| Author |
Thank You Talkabout
|
|
| Fondoo 2005-10-15, 10:49 am |
| Reading AIDS dissident sites taught me to critically look at the
mainstream HIV/AIDS studies and the media and political corruption in the
science.
The well read mainstream boys on talkabout are teaching me how to look
at the dissident information and ideas critically. I can see that neither
side is completely right and it is important not to be lulled into a
possibly false sense of security about my health, and from the bottom of
my heart I thank you.
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-17, 12:49 am |
|
"Fondoo" <dale601@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0b6ab260f0fdb40d7e4524587e431775@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> Reading AIDS dissident sites taught me to critically look at the
> mainstream HIV/AIDS studies and the media and political corruption in the
> science.
> The well read mainstream boys on talkabout are teaching me how to look
> at the dissident information and ideas critically. I can see that neither
> side is completely right and it is important not to be lulled into a
> possibly false sense of security about my health, and from the bottom of
> my heart I thank you.
>
>
Wow, that's refreshing, and thank you right back. It is really a breath of
fresh air to debate this with someone who is not so completely wedded to his
beliefs that he can't recognize that he or she might not be completely right
in those beliefs.
Again here is wishing you continued success in your choices regarding your
families health care and personal truth seeking.
Gary Stein
| |
| DavidT 2005-10-17, 10:50 am |
| >That is why I have *always* encouraged everyone
>reading this debate to question, question, question
>what the dissidents say
>We *welcome* questioning. We *want you* to question us.
Glad to here it. We would welcome answers to the questions we have
posed to the dissidents.
Simple one to start with - Can you name a drug that is not toxic?
| |
| Fondoo 2005-10-17, 10:50 am |
| "Simple one to start with - Can you name a drug that is not toxic?"
I'll bite
None come to mind, why is this important?
| |
| DavidT 2005-10-17, 5:50 pm |
| Paul would understand. He tried to separate HIV meds from other drugs
by virtue of their toxicity, producing a definition of toxic along the
way.
Unfortunately for him, every known pharmaceutical drug fulfils his
definition of toxic.
As at least you realise, toxicity is universal, and drugs differ only
by degree.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-18, 12:49 am |
| >"Can you name a drug that is not toxic?"
No.
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-18, 12:49 am |
|
"Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:e4952f608f80dd47fd05fa729f22794b@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> degree."
>
> Very true. And at the extreme end of high toxicity we find the DNA chain
> terminators, such as AZT.
>
>
No not by a long shot there are thousands of drugs which will kill within
hours of there being taken at extremely low doses in comparison to AZT. I
ask you how many milligrams of AZT would you need to take to commit suicide
now compare that dose with aspirin, or prescription pain killers. I have
never heard of a suicide by AZT and doubt that it could be accomplished, the
amount of the drug that one would need to take would most likely exceed the
capacity of the normal adult stomach. Hell booze is orders of magnitude more
capable of causing death quickly then is AZT.
You make idiotic statements like the one you make in this post then wonder
why people don't believe you have any training in science. Even your
denialist buddies aren't that stupid they see you for what you are another
internet troll with an ISP, some modest typing skills and that's about it.
Gary Stein
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-18, 12:49 am |
|
"Fondoo" <dale601@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f42a3ababb2d11c615f848c4ac6d6005@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> AZT is a cell killer plain and simple. If we come to a point where it is
> proven to be inapropriat for use in AIDS you may have dissidents to
> thank.
> We argue here but we are united in purpose and that is to stop people
> dying an AIDS death, God help us all.
>
Then after taking it twice a day since 1996 don't you think all my cells
should be dead?
Gary Stein
| |
| Fondoo 2005-10-18, 12:49 am |
| Gary I hope all your cells live forever man
| |
| Brian Mailman 2005-10-18, 12:50 am |
| Fondoo wrote:
> AZT is a cell killer plain and simple.
How do you think chemo for cancer works?
B/
| |
| Fondoo 2005-10-18, 10:50 am |
| By somtimes killing the cancer before it kills the person. That about
right?
