|
Home > Archive > HIV Aids > July 2006 > How to die from aids in 40 days....
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
How to die from aids in 40 days....
|
|
|
|
http://www.harpers.org/OutOfControl.html
Another life "saved" by the precious meds.
From happening.
Uwe Hayek.
--
L'intellectuel qui pense comme autrui ne sert à rien !
This is the bitterest pain among men, to have much
knowledge but no power.
Herodotus (484 BC - 430 BC), The Histories of Herodotus
IDIOCY - Never underestimate the power of stupid
people in large groups.
| |
| DavidT 2006-06-23, 8:19 am |
|
Hayek wrote:
> http://www.harpers.org/OutOfControl.html
> Another life "saved" by the precious meds.
A single documented death directly from AIDS meds is so unusual that
the whole world knows about it and the denialists still make a merry
song and dance about it over 3 years later.
39 million people in the world have HIV.
About 20 million have died from it.
| |
| GMCarter 2006-06-23, 8:19 am |
| On 23 Jun 2006 01:02:10 -0700, "DavidT" <david199@volcanomail.com>
wrote:
>
>Hayek wrote:
>
>A single documented death directly from AIDS meds is so unusual that
>the whole world knows about it and the denialists still make a merry
>song and dance about it over 3 years later.
>
>39 million people in the world have HIV.
>About 20 million have died from it.
There is no question that ARV's can be toxic. There is no question
that these toxicities can even be fatal in some cases. Fatalities are
very rare.
NOT treating HIV infection with ARVs at the appropriate time (200-350
CD4, being one important indicator) will be FAR more likely to result
in death than ARV use.
But hey. Denialists don't give a shit about that!
And then, of course, there is no discussion about methods and means to
mitigate these toxicities and side effects. Just another tired polemic
of "ARV is evil" (utterly wrong) or "ARV is good" (true but with
caveats).
George M. Carter
| |
|
|
DavidT wrote:
> Hayek wrote:
>
>
>
> A single
If you look closer at the facts, all aids deaths are
iatrogenic. It starts with pcp being caused by bactrim.
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/hkpneumo.htm
> documented death directly from AIDS meds is so
> unusual that the whole world knows about it and the
> denialists still make a merry song and dance about
> it over 3 years later.
That is your tactic. That is what your camp did when
one person who refused meds died.
The millions that survived without meds did not count
then.
And until you can come up with proof of a real virus,
ALL the deads are caused by the meds, not a single
one. There are about 600.000 aids deaths in the US and
99.99% of them were on your precieous meds. What A
magnificent result.
> 39 million people in the world have HIV.
Not at all. 38 million of them ar "assumed" to have
hiv, and have never been tested.
The remaining million is tested by a test that has
never been proven to be in real relation to any real
virus.
> About 20 million have died from it.
In the Western world, about a million have died from
the "magnificent" medication, that turned out not to
be magnificent, because that million died anyway.
The other 19 millions are estimates. Deaths in
countries that do not register births or deaths.
So anyone can say anything about everything.
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/chrfafrica.htm
Look at the experience of the field workers :
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/nhplague.htm
Uwe Hayek.
--
L'intellectuel qui pense comme autrui ne sert à rien !
This is the bitterest pain among men, to have much
knowledge but no power.
Herodotus (484 BC - 430 BC), The Histories of Herodotus
IDIOCY - Never underestimate the power of stupid
people in large groups.
| |
|
|
Hayek wrote:
> DavidT wrote:
>
> If you look closer at the facts, all aids deaths are
> iatrogenic.
So, presumably you would agree with this statement from Celia Farber's
article:
"Duesberg thinks that up to 75 percent of AIDS cases in the West can be
attributed to drug toxicity. If toxic AIDS therapies were discontinued,
he says, thousands of lives could be saved virtually overnight"
The Strategies for the Management of Antiretroviral Therapy (SMART)
trial enrolled over 5,000 people, who had been taking antiretrovirals
for an average of SIX YEARS. Half the participants discontinued
antiretroviral therapy. According to you and Duesberg, they should have
done better than the people that continued, right?
Well, their risk of death doubled. The results should be published soon
in the Lancet, you should take a look.
| |
|
|
RJ wrote:
> Hayek wrote:
>
>
>
> So, presumably you would agree with this statement
> from Celia Farber's article:
>
> "Duesberg thinks that up to 75 percent of AIDS
> cases in the West can be attributed to drug
> toxicity. If toxic AIDS therapies were
> discontinued, he says, thousands of lives could be
> saved virtually overnight"
>
> The Strategies for the Management of Antiretroviral
> Therapy (SMART) trial enrolled over 5,000 people,
> who had been taking antiretrovirals for an average
> of SIX YEARS. Half the participants discontinued
> antiretroviral therapy. According to you and
> Duesberg, they should have done better than the
> people that continued, right?
>
> Well, their risk of death doubled. The results
> should be published soon in the Lancet, you should
> take a look.
Another Mirage.
People who feel bad, after taking ARVs for an average
of six years are more likely to stop, and are more
likely to die. It is the "hospitals have the highest
death rate of all buildings"- statistic trap.
People who stop smoking and/or drinking usually do so
because they feel their health is deteriorating.
I would like a comparison with people who took NO ARVs
with a group that took them. Like the concord study.
And there it showed that Azt shortened lives.
Uwe Hayek.
