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.

 

Medical Industry Holding Back Cures for Major Diseases

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Very interesting thread from another website:

forum.mpacuk.org...

an excerpt (sorry some info already has been touched on in this thread):

"Now, the next document was from the US Senate Library. It is a record of the Appropriations Hearing that was held in July of 1969, where the Department of the Army specifically requested and received $10 million to develop "a synthetic biological agent that would impair or destroy the human immune system." This is from the US Senate Library. We also made reference to several published articles from the World Health Organization, written about the same time, which advocated similar kinds of research toward the development of "a hybrid virus that could selectively effect the human immune system." Like it not, these documents all exist. The Kissinger Memorandum, the Army Appropriations Hearing, the articles from the World Health Organization; these are official records -- facts of history -- that can not be disputed. We also pointed out an incredible coincidence.

The World Health Organization went into Central Africa in 1972 -- into an area that is known as the "AIDS Belt" -- and administered a smallpox vaccination to several thousands of Africans. This event was followed immediately by the first outbreak of AIDS on this planet -- a remarkable coincidence -- that was noted as a Front Page Headline in the London Times, but has never even been mentioned in the US Media -- never even mentioned. Another startling fact that was never mentioned in the mainstream media -- the Hepatitis B Vaccine that was given to several thousand male homosexuals in New York and San Francisco in 1978. The fact is, every single person who received that vaccine contracted AIDS -- every single one of them -- without exception. That is what the first American victims of AIDS all had in common. They were receivers of the Hepatitis B Vaccine. It is a documented fact."




[edit on 16-9-2005 by XanaX]




posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by XanaX
Do you have common sense?


No I don't. I have "practical sense."

If it was common, then everyone would have it which they clearly don't.


Now I suppose it's time to relax while you go on your cut-and-paste tirade all by yourself. You can blow the "open your mind kazoo" all day, but in the end I have posted at least three times that I understand the point you are making, but that it is still NOT "massive evidence."

Instead of anything similar (as in diplomatically seeing both sides - sometimes referred to being "open"), you cling to your dogma of "truth" as you want to see it by using the references you want to believe. How much "higher intelligence" is used in that kind of discussion? Not much more than the classic "I know you are but what am I?" arguments that kids have on a regular basis.

The Topic
It really a shame to fall into absolute belief with a conspiracy theory in this matter instead of focusing various steps needed to actually save lives. The mind-set that undermines cure efforts is denial from "I believe the rumors" instead of confronting one's own practices of protection. The "bought-and-sold" theories provide a seemingly simple and satisfying substitute to the challenges of actually dealing with the real factors that propel the epidemic.

Engineered
In looking at the matter of AIDs being "engineered" most research views are that HIV doesn't have a sufficient sector of homology with the proposed parent viruses used to supposedly create it.

Smallpox
The smallpox vaccinations that took place it seems that poor efforts to control contamination could be a cause, but it could not be the main cause because the geographical locations of the vaccinations don't match up to the locations of the early outbreaks of the disease. Further testing has also not found contamination.

To now look at the WHO (World health Organization) as a grand conspiracy group that would reveal themselves by openly by endorsing an evil plot to genocide third-world countries is nothing but a sham. Lying about WHO serves as a handy diversion from looking to real causes the way other countries crippled Africa through Imperialism and other tactics.

Timeline
Also, look at the timeline. Why would the government look for a weapon of mass genocide in the beginning of the 70's jump to the completely unknown area of human retroviruses? There were many known and available lethal alternatives available. Military science had no reason to look at that group of viruses that HIV belongs to.

The first human retrovirus (HTLV-I) was not discovered until 1977, and even then it could not immediately be linked to any disease, but scientific evidence shows AID was already in several countries by that time. It would have had to be an epidemic years before the 70's. (Slow virus, remember?).

If you read the book "The Birth of AIDS" you would note that cases in the 1930's (earliest accurate records) show some isolated cases with all the earmarks of AIDS. Studying the DNA sequences to determine age have provided estimates for HIV in the 30-900 year range.

