It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lawsuit Claims US manufactured the AIDS Virus

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 09:08 AM
link   
So.. if Viruses have DNA, can't someone map the DNA of say, the AIDS virus and work out what each thing does.. and then alter it to make it harmless, or simply attack AIDS viruses or other viruses and not the immune system?

Edit: And another random thought. Perhaps the monkeys arent the cause, but rather the cure.

[edit on 16-7-2005 by ekul08]

And that AidsVAX worries me a bit, as somebody said, Viruses just mutate.. if it will only prevent aids in 30% like it says it hopes it will, then thats 70% of new infections that WILL get through, and thus will adapt to be able to survive. Then this even more unknown virus will start spreading.

We should wait until we can develop one with 100% effectivity.

[edit on 16-7-2005 by ekul08]




posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
The controversial OPV AIDS hypothesis raises speculation that the origin of AIDS is due to the oral polio vaccination program that took place in the late 1950s of Africa."

it looks like it came from oral polio vaccination that took place in Africa, guess the genes in Africans cause a change.


always knew there be side effects wen rushing a new treatment would backfire.


The genes in Africans didn't cause a change in the vaccine. The vaccines were produced from the organs of monkeys and chimps, without the doctors creating the vaccine checking for other cultures (such as the one responsible for HIV). This vaccine was then administered in large quantities.

Read "The River," it explains everything.



posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Re: The River.

I read that book a couple of years ago; made for some interesting reading, for sure!

However...

There's very little in the way of conclusive evidence that the polio vaccines are/were solely responsible.

Study suggests vaccine theory wrong .

Excerpt:

""Robin Weiss, a professor of viral oncology at University College London in the United Kingdom, said the research only serves to confirm, once again, that the polio vaccine theory is without merit.

"I don't know any scientists who take the polio/HIV theory seriously anymore," Weiss said. "I did once, but I no longer do. It is still a topic for discussion because some investigative writers and television producers do still take it seriously.""

Though I do think it's possible that a vaccine was to blame - I'm not convinced. Sadly Hooper's book contains too many theories and not enough hard evidence, though it certainly gives us something to think about!

A more likely theory is that any vaccine link is only one of several possible methods of transmission.

The fact that the OPV theory accounts for just one (group M) of several different groups of HIV also suggests that transferral must have happened in other ways too.

More theories here

Excerpt:

"The final element that suggests that the OPV theory is not credible as the sole method of transmission is the argument that HIV existed in humans before the vaccine trials were ever carried out".

There are a few good links from the BBC's website, too - I'd generally consider these more objective than info from vaccine manufacturers (who generally deny the link outright), and info from Hooper himself, who obviously has a less-than-objective point of view


BBC article; scientists disprove vaccine/AIDS link

Then there's this page, from Guy's Hospital (England) - scroll down to World AIDS Day to read more.

It's all very intriguing; again, though it now seems unlikely (seeing as the original vaccines were tested independently and found to contain no evidence of HIV or chimp DNA), it remains a possibility - albeit vague.



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower

There's very little in the way of conclusive evidence that the polio vaccines are/were solely responsible.




Hmmm. Key phrase that, "solely responsible." ...There is NO doubt that some batches of polio vaccine were contaminated with SV40. ...There also is no doubt that bugs mutate, and sometimes, transfect across species barriers, as is the case with infectious prions. Most likely, HIV/AIDS resulted from 'multifactorial' influences.

Only old science looks for direct cause and effect. Contemporary work views life, cells, and disease as complex adaptive systems - and far beyond a simple linear 'cause and effect' analysis.

IMO - the quotes in the BBC article read like legal positions - developed to deflect charges of culpability and liability. Hardly credible.


.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by slayerfan
I would love to see the truth come out on this.

do you really belive a guy had sex with a monky and started aids,

I think not!!


hahahahahahahaha
that gave me a good laugh



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 04:45 AM
link   
...I found an insteresting article at Cospiracy Planet...
It seems to support the claims of the author of the lawsuit..

www.conspiracyplanet.com...


