly shorter for later KS cases, but no difference over time was seen in survival after OIs.

    The San Francisco study provides a good estimate of survival among homosexual men prior to the advent of effective therapies for HIV infection and prophylaxis for OIs. The homogeneity of the population in the San Francisco study might raise doubts that its results can be extrapolated to other risk groups, but other survival studies conducted in the same time period that included other HIV transmission groups largely confirm the San Francisco estimates. An analysis of U.S. hemophilia cases showed a median survival of 11.7 months.(26) All cases in Australia diagnosed before July 1987 had a median survival of 10.4 months.(27) A study from Barcelona, Spain, showed a median survival of 12.7 months (including cases diagnosed in 1986 and 1987) and a longer survival in IDUs than in other risk groups.(28)

    Fewer data are available concerning time from a CD4 lymphocyte count of 200/µl to death. An analysis of time from a CD4 lymphocyte count of 200/µl to death among two cohorts of homosexual men in San Francisco found the median survival time was 38 months and had increased about 12 months over the median time in the period from 1983 to 1986.(24) Comparable estimates were reported from the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study; 53% of subjects with a CD4 count in the range 101 to 200 cells/µl survived 30 months in the period from 1985 to 1988 and 71% in the period from 1989 to 1993.(29)
    ——–

    Introduction of AZT, prophylaxis for PCP and other OIs, and experience with treatment regimes, caused slight increases in survival times, up to about 2 years or so, until the introduction of combination therapies in 1996, at which time survival time became rapidly longer.

    My friend was near-death in 1987. AZT saved his life, then slowly began losing its effectiveness. He was near death again in 1997, and combination therapy saved his life a second time.
    And he is the only survivor from among his circle of friends, having attended dozens of funerals of strong young men from the time before AZT.
    He continued to attend funerals of acquaintainces into the early ’00s, mostly people who went off therapeutics, then got sick and died. By that time, I was close enough to that community that I was attending those funerals as well.

    And I cant begin to say how much I despise you rat fucks bent on convincing people to drop their therapeutics – I’ve seen too many people do that, then die as a result.

  256. #257 Braganza
    October 16, 2007

    Dear Gene,

    What about the Miao paper about the possibility of having anti-retroviral with simultaneous protection of the mitochondria,

    http://molpharm.aspetjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/mol.105.015412v1.

    ————————

    Anyway, Prof. Moore comment on botanicals is just a way to manifest that he doesnot believe that botanical-based treatments can be superior or equal to HAART. I assume he knows that many drugs are nature derived, and any major pharmaceutical company has a natural product department.

    ————————-

  257. #258 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    Roy Hinkley, Thanks for bringing up integrase!

    You may be aware of it’s “existence” as an endogenous gene within all animals next to the LTR gag-pol complex.

    It is indeed documented ancient as part of the LTR retroviral-like elements branch of the transposon “tree” and, as you know, part of the mechanism the cell uses to install “pseudogenes” within chromatin for possible later use in an evolutionary crisis.

    Perhaps the fine details of its activity are worthy of Dr Maniotis’ attention? And since it presented an opportunity for you to present your knowledge on the subject – but it’s like my God here we are at Aetiology having a close brush with something like professional collegiality with denialists it’s time for the hysteria alarm …

  258. #259 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    Braganza, the link didn’t work.

  259. #260 Adele
    October 16, 2007

    Running away.

    Running away is the deniosaur thing to do. Run away from facts and evidence. When they show your wrong change the subject to James Joyce and write some poetry.

    That’s what ELISA did on about the tenth thing we gave him where Duesberg lied in reviews. He admitted he never read the stuff and said Duesberg was “cheeky” and ran away Brave Sir Elisa.

    And like “Pope” who is elisa I guess but maybe not who cares they all sound the same. Three denialists with stuff I think is homophobe, sources and everything and all he says is a deniosite talks about hearsay in a story in a satire magazine by a denialist so supposedly Bob gallo said a bad word one time.

    What if its true I doubt it but what if pope has a videotape of it, that makes it ok for Bauer saying gay is “aberration or illness”? That’s logic for Eugene!

    I’m not scared of people like spreen who call me a c—. Bad word, mean, everyone says it some time. I’m scared of people who write books and say being a woman is bad and isn’t a good lifestyle and women should get silenced and no civil rights. That’s scary for me not a bad word. Or when they say that about gay people. Like HEnry Bauer and then no one like pope or anyone says anything about it. They would like GW or Ron Paul if he said good things about denialism Oh wait they probably do any way.

  260. #261 apy
    October 16, 2007

    Isn’t Brave Sir John’s behaviour evidence enough that he takes denialists seriously?

    It is arguable that his behavior is evidence that he does not take you seriously but rather the effect of your actions.

  261. #262 Braganza
    October 16, 2007

    Gene,

    If it is not HIV, can you tell me what is measured by PCR?

    I have been in a detailed discussion with Adele and Franklin and they have explained that there is no possibity of major error once the apparatus has been calibrated.

    If it give a positive value in an HIV- person, the error is in the technician.

    ——————-
    For the Miao paper you need to remove the dot.

    http://molpharm.aspetjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/mol.105.015412v1

    Molecular Pharmacology Fast Forward
    First published on September 1, 2005; DOI: 10.1124/mol.105.015412

    Sulfated polymannuroguluronate (SPMG), a novel anti-acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) drug candidate, inhibits T cell apoptosis via combating oxidative damage of mitochondria
    Benchun Miao 1, Jing Li 1, Xueyan Fu 2, Li Gan 1, Xianliang Xin 1, Meiyu Geng 1*

    ———————————

    There is also Prof. Foster ortomolecular theory, of equilibrating the body with the virus, using selenium, cysteine, tryptophan and glutathione, which he says allow HIV+ to stop the dysfunction of the immune system.

    This treatment if it works also dont damage the mitochondria.
    ——————————

    There is also the LDN approach that Noreen has been using.

    —————-
    The Gratz paper that I provided a translation in a previous post.

    ——————————-

    Plenty of solutions to control HIV and dont damage the mitochondria.

  262. #263 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    Dear Lee,

    Anecdotes and your emotional outbursts don’t prove anything.

    I say if an individual believes AZT is lifesaving, if there’s an antifungal or other pronounced effect that practicing physicians have unveiled in cases of full-blown AIDS, fine, it’s his right to take the stuff. It should be obvious that risks are worth taking when one is seriously ill and homeopathy etc. may not be appropriate for that “anomalous” OI taking over your insides.

    But the rapid deaths, many of them in the pre-AZT era were very likely due to the poppers-sulfonamide synergism which is documented at denialist web sites. Can you suspend your hate for a few minutes to check this out?

    In other words, I’m pushing back to that unhappy subject of iatrogenic medicine (which Dr Kremer understands quite well, Elkie darling): the number of deaths here are real and very well documented to be far in excess of the AIDS epidemic.

  263. #264 trrll
    October 16, 2007

    Ah Chris, it’s exhilirating to engage your wonderful logic again. Isn’t Brave Sir John’s behaviour evidence enough that he takes denialists seriously?

    How could anybody fail to take the existence of HIV denialism seriously? Just in terms of the potential for producing human misery, HIV denialism is more malign than Holocaust denialism, 9/11 denialism, and certainly evolution denialism (although global warming denialism might perhaps surpass it).

    Of course, that is a far, far different thing from taking the ludicrous arguments of the denialists seriously.

    It does not surprise me that denialists would love a debate format, where rhetoric routinely wins over facts. A time-limited debate with no peer review or fact checking is made to order for typical denialist strategies of cherry-picking, selective quoting, goalpost-moving, etc.–strategies that don’t fare so well in a peer-reviewed journal or even a court of law.

    But scientific debate is carried out in the pages of scientific journals. And the problem for denialists is that to get a hearing by a good journal, you have to bring something to the table in terms of original research; merely nitpicking other people’s studies does not rate.

    By the way, the strategy of calling the other guy names to try to provoke him into fighting you on your own terms may have worked for you on the schoolyard, but most people get wise to this sort of trick around age 15 or so.

  264. #265 Adele
    October 16, 2007

    Braganza you are new here so you don’t know about Gene he is “Eugene Semon” maybe not his real name who comes to here every two months and says HIV doesn’t exist. Same thing Michael was saying last week were you have 10 000 nucleotides in HIV but they say it’s not a real virus it comes from your own DNA when your stressed out. You get like 5 nucleotides from a cell and a little bit floating in the bloodstream and some more coming out of a dead cell and that same thing hundreds and hundreds of times over sticking together until you have HIV genome. Or maybe its RNA not DNA or some of both Gene doesn’t really care its all the same to him. Nice thing is, all random stuff right but it lines up every time every infected person to look like HIV. Also there’s no explanation for how it happenes you have to believe.

    Gene used to tell people he was a grad student working for Matthias Rath or Peter Duesberg or someone of those people so people would listen to him but he was lying like Chris Noble told us before.

    His new thing is iatrogenic medicine like Dr. P. Kaufman there’s 100 000 or is it 500 000 or a million people get killed, MURDERED I TELL YOU by doctors in United States this year! Don’t go to a hospital I tell you!

    Poor guy it will chear him up you want to argue with him.

  265. #266 cooler
    October 16, 2007

    you guys are really bad news, if heckler came out with Deusberg or shyh lo and said mycoplasmas or drugs were the cause of aids you guys would mindlessly parrot that.

    All funding would go towards this hypothesis, no study would be allowed to question this hypothesis, and anyone who dared question it would be called a woo. the editors of journals heavily brainwashed by this propaganda wouldnt allow dissenters like Gallo to publish.

    You guys are responsible for my sisters illness. Shyh ching lo from the Army inoculated chimps, mice, monkeys , and embyros and they all sickened/deformed/ died, with mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans, he didnt find it in over a hundered healthy controls. Unlike hpv hep c hiv that doesnt do zilch in most every animal. refrences in lonliness thread.

    Thanks noble, tara etc for creating an epidemic of complex multi organic symptom illnesses misdiagnosed as CFS/RA etc. Thanks for helping almost murder my sister, good work. Read project day lily to find out how the people in the biological weapons program are laughing their asses off on how dumb scientists are to miss this, and focus on HPV with a 30 year window periods and no animal models, just bc merck said it had to be that way.
    true story slightly fictionilized, no wonder armed agents from the DOD visted the nicolsons and threatened them when they were doing mfi reasearch, he was one of the few scienitists that figured it out and werent as dumb as you guys are.

  266. #267 carter
    October 16, 2007

    Lee’s above long winded rhetoric about death, dying an funerals goes to demonstrate an unknowing what actually causes illness. I bet he cannot answer why there are far more positives living and thriving throughout the last 23 years who never gave into the pressures of taking AZT mono or later HAART. He negates any and all possibilities the deaths be from fear, depression, drug abuse, or many other oxidative stress issues that could be the real issue. Gay men have been persuaded and programmed to ignore and/or de-value both psychogenic disease and the intense distress of a HIV diagnosis as to give way to the Team Virus theory and subsequent toxic poisoning with AZT monotherapy (beginning years) and the watered down AZT/HAART regimens so eagerly prescribed nowadays..

  267. #268 Lee
    October 16, 2007

    Mr Natural,

    Hemophiliacs diagnosed before March 1987 had a median survival of 11 months. That wasn’t from poppers.

    There is some older weak suggestive evidence of a possible link between popper use and incidence of KS in those already diagnosed with HIV/ADS. There are also studies showing a correlation between popper use and HIV infection – but there is also a correlation between popper use and receptive anal sex, and controlling for that shows that receptive anal sex is the risk factor.

    Amyl Nitrate has been around for a century or so now. A lot of people have used a lot of poppers – but the ones dying of AIDS, then and now, are the ones who are infected with HIV.

    Your crap kills people, Mr. Natural. I don’t hate you – I can understand the fear and mythmaking imperative that leads people to where you are – but I despise you for what you are doing and the consequences of those actions. People peddling your kind of crap killed friends of mine by convincing them that they could drop the cocktails, and the side effects of the cocktails, without risking their lives. They were wrong – and you are wrong – and it is other people paying the price with their lives.

  268. #269 carter
    October 16, 2007

    Furthermore, I went to far too many a funeral myself as far back as 87′ … it wasn’t until years later I started asking questions about why they really died… because at the very same time those other friends of mine who refused AZT and other drugs and whom stopped destroying themselves with recreational drugs are the ones I enjoy having lunch with nowadays. Go figure?

  269. #270 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    “when Gallo was nobody special”

    You just make it up as you go along, eh terrel?

    Duesberg’s outstanding investigator grant came well after Gallo’s work on HTLV and his authoritative papers go back into the early 70′s.

    Of particular note is the biochemical classification of
    DNA polymerases with David Baltimore circa 1976.

    And yes, what kind of technician posing as scientist continues to believe in cancer viruses and “HIV” vaccines after another “authority” stated, “We can now say that infectious viruses that cause many human diseases do not cause most human cancer. Therefore, we cannot hope to develop a vaccine against a virus that prevents most human cancer … We do not have the fundamental knowledge to prevent or cure most human cancer”. (Howard Temin, 1977, cited by Ralph Moss, The Cancer Industry)

    BTW, this book is an excellent introduction to the debate cowardly John Moore is avoiding on the related subject of cancer and alternative medicine. His post above with sweeping negative statements on alternative medicine is a textbook case of argument from authority. Nothing but blowing smoke.

  270. #271 Lee
    October 16, 2007

    in 1981, 6 years before AZT, the first cases of PCP and KS were seen among young homosexual men in SF, LA and NY. Later that year, there were reports of KS and PCP among injecting drug users. In 1982, cases of PCP, SK and other opportunistic infections started being reported in heterosexual Haitians living in the US. Within weeks, cases were seen in hemophiliacs and among blood transfusion recipients, the first a baby.

    All these cases, in disparate populations with disparate other risk factors, shared a profound immunodeficiency, later (but before AZT) associated in each of these groups with suppression of CD4-positive T-Helper lymphocytes. In all of these disparate classes of risk groups, once HIV was identified, risk of developing AIDS was highly correlated with HIV infection. In all of these groups, presentation of opportunistic infections was rapidly followed by death, within months in the overwhelming majority of cases.

    Early epidemiology showed that in all these groups, infection was very strongly correlated with exposure to semen or blood/blood products.
    All of the associated possible risk factors – poppers, drug use, anal exposure to semen, and so on, had been preexisting in each of those populations for a very long time. But AIDS popped up in these disparate populations in the same 2-year period, linked by patterns of transmission, and later after identification, by infection with HIV.

    This is the early pre-AZT US history of AIDS. You fucks can lie all you want, but it doesn’t make this history go away.

  271. #272 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    Wow, I’ve finally stirred up the hive and here comes the wasp swarm.

    Yes, terrel, of course there’s nothing in peer reviewed journals to back up what I say. That JAMA/John Hopkins Starfield study is more denialist propaganda. All that stuff about retroviruses, of course the journals show how a killer virus emerges from this gene pool. And Holocaust denialism and schoolyard analogies, how scientific a rebuttal …

    Now go back to sleep, I’m leaving the hive alone for now …

    And dearest Adele, a wasp whose sting consists primarily in putting the strangest of words into my mouth, what else can I say but you go girl, I hope this helps your career … Paul Kaufman??!! More denialist lies: I never heard of him …

    And to any other wasps swarming around up there, it’s time for me to run away …

  272. #273 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    Oops!

    Brazanga, i just realized that you’re that “middle guy”. Please look it up (my answer re PCR) at NAR where the Parenzee Case was threaded, and if you still have a question, I’ll be happy to answer.

  273. #274 Mr. Natural
    October 16, 2007

    And “suppression of CD4-positive T-Helper lymphocytes” can’t be caused by different things in disparate groups?

    Have Hatians ever been shown to have a sustained epidemic of KS and PCP?

  274. #275 Adele
    October 16, 2007

    cooler says

    You guys are responsible for my sisters illness.

    I though mycoplasma was responsible for your illness cooler. I mean your sisters illness lol google it youtube it. And then Dr. Lo must of been responsible because he was running the secret prison trials in Huntsville Texas of it for the secret day lily bioweapons project. That’s what people told the Nicoloson’s who found out and the armed defence pathologist comando team tried to kill them right? Wow wacko city.

    Pope where are you are you going to tell us about those two trials where EJs slides got used by Maggiore’s goulish death dealers for negative evidence? Did you make it up or someone else made it up?

  275. #276 Lee
    October 16, 2007

    Its AZT!!!!

    What about before AZT?
    Its Poppers!!!

    What about groups that didn’t use poppers?

    Its drug use!!!

    What about hemophiliacs and transfusion recipients and haitians and…

    Its some unknown “different things in disparate groups” that just happens to cause identical symptomology and just happens to show up simultaneously in groups that share as risk factors semen/blood exposure and HIV infection.

    But it isn’t HIV It can’t be, because, well…

    its AZT!!!

    What about before AZT?
    Its Poppers!!!

    What about groups that didn’t use poppers?

    Its drug use!!!

    What about…

    rinse, repeat.

  276. #277 Andrew Maniotis
    October 16, 2007

    Dear all,

    Several clear examples of Peter Duesberg’s homophobia:

    “In conclusion, the tumor risk of the statistically most relevant group of retovirus infections, namely the latent natural infections with antivial immunity, is very low. It averages less that 0.1% in different species, as it is less than 1% in domestic chickens, undetectably low in wild mice, 0.04% in domestic cats on an annual basis, 0.01 to 0.4% in cattle, and 0.06% in humans. Thus the virus is not sufficient to cause cancer.”

    “Because of the nearly complete correlation between AIDS and immunity against the virus, the virus is generally assumed to be the cause of AIDS (13, 27). Accordingly, detection of antiviral antibody, rather than virus, is now most frequently used to diagnose AIDS and those at risk for AIDS (27, 217-224). This is paradoxical, since serum antibody from AIDS patients neutralizes AIDS virus (225-227) and since antiviral immunity or vaccination typically protects against viral disease. It is even more paradoxical that a low antibody titer is equated with a low risk for AIDS (228, 229).”

    “Unlike all other retroviruses, AIDS viruses are thought to be direct pathogens that kill their host cells, namely T-lymphocytes (13, 27), and possibly cells of the brain (230, 255). This view is compatible with the phenotype of AIDS, the hallmark of which is a defect in T-cells (13, 27, 215), and with experimental evidence that many but not all viral isolates induce cytopathic fusion of T-lymphocytes under certain conditions in vitro (Section D).”

    “In these virus-infected groups the annual incidence of AIDS was found to average 0.3% (224) and to reach peak values of 2 to 5% (218, 223, 233). However even in these groups there are many more asymptomatic than symptomatic virus carriers.”

    “Other infected groups appear to be at no risk for AIDS. In Haiti and in certain countries in Africa antibody-positive individuals range from 4 to 20% of the population, whereas the incidence of AIDS is estimated at less than 0.01% (223, 229, 234). Several reports describe large samples of children from Africa who were 20 (228) to 60% (221) antibody positive and of female prostitutes who were 66 to 80% antibody positive (221, 235), yet none of these had AIDS. Among male homosexuals and hemophiliacs of Hungary about 5% are AIDS virus positive, yet no symptoms of AIDS were recorded (161). Among native male and female Indians of Venezuela 3.3 to 13.3% have antiviral immunity, but none have symptoms of AIDS (236). Since these Indians are totally isolated from the rest of the country, in which only one hemophiliac was reported to be virus positive (236), the asymptomatic nature of their infections is not likely to be a consequence of a recent introduction of the virus into their population. Thus it is not probable that these infections will produce AIDS after the average latent period of 5 years (Section B).”

    “The eclipse period of AIDS virus replication in cell culture is on the order of several days, very much like that of other retroviruses (238). In humans virus infection of a sufficient number of cells to elicit an antibody response appears to take less than 4 to 7 weeks. This estimate is based on an accidental needle-stick infection of a nurse, who developed antibody 7 weeks later (239), and on reports describing 12 (240) and 1 (232) cases of male homosexuals who developed antibody 1 to 8 weeks after infection. During this period a mononucleosis-like illness associated with transient lymphoadenopathy was observed. In contrast to AIDS (see below), this illness appeared 1 to 8 weeks after infection and lasted only 1 to 2 weeks until antiviral immunity was established. The same early mononucleosis-like disease, associated with lymphocyte hyperplasia, was observed by others in primary AIDS virus infections (234). This is reminiscent of the direct, early pathogenic effects observed in animals infected with retroviruses prior to the onset of antiviral immunity (Part I, Section B).”

    “By contrast the lag between infection and the appearance of AIDS is estimated from transfusion-associated AIDS to be 2 to 7 years in adults (220, 223, 241, 242) and 1 to 2 years in children from infected mothers (220, 223). The most likely mean latent period was estimated to be 5 years in adults (220, 223). Unexpectedly, most of the AIDS virus-positive blood donors identified in transfusion-associated AIDS transmission did not have AIDS when they donated blood and were reported to be in good health 6 years after the donation (220). Likewise there is evidence that individuals shown to be antibody positive since 1972 have not developed AIDS (228). Further 16 mothers of babies with AIDS did not have AIDS at the time of delivery but three of them developed AIDS years later (276). This indicates that the latent period may be longer than 5 years or that AIDS is not an obligatory consequence of infection.”

    Dear Hinkley,

    Regarding the “HIV integrase fascination of mine, check out the papers:

    Maniotis, A., Bojanowski, K., Ingber, D. Mechanical continuity and reversible chromosome disassembly within intact genomes removed from living cells. J. Cellular Biochem. Vol 65: 114-130, 1997.

    Bojanowski, K., Maniotis, A., Ingber, D. DNA toposiomerase ll can control chromatin topology and drive chromosome condensation without enzymatically modifying DNA. J. Cellular Biochem. Vol. 69:127-142, 1998.

    If not self-explanatory as a control for minor-groove binding activity of topoisomerase II, I can’t really help you further unless you come and take a course with me or work on the project yourself for awhile. There is an extra lab bench available for you and I invite you anytime.

    Cheers,

    Andy

  277. #278 Adele
    October 16, 2007

    Wow that was like the shortest paste the “Assitant Research Professor” ever did!! Assitant!

  278. #279 Dale
    October 16, 2007

    Andy writes Several clear examples of Peter Duesberg’s homophobia:

    followed by statements by Duesberg that do not address what causes AIDS in homosexuals.

    This should be obvious to you Andy but in case it isn’t … the homophobic overtones in Peter Duesberg’s statements come, not from his unsubstantiated opinion as to why HIV ‘can’t ‘ cause AIDS, but from his opinion as to what does cause AIDS in one particular high risk group; namely gays.

  279. #280 Roy Hinkley
    October 16, 2007

    Dr. Maniotis,

    That you used HIV integrase as a control for minor groove binding being the characteristic of Topo II that provides its chromosome reconstituting effects in your experiments is self-explanatory (or at least its iexplained in your paper).

    What is not clear, and to me makes no sense, is that you seem to believe that lack of chromosome reconstituting ability by HIV integrase tells you something about HIV.

    What can you possibly conclude? That HIV integrase is not likely to be involved in chromosme condensation, architechture, nuclear location,…

    This comes as a shock to whom? And, is likely true of every other viral integrase, and therefore proves just as much about the existence of other viruses as it does about HIV.

    Nothing.

  280. #281 Lee
    October 16, 2007

    Maniotis quote Deusberg:
    “In Haiti and in certain countries in Africa antibody-positive individuals range from 4 to 20% of the population, whereas the incidence of AIDS is estimated at less than 0.01% (223, 229, 234). Several reports describe large samples of children from Africa who were 20 (228) to 60% (221) antibody positive and of female prostitutes who were 66 to 80% antibody positive (221, 235), yet none of these had AIDS.”

    You must be aware that the life expectancy of untreated people who first present with AIDS symptoms, is significantly less than a year. And the incubation period between infection and presentation with AIDS symptoms can be several years. Therefore, one would expect that the percentage of living people with AIDS would be small, even with a lot of HIV-infected people.

    Why don’t you (or Deusberg) tell us the number of people who have died from AIDS, and that value as percentage of HIV-infected population, in those places?

  281. #282 Chris Noble
    October 16, 2007

    The Toni Gradl investigation to which you linked is certainly interesting but it is difficult to evaluate without further information. The study has not been peer-reviewed, and while that bothers me, I am even more concerned with the apparent absence of good experimental design.

    The question I ask is why do we read it on a website registered to Michael Leitner, a well known HIV denialist rather than in a peer-reviewed journal. This is not reason in itself to dismiss the information but it does make me highly skeptical.

    The paper gives no details about antiretroviral use, there is no control group. Where was the study conducted? Toni Gradl does not appear to have any university affiliations. Sabina Maurer GmbH appears to be a small company in Bavaria. Where do they get their patients from?

    None of this rules out the possibility that a couple of people in Bavaria found the cure for AIDS but excuse me if I am somewhat skeptical.

  282. #283 Chris Noble
    October 16, 2007

    Pope wrote:

    You have concluded that the reason why the “pandemic” has confined itself largely to homosexuals (and Africans) is that the pathogen is spread via their peculiar sexual practices. In contrast, Duesberg has never claimed that gay or African sexual practices explains the epidemiology of AIDS.

    Duesberg’s views are given in this article.
    Immunosuppressive Behavior, Not HIV, May Be the Cause of AIDS

    Procedures traumatic to the body can play a major role in weakening the immune system. Almost exclusive to the homosexual community is the practice of fisting, which like anal intercourse is often damaging to the rectum. This damage provides access for many infectious agents into the bloodstream.

    Both the AIDS diseases and the risk factors causing them have increased before and during the same period that AIDS has been officially defined. Although homosexuality is older than recorded history, the “gay liberation” movement in 1969 began a wave of increasing activity by many homosexuals. Bath houses were opened in major cities, where both sexual promiscuity and drug use exploded. The number of sexual contacts per individual jumped to hundreds or thousands over only a few years, and the diseases discussed above exploded in frequency a the same time. Chronic disease epidemics actually became the medical hallmark of homosexuals in New York and San Francisco. The practice of fisting appears to have begun in the early 1970′s, along with the use of nitrite inhalants.

    Instead the risk hypothesis suggests that AIDS diseases can be attributed to the explosion in drug use and multiple infections associated with sexual promiscuity among certain sectors of the population. Hemophilia is a separate risk factor.

    Duesberg clearly writes that sexual promiscuity and “peculiar” sexual practises such as fisting in addition to drug use were risk factors for AIDS.

  283. #284 Michael
    October 16, 2007

    Hey Lee. Go fuck your own self!

    You said: “Why don’t you (or Deusberg) tell us the number of people who have died from AIDS.”

    Well, Lee, the fact is that NOBODY EVER DIED FROM AIDS. Get that fool? NOBODY EVER DIED OF AIDS! AIDS is a definition and a syndrome, NOT A CAUSE OF DEATH. People die from actual diseases and from actual bodily failures. Not from AIDS, Lee!

    But you, Lee, have AIDS of the brain. You have a strange and twisted victim mentallity with its inability to understand how depression, panic, fear, drug addiction, antibiotics overuse, factor 8, poverty, and hopelessness, and the shaming and guilting and rejection of gays beginning in the 70′s with Anita Bryant and the so called Moral Majority that caused immune suppression, which was then topped off with the most toxic of drugs. I know, Lee, cause I lived in the gay community for 30 years. I saw it all come down. I saw as the gay population was taken over with fear, and shame and guilt and depression and panic. I watched as many wonderful people became self destructive drug or sex addicts or alcoholics or suicidal over it all.

    You, Lee, are also failing to recognise that LIVER FAILURE has been the leading cause of death in HIV positive Americans since the inception of HAART drugs.

    Now taking these drugs may help a lot of people stay out of immune destroying states of mind such as total panicked fear of death or states of mind of hopelessness that were prevalent in the 80s and early 90′s, but that still does not mean that a simple sugar pill would not do the same and be far less destructive! Not ONE of the drugs you tout have EVER BEEN TESTED for placebo effects! NOT EVEN ONE!

    You HIV researchers and pushers really do need to get a life, and a new cause to push and a reason for your existence, other than continuing to scare people into immune suppressing states of mind.

    How bout this, cause its true, its current, its in todays JAMA:

    More death is currently attributed to Antibiotic resistant staph than is attributed to AIDS in the US.

    But I doubt that will happen as there is no money in staph, so I am sure you will all just ignore it and keep on singing about AIDS.

    And it is doubtful you good-for-nuthin’ HIV/AIDS research dogs can even learn any new tricks anyway. You just keep singing the same old tired, broken, twisted song: “AIDS, AIDS, we are all gonna die from AIDS. Give us more funding cause the sky is falling, AIDS here, AIDS there, AIDS everywhere! AIDS, AIDS, AIDS! AAAAGGGHHHHHH!”

  284. #285 Chris Noble
    October 16, 2007

    Hey Lee. Go fuck your own self!

    For somebody who holds his own personal experience to be superior to science you are strangely dismissive of other people’s experiences.

    Well, Lee, the fact is that NOBODY EVER DIED FROM AIDS.

    And you get offended when people call you a Denialist!

  285. #286 Michael
    October 16, 2007

    Chris wrote:

    Duesberg clearly writes that sexual promiscuity and “peculiar” sexual practises such as fisting in addition to drug use were risk factors for AIDS.

    Chris, please tell us…. Is the tearing of the walls of the intestine that is inherent in “fisting” healthy for the immune system or for the blood stream?

    Tell me Chris. I am a gay man. Please tell me if fisting contributes to a healthy immune system or is it patently unhealthy for shit to enter the blood stream through tears in the walls of the intestine.

    And also, Chris, please tell me if using a lot of antibiotics is healthy for an immune system, as antibiotics usage increases with every increase in STD’s that someone who is sexually promiscuous is affected by.

    Chris, IS FISTING AND ANTIBIOTICS USAGE HEALTHY FOR ONE’S IMMUNE SYSTEM? Or do you agree with Dr. Duesberg that these factors that are inherent in some gay mens promiscuous lifestyles can precipitate high degrees of immune system stress?

    And Chris, in case you think that fisting is healthy, I would like to be the first to FIST YOU, then pry you open with my one foot up your ass, and the other in your mouth.

    Do let me know when you are ready to begin.

  286. #287 cooler
    October 16, 2007

    adele, just shutup and get a life, you’d probably deny the tuskegee experiment while it happened, since you and noble are 2 miserable losers that nobody else wants, why dont you two pigs make out? lol losers

  287. #288 Chris Noble
    October 16, 2007

    Chris, please tell us…. Is the tearing of the walls of the intestine that is inherent in “fisting” healthy for the immune system or for the blood stream?

    I don’t think it is healthy at all. It would increase the risk of infections including HIV.

    I seriously doubt that a significant fraction let alone the majority of homosexuals with AIDS engaged in fisting.

    The point was that in contradiction to Pope’s claim Duesberg has identified “peculiar” sexual practises that he believes explain the epidemiology of AIDS.

    You have accused me and every one else that accepts the evidence that HIV causes AIDS of being homophobic. Why don’t you think that Duesberg with his interest in fisting is homophobic?

  288. #289 Michael
    October 16, 2007

    Adele, stay away from Chris.

    Opposites attract. Go for Cooler.

    Chris is all mine. I love him, I need him, and I can’t live without him and his promotion of HIV and AIDS meds. Neither Chris nor I would know what to do without each other now that we fill each others every moment of loneliness with our neverending jolly and otherwise emotionally charged discussions of death and disease.

  289. #290 Michael
    October 16, 2007

    Why don’t you think that Duesberg with his interest in fisting is homophobic?

    Because, my love, I think he made a very valid and truthful point. Don’t you? What could possibly be homophobic about the truth that fisting, constant stds, or drug abuse can be particularly unhealthy for ones immune system?

    Undoubtedly the re-affirming of such truths can only be of great benefit in steering some people to more careful or more healthful expressions of enjoying their own sexuality.

    Duesberg has undoubtedly saved many gay mens lives by steering them toward more healthy choices than fisting, drug addiction, and overt promiscuity during a time of extreme emotional distress and depression in the gay community, where such unhealthful choices and habits can easily hold sway or go to extreme.

  290. #291 Lee
    October 16, 2007

    now this is a new one: AIDS is caused by Anita Bryant.

    “You have a strange and twisted victim mentallity with its inability to understand how depression, panic, fear, drug addiction, antibiotics overuse, factor 8, poverty, and hopelessness, and the shaming and guilting and rejection of gays beginning in the 70′s with Anita Bryant and the so called Moral Majority that caused immune suppression, which was then topped off with the most toxic of drugs.”

    Because God knows no gay man was ever guilted or shamed or rejected before Anita Bryant in the 70s.

    So, how did Anita Bryant and guilt, shame, and rejection kill all those hemophiliacs and transfusion recipients, including babies, with the same syndrome, before we even knew what the virus was and before AZT was ever heard of?

    BTW, I’m not an “HIV researcher or pusher.”

    “And Chris, in case you think that fisting is healthy, I would like to be the first to FIST YOU, then pry you open with my one foot up your ass, and the other in your mouth.”
    Michael, get some help. You’re acting borderline psychopathic here.

  291. #292 Chris Noble
    October 16, 2007

    Because, my love, I think he made a very valid and truthful point. Don’t you? What could possibly be homophobic about the truth that fisting, constant stds, or drug abuse can be particularly unhealthy for ones immune system?

    What could possibly be homophobic about the scientific evidence that HIV causes AIDS?

  292. #293 Michael
    October 16, 2007

    Chris, also you said: I seriously doubt that a significant fraction let alone the majority of homosexuals with AIDS engaged in fisting.

    You are quite correct in this as well. It IS a very small fraction of homosexuals who indulge in fisting. It is also only a very small fraction of homosexuals who have ever come down with any opportunistic infections such as KS or PCP, or any of the other AIDS associated illnesses. It is also only a very very small percent who died of what is called AIDS.

    The vast majority of those who did die, died of “complications of AIDS”, or namely, the liver failure, organ failure, etc, that was purely exacerbated by their AIDS drugs.

    In San Diego, where I live, and where there are well over 150,000 gays, the stats are as follows: 6,741: Number of deaths due to AIDS in San Diego County from 1981 through December 2005.

    The vast vast vast majority of these 6741 “AIDS” deaths, including many now deceased friends, were during the AZT monotherapy years of 87 to 96.

    And this number is not broken down into those who died from the effects of the AIDS drugs such as liver failures, kidney failures, heart failures versus those who died of PCP, etc. This is the total number of all deaths to those who were ever diagnosed as AIDS in San Diego no matter what they died from.

    The greatest majority of these deaths were also those who were treated by the local UCSD AntiViral Research Center, or AVRC, which was begun by Bob Gallo’s former lab worker and illicit consort, Flossie Wong Staal, who moved to the west coast from Maryland NIH headquarters to run the AVRC immediately after Gallo’s wife found out about Bob’ and Flossies illegitamate kid together. Bob’s wife wanted a divorce, so Bob moved Flossie out here 3000 miles away. The AVRC is part of the NIH’s ACTG AIDS drug trials group that is run by the NIH, but all drug studies are paid for by the pharmaceutical companies. A Dr. Douglas Richman ran this place under Flossie Wong Staal, until the Celia Farber article in Harpers. At the time, there were too many people, including Congress wanting to know financial connections of the people running government funded research and their financial connections to all of the drug companies, so he stepped down to work behind the scenes as head of the Center For AIDS Research, CFAR, which, by the way, still oversees the AVRC. His connections to such pharmaceutical companies are quite vast. I guess his last name is “RICHMAN” for good reason, as he has been on the payroll of EVERY HIV drug manufacturer. He is most famous as one of the original Burroughs Welcome team members and ran one of the original AZT four month trials here in San Diego. He was highly criticised for unblinded trials, sloppy records, and for having lots and lots of stock in Burroughs Welcome Pharmaceuticals. He is also famous for his theory of “HIV drug resistance” to explain why the drugs often do not work and why some people taking the same drugs come down with OI’s anyway. Naturally, he blames HIV instead of the entire HIV theory or instead of the drugs he is paid to test.

    Now, ain’t AIDS Inc. just grand? They just come up with excuses for everything, whether they make any sense or not!

    Yes indeed. Dr. Douglas RICHMAN runs that show. As far from the prying eyes of Washington as he can get and still be in the continental US. RICHMAN. Gotta love that name. Or how bout some of the other docs that work there. There is actually a Dr. David LOONEY who runs some of the drug trials, and even a Dr. Specter (as in specter of death) who runs the pediatric and womens studies.

  293. #294 Michael
    October 16, 2007

    “What could possibly be homophobic about the scientific evidence that HIV causes AIDS?