Then you have the social conditions of the time. International travel on the rise, the sexual revolution, injection drug use building and blood donations with multiple re-use of syringes in many Third World countries, provide an Occam's Razor type of explanation.

Thousands of Africans get infected with HIV each year from blood transfusions alone because they can't afford to screen their blood supply.

Reuse of old syringes which in some cases is a handful of needles for a few thousand people.

Poor protection practices. Just look at the STD rate in Africa as a result of a lack of basic public health. Poverty in those nations means that many Africans don't even have basic medication like aspirin

Conclusion
The world response to AIDs was slow and filled with various flaws from the first reported origin to the pushing of certain drugs as a means of fighting the virus. We need to do more. There are plenty of documented reasons why things are bad.

Why not look rather at the fact that some places in Africa spent about $5 per year per person on preventative health care? Why not look at how various countries are forcing a payback of debt which amounts to over $40 billion per year from Africa or that the USA never even funded the WHO with the $100 or so million it promised in the 90's?

This matter demands that we think critically rather than simply bow our heads and step-toe into the various (unproven) rumors that circulate about it's beginnings and focus in on what really is happening.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   


This matter demands that we think critically rather than simply bow our heads and step-toe into the various (unproven) rumors that circulate about it's beginnings and focus in on what really is happening.


ZZZ...most of the information I have provided is much more than rumor. You're the close minded one here, not me. I'm willing to look at both sides and after doing so, it seems quite clear to me that there is a conspiracy and that AIDS was man-made purposely to control the population here and in third world countries abroad especially Africa. This is what I believe and what I know to be the truth. You believe whatever you want. But you can quit arguing semantics with me because it's getting you nowhere at all.

you say quote: "I (meaning you) have pracitcal sense not common sense." Well it is obvious you don't have common sense.

You keep trying to control how I think and what I believe...it's not working....sorry if that disappoints you. I will say it for the 3rd time now: everyone on here can take the information I've provided and do whatever they want with it. They can believe it or not. What I'm doing is sharing information. It's up to the reader to decide what the truth is for them.

I certainly have provided a lot of information that makes a conspiracy seem quite obvious. You choose to be blind to that, that is your choice. I don't care what postion you take. I do care when you try to tell me what position I should take. Take care of yourself and I'll take care of myself. You believe what you want and I'll do the same.

The overwhelming evidence, however, leads to a conspiracy. And it is a fact that this country has had a depopulation policy for a long time. That is FACT!!

Question: How is something a rumor when there is documented evidence to prove it? Answer that for me cowboy!



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Xanax - as you invoked my name, I find it necessary to clarify what I tried to say in my u2u.

I do believe you are on the right track here - but you are muddying the waters (perhaps irreparably) by bickering.

You need to focus on the research - and for the record - I'm with ZZZ on this one: corporate financed sources are spurious, even when they're hawking "natural" cures. You need to use the National Institutes of Health PubMed database. [When you search, just add +PMID to your string]

So while you have provided evidence to support your hypothesis, you have not proved it, as ZZZ says.

You are NOT going to find support for your global hypothesis in the scientific literature, and WILL need to prove your case from the ground up. IMO - the evidence exists. You just need to do the work - and not rely on others' summaries.

To prove your case, you will need to integrate proofs derived from medical and scientific research, with an added politico-economic analysis. Also, you need to start with the premise that most, if not all, modern diseases arise from an original underlying infection with the same protein.

Your main obstacle is that most medical and scientific research results are privately owned, protected by Intellectual Property Rights laws, and generally inaccessible. However, recent Open Source and Open Access movements now are bringing taxpayer funded research into the public domain - so there's stuff out there, if you know how to look, and what to look for.

Here's a (very) quick and dirty outline to help you get started:

A. Break down your medical research to cover the 4 primary treatment modalities:

1. Drugs
2. Surgery
3. Organ replacement, including transplant and regrowth
4. Cell therapies, including bone marrow transplants, which are the only stem cell therapy available to ordinary people (on a limited basis, generally not covered by insurance as "experimental")

Document what treatments exist, what's covered by insurance, and what's not covered by insurance. You will find that the main obstacles to early diagnosis, and effective preventive treatment ("cure"), result from limits on insurance coverage. So once you have identified the medical realities - in scientific detail - you might want to look at the business associations between the pharmaceutical giants and global insurance and reinsurance corporations.