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| Mr. Stein, when will you start realizing that most ARVs are simply DNA
chain terminators. So they act at the most basic level of life: They
kill cells.
I'll gladly believe that there are chemicals that will kill you faster
than AZT. But AZT does it surer and more thorough. Amounts that won't
kill you today are able to do enough damage to your body that will make
sure the ill effects will be felt for a long time, even after you stop the
medication.
Mentioning aspirin in this context is so utterly ridiculous that it's very
clear you have been brainwashed by the pharma industry. Aspirin has an
impressive service record, over a period of more than 100 years. Because
it's a cheap substance, the pharma industry has been badmouthing it for
years, so that they could sell more effective (and more expensive)
drugs... such as Vioxx. And you believe all the bad things that are said
about aspirin?? Hahahahahahahaha!
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| >"Then after taking it twice a day since 1996 don't you think all my cells
should be dead?"
That's what can be expected. But fortunately, they are not. You must
have been very healthy when you started taking the stuff.
Anyhow, I wish you a long and productive live, Mr. Stein.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| >"How do you think chemo for cancer works?"
Deadly. It kills people. I've lost a lot of relatives and friends to
cancer chemotherapy.
It's possible to survive cancer, but I don't know anybody who has survived
chemotherapy.
Before AIDS was invented, we had a "War on Cancer". And guess what? The
same AIDS celebrities were working on cancer then. And they have not
achieved a damn thing then either.
| |
| DavidT 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| No, there are hundreds of more toxic drugs in daily medical use. AZT is
of fairly limited toxicity when judged by the standards universally
applied to drugs and adverse reactions..
| |
| DavidT 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| >"It's possible to survive cancer, but I don't know anybody who has survived
chemotherapy."
ROTFLMAO!
What an insular existence you must have.
| |
| GMCarter 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 21:09:43 -0400, "Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl>
wrote:
>
>Deadly. It kills people. I've lost a lot of relatives and friends to
>cancer chemotherapy.
Radiation can be worse.
A lot of cancers don't respond well to either. They're given anyway.
They thus should NEVER be used. Is that your worldview?
| |
| Brian Mailman 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| DavidT wrote:
> chemotherapy."
>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
> What an insular existence you must have.
Aryans don't get cancer.
B/
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
|
"Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:1954b0812f06f0d38fb948e36da3fa08@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> Mr. Stein, when will you start realizing that most ARVs are simply DNA
> chain terminators. So they act at the most basic level of life: They
> kill cells.
> I'll gladly believe that there are chemicals that will kill you faster
> than AZT. But AZT does it surer and more thorough. Amounts that won't
> kill you today are able to do enough damage to your body that will make
> sure the ill effects will be felt for a long time, even after you stop the
> medication.
Well after a decade of taking AZT twice a day I'm still here it sure doesn't
seem to had much of a negative effect on my body. Why would that be if it's
as deadly as you claim it is?
I notice you don't even attempt to back up your claim by telling us what the
fatal dose of AZT would be.
As to Aspirin are you honestly claiming that it is not one of the most
common drugs used by suicides in the US?
Gary Stein
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
|
"Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:446c2825a614ed375ae7d1989ba8457a@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> should be dead?"
>
> That's what can be expected. But fortunately, they are not. You must
> have been very healthy when you started taking the stuff.
> Anyhow, I wish you a long and productive live, Mr. Stein.
>
>
>
>
No actually I was about a week away from death at the time I started AZT,
Epiver, and Saquiniver.
Gary Stein
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| >"Well after a decade of taking AZT twice a day I'm still here it sure
doesn't seem to had much of a negative effect on my body. Why would that
be if
it's as deadly as you claim it is?"
I usually don't put much value in anecdotal evidence. I don't even know
whether you're a real person, or that "AZTMurder" is right.
But if what you say is true, I'm happy about it. You must be one hell of
a strong individual.
>"I notice you don't even attempt to back up your claim by telling us what
the fatal dose of AZT would be."