    Quite simple Chris.

    You take a group of depressed, oppressed, stressed, and religiously and governmentally and societally persecuted minority group of homosexuals who has also been programmed by society to believe they are “sinful sinners” and unworthy and lesser than the hetero majority. These people now suffer from their own internalized battles with feelings of what they have been programmed to believe is sin, and they battle with shame and guilt, with its associated need to be banished or punished, and often battle depression and hopelessness as they cannot change nor can they accept their own inner sexual likes and dislikes.

    Every human has an inner need to be accepted and to be loved and to see themselves as valued and valuable. That even includes you, Chris.

    You also take a group of white heterosexual virologists who have been societally programmed for their entire lives to also believe the prevailing societal belief that gays are unworthy and lesser and to be despised, and you put this preprogrammed and hostile group to finding why a small number of members of the group that is the object of their hostility, namely the societally disparaged group of homosexuals are getting deathly ill. You send in this team of hetero elite virologists, who are all just as susceptible to being programmed with derision toward homosexuals, and who have all heard and laughed at and agreed with vast numbers of “f@g” jokes deriding homosexuals ever since their ownchildhood. These virologists have also been programmed by their religious affiliations and been preprogrammed by the prevailing beliefs of their society. Then, this group just happens to find a new marker in some of the gays who are most ill. The team then tells the persecuted minority that this marker is contagious and that they are most definitely going to die if they have this marker.

    Panic, stress, and depression and hopelessness in this preprogrammed group of disparaged people will do the rest, and will take them to fulfilling their inner belief by focusing them on death, sickness, and dying.

    But the marker is not just in the sick people of this group. The marker is found in sick people of every repressed, depressed, stressed group. And every time the virologists find the marker, they tell whoever has it that their death is imminent. The fear and the belief in imminent death carried by receiver of the diagnosis will do the rest, and will often fulful the expectations of the observer and the observed. More programming of course, but now the diagnosed people are programmed to get sick or to die or to take some meds for eternity or they will sicken and die. Becomes quite the self fulfulling prophecy for the believers on all sides, don’t you think?

    After all, it is well known to mankind for centuries that whatever one holds in mind has a tendency to manifest.

    Whether any choose or not to look at the larger picture of mental, emotional and societal dynamics involved, their choice does not change the facts.

    What, you asked, is homophobic about the “science” of HIV/AIDS? The belief itself was based in homophobia. What does the word “HOMOPHOBIC” mean? It means FEAR OF HOMOSEXUALS. The supposed and believed fear of homosexuals was behind the now transposed GERMAPHOBIC fear of catching whatever cause of illness the homosexuals may have had.

    Therefore, the societal belief in HIV and AIDS was based in homophobia. Both the projected homophobia of the scientists, and the internalized homophobia of gays themselves.

    Such a belief system also transposes quite well to be put upon any disparaged group, ie: blacks, drug addicts, the poor, the criminal, any who are perceived as the derelicts or outcasts of society. But of course, the foundation and the origination of the paradigm of HIV/AIDS was homophobia and the perceived “sinfullness of homosexuality” itself.

  294. #295 Pope
    October 16, 2007

    Dr. Noble what is your frequently repeated explanation for the fact that the “pandemic” has hit gays so unproportionally hard? Tick the appropriate box(es).

    1. Abstinense
    2. Promiscuity
    3. Vaginal sex
    4. Anal sex
    5. 3&4

    Dr. Noble what is your explanation for why the “pandemic” has hit parts of Africa so hard?

    1. Abstinense
    2. Promiscuity
    3. Vaginal sex
    4. Anal sex
    5. 3&4

    Dr. Noble what is your explanation for why the Pandemic has hardly touched the heterosexual white middle and upper classes?

    1. Abstinense
    2. Promiscuity
    3. Vaginal sex
    4. Anal sex
    5. 3&4

    Dr. Noble we have you on record countless times; are you going to deny now that by your own standards, the standards you hold Duesberg to, you are the homophobe and a racist to boot?

    Mr. Lee, if you are concerned about the frivolous quality of the arguments here, why don’t you set an example and start referencing your own proliferate epidemiological claims?

  295. #296 Chris Noble
    October 16, 2007

    Dr. Noble we have you on record countless times; are you going to deny now that by your own standards, the standards you hold Duesberg to, you are the homophobe and a racist to boot?

    The question was whether Duesberg was homophobic according to the standards that you and other Denialists apply to smear everybody else.

    You wrote:

    You have concluded that the reason why the “pandemic” has confined itself largely to homosexuals (and Africans) is that the pathogen is spread via their peculiar sexual practices. In contrast, Duesberg has never claimed that gay or African sexual practices explains the epidemiology of AIDS.

    I showed that this isn’t true.

  296. #297 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    “After all, it is well known to mankind for centuries that whatever one holds in mind has a tendency to manifest.”

    Well, I’ve been holding in mind that I;d like you to show some hint of logic, Michael, and it ain’t working yet. I think this sentence just abut sums up the depth and power of your argument, all by itself, and needs no response.

  297. #298 Pope
    October 17, 2007

    The question was whether Duesberg was homophobic according to the standards that you and other Denialists apply to smear everybody else.

    No Dr. Chrissie, that was absolutely not the question, but thanks for bringing it up. Just try and do a search on “homophobia” on AIDStruth.org, then do a corresponding one on Duesberg. com. I think you’ll find out very quickly who are the dirty players in this game.

    I showed that this isn’t true

    No you didn’t Dr. Chrissie. You showed that Duesberg has an explanation for the many OIs in certain parts of the gay community, the exact same as yours, not that “promiscuity” is a cause of AIDS.

    Now show ewhere DUesberg says that “fisting is the cause of African AIDS.

  298. #299 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    Lee, yes indeed, such a statement does evidence and sum up great depth and power, but is most likely a pearl cast before swine in your case, as it is a direct counter to your own impotent and shallow, and forceful, not powerful, thoughts and beliefs. And of course, an ego will fully resist such a concept as it prefers to blame all on externals than to allow itself to be examined as the source of its own problems.

    Ahhhh, Lee, I see you cringing in full disbelief as you read this, but that does not change reality Lee. The verification, Lee, that you are indeed trapped by your own ego in an impotent victim mentality is quite easy for you to obtain any time you like, if you can work up the courage to deal with truth. If you do ever work up the courage, Lee, then just go ask anyone who knows you well if they consider you to be a person who constantly blames other people for what you yourself create in your life.

    I promise you that those who know you will fully agree that you do indeed blame others, including them, for all your own creations.

    And my truthful statement is obviously pushing a button in this victim level ego of yours and evidences therefore that it is a great threat to your own ego, for it points out the fact that you yourself, just like the rest of us, are indeed the source and the creator of your own experience, and that you are therefore responsible for the circumstances of your own existence, not others, and not by by any “accident”.

    What a frightening concept that must be for an ego such as yours, Lee, to be at the helm of your own ship of negative thinking!

  299. #300 Chris Noble
    October 17, 2007

    Now show ewhere DUesberg says that “fisting is the cause of African AIDS.

    Whoosh – goalpost move. Duesberg does talk about fisting and promiscuity to explain the epidemiology of AIDS in homosexual males. This is something that you claimed he didn’t do.

    Duesberg doesn’t state that fisting or promiscuity in and of themselves cause AIDS. But then HIV researchers don’t say that promiscuity or anal sex cause AIDS. Sex without HIV doesn’t cause AIDS.

    However, I’ll agree with the point I gather you are trying to make that some of the articles on Aidstruth that deal primarily with speculations about Duesberg’s personality, motives and possible homophobia are not constructive and are in fact counterproductive. If they provide a reason for people like you to avoid dealing with the scientific evidence that is found on the website then they are counterproductive.

  300. #301 Braganza
    October 17, 2007

    Dear Gene,

    Where is the PCR error analysis in your NAR web page ?
    Could you provide some references (day /hr of posting;) so I can locate them quick.

    I doubt that you could prove Franklin/Adele wrong, as I tried to cross check their posts with other info, but I may be wrong and I am very interested in the subject.

    Are you really a colaborator of both Mathias Rath and Duesberg ? There is one very famous, David Rasnick, who is the co-author of a paper that apparently is full of errors and has been analysed in depth in this blog recently. Have you seen the analysis and do you have something to say about that ? This would be more useful for the sake of the truth on HIV AIDS, that to speculate on who is homophobe or not.

    P.S. I am not the middle man of somebody, I represent myself and am interested in AIDS control in poor African countries and in the use of plants and medicinal mushrooms. My background is in organic chemistry.

    I believe that Duesberg is totally wrong on saying that HIV is not cause of AIDS because of a) High correlation between being HIV+ and probability of being sick (in Swaziland babies born HIV+ died far more than the ones HIV-),possibility to decrease CD4 and create Th1/Th2 unbalance with animal models and related retroviruses (plenty of references in the literature), Duesberg paper with Koehnlein, C. and Rasnick, D. (2003) The Chemical Bases of the Various AIDS Epidemics: Recreational Drugs, Anti-viral Chemotherapy etc.. has a large amount of major errors that have been seen in detail here.

  301. #302 Braganza
    October 17, 2007

    Dear Chris,

    You wrote:

    The question I ask is why do we read it on a website registered to Michael Leitner, a well known HIV denialist rather than in a peer-reviewed journal. (..)

    The paper gives no details about antiretroviral use, there is no control group. Where was the study conducted? Toni Gradl does not appear to have any university affiliations. Sabina Maurer GmbH appears to be a small company in Bavaria. Where do they get their patients from?
    —————————————————–

    I dont know how you find the Michael Leitner stuff, and am very curious, as I also try to search info in the web.

    What is your technique/ source to obtain such data?

    I suppose that Sabina Maurer/ Toni Gradl are somewhere connected to Dr. H. Kremer, because they are both germans and as ElkMountainMain suggested they have common approaches, so it is plausible that persons who are buying Kremer book, and want to follow his approach, are Sabina/Gradl patients.

    However they believe that HIV is the cause of AIDS, otherwise why are they measuring the viral load and looking to have zero viral load ?

  302. #303 Pope
    October 17, 2007

    Dr. Noble, one more time: Duesberg mentions “fisting” in passing among a host of other possible causes of immune supression and direct entry of microbes into the blood stream. I have no idea where or how widespread “fisting” is/was, but if you want to call it a homophobic remark, the very least you have to do is show that Duesberg doesn’t have it on good authority that fisting was indeed a frequent practice with the groups he is talking about, or that it is not risky.

    Even so, in NO WISE does Duesberg pretend that fisting OR anal intercourse explain the AIDS epidemic. His hypothesis is “Chemical AIDS” – NOT “Anal Trauma AIDS”

    Duesberg says what is called “AIDS” is mostly a result of a drug-party lifestyle, including poor diets, prophylactic antibiotic overuse etc. – a life-style which was/is popular with a certain subset of gays, but not defining of “gay” as such.

    Sir John et al. have ONLY promiscuity and gay-defining anal sex as an explanation for why gays are
    disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS.

    Finally, if you want to say gays coming down with AIDS has nothing to do with life-style, you have no explanation for why the majority of Western AIDS cases are gay other than the virus by an act of God prefers gays. THAT is TRULY homophobic.

    I agree with you that this gutter level PC smear perpetrated against Duesberg is detracting from the real scientific issues. That is why it is the favourite argument in the arsenal of Brave, Brave Sir John et al. That is what shows even people who can’t spell
    “retrovirus” that they are scientific cowards through and through.

  303. #304 ElkMountainMan
    October 17, 2007

    Braganza,

    you wrote, concerning Kremer/Maurer/Gradl,

    However they believe that HIV is the cause of AIDS, otherwise why are they measuring the viral load and looking to have zero viral load ?

    Kremer and those in his circle believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS and that HIV does not exist. Yet, as you point out, they are quick to use measurements of viral load and CD4 count to establish the putative recovery of their patients.

    The answer to this apparent contradiction is that they believe viral load does measure something important, but not a virus. Other visitors to Tara’s site have mentioned the “reasoning” behind this assumption: to denialists like Kremer and his followers, “poor nutrition and lifestyle” (the last word could also be “habits”) cause AIDS. Not “may be co-factors” or “may contribute to disease progression;” no, according to this particular school of what passes for thought, they “cause” AIDS.

    To sum up this strange fiction of medicine, the combination of poor nutrition and “bad habits” (read, taking drugs, wearing condoms, having multiple sex partners, anal sex, exposure to semen, etc.–the list of “bad habits” depends on which denialist is speaking, and to whom, and is often internally contradictory), cause oxidative stress in the body and result in elevated cell death. The release of cellular nucleic acids from cells in the blood floods the bloodstream with the building blocks for making a unique “molecular signature,” a long RNA, almost ten thousand units long.

    How this RNA is assembled has never been explained by the rethinkers, who usually prefer not to think about this. Using transcriptome data, we could calculate the minimum number of pieces of cellular RNAs that would need to be cleaved precisely (but how?), lined up in a specific order (why and how?), and joined together seamlessly (how?) to produce a HIV genome. The number would be somewhere in the high hundreds or low thousands of pieces. “Improbable” doesn’t come close to describing how unlikely this would be. Yet for the Kremer devotee, this process must happen independently for every RNA genome measured by RT-PCR and for every genome cloned full-length and in every HIV positive person.

    To get around some of these problems, an alternative explanation sees the process happening within stressed cells, not outside, and to DNA, not RNA. In this view, oxidative stress causes almost instantaneous mutation of normal DNA into a transcriptional unit encoding the entire HIV genome, ready to make viral RNA. The sort of thing, in other words, one might expect from an X-Men movie. In science fiction, though, the “mutants” have different mutations, consistent with the largely random nature of mutation. In the real world, the dissident’s random mutations somehow occur at the same places and produce the same easily recognized HIV in millions of people. The same process must occur identically in every one of them and in multiple cells because according to the rethinkers, HIV doesn’t exist, so it can’t be sexually transmitted or transmitted at all.

    Some rethinkers have recognized the problems and tried to improve on the theory, but each ad hoc change just makes the whole more implausible. There is then the issue of why the “molecular signature” can be sucrose-gradient-purified, separated from cellular debris, and yet be shown to associate with unique viral proteins. Also, the issue of why the “molecular signature” resides within a protein shell inside a lipid membrane, a particle with classic complex retroviral morphology, by electron microscopy.

    All of this to avoid admitting that HIV is a retrovirus that infects people.

    Tragically, many sick and distraught people do not have the background to recognize how foolish and dangerous this theory is. Nutrition and good habits alone will not save a person from AIDS. The example of Raphael Lombardo, told so eloquently by the man himself in a letter Duesberg published in his book (while Lombardo remained healthy) is just one of many.

    Dr. Gradl it seems convinced forty people to try an untested plant extract instead of antivirals. (Or were they prescribed HAART, too? We are not told.)

    I would like for Dr. Gradl to be right, a cure for AIDS in plant extract. But Dr. Gradl, I fear, is just another salesman trying to profit from vulnerable patients. He sells a product called “OxyBrain,” touted to increase mental acuity and keep one awake. Also “OxyLove,” said to increase function “in other parts of the body.” Have these products been tested? Are they safe? Do they work?

    I have a long list of questions about Dr. Gradl, who is referred to as a “microbiologist” in news articles and studied at a university for pscyhology in Munich (I couldn’t find what his degree was), and whose previous job was running a waste-water treatment in a small Bavarian town near the Czech border. They include,

    Is Dr. Gradl a medical doctor? If not, why was Dr. Gradl allowed to perform an uncontrolled experiment with humans? If not, why is Dr. Gradl the only “author” on the report at the denialist website?

    Do the regulatory authorities in Germany allow this sort of “trial?”

    Was there any oversight?

    Were the patients counseled about the benefits and risks of taking HAART and offered prescriptions?

    Were the patients monitored for longer than ninety days? What happened to them?

    Michael has been influenced by these ideas, and Andrew Maniotis, who, when writing about Dr. Gallo above, writes about a “molecular signature” rather than a virus. And at least two patients influenced by these ideas died within ninety days in Gradl’s human experiment, patients who may have benefitted from standard medical care. Without more information, I consider these people victims of denial.

  304. #305 Andrew Maniotis
    October 17, 2007

    Lee,

    You asked me a question above, for which I provide the following stats and link to the whole article:

    http://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2007/01/a_global_strate.html

    Note that these stats are given by Africans themselves, and are not trumpted up projections from the WHO or gleened from pre or anti-natal clinics.

    In 2004, the total number of South African deaths (in a country then of 47 million) whose cause was officially listed as “HIV Diseases” was 13,220. That number represented only 2.3% of ALL deaths in South Africa that year, a decrease from 2.6% five years earlier.

    For both 2003 and 2004, “HIV diseases” were officially ranked #21 in the list of leading causes of death for South Africa.

    We have no way of ascertaining from this data exactly how any attending physician, health care worker, or coroner knew for certain that so-called “HIV disease” was the underlying cause of death.

    Meanwhile, in KwaZulu-Natal for 2004, the total number of deaths attributed to “HIV disease” that year was 3044 which corresponded exactly to the same 2.3% of all provincial deaths that were reported five years earlier.

    It is our contention that statistics amassed on “HIV disease” and/or “AIDS” are littered with inconsistencies and absurd projections that invite criticism. For an example of how inflationary figures routinely characterize orthodox HIV and AIDS statistics, one need only consult the latest annual volume by S. Buhlungu, et. al. (eds.), State of the Nation: South Africa 2007 especially the chapter by H. Schneider, et. al., entitled, “The Promise and the Practice of Transformation in South Africa’s Health System” [38].

    That chapter utilizes a table that alleges that for 2000, HIV/AIDS was the #1 cause of death in South Africa, accounting for 30% of all the 410,000 deaths reported in the country, or 123,000 HIV/AIDS deaths.

    Compare that alarmist data with the sober statistics given in mid-2006 by Statistics South Africa, which state that for 2000, HIV diseases numbered 10,321 or 2.5% of all deaths. In other words, even in 2007 Schneider and her associates retrospectively increased the number of HIV/AIDS deaths for 2000 in South Africa by 12 times!

    The data on death rates from “HIV diseases” from 1997 to 2004 in South Africa reveals other interesting anomalies from select provinces:

    1) In 1997 in KwaZulu-Natal Province, “HIV diseases” accounted for 2.2% of all its deaths; in 2004, it was 2.3%.

    2) In 1997 in Mpumalanga Province, “HIV diseases” accounted for 2.3% of all its deaths; in 2004 it was >2.2%.

    3) In 1997 in Limpopo Province, “HIV diseases” accounted for 2.3% of all its deaths; in 2004, it was >2.0%.

    4) In 1997 in Free State Province, “HIV diseases” accounted for 3.9% of all its deaths; in 2004, it was >2.1%.

    5) And even for South Africa as a whole, in 1997 “HIV disease” was said to account for 2.0% of all deaths; in 2004 it had risen to 2.3%, but that was down from 2.6% in 1999.

    It appears that President Mbeki’s skepticism had some merit and was empirically based. This stands in sharp contrast to his critics, whose resort to personal vilification and vicious slurs, revealed the reflexively irrational and vindictive manner whereby HIV/AIDS mainstreamers respond to anyone who dares to challenge their assumptions.

    As an African historian who has worked in various parts of Africa for 35 years, especially Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti, Geshekter had observed an increasing number of Africans who appeared malnourished, or suffered from respiratory illness, or malaria over that period. None of those conditions had anything to do with sexual activities, but reflected the changing nature of African political economies since the late 1970s and its devastation on African lives.

    For instance, when Geshekter visited northern Somalia (the Republic of Somaliland) in June-July 2001, he spoke at length with Dr. Ali Sheikh Ibrahim, a leading physician at the main hospital in the capital city of Hargeisa. Dr. Ali acknowledged that those were the same illnesses and medical problems that primarily afflicted northern Somalis, along with serious dental and gum diseases and mental breakdowns associated with the traumas of civil war violence.

    Similar conclusions to Geshekter’s were advanced by Stuart W. Dwyer, a district surgeon (forensic medical officer) in Grahams-town, South Africa who wrote to the British Medical Journal stating that:

    “As a prison medical officer in South Africa, I partly agree with President Mbeki’s sceptical view of current statistical research into HIV infection and AIDS” [39].

    “In South Africa’s prisons there is a vast overcrowded (often 30 people per cell) population in which homosexuality is widespread and condom use practically non-existent. This is the perfect breeding ground for the rapid spread of HIV” [39].

    “Prisoners with any other illnesses that do not resolve rapidly (within one to two weeks) are also tested for HIV. As a result, a large number of HIV tests are done every week. This prison, which holds 550 inmates and is always full or overfull, has an HIV infection rate of 2-4% and has had only two deaths from AIDS in the seven years I have been working there” [39].

    Sam Mhlongo, M.D., Head of the Department of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care at the Medical University of South Africa, Johannesburg claimed that:

    “Nutritional AIDS dominates the scene in South Africa today as indeed it did during Apartheid. In the middle 1950′s and 1960′s, 50 percent of black children were dead before the age of five. The causes of death were recorded as: pneumonia, high fever, dehydration, and intractable diarrhea due to protein deficiency. Today, these clinical features are called AIDS. Today in South Africa, TB is the leading cause of death and morbidity amongst Africans, but this is called AIDS” [40].

    Dr. Marc Deru, a Belgian physician who has also worked extensively in Africa noted that official census results in Tanzania showed a regular upward curve for the period 1967 to 2002, with a population growth of 49% between 1988 and 2002:

    “There is no drop in the population. For the Kagera region, we see the same upward curve, with 53% growth between 1988 and 2002″ [41].

    “While the experts, with their statistics, would have one believe that there exists an extremely serious HIV/AIDS epidemic [in Africa], no trace of an epidemic is observable in the field. All that can be seen is a very poor, under-nourished population suffering from malaria, endemic immunodeficiency and common illnesses” [41].

    “The so-called ‘HIV’ tests are unspecific; the positive results they may give are misleading and lead to the false belief in the existence of a viral epidemic. A positive test — and this applies especially to Africa — is not a sign of a specific viral infection. These so-called ‘HIV’ tests are deceptive, in that the positive results give the illusion that a precise diagnosis has been made” [41].

    “And yet, it is these very same misleading [HIV test] results which constitute the basis of official statistics and which lead, first the experts, then the scientists, medical doctors, newspaper reporters, and finally the general public to believe that Africa is being ravaged by a specific viral infection called ‘HIV/AIDS!’ People speak of an epidemic of ‘HIV/AIDS,’ but the only thing which has the appearance of an epidemic is what I would call the ‘epidemic of tests,’ an artificial epidemic which is being actively promoted” [41].

    “[The HIV tests] are also dangerous because they cause panic and stigmatization, they lead to the use of toxic anti-viral drugs and they draw attention away from the real sources of immune system deficiencies. Common sense and scientific reason dictate their abandonment” [41].

    “To state that the priority, with respect to emergency humanitarian aid, should be given to the fight against ‘HIV’ and to giving those countries the possibility of buying cheap-priced anti-viral products is just as irrational as saying to someone suffering from acute vitamin C deficiency, ‘Sir, I see that you are suffering from scurvy. You’d better go buy yourself some antibiotics and condoms” [41].

    38. Sakhela Buhlungu, et. al. (eds.), State of the Nation: South Africa 2007, Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council, 2007.

    39. Stuart W Dwyer. Letter to the editor: President Mbeki might have a case on rethinking AIDS BMJ 324:237 (26 January), 2002.

    40. Sam Mhlongo. Address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels, December 8, 2003.

    41. Marc Deru. Address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels December 8, 2003.

  305. #306 Andrew Maniotis
    October 17, 2007

    To Roy Hinkley:

    In response to your question re: “HIV-integrase,” as I told you before, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, this is when controls can be useful.

    You are absolutely correct in stating that there is no a priori reason that “HIV-integrase” should have exhibited any chromatin remodeling activity in our assays (with or without energy molecules added as we always test it both ways). However, we haven’t found a molecule thought to be associated with DNA or chromatin structure that we can’t measure activity for, both without or with energy molecules added) during the past 15 or so years, except “HIV-integrase,” and albumin.

    To review, we wanted a control for the minor-groove binding of topoisomerase II because this is believed to be so critical for the mechanics of strand-passing known to occur with the topoisomerases. Using our handy decoder rings, as some of you like to say to me, we looked up on gene bank and elsewhere what could possibly have homology to topoisomerases’ minor-groove-binding characteristic. “HIV-integrase” popped out. We found a firm that sold it (it is in the figure legend of the paper I posted above), and I bought it (at considerable expense).

    When sprinkled on chromosomes that have not been denatured in any way, even H20 has a modulating effect that is measurable because of the charge differences of DNA and H20. Albumin does not have any activity that we have been able to measure over the years. However, every molecule thought to participate in “nuclear dynamics” of any kind always exhibits some kind of measureable activity, and usually that activity is profound and easy to see. Most are stoikiometric that don’t involve energy molecules such as ATP or GTP.

    But not “HIV integrase:” a molecule thought to be so important for pro-viral integration. At concentrations that are even physiologically meaningless because they were so high, we saw no activity. How do you propose the “HIV” genome becomes “integrated” unless this so-called essential enzyme mediates minor groove-binding activity for “HIV” insertion, much like the topoisomerases mediate strand passage? Could be, the batch we bought was not active-maybe it was left in a truck somewhere and got boiled? Possible I suppose, but we did buy several different lots and none of them worked. This is when I left the Duesberg camp and began reading Perth. It was also a year or two after my boss, Folkman, who can be recounted in Gallo’s book on Virus hunting, communicated to Gallo and others that Kaposi’s, one of the first two AIDS-defining illnesses, could not be due to a retrovirus, “HIV.”

    Oh well, who the hell cares. No matter what I or anyone else writes (to the detriment of their careers), the AIDS culture has such inertia, that it will continue to plague my children’s lives, with legions of phony tests, and phony science, and dangerous public health policies. Its kind of like bombing Afghanastan and Iraq because building 7 collapsed like the others demolition style, without any plane even coming close to it, and after Marvin Bush, GW’s brother, was seen closing down the buildings during the preceding weeks to allow securicom to “renovate” sections of the World Trade Centers.

    I suspect the role of “HIV integrase” in AIDS pathogenesis is somewhat akin to the role of muslims on September 11, unless you can show me data to the contrary.

    Woops! The black helicopters are outside….gotta go…

    cheers,

    andy

  306. #307 Adele
    October 17, 2007

    Wow can’t say I like the stuff Maniotis does but this is scary to watch and Im worried.

    Andy I’m relaly serious about this I know I like to joke or be “strong” like Braganza says but this is real, maybe you can take a sabbatical and get some rest? And talk to some people I don’t mean that as an insult and I’m not a doctor but I know mental illness is real and dangerous I saw it myself in my family even if you won’t let yourself believe in it now. Your under alot of stress and its not going to hurt getting some good advice. I would do it. I’d tell any one the same thing.I know its hard taking the first step. Think about yourself first and then your family your career.

  307. #308 Braganza
    October 17, 2007

    ElkMountainMan,

    Thanks for the explanation.

    I would like to point you to two micro-studies suggesting that it is possible, using nutritional techniques, to control both the CD4 depression and the viral load in AIDS patients.

    The first one is Prof. Knox Van Dyke proposed treatment for AIDS.

    Prof. Knox Van Dyke is a Professor of Biochemistry at West Virginia University. He has a good professional reputation, as he developped new malaria compounds
    (recently licenced to Millenia).

    He wrote a chapter in the textbook Modern Pharmacology With Clinical Applications – Google Books Result by Charles R. Craig, Robert E. Stitzel – 2003, on treatment of HIV, explaining HAART, so he would know a lot about HAART, and subtilities of why using a particular combination of antiretrovirals,

    BUT

    He also presented a method to control AIDS using nutritional supplements and an anti-inflammatory steroid, or a plant extract, glycyrrhizic acid (from licorice root).

    You can read the details of his method in the US 5686436, that you can download free of charge in extenso from the US Patent database at http://www.uspto.gov/patft/

    Or you can click in the link :

    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5686436.PN.&OS=PN/5686436&RS=PN/5686436.

    The second one is the J.Kaiser Book where he presented somebody who reduced his viral load to zero using nutritional supplements. It is true that this patient was having a pretty good CD4 at the begining (cannot remember exactly but it was around 500). I have the book in the library so I can give you more details if required. He manged to scale down the viral load to indetectable and increase his CD4 to 700 something.

    What do you think of that? Would you be wrong on the question of absolute need of HAART to control AIDS.

  308. #309 cooler
    October 17, 2007

    adele, the only one that is mentally ill is you, millions of people are questioning 9/11 you big fat idiot. What evidence do you have of your conspiracy theory? the fatty bin laden confession tape, the terrorists passports found at ground zero, when they couldnt find the black boxes?

    Oh jolly luckily they found another terrorists passport in the empty ditch in shanksville, too bad 99% of the plane dissappeared, thereis no visual evidence of anything more.

    wonder why cheney tried to block the invesigation?

    wonder how all 90 columns of building 7 failed at the same time when fire/ damage has never casued a rapid total collapse

    wonder why the administration totally forgot about Osama, youd think if they thought he was guilty theyd mention him some time in the past few years.

    why doesnt your mentally ill idiotic ass debate david ray griffin phd and get blown away? or have your idiotic loverboy orac do it.

    How did the tops of the wtc towers disintergrate?, never got an answer from NIST.

    See loose change on google video.

  309. #310 Adele
    October 17, 2007

    adele, the only one that is mentally ill is you, millions of people are questioning 9/11 you big fat idiot.

    Yes true if I’m big and fat you must be right. I can’t argue with that you convinced me. Was it Marvin Bush put the explosives in there or the Mossad I can’t remember? But your totally right cooler. No body flew any planes into buildings it was all holographs. They can’t hurt you except when your on poppers like Peter Duesberg says.

    So that’s settled!! So I want to know more about Huntsville Texas. In websites I saw, the Nicoloson’s, say Lo was doing secret tests on people in prison injecting with mycoplasma. Are the Nicoloson’s right. if they are why do you, I mean your sister like Lo so much if not why are people lying about him? Whose lying?

  310. #311 David Marjanović
    October 17, 2007

    wonder how all 90 columns of building 7 failed at the same time when fire/ damage has never casued a rapid total collapse

    This time, all weight-bearing parts of the building were made of steel, steel becomes soft at a few hundred °C, and the insulating foam layer was very thin in all but the lowest floors — it was even absent altogether in the most critical places because those were the most difficult to reach. This is the scandal. This is what was covered up.

    Apart from the Decider’s decision to do nothing when he was warned in July 2001, of course. Some say Captain Unelected wanted to be a war president. I don’t have a better explanation, except for his manifest incompetence to do, well, any job.

    If you want to know what Bin Laden says, read the transcript of a video of his, from Aljazeera… except that the page cannot be found. It was online for years. Check again later.

    How did the tops of the wtc towers disintergrate [sic]?

    By falling from a height of 300 m? Maybe? Just maybe?

    wonder why the administration totally forgot about Osama, youd think if they thought he was guilty theyd mention him some time in the past few years.

    Because they don’t care. They merely wanted to dupe enough people into voting for them so that Kenneth Blackwell would be able to steal the 2004 election, and accomplished that. They have their Iraq war and are happy.

    You think the Busheviki are morally capable of murdering over 2700 Americans, but not of ignoring someone who murdered over 2700 Americans because they have other priorities? What a strange mindset, cooler.

    It was also a year or two after my boss, Folkman, who can be recounted in Gallo’s book on Virus hunting, communicated to Gallo and others that Kaposi’s, one of the first two AIDS-defining illnesses, could not be due to a retrovirus, “HIV.”

    Erm… of course Kaposi’s sarcoma isn’t triggered by HIV. Did anyone say it was? Healthy people don’t get Kaposi’s sarcoma because the immune system kills it before it becomes visible. HIV kills the immune system, allowing the sarcoma to flourish.

    Do you know what “sarcoma” means, and which cells HIV infects? I have to conclude that at least one of the two has escaped you. If Kaposi’s weren’t a sarcoma but a lymphoma, you might have a point…

  311. #312 David Marjanović
    October 17, 2007

    Quoth Pope:

    the majority of Western AIDS cases are gay

    Is that even still the case, your holiness? I know AIDS was largely restricted to gays and drug abusers in the Western world 30 years ago, but is it still? I was even taught at school that it’s no longer.

  312. #313 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    Maniotis,

    So, I followed your link to the blog, from which I followed the link to your essay, from which I found the reference, did my own search, and found a 2005 version of the SA statistical mortality report you reference in your essay. You couldn’t just link to the actual data source?

    In the classification section on page 5 of that report, talkigna obut coding of deaths, they say that reported deaths from immunosuppression and immunodeficiency are coded as immunodeficiency, not HIV disease. Deaths listed by the doctor as ‘acquired immune suppression’, HIV Disease, or HIV arelsited as HIV.

    IOW, only in cases where the doctor specifically lists the immediate cause of death as acquired immunosupporession or HIV, is it listed as HIV.

    If yo look at the listed majar causes of death, they are as follows. They list 2005 and 2005 percentages – I’ll show both, with 2004 in parens.

    1. Tuberculosis 12.5% (12.3%) Active TB is a known frequent complication of AIDS and frequently the cause of death, but if the TB kills the patient, s/he didn’t officially die of AIDS and won’t be listed that way. This amounts to 1/8 of all deaths in SA in 2005.

    2. Influenza and Pneumonia 7.7% (8%) Pneumonia (PCP and others) is one of the most frequent causes of death for AIDS patients. If they died of pneumonia, it is listed here, not as HIV.

    Between these two highest mortality listings, which necessarily conflate a lot of HIV deaths given their coding criteria, we are looking at 20% of all deaths in SA in 2004. and 2005.

    3, 4, 5, and 6 are infectious intestinal, cerebrovascular, other heart disease, and diabetes – between them they account for ~16% of all deaths.

    7 is “Certain diseases involving the immune system” at 2.7% (2.8%). These are not included in the HIV category you cite, but are certain to include a lot of HIV/AIDS deaths.

    8 is “Chronic lower respiratory disease, ” also at 2.7% (2.8%). Again, certain to include a lot of HIV/AIDS deaths.

    10 is “HIV DIsease” at 2.5% (2.3%)

    Actual HIV/AIDS deaths cant easily be teased out from the conflated numbers in these reports, but they are consistent with up to 25% of all deaths coming from HIV/AIDS patients, and they certainly do NOT offer any assurance, as you argue, that only 2.5% of SA deaths involve AIDS.

    In fact, I think you can only reach that conclusion by either negligently failing to even look at the tables except to pick out the one category, or by intentionally and dishonestly failing to point out the issues with the coding and conflation of causes of death.

    Given that the WHO reports you attempt to discredit do specifically deal with these issues, I have to assume the latter.

  313. #314 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    BTW,here is a link to a PDF of the actual 2005 report, the link Maniotis failed to give:

    http://www.statssa.gov.za/Publications/P03093/P030932005.pdf

  314. #315 Pope
    October 17, 2007

    Hey kid,

    Why don’t you go back to school and read up on KS and HIV from around ’84 before writing that thesis on structural engineering

  315. #316 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    Manitois also, in that absurd essay,includes a scary quote about a 60-90% (from memory – I cant be bothered to go back and check again) false positive rate in HIV testing. It is in the context of Maniotis casting doubt on the results from HIV test kits.

    His cite (reference 22, if I recall correctly) is to a 1985 (19 fricking eighty five!!!) paper reporting results of antibody testing for HTLV-III in sperm donors. I havent read the paper – its not available as text in the ways I usually search, probably becasue it is twenty fricking two years old. But I can tell some things that help to inform the honesty of Maniotis in using that dreadfully outdated paper in this way.

    The very first serological HTLV-III / HIV test kit was not approved for market until sometime in 1985, and that kit was rushed to market because of the blood supply crisis, and was very rapidly superceded by more accurate kits. This paper was either an off-label use of the very first serological kit in human sperm, or more likely was not a kit at all – meaning that for Maniotis to use it to undermine confidence in moern kit results is simply wrong.

    Moreover, Maniotis implies in that paragraph that these results are looking at reverse transcriptase activity as a marker for HIV. I cant check that, given that I cant find the paper to read, but if so – sperm has an endogenous RT activity, and would be expected to give very high false positives on an RT-based test.

    In any case, for Maniotis to use this as a datum in an attempt to cast doubt on the accuracy of modern HIV-detection kits is absurdly – and transparently – dishonest.