If you do your homework - you will be able to prove that:

1. Modern diseases start with a protein that interferes with stem cell differentiation and development, and destroys tissue by causing cell mutations. This protein targets different cells and tissues depending on a variety of factors, termed "catalytic cofactors." The only way to effectively treat modern disease is to go straight to the protein, and nip the diseases in the bud before they progress and create complications ("clinical symptoms", and new protein mutations (re-categorized as 'different' diseases).

2. Insurance policies specifically preclude early diagnosis, and only cover treatments targeted to complications that arise after underlying disease has progressed. This is called a "cost-effective treatment strategy" - which relies first on treating secondary symptoms with drugs; second, removing diseased tissue surgically; and third, removing destroyed organs or glands if possible, and replacing said destroyed body parts, if necessary.

3. Insurance companies justify tiered "cost-effective treatment strategies" because most modern diseases are very slowly progressive, often taking decades to become life threatening - they say that early diagnosis and intervention is "medically unnecessary." [Also search "medical necessity"] NOTE:The costs arising from chronic debilitation and early disability - which results from non-diagnosis and non-treatment - are off-loaded onto victims, and sometimes, governments.

4. Massive cleanup efforts are required to remove disease-causing proteins from food and water; also, industrial practises need to be redesigned to prevent environmental contamination with synthetically created "catalytic cofactors." ...These considerations should lead you towards an investigation of the financial connections between Big Pharma, the insurance industry, and the chemical industry - you might start with Merck and I.G. Farben.


Your research into treatments should review the treatment's history. For example:

1. Prior to penicillin's monopoly, bacteriophages were used with great success to treat bacterial infection - and because they are 'natural bacterial predators,' have the ability to evolve right along with bacteria. Political intervention killed the bacteriophage industry to promote penicillin and help establish the monopoly for anti-bacterial drugs. We now are paying the price. ...FYI - political intervention still is protecting the antibacterial drug monopoly, and suppressing the re-creation of a bacteriophage industry.

"The war against bacteria is not something that can be won by humans," Sulakvelidze says. "If you try to wipe them out, they will always return. Only they will be stronger."
They're called phages. And they eat drug-resistant bacteria for breakfast.
Also see: Investigator Lawrence Broxmeyer MD sees the possibility of bacteriophages as the antimicrobrials of the future.

2. Most modern drugs are targeted to proteins - but focus on later-stage secondary symptoms. This means that the drugs target secondary proteins that are produced by the body in response to disease, or are a mutation of the original infectious protein. Either way, even the most expensive state-of-the-art drugs do not target the protein causing the underlying disease - only proteins responsible for secondary effects. ...And most drugs are themselves "catalytic cofactors" that trigger new mutations, and speed progression of the underlying disease.

proteinology - the scientific study of proteins or of the protein status of the body. [Ed. Note: Much more narrow than proteomics, which is concerned with protein development, interractions, mutations, etc.]
Dorlands - Merck Source

Ie., see: Proteinology: Commercial pharmaceutical applicationsdo note the rumors saying that the island where Kuru was "discovered" was purposefully infected, to see how protein-related disease spread and progressed.


Review current treatment alternatives:

1. Pay special attention to "personalized medicine" - including proteomics, metabolomics, and bioinformatics.

2. Consider the fact that treatments for protein-related diseases are now being marketed as "anti-aging therapies" - which are not covered by insurance.

3. Take a look at the illegal trade in organs, and the "organ farms," where humans of all ages are imprisoned so doctors can harvest their organs as needed. [Search Thomas Gordan, organ hunters, organ harvesting, etc.]

4. Think about how "stem cell farms" might operate - and who might have the financial ability to access treatments using the harvested stem cells.

5. Research 'natural remedies' that block prion multiplication in the body - green tea, sage, curcurim (sp.?, in curry), and antihistamines top the list.