Correct. That would be very much like calculating the weight of a
wrecking ball that would level a building with one impact. AZT is not an
acute poison; it slowly wrecks you, blow for blow.
>"As to Aspirin are you honestly claiming that it is not one of the most
common drugs used by suicides in the US?"
No, I'm not claiming that at all. It may very well be true what you're
saying. It just goes to prove that suicidal people are not too bright.
It takes a really high dose of aspirin to send you into a metabolic
acidosis, from which you can get into a coma and die. But lower doses of
aspirin are harmless.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| >"No, there are hundreds of more toxic drugs in daily medical use."
Yes, and they have been since the Dark Ages.
But the trouble with AZT is that they want you to take it for the rest of
your life. "Fortunately" that's not all that long, on the average.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| >"ROTFLMAO!
what an insular existence you must have."
Not really. And I don't quite understand what's there to laugh about
people who died from cancer chemotherapy. There were a lot of them that I
knew.
| |
|
|
"Gary Stein" <ge.stein@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> As to Aspirin are you honestly claiming that it is not one of the most
> common drugs used by suicides in the US?
>
I thought it was gin and tonic with a cigarette.
| |
| GMCarter 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:23:15 -0400, "Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl>
wrote:
>
>Yes, and they have been since the Dark Ages.
>But the trouble with AZT is that they want you to take it for the rest of
>your life. "Fortunately" that's not all that long, on the average.
As a so-called scientist of some sort or other, you're supposed to
have some evidence to back up such a claim. No one argues that AZT can
cause serious side effects and is toxic. But it does not kill people
at the rate or in the way your statements imply.
And you know you can't produce data because they don't exist.
George M. Carter
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
|
"Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:ea12f9cbb5a79551f3edd25506b471c7@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> doesn't seem to had much of a negative effect on my body. Why would that
> be if
> it's as deadly as you claim it is?"
>
> I usually don't put much value in anecdotal evidence. I don't even know
> whether you're a real person, or that "AZTMurder" is right.
> But if what you say is true, I'm happy about it. You must be one hell of
> a strong individual.
Well if you do a Google search on me in the MHA newsgroup you can probably
find the posts where I posted my lab results, medical records, and Medicare
disability status. So doubt me if you want but I have been totally open
about those records in the past.
>
> the fatal dose of AZT would be."
>
> Correct. That would be very much like calculating the weight of a
> wrecking ball that would level a building with one impact. AZT is not an
> acute poison; it slowly wrecks you, blow for blow.
>
> common drugs used by suicides in the US?"
>
> No, I'm not claiming that at all. It may very well be true what you're
> saying. It just goes to prove that suicidal people are not too bright.
> It takes a really high dose of aspirin to send you into a metabolic
> acidosis, from which you can get into a coma and die. But lower doses of
> aspirin are harmless.
>
Just as the current dosing of AZT is much easier tolerated than was the
original dosing when it was used as monotherapy. You might be surprised to
know that I refused AZT monotherapy because I was of the opinion at that
time that it did more harm then good, and I still hold that opinion. Which
is that 1500mg's of AZT as a daily monotherapy is very dangerous and not
much help in prolonging the life of an AIDS patient.
Gary Stein
>
>
>
| |
| Gary Stein 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
|
"Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:ee7199ff854d8d5595cf0615dcbd0b26@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
>
> Yes, and they have been since the Dark Ages.
> But the trouble with AZT is that they want you to take it for the rest of
> your life. "Fortunately" that's not all that long, on the average.
>
>
Just how long do you think the average lifespan of an ARV patient is
currently?
Gary Stein
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| >"Radiation can be worse."
You're absolutely right.
>"A lot of cancers don't respond well to either. They're given anyway.
They thus should NEVER be used. Is that your worldview?
Yes, that's my worldview. We should not apply therapies that kill off the
patient's own cells undiscriminately, on the offchance that they might
kill the cancer cells first. Then the cure becomes worse that the
disease. have you ever heard of the physician's creed: "First, do no
harm"?