  316. #317 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    Furthermore, clinical experience with that first HTLV-III serological test indicates just a 0.16% false positive rate. this in the first, rapidly-developed screening kit test. For diagnosic purpose, the test ws always confirmed with a Western blot test, which has a much lower and independent false positive rate

    Remember, this is ancient history – but its from the period Maniotis was citing in his absurd essay.

    This is from an 1985 article for clinical laboratory workers:

    Today, the ELISA test for HTLV-III antibody is the blood bank’s best tool for maintaining the safety of the blood supply. (It is also used for epidemiologic studies on at-risk populations.) Of more than 3 million units collected at 75 regional Red Cross blood centers through September 1985, 0.2 per cent were reported repeatedly positive and discarded. Of the positive units, however, only 0.04 per cent could be confirmed by the Western blot test, constituting a potential false-positive rate of 0.16 per cent.

    Although the ELISA test has, in effect, eliminated the AIDS risk in transfused blood, no one knows exactly how to interpret the results in individual patients: It is not a test for the AIDS-related complex (ARC), AIDS, or future disease, although a positive reaction indicates that a person has probably been infected with HTLV-III.

    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3230/is_v17/ai_4045303

  317. #318 Adele
    October 17, 2007

    Hey Pope,

    Why don’t you get in your popemobile and go to school, learn about biology maybe history to. People knew about Kaposis a hundred years back. Thing is, there was suddenly more of it in late seventies and later and it was worse cases and it looked like sexually transmisted. So scientists had this debate about ten years about can HIV cause it itself or is there something else? And Gallo said HIV but maybe there’s something else but you have to convince me. And some people said no its something else and I think 1991 or something later they found out it was another virus KSHV. But HIV makes it more likely like other OIS. Both sides were right you need KSHV to cause it but HIV to help it along protect it from immune system.

    Evidence was good we know KSHV causes Kaposis for like fifteen years. Come join us in 2007 Claus like when your not busy your servants reading James Joyce to you.

  318. #319 trrll
    October 17, 2007

    You just make it up as you go along, eh terrel?

    Duesberg’s outstanding investigator grant came well after Gallo’s work on HTLV and his authoritative papers go back into the early 70′s.

    OK, I concede that “nobody special” was overstating the point. But Duesberg’s authoritative work also goes back to the mid ’60′s. Indeed, Duesberg was elected to the National Academy two years before Gallo was.

    So the point remains: Duesberg was a recognized authority with stature at least equal to Gallo’s at the time of Gallo’s initial papers on HIV. Scientists came around to Gallo’s point of view not of his greater “authority,” but because the experimental data supported Gallo’s theory and not Duesberg’s.

  319. #320 trrll
    October 17, 2007

    Lee, you can get a false positive rate of the HIV test pretty much as high as you want, simply by picking a population in which the true incidence is very low.

    After all, in a population in which nobody is infected, the false positive rate is by definition 100%, no matter how good the test is.

    Denialists often like to cherry-pick reports of false-positive rates from low-incidence populations to give the impression that the test is worthless.

  320. #321 Carter
    October 17, 2007

    Lee
    “…….probably becasue it is twenty fricking two years old. But I can tell some things that help to inform the honesty of Maniotis in using that dreadfully outdated paper in this way. Why don’t you just quit because one cannot claim that certain papers are out of date then turn around and cite the entire collection of redundant orthodox research that HIV = AIDS = Death because there’s overwhelming evidence for it. Your Bull Shit runs deep.

    “….and that kit was rushed to market because of the blood supply crisis, and was very rapidly superceded by more accurate kits.” More Bull Shit! – Prove it! Tell us definitively how you know the tests became newfangled and improved, or are you going by hearsay?

    “……an attempt to cast doubt on the accuracy of modern HIV-detection…” You don’t need Dr. Maniotis to cast doubt. The test kits themselves already do that. “Abbott Labs — “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.”

  321. #322 trrll
    October 17, 2007

    Abbott Labs — “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.”

    Denialists seem to be irrationally enamored of this particular quote. I’ve never quite been able to figure out why. I think that maybe they think that “no recognized standard” is some sort of euphemism for “it doesn’t work.”

    Of course, scientists develop assays where there is “no recognized standard” all the time–that’s always the case when you invent a new assay. It just means that you have to carry out your own validation with appropriate standards.

  322. #323 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    Carter.. speaking of bullshit.

    That 1985 paper, assuming it was solid when published, is still solid. What it was reporting on, though, was pre-kit detection of HIV in a system (sperm) that is not used for diagnosis or epidemiology. The date matters because it means that the technology used was NOT THE SAME as the technology that Maniotis is trying to disparage. He is quoting irrelevant but scary data to try to make his point, and it is a dishonest technique. IMO, Maniotis is discrediting himself here as any kind off a scientist, thoroughly and deeply.

    Testing – the ELISA / Western Blot testing which has always been accurate and sensitive, was supplemented by the P24 test,now superceded by direct nucleic acid testing by RT-PCR and now real-time qRT-PCR. For you to even imply that testing has not developed and improved over the decades is to show your naivete or dishonesty, one.

    What on earth does the existence of a recognized standard have to do with the accuracy and sensitivity of these tests?

  323. #324 Chris Noble
    October 17, 2007

    I dont know how you find the Michael Leitner stuff, and am very curious, as I also try to search info in the web.

    There is an internet toolk called whois which enables you to find out who owns a particular domain name such as immun-therapie.net

    owner-contact: P-MJL290
    owner-organization: Wunschfilme
    owner-fname: Michael
    owner-lname: Leitner

    While it might be wrong to dismiss the paper solely because it appears on a website registered to Michael Leitner it does raise a number of questions.

    Michael Leitner denies that HIV causes AIDS. The paper assumes that HIV causes AIDS.

    I also find it hard to believe that the trial as described could be approved in Germany. Perhaps the patients were given HAART. Perhaps it was done in another country.

  324. #325 Chris Noble
    October 17, 2007

    I agree with you that this gutter level PC smear perpetrated against Duesberg is detracting from the real scientific issues. That is why it is the favourite argument in the arsenal of Brave, Brave Sir John et al. That is what shows even people who can’t spell “retrovirus” that they are scientific cowards through and through.

    That you choose to focus on the few articles that speculate about Duesberg’s personality rather than the rest of the articles that deal with the science says more about you than John Moore.

    If the only arguments against Duesberg were of this nature then you would have a point.

    In my experience the Denialists including yourself constantly battle to frame the “debate” in terms of politics and personality rather than the science. There is an obsession about Gallo’s personality which is simply a ruse to avoid the subsequent 20 years of science that followed Gallo’s important contributions.

    I can only conclude that you are afraid of the science.

  325. #326 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    Adele said:

    Running away. Running away is the deniosaur thing to do. Run away from facts and evidence. When they show your wrong change the subject

    Adele dear, did you mean running away just like John P Moore did? Moore never answered Pope. Never answered Maniotis. Never answered anyone. Just simply up and ran away.

    Certainly showed himself to be a complete “deniosaur”, according to Adele, as she likes to call them.

  326. #327 ElkMountainMan
    October 17, 2007

    Braganza,

    Thank you for the studies on nutrition and prognostics. You asked,
    What do you think of that? Would you be wrong on the question of absolute need of HAART to control AIDS.

    Certainly, I would be wrong. I would have quite a tenuous claim indeed to the title “scientist” if I ever spoke of the absolute need for any substance to control anything in the biological realm. Absolutes are the substance of faith, not science. The substance that allows humans to become creatures of fear and denial who “having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not” the evidence before them.

    Almost three decades of AIDS research have shown that some people, perhaps including Noreen, are able to control virus replication: sometimes, looking to Noreen, with a boost of pharmaceutical help, sometimes entirely without it. Research has also shown that such people are the exception, not the rule.

    I am entirely open to the possibility that “neutriceuticals” may help some HIV-positive people to control viral load and raise CD4+ T-cell counts. I also recognize that this alluring theory has not yet been proven to the satisfaction of anyone but the true believers. We may find some intriguing anecdotes and suggestive preliminary results, but we need more to go on before patients are urged to abandon an effective and time-tested standard.

    To answer an earlier question of yours, the problem of absolutes is at the heart of my statement about cytokines from several days ago. I don’t mean that cytokines cannot be measured. This is a matter of routine. What I mean is that the balance of cytokines should be thought of not as the product of a light switch–on or off–but as a living, breathing thing, like the organism of which it is part. If we observe that a cytokine is “down” during viral infection, we cannot immediately conclude that dialing it back “up” will resolve all clinical problems; the change may very well do more harm than good. In the same way, it is not entirely accurate to say that only “cellular” immunity is affected by HIV, while “humoral” immunity remains unaffected. The two branches are themselves multiply interdependent.

    While such concepts as “Th1/Th2 shift” and “CD4+/CD8+ T-cell ratio” make fine and serviceable heuristics and have served as the springboard for important findings, we must always keep in mind their limitations. For example, some Th1 and Th2 cytokines could easily be placed in the other class depending upon their setting or composition; also, the quantity and by extension ratio of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells may be important and indicative of clinical outcome, but not so important as qualitative, functional aspects that are only now beginnning to be understood.

    This is how science works: never finding satisfaction in the present state of knowledge, always pressing for more…an attitude antithetical to that of the “rethinkers,” who rock to an outdated groove and prefer to keep their knowledge, such as it is, on ice.

  327. #328 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    so Maniotis is a 9/11 troofer, too. Surprise…

    “Its kind of like bombing Afghanastan and Iraq because building 7 collapsed like the others demolition style, without any plane even coming close to it, and after Marvin Bush, GW’s brother, was seen closing down the buildings during the preceding weeks to allow securicom to “renovate” sections of the World Trade Centers.”

  328. #329 cooler
    October 17, 2007

    god bless DR. maniotis ,one of the many brilliant academics like margulis, david ray griffin, stephen jones and over 180 architects that realize the 9/11 myth is a complete woo.

    Funny how you idiots mock us when you have no evidence for your wacky theories.
    Not one epidemimological designed to test gallo’s hypothesis, to see if hiv positive people with no other risk factors such as AZT, mycoplasmas, severe mental illness, drug abuse get AIDS vs matched controls, which is what you need when most every animal does not get AIDS when inoculated. Also when there is an ever extending window period that is now up to 10 years, when no one knows how the virus kills so many blood t cells when its only in 1/1000 blood tcells.

    And for 9/11 what evidence do you wackjobs have for your conspiracy theory? The passport that flew out of the hijackers pocket and landed on the sidewalk at ground zero!LOL when they couldnt find the black boxes!

    Or the other terrorists passport found in the empty ditch in shankesville thank god for that, to bad you dont see 99% of the plane! Thank god for those passports, they’ve given us the right to invade the entire middle east!

    Dont forget the fatty big nosed bin laden tape (strange that he actually denied any involvement, and youd think hed brag about if he did it)

    You guys have no evidence for your idiotic theories, the best evidence you have is “Duuuuuuuuh the government said it so it must be true! duuuuuuuuuuuuh!”

    Our theories are falsifiable, yours are not, the study mentioned could falsify or prove the hiv hypothesis but it cant be conducted for a myriad of strange reasons. Too dangerous! as if monster doses AZT are not. Thats the only way to test a specied specific microbe, so its much more dangerous to tell people they are going to die when you dont have any evidence for it.

    The inside job hypothesis could be proven/falsified by releasing the footage from the 80 cameras at the Pentagon and putting a few people under oath. Your wacky theories are unfalsifiable, for every experiment proposed that can prove or disprove a hypothesis can not be conducted, therefore your theories are unscientific. “duuuuuuuuuuuuh they cant release the film at the pentagon bc they just cant duuuuuuuuuuuuuh!”

    see loose change
    architects for truth google it

  329. #330 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    Hey Lee, if the tests are so wonderful at finding HIV, which none of them have ever even claimed to do, then explain this:

    It has been repeatedly shown more than 30 times in “HIV” vaccine trials that antibodies against “HIV” proteins aren’t evoked even when the so-called unique and diagnostic “HIV’” antigens are injected directly into the bloodstream of healthy humans.

    So, Lee, if these “HIV tests” are finding these proteins that are supposedly antigens to HIV, please explain why nobody develops antibodies against these proteins when they are injected directly?

    Obviously there is something quite wrong with the picture!

    By the way, Lee, I was reading your first post, where you whined about the first San Fran cases of AIDS.

    But Lee, you failed to tell us about the lifestyles and poppers and crystal meth drug addiction habits and fisting habits, and antibiotics overuse, and depressions, and panic that these 500 deaths including the plus 40 friends of someone you knew, all share.

    Lets go through the list one at a time Lee, and lets look at the REAL FACTS about every one of these deaths, instead of hiding your head in the sand and screaming “HIV, HIV, HIV!”

    You can delude yourself about these all you want Lee. But I am a gay man who spent plenty of time up in San Fran and went to some of the parties and visited some of the bath houses, and personally knew and witnessed the self destructive insanity of a good number of my fellow gays, without joining in myself. I witnessed the cholera spreading filth that some of these hard core sex addicted people indulged in. I witnessed how some would go get a friday night shot of antibiotics before partying for the weekend. I witnessed how some were up for 10 or more days straight on crystal meth. I witnessed how some would pour poppers into a pillow and practically smother themselves with it. I witnessed some people spun on a wheel and getting it at both ends depending on who the wheel stopped in front of. The only thing that really surprises me is that so many even survived this, and lived as long as they did.

    And believe it or not, I do have compassion for these men regardless of what they had done. All were doing the best they could with what they had. Most all were running away from some very intense emotional pain. Many had been rejected by their families for being gay. Many just had a difficult time with their pasts. Some came from homes where they were severely abused as children. Some had other horror stories of their past. But all were certainly doing the best they could with what they had, and what they had to deal with.

    Lee, I am a gay man who used to do a lot of psych counseling in the gay community through the 80s and 90s. I did not do it for a living, nor did I ever charge for it, but because it was what I felt the gay community needed the most due to the pressures of being gay in a society that more and more despised and condemned us, as was evidenced by the movement in the late 70s to get the death penalty instituted for homosexuals. Throughout the 70s and 80s and even through most of the 90s, you could turn on any TV evangelist and listen to them condemning gays. Now, Lee, I don’t expect you to know what such as that “feels” like, nor do I expect you to understand the emotional and psychological and even physical impacts of such. Particularly for those who were themselves raised in the most homophobic of families. But I can tell you that many gay men were absolutely tortured inside from this, and struggling just to find a desire to live at all. It is quite understandable how so many fell into self destructive and outlandish addictions to escape the emotional pain they endured.

    So, lets see, Lee. You base your perception of HIV and what causes AIDS on the 2nd hand info of an acquaintance who did not even bother to tell you that he too was a popper sniffing crystal meth drug addict and sex addict and that he himself did some rather unhealthful things sexually earlier in his life before you even knew him. I base mine on what my own eyes and ears personally witnessed.

    Hmmmmm, which would be more accurate???? Your info, or mine?????

    You know Lee, I don’t give a damn about how in denial some of the HIV or AIDS affected are, or how convenient their own memories have become about their past or their behaviors, but I do care that the world has not been informed of the truth of what many gays endured, and some still endure, and why some of these men really came down ill.

  330. #331 Lee
    October 17, 2007

    I repeat:

    Its AZT!!!!

    What about before AZT?
    Its Poppers!!!

    What about groups that didn’t use poppers?

    Its drug use!!!

    What about hemophiliacs and transfusion recipients and haitians and…

    Its some unknown “different things in disparate groups” that just happens to cause identical symptomology and just happens to show up simultaneously in groups that share as risk factors semen/blood exposure and HIV infection.

    But it isn’t HIV It can’t be, because, well…

    its AZT!!!

    What about before AZT?
    Its Poppers!!!

    What about groups that didn’t use poppers?

    Its drug use!!!

    What about…

    rinse, repeat.

  331. #332 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    You know, Lee, as we discuss how much death occured, and of what, in the gay community prior to the explosion of death which occurred after AZT usage, you also have conveniently forgotten to put into context not only the effects of unhealthful lifestyles, and not only the effects of drug abuse, and not only the effects of untreated psyhological and emotional pain and stress on the immune system. But then, add in the panic and extreme fear of AIDS which swept through the gay community onto the immune system. As a handful of men came down sick and some died, the entire thing was hyped in almost every paper and news channel in the country, and ESPECIALLY HYPED in the gay media itself. Fear and panic and depression increased exponentially in the gay community with every diagnosis of HIV or AIDS.

    Emotional states of fear itself depletes the adrenal functions which in turn suppresses immune function.

    A positive HIV test further creates panic, and further depletes the immune system.

    And add to all that the stress that many gays were already enduring as they came from homophobic families and lived in a homophobic world.

    Stress shuts down the immune system in several ways. It shuts down the function of the adrenal system, and drug use further depletes this, and stress also shuts down the thymus gland which regulates immune function.

    Then add to that the depression that many gays sunk into as one and then two and then more and more of their friends died.

    Immune disfunction is often found in depressed people.

    Yet you want to blame it all on HIV.

    Gee, no, Lee. Thoughts and feelings and beliefs and emotions have nothing at all to do with health, now do they?

  332. #333 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    How convenient of you Lee, to consider every death in the world where you can find antibodies that are evident particularly in highly stressed people all over the world, both well and ill, and shovel them all into one bucket and call it AIDS, and claim it was all caused by HIV!

    And how further convenient of you to ignore the fact that the deaths in this group increased after further stressing the populations with fear and panic and increased exponentially after administration of monotherapy AZT.

    Your so smart Lee, you really should get a job at NIAIDS developing more drugs like AZT.

    Or is that what you already currently do, which would completely explain your protectionism toward the HIV theory?

  333. #334 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    Hey Lee. What about hemophiliacs and transfusion recipients?

    The death rate in these groups was already exceedingly high prior to HIV/AIDS. Hemophiliacs lives had always been short. And blood products are still dangerous today, though not nearly as dangerous nor deadly as they were in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.

    Transfusions and organ transplants were almost always deadly before HIV/AIDS.

    What exactly is your friggin point about these groups?

    And what about Haitians, Lee. Haiti is and was a downtrodden 3rd world country with many people living in poverty and filth. Do you think these people were living in the lap of luxury with easy lifestyles, no stress and good diets?

    Hey Lee, don’t you know anything at all? You egotistical fuck!

  334. #335 Michael
    October 17, 2007

    Elkmountain, I applaud you for your statement: Absolutes are the substance of faith, not science. The substance that allows humans to become creatures of fear and denial who “having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not” the evidence before them.

    However, it is quite obvious that your fearless leader, John P Moore, is an “absolutist” when it comes to HIV and AIDS, and therefore a “faith based” scientist, as he said to Hajjar above: The hypothetical scenario you pose (that HIV is not the cause of AIDS) is impossible to take seriously, as the causative role of HIV is an established fact. One might as well ask a physicist what he or she would do if the law of gravity were found to be false.

    So John Moore knows that HIV is an ABSOLUTE fact in existence and an ABSOLUTE fact in its causing AIDS. He claims it is an established fact. An unquestionable fact. A fact as sure as the law of gravity is a fact.

    Well, Elkmountain, certainly you are able to mouth the words of wisdom distinguishing absolutes and faith from science. But are you capable of seeing it in yourself and others. Can you not see in John P Moore what allows humans to become creatures of fear and denial?

    Perhaps you could explain how it is that you do not recognize faith, not science, when it is at the helm of your fellow scientists. Are you capable of looking at and recognizing these human qualities when they turn up even within those who share your own beliefs or even in your own self? Or only when you happen to believe that you perceive them in others who disagree with your own pre-programmed beliefs? By the way, seeing in others what is actually in ones own self is called “projection” in psych circles, when one projects upon others what is actually going on in their own self.

    But enough of that, as I am sure you will only ponder it for less than 1/1000th of a second, before your own ego tightly locks the door before it is exposed.

  335. #336 Michael
    October 18, 2007

    This is how science works: never finding satisfaction in the present state of knowledge, always pressing for more…an attitude antithetical to that of the “rethinkers,” who rock to an outdated groove and prefer to keep their knowledge, such as it is, on ice.

    Seems to me that it would be quite easy to turn the tables on this statement by replacing the word “rethinkers” with “HIV orthodoxy”.

    I see no reason why I would be mistaken to replace the word “rethinkers” with “orthodoxy”, as certainly it is the “rethinkers” who find no satisfaction in the words or beliefs of the established majority, and who are “always pushing for more”, and who push the envelope of knowledge and questioning, instead of “rocking to an outdated groove and prefering to keep their knowledge, such as it is, on ice”.

  336. #337 Chris Noble
    October 18, 2007

    so Maniotis is a 9/11 troofer, too. Surprise…

    I suspect Maniotis is attempting satire. With cooler around it’s difficult to tell what is satire and what isn’t.

  337. #338 Tara C. Smith
    October 18, 2007

    Re: Mantiotis’ claims about deaths in South Africa, I wonder how he explains the excess mortality in young age groups that’s been seen over the past decade. That figure is from Stats South Africa 1997-2003, but the newer report linked above shows the same pattern from the years 2002-5 (see Figure 3.2). What’s causing all these deaths in the 25-45 year old age group?

  338. #339 notopos
    October 18, 2007

    To Andrew Maniotis:

    I suspect the dysfunctional data interpretation skills revealed in your post about HIV integrase explains why you are still a research assistant professor after 7 years. Any graduate student knows that a negative result means nothing in the absence of the necessary controls. Without proof that the integrase protein you purchased was functional your so-called experiment means nothing.

    You state “I suspect the role of “HIV integrase” in AIDS pathogenesis is somewhat akin to the role of muslims on September 11, unless you can show me data to the contrary.”

    But, you fail to cite the numerous publications that show that HIV integrase can insert HIV DNA into target DNA. I suggest a pubmed search with the words HIV and integrase and in vitro. I get 361 papers. There is the requested data to contrary. The fact that eight percent of your genome is integration events into your ancestors DNA should be proof enough for anyone that integrases can insert DNA into the genome even if your experiment didn’t work. You often mention such endogenous retroviruses in your rants. You can’t have it both ways. It is just another example of how you twist the facts towards your end. You shoot your mouth off without the facts. Not the sign of a good scientist. One would have hoped that you had learned your lesson from you recent apology to Dr. Gallo for speaking without knowing the facts. If you can’t remember I list the websites where you wrote “It is vital, I believe, to tell the whole truth regarding the distortions, the history, the mistaken conclusions I have made that have in part been based on the wrong and inaccurate information you have brought to my attention, and which I have been guilty of passing along without adequately fact checking.”

    http://aidshiv.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/a-letter-to-robert-gallo/#respond

    http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2007/06/introduction_to_hiv_and_hiv_de.php#c542652

    Another example of you twisting the truth is where you refer to your former boss Judah Folkman. You did not work with him. Where are the papers? Your mentor was Donald Ingber. Judah Folkman is listed as the Director on your own CV. Director of what? I doubt you had much interaction with Dr. Folkman. Yet you want everyone to think your manufactured relationship with him makes you somehow more credible. The same is true in your many previous misrepresentations of your credentials. One twisted fact after another that somehow makes you the voice for a band of simple-minded denialists.

  339. #340 Michael
    October 18, 2007

    Ummmm, Tara, that is fairly simple to understand if you simply look at the population explosion in the ghettos.

    The population density has more than doubled over the last 25 years, and the infrastructure has not, and this has put intense pressure on people, especially the ages of 25 to 45, to find ways to survive. You will find intense competition for the most menial jobs that barely provide a survival. You will find a lot of criminality, and a lot of beggars who are barely surviving. Additionally, there have been many people moving in from other stressed out areas surrounding SA.

    Here’s a great idea, Tara. Since you are so very concerned with the wellbeing of Africans and South Africa, why don’t you spend a lovely family vacation over there touring and tooling around in the ghettos such as those around Soweto, and be sure to go with a mouth full of tea and crumpets. But be sure between your bites of crumpets and slurps of tea to note how difficult life there can be. And be sure to note the poor nutrition and poor hygiene and scarcity of drinking water and stressed out angry populations with many that have sunk into depression and hopelessness. And be sure to note the children playing in the garbage and the sewer in the streets.

  340. #341 Michael
    October 18, 2007

    Hey Notopos.

    Might I suggest pulling the microscope eyepieces out of your myopic eyes, that you might take a look at the bigger picture. Perhaps its better if you don’t. The great big scary world is far too much for you to expose your own fatheaded ego to.

    Do you think your own little rant filled screed about integrase is going to somehow answer all of the dissidents multitudinous points and that it is somehow going to verify that HIV is isolated and does cause AIDS and is sexually transmitted?

    The rethinkers positions do not even remotely rise and set on integrase fool. You still don’t have any isolated virus, you still haven’t proven it to cause any disease, you haven’t shown it to be sexually transmitted, you haven’t shown it to do anything to any T cells, you haven’t proven any of the HIV tests, and you haven’t shown us squat!

    But keep going fool, undoubtedly you will yet discover the mind-body connection! Just not in this lifetime. Fool.

  341. #342 Chris Noble
    October 18, 2007

    But, you fail to cite the numerous publications that show that HIV integrase can insert HIV DNA into target DNA. I suggest a pubmed search with the words HIV and integrase and in vitro.

    A pubmed search for HIV based gene therapy vectors is also contructive.

    Perhaps these researchers are all incompetent, stupid or liars but given Maniotis’ demonstrated inability to read and understand the DAIDS virology manual the most parsimonious explanation is that Maniotis stuffed up.

  342. #343 cooler
    October 18, 2007

    noble, why dont you debate david ray griffin and get blown away, he has a real phd, he didnt buy it at wal mart.

  343. #344 Chris Noble
    October 18, 2007

    hey misery woman leda dAvid ray griffin real phd in phIlosophy theology top army philosopher collapsing theology buildings google it get blown away thermite faster than gravity see nothing pentlawn

  344. #345 cooler
    October 18, 2007

    woo son woo to you, god damn deranged loser, how much was your phd at wal mart 10 bucks, or did you use a coupon?

  345. #346 Michael
    October 18, 2007

    Hey Tara, seeing as how I am fairly sure that you do not have the courage to face poverty eye to eye, here are notes from a recent trip. Undoubtedly you will read this and decide there are really no problems contributing to stress and poor health in the ghettos of Soweto whatsoever, except for that pesky invisible virus HIV:

    The day before I was to leave Jo’Berg (or “Crime-berg,” as it had come to be known to travelers), I took our machine-gunning friend up o­n his offer. He proceeded to drive, in silence, through the areas of Johannesburg that have some of the worst crime rates in the world. As he reached across and locked my door, he said that everyone we were seeing o­n the streets was a pimp, dealer, junkie, prostitute or gangster. There was razor wire around almost all of the buildings, dwellings, and storefronts. There were no trees, flowers or grassy areas anywhere in the city.

    We continued towards the poorest ghetto: Soweto. The “better” areas of Soweto consisted mostly of shacks of tin. There was the occasional o­ne or two room brick structure about the size of a o­ne-car garage in the States. We drove to an exhibit and memorial site that commemorated the student uprising of 1976 that marked the beginning of the end of apartheid in South Africa. The museum consisted of four open freight train containers exhibiting photographs of the Soweto uprising.

    We moved o­n until Kliptown – the worst of the worst of the Soweto ghettos. We drove past tents made of sticks covered by scrap cloth, stalls made of discarded wood and branches, erected by the side of the road in efforts to sell fruit to anyone who had the misfortune to have to travel this route. All the black residents were staring at us as we drove into the ghetto, their eyes haunting us as they studied our clean clothes, cameras, and backpacks.

    Brian introduced us to Bob Nameng, a Soweto local who proudly displayed his seven-year-old dreadlocks. He was a very talkative and amazingly positive young man, considering his surroundings. I felt instantly at ease in his company. I was to find out later that there are no “tours” that let o­ne out of the car in any area of Soweto at anytime. As I walked through Kliptown with Bob I saw shacks made of scrap tin siding, boards, cloth and dirty cardboard. All had low ceilings, enough so that o­ne had to duck even when inside. There was no running water, no electricity, nothing. We met some black children clothed in old rags, no shoes, nothing. I watched them play as children do, laughing, smiling, and sharing the o­ne toy that they had; a bent metal bar with two wheels attached that could be used as a makeshift wagon. They took turns rolling each other along the dirt, laughing hysterically when o­ne of the wheels would give and they both went tumbling.

    Bob was the closest thing to a mayor that this town had. He quoted some shocking statistics to us as boys and girls passed by returning home from school.

    “These young women,” he said, of the students passing us. “One in three of them will experience her first sexual experience through rape. Also the incidence of AIDS is higher here than anywhere else o­n the planet. Of the world’s 34 million cases, seventy per cent occur in Sub- Saharan Africa.”

    We later found out that he organized all of the community programs, including AIDS awareness, child abuse and rape prevention programs, a shelter for the neglected, charity collection, youth plays, soccer teams and even beauty pageants. He ran all these programs out of the back of an old tire-repair shop. Bob showed us his library, of which he was especially proud. It actually was a collection of 20 or so used books stacked in an old tire rack. He provided beds for children who needed to spend a few nights away from abusive parents, offering two rooms with old dirty cushions o­n the floor. We met Gordon, Tabo and Robert in this center, all community volunteers who worked with Bob. They walked us through their community; between dirty shacks, under clothes lines, over open streams of sewer water and through back alleys as they described what they hoped for their community.

    There was a lot of activity in the streets and Bob seemed to know everyone. Old women wrapped in shawls, despite the heat, waved and shouted greetings to him. Teenagers high-fived him as we walked by and children were constantly running up to him as o­ne would a favorite uncle. Through all the poverty and filth, the dirt, depression, maimed and deformed, the shantytown shacks, the hungry and abused, Bob somehow made it seem not so grim. Every time he told or showed me something horrible or devastating, he also let me know how he was trying to improve it. Walking with these four young black South Africans through Kliptown; the worst slum in Soweto, supposedly the most dangerous place in South Africa, I felt more at ease than I had o­n any of my travels.

  346. #347 Michael
    October 18, 2007

    No sireee, Tara. The only problem those people have is HIV. Send em all a pill of AZT, Tara, that will cure all their ills.

  347. #348 cooler
    October 18, 2007

    moment of silence please.

    moment of silence for army’s the DR. shyh ching Lo md phd the only scientist since koch to discover a microbe that killed/sickened every animal injected. Mycoplasma incognitus, slowly spreading through the population, the new world orders ultimate trick, have everyone worry about a harmless retrovirus while the real killer spread through the population culling the population.

    moment of silence please, all the inferior scientists bow your head in awe and in effigy for Lo. Shyh ching lo is your father, he is our master who holds the eternal key.

    Project day lily, mind blowing book part of the bioweapons program son true story slightly fictionilized, google it. Written by 2 top cancer researchers.

  348. #349 Braganza
    October 18, 2007

    A small contribution on the question of epidemy in Southern Africa ,

    I would like to refer to a research done in a neighboring country, Mozambic which has a lot of trade a migration with SouthAfrica, which was published
    by J. Barreto, et al , Scand J Infect Dis. 1993;25(6):685-8, which abstract is
    available from PUBMED, and which suggested, on the basis of Elisa tests that
    HIV appeared in the country between 1980 and 1990. Some of these Elisa tests
    where confirmed posteriorly- by Western Blot
    tests/PCR.

    I have been there, and have been told that all regional hospitals in Mozambic are now performing PCR assays in addition of Elisa. Smaller hospitals and clinics only perform Elisa and send positive samples for confirmation to the regional hospitals.

    HIV diagnostic in Africa is not based any more on subjective analysis, we can say that indications of HIV infections are as good as in EU/US.

    In Swaziland- another South African neighboring country, where also I have been, I have been told by a sugar plant manager that work force is now reduced due to AIDS.

  349. #350 Andrew Dodds
    October 18, 2007

    Michael -

    Not sure why you didn’t include the reference:

    http://www.studenttraveler.com/mod-Pagesetter-viewpub-tid-10002-pid-263.html

    Anyway – conditions such as those described could no doubt be found in some of the new magacities in India and China – so why do these not see the same rise in mortality in the 25-45 age group?

  350. #351 Tara C. Smith
    October 18, 2007

    Michael, since you put so much weight on your own personal experience, why don’t you accept the experience of the “mayor” there, quoting stats about AIDS and discussing AIDS prevention programs? Why isn’t his experience as valid as yours?

    I also find it a bit ironic that you’re impugning my own courage and character, and at the same time copying and pasting someone else’s experience and at least leaving it ambiguous in the comment that it wasn’t your own.

    Finally, I’d also love to see a response to Andrew’s question.

  351. #352 Carter
    October 18, 2007

    Tara… to answer Andrews question. I’ve been to China on many an occasion to these highly populous mega cities in the southern Guangdong Province and although still poor most of the inhabitants are, they are rich as to Africa’s standards. The government has spent loads of money for infrastructure, roads, schools, subsidizes farming ect..ect.ect.. There’s no way China can be equal to poverty stricken Africa. Since when did you ever see something labeled “made in Africa?” The money goes to China and the Chinese spend it to bring living standards up, hence the huge growth of the middle class there. DongGuan city is as clean as most American cities. There’s go garbage or sewers in the streets. Andrew Dodd is ill informed.

  352. #353 Pope
    October 18, 2007

    Michael, Carter, Cooler,

    Maybe you don’t understand, now that Tara has been knighted as a bona fide AIDStruth Crusader, she’s prevented by oath from engaging in any meaningful exchange because Brave Sir John knows it’s gonna make them look bad. That’s why she is now confining herself 100% to snide remarks once in a while: It shows she’s mature and responsible – that and the newly grown wart on her nose.

  353. #354 Pope
    October 18, 2007

    Bra-Middle-Man-Ganza, you are more than entitled to continue discussing Herbalism and Organic Chemistry with Brave Sir John and ElkMountainMan, but if you’re going to continue to pretend that you want to engage with people from “the other side”, like Gene, I advise you go to Duesberg.com and theperthgroup.com then comeback andshoe you’ve got just a basic understanding of the dissident arguments.

    How does that sound Mr. Middle-Man?

  354. #355 Tara C. Smith
    October 18, 2007

    Pope, I don’t chime in as much because I simply don’t have time to get into extended discussions, and I’m bored of repeating myself to y’all. It’s generally a choice of getting more involved in the comments section or putting up new material, and I choose the latter. But please, feel free to pontificate longer on the warts on my nose and ignore the science once again.

  355. #356 pat
    October 18, 2007

    If your comments section was a poll and your boss a TV station your show would be the HIV Late Night Comedy Show
    because it would be rated XXX

  356. #357 Michael
    October 18, 2007

    Tara said: “why don’t you accept the experience of the “mayor” there, quoting stats about AIDS”.

    First of all, who said I do not accept his experience? Of course I accept his experience. I absolutely agree that there is massive immune deficiency and illness in the slums of Soweto. The mayor is welcome to call it AIDS or call it whatever, as it makes no difference what it is called.

    Second of all, I am well aware that illness is rampant in any such a poverty stricken area anywhere in the world in ALL age groups, and Andrew is naive for thinking there is not, simply because no one has yet given him a study to point it out. Next of all, he is naive for having posted without considering that the effects and circumstances of one group in poverty are far different and certainly not identical to the effects and circumstances of every other group, even if the groups share a few commonalities.

    How many Hindus live in Soweto Africa Andrew? How many budhists budhists live there Andrew? Are there other cultural differences between the groups you presented Andrew? Of course there are. These ethnic groups and how they deal with their societal problems are all very different in each and every different group. Andrew just shows himself to be another unworldly and patently brainwashed and programmed HIV believer.

    With all of the billboards all around the city of Soweto shouting about AIDS, whenever anyone is ill with anything it is automatically assumed to be caused by HIV and called AIDS. However, such brainwashing of the public there to all expect illness and disease does not equate to disease that is actually caused by HIV. It does, however, further contribute to depressing the people even further, resulting in even more illness and disease.

    The high rates of illness which are all called AIDS or Slim Disease there by the mostly illiterate slum dwellers does not mean that the origination of any and all illness is due to HIV. The semi-literate “Mayor” is not to be condemned for his simple unworldly view, nor for believing whatever “stats” the high priests of AIDS Inc. have told him to believe.

    It seems that I may have mentioned once or twice before, that obviously the poverty, the lack of proper nutrition, lack of clean drinking water, high stress, depression, and lives lived in perceptions of helplessness and hopelessness are the actual source of the problems.

    Third of all, how would the “mayor” who lives in a garage in the slums of Soweto know if the “stats” he has repetitively heard are correct of not? Has he counted them? Surely he has not, and is simply repeating what he has been told.