--
L'intellectuel qui pense comme autrui ne sert à rien !
This is the bitterest pain among men, to have much
knowledge but no power.
Herodotus (484 BC - 430 BC), The Histories of Herodotus
IDIOCY - Never underestimate the power of stupid
people in large groups.
| |
| GMCarter 2006-06-24, 8:20 am |
| X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 32
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 12:02:17 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.247.170.143
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: trndny05 1151150537 71.247.170.143 (Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:02:17 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:02:17 EDT
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com misc.health.aids:112410
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:47:35 +0200, Hayek <hayektt@nospam.xs4all.nl>
wrote:
snip
>Another Mirage.
>
>People who feel bad, after taking ARVs for an average
>of six years are more likely to stop, and are more
>likely to die. It is the "hospitals have the highest
>death rate of all buildings"- statistic trap.
Nope. People with HIV who are not on ARV or who stop do not go to the
hospital. Unless they get sick.
>People who stop smoking and/or drinking usually do so
>because they feel their health is deteriorating.
This is an unsupported statement. People stop for many reasons.
>I would like a comparison with people who took NO ARVs
>with a group that took them. Like the concord study.
>And there it showed that Azt shortened lives.
That is not what Concorde showed at all. Your facts are wrong, your
suppositions are unsupported, your commentary rife with delusion.
Why should anyone give credence to your comments?
George M. Carter
| |
|
| Hayek wrote:
> Another Mirage.
No, actually it was a randomized, controlled study with over 5,000
participants.
> People who feel bad, after taking ARVs for an average
> of six years are more likely to stop, and are more
> likely to die. It is the "hospitals have the highest
> death rate of all buildings"- statistic trap.
The study randomized people 1:1 to stop or continue their
antiretrovirals. There was also a Quality of Life substudy which
clearly shows that people did not come into the study feeling bad.
> I would like a comparison with people who took NO ARVs
> with a group that took them. Like the concord study.
> And there it showed that Azt shortened lives.
But if it's your hypothesis that NO ARVS are a good thing, then surely
it would predict that any clinical trial that involved stopping ARVS
would inevitably improve people's health? Rather than doubling their
risk of disease progression and death?
And please don't take this as some kind of blanket endorsement of ARVs
as ideal drugs; I and many other people have long advocated for
studying approaches that can maintain immunological and clinical health
with the least amount of ARV utilization possible. SMART investigated
one such approach, and it is profoundly disappointing that it was not
sucessful. The late, deeply missed Carlton Hogan, a misc.health.aids
veteran whose posts can still be found in the archive, was one of the
people that worked on the SMART protocol so I actually find it kind of
grim to have to use it in response to your ignorant caterwauling.
| |
|
|
RJ wrote:
> Hayek wrote:
>
>
>
>
> No, actually it was a randomized, controlled study
> with over 5,000 participants.
>
>
>
>
> The study randomized people 1:1 to stop or continue
> their antiretrovirals. There was also a Quality of
> Life substudy which clearly shows that people did
> not come into the study feeling bad.
>
>
>
>
> But if it's your hypothesis that NO ARVS are a good
> thing, then surely it would predict that any
> clinical trial that involved stopping ARVS would
> inevitably improve people's health?
After reading the "clinical trial" of AZT and the
nevirapine trial in Africa, I have become highly
suspicious of clinical trials.
You say that the study "randomized" people to stop or
continue their ARV's. Is not that highly unethical
from your point of view ? And did these people then
suddenly went on placebo ?
And why was such Quality of Life not performed on the
first AZT trial ?
> Rather than doubling their risk of disease
> progression and death?
You now use the results of the trial as a fact, while
we are in the middle of discussing this.
There are numerous cases where only a few weeks of
arv's made people very ill and even killed them.
Nevirapine was banned for use for hospital staff that
had a needle accident, after it proved highly toxic
after even a short treatment.
> And please don't take this as some kind of blanket
> endorsement of ARVs as ideal drugs; I and many
> other people have long advocated for studying
> approaches that can maintain immunological and
> clinical health with the least amount of ARV
> utilization possible. SMART investigated one such
> approach, and it is profoundly disappointing that
> it was not sucessful. The late, deeply missed
> Carlton Hogan, a misc.health.aids veteran whose
> posts can still be found in the archive, was one of
> the people that worked on the SMART protocol so I
> actually find it kind of grim to have to use it in
> response to your ignorant caterwauling.
I find it grim that you do not even consider that you
might be wrong. Because there is ample evidence that
it is possible. And then hiv-aids misconceptions
killed about a million people.
Uwe Hayek.
--
L'intellectuel qui pense comme autrui ne sert à rien !
This is the bitterest pain among men, to have much
knowledge but no power.
Herodotus (484 BC - 430 BC), The Histories of Herodotus
IDIOCY - Never underestimate the power of stupid
people in large groups.
| |
| evo-LOL 2006-07-01, 2:20 am |
|
Hayek wrote:
> After reading the "clinical trial" of AZT and the
> nevirapine trial in Africa, I have become highly
> suspicious of clinical trials.
>
> <snip>
>
> I find it grim that you do not even consider that you
> might be wrong. Because there is ample evidence that
> it is possible. And then hiv-aids misconceptions
> killed about a million people.
Please cite a study which shows that a million people have died from
"HIV-AIDS misconceptions". Without reference to clinical studies,
please.
|
| |
|
|