| Iconoclaster 2005-10-20, 5:53 pm |
| One of Fawzi's papers starts like this:
>"HIV-1 infection is having a devastating impact on people in developing
countries. Poor nutrition and HIV-related adverse health outcomes
contribute to a vicious cycle that may be slowed down by using
nutritional
interventions, including vitamins and minerals."
Oh... Right. Makes me think of the "Malnutrition Virus", described by
satirist Marcel Girodian.
My own virus, the .357 Magnum Virus, works the same way: The bullet is a
cofactor, so if you take the bullets out, the action of the virus may be
slowed down.
Now really, Mr. Noble! (and Mr. Fawzi): If we leave HIV completely out
of
the equation, don't you think we'd get the same results? You feed people
properly, their health improves. Why the hocus pocus with a virus? More
$$$$ ?
But I do agree with your suggestion to read the original studies.
The second reference, about glutathione, looks a lot better. But do they
really need 8 authors at Stanford these days, to produce one paper?
This study shows clearly that low GSH levels are predictive of
deteriorating health. But WHY the hell drag "HIV" into the whole story?
Depressed GSH levels can be caused by various mechanisms, the most obvious
being oxidation. So why include a "magic" ingredient such as "HIV"?
Without even so much as mentioning HIV, this would have been a fine paper.
$$$$ ?
|