    Andrew said: “Anyway – conditions such as those described could no doubt be found in some of the new magacities in India and China – so why do these not see the same rise in mortality in the 25-45 age group?”

    Says who, Andrew? Who says that there is not high mortality in 25-45 year olds in any area of the world that has the same problems as the ghettos of Soweto? Are YOU claiming that Andy? When did you take a poll of the average age of disease and illness in the slums of Calcutta or slums that might be elsewhere in the world including China? But you might consider taking a look at the massive rates of death in the 25 to 45 year olds that have happened in North Korea as the populations struggled with starvation under the current dictator! Yet they are certainly not claiming the deaths are due to HIV/AIDS! When people die in North Korea in the poverty stricken starving groups, they call it what it is! STARVATION! 220,000 between 95 and 98!

    http://www.atimes.com/koreas/CE23Dg02.html

    Yet North Korea claims not even one single case of HIV/AIDS!

    Anywhere and everywhere in the world where mass poverty and poor nutrition and high stress and depression exists, there is always found high rates of illness and death existing along with it, and considering that most of the worlds population is between the age of 25 to 45, it should not be too great of a mystery for anyone with a brain to understand why this group is hit hardest. It is the group with the most highly affected members when poverty is endemic. There is also massive poverty and also massive illness in the slums of India, and certainly includes the 25 to 45 year olds.

    Illness and disease in the masses of India was happening long before the concept of HIV/AIDS, especially after their fight for Indian independence and after separation of Muslims and Hindus and the break with Pakistan, as hundreds of thousands of displaced starving people between the age of 25 to 45 died of every disease possible. Go read some of the writings of Mother Theresa and others who witnessed the events.

    And this happened in India even though most Indians are of Hindu belief, where helping and feeding the poor are expected ways of life for all who can afford to help. Unfortunately, the streets of Soweto are not populated with Hindus!

    In China, most people, regardless of Communism, are budhist, an ancient offshoot of Hinduism, who are also expected to feed the poverty stricken. The ex-colonialized blacks of Africa are unfortunately more apt to live by rules of survival of the fittest. Unfortunately as well, the streets of Soweto are not populated with budhists either!

    So Andrew, don’t be a shallow minded turnip and pretend that all these events, people, and circumstances are all the same and that this somehow proves HIV. It does not prove anything. They are not the same. And even in groups around the world where things are relatively equal, the amount or types of disease and illness are completely different. And if anything, these facts alone disprove HIV as the cause of AIDS. And the fact that they are not the same in different peoples, different cultures, different religions and different groups, even when some similarities exist, lends ever more credence and evidence and proof to the rethinkers longstanding position that “IT AIN”T THE VIRUS, STUPID!”

  357. #358 Jonas Moses
    October 18, 2007

    To the person who used the screen name “notopos” to make a posting on this blog (sic) “…To Andrew Maniotis:

    I suspect the dysfunctional data interpretation skills revealed in your post about HIV integrase explains why you are still a research assistant professor after 7 years. Any graduate student knows that a negative result means nothing in the absence of the necessary controls. Without proof that the integrase protein you purchased was functional your so-called experiment means nothing…,” et alia.

    For the record, this is a word I coined, nearly 20 years ago, is trade-marked, is my email name, is the name of my incorporated biomedical technology company and is protected by United States Trademark and Patent laws. When, not “if,” I learn just whom you are, I can assure you that you will be hearing from my attorney. If you ever use this word-name to identify yourself again, anywhere, and in any context, you can expect swift, additional legal action to be taken. I do not wish to conjecture, here, who you are – I have a good idea, already. If you had an issue with me, personally, you should have kept it personal. When you usurped my identity – which is exactly what this is, according to my attorney – to make statements demeaning to others, and thereby to cause these statements to be attributed to me, you traveled down a road from which there is no safe return. Ergo…

    TO ALL READERS: whoever it is that posted using the name “notopos” has broken the law, and cannot be trusted. I will not hesitate, upon determining his/her true identity, to post that name hereon, for all to see.

    With all due respect,

    Dr. Jonas Moses

  358. #359 pat
    October 18, 2007

    …sorry…Drama show

  359. #360 pat
    October 18, 2007

    Jonas,
    unless he has competing financial interests then you have no chan….oh what the hell, sue him in america; no one cares there about the truth there. I can patent my ASS there!

  360. #361 pat
    October 18, 2007

    The first one to violate my patent not only gets nailed for …*gasp* rape but more importantly for PATENT VIOLATION! katchiiiiiiiiiiing!………….rimmed!

  361. #362 Jonas Moses
    October 18, 2007

    “Pat”…

    Respectfully, this is not about competing financial interests. We are talking about identity theft. I am widely associated with the name-word, “notopos.” End of conversation…

    Sincerely,

    Dr. Jonas Moses

  362. #363 jen_m
    October 18, 2007

    Dr. Moses,

    With all due respect, a person using the handle “notopos” could easily be abbreviating a proper name, or something like “not-O-positive” or “no topos” (that being Greek for “place” and also short for topology maps among climbers). Trademark is only protected as far as the use poses a reasonable threat, and I’ll bet you dollars to doughnuts that you can’t protect a screen name under trademark law. People post under all sorts of pseudonyms, some of which derive from celebrities’ names. As to identity theft: good luck claiming that your particular seven-letter combination is so special that it identifies you uniquely on the Internet. (I suspect that P.Z. Myers himself wouldn’t try to claim his name as all-encompassing on the ‘net, and he has a couple of extra characters in the string, plus the case-sensitivity, on his side.)

    Disclaiming notopos’ comments is reasonable; threatening legal action is nuts. And in this thread, it takes some doing to stand out as crazy.

  363. #364 Chris Noble
    October 18, 2007

    Respectfully, this is not about competing financial interests. We are talking about identity theft. I am widely associated with the name-word, “notopos.” End of conversation…

    Jonas, I’m curious as to whether you would apply similar criteria to somebody pretending to be Robert Gallo.

    (yes, I really am a sort of famous scientist that can’t spell).

  364. #365 sopoton
    October 18, 2007

    Jonas,

    I suggest that you check the following website for another potential trademark infringement.

    http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=167939328

    There is a 19-year-old woman in CA who is writing a novel called “The Tales of Notopos”. I suspect she will be hearing from your attorney. Can I have some of the settlement as a finder’s fee?

  365. #366 Chris Noble
    October 19, 2007

    I suggest that you check the following website for another potential trademark infringement.

    What about that Thomas More guy? I’m not sure whether he has a website though.

  366. #367 another undefinable space
    October 19, 2007

    Notopos(TM)? THE Notopos(TM)?

    But where have I read that famous name before….?

    Why, in this morning’s paper, of course! And the headline was monstrous.

    EAGLE SCOUT(tm) FORSAKES DA LAND OF DE NIAL
    Moses(tm) delivers deluded from the hand of Cuckoo-King Pharaohtis

    (The whole article was written by famous former BarnSwallop Assistant Editor, the inimitably touchy Feeley A. Carber.)

  367. #368 another undefinable space
    October 19, 2007

    Dear Dr. Moses, BS, PA, PhD,

    Upon further consideration, I herebyupon recognize with all due respect that your complaint may have legal standing hereunto. Thereupon, I urge you to pursue this matter furtherabout. The damage to your acting career alone justifies a record-breaking settlement.

    Clearly, the pretending “notoxxxx(tm)” is in violation of the law of Life, as all would agree unto-upon. Although I received my PhD only four months ago, I too sign my name with “Dr.” in front of it whenever I can. I am also a Prince and a Sultan, address me as such or I shall sue you, your offspring, your hairdresser, your advisor, your advisor’s advisor, and anyone else I can think of.

    I herefore alert you unto another violation of the Law. My colleague Vinod is a rapacious consumer of the ganja and when I asked him yesterday what he wanted, he said, “Pot. Soon.”

    Yes. Those same seven letters.

    Please give me your top-secret government-issued DOD-funded oh-so-vital-to-national-security email address (the one you put on your correspondence to spammers, as posted on the top-secret internet, with the IP address of your top secret university server) and I will send you-unto the name and address of this sue-worthy scum.

  368. #369 Pope
    October 19, 2007

    Pope, I don’t chime in as much because I simply don’t have time to get into extended discussions, and I’m bored of repeating myself to y’all. It’s generally a choice of getting more involved in the comments section or putting up new material, and I choose the latter. But please, feel free to pontificate longer on the warts on my nose and ignore the science once again.

    LOL! Dear Tara,

    The wart thing was figuratively speaking, more like a term of endearment.

    Your “putting up of new material” lately has consisted mostly in linking to other people’s material, and you do not seem to be getting bored of meta-strategizing about how denalists are their own worst enemy in Comment after Comment. Like so:

    Tara, how in the world do you deal with these denialists without killfiling them the way PZ does?

    It’s a public service. No way can I make them look any worse than they do themselves

    With all due respect, the fact that you never fail to dignify “scientific” Comments of this kind with the same old same old, is the (trade)mark that identifies you as a member of Grand Master Moore’s coven (do you see now where the wart-on-nose figure of speech comes in?).

    Personally I think you’re doing the public a much better service when posting tough and pertinent questions to Maniotis, like the example below, instead of the usual screech-and-cackle approach as practiced by your neophyte, Adele.

    Re: Mantiotis’ claims about deaths in South Africa, I wonder how he explains the excess mortality in young age groups that’s been seen over the past decade. That figure is from Stats South Africa 1997-2003, but the newer report linked above shows the same pattern from the years 2002-5 (see Figure 3.2). What’s causing all these deaths in the 25-45 year old age group?

    Posted by: Tara C. Smith | October 18, 2007 12:54 AM

  369. #370 Jonas Moses
    October 19, 2007

    Dear “pat,” “jen_m,” “Chris Noble,” and “sopoton” as well as the person who first posted that entry under the screen name “notopos” and anyone else who feels compelled to weigh in on my posts:

    Evidently, you believe I am joking. I am quite serious, and you are being exceptionally juvenile. From a first read of the topics, I was under the impression that this blog was devoted to the discussion of legitimate, fact-based Science and Medicine. Apparently this is far from the case.

    If you persist in playing fast and loose with my name, or my character, or persist at including mention of me, whether directly by name or inferentially, in your “conversations” on this blog, you can expect legal action to be taken against you.

    In case you think you are being clever, consider this: As I was not even aware of this blog site until yesterday, I would never have known about the use of “notopos” as an identity, if that word was not already closely associated with me, by name. In fact, “notopos” is quite well-known by colleagues, friends, family et al., as a word I coined nearly 20 years ago, have utilized as a company name – for many years – and as my Internet “alter ego.” As it is, someone contacted me, within a few hours’ time from that posting to inform me that I have been identified as the author of the “notopos” blog submission, which means that you are all quite wrong about your assertions that the word is commonly used by others and not necessarily attributable to me.

    This is my final word to the lot of you. I have no patience for your lack of manners, failed sense of propriety or disregard for the privacy of others. Since you behave like children, expect to be treated as such. I must assume you have very deep pockets and are eager to spend your money on legal fees, for I am done mincing words. Stop. Now. There is ample precedent to subpoena the webmaster of this site to acquire the identity(ies) of those who are abusing my identity, my privacy and/or my personal and professional reputation, and I have no qualms about allowing my attorney to pursue this course of action.

    It is equally plain those of you who are making derisive remarks about my legal claim(s) have no legal knowledge, whatsoever. If you think I am bluffing, please call my attorney. I shall instruct him to accept any and all of your calls. His name is David Edwards and he is corporate counsel at Barnes & Thornburg, in Chicago, IL. Please note that the contents of what I have written herein are being forwarded to Mr. Edwards, for his reference to this matter.

    So, get on with your in-fighting about AIDS and quit resorting to illicitly enlisting the good name of others in your efforts to out-shout one another.

    One more time: Cease and desist.

    Again, with all due respect,

    Dr. Jonas Moses

  370. #371 franklin
    October 19, 2007

    Andrew,

    I have become accustomed to your making claims about the work of other scientists, only to read the actual scientific paper and find that you have completely misrepresented the science.

    Well, you did it again, but this time with a twist.

    You claim that the work of Bojanowski et al. (1998) J. Cell. Biochem. 69:127-142 suggests that HIV integrase cannot perform the biochemical activities attributed to it in the process of viral DNA integration.

    Weirdly, this time you get the science completely wrong even though you are one of the authors of the paper!

    You claim:

    But not “HIV integrase:” a molecule thought to be so important for pro-viral integration. At concentrations that are even physiologically meaningless because they were so high, we saw no activity. How do you propose the “HIV” genome becomes “integrated” unless this so-called essential enzyme mediates minor groove-binding activity for “HIV” insertion, much like the topoisomerases mediate strand passage?

    WTF!?

    The assay described in the paper assesses the recondensation of chromatin, as judged by phase-contrast microscopy and image analysis. Nowhere in the paper is it described as an assay for “minor groove-binding activity.” Indeed, the term “minor groove” does not occur in the paper.

    So, what does the paper report about HIV-1 Integrase?

    HIV-1 integrase did not produce any detectable condensation in our system although immunofluorescence analysis showed that it physically associated with the unfolded chromatin (Fig. 5 I-L).

    Although you now claim that the assay demonstrated a lack of “minor groove-binding activity” for HIV-1 Integrase, the actual results reported in the paper showed that the protein binds to chromatin. Where does the paper show that the Integrase protein associated with chromatin is not bound to the minor groove of the DNA, since that seems to be your claim?

    You go on to claim that HIV-1 DNA Integrase is the only molecule (other than albumin) that you have tested that lacks measurable activity in this assay.

    Some observers might conclude that if almost every protein has activity in the assay, then the assay might not measure something as specific as the ability to catalyze DNA strand passages. For example, in an earlier paper (Maniotis et al (1997) J. Cell. Biochem. 65:114-130) you reported that incubation of the chromatin with antibodies against histones had dramatic recondensation activity.

    Certainly, you are not arguing that their activity in this assay suggests that these antibodies are likely to possess topoisomerase activity.

    In the 1997 paper, you also report that while histone H1 possessed chromatin recondensation activity, “the histones H2b and H3 were incapable of inducing recondensation or reconstitution even when added at 10-fold higher concentrations (H2b 5 7/ 7; H3 5 5/5).”

    What? I thought you claimed that only HIV-1 Integrase and albumin lacked recondensation activity.

    Furthermore, the 1998 paper goes on to show that for Topisomerase II, the ability to promote recondensation of chromatin is independent of its catalytic activity as a DNA Topoisomerase. The paper proves that the chromatin recondensation assay has NOTHING to do with topoisomerase activity!

    The paper you cite in support of your claim that HIV-1 integrase is unlikley to possess the needed biochemical activities proves that the assay upon which you rely is irrelevant to topoisomerase activity–irrelevant to the ability of topoisomerases to “mediate strand passage.”

    The very paper that you cite–a paper of which you are an author–proves that you have no basis to argue that the results of the chromatin recondensation assay suggest that HIV-1 DNA Integrase is unable to mediate the strand exchanges required for HIV DNA integration!

    Andrew, if you are interested in learning whether or not HIV-1 Integrase possesses the enzymatic activities needed to catalyze viral DNA integration, I suggest you perform assays of the relevant biochemical activities. (Perhaps you could ask Dr. Bojanowski to perform the assays for you.) The paper by Calmels et al (2004) describes several suitable assays and convincingly demonstrates the biochemical activity of HIV-1 Integrase.

    I really don’t understand what is going on.
    Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. July 6, 2007

    (Apparently not even when discussing his own work.)

  371. #372 Chris Noble
    October 19, 2007

    Weirdly, this time you get the science completely wrong even though you are one of the authors of the paper!

    Maybe Maniotis can sue himself for defamation. I think he should have a good chance considering the damage to his reputation.

  372. #373 absqueloco™®©
    October 19, 2007

    You’d need more than just an association amongst family and friends for you to have any claim to a name other than your legally protected family and christian names. A wide notoriety in the public and if your going to sue in courts other than the US than an notoriety within those jurisdictions.

  373. #374 pat
    October 19, 2007

    “Evidently, you believe I am joking. I am quite serious, and you are being exceptionally juvenile. From a first read of the topics, I was under the impression that this blog was devoted to the discussion of legitimate, fact-based Science and Medicine. Apparently this is far from the case. ”

    You will sue in america where everything goes and nothing makes sense. I believe you are dead serious.

    “If you persist in playing fast and loose with my name, or my character, or persist at including mention of me, whether directly by name or inferentially, in your “conversations” on this blog, you can expect legal action to be taken against you.”

    Evidently, you believe I am joking. I am quite serious, and you are being exceptionally juvenile. From a first read of the topics, I was under the impression that this blog was devoted to the discussion of legitimate, fact-based Science and Medicine. Apparently this is far from the case.

    If you persist in playing fast and loose with my name, or my character, or persist at including mention of me, whether directly by name or inferentially, in your “conversations” on this blog, you can expect legal action to be taken against you.

    notoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotoposnotopos….sue me

  374. #375 pat
    October 19, 2007

    “I was under the impression that this blog was devoted to the discussion of legitimate, fact-based Science and Medicine. Apparently this is far from the case.”

    spot on btw

  375. #376 jspreen
    October 19, 2007

    Denialism: “they don’t remember”

    Huh? I remember quite well what happenend in the eighties. But I also remember quite well the looks of the junkies in the streets of Amsterdam in the seventies.
    They didn’t look healthy at all, you know. The other day I was suddenly very sure of the fact that many of them must have suffered from Aids.
    But that’s a stupid thought, of course. HIV wasn’t dicovered yet so Aids didn’t exist in the seventies.

  376. #377 carter
    October 19, 2007

    Yes Jspreen… Imagine that. Conversely these foolish supporters want us to think none of the AIDs defining illnesses ever existed before 1980 by renaming them, a pseudonym, as if its a single entity in order to sell a social agenda.

  377. #378 Andrew Maniotis
    October 19, 2007

    Franklin, or whomoorever you are, I am disappointed in you.

    The topoisomerase work you distort and criticize displays a profound lack of appreciation for the history of chromatin biology. There is no dispute about the strand-passing activity of the topoisomerases. It has been studied, and repeated a multitude of times. Strand passage is the biochemist’s explanation for this molecule, but not necessarily the only model.

    What our work showed, contrary to widely held beliefs, is that the activity of this enzyme is independent of its catalytic activity. We and the French team teamed up to investigate and characterize the dynamic responses of these enzymes on chromatin that was not chemically treated in any way, and which retained its natural dynamics.

    The year before I arrived at UIC, the work was confirmed: that topoisomerase’s strand passing ability could occur independent of its catalytic activity by William Beck’s group, who is Professor and Department Head of Biopharmaceutical Sciences at UIC:

    Mo YY, Beck WT. Association of human DNA topoisomerase IIalpha with mitotic chromosomes in mammalian cells is independent of its catalytic activity. Exp Cell Res. Oct 10;252 (1):50-62, 1999.

    Note that when in the Maniotis et al., paper, we compare histone H3 and others, but claim, that not even at concentrations as high as 15 fold, we saw no condensing activity. We saw decondensing activity, and other types of reactions, but this was not the point. We needed to see condensation. Note also that I say that most enzymes thought to participate in chromatin dynamics don’t typically have activity-albumin being one of our controls for protein concentration of the applied reagents.

    I HOPE notopos, or whomever you are: why don’t you all use your real names? What is it that you’ve got to hide?

    As for my lack of association with Folkman, the same journalist involved in Watergate, and who made Robert Gallo’s life hell for 5 years, wrote an article in the Chicago Tribune about us after I left the group and found that tumors make their own vascular channels:

    http://chicago.tribune.com/news/nationworld/ws/item/0,1308,42540-42548-34630,00.html

    The full title stated:

    Breaktrhough cancer theory questioned: Human trials of Dr. Judah Folkman’s treatment are about to begin as the discovery by an ex-associate that some tumors defy Folkman’s conception come to light.

    By John Crewdson:

    For some reason my version which is free doesn’t have this intro. Go figure!

    Here are some relevant sentences and a Reuters report:

    The NCI’s rebuttal that the report was in error was followed by fresh findings from another laboratory that appear to question the underlying premise of Folkman’s celebrated research and the burgeoning field of cancer research it has spawned.

    A potential chink in that theory appeared this week, when researchers at the University of Iowa reported that at least two kinds of tumors, including a lethal skin cancer called melanoma, appear to be able to grow without creating new blood vessels but merely by channeling blood through the spaces between tumor cells.

    Dr. Robert Folberg, a professor of pathology at the University of Iowa’s Medical Research Center, which maintains the largest “melanoma bank” in the U.S., said the unexpected failure to find any evidence of blood-vessel formation in the melanomas studied would require a rethinking of Folkman’s theory.

    The Iowa research, which is being extended to prostate and other kinds of tumors, is the first to question the assumption that all, or even most, tumors secrete chemicals that induce the formation of new blood vessels.

    Although the Iowa findings are so far unconfirmed by other laboratories, they carry added weight because the principal researcher, Andrew J. Maniotis, spent several years working on angiogenesis as a postdoctoral fellow in Folkman’s laboratory.

    After arriving in Iowa, Maniotis recalled, he had begun working on an angiogenesis-related project in which he was surprised not to find blood vessels in a rare form of melanoma. “I’m not going to say that I’m right and Folkman’s wrong,” Maniotis said. “The whole concept needs to be re-examined.”

    Or:

    Aggressive tumors may form their own blood vessels

    ————————————————————————

    SOURCE: Reuters [HD]

    DATE: Monday, September 6, 1999
    ————————————————————————

    NEW YORK, Reuters [HD] via NewsEdge Corporation: Rather than depend on nearby vessels for blood supply, aggressive tumors can generate their own network of blood vessels, report researchers.

    The new finding helps explain why some advanced tumors fail to respond to conventional chemotherapy, according to a report published in the September issue of the American Journal of Pathology.

    The investigators, led by Dr. Andrew J. Maniotis of the University of Iowa at Iowa City, examined aggressive melanoma cells from patients and melanoma cells grown in culture. They found that these aggressive skin cancers are capable of building primitive types of blood vessels.

    In a statement, Maniotis said that these tumor-directed ”vascular channels” allow the tumor to continue to carry on basic tissue processes, even when challenged by chemotherapy drugs. He added that “new forms of cancer therapy could be developed that would specifically interfere with the way tumor cells pack together to form these channels.”

    And because these channels can be identified through imaging studies, “it may be possible to develop new non-invasive imaging tests to detect aggressive cancers,” co-author Dr. Robert Folberg commented in the statement. “These tests may complement and perhaps even substitute for some forms of invasive biopsies.”

    SOURCE: American Journal Pathology 1999;155:739-752.

    ————————————————————————

    [09-03-99 at 13:58 EDT, Copyright 1999, Reuters America Inc. [Reuters [HD]], File: m0903144.801]

    Or:

    Developments and Confirmations of Vasculogenic mimicry since:

    Original finding:
    Maniotis A., Folberg R., Hess A., Seftor E., Gardner L., Pe’er J., Trent J., Meltzer P., Hendrix M. Vascular channel formation by human uveal melanoma cells in vivo and in vitro: Vasculogenic mimicry. Amer. J. Path. Vol. I55, No 3, pps. 739-752, September, 1999.

    Also see: Chicago Tribune, September 17, 1999. “Cancer Theory is Questioned,” by John Crewdson,
    Front page.

    Subsequent developments in vasculogenic mimicry research:
    Robert Folberg, Mary Hendrix, and Andrew Maniotis. Vasculogenic Mimicry and Tumor Angiogenesis. American Journal of Pathology. Amer. Journ. Pathol. Vol 156, No.2, 2000.

    Folberg R, Chen X, Boldt HC, Pe’er J, Brown CK, Woolson RF, Maniotis AJ: Microcirculation patterns other than loops and networks in choroidal and ciliary body melanomas. Ophthalmology; 98:996-1001, 2001.

    Michael A. Warso, Andrew Maniotis, Xue Chen, Dibyen Majumdar, Niu K. Patel, Anne Shilkaitis, tapas K. Das Gupta, Robert Folberg. Prognostic Significance of vasculogenic mimicry patterns in primary cutaneous melanoma. Clinical Cancer Research , Vol 7, 473-477, March 2001.
    Reviews:

    Folberg R., Chen X, Maniotis A, Vasculogenic Mimicry in Uveal Melanoma: Findings, Critiques, and Future Directions. Leiden Monograph Series, 2001.

    Andrew Maniotis, Xue Chen, Christopher Garcia, Phillip J. DeChristopher, Ding Wu, Jacob Pe’er, Robert Folberg. Control of Melanoma Morphogenesis Endothelial Survival, and Perfusion By Extracellular Matrix. Lab Investigation. Vol. 82 No. 8 p.1083-1092, 2002.

    Chen X, Maniotis AJ, Majumdar D, Pe’er J, Folberg R: Uveal melanoma cell staining for CD34 and the assessment of tumor vascularity. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. Aug; 43(8): 2533-9. 2002.

    A. Mueller, A. Maniotis, W. Freeman, D. Bartch, U.Schaller, G.Bergeron-Lynn, L. Cheng, Taskintuna, X. Chen, J. Kan-Mitchell, R. Folberg. An orthotopic model for human uveal melanoma in SCID mice. Microvasc Res Vol. 44, 2002.

    Elisabeth A. Seftor, Paul S. Meltzer, Dawn A. Kirschmann, Jacob Pe’er, Andrew J. Maniotis, Jeffrey M. Trent Robert Folberg and Mary J.C. Hendrix. Molecular Determinants of Human Uveal Melanoma Metastasis. Clinical & Experimental Metastasis 19: 233-246, 2002.

    Chen X, Ai Z, Rasmussen M, Bajcsy P, Auvil L, Welge M, Leach L, Vangveeravong S, Maniotis AJ, Folberg R. Three-dimensional reconstruction of extravascular matrix patterns and blood vessels in human uveal melanoma tissue: techniques and preliminary findings. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. Jul;44(7):2834-40, 2003.

    Robert Folberg, Jacob Pe’er, Andrew J. Maniotis. Extravascular Matrix Patterns in Uveal Melanoma: Histogenesis, Structure, and Molecular Regulation. In: Uveal Melanoma: A model for Exploring Fundamental Cancer Biology. Swets&Zeitlinger, Publishers, 2004.

    Folberg R, Arbieva Z, Moses J, Hayee A, Sandal T, Kadkol S, Lin AY, Valyi-Nagy K, Setty S, Leach L, Chevez-Barrios P, Larsen P, Majumdar D, Pe’er J, Maniotis AJ. Tumor cell plasticity in uveal melanoma: microenvironment directed dampening of the invasive and metastatic genotype and phenotype accompanies the generation of vasculogenic mimicry patterns.
    Am J Pathol. Oct;169(4):1376-89, 2006.

    Kadkol SS, Lin AY, Barak V, Kalickman I, Leach L, Valyi-Nagy K, Majumdar D, Setty S, Maniotis AJ, Folberg R, Pe’er J. Osteopontin expression and serum levels in metastatic uveal melanoma: a pilot study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. Mar;47(3):802-6, 2006.

    Rieber M, Strasberg-Rieber M, Maniotis AJ, Folberg R. Different Chromatin Organization in Benign and Malignant Cells Revealed by Unequal Nuclease Sensitivity between Tumor and Normal Cell Genomes. Am J Pathol. 2007 Feb;170(2):787-9.

    Grace Guzman, Scott J. Cotler, Amy Y. Lin, Robert Folberg, Andrew J. Maniotis. Expression of vasculogenic mimicry correlates with earlier hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after orthotopic liver transplant. Submitted.

    Tone Sandal, Jonas Moses, Klara Valyi-Nagy, Amin Hayee , John Karavitis , Laurence J Marton, and Andrew J Maniotis. Interactions of polyamine analogs with chromatin, and the relationship of polyamine analog growth inhibitory activity to extracellular matrix control of tumor cell phenotype. Submitted.

    Epigenetic reversion of breast carcinoma phenotype is accompanied by changes in DNA sequestration as measured by Alu I restriction enzyme. Tone Sandal, Klara Valyi-Nagy, Virginia A Spencer, Robert Folberg, Mina J Bissell, Andrew J Maniotis. Accepted, American Journal of Pathology, 1-2007.

    Confirmations and work by independent groups:
    Makitie, T., Summanen, P., Tarkannen, A., and Kivela, T. Microvascular loops and networks as prognostic indicators in choroidal and ciliary body melanomas. J.Nat.Cancer Inst., 91: 359-367, 1999.

    Pezella F., Manzotti M, Di Bacco A, Giuseppe V, Nicholson AG, Price R, Ratcliffe C, Pastorino U, Harris A, Altman DG, Pilotti S, Veronesi U. Evidence for a novel non-angiogenic pathway in breast-cancer metastasis. Lancet, 355: 1787-1788, 2000.

    E Passalidou, M Trivella, N Singh, M Ferguson, Jhu, A Cesario, P Granone, AG Nicholson, Goldstraw, C Ratcliffe, M Tetlow, I Leigh, AL Harris, KC Gatter, and F Pezzella. Vascular phenotype in angiogenic and non-angiogenic lung non-small cell carcinomas. British Journal of Cancer 86, 244 – 249. 2002.

    Baron, J. A., Monzon, F., Galaria, N., and Murphy, G. F. Angiomatoid melanoma: A novel pattern of differentiation in invasive periocular desmoplastic malignant melanoma. Hum.Pathol., 31: 1520-1522, 2000.

    Potter CJ. Turenchalk G. Xu T. Drosophila in cancer research. TIG January, Volume 16 No 1, 2000.

    SM Rybak PhD, E Sanovich PhD, M Hollingshead PhD, DL Newton PhD, G Kaur BS, EA Sausville MD PhD. Differential effects of drugs on vascular channels formed by tumor cells vs vascular channels formed by endothelial cells. Molecular detection & therapy. Journal of The International Society for Preventive Oncology, Copyright © 2000.

    Rybak SM, Sanovich E, Hollingshead MG, Borgel SD, Newton DL, Melillo G, Kong D, Kaur G, Sausville EA “Vasocrine” formation of tumor cell-lined vascular spaces: implications for rational design of antiangiogenic therapies.Cancer Res., Jun 1;63(11):2812-9, 2003.

    Shirakawa K, Tsuda H, Heike Y, Kato K, Asada R, Inomata M, Sasaki H, Kasumi F, Yoshimoto M, Iwanaga T, Konishi F, Terada M, and Wakasugi H. Absence of Endothelial Cells, Central Necrosis, and Fibrosis Are Associated with Aggressive Inflammatory Breast Cancer. Cancer Research 61, 445-451, January 15, 2001.

    Shirakawa K, Kobayashi H, Heike Y, Kawamoto S, Brechbiel M, Kasumi F, Iwanaga T, Konishi F, Terada M, Wakasugi H. Hemodynamics in Vasculogenic Mimicry and Angiogenesis of Inflammatory Breast Cancer Xenograft. Cancer Research 62, 560-566, January 15, 2002.

    Shirakawa K, Kobayashi H, Sobajima J, Hashimoto D, Shimizu A, Wakasugi H. Inflammatory breast cancer: vasculogenic mimicry and its hemodynamics of an inflammatory breast cancer xenograft model. Breast Cancer Res. 2003;5(3):136-9. Mar 06, 2003.

    Shirakawa K, Wakasugi H, Heike Y, Watanabe I, Yamada S, Saito K, Konishi F. Vasculogenic mimicry and pseudo-comedo formation in breast cancer. Int J Cancer Jun 20;99(6):821-8, 2002.

    Kobayashi H, Shirakawa K, Kawamoto S, Saga T, Sato N, Hiraga A, Watanabe I, Heike Y, Togashi K, Konishi J, Brechbiel MW, Wakasugi H. Rapid accumulation and internalization of radiolabeled herceptin in an inflammatory breast cancer xenograft with vasculogenic mimicry predicted by the contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI with the macromolecular contrast agent G6-(1B4M-Gd)(256). Cancer Res. Feb 1;62(3):860-6, 2002.

    Clarijs R. Otte-Holler I, Ruiter, de Waal MW. Presence of a fluid-conducting meshwork in xenografted cutaneous and primary human uveal melanoma. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science: Vol. 43 No 4 2002.

    Anka Thies, Ulrich Mangold ,Ingrid Mol, and Udo Schumaker. PAS-positive loops and networks as a prognostic indicator in cutaneous malignant melanoma. J Pathol 195 :537 -542, 2002.

    You-Jin Lee, Noriyuki Nagai, Chong-Huat Siar, Keisuke Nakano, Hitoshi Nagatsuka, Hidetsugu Tsujigiwa, Cheng-Hsiung Roan, and Mehmet Gunduz. Angioarchitecture of Primary Oral Malignant Melanomas. Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry. Volume 50(11): 1555-1562, 2002.

    Judith Favier, Pierre-Francois Plouin, Pierre Corvol, and Jean-Marie Gasc. Angiogenesis and Vascular Architecture in Pheochromocytomas: Distinctive Traits in Malignant Tumors. American Journal of Pathology, Vol. 161, No. 4, October 2002

    Liu C, Huang H, Donate F, Dickinson C, Santucci R, El-Sheikh A, Vessella R, Edgington TS. Prostate-specific membrane antigen directed selective thrombotic infarction of tumors. Cancer Res. Oct 1;62(19):5470-5, 2002.

    Van Rompaey L, Holland E, Grosveld G. TEL Induces Aggregation in Transformed Cells and Induces Tube Formation in NIH3T3-UCLA Cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. Mar 8;291(4):820-8, 2002.

    Dupuy E, Hainaud P, Villemain A, Bodevin-Phedre E, Brouland JP, Briand P, Tobelem G. Tumoral angiogenesis and tissue factor expression during hepatocellular carcinoma progression in a transgenic mouse model. J Hepatol. Jun;38(6):793-802, 2003.

    Sun BC, Zhang SW, Zhao XL, Hao XS. Study on vasculogenic mimicry in malignant melanoma. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi. Dec;32(6):539-43, 2003.

    Hao XS, Sun BC, Zhang SW, Zhao XL. Correlation between the expression of collgen IV, VEGF and vasculogenic mimicry. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. Nov;25(6):524-6, 2003.

    Seifert P, Journee-de Korver JG. An implanted hamster greene melanoma expressing multiple host-tissue differentiation. J Submicrosc Cytol Pathol. Jul;35(3):315-21, 2003.

    Sanz L, Feijoo M, Blanco B, Serrano A, Alvarez-Vallina L. Generation of non-permissive basement membranes by anti-laminin antibody fragments produced by matrix-embedded gene-modified cells. Cancer Immunol Immunother. Oct;52(10):643-7. Epub 2003 Jun 19, 2003.

    Cai XS, Jia YW, Mei J, Tang RY. Tumor blood vessels formation in osteosarcoma: vasculogenesis mimicry.Chin Med J (Engl). Jan;117(1):94-8, 2004.

    Hao X, Sun B, Zhang S, Zhao X. Microarray study of vasculogenic mimicry in bi-directional differentiation of malignant tumors. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. Oct 10;82(19):1298-302, 2002.

    Hendrix MJ, Seftor EA, Meltzer PS, Gardner LM, Hess AR, Kirschmann DA, Schatteman GC, Seftor RE. Expression and functional significance of VE-cadherin in aggressive human melanoma cells: role in vasculogenic mimicry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Jul 3;98(14):8018-23. Epub 2001 Jun 19, 2001.

    Bittner M, Meltzer P, Chen Y, Jiang Y, Seftor E, Hendrix M, Radmacher M, Simon R, Yakhini Z, Ben-Dor A, Sampas N, Dougherty E, Wang E, Marincola F, Gooden C, Lueders J, Glatfelter A, Pollock P, Carpten J, Gillanders E, Leja D, Dietrich K, Beaudry C, Berens M, Alberts D, Sondak V, Hayward N, Trent J. Molecular Classification of cutaneous malignant melanoma by gene expression profiling. Nature, 406: 536-540. 2000.

    Hess AR, Seftor EA, Gardner LM, Carles-Kinch K, Schneider GB, Seftor RE, Kinch MS, Hendrix MJ. Molecular regulation of tumor cell vasculogenic mimicry by tyrosine phosphorylation: role of epithelial cell kinase (Eck/EphA2). Cancer Res. Apr 15;61(8):3250-5, 2001.

    Sood AK, Fletcher MS, Zahn CM, Gruman LM, Coffin JE, Seftor EA, Hendrix MJ. The clinical significance of tumor cell-lined vasculature in ovarian carcinoma: implications for anti-vasculogenic therapy. Cancer Biol Ther., Nov-Dec;1(6):661-669, 2002.