Finally, but perhaps most critically:

1. You will find that new virulent diseases now are appearing at a horrifically rapid rate. Ie., "Doctors know C. difficile flourish after patients take certain antibiotics. Now it seems any antibiotic can bring on the disease. ..."Something happened 18 to 24 months ago, ..." said Dr. Mark Miller, chief of infectious diseases at Montreal's Jewish General Hospital."

www.cbc.ca...

calgary.cbc.ca...

2. Virtually all of these diseases arise from the ability of a protein called "a-smooth muscle actin" to access any living cell, and thus, cross species and kingdom barriers with ease - which allowed mutations to occur unhindered over the past century, and resulted in the now uncontrollably rapid mutation rate.

3. Medical science canNOT treat or cure these new infectious diseases, mainly because current treatment modalities and industrial processes actually create them.

4. There are solutions, and there is hope, but not without full disclosure, and honesty from our governments.



The following articles will help you get a handle on the complexities inherent in your hypothesis, and to develop a more comprehensive framework. Also, all the articles have some specific references that will be useful to you. Again, while you can use others' work to help develop your personal understanding, you MUST focus primarily on the credible articles listed in PubMed as references to support your contentions:


[url=http://www.atsnn.com/story/151455.html]Eli Lilly Disses Blockbusters, Plugs Personalized Medicine: Medicaid Chokes" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">

3. Stem cell therapies go straight to the protein causing the underlying disease - and they work. The known history of cell therapy starts in 1912 with Dr. Kuettner - in 1931 Dr. Paul Nichans advertised cell therapies using non-human embryonic stem cells. Note that the first officially recognized protein-related disease was fibromuscular dysplasia (1938, Leadbetter and Burkland) - which is not really a disease in its own right, but rather, the stage where "a-smooth muscle actin" uses the vascular and immune systems to spread through the body. Review Linus Pauling's work on the immune system in 1940, and his work on the actin protein's 'a' and 'b' conformations in 1950 - do not fail to note that Pauling was blacklisted by the FBI for being a "commie," who thereby destroyed his credibility in America. Review the work on "teleomeres" done by the Nazis and in US laboratories dominated by eugenics sympathizers in the 1940's. ...Research publicly available information on "fibroblasts" and embryonic stem cell research conducted in the early 1950's - and outline the cryogenic storage facilities built in the USA in the early 1960's for the wealthy to store their own "young" stem cells, for later use in autologic transplants. ...Do not overlook Gadjusek and other scientists researching proteins associated with infectious disease in the 1950's - and do note the rumors saying that the island where Kuru was "discovered" was purposefully infected, to see how protein-related disease spread and progressed.


Review current treatment alternatives:

1. Pay special attention to "personalized medicine" - including proteomics, metabolomics, and bioinformatics.

2. Consider the fact that treatments for protein-related diseases are now being marketed as "anti-aging therapies" - which are not covered by insurance.

3. Take a look at the illegal trade in organs, and the "organ farms," where humans of all ages are imprisoned so doctors can harvest their organs as needed. [Search Thomas Gordan, organ hunters, organ harvesting, etc.]

4. Think about how "stem cell farms" might operate - and who might have the financial ability to access treatments using the harvested stem cells.

5. Research 'natural remedies' that block prion multiplication in the body - green tea, sage, curcurim (sp.?, in curry), and antihistamines top the list.


Finally, but perhaps most critically:

1. You will find that new virulent diseases now are appearing at a horrifically rapid rate. Ie., "Doctors know C. difficile flourish after patients take certain antibiotics. Now it seems any antibiotic can bring on the disease. ..."Something happened 18 to 24 months ago, ..." said Dr. Mark Miller, chief of infectious diseases at Montreal's Jewish General Hospital."

www.cbc.ca...

calgary.cbc.ca...

2. Virtually all of these diseases arise from the ability of a protein called "a-smooth muscle actin" to access any living cell, and thus, cross species and kingdom barriers with ease - which allowed mutations to occur unhindered over the past century, and resulted in the now uncontrollably rapid mutation rate.