Now with cancer therapy, an argument may still be made for these drastic
methods. After all, cancer cells are cells. But the idea of "killing" a
virus with toxic meds is so totally off-the-wall that it's downright
murderous.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| >"Well if you do a Google search on me in the MHA newsgroup you can
probably find the posts where I posted my lab results, medical records,
and
Medicare disability status. So doubt me if you want but I have been
totally open about those records in the past."
Fair enough. Maybe I'm being too distrustful
>"Just as the current dosing of AZT is much easier tolerated than was the
original dosing when it was used as monotherapy. You might be surprised
to
know that I refused AZT monotherapy because I was of the opinion at that
time that it did more harm then good, and I still hold that opinion.
Which
is that 1500mg's of AZT as a daily monotherapy is very dangerous and not
much help in prolonging the life of an AIDS patient."
There's nothing in these statements that I disagree with. I still have my
reservations about HAART, but for your sake, I sincerely hope you'll be
doing all right.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| >"Just how long do you think the average lifespan of an ARV patient is
currently?"
5 years average, 10 years tops? Please educate me.
| |
| Iconoclaster 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| >"No one argues that AZT can cause serious side effects and is toxic. But
it does not kill people
at the rate or in the way your statements imply.
And you know you can't produce data because they don't exist."
I have a feeling we've been over this before. Anyhow, here's a paper from
an unsuspected orthodox site:
http://www.thebody.com/gmhc/issues/spring00/mito.html
It does not report any deaths, but if you read all this horror, would you
subject your body to stuff that causes all this misery?
The mortality data you ask for are hard to come by, because they are being
covered up. When somebody dies from ARV's, the death certificate will
say: "Cause of death: AIDS-related complications". So you may be right:
The data don't exist. They are being falsified.
| |
| GMCarter 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 19:59:41 -0400, "Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl>
wrote:
>Now with cancer therapy, an argument may still be made for these drastic
>methods. After all, cancer cells are cells. But the idea of "killing" a
>virus with toxic meds is so totally off-the-wall that it's downright
>murderous.
Except it seems to work fairly well. Better than dying of AIDS.
| |
| GMCarter 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:29:34 -0400, "Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl>
wrote:
>it does not kill people
>at the rate or in the way your statements imply.
>
>And you know you can't produce data because they don't exist."
>
>I have a feeling we've been over this before. Anyhow, here's a paper from
>an unsuspected orthodox site:
>
>http://www.thebody.com/gmhc/issues/spring00/mito.html
>
>It does not report any deaths, but if you read all this horror, would you
>subject your body to stuff that causes all this misery?
Versus the mayhem of PCP, cryptococcal meningitis, MAC, TB, CMV
retinitis, KS, etc.? If I had a low T cell count, high viral load, low
CD4 percentage? Yep.
But I'd continue to use or increase the use of antioxidants to protect
the mitochondria of healthy cells and to reduce inflammation.
>The mortality data you ask for are hard to come by, because they are being
>covered up.
LOL. Right. Get out the aluminum hats, boys!! The CONSPIRACY is
hot....
| |
| GMCarter 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:17:49 -0400, "Iconoclaster" <wgods@xs4all.nl>
wrote:
>currently?"
>
>5 years average, 10 years tops? Please educate me.
Well!! So people can live for 5-10 years on all these so toxic, fatal
drugs that earlier you were implying would kill you in a few weeks?
Like David Pasquarelli. 2 weeks in jail and maybe a month or two of
intermittent ARV is what caused him to die of AIDS?
| |
| Fondoo 2005-10-24, 12:55 am |
| My wife was diagnosed with breast cancer a few years back. It's funny
that when we asked her doctors including her HIV doc why the tumor seemed
to grow super fast from a small lump as soon as she had gone on a drug
holiday nobody seemed to have the slightest clue.
If just one doc would have said the fact she was on a drug that was
developed for cancer and being a DNA chain terminator could have something
to do with it.
I wonder if the docs were that poorly informed or did they just feel
our ignorance was bliss.
|
|
|
|