    Seftor RE, Seftor EA, Koshikawa N, Meltzer PS, Gardner LM, Bilban M, Stetler-Stevenson WG, Quaranta V, Hendrix MJ. Cooperative interactions of laminin 5 gamma2 chain, matrix metalloproteinase-2, and membrane type-1-matrix/metalloproteinase are required for mimicry of embryonic vasculogenesis by aggressive melanoma. Cancer Res., Sep 1; 61(17):6322-7, 2001.

    Seftor RE, Seftor EA, Kirschmann DA, Hendrix MJ. Targeting the tumor microenvironment with chemically modified tetracyclines: inhibition of laminin 5 gamma2 chain promigratory fragments and vasculogenic mimicry. Mol Cancer Ther. Nov;1(13):1173-9, 2002.

    Mary J. C. Hendrix, Richard E. B. Seftor, Elisabeth A. Seftor, Lynn M. Gruman, Lisa M. L. Lee, Brian J. Nickoloff, Lucio Miele, Don D. Sheriff, and Gina C. Schatteman. Transendothelial Function of Human Metastatic Melanoma Cells: Role of the Microenvironment in Cell-Fate Determination. Cancer Research, 62, 665-668, February 1, 2002.

    Hendrix MJ, Seftor RE, Seftor EA, Gruman LM, Lee LM, Nickoloff BJ, Miele L, Sheriff DD, Schatteman GC. Transendothelial function of human metastatic melanoma cells: role of the microenvironment in cell-fate determination. Cancer Res. Feb 1;62(3):665-8, 2002.

    Sharma N, Seftor RE, Seftor EA, Gruman LM, Heidger PM Jr, Cohen MB, Lubaroff DM, Hendrix MJ. Prostatic tumor cell plasticity involves cooperative interactions of distinct phenotypic subpopulations: role in vasculogenic mimicry. Prostate. Feb 15;50(3):189-201, 2002.

    Hess AR, Seftor EA, Seftor RE, Hendrix MJ. Phosphoinositide 3-kinase regulates membrane Type 1-matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) and MMP-2 activity during melanoma cell vasculogenic mimicry. Cancer Res., Aug 15;63(16):4757-62, 2003.

    Ruf W, Seftor EA, Petrovan RJ, Weiss RM, Gruman LM, Margaryan NV, Seftor RE, Miyagi Y, Hendrix MJ. Differential role of tissue factor pathway inhibitors 1 and 2 in melanoma vasculogenic mimicry.
    Cancer Res., Sep 1;63(17):5381-9, 2003.

    van der Schaft D., Seftor REB, Seftor E, Hess AR, Bruman LM, Kirschmann DA, Yokayama Y, Briffieoen AW, Hendrix MJC. Effects of angiogenesis inhibitors of vascular network formation by endothelial cells and melanoma cells. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 96, No. 19, October 6, 2004.

    Aaron P. Petty, Kiera L. Garman, Virginia D. Winn, Celee M. Spidel, and Suzanne Lindsey. Overexpression of Carcinoma and embryonic cytotrophoblast cell-specific Mig-7 induces invasion and vessel-like structure formation. American Journal of Pathology, 170:1763-1780, 2007.

    Garin P. Robertson. Mig-7 linked to vasculogenic mimicry. The American Journal of Pathology, Vol. 170, No. 5, May, 2007.

    Vartanian, Amalia A.; Burova, Olga S.; Stepanova, Eugeniya V.; Baryshnikov, Anatoly Yu. The involvement of apoptosis in melanoma vasculogenic mimicry. Melanoma Research. 17(1):1-8, February 2007.

    Cheers,

    Andy

  378. #379 ElkMountainMan
    October 19, 2007

    Dear Dr. Jonas Moses,

    This blog has been host to many in-depth discussions of the scientific literature and other matters pertaining to science. By your own admission, you learned of Aetiology only yesterday, so your disparaging comments, while hasty, are born of ignorance and should be excused by any reasonable person.

    Most of us here are in fact reasonable persons, or very nearly so. We are serious about science and we are serious about public health, even if a few among us (Andrew Maniotis comes to mind) have little evidence to support their theories. We do, sometimes, stray off topic. And on occasion, tempers flare and intemperate comments are made; attempts at humor sometimes fall flat and may be considered offensive. The relative anonymity of the internet is a catalyst for such behavior, and every world-wise visitor to a blog expects it.

    Several weeks ago, a few Aetiology regulars discussed the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The context was a statement by Dr. Mark Wainberg, who has implied that certain individuals, such as Dr. Peter Duesberg, the famous HIV/AIDS denialist, should be imprisoned if their evidence-free propaganda about infection and treatment is given as medical advice and leads to refusal of medical care (or refusal to treat an infected child) and ultimate death. Should protected “free speech” include the dissemination of medically dangerous lies? Although many restrictions have been imposed upon free speech, “fire in the theater”-type restrictions usually involve dangers to welfare more immediate (if no more inevitable) than the dangers of HIV/AIDS denial. I defended Mark Wainberg’s right to his opinion in that debate, but DuWayne, a libertarian-minded defender of a broad interpretation of free speech, made a compelling case against further legal restriction.

    My point here is that, immediately following common sense, the rights recognized by the First Amendment are the second-biggest obstacle to any successful lawsuit by you. I encourage you to visit the ACLU website and to read about organizations like the “Electronic Frontier Foundation.” In my opinion, every comment made about you so far on Aetiology is, unequivocally, protected free speech. Assuming generously that you could bring a suit and that it would ever be heard, no defendant would need “deep pockets,” as the ACLU and any number of other organizations would come gladly to the defense of “notopos,” “jen_m” and anyone else. First, to protect their anonymity, and, if unsuccessful at that (unlikely), to protect their free speech rights. Defendants would likely even be forced to turn away many enthusiastic pro bono offers.

    Perhaps your lawyer does “pro bono” work for you; in his place, I certainly would, since in my experience a hearty laugh every now and then can be worth more than any financial compensation. If not, though, before you waste more of your legal counsel’s time and your own apparently more-than-ample funds, consider that:

    No invasion of privacy has occurred if facts about you have been posted by you in a public place and are repeated by someone else.

    If private and damaging information about you has been published by a second party, you may have a case against that second party, but probably not against a third party who cites the report. Also, look up “actual malice.”

    No defamation has occurred if facts about yourself, given freely by you and available to the public, are mentioned.

    “Identity theft” involves the use of an individual’s or a business’s legal name and/or private identifying information for financial gain or other ends. For example, if I started a consulting business and called it “Toyota Corporation,” the pre-existing car manufacturer might have a good case against me. Identity theft may also occur if one uses the legal name of and otherwise impersonates another in “everyday life.” For example, if someone were to assume the name of “Andrew Maniotis,” compose an email supposedly confessing to various crimes, doctor its heading to make it look as if it came from Maniotis’s institutional email account, and send it out to hundreds of people, Dr. Maniotis would probably have a claim to identity theft (and defamation).

    Notice, Dr. Moses, that “notopos” never mentioned you or anything about you in his or her comment, above. There is no indication whatsoever that this person knew you or anything about you, including your self-reported legal claims to all uses of the word “notopos.” As a result, no one could well have confused this “notopos” with you, even if they had known you and known that you go by that name on the internet. The Dr. Jonas Moses-”notopos” connection, if it even exists from a legal standpoint, became clear to Aetiology readers only when you voluntarily exposed it six hours after the original “notopos” post.

    By writing on this thread, using your name and establishing your putative connection to “notopos,” you have made your words a legitimate topic of further discussion and allowed others to find publicly-available (not private) information about you. I agree that making fun of you based upon your own words could be considered juvenile, but you cannot level even this “charge” against the “notopos” who addressed Dr. Maniotis, since she or he does not even ridicule you or mention you. As for the later comments, snide remarks, however juvenile, are not defamation, invasion of privacy, or identity theft. You can’t sue someone for bad manners, and “making fun” is a form of free speech, as well as funny to some. You seem to have made it very tempting, too, what with the bombast and hyperbole.

    Dr. Moses, few visitors to Aetiology likely knew anything about you before you showed up yesterday morning. If you play your cards right, by next week most of us will have forgotten all about you, and that is what you claim to want. But it will not happen if you continue to make an embarassing public spectacle of yourself. The best way to achieve your goal of “privacy” is to discontinue your threats, stop ordering anonymous blog posters to call your lawyer, and, well, stop talking about yourself. Kindly, you might want to ask Dr. Maniotis to do the same.

  379. #380 Pope
    October 19, 2007

    Very dignified Elkie. That should put all speculations to rest about Aetiology posters being either juveniles or pompous a-holes.

    I cannot help but wonder, though, how you can tell Jonah Moses that it’s ridiculous to ask Commenters to call his lawyer, then immediately following that ask Jonah Moses to contact Dr. Maniotis.

    Isn’t that a bit juvenile?

  380. #381 woodchuck
    October 19, 2007

    To Andrew Maniotis:

    The conversation was about HIV integrase and your gross misinterpretation of the potential importance of your own data relating to AIDS pathogenesis. You suggest that your simple experiment argues against HIV integrase inserting the HIV genome into infected cells.

    You were the one who stated “I suspect the role of “HIV integrase” in AIDS pathogenesis is somewhat akin to the role of muslims on September 11, unless you can show me data to the contrary.”

    Have you done your PUBMED search yet. Is there enough data there to get you to admit that you did not check your facts, again. Numerous laboratories have demonstrated the integration activity of HIV integrase. Will you apologize in this blog for misrepresenting what is known about HIV integrase the same way that you apologized to Dr. Gallo saying, “It is vital, I believe, to tell the whole truth regarding the distortions, the history, the mistaken conclusions I have made that have in part been based on the wrong and inaccurate information you have brought to my attention, and which I have been guilty of passing along without adequately fact checking.” If you keep twisting the truth relating to HIV you will loose any credibility that you may have left in other scientific circles.

  381. #382 Mr. Natural
    October 19, 2007

    “hey misery woman leda dAvid ray griffin real phd in phIlosophy theology top army philosopher collapsing theology buildings google it get blown away thermite faster than gravity see nothing pentlawn”

    Chris, you’re definitely getting better …

    “When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.”

    Hunter S Thompson

  382. #383 Mr Natural
    October 19, 2007

    I notice that my true love Elkie (turned on by big brains as I am) has stayed away from the integrase controversy.

    I think he’s smart enough to see the trap here.

    What am I talking about?

    What kind of self respecting killer virus is going to bury itself in chromatin, making itself an “absolute” prisoner of the cell’s transcriptional apparatus?

    This is why 911 conspiracy theories are more plausible than miraculous viral resurrection theories.

  383. #384 Adele
    October 19, 2007

    Oh poor Maniotis living in the past. Maybe some people have to get this one in the stacks, real good paper and they knew about integrase in 1990,

    Bushman Fujiwara Craigie Science 1990 Sept 28 “Retroviral DNA integration directed by HIV integration protein in vitro” in the abstract it says
    These results indicate that HIV IN protein is the only viral protein required to insert model HIV DNA sequences into a target DNA in vitro.

    They’re getting integration with HIV IN but not controls lysates 71 to 0. They did a paper in Cell that year to with Mouse Leukemia and same results that integrase puts leukemia virus in DNA.

    There’s so many papers about this since then. Now the author from the paper F Bushman does integration preferences and integrase puts virus in DNA but it picks where to put it too! “Retroviral DNA integration: viral and cellular determinants of target-site selection” M K Lewinski et al PLOS Pathogen June 2006, there’s lots more.

    So Maniotis says HIVs not real and the tests are wrong its not a virus then where does integrase come from why does it put HIV in DNA in a reaction and a cell cultre. Why is there that preference Bushman shows on integration sites, that s in a person and in culture, in a tube too what is it then?

    You have to get real complicated and wierd and ignore alot of stuff or you go with a good simple system, lots of good facts, integrase puts virus DNA in other DNA it works in vitro ex vivo in vivo.

  384. #385 woodchuck
    October 19, 2007

    HIV integrase preferentially integrates into active genes where chromatin is in an open configuration (Mitchell RS, et al. Retroviral DNA integration: ASLV, HIV, and MLV show distinct target site preferences. PLoS Biol. 2004 2(8):E234). No need for resurrection theories. HIV integrase is targeted to chromatin through it interaction with the cellular protein LEDGF/p75 (Shun MC, et al. LEDGF/p75 functions downstream from preintegration complex formation to effect gene-specific HIV-1 integration. Genes Dev. 2007 21:1767-78). Integration is necessary for retroviral replication (including HIV). In fact, a new class of drug directed against HIV integrase was approved last week (Isentress). Another weapon in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The investment of resources and hours towards fighting this virus are clearly paying dividends.

  385. #386 Mr. Natural
    October 19, 2007

    “How this RNA is assembled has never been explained by the rethinkers, who usually prefer not to think about this. Using transcriptome data, we could calculate the minimum number of pieces of cellular RNAs that would need to be cleaved precisely (but how?), lined up in a specific order (why and how?), and joined together seamlessly (how?) to produce a HIV genome. The number would be somewhere in the
    high hundreds or low thousands of pieces. “Improbable” doesn’t come close to describing how unlikely this would be. Yet for the Kremer devotee, this process must happen independently for every RNA genome measured by RT-PCR and for every genome cloned full-length and in every HIV positive person.”

    Unfortunately, in my Kremer Church that last sentence is pure heresy.

    But I must agree with the previous portion, a very improbable event to take place on a meaningful scale and produce measurable quanities of the complete retroviral genome; thus, the 70S or 19Kb dimeric RNA cannot be directly measured from AIDS patients.

  386. #387 Andrew Maniotis
    October 19, 2007

    RE:
    “Bushman Fujiwara Craigie Science 1990 Sept 28 “Retroviral DNA integration directed by HIV integration protein in vitro” in the abstract it says
    These results indicate that HIV IN protein is the only viral protein required to insert model HIV DNA sequences into a target DNA in vitro.”

    “HIV integrase is targeted to chromatin through it interaction with the cellular protein LEDGF/p75 (Shun MC, et al. LEDGF/p75 functions downstream from preintegration complex formation to effect gene-specific HIV-1 integration. Genes Dev. 2007 21:1767-78).”

    “They’re getting integration with HIV IN but not controls lysates 71 to 0. They did a paper in Cell that year to with Mouse Leukemia and same results that integrase puts leukemia virus in DNA.”

    “There’s so many papers about this since then. Now the author from the paper F Bushman does integration preferences and integrase puts virus in DNA but it picks where to put it too! “Retroviral DNA integration: viral and cellular determinants of target-site selection” M K Lewinski et al PLOS Pathogen June 2006, there’s lots more.”

    All this would be great if only “HIV” could be shown to exist as an exogenous retrovirus (instead of what Montagnier, for example showed with his T-cell primaries that were known to be from a source that normally generate HERV’s which is why they the material was studied so intensively). Also, we can’t forget, patient 1, had been treated the year before for syphilis, twice for gonorrhea, had CMV, and 2 types of herpes, and these sera/cells were then stimulated wity PHA, IL2, and toxified with anti-IF antibody, as stated by Gallo. Great science, it is. So certain. So careful to control single variables.

    But shouldn’t integration of any DNA sequence, exogenous or endogenous at least involve a modification of chromatin structure that is visible (that we couldn’t detect although we should have been able to if it is the same stuff those 300+ labs used and have published)? As I said before, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but then again, that’s what controls are used for. If all these labs used the same reagents we bought (which is likely), and no chromatin remodeling activity was detected in native chromatin, then perhaps something else in the ill-defined gmish is responsible for the detection of “integration.”

    This is no surprise, however. There are said to be 100,000 papers on “HIV,” and so therefore, the 300+ odd papers you refer to on “HIV-integrase” on medline are just a drop in the ocean in number that is predicated on a wrong hypothesis that has yet to be shown to even be plausible, that there is such a thing as an exogenous retrovirus called “HIV.” But we’ll keep working on a vaccine, and beat Merck, and the 30+ other completed trials that failed to show a single humoral or cellular response to exogenously added “HIV” components.

    Cheers,

    andy

  387. #388 woodchuck
    October 19, 2007

    Andrew Maniotis:

    100,000 papers on HIV wrong and your one paper is right. You must be so proud!

    You are such a hack. Your assay can only detect gross changes. To use it to exclude the function of HIV integrase is poor science. How many labs use this amazing technique. Who has confirmed your work? How many times has Bojanowski et al, (1998) J Cell Biochem 69:127 been cited by others ?

    “If all these labs used the same reagents we bought (which is likely), and no chromatin remodeling activity was detected in native chromatin, then perhaps something else in the ill-defined gmish is responsible for the detection of “integration.””

    The other labs didn’t purchase the integrase like you did. They have generated it by number of techniques. It is also purified as part of complexes with the HIV genome. The recombinant integrase you worked with was likely a fragment because the complete protein is hard to handle. Read the papers.

    As for the proof that HIV is an exogenous retrovirus it is very clear. Infection can be started from expression of pure DNA sequence (it doesn’t get cleaner than that). Further, the virus can be shown by its DNA coding differences to spread from one cell to another and from one person to another. Do the damn experiment!

  388. #389 Adele
    October 19, 2007

    Also, we can’t forget, patient 1, had been treated the year before for syphilis, twice for gonorrhea, had CMV, and 2 types of herpes, and these sera/cells were then stimulated wity PHA, IL2, and toxified with anti-IF antibody, as stated by Gallo.

    Like I said poor Maniotis living in the past. Great objection if its 1983 if its the only AIDS sample ever, it’s 2007 guy! We show evidence, refs, and the best you got is

    All this would be great if only “HIV” could be shown to exist as an exogenous retrovirus

    So your like no experiment works I’ll always believe HIV is a HERV no matter what experiments say.

    OK Maniotis has a lab right what about,
    Take some cells show theyr’es no HIV sequence in them.
    treat with IL-2 or PHA whatever you want give em bacteria fungi any thing.
    Now show us there’s HIV sequences in them and coming out of them and infecting other stuff.
    Ever try that Maniotis? I do it all the time, negative controls Sir, third step never works ever! No HIV in them

  389. #390 franklin
    October 19, 2007

    Andrew,

    You accuse me of distorting your work:

    The topoisomerase work you distort and criticize displays a profound lack of appreciation for the history of chromatin biology.

    I pointed out that although in your previous post you indicated that the results of Bojanowski et al. ((1998) J. Cell. Biochem. 69:127-142) suggested that HIV-1 integrase lacks “minor groove-binding activity,” the actual paper never characterizes the assays used as having any relation to DNA-binding activity. The term “minor groove” does not even occur in the paper. Not even once.

    In fact, the results of the paper indicate that HIV-1 Integrase binds to chromatin. Based on the results of this paper, you have no basis for your conclusion that HIV-1 Integrase lacks “minor groove-binding activity.”

    I then directed you to the full text of a paper that demonstrates that HIV-1 integrase possesses the enzymatic activities required of a DNA Integrase: Calmels et al (2004). You buried your head in the sand and ignored this paper.

    I conclude that you either 1) are distorting the results of Bojanowski et al. (1998) in an attempt to pretend that you have performed experimental work relevant to HIV or 2) don’t understand the results reported in your own publication.

    Which is it?

    I really don’t understand what is going on.
    Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. July 6, 2007

    (Apparently not even when discussing his own work.)

  390. #391 franklin
    October 19, 2007

    Andrew states:

    What our work showed, contrary to widely held beliefs, is that the activity of this enzyme is independent of its catalytic activity.

    What can you possibly mean by that statement?

    By definition, an enzyme is a catalyst.

    Perhaps you mean that the acivity of this PROTEIN in the chromatin recondensation assay is independent of its catalytic activity.

    Andrew, your work showed that the chromatin recondensation assay does not measure an enzymatic activity. Therefore, the results of this assay are irrelevant to the enzymatic functions of HIV-1 Integrase, just as they are irrelevant to the enzymatic functions of Topoisomerase II.

    Even the activity of Topoisomerase II in the chromatin recondensation assay was shown to be noncatalytic. Its activity in this assay was stoichiometric–that is, Topo II was consumed by its activity–and its activity in this assay was present under conditions that preclude the catalytic function of the enzyme.

    The fact that you showed that even antibodies to histones display recondensation activity indicates that mere cross-linking of histones is sufficient for activity in this assay.

    Perhaps that’s all Topo II is doing in this asay– binding to histones–just like the antibodies.

    The very results you reported in your own paper indicate that the lack of chromatin recondensation activity of HIV-1 Integrase is completely irrelevant to its enzymatic activity–your paper showed that chromatin recondensation activity is non-enzymatic.

    I really don’t understand what is going on.
    Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. July 6, 2007

    (Apparently not even when discussing his own work.)

  391. #392 woodchuck
    October 19, 2007

    Franklin,
    Your evaluation of the data presented in Bojanowski et al. ((1998) J. Cell. Biochem. 69:127-142) is truly outstanding. Clearly you have an excellent grasp of science. You took the time to carefully read the manuscript, considered the outcome of the experiments, and formulated a thoughtful interpretation of the results. Such analysis of the data of any paper is always easier after the fact, but your analysis of the results should stand as an example to everyone involved in this discussion. Hopefully the pretenders such as Andrew Maniotis will consider your logic carefully and take a similar approach in evaluating the overwhelming evidence that HIV is a retrovirus that causes destruction of the immune system leading to the disease we call AIDS.

  392. #393 cooler
    October 20, 2007

    yeah the virus that doesnt do zilch in virtually every animal injected is in only 1/1000 blood t cells. ohhhhhhhh im really scared, no one even knows why it takes 10 years when people can barely find it. there is not even one study designed to see if hiv positive people with no other risk factors like AZT, mycoplasmas, severe stress/drug abuse get aids faster than matched negative controls.

    Maniotis, Duesberg, shyh ching lo are modern day copernicus’s for exposing this fraud.

    Garth nicolson phd claims to have confidenial informants in the pentagon that mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans were part of the bioweapons program and how they are laughing thier asses off how dumb doctors are to miss this and blame everything on a retrovirus.

    This would make some sense bc a military scientist shyh ching lo md phd published much on it, inducing death and disease in every animal inoculated, mice, chimps, silver leaf monkeys, embryos, and not finding it in one healthy control. refrences in lonliness thread.

    when garth nicolson found it in the blood of gwi vets and other civilains with complicated multiorganic illnesses misdiagnosed with CFS/als etc armed defense intelligence agents paid him a visit and warned him to stop his research. To find out more about how mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans was part of the bioweapons program google nicolsons true story slightly fictionilized Project Day Lily.

  393. #394 Pope
    October 20, 2007

    The other labs didn’t purchase the integrase like you did. They have generated it by number of techniques. It is also purified as part of complexes with the HIV genome. The recombinant integrase you worked with was likely a fragment because the complete protein is hard to handle. Read the papers.

    Woodchuck, are you saying that the whole team had omitted to read the small print in the sales ad. where it said “NB! only fragments available”, or that the company advertized whole proteins when all they had was fragments?

    As for the proof that HIV is an exogenous retrovirus it is very clear. Infection can be started from expression of pure DNA sequence (it doesn’t get cleaner than that). Further, the virus can be shown by its DNA coding differences to spread from one cell to another and from one person to another. Do the damn experiment!

    We are all impressed with the cleanness of isolation, cloning, transfection, mass production etc. But you must know that the good old fashioned starting with a purified particle and ending with a particle is the damn experiment denialists are looking for, not pieces of RNA or DNA. Otherwise the antigen in the vaccines would provoke the desired antibody production and we would hardly be having this wide ranging discussion with Dr. Maniotis offering such wealth of opportunities to call him a hack.

  394. #395 John Smith
    October 20, 2007

    Cooler wrote:
    “…
    when garth nicolson found it in the blood of gwi vets and other civilains with complicated multiorganic illnesses misdiagnosed with CFS/als etc armed defense intelligence agents paid him a visit and warned him to stop his research. To find out more about how mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans was part of the bioweapons program google nicolsons true story slightly fictionilized Project Day Lily.
    …”

    True AIDS dissidents are NOT conspiracy theorists! Peter Duesberg, Kary Mullis, Andrew Maniotis, and our other top scientists have SOLID data that HIV does not exist. They are nobel prize winners and top scientists, who have published in peer reviewed journals their painstakingly researched data proving that HIV is no more than a dogma created out of thin air.

    Cooler and many of the other people posting on these threds of Tara’s blog are not true rethinkers. Do not go to the Project Day lily and similar sites for the real data on how harmless HIV is. The true data has been published by Duesberg and similar respectable scientitists.

    John

  395. #396 Dr. Duke
    October 20, 2007

    I think Mr. Smith has had one too many diet sodas.

  396. #397 K J Bowling
    October 20, 2007

    Can you say circle jerk”? Sure…

    Andrew Maniotis and He Who Cannot be Named without a major lawsuit from the eagle scout, are “best friends for life”, or more.

  397. #398 woodchuck
    October 20, 2007

    Dear John Smith,

    What’s the difference between a rethinker and a true rethinker? Is it like dumb and dumber?

    Mullis and Duesberg have been retired from active science for many years. What is this data? Maniotis is a research assistant professor, something often referred to as a dog meat faculty position in biomedical science. He is not a top scientist. He is a blowhard, who will hopefully be a former research assistant professor soon.

  398. #399 trrll
    October 20, 2007

    Woodchuck, are you saying that the whole team had omitted to read the small print in the sales ad. where it said “NB! only fragments available”, or that the company advertized whole proteins when all they had was fragments?

    This is a remarkably naive statement. I imagine that every scientist has at one time or another had the experience of receiving a product from a supplier that is inactive, or even something else entirely than what was advertised. This is one of many reasons why positive and negative controls are important.

    We are all impressed with the cleanness of isolation, cloning, transfection, mass production etc. But you must know that the good old fashioned starting with a purified particle and ending with a particle is the damn experiment denialists are looking for, not pieces of RNA or DNA.

    Another characteristic of denialism is the refusal to interpret the evidence that is before them, and insisting “If you don’t do experiment X (where X is usually impractical, unethical, or downright nonsensical) then your evidence is worth nothing.” Needless to say, if X is actually done, the goalpost gets moved. Demanding that something be “purified” is particularly convenient to this purpose, as it is effectively impossible to purify anything completely, so one can always respond, “that’s not pure enough.”

    Otherwise the antigen in the vaccines would provoke the desired antibody production and we would hardly be having this wide ranging discussion with Dr. Maniotis offering such wealth of opportunities to call him a hack.

    Again, this is remarkably naive. It is not at all true that one can always provoke an antibody response to a protein, and any scientist knows this. The immune system is very complex, and what will and will not provoke an antibody is hard to predict. This is one reason why adjuvants are used to “trick” the immune system into producing an antibody to a protein that is not otherwise antigenically active, but this is as much an art as a science.

  399. #400 woodchuck
    October 20, 2007

    Dear Pope,

    What exactly is this old fashion experiment that you desire? Start with a particle and end with a particle. I think this has been done numerous times. Please define.

    As for HIV vaccine candidates, they do generate antigen responses. The issue is that the response is not broad enough to protect from all variants of the virus. It like the flu virus (do you believe in that one?). The virus changes enough from year to year so that the immunity that was generated the last time someone was infected is not broad enough to prevent infection by the new strain of flu.

  400. #401 cooler
    October 20, 2007

    john smith,
    have you even bothered to go over shyh ching lo’s research on mycoplasma incognitus? when garth and nancy nicolson found it in gwi vets according to them, two of the top cancer reserachers of the time thier phones were tapped and armed defense agents visited them threating them to stop their reaserch., all criminal complaints deserve to be invesigated and not dismissed out of hand in a democracy.

    Think mycoplasma incognitus is harmless, read this, one of Lo’s many animal models, found in a subset of cases AIDS and people misdiagnosed with cfs etc. mice, chimps embryos all sickened/died as well displaying a broad sprectrum of illnesses in Lo’s studies, hiv/hpv/hep c does zilch in animals

    Fatal systemic infections of nonhuman primates by Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain).Lo SC, Wear DJ, Shih JW, Wang RY, Newton PB 3rd, Rodriguez JF.
    American Registry of Pathology, Department of Infectious and Parasitic Diseases Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, D.C. 20306-6000.

    Four silvered leaf monkeys inoculated with Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain) showed wasting syndromes and died in 7-9 months. Infected animals had a late and transient antibody response to mycoplasmal infection. Three monkeys revealed periodic mycoplasmal antigenemia. The one that had the most persistent antigenemia failed to mount a detectable antibody response and was the first to die of the infection. The control monkey was killed 8 months later, after the last of the infected animals had died, and revealed no evidence of seroconversion or antigenemia. Polymerase chain reaction, immunohistochemical, and electron microscopic studies identified systemic infections of M. fermentans in the infected animals. No other opportunistic infection or neoplastic disease was found. It is interesting to note the absence of an inflammatory reaction to the large number of mycoplasmas in the infected tissues. M. fermentans (incognitus strain) apparently suppressed normal inflammatory or immune responses, produced wasting syndromes, and caused a fatal systemic infection in these monkeys.

  401. #402 Pope
    October 20, 2007

    What exactly is this old fashion experiment that you desire? Start with a particle and end with a particle.

    Dear Woodchuck (I seem to remember something about cancer and woodchucks?),

    As you see I’ve been very aggressively accused of being naive by the otherwise so urbane and always well informed Dr. Trrll, which makes me a little bit cautious. It also makes me a little bit confused because you, who are obviously expert on this whole issue, seems to be unaware of something that Dr. Trrll considers common knowledge.

    Anyway, since you chose to talk about DNA rather than – and I beg Dr. Trrll’s forgiveness for my use of that word -”purified” viral particles, I was just wondering if you were aware that various prizes put up by dissidents for that initial viral particle (not the clone) haven’t been collected yet?

    Although not an expert by any means, I am well aware of the flu virus, and also some of the supposed differences between that and “HIV”. However, what Dr. Maniotis states above – and he might very well be wrong, that’s part of science – is that all the “HIV” vaccine initiatives have failed misreably, whereas the flu vaccines seldom fail and are supposed to protect for a year or two.

    Dr. Maniotis makes the further claim, I think – in this I may be wrong that’s the frequent lot of lay people trying to interpret these lofty matters and I accept it if it is so – is that the “HIV DNA” or whatever you may wish to call it, in the vaccines has failed to evoke the “HIV” specific antibody response.

    Now instead of going into detail about the biochemical (non)activity of “HIV” integrase, you could simply tell us that the vaccines do evoke “HIV” specific antibodies and then explain why these antibodies offer zero protection
    although the antigens are the same as the ones certified for the well nigh infallible “HIV” tests, if you catch my drift despite my naivete and unfamiliarity with the technical terminology

  402. #403 pat
    October 20, 2007

    “Maniotis is a research assistant professor, something often referred to as a dog meat faculty position in biomedical science. He is not a top scientist. He is a blowhard, who will hopefully be a former research assistant professor soon.”

    You mean like Tara?

  403. #404 jspreen
    October 20, 2007

    True AIDS dissidents are NOT conspiracy theorists!

    Now what’s this John Smith dummy talking about? Are you and Tara twins or what?

    Don’t you know that the term “conspiracy theorist” is nothing but an idle concept invented to discredit people who have thoughts that are not approved by the leaders of the herds of nerds?
    True AIDS dissidents Ha! Ha! ha! Let me laugh. So now people who are not scientists but who simply have a working brain, and thus recognize HIV=Aids science as baby talk, are not TRUE dissidents?

  404. #405 cooler
    October 20, 2007

    totally agree jspreen, if we all lived in nazi germany and you and I said they were throwing people in gas chambers, people like adele, noble and Tara would say we were deragaged conspiracy theorists, too bad we have the facts on our side.

    They dont have zilch, not one reliable animal model, hundereds of chimps were inoculated not one has died of aids after 20 years,
    not one matched controlled study to see if hiv positive people with no risk factors such as azt, mycoplasmas, severe stress/drug abuse even get aids to test this slow virus 1/1000 tcells theory. These people are bad news.

    all the while the only real microbe people need to worry about mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans slowly spreads and disables the population causing a wide array of complex multi organic illnesses that in many cases have been misdiagnosed as CFS/als/RA.

    Theyve created a nightmare, and the people in charge of the bioweapons program are just laughing their asses off how dumb many scientists are to let this genocide occur. NO wonder when nicolson figured it out they sent armed defense intelligence agents to try and stop his research, the phone company said theyve never seen so many taps on the phone, project day lily, true events slightly fictionilized to stay out of court. Part of the bioweapons program thats why youve not heard of it.

    The science is on my side, every animal lo injected this with died/sickened, while your pet microbes like HPV do zilch in animals, are found in cancer free people and have 40 yr window periods.

  405. #406 franklin
    October 20, 2007

    Cooler,

    Do you realize that jspreen thinks Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitius strain) does not cause disease?

    Perhaps there is a work of fiction that you would like to recommend to him.

  406. #407 cooler
    October 20, 2007

    stop insulting shyh ching lo’s md phd’s brilliant research, his animal models (posted above) are far from fiction. Hes actually one of the few people that have examined the dead bodies of AIDS patients, being that he is the the worlds foremost infectious disease pathologists working at the most sophisticated lab, the Armed forces institute of Pathology, he didnt buy his degree at wal mart, like you and noble did.

    Lo knew that throwing kochs postulates out the window was not the way to go, unlike the sorry scientists you worship like gallo and levy, who flushed every rule of virology down the toilet.

    Microbes that didnt induce disease in animals, were barely detectable and in 1/1000 tcells, not visible by electron microscopy, while lo’s pathenogenic mycoplasmas induced death/disease in chimps, mice, monkeys and embryos and could be seen in large quantities using the electron microscope, and he didnt find in 1 healthy control. (refrences in lonliness causes AIDS thread)

    You should be ashamed of yourself for if you are really a scientist turning a blind eye to the spread of this microbe through the population causing an epidemic of chronic multi organic illnesses responsible for my sisters suffering.

    Many of these people have been misdiagnosed with CFS etc, a new disease catergory should be created called mycoplasma penetrans/incognitus positive based on Lo’s brilliant work and animal models.

    Shameless loser. You are a drug company hack and arent fit to shine Lo’s , nicolsons, Mullis’s and Duesbergs shoes.

  407. #408 franklin
    October 20, 2007

    I’m just letting you know that jspeen, who you totally agree with, doesn’t beleive that Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitius strain) causes disease.

    There may be a work of fiction that you might be interested in recommending to him.

  408. #409 woodchuck
    October 20, 2007

    Dear Pope,

    First, you are correct about woodchucks and cancer. Woodchucks have a virus called woodchuck hepatitis virus (WHV), which is related to human hepatitis B virus (HBV), and causes liver cancer (like HBV). Do you guys believe in HBV? HBV also has a number of features that I would think would drive you guys crazy, but that’s a story for another day I guess.

    As for the prizes relating to the particle thing, didn’t your hero Peter Duesberg try to claim the prize? A website referring to this issue is:

    http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/pdreplyep.htm

    It looks like he believes that HIV is an exogenous retrovirus. I would agree with him on this one which is why I still don’t know what you are looking for, do you? Please articulate what you are looking for as evidence. As for the whole issue of a picture of the virus (electron microscope image) I find that to be a bit ridiculous. In the old days identification by an eyewitness was required to identify someone in a court of law. A fingerprint, a unique signature that could identify someone, replaced this. Today what is used is DNA sequence. This is the ultimate proof of identification and is used to convict and exonerate individuals. If DNA is good enough to decide guilt or innocence, why isn’t it good enough for the denialists?

    As for potential vaccines, they do generate antibodies. The literature is full of examples of this. I can provide citations if you like. The issue is the generation of neutralizing antibodies. These are antibodies that potently block viral infection. HIV has evolved a number of characteristics that makes it difficult for antibodies to block the function of the viral envelope protein and prevent the virus from entering target cells. More importantly, is the generation of broadly neutralizing antibodies, that is antibodies that block multiple variants of HIV. Such antibodies have been identified but they are rare. Why is it difficult for the immune system to generate such antibodies? The HIV envelope is heavily coated with carbohydrate molecules and regions sensitive to neutralization are masked in the protein structure. On this topic Maniotis is especially ignorant.

    When comparing flu and HIV it is important to appreciate that while HIV mutates at a high rate, flu does not. It does change at a slow rate, which is why last years vaccine will not work this year. Further, the immune system is quite efficient at generating neutralizing antibodies to flu virus.

    You seem genuinely interested in learning more and understanding the details of what you question relating to HIV/AIDS. Maybe this is the difference between a denialist and a true denialist.