Book review' AIDS and the Doctors of Death

[edit on 22-7-2005 by cosmokatt7]



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by slayerfan
I would love to see the truth come out on this.

do you really belive a guy had sex with a monky and started aids,

I think not!!


Exactly, nobody has sex with both monkeys and people, there is a line you cross it and thats it, no more people !

Various comedians have tackled this issue, while funny, its true.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 01:53 PM
link   
The more realistic theories about "Patient Zero" surround the premise that one of his sexual contacts (or he himself) had been bitten by an infected monkey - not that the monkey was part of his sexual conquests.

I'm not sure anyone is going with the "he had sex with a monkey" theory, these days.



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
The more realistic theories about "Patient Zero" surround the premise that one of his sexual contacts (or he himself) had been bitten by an infected monkey - not that the monkey was part of his sexual conquests.

I'm not sure anyone is going with the "he had sex with a monkey" theory, these days.



Well, HIV is not transmitted by saliva, so this theory is probably total bunk.



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 07:54 AM
link   
Jeremiah,

With all due respect, you might have misread the post.

SIV can be transmitted via the saliva of an infected monkey, thus the theoretical conclusion that if the infected monkey shares saliva with it's victim, the exchange can occur.

Obviously, this becomes relevant only if HIV does originate from SIV - and this is the issue which remains in dispute.

Then there's the "infected monkeys were eaten, and thus spread infection that way" idea...and more can be read here

Interestingly, chimpanzees confine HIV to blood cells, but in humans HIV is found in plasma, saliva, and cerebral spinal fluid. A little oddity there, and one which is more than a little curious.



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 07:57 AM
link   
How about make a lawsuit claiming that US manufactured the black death too? and be done with this!



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
How about make a lawsuit claiming that US manufactured the black death too? and be done with this!


Aw come on.....

Assuming your view is that the allegation is complete bunk...how about you share your reasons why? or why not?

So far it's been an interesting discussion....



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Aw come on.....

Assuming your view is that the allegation is complete bunk...how about you share your reasons why? or why not?

So far it's been an interesting discussion....


I think this is just Ludicrous.



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Yes, yes, so you've said.

But it'd be much easier to understand your point of view if you could offer a reason why, instead of just doing one-liners, you know?



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Yes, yes, so you've said.

But it'd be much easier to understand your point of view if you could offer a reason why, instead of just doing one-liners, you know?



I don't think the US can manufactured a virus this advance. it's way beyond their tech level. + why would the US make something that would affect themselves, many Americans has died because of aids.

[edit on 31-7-2005 by ulshadow]



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
I don't think the US can manufactured a virus this advance. it's way beyond their tech level. + why would the US make something that would affect themselves, many Americans has died because of aids.

[edit on 31-7-2005 by ulshadow]


Two words.

Tuskegee experiment.

This alone is ample proof that we really don't have too many qualms about deliberately harming our own citizens.


xu

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   
if anyone cant accept such a thing, take a look at the history

History of Secret Experimentation on United States Citizens from ATS main.

and about AIDS:
AIDS as Biological & Psychological Warfare from ATS main.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   
... well ... i think hes right... its just that some ppl have the power but they dont have the BRAINS brains.... i can see the U.S making a virus and then saying that some1 screwed a monkey and got it...



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by russiankid
... well ... i think hes right... its just that some ppl have the power but they dont have the BRAINS brains.... i can see the U.S making a virus and then saying that some1 screwed a monkey and got it...


All I could think of to answer this was...

...
...
...

(yes, that's my Extra Cranky Triple Ellipse. A rare animal, not often seen on these boards)

So...what else d'ya got, russiankid? Any theories? proof? vague hypothesis?


What are your thoughts on the subject?



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
well... i think that the U.S made AIDS to threaten the rest of the world and make every1 scared... the U.S always had enough power to make the world scared... now go back to the 1970's and imagine the U.S saying that they have a virus that WILL KILL YOU and theres nothing u can do about it...




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join