| Gary Stein 2004-08-26, 2:06 am |
|
"KellyJonLandis" <kjlandis@alumni.usc.edu> wrote in message
news:a812a5afed70041f1099a9d3a6dcca96@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> "Gary Stein" <ge.stein@verizon.net> Aug 25, 2004 at 10:29 PM
>
> <<The truth about HIV and AIDS is proven beyond any reasonable doubt.>>
>
> I've examined more than enough reasons to doubt the
> 'HIV/AIDS' theory of model.
Well you don't show any proof of that with what you write bellow......
>
> <<Even if you ignore all the work on the genetics of HIV...>>
>
> The have not mapped the entire genetic struture, there are huge gaps in
> the alleged "HIV genome."
Your source of information on this assertion?
>
>
> <<...or the fact that HIV can be cultured in the Lab>>
>
> Anything can be stimulated in a petrie dish, even some genetic soup they
> are calling 'HIV.'
So you dismiss accepted lab work that is readly duplicated and accepted by
the virology community with a vague unatributed statement that means
nothing?
>
> <<...or the fact that CD4 counts and Viral Load numbers are completely
> consistent with the patients health status in
> every study on the matter that has been undertaken>>
>
> Oh, c'mon. That's a joke right? Do you even know what you are spouting?
Yes obviously more then you do, study after study shows in unmedicated
patients health declines as Viral Loads rise and CD4 counts fall ultimately
ending in death for more then 90% of patients who are not taking
anti-virals. Your URL is a compendium of opinions of dissidents with no
science backing them up, I saw no references to peer reviewed studies and
even an acceptance of CD4 counts value in assessing the health of large
groups of samples.
>
> INDEX OF REFERENCED QUOTES OF SOCALLED SURROGATE LAB MARKERS
> http://www.aras.ab.ca/test.html
>
> <<...you can not argue with the fact that there are hundreds of thousands
> of patients whose health has been analyzed in retrospective studies that
> show they respond to treatment with anti-viral medications, that if
> unmedicated more the 90% of them die...>>
>
> Yes, I can. You cannot provide one reference to a completed,
> placebo controlled [drug vs no drug] study that shows patients lived
> longer or healthier. You can only refer to studies that look only at those
> on the drugs and what their socalled 'numbers' are doing.
Well since it is not ethical to let the patient die just to satisfy you
dissidents you are correct studies do not allow unmedicated patients to die.
However there are plenty of retrospective studies of unmedicated patients
and again what they show is that 90% plus of those people die period no
ambiguties involved. So one can compare the outcomes of patients on
medication to those retrospective studies of unmedicated patients and see
clearly that the medicated patients do not progress to AIDS and death at
anywhere approaching the rate of those who are unmedicated.
>
>
> CDC data on number of AIDS cases and AIDS deaths. AIDS cases and deaths
> CLEARLY begin to decline *PRIOR* to the release of new "miracle" drugs!
> (Taken from: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hivsur92.pdf). However, only 19%
> of so-called "HIV-positive" people were on the new drugs by the end of
> June *1996* (see:
> http://www.retroconference.org/2001...stracts/494.htm
> ). Also, the dosage of the TOXIC AZT has been lowered SUBSTANTIALLY (by at
> least 50%) since its release in 1987. See THIS GRAPHIC
> http://groups.msn.com/aidsmythexpos...hoto&PhotoID=24
> for related information.
Old bogus propaganda of the dissident movement, two drug therapy started
before 1996 so yes that would account for a small decline in AIDS deaths
which is just what happened. Then in late 1995 triple drug threapy became
available and begining slowly from then on until 2002 AIDS deaths declined
each year.
>
>
> <<...and there CD4 count profiles are not replicated by any other known
> illness or environmental factor, and finally that they all have one and
> only one thing in common that being HIV infection.>>
>
>
(snip massive pile of dissident propaganda from such notable non-scientists
such as (first she's POZ then she's not) Celia Farbor, and HEAL (those snake
oil salesman and exercise guru's). When you can provide us with something
that was peer reviewed and published that supports your nonsense do so but
don't waste our time regurgitating garbage that has been discredited 100's
of times over the years that this debate has been going on.
Gary Stein
|