  409. #410 trrll
    October 20, 2007

    Don’t you know that the term “conspiracy theorist” is nothing but an idle concept invented to discredit people who have thoughts that are not approved by the leaders of the herds of nerds?

    Scientific denialists pretty much always turn to conspiracy theory to get around a central problem–the fact that virtually all of the scientific progress is being made by people who guide their research based on the theory the denialsit is trying to deny. To rationalize this, the denialist has to convince himself that there is some kind of conspiracy to suppress research that supports his views.

  410. #411 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Dear Woodchuck,

    You are right, this particular topic is what intrigues me the most about the HIV/AIDS issue; you are also right that I will probably remain if not an outright denialist of Jspreen’s magnitude then highly sceptical of various viruses’ “existence” as normally conceptualized, and all the biological properties ascribed to them.

    Duesberg has indeed challenged the Perth Group (and Stefan Lanka) He has also been answered by them same place which is why I thought it wouldn’t be necessary for me to restate their arguments. In terms of your analogy, however, a finger print is an unique signature, but in the case of finger prints it is very easy to assure oneself that there is a real being associated with it possessing the characteristic properties of “human being”. In the case of HIV DNA, it does not seem unreasonable to wish to assure oneself initially that there is a replication competent, exogenous, disease causing retroviral particle associated with it, before accepting the part as proof of the whole.

    On initial purification and electronmicroscopy, let me give a little snippet as a mere sample of the interesting complications that can arise (in the Perth Group’s mind anyway) when one raises the bar slightly. This is in answer to Robin Weiss:

    6. “…purification by this method is no problem…” (Weiss)

    If purification of HIV particles by density gradient centrifugation is no problem why has it not been reported?
    (Perth)

    Given the fact there is no electron microscopic evidence for the existence of HIV particles at the density of 1.16 gm/ml, how may one have evidence that the particles lose their infectivity during density gradient centrifugation? If the infectivity of HIV particles is so labile how do they retain their infectivity during the processing of plasma into the factor VIII clotting concentrates which are administered to individuals with haemophilia? (This procedure involves collection of blood, separation of plasma by centrifugation, cool storage followed by freezing, transport to a facility for pooling with donation of similarly obtained plasma, thawing, further freezing and thawing, filtration, lyophilisation and storage as a dry powder for weeks to months before use

    http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/epreplyek.htm

    The comparison with flu virus and its mutation rate is also intriguing because I variously hear the argument from
    “your side” that there’s nothing unique about HIV’s mutation rate – which is supposed to be comparable to that of influenza A – but also the “endlessly sneaky
    evolutionary giant” description which you have given.

    Howbeit, the question has been raised, if HIV continually outmutates the other evolutionary giant, the body’s immune defences, and all attempts at a vaccine, why doesn’t it outmutate the HIV tests at a corresponding rate?

    On the other hand, we have the fact that, after an initial “burst” on the part of the virus, the immune system seems to catch up admirably, so well in fact that HIV (HIV scientists’ theorizing some would say) has been forced into hiding in strange nooks and crannies, from where it carries out its hit and run missions and/or causes constant self-defeating hyperactivation of the body’s defences – on an exact analogy with the cavebound Al Qaeda, if you don’t mind.

  411. #412 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Mysteriously it seems that the middle part(!) of the passage Weiss-Perth exchange I cut and pasted in toto has become victim of some sort of deletion or recombination event I try again.

    6. “…purification by this method is no problem…” (Weiss)

    If purification of HIV particles by density gradient centrifugation is no problem why has it not been reported? (Perth)

    7. “…[HIV] loses most of its infectivity during this laboratory process”.(Weiss)

    Given the fact there is no electron microscopic evidence for the existence of HIV particles at the density of 1.16 gm/ml, how may one have evidence that the particles lose their infectivity during density gradient centrifugation? If the infectivity of HIV particles is so labile how do they retain their infectivity during the processing of plasma into the factor VIII clotting concentrates which are administered to individuals with haemophilia? (This procedure involves collection of blood, separation of plasma by centrifugation, cool storage followed by freezing, transport to a facility for pooling with donation of similarly obtained plasma, thawing, further freezing and thawing, filtration, lyophilisation and storage as a dry powder for weeks to months before use. (Perth)

  412. #413 jspreen
    October 21, 2007

    Do you realize that jspreen thinks Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitius strain) does not cause disease?

    I have no thoughts at all about the Mycoplasma things but that’s not the point. I am pretty sure also that cooler has no thoughts about Hamer’s New Medicine and if he does have some, that they are probably not very positive. But that’s not the point either.
    The point is that I think, and I’m quite sure cooler totally agrees with this, that each person has the right to speak out for his/her convictions without being treated like some kind of devilish denialist.
    And, to come back to subject of the conspiracy theorists mentioned above:
    The only eternal conspiracy is the conspiracy of the herd nerds who, without being active conspirers, are always ready to throw the first stone, exclude the strange and unknown from their daily introspection and lazily hang on to the beaten path prophet’s ideas.
    The real conspirers, like Ben Laden’s imaginary troops of terrorists and the G.W.Bush&Co’s real gang of world-order soldiers, they won’t go free eternally.

  413. #414 jspreen
    October 21, 2007

    It’s strange, ancient answers to even more ancient questions suddenly appear in this thread…. I know this is not a place for 911 but one thing for sure, David Marjanović, I won’t you let get off the hook with your silly statements about the Pentagone photos I referred to above.

    David Marjanović wrote:

    Sure. You implied there was no plane. But we have photos of plane fragments and corpses all around the impact site, inside and outside the building. It follows that there was a plane. In short: you’re wrong.

    Who are “we”, please? Were are the pictures? Huh? Oh yes, wait a minute, I see.
    “We” are the people who don’t mind that millions doubt the aircraft version and the all unveiling pictures we have, well, “we” keep them pictures neatly in the album where we glued them together with the photographs of Grampa, Mamma, The Baby and the barbecue garden parties.

  414. #415 franklin
    October 21, 2007

    See that, Cooler?

    He has “no thoughts at all about the Mycoplasma things.”

    Your work is unfinished.

    Are you sure there is no work of fiction you want to recommend to him?

  415. #416 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Are you sure there is no work of fiction you want to recommend to him?

    How about Gallo’s initial papers on the discovery of the aetiological agent of AIDS?

  416. #417 Adele
    October 21, 2007

    Pope says
    why doesn’t it outmutate the HIV tests at a corresponding rate?

    Well pope we went throw this when you were Epidemic-Lisa and w/Michael too. Parts of HIV mutate at different rates. Everyones talking about airplanes today so think about Write brothers plane and modern jet plane. They have wings wheels a seat for the pilot but they mutated alot other places! HIV tests use places in HIV where there’s not so much mutation. Oh and HIVs are similar more then the Write brothers plane and a modern plane.

    Oh and maybe find something better than crap from a australian medical tech with a bachelors degree for your “facts” imagine if I was the only person who said HIV causes AIDS and I never did good experiments about it only wrote stuff on the internet. Would you believe me, no. Thing is, I’m more qualified then Eleni whatever her name is to talk about HIV and I’m alot less then Tara Dale Franklin DT woodchuck maybe all scientists hear. You don’t listen with people who know whattheir talking about why do you listen to Eleni.

  417. #418 Adele
    October 21, 2007

    I’m so sad Andy did not tell me about when his paper’s coming out about how you put IL-2 and PHA on normal cells and HIV comes out Magic!

    He said that’s what Dr. Gallo did and he said Dr, Gallo lied about HIV it was just IL-2 and PHA and interferon antibodies made a “sginature” no HIV, but Gallo destroyed those controls. Fraud Andy said.

    I did not see Andy aplogize about saying that did you?

    Well a good way to find out if Andy’s, right is, start a contest!! I have a “individually wrapped Honey Bun” on my desk, joke about it kiddies but I do. And I will save it for the first denialist who publish in a major perreview journal even tho I love Honey Buns and I’m so fat and ugly bc of them. The winner have to publish this,

    Start on cells, no HIV DNA in them by PCR no RNA coming out by qRT-PCR.
    Give some HIV IL2 IFN antibodies PHA and some other ones just IL2 IFN ab PHA, and some other ones nothing.
    THen you get HIV coming out of the cells even the ones you didn’t give HIV to, but not the ones with nothing. And HIV DNA in cells too. And you have to show you didn’t contaminate your noHIV control.

    So if no one does it that’s proof Maniotis is wrong because if there’s a contest everyone should try and get the prize right Pope if they don’t their totally wrong! The expiration date on the Honey Bun is August 2009, nice preservatives huh? So let me know and take your time you might be trying a while.

  418. #419 jspreen
    October 21, 2007

    Thing is, I’m more qualified then Eleni whatever her name is to talk about HIV

    Of course, of course. You’re certainly infinitely more qualified to talk about HIV than ANY HIV=Aids denialist. Of course, denialist know nothing about HIV because they think the thing doesn’t exist. Now, get me right: The thing you call HIV may exist, but the thing you call HIV and causes Aids, that thing doesn’t exist.

    BTW, befor yu wright about ze Wright broffers, git the spilling wright.

  419. #420 cooler
    October 21, 2007

    Franklin, lo’s work on mfi are not fiction, theyre on pub med, what is a work of fiction is the delusional world that your drug company masters have given you.

    Like HPV causing cancer 30 years later, no animal model, most everyone who has it does not get cancer, but gotta make money off those vaccines, being the prostitute for merck that you are! Your whole scientific persona is a work of fiction.

  420. #421 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Adele, the antibody tests look for conserved parts of the HIV genome?

  421. #422 woodchuck
    October 21, 2007

    Pope said:

    “Howbeit, the question has been raised, if HIV continually outmutates the other evolutionary giant, the body’s immune defences, and all attempts at a vaccine, why doesn’t it outmutate the HIV tests at a corresponding rate?”

    Antibodies that are detected for the HIV test are directed against p24, also known as capsid, which is located inside the virus. Therefore it does not change like the envelope (which is on the outside of the virus) in response to the antibody response in an infected individual.

  422. #423 Adele
    October 21, 2007

    the antibody tests look for conserved parts of the HIV genome?

    very funny pope or are you being serious? The antibody tests look at proteins for example p24 read what woodchuck said.

    The PCR tests like viral load tests look at HIV genome, parts that are conserved or like pope says “preserved”

    Pope some day maybe try backing up stuff you say like,

    These slides have in fact been used as negative controls in two legal cases.

    You still didn’t tell us what cases where, links. Are you going to or did you just make it up.

  423. #424 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Dear Woodchuck,

    ELISA and WB are looking exclusively for the p24 core protein?

    Anyway, I’ve checked and I may have misunderstood Dr. Maniotis when he talked about “diagnostic antigens” as being the ones from the antibody tests, I don’t know, but that is waht he says. He further says that gp120, which is hardly a core potein, fails to evoke antibody reponses. Perhaps you could comment directly on Dr. Maniotis statement?

    it has been repeatedly shown more than 30 times in “HIV” vaccine trials that antibodies against “HIV” proteins aren’t evoked even when the so-called unique and diagnostic “HIV’” antigens are injected directly into the bloodstream of healthy humans (according to “experts,” no molecular entity associated with “HIV” sequences, proteins, or glycoproteins such as GP120, has been shown to be immunogenic in humans

  424. #425 Adele
    October 21, 2007

    Perhaps you could comment directly on Dr. Maniotis statement?

    Sure I know your not talking to me but I can comment, Maniotis doesn’t know what he’s talking about. That’s kinda common for him. HPV HIV childhood vax, artificail sweetener 9-11, the guy’s confused about alot. MAybe you shouldn’t listen to me though listen to Maniotis,

    I really don’t understand what is going on. Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. July 6, 2007

    So pope where are those court cases and I want real links please.

  425. #426 Adele
    October 21, 2007

    Pope here’s a few papers Maniotis didn’t read but if you ever get around they answer the questions you got,

    1: Abdel-Motal U, Wang S, Lu S, Wigglesworth K, Galili U.
    Increased immunogenicity of human immunodeficiency virus gp120 engineered to
    express Galalpha1-3Galbeta1-4GlcNAc-R epitopes.
    J Virol. 2006 Jul;80(14):6943-51.
    PMID: 16809300 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    2: Kim JH, Pitisuttithum P, Kamboonruang C, Chuenchitra T, Mascola J, Frankel SS,
    DeSouza MS, Polonis V, McLinden R, Sambor A, Brown AE, Phonrat B,
    Rungruengthanakit K, Duliege AM, Robb ML, McNeil J, Birx DL; Thai AIDS Vaccine
    Evaluation Group.
    Specific antibody responses to vaccination with bivalent CM235/SF2 gp120:
    detection of homologous and heterologous neutralizing antibody to subtype E
    (CRF01.AE) HIV type 1.
    AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2003 Sep;19(9):807-16.
    PMID: 14585211 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    3: Sailaja G, Husain S, Nayak BP, Jabbar AM.
    Long-term maintenance of gp120-specific immune responses by genetic vaccination
    with the HIV-1 envelope genes linked to the gene encoding Flt-3 ligand.
    J Immunol. 2003 Mar 1;170(5):2496-507.
    PMID: 12594275 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    4: Jin X, Ramanathan M Jr, Barsoum S, Deschenes GR, Ba L, Binley J, Schiller D,
    Bauer DE, Chen DC, Hurley A, Gebuhrer L, El Habib R, Caudrelier P, Klein M, Zhang
    L, Ho DD, Markowitz M.
    Safety and immunogenicity of ALVAC vCP1452 and recombinant gp160 in newly human
    immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected patients treated with prolonged highly
    active antiretroviral therapy.
    J Virol. 2002 Mar;76(5):2206-16.
    PMID: 11836398 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    5: McFarland EJ, Borkowsky W, Fenton T, Wara D, McNamara J, Samson P, Kang M,
    Mofenson L, Cunningham C, Duliege AM, Sinangil F, Spector SA, Jimenez E, Bryson
    Y, Burchett S, Frenkel LM, Yogev R, Gigliotti F, Luzuriaga K, Livingston RA; AIDS
    Clinical Trials Group 230 Collaborators.
    Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) gp120-specific antibodies in neonates
    receiving an HIV-1 recombinant gp120 vaccine.
    J Infect Dis. 2001 Nov 15;184(10):1331-5. Epub 2001 Oct 10.
    PMID: 11679925 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    6: Hladik F, Bender S, Akridge RE, Hu YX, Galloway C, Francis D, McElrath MJ.
    Recombinant HIV-1 glycoprotein 120 induces distinct types of delayed
    hypersensitivity in persons with or without pre-existing immunologic memory.
    J Immunol. 2001 Mar 1;166(5):3580-8.
    PMID: 11207319 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    7: Corbet S, Vinner L, Hougaard DM, Bryder K, Nielsen HV, Nielsen C, Fomsgaard A.
    Construction, biological activity, and immunogenicity of synthetic envelope DNA
    vaccines based on a primary, CCR5-tropic, early HIV type 1 isolate (BX08) with
    human codons.
    AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2000 Dec 10;16(18):1997-2008.
    PMID: 11153083 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    8: Binley JM, Arshad H, Fouts TR, Moore JP.
    An investigation of the high-avidity antibody response to glycoprotein 120 of
    human immunodeficiency virus type 1.
    AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 1997 Aug 10;13(12):1007-15.
    PMID: 9264287 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    9: Deckert PM, Ballmaier M, Lang S, Deicher H, Schedel I.
    CD4-imitating human antibodies in HIV infection and anti-idiotypic vaccination.
    J Immunol. 1996 Jan 15;156(2):826-33.
    PMID: 8543839 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  426. #427 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Adele, thanks you input is as usual invaluable – which is more than can be said about your honey bun prize. Obviously you don’t feel very confident it will not be claimed or you would have upped the stakes a bit, like thrown your pet macaque into the bargain or something. Btw. would you happen to have some left over HIV in your fridge? For some unfathomable reason they keep turning down my grant proposal for Experimental Evaluation Of Standard HIV Controls. Maybe I could come and stay with you while I work on it? All those CDC choppers hovering in my garden is starting to get on my nerves.

  427. #428 cooler
    October 21, 2007

    why dont Adele, tara, franklin debate harvard trained scientist Dr maniotis in public on hiv as the cause of AIDS, I dont blame you clowns for being scared, cmon it would be 3 against 1, plus you guys could bring all of your “overhelming evidence” to humiliate him.

    LOL you have no overwhelming evidence, no original scientific papers that prove hiv causes AIDS (they dont exist), just the NIH fact sheet with cherry picked data that was released years later, now I know why you turkeys always make every excuse not to debate.

    You guys think Dr. Maniotis is such a quack debate him in front of students and faculty at a good school, youll have your oppurtunity to make a fool of him. Bring that loser orac along as well, it will be 4 vs 1, surely youll come out on top!

    lol even the 9/11 debunkers debate. You guys are just scared dont give me that “its beneath us” crap or that debates only take place in the peer reviewed journals bullshit, as if editors of these journals are could not possibly have biases themselves bc of the governments propaganda campaign with hiv.

    the “respectable” academic journals in nazi germany and mao’s china also published propaganda and bullshit, same thing nowadays. 4 against 1 are you guys that cowardly?

  428. #429 woodchuck
    October 21, 2007

    Pope,

    The ELISA is to p24; the western blot detects antibodies to all viral proteins.

    Did Maniotis really write?

    “it has been repeatedly shown more than 30 times in “HIV” vaccine trials that antibodies against “HIV” proteins aren’t evoked even when the so-called unique and diagnostic “HIV’” antigens are injected directly into the bloodstream of healthy humans (according to “experts,” no molecular entity associated with “HIV” sequences, proteins, or glycoproteins such as GP120, has been shown to be immunogenic in humans”

    Where are the 30 citations? That statement is ridiculous. Antibodies are generated to any non-self expressed protein when injected into any animal (human, bird, etc) with an immune system. As stated above, immune responses to vaccines for HIV tested to date are always detected. The problem is that the responses to injected antigens are not sufficient to protect against infection by the different HIV variants

  429. #430 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Test for censorship

  430. #431 Braganza
    October 21, 2007

    Dear Everybody,

    John Moore wrote:
    “Dear Braganza, I recommend you (and others) read Nicoli Nattrass’s book “Mortal Combat”, and her previous book that more specifically addresses the economics of HAART rollout in South Africa. ”

    Is there any public review on these assays that I can read or download from the net ? There is nothing in amazon…

    I am interested in the subject.

    Thanks in advance,

  431. #432 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Ok I’ m seemingly not censored anymore.

    I was hoping you’d be a bit more honest and forthcoming. Dr. Maniotis is not, as far as I can see, saying that no antibodies were generated in any of those 30+ trials, only none protective against HIV. You claim that this is due to the terroristic virus outmutating all you clever guys. Maniotis speculates that part of the failure could be due to the fact that self is indeed challenged with self.

    On P24 from Dr. Maniotis:

    Its even more confusing given that p24 is found, according to at least one group, in the kidneys of non-HIV-infected children (Dura WT, Wozniewicz BM. (Expression of antigens homologous to human retrovirus molecules in normal and severely atrophic thymus. Thymus 22 (4):245-54, 1994).

    there is still, no evidence whatsoever, that p24 has anything to do with an exogenous virus called “HIV.” I’d like to give a few examples:
    1. If you go to figure 3 in this paper, one cannot tell a piece of cellular debris from any other piece of debris or crap. And this is where p24 was isolated from under the best PURIFICATION conditions that “HIV” science could muster? If you want to see what a virus prep for purification should look like, see http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/news/edhlettercont.htm
    And note that there isn’t any crap that can co-purify and be mistaken for a unique, exogenous, viral protein, or at least its highly unlikely. The author points to the two pieces of shit in the prep that aren’t viral in nature in a background of hundreds that are identical.
    2. The authors specifically state that: “Identification and analysis of the virus are complicated by the presence of cellular membrane vesicles which COPURIFY with the virus.”
    3. “We recently reported a proteolytic procedure (Ott et al., 1995b) that effectively rejmoves greater than 95% of proteins associated with these membrane vesicles. This procedure has allowed us to demonstrate that the cytoskeletal proteins, actin, ezrin, moesin, and cofilin are located IN THE INTERIOR of virions.”
    Question: If actin, exrin, and cytoskeletal proteins are located INSIDE the virions, how can one tell if p24, which is a faint band on most cellular gels that come from non-infected cells in most labs, is also a cellular protein? The gel shown in figure 1 (the non-infected lane) has weaker bands at all of these weight designations that supposedly the infected supernatants were run (B,C). In fact the p24 band is extremely PRESENT in lane A, which is the uninfected lane. This gel is the basis for giving someone cancer chemo on their cornflakes for life? For shame!

    This is either from an unspecified in the context “Bess et al., (1997)” and/or “Laurent-Crawford et al.” paper.

    http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2007/05/smallpox_still_takes_a_toll.php#comment-490510

  432. #433 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    Woodchuck I agree it would have been easier for both of us if Dr. Maniotis had identified who the “experts” are he is referring to. in the snippet you quote back at me.

    These slides have in fact been used as negative controls in two legal cases.
    You still didn’t tell us what cases where, links. Are you going to or did you just make it up.

    Adele, you still didn’t produce anybody with a real name a real degree and a real university affiliation to take up Christine Maggiore’s challenge. You get me brave Sir John, Nick Bennett or another member of the Order of the Suddenly Silent Crusaders and I’ll get you all the references you want.

    http://groups.msn.com/aidsmythexposed/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=1&ID_Message=31695 (First 3 paragraphs)

  433. #434 trrll
    October 21, 2007

    Howbeit, the question has been raised, if HIV continually outmutates the other evolutionary giant, the body’s immune defences, and all attempts at a vaccine, why doesn’t it outmutate the HIV tests at a corresponding rate?

    In the body, HIV variants that are inhibited by drugs or antibodies do not survive to replicate, whereas those that are resistant are able to replicate. Combined with HIV’s high rate of mutation, this is a recipe for evolution within the body of resistant HIV strains. Since a diagnostic test does not influence which viruses replicate in the body and which do not, there is no selective pressure to drive evolution of HIV variants that are not detected by the diagnostic test.

  434. #435 woodchuck
    October 21, 2007

    Pope,

    The human genome is sequenced. Where is this endogenous virus? Where is the p24 coding sequence?

  435. #436 trrll
    October 21, 2007

    why dont Adele, tara, franklin debate harvard trained scientist Dr maniotis in public on hiv as the cause of AIDS

    Denialists have lost the scientific debate in the pages of peer reviewed journals.

    The have lost the legal debate in the courtroom.

    So now they are desperate to take their case to a forum where they are free of those fact-checking peer-reviewers and those cross-examining lawyers. Where rhetoric trumps evidence, and where they can get away with their favorite tactics of cherry picking, quote mining, and shifting goalposts.

    But science is not politics, and scientific decisions are not based on who can produce the best-sounding sound-bites.

  436. #437 Pope
    October 21, 2007

    But science is not politics, and scientific decisions are not based on who can produce the best-sounding sound-bites.

    That’s too bad Dr. Trrll, because that there The human genome is sequenced, and we didn’t find any HIV is one hell of an impressive-sounding sound-bite.

  437. #438 jspreen
    October 21, 2007

    Denialists have lost the scientific debate in the pages of peer reviewed journals.

    Ha Ha Ha !!!! You sure are some kind of a clown trrll and if I had to write such nonsense on the Web I wouldn’t put my name under it either.
    trrll… Anyway, it’s not because you keep hiding away behind a string of five random letters that I will let you get away with this. A part from some (hastily aborted by the editor) Duesberg/Bialy publications, ages ago, to which scientific debate in which peer reviewed journals do you refer?

    !!!!!!!!! ANSWER !!!!!!!!!!!

    So now we have two of a kind. David Marjanović who sees lots and lots of corpses and aircraft debris on an immaculate lawn and trrll who reports scientific debate, nobody ever witnessed, with people his party has always openly refused to debate with.

    I deeply regret it, but I cannot get past asking the same question for the third time: How full of shit are you, David Marjanović and trrll, to be able to backup such nonsense?

  438. #439 trrll
    October 21, 2007

    A part from some (hastily aborted by the editor) Duesberg/Bialy publications, ages ago, to which scientific debate in which peer reviewed journals do you refer?

    You are correct that the scientific debate on the role of HIV and AIDS has been over for ages. To determine who won, simply google “HIV” and “AIDS,” pick a few dozen papers at random, and count how many researchers are basing their investigations on Duesberg’s “drugs and unhealthy habits” theory, and how many are basing their research on the theory that HIV is causative in AIDS.

  439. #440 trrll
    October 21, 2007

    That’s too bad Dr. Trrll, because that there The human genome is sequenced, and we didn’t find any HIV is one hell of an impressive-sounding sound-bite.

    Indeed. But you could claim the opposite, and it would sound just as impressive. In a public debate, truth is less important than who can sound the most persuasive, because most of the people in the audience will have no way of knowing who is telling the truth. But if you claim that in a paper submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, the reviewers will check your references, and you will be out of luck. And in a courtroom, opposing lawyers will demand that you produce the evidence.

  440. #441 jspreen
    October 21, 2007

    To determine who won, simply google “HIV” and “AIDS,”

    Too late ttrrrlll! I have already published (peer reviewed!!!) an article on the scientific method of how to proof the validity of the equation HIV=Aids. The article is called “The absolute certainty that HIV causes Aids” and as you will notice, Google plays an impressive role in my brilliant exposé.

    Here you can read the article. Enjoy!

  441. #442 Dustin
    October 21, 2007

    Too late ttrrrlll! I have already published (peer reviewed!!!) an article on the scientific method of how to proof the validity of the equation HIV=Aids. The article is called “The absolute certainty that HIV causes Aids” and as you will notice, Google plays an impressive role in my brilliant exposé.

    He had to get a little less subtle for me to finally catch on, but jspreen has been running a satire of denialism worthy of Dr. Richard Paley (the world renowned crypozoologist and theobiologist).

  442. #443 ElkMountainMan
    October 21, 2007

    Dear Braganza,

    a short review of Nattrass’s book may be found at,
    http://www.news.uct.ac.za/dailynews/archives/?id=6383
    There is more about the book on aids truth.

    Dear Pope,

    As you have most likely gathered from your extensive readings on the subject, the antigenicity of HIV proteins is not the problem in vaccine design; the accessibility of these antigens in the real virion is.

    Woodchuck mentioned the carbohydrate coatings of the envelope, rendering the protein itself largely invisible to the immune system in the only context where it counts: the intact, potent, infectious virus. Protein fragments or proteins associated with defective virions may generate antibody response, but this response will not affect the properly-glycosylated surface proteins of infectious virions.

    Could one, perhaps, design a vaccine to the carbohydrates that coat the outside of the virion? At first blush, the answer is no, since individual carbohydrates, as “self,” do not tend to elicit strong antibody responses.

    However, specific patterns of specific types of glycosylation as a whole could generate an effective antibody response. Those who are interested in this topic are encouraged to consult the literature. I recommend a recent publication in Current Pharmaceutical Design, “Defining Carboyhdrate Antigens as HIV Vaccine Candidates,” by Anastas Pashov, et al, 2007, 13, 185-201.

  443. #444 Chris Noble
    October 22, 2007

    You still didn’t tell us what cases where, links. Are you going to or did you just make it up.

    Al-Bayati appears to make his living as an “expert” witness to defend people accused of shaking their babies to death. Predictably the babies always seem to have died from vaccine damage or something else entirely unrelated to being shaken to death.

    Perhaps Al-Bayati has used the slides in some of these cases.

    If you want you can find most of them in Medical (not)Veritas

    If you want a laugh click on the link labelled editors. Familiar faces?

    I think the more relevant question relates to Al-Bayati’s performance in court. Has he actually won a case? Has he actually made it to court?

  444. #445 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    Dear ElkMountainMan,

    None of my incredibly wide-ranging reading on the topic have made the problem of core and envelope proteins and the sugar coating of it all as clear as you and Woodchuck have in just a few lines. But now I must back up and reveal my ignorance again, because it looks like you are saying that fully functional virions come equipped to cheat the immune system, which generally only catches the jettisoned parts or the defective particles; a viral defence system not unlike that of a fighter plane under missile attack.

    This gives us at least 3 methods of defence: the “disguise as self”, the “run and hide”, and the “mutating around” defence. which one is more important, and why would the virus need the last two when it has already found the perfect disguise as self? More bafflingly, why would it take such a resourceful virus 1o-15 years to accomplish its nefarious ends?

  445. #446 Chris Noble
    October 22, 2007

    This gives us at least 3 methods of defence: the “disguise as self”, the “run and hide”, and the “mutating around” defence. which one is more important, and why would the virus need the last two when it has already found the perfect disguise as self? More bafflingly, why would it take such a resourceful virus 1o-15 years to accomplish its nefarious ends?

    Your wide reading would have also alerted to you the fact that before the discovery of HIV other lentiviruses such as EIAV and maedi-visna were known to cause persistent infections and cause disease after an immune response. Heavy glycosylation is common in lentiviruses as is antigenic escape.

    HIV causes a major depletion of CD4+ cells during the initial infection. A “resourceful virus” does not have “nefarious ends”. It survives by passing itself onto a new host before the current host dies.

  446. #447 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    I stand corrected on the pathetic fallacy: HIV certainly does not have nefarious ends.

    These other glycolysated so-called lentiviruses, how many pandemics have they caused?

    How many of the cells they don’t infect do they kill?

    Do they cause disease while they’re asleep?

    What accounts for the dormant period?

  447. #448 Braganza
    October 22, 2007

    So Pope,

    What is your explanation for AIDS ?

    How do you explain that AIDS occurs mostly in HIV+ ?

    How do you explain that HIV+ babies have higher probability to die than the HIV- ?

    Waht about HIV+ gradual dysfunction of the immune system, ultimately indicated by the Th1 Th2 shift ?

    Looking for your own reading of the facts.

  448. #449 Adele
    October 22, 2007

    Day two of the Honey Bun Challenge and still no one registered. I thought all the deniosaurs with labs would register right away but I guess Duesberg and Maniotis don’t have money right now??

    Pope nice questions,

    These other glycolysated so-called lentiviruses, how many pandemics have they caused?

    well pendamic means all people in greek, I don’t know Greek like Pope I just looked it up so a pandemic is something in people. EIAV Visna have outbreaks like Chris said but you can’t call it a pandemic bc its not people.

    How many of the cells they don’t infect do they kill?

    Alot more work’s done with HIV but other lentiviruses do indirect cell killing and not just lentiviruses parvoviruses too. No surprise if any pathogen does indirect cell killing. Heres a paper 15 years old for you with indirect cell killing.

    Wong PK
    Leukemia. 1992;6 Suppl 3:161S-165S
    Murine leukemia virus induced central nervous system diseases.

    Do they cause disease while they’re asleep?

    A latent provirus isn’t asleep, just it’s transcription is down or some times zero. You got immune activation all ready and like Chris said lots of cell death in first weeks before latency so when its latent you still have disease because of that. And it’s not like you always go to zero virus there’s some virus getting made all the time.

    What accounts for the dormant period?

    Latency of virus is same, generally for most latent viruses. HSV-1 is a good example in acute phase there’s alot of reproduction then it gets in neurons and goes quiet, not so much transcription. But there’s always some transcripts getting made called Latency Associated Transcripts LATS. If you get activation then there ready to go again.

    HIV has transcriptonal regulaters to. The processes similar.

  449. #450 noreen
    October 22, 2007

    Braganza, since you showed an interest in the LDN Conference, I would like to give you some of the highlights. The keynote speakers were Dr. David Gluck who specilizes in internal and preventive medicine, Dr. Jill Smith, Professor of Gastroenterology at Hershey Medical Center, Dr. Burt Berkson who practices medicine in New Mexico, Dr. Terry Grossman who is a leading expert on anti-aging and life extension therapies, Dr. Skip Lenz, pharmacits from Florida, Dr. Pat Crowley, faimly practictioner from Kilkenny, Ireland, Dr. Brendan Quinn, Pharmacist from Belfast, Dr. Bob Lawrence from England and a slide presentation from Dr. Jaquelyn McCandless, who is currently doing LDN studies in Africa.

    Dr. Gluck told us about 7 clinical trials for LDN. Dr. Smith’s clinical trial for Chron’ disease has shown 89% improvement and 2/3 remission. The African study is ongoing with LDN and the treatment of AIDS. This study involves patients who do not have malaria, TB or are pregnant. There are three group, one being treated with HAART, the second with HAART and LDN and the third only with LDN. The CD4 count for these groups is 275 to 475, respectively. Interferon-alpha and viral load counts will be measured. There is an Italian study for endorphins in autoimmune disease, the University of California is finishing up a study about LDN and MS, Stanford is conducting a study about fibromyalgia and an Ohio study is being performed concerning MS and brain-fog.

    What was really exciting was listening to the speakers present individual cases of treating incurable cancers, lupus, autism, MS and many more diseases. Their approach seemed to be novel in that they prescribed LDN along with diet changes and sometimes chemotherapy in a new way by giving the patient insuling and very low doses of chemo thus eliminating the horrible side effects. In fact, one physician preferred to treat those cases which were hopeless with LDN and other natural means. It was interesting to listen to some of their theories such as nitrous oxide cycle and bladder dysfunction. Several weeks from now, the video will be available from Skip’s pharmacy for those who would like to view it. It should cost $10.00. Also, many patients spoke of how LDN had improved their lives. All in all, it was a great conference and hopefully, next year, it will be extended to two days.

  450. #451 jspreen
    October 22, 2007

    How do you explain that AIDS occurs mostly in HIV+ ?

    (I know I should leave this to pope but it’s stronger than me…)

    Don’t you know? It’s simply because it’s mostly not called AIDS in HIV-.

  451. #452 Adele
    October 22, 2007

    Thanks for the report Noreen. Please let us know when the videos available. Thanks.

  452. #453 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    Jspreen, it’s ok.

    I’ve repeatedly asked Braganza to familiarize himself with at least the most fundamental dissident positions, so we can avoid the most idiotic questions. It doesn’t look like he is interested in doing that. Instead he is now asking for MY reading as if I’m somehow supposed to be more of an auhtority o th1-th2 shift or whatever than people like Duesberg and the Perth Group or as if I do not constantly give my reading on different issues here.

    Braganza, all your questions are amply answered in the so-called “dissident literature”, including the Duesberg Biosci. 2003 paper you apparently decided had so many errors it was better not to read.

    The passenger virus theory explains the high but not perfect correlation between HIV and “AIDS” The oxidative stress theories explain it perhaps even better.

    They’ve had 25 years to work on manufacturing the correlation between a positive test and risk of “AIDS”, including the definition of “AIDS” Jspreen is referring to making it impossible to have any AIDS cases without HIV.

  453. #454 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    Adele, honey bun, I have already answeed your challenge. Maybe you missed it since that post a is frequently the case got held up in Tara’s Denialist filter:

    Adele, thanks your input is as usual invaluable – which is more than can be said about your honey bun prize. Obviously you don’t feel very confident it will not be claimed or you would have upped the stakes a bit, like thrown your pet macaque into the bargain or something. Btw. would you happen to have some left over HIV in your fridge? For some unfathomable reason they keep turning down my grant proposal for Experimental Evaluation Of Standard HIV Controls. Maybe I could come and stay with you while I work on it? All those CDC choppers hovering in my garden are starting to get on my nerves.

    Posted by: Pope | October 21, 2007 1:51 PM

    And please girl, those “answers” a couple of comments up to my “nice questions” wouldn’t even fool Braganza. I have treid to resist but I seem to be left with no choice but to resurrect the technical term “Beefless Burger” from its lenti-chromatin-sleep

  454. #455 woodchuck
    October 22, 2007

    Pope said:

    “This gives us at least 3 methods of defence: the “disguise as self”, the “run and hide”, and the “mutating around” defence. which one is more important, and why would the virus need the last two when it has already found the perfect disguise as self? More bafflingly, why would it take such a resourceful virus 1o-15 years to accomplish its nefarious ends?”

    HIV uses multiple layers of defense. That’s why is it so successful at staying one step ahead of the immune response. As for the 10-15 years question the answer is clear. The virus only has a chance to be spread while the host is alive. Such chronic infection gives the virus more time to be passed from host to host.

    As for the latency questions, the virus is continuously replicating in infected individuals, even in the absence of obvious symptoms. This is such old news. Using sensitive viral detection assays it is clear that there is plenty of virus around during “clinical latency”. I recommend Coffin JM. HIV population dynamics in vivo: implications for genetic variation, pathogenesis, and therapy. Science. 1995 267:483-9. The current view is that in the end the ongoing efforts of the immune system to get rid of the virus, along with the destruction of CD4 positive T cells (helper T cells), cause its ultimate collapse.

  455. #456 Andrew Maniotis
    October 22, 2007

    Woodchuck et al., and the other ab hominim folks,

    Read:

    1995 Congress of the United States: Office of Technology assessment. Adverse Reactions to HIV Vaccines: Medical, Ethical, and Legal Issues. (Roger C. Herdman, Director). Below are excerpts from this important milestone document, and some comments regarding the status of “HIV” vaccines since Margaret Heckler in 1984 announced that one would be available in 2 years:

    From page 1,2 . (“OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS-Potential and Risks of HIV vaccines”):

    “A number of vaccines are being developed that use new strategies and each of these strategies carry special risks:”

    1.Vaccines using live vectors, such as the vaccinia virus shown to be attenuated in laboratory animals, may prove to be inadequately attenuated, producing the disease caused by the unattenuated vector.
    2. Naked DNA vaccines have been shown to create potent immune responses, but there are theoretical reasons to be concerned that they might produce tumors or autoimmune diseases, or be transmitted from mother to fetus.
    3.Although inactivated whole virus vaccines have generally been successful in protecting from infection with other viral diseases, it would be difficult to assure that all HIV particles in such a vaccine were inactivated.
    4. Live attenuated virus vaccines have also been successful in protecting from other viral diseases, but there is the potential for the viruses to be inadequately attenuated, for an adequately attenuated viral vaccine to cause disease in immunocompromised individuals (Read AIDS patients), and for an adequately attenuated virus to revert to virulence. There is also concern that a live attenuated vaccine could induce tumors.

    “A number of social harms-non-medical adverse consequences-may result from vaccination:”
    1. Vaccines may cause a false-positive HIV screening testing test…resulting in discrimination against vaccine recipients in, for example, military service, health insurance, life insurance, employment, and travel.
    2. Participation in an HIV vaccine trial, itself, may result in stigmatization, as others may assume that all vaccine trial participants are members of groups, such as injection drug users and men who have sex with men, who are at increased risk for HIV infection.
    3. Vaccinees, relying on the protection afforded by an experimental vaccine, may engage in behaviors that increase their risk for HIV infection.
    4. In June, 1994, the AIDS Research Advisory Committee (ARAC) of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Dieases (NIAID) recommended that Phase III clinical trials with enveloped vaccines should not proceed in the United States. Factors contributing to the decision included scientific, political, and ethical issues, and the significant level of scientific uncertainty about the wisdom of immediate trials. Phase I and II clinical trials of HIV will continue.”

    From page 2,3. There are 15 ethical issues in HIV vaccine development. The last one states:

    # 15. “Although vaccine sponsors have no legal obligation to provide compensation to subjects for injuries incurred as a result of their participation, there is an ethical obligation to do so.”

    From page 3. (“Liability and Compensation for Adverse Reactions”):

    “Any system that limits compensation to injuries from one specific cause, like an HIV vaccine, raises questions of fairness to people with similar injuries from a different vaccine. A compensation system limited to persons with adverse reactions to an HIV vaccine invites the question why people living with injuries from other vaccines or from other causes should not be compensated as well.”

    “More companies are engaged in HIV vaccine research than in research for any other type of vaccine. Potential liability may have discouraged some companies, but it has not stopped HIV vaccine development.”

    From page 4.
    Liability claims based on low levels of effectiveness have NOT been brought against existing vaccines. The likelihood of success of a claim of lack of effectiveness of an HIV vaccine is speculative, but probably small as long as those who take the vaccine are warned of its limited efficacy and advised to take precautions against exposure to HIV infection.”

    Translation: …No liability will occur once you tell millions of vaccine test subjects that the vaccine doesn’t prevent acquiring “HIV” infections.

    “Given the need for an HIV vaccine, it appears unlikely that a manufacturer would be held responsible for distributing a vaccine with a risk of development of cancer that could not be verified at the time it was released.”

    “The decision whether or not to invest in the development of a vaccine depends on complex financial considerations of a number of factors, including the scientific obstacles to vaccine development, the potential market for the vaccine, the price at which the vaccine could be sold, and the potential liability for vaccines. The major factor influencing vaccine development is the expected return on investment or profitability, and the major obstacles to developing an HIV vaccine are scientific.”

    “Vaccine manufacturers are not likely to be responsible for harms resulting from the bigotry of others. Physicians who administer HIV vaccines may be the more likely targets for any claim that a vaccine recipient was not adequately warned about possible discrimination.”

    From page 6. After a description of the immune system and how it eliminates virus, the following statements appear (“Unique Features of HIV”):

    “HIV is a “retrovirus” that integrates its genome into the human genome through a process called “reverse transcription,” Once this happens, it cannot be detected and eliminated by the immune system.”

    Comment: Then why immunize against it if immunity is mediated by the immune system?

    “HIV is able to evade immune recognition through a process of rapid genetic mutation and selection.”

    Comment: Then how can you target it if it is constantly mutating to evade the immune system?

    “The virus can spread through direct cell-to-cell contact, avoiding immune activation.”

    Comment: Then why immunize against it if once incorporated by even a single cell (say in a “mucosal dendritic cell” from (for instance) an “uncircumcised penis,” HIV is hidden from the immune system? This should take about 2 minutes in some men who “are quick.”

    “HIV can be transmitted as free virus as well as virus inside cells; it is more difficult to block the transmission of virus inside cells.”

    Comment: If the immune system cannot see “HIV’ once it has incorporated its RNA that has become reverse transcribed to DNA (the first step of viral infection), then how “is it more difficult,” instead of impossible to block transmission thereafter from cell to cell?

    “Unlike other viral infections that are self-limited, there are few, if any, instances of recovery.”

    Comment: What about Long-Term Non-Progressors, and people currently who exhibit a positive test but who are not clinical ill in any detectable way? Not even is Ebola 100% fatal or anywhere close, nor has any other syndrome in human history, or else we wouldn’t be here.

    From page 9: (“ADVERSE REACTIONS TO HIV VACCINES”):
    “Ten vaccinees developed a rash to several products, and one also developed joint pain. A few individuals developed a positive antinuclear antibody (ANA) test (which may at times be associated with autoimmune disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis). However further testing ruled out any vaccine-related diseases.”

    Comment: What further tests ruled out these non-vaccine related diseases? What were these diseases?

    From Page 10: (“ADVERSE REACTIONS TO HIV VACCINES” cont.): “As of May 1994, 10 neoplasms (tumors) were observed among participants in 9 vaccine trial protocols. One of the neoplasms was benign.”

    Comment: That is comforting information! Cancer was only seen in 10 out of 9 trials.

    “Cases of malignancy tended to occur among old participants.”

    Comment: Cancer tends to be a disease of old age-how old were these 10 cancer victims in the 9 trials, and how representative are they of the ages of the rest of the participants?

    Comment: Are other autoimmune diseases noted in these trials, such as lupus? Is their conformed consent among trial participants that adjuvants such as squalene cause autoimmune diseases, as demonstrated during its use in Operation Dessert Storm (see 1991).

    ” There is concern that HIV vaccines have the potential to cause autoimmunity (an immune reaction against the bodies own tissues), because HIV shares several envelope proteins that are identical to proteins on human tissues. For example, there is a similarity between one HIV envelope protein region and a normal human blood-type protein.”

    Comment: How could “HIV share several envelope proteins that are identical to proteins on human tissues” if its genome codes for unique exogenous retroviral proteins? Did “HIV” hijack cellular lipid-producing genes?

    From Page 10: (“ADVERSE REACTIONS TO HIV VACCINES” cont.):
    “If they (vaccines) are inadequately or unstably attenuated, they may produce the disease caused by the unattenuated vector. They may result in unwanted spread to contacts and the community at large. And even an adequately attenuated vector may cause disease in individuals with impared immunity.”

    “Some new vaccines are composed of “naked DNA,” our viral genetic material. Persistent antibody and cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses have been induced in laboratory animals immunized with naked DNA (not “HIV”s however-according to the Technology Manual’s assessment on page 33 (Reactions to HIV Vaccines: Medical, Ethical, and Legal Issues-so this is a misleading statement that implies that an “HIV” vaccine has caused a T cell response, when what is meant is that OTHER vaccines have evoked a T cell response).

    From page 15 (“Informed Consent”):
    “Potential subjects of HIV vaccine trials need to be informed of the following:
    1. The experimental vaccine has not been demonstrated to be effective, and it is unlikely that any HIV vaccine will be completely effective…Compensation will not be provided for failure of the experimental vaccine to protect research subjects from HIV infection.
    2. Receipt of the experimental vaccine may complicate the diagnosis of HIV, because vaccinees may falsely test positive on conventional HIV screening tests…
    3. Trial participants should not be tested for HIV outside of the study, since knowledge of their assignment could bias the study’s results.
    4. Social harms may result from testing positive on an HIV screening test, such as problems with health or life insurance, employment, military service, and travel. All subjects will be provided with documentation of trial participation.”

    From page 19: (Product liability)”
    “Almost 30 candidate vaccines have been in clinical trials.”

    From page 20: (“Design defects”):
    “An increasing number of states have held that makers of FDA-approved prescription drugs or vaccines are entirely exempt from strict liability for design defects, regardless of the product in question, largely for reasons of public policy.”

    Comment: What are these “reasons of public policy” that make immune design defects of manufacturer’s?

    From page 20: (“Learned Intermediary Rule”):
    “Although the general rule is that all manufacturers have a duty to warn those who use their products of dangers that are not readily appearent, an exception, known as the “learned intermediary rule,” permits the maker of prescription drugs or vaccines to warn only the prescribing physician, and not the patient who receives the product…” “…thus vaccine vaccine manufacturers do not ordinarily have a duty to provide a warning directly to a vaccine recipient.”

    “…Under the learned intermediary rule, a warning is generally not considered inadequate unless the missing information would have caused a physician NOT to give the vaccine to the patient.”

    From page 21: (“Development of Cancer”):
    There has been speculation that, because HIV is a retrovirus, an HIV vaccine might cause cancer many years after vaccination. Although a manufacturer is not liable for injuries caused by unforeseeable dangers in its products, there may be some question as to whether a manufacturer adequately investigated a suggested risk (i.e. induction of cancer). Given THE NEED (EMPHASIS MINE) for an HIV vaccine, it appears unlikely that a manufacturer would be held responsible for distributing a vaccine with a risk (causing cancer) that could not be verified at the time it was released.”

    Comment: Sorta like SV40, hey?

    From page 22: (“Susceptibility of HIV vaccines to Liability Claims”):
    “Plaintiffs rarely succeed on a claim of design defect, probably because of the difficulty of proving that a safer, equally effective vaccine could have replaced a vaccine that was approved by the FDA. Although most states still permit claims that a vaccine was defectively designed, only one vaccine (Quadrigen) has been found to have a defective design (in warranty, not product oliability, action). No reported court decision after 1969 has held a vaccine maker liable for a design defect. Few courts have found a vaccine maker liable for an inadequate warning of risks.”

    From page 38, (“Immune Correlates of Protection”).
    “While primate studies have shown examples of protection under limited circumstances (yeh, right, how limited were these circumstances), as yet the immune responses required for a successful HIV vaccine remain “undefined” (must be quite different than “catching “AIDS” from one of them “high risk folks, heh!) Levels of antibody induced in primates by vaccines are, in themselves, not well correlated with protection against HIV infection.”

    Very very interesting, I’d say….

    “What is the evidence for natural immunity to HIV infection in man? Studies of the natural history of long-term survivors of HIV infection have helped us know what are the clinical indicators of sustained favorable prognosis in HIV infection. But these studies have been less useful in helping us understand the requirements for a protective immune blockade to HIV infection (57). Studies of individuals who have remained seronegative (14) despite intense exposure to HIV, such as infants of seropositive mothers (78) and multiply-exposed men (17) have shown that some of these individuals have developed protective patterns of immune response, suggesting that “natural immunization” to HIV infection may occur.”

    Comment: Infants of seropositive mothers can’t be considered “positive” on any protein-based test (or nucleic acid test-if you heed what it’s inventor, Kary Mullis, has warned on many occasions about his invention with respect to “HIV” PCR-based viral load testing routinely used against his recommendations). Infants retain maternal antibodies for up to 18 months, so if treated for “HIV” infection with nevirapine or other toxic drugs, they can’t be considered a legitimate cohort because it is well established that a major proportion of them (>50-67%) will spontaneously serorevert (change back to “HIV-negative” ) once their immune systems mature enough to assume total immune autonomy (Parekh BS, Shaffer N, Coughlin R, et al. Dynamics of maternal IgG antibody decay and HIV-specific antibody synthesis in infants born to seropositive mothers. The NYC Perinatal HIV Transmission Study Group. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 9:907-12, 1993; Chantry CJ, Cooper ER, Pelton SI, Zorilla C, Hillyer GV, Diaz C. Seroreversion in human immunodeficiency virus-exposed but uninfected infants. Pediatr Infect Dis J 14:382-7, 1995).

    Also, as mentioned above, the PCR tests to test for “HIV” “viral genomes” in infants suspected of harboring “HIV” virus has been completely discredited (Dec. 2006), because for any individual tested they have no predictive value [Rodriquez B, Sethi AK, Cheruvu VK, et al. Predictive value of plasma HIV RNA level on rate of CD4 T-cell decline in untreated HIV infection. JAMA 296(12):1498-506, 2006; see also Cohen J. Study says HIV blood levels don't predict immune decline. Science 313(5795): 1868, 2006].

    These two paragraphs are from page 48:
    “Some experts have questioned whether priming with an HIV vaccine can potentiate subsequently acquired natural HIV infection (12). The historical prototype giving rise to this concern is dengue virus, a tropical viral disease. The presence of serum antibodies induced by a first attack of mild dengue can facilitate the development of severe disease on subsequent infection with a related dengue virus (40). This “antibody-dependent enhancement” (ADE) of infection can be demonstrated in the laboratory by an increase in growth of virus in cell culture in the presence of antibodies from the serum of exposed individuals. Recipients of envelope vaccines have been shown to develop small amounts of enhancing antibodies (66). The clinical significance of HIV vaccine-induced ADE is unclear. No direct evidence exists at this time that ADE has any clinical significance. Many scientists consider it to be an unrelated laboratory phenomenon only. Enhancement of disease has not been duplicated with HIV-1 or SIV in primate experiments, although it has been recommended that studies in primate models should continue” (59, 67).

    Comment: How could enhancement be demonstrated in an ape model if apes do not exhibit AIDS, or in an SIV model since SIV isn’t “HIV,” and since to date no models appear to generate humoral immunity, mucosal immunity, nor T-cell activation-the three hallmarks of any foreign antigen challenge to the immune system?

    Other mechanisms of Enhanced Disease
    “Historically, two other vaccines have been associated with an accompanying subsequent natural infection that is atypically severe: an experimental respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine and a licensed measles virus vaccine (27, 54). Both were vaccines composed of whole virus inactivated by formalin (like the Salk vaccine). While the mechanisms of disease enhancement remain unclear, they both appear to occur by mechanisms unrelated to ADE of the dengue fever type. The enhance disease experiences with these vaccines were wholly unexpected and have had a significant effect on further vaccine development. For measles, a live attenuated vaccine has supplanted the inactivated vaccine, and currently there is no licensed RSV vaccine. It has been suggested recently that inactivated RSV vaccine. It has been suggested recently that inactivated RSV vaccine may induce inappropriate cytokines, or cell-to-cell communication substances, that are responsible for enhancement.”

    Translation: These vaccines cause the diseases for which they are meant to be preventative. This is what is called “enhancement.’

    From page 50:

    “There is a narrow margin between surviving virus and the destruction of viral immunogenicity; this was highlighted early in the use of licensed polio vaccine when a number of vaccinated individuals developed paralytic poliomyelitis from vaccine lots containing residual live virus (71). The safety problem was resolved by simple refinements in the inactivation process. By contrast, assuring inactivation of all HIV particles could prove difficult. In particular, concern exists as to whether cell cultures or animal models are sufficiently sensitive to detect the minimal residual live virus capable of infecting humans. There has also been theoretical concern regarding residual reactive viral DNA in the product.”

    “In addition, the safety of the “lymphoblastoid” cell lines used to prepare the virus is unknown. “Adventitious agents,” that is, unwanted agents growing silently in the cell cultures used to prepare vaccine stock, have posed safety problems in the past. As an example, SV40, a monkey tumor virus, contaminated early lots of inactivated polio vaccine prepared in monkey cells” (68).

    The safety of an inactivated whole-virus vaccine for HIV was reviewed at a workshop in 1990. It was the consensus that a safe product is technically feasible but that product development should proceed with caution (82).”

    Live Attenuated Vaccine
    “Vaccines using live attenuated virus, exemplified by polio or measles vaccines, are capable of producing immune responses that closely mimic the solid, long-term protective immune response afforded by natural viral infection (see page 33). In addition to a more vigorous and broader antibody response, attenuated virus vaccines may more effectively induce cytotoxic T-lymphocytes and mucosal immunity compared with vaccines composed of inert antigens, such as envelope protein vaccines.

    On page 33, however, it is claimed that:

    “The number of infectious agents for which we have failed to develop a satisfactory vaccine, even those targeted as high priority (49), is far greater than the number for which we have been successful. Examples of VIRUSES for which we have failed include the viruses Herpes simplex, infectious mononucleosis, cytomegalovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and rotovirus; vaccines against many sexually-transmited disease agents, such as syphilis and gonorrhea; vaccines against parasitic diseases, such as malaria and schistosomiases; and vaccines against numerous bacterial infections, including tuberculosis.”

    “Using the SIV/monkey model, attenuated live virus vaccines have been constructed using selective deletions of nonessential auxiliary genes that are required for SIV replication (21). The attenuated virus is stable, not reverting to a virulent form of virus (i.e. a form of virus capable of producing disease) over an observation period of several years. Monkeys vaccinated with an SIV Nef gene deletion show protection against challenge with large doses of virulent virus. By contrast, the control vaccinated monkeys acquire an AIDS-like disease and died in two years (disease(s) not specified).”

    The work cited in reference 21 above is by Desrosiers, R. C., et al: “HIV with Multiple gene Deletions as a Live Attenuated Vaccine for AIDS,” AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses 8:411-422, 1992. In subsequent years, however, Desroisiers discusses how these vaccines may cause cancer years later, through insertional mutagenesis:

    J Int Assoc Physicians AIDS Care. 1998 Mar;4(3):45-6.
    Does the HIV-1deltakURNe vaccine strain hold the key to curbing HIV infection? An interview with Ronald Desrosiers, PhD.

    Desrosiers R.
    AIDS: Dr. Ronald Desrosiers of the New England Primate Research Center at the Harvard Medical School provides his opinions on the HIV-1deltakURNe vaccine strain. Dr. Desrosiers explains what this strain represents and how it was chosen for live-attenuated HIV vaccine human safety trials. Further, Desrosiers discusses the balance in using highly attenuated vaccines and protection effectiveness, whether it is possible for the vaccine strain to revert to a disease-causing form, the possibility of transmission of a vaccine virus to unvaccinated individuals, and the issue of cancer development through insertional mutagenesis.

    Continuing from Reactions to HIV Vaccines: Medical, Ethical, and Legal Issues:

    “Safety Concerns Associated with Attenuated Virus
    There are four primary safety concerns about attenuated viral vaccines that have been recognized” (11,22,104).

    1. Level of attenuation. Inadequate attenuation (reduction of virulence) of virus may result in a vaccine that induces the disease4 that it was designed to prevent; over-attenuated virus may fail to induce protective immune responses. However, even an appropriately attenuated virus may show virulent behavior when not constrained by a competent immune system , such as in vaccine recipients with immue systems compromised by cancers, immunosuppressant drugs, and other non-AIDS causes. The highly infectious nature of SIV administered orally to monkeys at birth, before the monkey’s immune system has developed, has rasied new questions about safety of vaccines in immunocompromised individuals (79).
    2. Stability of attenuation. The vaccine strain could undergo genetic reversion to a more virulent form during the lengthy course of replication in the vaccine. Tis risk is of particular concern with vaccines using attenuated strains of HIV, as the human immunodeficiency virus is cyharacterized by rapid and frequentg genetic mutations.
    3. Possibility of secondary spread. Spread of attenuated virus to contacts of vaccines (secondary spread) may provide the virus with further opportunity to revert to virulence (e.g. vaccine-induced poliomyelitis in contacts of vaccinees.) However, if it can be assured that the level of attenuation of the virus remains stable, secondary spread of the virus may be beneficial, because the attenuated virus could induce protective immunity in contacts. Sufficient spread of the attenuated virus would result in the induction of herd immunity (as had occurred with poliovirus vaccine.” (But if the virus is constantly mutating in people, or able to be induced to mutate with a single dose of Nevirapine, then how could any be stable? See 2007, January).
    4. Possibility of induction of tumors. Other members of the retrovirus family regularly produce tumors (e.g., mouse tumors and a form of human leukemia). Theoretically, the prolonged residence of a live attenuated HIV vaccine strain in vaccinees could allow the retrovirus to rpoduce tumors. Recent evidence for a direct role for HIV infection in the etiology of some T-cell lymphomas suggest a need to proceed cautiously while continuing to investigate the long-term potential of these vaccineees to produce tumors (92, 104)…(From page 52, 2nd pararaph-)…The protective mechanism of attenuated SIV vaccine is unclear. It is not correlated with antibody or cytotoxic T lymphocytes responses, and mucosal immunity is not involed.”

    “New Approaches to Improve Vaccine Performance (page 52):
    The mucosal administration of vaccine vectors that grow on mucosal surfaces may provide a critical tool for the prevention of HIV transmission by sexual routes [BUT] antigen uptake from mucosal surfaces is poor compared with injection.”

    “New Adjuvants and Delivery Vehicles
    …Adjuvants have been discovered largely empirically, and are commonly derivatives of bacteria or plants,. They may be combined with chemical surfactants (emulsifiers), forming complexes with specific HIV proteins or individual peptides. The introduction of new adjuvants into clinical practice has been slowed by concerns about the adjuvant’s toxicity. Significant transient toxicity was shown in comparative trials of experimental adjuvants” (table 2-6).

    “Exploration of adjuvants is currently undergoing a renaissance in an effort to selectively enhance HIV antibody, cytotoxic T lymphocyte, or mucosal immue responses. The HOPE is to move from an empiric to a rational approach to attain specific immune response goals.”

    “…Any of the above approaches to improve vaccine performance may have unexpected side effects. So far, several new adjuvants have caused early transient difficulties and have been withdrawn from use.”

    “Social Harms As Adverse Events
    Adverse consequences or harms may be expected , not attributable to the biological properties of the vaccine, but rather falling into the realm of “social injury” (2,29). Vaccines may cause “false-positive” screening tests for HIV infection. This vaccine-induced seropositivity can result in discrimination against false-positive individuals, such as in eligibility for military service, employment, health or life insurance, or restriction of travel.”

    “Seropositivity following inoculation with envelope vaccines can usually be distinguished from HIV infection by the Western blot test which is used to confirm the results HIV enzyme-linked i9mmunosorbant assay) (ELISA) used in HIV screening. Volunteers in NIAIDS-sponsored trials have received identification documents certifying their particip[ation in these trials, although AVEG personnel have had to intervene to provide validation of confounding Western blot confirmatory tests (5).”

    “The problem may become more acute in the future as new generation vaccines that include many more types of antigenic proteins than are currently used may render the Western blot test unable to distinguish vaccine-induced seropositivity from true HIV infection. Reliance must then be placed on time-consuming and expernsive polymerase chain r4eaction (PCR_ tests which detect the presence of the virus directly (assuming its nucleic acids were isolated from those present in contaminating cellular debris when Gallo amplified Montagnier’s isolate-author’s comment), and on viral cultures…”

    “Participation in an HIV trial, in itself, may engender social harms. Others may perceive a volunteer’s participation in the trial as implying that the volunteer is in a group at special risk of acquiring HIV infection, and this may result in personal stigmatization of the volunteer. Further, volunteers who are immunized with one candidate vaccine may be precluded from participating in clinical trials of subsequent, possibly more effective, vaccine products. Also, trial participants may assume that they are protected from HIV infection, and as a consequence may increase their risk-taking behaviors (they might have sex). This increased risk-taking behavior may occur despite intensive counseling on the possibility of assignment to placebo vaccine and the unknown efficacy of the trial vaccine.”

    ” HIV vaccines will fall short of protecting all recipients. None of the currently licensed vaccines in public health use, even the most effective, vaccines protects all recipients: estimates of protection range from 50 to 70 percent for influenza vaccine, to 95% for measles and polio vaccines. Failure of vaccine to protect is expected in clinical trials. These failures may be perceived as vaccine-induced enhancement of infection, manifest as an increased susceptibility or a more aggressive course of infection. Lastly, questions of responsibility and legal liability for vaccine injury, provision of health care, or other services to trial participants remain unresolved. The concept of social harms is developed further in the discussion of efficacy trials below. These issues are also discussed in further detail in chapters 3 and 4.”

    From Appendix A, page 162.
    “The possibility that HIV vaccination could induce antibodies that facilitate viral entry into immune phagocytic cells has been studied in the laboratory using a variety of cell types (143)…Investigators have presented evidence that macaques that were vaccinated with SIV protein subunit vaccine (17) or transfused with anti-SIV antibodies (26) showed enhanced rates of infection and disease progression when subsequently exposed at mucosal membranes to SIV.”

    Original antigenic sin (OAS).
    HIV infection induces an abundance of antibodies, including neutralizing antibodies: however, several groups have shown that the generation of neutralizing antibodies tends to lag behind the generation of viral escape mutants by several months or even years. One explanation for this observation involves the phenomenon of original antigenic sin (OAS)_, the fixing of an immune response in a non-adaptive pattern.

    Translation: Bt evoking the concept of “a non-adaptive pattern” is begging immunology to break the rules of what we understand about the immune response. It is interesting it is couched in the term “original sin,” however.

    “Vaccine-induced OAS may occur when a vaccinated individual is exposed to a noncross- reactive strain of HIV that induces the production of antibodies specific for the vaccine strain that are unable to neutralize the newly encountered strain.”

    Translation: “When exposed to HIV, however, vaccinated individuals exhibiting OAS may be no worse off than unvaccinated individuals because unvaccinated individuals also have a lag in generation of antibody to HIV because their immune response has not been “primed” by vaccination. It is not known whether the lab in antibody production in unvaccinated individuals is greater than the lab in the production of antibody direcd o contemporaneous HIV strains in vaccinated individuals exhibiting OAS.”

    Question: How can any of these statements be made without clear evidence to date regarding humoral, cellular (activation of T cells), or mucosal immunity being generated by a single “HIV” or “SIV” vaccine?

    Squalene and other adjuvants added to “HIV” vaccines cause arthritis, neurodemyelination syndromes, lupus, and other life-long debilitating syndromes:
    Finally, it should be mentioned, at least as an aside, that toxic adjuvants have been used to boost the non-specific immune response in “HIV” vaccines and many others (adjuvants are compounds such as squalene known as MF59). Adjuvants are supposed to boost the non-specific immune response stimulated by a specific pathogen-associated antigen, because the modern molecular design of the vaccines don’t work as well as some of Pasteur’s did, against rabies, cholera, or anthrax more than 120 years ago). For example (www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00000972):

    A Phase I Clinical Trial to Evaluate: Part A. The Safety of MTP-PE/MF59 Adjuvant Emulsion. Part B. The Safety and Immunogenicity of Env 2-3, a Yeast Derived Recombinant Envelope Protein of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1, in Combination With MTP-PE/MF59.

    To evaluate the safety of a fixed antigen dose with an increasing dose of adjuvant (MTP-PE/MF59, a substance to enhance the immune response to vaccine) in volunteers. To evaluate local and systemic reactions (Part A). To determine the safety and immunogenicity of Env 2-3 in combination with MTP-PE/MF59 in volunteers (Part B). The vaccine Env 2-3 is created from one of the viral proteins that make up HIV called envelope glycoprotein gp120. A problem with many immunogens, including candidate HIV vaccines, is that they may evoke relatively weak immune responses, particularly in humans and in nonhuman primates. Thus, there is considerable interest in the development of “adjuvants” (substances that augment immune responses to vaccines). MTP-PE/MF59 is an adjuvant that appears to be particularly promising, and is selected for the studies with this HIV vaccine candidate.

    However, some “HIV’ vaccine critics claim there is evidence that adjuvants like squalene (MF-59), when they have been added to certain lots of anthrax (and perhaps “HIV”) vaccines given to soldiers on threat of court martial if they don’t roll up their shirt on command (in contrast to Walter Reed’s voluntary experiment with yellow fever), have induced autoimmune syndromes in almost 100% of every sick Gulf-War I veteran tested, and have evoked antibodies to squalene in their blood (P. B. Asa et al., Exp. Mol. Pathol 68, 196-197, 2000; Asa PB, Wilson RB, Garry RF. Antibodies to squalene in recipients of anthrax vaccine. Exp Mol Pathol. Aug;73 (1):19-27, 2002;Gary Matsumoto. Vaccine A, Basic Books Publisher, 2005). This type of “promising vaccine experimentation” on our young soldiers is particularly disturbing in light of the fact that squalene and other adjuvants have been used by scientists for many years to induce rodents to develop arthritis, macrophagic myofasciitis, mutliple-sclerosis (demyelinating syndromes), and lupus (Holmdahl et al. Arthritis induced in rats with nonimmunogenic adjuvants as models for rheumatoid arthritis Immunol Rev. Dec;184:184-202, 2001;Gherardi NK. Lessons from macrophagic myofasciitis: towards definition of a vaccine adjuvant-related syndrome. Rev Neurol (Paris). Feb;159 (2):162-4), 2003).

  456. #457 Braganza
    October 22, 2007

    Noreen,

    I am glad to read the news. It would be interesting to have some writen communications so we can see how wrong is Franklin.

    On another topic, I remember that you posted some information on cordyceps and AIDS.

    It just happen that a friend of mine told me that in the 4th International conference of medicinal mushrooms, September this year, there was a presentation indicating that a Cordycep based extract has been approved for use against HIV/AIDS in South Africa in hospitals.

    Apparently the product was develloped by an American company (Aloha Pharmaceuticals) and has been found to increase CD4 and not attack the liver. I wrote to the company to have details of the trials (now that I am in this blog, I know that this is crucial) but dont have had any answer. Do you know something about that?

  457. #458 noreen
    October 22, 2007

    I somewhat recall this too and I’m sure that the information will be found on their website. Their product called immune assist 247 was one of many that I routinely took during my illness. It ran about $100.00 for three bottles of 90 capsules each. As I don’t believe that there is one cause of AIDS, neither do I believe that there is one treatment. All things or approaches work together to restore one’s health.

  458. #459 Braganza
    October 22, 2007

    Pope & Jspreen,

    HIV- with AIDS are an infime minority.

    HIV- people have zero viral load, this invalidate the passenger virus theory.

    HIV+ are immuno-depressed, or have a Th1/Th2 unbalance toward Th2, allowing the grow of fungi, mycobacterias and others intra-cellular parasites, one of them being HIV.

    If HIV is a “passenger virus”, it would be distributed into some humans not immuno-suppressed, and these people, which would be HIV- by Elisa/WB would still have a very small amount of HIV that would be detectable by PCR.

    This because these persons, being not be immuno depressed, would not allow any parasite to grow, HIV would be maintained in a very low concentration, however detectable by PCR.

    Because ALL HIV- HAVE ZERO VIRAL LOAD, (as explained in this blog by Adele/Franklin who are working with PCR ) I believe that it is impossible to say that HIV is a passager virus.

    And so, it does not look that you are serious with your posts or (I am sorry) I cannot understand what you/Duesberg are writing.

    In any case thanks for your time in answering my post,

  459. #460 Braganza
    October 22, 2007

    Pope, (& jspreen)

    May be I am wrong with my last post, sometimes I make some deductions and models and they dont work, so if I am illogic please tell me and why.

    On another topic I saw your name in the Hank web page as a co-editor, so I cannot resist to ask you a question. You may have some answers as an insider that you may share with the world.

    Thabo Mbeki was a supporter, or at least was interested in allowing a discussion and testing of Duesberg ideas.

    However he has now dropped totally his support.

    See http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/ for his new position (number 34).

    I, (that dont have access to insider info) are thinking that it is not because the JPMoore/Natrass campaign against him. Mbeki has just shown that he does not care about Natrass opinions by firing Madlala-Routledge and maintaining his health minister.

    The impression that I have is that Mbeki is too inteligent to have understood that really, there was a problem with AIDS in South Africa, and HIV is not exactly “a passager virus”.

    “Duesberg theory is just totally wrong, it cannot explain what is happening here”. This is Mbeki silent message.

    Mbeki could have funded easy additional testing of Duesberg if he wanted, as the amount of money that PDuesberg is claiming is peanuts for the RSA government.

    Am I wrong?

    Thanks in advance for sharing your opinions about this critical and sensitive question,

  460. #461 Adele
    October 22, 2007

    it does not look that you are serious with your posts

    Pope’s goal is provoking people. He doesn’t understand biology and he doesn’t care he just wants to make himself laugh. He doesn’t want to learn about HIV and AIDS he only wants to argue. He calls Braganza’s good questions idiotic then HE asks stupid questions same ones he asks all the time, get answered and he doesn’t read the answers he doesn’t care.

    Sad way to live, I think he needs a Honey Bun.

  461. #462 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    Braganza,

    “HIV- with AIDS are an infime minority.”

    As all the distinguished AIDStruth scientists here will tell you, there are 0.000 AIDS cases without HIV. If they were to allow but a single, the construct would start to crumble. You are very welcome to challenge them on that point.

    “HIV- people have zero viral load, this invalidate the passenger virus theory.”

    What you are trying to formulate (I think) is the argument against HIV being endogenous – the famous “we’ve sequenced the human genome, and nope, no HIV there” end of science hay-maker. It has no bearing on Duesberg’s exogenous
    passenger virus theory.

    “If HIV is a “passenger virus”, it would be distributed into some humans not immuno-suppressed, and these people, which would be HIV- by Elisa/WB would still have a very small amount of HIV that would be detectable by PCR.”

    Have you ever heard of Long Term Non-Progressors? Antibodies are, as Woodchuck informed, us generated against all non-self antigens, even harmless passenger viruses. I think you are confusing exogenous (non-self)passenger viruses and endogenous (not necessarily expressed) elements again.

    I think the confusion may be partly because English is not your first language, not because you don’t have the knowledge. As soon as you get clear about the difference in meaning between the terms “passenger virus” and “endogenous elements/viruses” you will be able to understand the different arguments.

    However,if you don’t stop believing all that Adele and Franklin tells you, the confusion will never go away(-;

  462. #463 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    Braganza,

    I don’t know where you found Pope and Jspreen listed as editors. Have you been listening to Adele and Franklin again? Anyway, I am not in a position to comment on Mbeki’s motivations.

  463. #464 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    As for the latency questions, the virus is continuously replicating in infected individuals, even in the absence of obvious symptoms. This is such old news. Using sensitive viral detection assays it is clear that there is plenty of virus around during “clinical latency”. I recommend Coffin JM. HIV population dynamics in vivo: implications for genetic variation, pathogenesis, and therapy. Science. 1995 267:483-9

    This does seem like old news. I admit that I am not familiar with every single variation of this theme, but basically it looks like what the ill-fated Jankovich called the “runaway” model, with elements of “hit, hide, hit”.

    http://aidstruth.org/andrew-yates.php

    http://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2007/02/anthony_fauci_e.html

    What the “sensitive viral detection assays” detect is viral RNA not replication competent virions.

    The steady state model looks very attractive, but that is hardly enough to explain how exactly it comes about and is maintained – and why the steady state is really a runaway state. Mathematical models are only as got the known factors going into them, and so far it seems the models are based on some measure of speculation. (see link above)

  464. #465 Braganza
    October 22, 2007

    Pope,

    I thought that Long Term Non-Progressors had specific characteristics that dont allow HIV to attack the CD4, ie. some mutations. I have read this in Montagnier book.

    He explained this, telling that ancestors of such mutants have been in contact with HIV-like virus thousands of years ago.

    I really dont speak english as a first language, and make a lot of spelling/gramatical errors despite living and working in the UK, but I speak 4 latin languages, am fluent in two of them, and the prefix endo/ exo is used in these languages in the same way than in english. So there is no error in this.

    Passager virus can be proven only if a large number of HIV people dont devellop AIDS and dont have the mutant characteristics.

    I would say to prove Duesberg point we would need to have the same proportion of HIV+ and HIV negative would devellop AIDS.

    I have been in Southern Africa (Swaziland and Mozambic to be exact) and have been in touch with academics interested in low cost treatment to AIDS, hence my present interest in the question. The Swazis were speaking of mushrooms and the Mozambicans of a range of local plants (mormodica charantia etc…).

    I asked them, “How do you know that the tests are correct, that they show you that people are immunodificients ? “, as I was then thinking that all AIDS in Africa was a bit exagerated.

    They told me, in both places, that “babies born HIV+ have higher mortality than the ones born HIV-”.

    They also have explained that the testing involve Elisa/WB and PCR. Very similar to what is done in the UK, and very different of what we found in many web page that are writing about Bangui convention.

    In Mozambic they also took me to the hospital to speak with some doctors.

    So there is the point that BANG on Duesberg theory; the probability to have AIDS is far higher if you are a carrier of exogenous HIV than if you are a no carrier but still submited to other stress inducing conditions.

    People independent of being positive or negative are very poor in both countries, so I cannot account oxidative stress from lack of wealth as a factor in this observation.

    Apparently Duesberg was aware of the DISPROPORTIONATE mortality of HIV+ children, when he was in South Africa, as they show him also a study of Soweto hospital, but was unable to explain it. He was also unable to modify his theory accordingly.

    WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT ?

    Hope that you would change your idea of Duesberg “passager virus” theory, as in fact Mbeki has,

    Faithfully,

  465. #466 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    On a slightly different note, Woodchuck and Chris Noble – and forgive me for snickering, Adele, I am really being quite serious – I see now the basic idea behind HIV outmutating not only the immunesystem but also HIV scientists. In both cases it has to do with Original Sin:

    “Original antigenic sin (OAS).
    HIV infection induces an abundance of antibodies, including neutralizing antibodies: however, several groups have shown that the generation of neutralizing antibodies tends to lag behind the generation of viral escape mutants by several months or even years. One explanation for this observation involves the phenomenon of original antigenic sin (OAS)- the fixing of an immune response in a non-adaptive pattern.

    Translation: Evoking the concept of “a non-adaptive pattern” is begging immunology to break the rules of what we understand about the immune response. It is interesting it is couched in the term “original sin,” however.

    http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2007/10/denialism_they_dont_remember.php#comment-610747

  466. #467 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    Braganza,

    I wasn’t implying there was anything wrong with your latin, since you are a scientist. I simply thought you might have misunderstood what Duesberg meant by “passenger virus”.

    Of course they find some kind of mutation in LTNPs, and if not they find some kind of mutation in the specific virus strain, or, in case of other survivors, the drugs get the credit. It’s like I wrote in the other thread, you will not find a single HIV paper where results counter to prediction are not explained (away). Please look very carefully at this little exchange to understand the idea of bias in interpretation.

    Q: When I interviewed neuroscience and AIDS researcher Candace Pert, I said to her that, “A few scientists that I’ve spoken with told me that they don’t think that the HIV virus is responsible for causing AIDS.”
    When I asked her what she thought about this idea she said, ” … These people are nuts. The evidence is clear, and it’s the most elegant scientific story. There was a movement against HIV research, and the main champion was Peter Duesberg. There were some personal animosities against the power and the money that the early AIDS researchers got, and there are a lot of political aspects to this. But beyond a shadow of a doubt–and I’m speaking as somebody who studies data in the lab–there is just no doubt about the fact that HIV is the cause of AIDS. There’s just so much elegant science behind it. Just let me site one little tidbit that tells you how clean the whole thing is. There are two primary receptors that the AIDS virus uses to enter and infect cells. One of them is called CCR-5. It turns out that a small percentage of Caucasian Europeans don’t have that receptor. They have a genetic mutation where the receptor should be, and it’s missing a major chunk of it in the middle. Now those people who have that mutation, no matter what risky behavior they indulge in, they do not get HIV disease … Then, of course, you can show clearly in the test tube that you can artificially make cells that have this receptor and they will become readily infected with the viruses that use this receptor. And if the cells don’t have the receptor then they don’t. That’s summarizing like hundreds and hundreds of papers that elegantly address this, so there’s no doubt that HIV causes AIDS. Duesberg may not like some of the HIV virologists, and their style and all, but it’s just so silly. And it’s sad, because they’ve created a movement that’s been very destructive. My understanding is that out in California some of these people are like Luddites. Some of the activists–not all of them, but some small percentage–have gotten this into their head, and have stormed research labs. They’ve gotten very angry and very crazy, and it’s complete rubbish. I have no doubt in my mind. I’m a hundred percent sure about this.”

    How would you respond to Candace?

    Dr. Duesberg: Take for example Candace’s “tidbit” of the “elegant science” of AIDS, that “a small percentage of Caucasian Europeans don’t have that receptor” for HIV and “no matter what risky behavior they indulge in, they do not get HIV disease”–which means according to the CDC: no dementia, no diarrhea, no Kaposi sarcoma, no tuberculosis, no yeast infection, no lymphoma, no cervical cancer, no weight loss, no fevers, no pneumocystis pneumonia, etc. Elegant indeed!
    Fortunately in the U.S., God must have distributed Candace Pert’s elegant HIV non-receptors otherwise: Here the majority of the heterosexual population has no HIV-receptors and therefore does not get AIDS! Instead, God must have distributed good HIV-receptors in the U.S. non-randomly to male homosexuals, junkies, and a few hemophiliacs and transfusion recipients, which make up over ninety-five percent of the American AIDS cases. Let’s thank God that our mainstream heterosexuals–from our president to our leading HIV-AIDS researchers–are genetically protected against this “deadly” virus via defective HIV receptors, and are therefore AIDS-free–ever since this virus is said to have arrived in the U.S. over twenty years ago.

    I am not familiar with the story about the Soweto hopital and what Duesberg may or may not said to explain it. Sorry.

  467. #468 woodchuck
    October 22, 2007

    Hey Andrew Maniotis,

    How about making your point instead of putting everyone to sleep with pages of copy and pasted junk (8 pages is way too much). If your point is that vaccines can have negative effects, I think that everyone would agree. However, does this mean that we should not have vaccines? No. How many children died in the days before vaccines. What about smallpox, which is now eradicated because of a vaccine. Vaccines have made the world a better place.

    One of the main problems with your rants is that you like to cite one paper, saying that it discredits everything before it or discredits some assay or another. You know this is not a right or fair way to represent the scientific process. I will remind you of a public exchange in the American Journal of Pathology relating to a paper that you published there in 1999. McDonald et al present a very scathing and negative look at your paper, which is free at the journal for anyone to see ( http://ajp.amjpathol.org/cgi/content/full/156/2/383 ). I paste the first couple paragraphs below. Now using your standard that one negative comment is enough to discredit previous work, I and everyone else world be forced to conclude your work on Vasculogenic Mimicry is a load of crap. Maybe the work is crap or maybe its not. I can assure you there is much data and controversy that requires a careful consideration of all the facts, not the sort of cherry-picking approach you use to argue against HIV=AIDS. Come on Andy, you can’t have it both ways. Be a real scientist. I know you were properly trained at Berkeley. Why lower yourself with ridiculous approach.

    Vasculogenic Mimicry: How Convincing, How Novel, and How Significant?
    Donald M. McDonald*, Lance Munn and Rakesh K. Jain

    From the Cardiovascular Research Institute and Department of Anatomy,*
    University of California, San Francisco, California; and the Edwin L. Steele Laboratory,
    Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

    In a recent publication, Maniotis et al1 report that blood vessels of malignant eye tumors known as uveal melanomas are formed by tumor cells instead of endothelial cells. The authors use the term vasculogenic mimicry to describe this phenomenon and consider it a novel concept in the biology of tumor vascularization. The paper has received widespread attention and apparent validation through two commentaries, one published along with the paper in The American Journal of Pathology2 and another published concurrently in Science.3

    Despite the paper’s impact the evidence is, in our view, unconvincing. The problems are, however, not easily detected by readers unfamiliar with the background or pitfalls of this specialized topic. Although it is intriguing and worthy of further study, the evidence presented in Maniotis et al for a functionally significant contribution of tumor cell-lined blood vessels to vascularization and blood flow in uveal melanomas is neither persuasive nor novel. The purpose of this commentary is to examine the evidence for vasculogenic mimicry and the reasons for our assessment. (Note: This commentary does not address the in vitro or microarray data presented by Maniotis et al, because the interpretation of these results is dependent on the histological, immunohistochemical, and electron microscopic evidence that is the focus of our remarks. Also, this commentary does not question the validity of the relationship between the periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) staining pattern of uveal melanomas and clinical outcome, as reported by Folberg et al in several publications.4,5 This correlation may be clinically useful even if the PAS staining pattern does not faithfully represent the microvascular architecture. Neither does our commentary question the usefulness of microvascular density as a prognostic factor for survival in uveal melanomas.6,7 Indeed, PAS staining pattern and microvascular density may offer complementary indices of the lethality of these tumors.6-9 )

    How Convincing?

    A definitive demonstration of tumor cell-lined blood vessels would address several key questions. 1) Are the structures under consideration actually blood vessels, defined as routes through which blood circulates; ie, do they contribute meaningfully to blood flow? 2) Can the presence or absence of endothelial cells and tumor cells in contact with the vascular lumen be established using unambiguous markers? 3) If erythrocytes are used as markers, are they located inside or outside blood vessels? 4) Where is the interface between endothelial cells and tumor cells in blood vessel walls? 5) How extensive is the presumptive contribution of tumor cells to the lining of blood vessels?

    The first two of these questions are addressed in Maniotis et al, but the approach is not on target and the results are not straightforward or convincing. Consider the following five problems. (see site for the rest, http://ajp.amjpathol.org/cgi/content/full/156/2/383)

  468. #469 Pope
    October 22, 2007

    To be fair, Dr. Maniotis is this time not just citing a randomly chosen paper it seems, but a thoroughly researched overview and assessment:

    1995 Congress of the United States: Office of Technology assessment. Adverse Reactions to HIV Vaccines: Medical, Ethical, and Legal Issues. (Roger C. Herdman, Director).

    Dr. Maniotis calls it “a milestone document”, Woodchuck calls it “copy and pasted junk”.

    I guess it’s a case of “we report you decide”.

  469. #470 woodchuck
    October 22, 2007

    Actually it’s a minimally researched commentary on many topics, all quite superficial. Pope, it looks like you couldn’t make it past the first sentence. There were 8 pages. Reminds me of high school where even if you didn’t study it was possible to get a decent grade by writing several paragraphs of BS. Well this is the real world and the old high school approach doesn’t work.

    Pope, you still have not articulated what YOU need to see to believe in HIV=AIDS.

  470. #471 Chris Noble
    October 22, 2007

    On a slightly different note, Woodchuck and Chris Noble – and forgive me for snickering, Adele, I am really being quite serious – I see now the basic idea behind HIV outmutating not only the immunesystem but also HIV scientists. In both cases it has to do with Original Sin:

    The phenomenom described as original antigenic sin was known in 1960. Despite Maniotis’ insinuations it isn’t something that was invented to explain away “paradoxes” in HIV science. Maniotis talks about HIV “begging immunology to break the rules of what we understand about the immune response”. The only thing that this demonstrates is that Maniotis is ignorant of the “rules”.

    Other lentiviral persistent infections were described before HIV was discovered.

  471. #472 jspreen
    October 22, 2007

    It’s amazing how apologists get deeper and deeper into the shit hole they’re digging themselves.

    Al-Bayati appears to make his living as an “expert” witness to defend people accused of shaking their babies to death. Predictably the babies always seem to have died from vaccine damage or something else entirely unrelated to being shaken to death. – Writes Chris Noble

    I’m always curious and thus, I Google: “Al-Bayati” shaking babies.

    One of the links refers to http://www.justiceforej.com/al-bayati.html where I learn more about Al-Bayati’s professional activities. While scrolling through those and some other pages, several curious thoughts pop up into my brain, some of which a person using a much less respectful language than I always use myself, might possibly formulate approximately like:

    - Who the fuck is this foul-mouthed Chris Noble?*
    - How can a scumbag have such a name? Noble + one letter away from Christ?**
    - Why is this sucker of Satan’s cock spreading shit on my computer screen all day long and why does he invariably come up with stupid accusations like: Each and every scientist / researcher / writer / doctor / poet / musician / engineer / architect / lawyer / judge / professor / etc., who dares question the HIV=Aids equation, is just a low-life criminal quack protector of baby-shakers and wife-beaters?***

    (*, ** and ***: Don’t forget, it’s not me, it’s the non-respectful person speaking)

    The way good ol’ Chris easily classifies all Aids-denialists in the drawer of stupid persons at best, reminds me in a certain way of the classification much applied in the cancer business where ALL cases of healing without chemo-poisoning and the like are shovelled under the carpet with the label: “false initial diagnose”.

  472. #473 Chris Noble
    October 22, 2007

    I somewhat recall this too and I’m sure that the information will be found on their website. Their product called immune assist 247 was one of many that I routinely took during my illness. It ran about $100.00 for three bottles of 90 capsules each. As I don’t believe that there is one cause of AIDS, neither do I believe that there is one treatment. All things or approaches work together to restore one’s health.

    Another group of compounds found in IA 247 are the naturally occurring altered nucleosides from Cordyceps. Cordyceps sinensis contains a number of different compounds that have direct anti-viral replication activity. They interfere directly with the RNA synthesis as the virus is replicating.

    Let’s pass this through the Duesberg translation filter: Immune 247 contains deadly toxic DNA terminating nucleoside analog poisons that cause AIDS

  473. #474 Chris Noble
    October 22, 2007

    What the “sensitive viral detection assays” detect is viral RNA not replication competent virions.

    We’ve already been through this.

    Sensitive viral culture assays.

  474. #475 trrll
    October 22, 2007

    Andrew Maniottis asks:

    Then why immunize against it if immunity is mediated by the immune system?

    Then how can you target it if it is constantly mutating to evade the immune system?

    Then why immunize against it if once incorporated by even a single cell (say in a “mucosal dendritic cell” from (for instance) an “uncircumcised penis,” HIV is hidden from the immune system? This should take about 2 minutes in some men who “are quick.”

    If the immune system cannot see “HIV’ once it has incorporated its RNA that has become reverse transcribed to DNA (the first step of viral infection), then how “is it more difficult,” instead of impossible to block transmission thereafter from cell to cell?

    (this is as far as I managed to read before losing patience)

    This is a truly remarkable series of questions from somebody who professes to be a scientist with an interest in HIV and AIDS. I can only conclude that Dr. Maniottis either is not even bothering to follow the literature on HIV and AIDS, or he is being deliberately and deceptively ingenuous.

    The answers to these rather basic questions are well known to anybody with even a passing familiarity with the literature.

    1. You immunize against it because the immune system on its own is unable to mount an effective immune response that would reduce the risk of infection and cell to cell transmission. The hope is that it may be possible to come up with an immunization strategy that will evoke antibodies different (and more effective) than those evoked by the native HIV virus.

    2. The hope is that antibodies can be raised to parts of the virus that cannot readily mutate without loss of critical function.

    3. It may be useful to immunize against it even if it hides inside cells, because the virus has to enter that first cell, and if its critical surface proteins have antibodies stuck to them it will be far less infective. Immunizations have been found to be effective against other viruses that hide inside cells, such as chicken pox and rabies.

    4. It is not impossible to block transmission from cell to cell even after the virus has integrated, because while integrated virus is protected against immune attack, it is also unable to infect additional cells to cause further damage. To reach other cells, it has to emerge its hiding place inside the cell, and at this point it is vulnerable to antibody attack.

    Based on the characteristics of HIV, it has long been thought that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to produce an effective vaccine, but some very creative strategies are being tried. The failure of the recent trial is a clear setback, but it is foolish to try to point to this (as Dr. Maniottis did in a previous post) as some sort of evidence that the virus is not genuine.

  475. #476 cooler
    October 22, 2007

    Yeah, if there is ever a vaccine, everyone will test positive, people will have to carry around a note saying ” I didnt have sex with a chimpanzee (thats how you guys claim aids started) I’m positive because I got vacccinated, dont worry you can fuck me with no worry’s!

    what a load of bullshit aids science is.

  476. #477 ElkMountainMan
    October 23, 2007

    I couldn’t help but chuckle when Jan Spreen, perhaps the most foul-mouthed participant on Aetiology (when Michael is away), accused Chris Noble of all people of being foul.

    What did Chris write to provoke Spreen’s tirade?

    Chris wrote that Dr. Al-Bayati defends accused baby-shakers.

    That’s an accurate statement. Dr. Al-Bayati does make money trying to keep accused child-killers out of prison. Notice that Chris does not explicitly praise or condemn this sort of business. If what he says is “foul mouthed,” then only because spreen is reading quite a bit into Chris’s words.

    Chris stated that Al-Bayati’s “differential diagnosis” does not implicate the accused killer.

    This, too, is accurate. Al-Bayati finds the child was killed by anything except for physical abuse. Common drugs, vaccines, incompetent medical staff, and so on. Al-Bayati performs a service for accused murderers and he is compensated for it.

    Since we are on the topic of Al-Bayati, I would like to ask those of you who know the man and are familiar with his work:

    Is Dr. Al-Bayati a certified Pathologist? If not, why did Christine Maggiore ask him to review her daughter’s autopsy file instead of finding a certified Pathologist?

  477. #478 Pope
    October 23, 2007

    Ah I see Elkie has a way with words. Would you please clarify was it an accused murderer as in a soebody who is a murdere who happens to be also accused of it, or simply somebody accused of murder? There are a lot of people who performs a service for accused people and are compensated for it. They are called lawyers.

    But brave Sir Elkie, why ask around here baout Christine Maggiore’s motivations when you’ve been repeatedly invited to go and dicuss it with her in person – show her the erro of her muderous ways andbe compensatedfor for it to boot?

    Woodchuck, I don’t know why you would think I couldn’t make past first sentence of Maniotis reference, but I take it as a compliment, since almost everybody here are proudly pronouncing they had to give up as well.

  478. #479 Pope
    October 23, 2007

    Ok now that the syrup is out of my keyboard, let me repeat that part

    BSir Elkie, why ask around here about Christine Maggiore’s motivations when you’ve been repeatedly invited to go and dicuss it with her in person – show her the error of her murderous ways and be compensated for it to boot?

  479. #480 ElkMountainMan
    October 23, 2007

    Dear Pope,

    you ask me to
    clarify was it an accused murderer as in a soebody who is a murdere who happens to be also accused of it, or simply somebody accused of murder?

    Pope, unless I have witnessed the crime in question, I have no way of knowing for sure whether an accused murderer is or is not a murderer, nor can I say with absolute certainty whether a convicted murderer is or is not actually guilty, only that he was convicted in the legal system. If you read my comment again, you will notice that I refer only to “accused murderers,” no more and no less.

    There are a lot of people who performs a service for accused people and are compensated for it. They are called lawyers.

    Pope, the defendant is entitled to a defense; the defense team is entitled to compensation. Like Jan Spreen with Chris Noble’s comment, you are reading quite a bit into my words here. I personally find Al-Bayati’s work distasteful and some of his conclusions strange, but I recognize that he is performing a needed service.

    My questions had nothing to do with whether I like what Al-Bayati does. I asked a simple question about his certification. Is he a certified Pathologist or not? In my understanding (which could be wrong), a Pathologist is a medical doctor who has attained certification as a Pathologist. Al-Bayati does not appear to be a medical doctor or a pathologist. Is he a medical technician who refers to himself loosely as a “pathologist?” Is there another explanation? I would like to understand.

    Will you answer my questions, Pope? Or will you repeat your lines about contests and debates?

  480. #481 pat
    October 23, 2007

    Elk,Can you show us he’s NOT a toxicologist and comparative pathologist?

    Hey if Dubbya tells us that Gitmo is full of terrorists then it is full of terrorists and if Noble tells us they are baby killers then they are baby killers.

  481. #482 pat
    October 23, 2007

    “Pope, unless I have witnessed the crime in question, I have no way of knowing for sure whether an accused murderer is or is not a murderer, nor can I say with absolute certainty whether a convicted murderer is or is not actually guilty, only that he was convicted in the legal syste”

    Maggiore was never charged with anything but somehow remains a baby killer, why?

  482. #483 jspreen
    October 23, 2007

    Al-Bayati does not appear to be a medical doctor or a pathologist. Is he a medical technician who refers to himself loosely as a “pathologist?” Is there another explanation? I would like to understand.

    No, you don’t want to understand. Like all Aids-apologist herd nerds you divide the world into two distinct populations, the trustworthy preachers of mainstream opinion on one hand, the treacherous conspiracy theorists on the other.
    How do I know that? It’s simple. If you really wanted to understand, you would have done some research all by your little self, hit a couple of keys in the Google and found out for yourself the answer to your silly questioning.

    DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE

    Is that really as far as you can get?

  483. #484 jspreen
    October 23, 2007

    OK, I’m a foul-mouthed bastard and have totally mistreated Chris Noble. That was some filthy trick, wasn’t it? I’m sorry, I really am. The more because I brutally nailed good ol’ Chris to a cross as if he were some other noble Christ, the one who ends on a T. And also because it’s really too easy for an Aids-denialist to jump all over an Aids-apologist and leave what’s left to the crows, the first, having understood the meaning of many things long before the latter, being per definition superior. But it is not in my nature to leave people’s leftovers to thigh-slapping crowds, which is why I will now perform a hit and run rescue manoeuvre, help ol’ Chris get back on his feet and refresh his memory, where after I’ll receive a second round of applause from the crowd.
    Who really is Chris Noble, where does he come from? To restore Noble’s noblesse, I will try to provide an answer to that urging question and silence the ignoble maiming Noble. The question was formulated at first, although worded slightly differently, about a quarter of a century ago, when an old man put his eyes on a youngster named Chris, hungrily hanging around clothed in shabby drags, and exclaimed in painful wonder, overcome by the sight of such deep misery: “Noble Christ! Who are you really, where do you come from?”
    At first came no response, Chris having been depraved of food and fresh oranges for so many years he could hardly talk anymore. The old man swiftly recognized the signs of ill-being and malnutrition and he invited Chris over to the next coffee-shop. At first Chris only wanted huge parts of space-cake each and every customer was addicted to, but the old man didn’t give in and forced Chris into having fresh bread, cheese, milk, peanut-butter and bananas. Three quarters of an hour and $35.50 worth of good food later, a new Chris was born. They talked and talked, the old man and the lost kitten he saved from drowning, they went through all the important questions of life and Chris finally managed to get to where he had left the beaten path some years before, swearing he would never ever allow himself to get near drowning again.
    And he kept to his oath. But in doing so, in keeping an eye too close on his own well-being, he drifted away into a direction opposite from where he got lost before. And Chris forgot. About the indisputable positive effect bananas, cheese and milk immediately produce when applied to people showing the signs of ill-being and malnutrition. He drifted far away from poverty but in doing so, he was caught in the nets of greed. Chris met the wrong people. Chris met another kind of drug pushers. The legal kind. The kind who so easily convince the masses of their noble goal. The saviours of humanity, the people who sell life-saving killer-drugs to poor countries. Chris believes in them, unconditionally. This is why Chris writes what he writes, says what he says, thinks what he thinks.
    Dear readers, all this may be quite surprising for you. But I’ve known the barren truth for a long time already, which is why my mean ranting of yesterday evening is absolutely unforgivable. I deeply regret, I swear I do.

  484. #485 Adele
    October 23, 2007

    The Honey Bun Viral Signature Challenge is going into a third day!! Damn that thing looks tastey sitting here on my desk. I know you want it. Individually wrapped.

    Pope said he doesn’t have money to do experiments well maybe he can borrow some from Maggiore or maybe he can go work in Maniotis lab for a week that’s all it takes. I don’t care about your excuses I just care about if you take away my Honey Bun that would suck but I made the offer so oh well.

    You to can claim the Honey Bun!! Heres how,
    Take some cells and show theiy’re not infected with HIV.
    Give some of them stimulation and interferon antibodies w/or w/o HIV. And some other ones nothing.
    Show us the HIV cells and the stimulated cells are getting HIV coming out of them and DNA in the cells. That’s how Dr. Mantious says you see HIV and it doesn’t exist he says so here’s your chance to prove he’s right people.

    Just takes a couple a days the cells do most of the work.

    C’mon deniosaurs don’t sit around and go extinct prove your right!! And win a fine Honey Bun, Yum.

  485. #486 apy
    October 23, 2007

    Does anyone else have no idea what that rant of jspreen’s actually meant? I could barely follow it.

  486. #487 Dale
    October 23, 2007

    Elk,
    Al-Bayati, according to what one can find online, has a Ph.D. in comparative pathology and is certified as a toxicologist and a veterinary toxicologist. His thesis was about vanadium toxicity in rats. In other words he’s a pathologist in the same way Maniotis is a pathologist; they have experience with pathology research in model systems but they aren’t medical pathologists. But it hardly matters since I doubt that Ms. Maggiore was looking for a critical review of the coroner’s report but rather for someone with qualifications that sounded vaguely relevant to come up with a plausible sounding cause of death other than AIDS for her daughter.

  487. #488 Adele
    October 23, 2007

    Does anyone else have no idea what that rant of jspreen’s actually meant?

    apy did you hear, Rumor is, spreen was very busy last two weeks on a creative writing project writing spam emails from famous scientists!

    So he is just tired out from it poor thing, give him a break for his incoherant thing about Chris and food and Christ.

  488. #489 jspreen
    October 23, 2007

    Does anyone else have no idea what that rant of jspreen’s actually meant?

    Everybody has quite a clear idea of what I meant but it’s so much more comfortable to pretend one didn’t notice or couldn’t follow. But maybe you are a genuine exception to the rule. In which case you should know that you must always read an author you really want to understand at least three times. And that you must take time to let things settle down and come to rest.
    I posted at 11:58 AM. You answered at 1.01 PM. Far too hastily apy, far too hastily. You should learn to be more patient, to take time to read and read again. And to take even more time to try to understand what you read.

    Of course it is not impossible that my postings, being written by a stranger to the English language, actually are truly incomprehensible because I use many words that do not even exist. If that’s the case, I cannot really judge my crap and you should drop it all.

  489. #490 Dustin
    October 23, 2007

    Of course it is not impossible that my postings, being written by a stranger to the English language, actually are truly incomprehensible because I use many words that do not even exist. If that’s the case, I cannot really judge my crap and you should drop it all.

    That is a very parsimonious appraisal for a crank. There’s hope for you yet.

  490. #491 Andrew Maniotis
    October 23, 2007

    Hope woodchuck chuck,

    RE: power of mutation, prayer, and Chinese menus.

    Faith-based science and medicine dominates ideas regarding the “mutability” of the “HIV” virus, and the failure of ARV-therapy. Individuals who fail ARV therapy are told their virus has mutated and is no longer sensitive to the drugs. The impact of this hypothesis on persons living with “HIV” or “AIDS” is unfair, uninformed, and cruel.

    For example, Mark Harrington, a member of The Treatment Action Group (TAG) summoned “the power of prayer” over “HIV” mutability, and discussed “The Chinese Menu Approach” in a description of a meeting he attended on developments regarding anti-retrovirals that included AIDS leaders such as Marc Wainberg, Director, McGill AIDS Centre, and this summer’s Chair of The Toronto International AIDS Conference-who possesses several “HIV” drug patents such as lamivudine (3TC), and grants from GlaxoSmithKlein, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer-Ingelheim. Also present at the meeting was Emilio Emini, Tufts University’s John Coffin, Roche’s Noel Roberts, the CDC’s Harold Jaffe, Chiron’s David Chernoff, the ACTG’s Robert (“Chip”) Schooley and John Mellors (developer and champion of the viral load tests now known to be invalid), as well as treatment activist Dawn Averitt-Doherty of Atlanta-based Woman’s Information Service and Exchange (WISE):

    “During the coffee break, I (Harrington) joined three activists outside to share nicotine and despair. What was the point of quitting smoking if we were still all passengers on the speeding train heading for the cliff? The Birmingham resistance data were wrenching. Our fears of multiple cross-resistance, from November 1995′s 3TC and saquinavir FDA approval hearings, reared their ugly heads. Several months of post-Vancouver euphoria crumbled in a moment as it became clear that many of those who developed resistance to ritonavir and indirovine-as thousands clearly would-might have no protease inhibiting options ahead of them. Today’s resistance news made for a toxic cocktail. As I left the auditorium I bumped into Emilio Emini.”

    “Harrington: So what do you do if you fail Crixivan?”

    “Emini: [sighs] We don’t know what to do.”

    “Harrington: Take two new nucleosides and nevirapine?”

    “Emini: Yeah. And pray.”

    “No one had yet assessed the healing effects of prayer on viral load. This was what we’d come to. I rushed into the lobby of the Interior Department and ran into a colleague, who was wild with fear and disappointment.”

    “Sometimes the gap between how the researchers felt and how we felt became an abyss. They were excited about the endless possibilities opened up by the research advances of 1996; we were terrified about the limited treatment options facing people who had exhausted most of the current arsenal of antiretroviral therapy. What to do with those whose viral load refused to go undetectable? What to do with those who added a protease inhibitor to a failing two-drug regimen and appeared doomed to develop resistance, most of it-especially with ritonavir and indinovir-cross-resistant to all other protease inhibitors? What to do with those who jumped aboard last year’s bandwagon, AZT+3TC, and now appeared likely to have developed 3TC resistance and, with it, cross-resistance to ddI, ddC and possibly 1592? The Chinese menu approach to antiretroviral treatment suddenly looked much less appetizing, and much less nourishing”[TAGline/Volume 4 Issue 2 February 1997].

  491. #492 Andrew Maniotis
    October 23, 2007

    Dear colleagues,

    “Dr. Tectonidis says if the United States and the European Union were willing to spend part of their food aid on this, more companies will start making it.”

    The Doctors Without Boarders finally figured out the cause of the African Holocaust-and it was on 60 minutes this weekend. They concluded that plumpynut is better than antibiotics and antiretrovirals-its essential medicine-at least give them some gruel and water to wash down their nevirapine tablets, will ya guys?

    A Life Saver Called “Plumpynut”
    Anderson Cooper Reports On A Nutritional Breakthrough

    Oct. 21, 2007

    See the video free at:
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/19/60minutes/main3386661.shtml

    Plumpynut is cheap, nutritious and needs no refrigeration. It is saving starving children in the developing world and could save more … if there were more of it. CNN’s Anderson Cooper reports.
    * Doctors Without Borders
    * Doctors Without Borders: Malnutrition
    * Doctors Without Borders Briefing Paper: Food Is Not Enough: (.pdf)

    (CBS) You’ve probably never heard a good news story about malnutrition, but you’re about to. Every year, malnutrition kills five million children — that’s one child every six seconds. But now, the Nobel Prize-winning relief group “Doctors Without Borders” says it finally has something that can save millions of these children.

    It’s cheap, easy to make and even easier to use. What is this miraculous cure? As CNN’s Anderson Cooper reports, it’s a ready-to-eat, vitamin-enriched concoction called “Plumpynut,” an unusual name for a food that may just be the most important advance ever to cure and prevent malnutrition.

    “It’s a revolution in nutritional affairs,” says Dr. Milton Tectonidis, the chief nutritionist for Doctors Without Borders.

    “Now we have something. It is like an essential medicine. In three weeks, we can cure a kid that is looked like they’re half dead. We can cure them just like an antibiotic. It’s just, boom! It’s a spectacular response,” Dr. Tectonidis says.

    “It’s the equivalent of penicillin, you’re saying?” Cooper asks.

    “For these kids, for sure,” the doctor says.

    No kids need it more than a group of children 60 Minutes saw in Niger, a desperately poor country in West Africa, where child malnutrition is so widespread that most mothers have watched at least one of their children die.

    Why are so many kids dying? Because they can’t get the milk, vitamins and minerals their young bodies need. Mothers in these villages can’t produce enough milk themselves and can’t afford to buy it. Even if they could, they can’t store it — there’s no electricity, so no refrigeration. Powdered milk is useless because most villagers don’t have clean water. Plumpynut was designed to overcome all these obstacles.

    Plumpynut is a remarkably simple concoction: it is basically made of peanut butter, powdered milk, powdered sugar, and enriched with vitamins and minerals. It tastes like a peanut butter paste. It is very sweet, and because of that kids cannot get enough of it.

    The formula was developed by a nutritionist. It doesn’t need refrigeration, water, or cooking; mothers simply squeeze out the paste. Many children can even feed themselves. Each serving is the equivalent of a glass of milk and a multivitamin.

    To see the impact it’s having, 60 Minutes drove for 12 hours from Niger’s capital to a remote village, where every week Doctors Without Borders hand out Plumpynut. After sleeping in a field under mosquito nets, Cooper and the team awoke at sunrise to find mothers emerging from the fields. Many had walked for hours in the dark, along treacherous paths, avoiding scorpions, spiders and poisonous snakes.

    Rivers of women flowed into the site and within minutes there were more than a thousand of them, all waiting to get packets or tubs of Plumpynut. In a land where plastic bags are a luxury, they carry the food home in their scarves, their hands, or simply stacked on top of their heads.

    “When you see some of these kids they don’t look sick. They don’t look malnourished. They don’t have bloated bellies or little stick arms,” Cooper remarks.

    “The ones that we’re used to seeing on TV, that’s the worst of the worst of the worst. It’s the tip of the iceberg. And then below that, there’s the iceberg. So, there’s a whole spectrum of malnutrition,” Dr. Tectonidis says. “And when we go and check these kids, well, they’re way off in height or in weight. They’re way off.”

    (CBS) Niger has become Plumpynut’s proving ground. A daily dose costs about $1; small factories mix it here and in three other African countries. Tectonidis says other companies could make similar products wherever children need them.

    “There’s many countries in Africa now saying, ‘We want a factory. We want a factory.’ Well let’s give it to them,” he says. “We just have to focus on these areas. We don’t have to feed the whole world. We have to go for the jugular. Where are they dying? Where are they wasted? That’s where we have to intervene. If you feed them well until they’re two or three years old it’s won. They’re healthy, they can get a healthy life. If you miss that window, it’s finished.”

    In Niger, most children need help now during what’s called the “hunger season,” just before the new harvest. Old food supplies have run out and about all that’s left is millet, a basic grain women pound for porridge. But millet doesn’t have enough nutrients to keep kids alive; in America we use it as birdseed.

    Normally a children’s hospital 60 Minutes visited would have more patients than beds. But now, thanks to Plumpynut, it has empty beds. Dr. Susan Shepherd, a pediatrician from Butte, Mont., runs Doctors Without Borders in Niger.

    She says children that would have been hospitalized in the past can now be treated at home. “The reason we can do that is because we can give children Plumpynut here in the ambulatory center, and they take a week’s ration home. Moms treat their children at home and come back every week for a weight check,” Dr. Shepherd explains.

    That’s what Sahia Ibrahim has been doing. She’s already lost four children to malnutrition. Now her six-month-old twins, Hassana and Husseina, are malnourished and she’s worried they might die too. So she’s been coming to the hospital for Plumpynut.

    Hassana, at six months old, weighs only seven pounds. While that’s what a newborn should weigh, the little girl has put on a pound in just a week thanks to Plumpynut.

    Children are weighed and measured at the distribution sites. They’re also examined to make sure they don’t have any serious infections. Malnutrition destroys a child’s immune system, so they’re more susceptible to diseases and less capable of recovering from them.

    “Often these kids aren’t even hungry. It’s the opposite. They are anorexic because of the deficiencies they have. They lose their appetite,” Tectonidis explains.

    That’s what happened to Mansour Miko and Maroufee Mazoo. Less than a year old, they had stopped eating and became listless and weak — so weak that when their mothers brought them to get Plumpynut, the nurse put them in a van and sent them straight to the hospital. Three days later however, they were smacking their lips on Plumpynut, almost ready to go home.

    “Have you seen kids who were on the brink of death brought back by Plumpynut?” Cooper asks.

    “Oh, yeah, for sure. Again and again and again and again,” Dr.Shepherd says.

    But not always. Sometimes parents wait too long before bringing their child to doctors. 60 Minutes found Rashida Mahmadou in intensive care, barely clinging to life.

    Rashida’s condition was very serious. Her skin was literally peeling away — one side effect of malnutrition, as skin becomes thin, pliable, cracks easily, and bacteria invade.

    Just two hours later, Rashida’s litt