3. Medical science canNOT treat or cure these new infectious diseases, mainly because current treatment modalities and industrial processes actually create them.

4. There are solutions, and there is hope, but not without full disclosure, and honesty from our governments.



The following articles will help you get a handle on the complexities inherent in your hypothesis, and to develop a more comprehensive framework. Also, all the articles have some specific references that will be useful to you. Again, while you can use others' work to help develop your personal understanding, you MUST focus primarily on the credible articles listed in PubMed as references to support your contentions:


[url=http://www.atsnn.com/story/151455.html]Eli Lilly Disses Blockbusters, Plugs Personalized Medicine: Medicaid Chokes
[url=http://www.atsnn.com/story/133261.html]Personalized Medicine: The End of Blockbuster Drugs?
Sick Dog Gets $45,000 Stem Cell Transplant
Bush Signs Quarantine Orders for Bird Flu
Polarization Prevents US Cloning Ban
Bhopal in Slow Motion
Connections: Health, Finance and the US Treasury
Military Says Terrorists Might Use Bird Flu as Bioweapon
WHO Pushes for Bird Flu Vaccine Production
Neuro-Marketing: Straight to the Brain
New Bankruptcy Bill Protects Rich: Squeezes Troops, Everyone Else
Poison DUst: Depleted Uranium Kills
US Health Care Tab Ready to Explode
U.S. Still Silencing Scientists
Smoke, Mirrors, and Gulf War Syndrome
New Test Finds Mad Cow Before Symptoms Appear
Obesity and Mad Cow Disease
Mad Cow Madness
Bush Pushes to Limit Class-Action Suits
The New Military: Robots with Human DNA
The New Military: Microbots
Did Chemical and Drug Industries Create Mad Cow?
Mad Cow-causing Prions Found in All Organs
Mad Cow in Cosmetic Implants?
"Mad Cow" Spreading in Deer and Elk
"Mad Cow" Disease Uses Immune System to Spread in Body
The Final Solution
A Military-Governmental-Industrial Conspiracy?
Winds of Change: Science Goes Open Source
Stepping Down from the Ivory Tower
Prescription Drug Marketing Misleads Public
Health Care Crisis Debate Heats Up Behind the Scenes
Threat Analysis: Genetically Engineered Stealth Bio-weapons
Flu Vaccine Technology: Who's Blocking its Use?
Kerry Claims 100 Million Americans Chronically Debilitated
UK, US Criticized by Scientists
Fears of Terrorism Hide Real Biological Attack, Assault on Voting Rights
Merck and Vioxx: A Twisted Tale of Cover-ups, Pork and Profits
NIH Bypasses Need for Open Access Legislation
Population Control Bioweapon? Medical Accident? What is Fibromuscular Dysplasia (FMD)?


Also see: Green Medicine




EDIT: Somehow
a section keeps getting copied and inserted - although it does NOT EXIST except in the final copy. ...I cannot delete it. Please ignore.

...Tried again - doesn't show up where I can cut it. Must be a glitch. Maybe a gremlin.




[edit on 17-9-2005 by soficrow]

[edit on 17-9-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   


You are NOT going to find support for your global hypothesis in the scientific literature, and WILL need to prove your case from the ground up. IMO - the evidence exists. You just need to do the work - and not rely on others' summaries.


Thank you Soficrow and for also saying that "I'm on the right track."

The amount of research you are asking me to take part in is pretty muchimpossible for me to have the time for. I run a business which takes up 60 hours a week, I paint, I am renovating a house, etc. etc...and of course I have a home life.

I will attempt to do more research and post anything additional I see fit. I have been doing a lot of reading on the National Security Database as well as other government websites where the Freedom of Information Act has allowed the viewing of documents once classified.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Lastly.....Soficow....I will do my best to stop taking part in the bickering. It's my fault for allowing ZZZ to get under my skin, which I didn't think was part of his job description as a Moderator....but, if it pleases him, then God bless him!



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by XanaX

The amount of research you are asking me to take part in is pretty muchimpossible for me to have the time for.




I know, I know.





I have been doing a lot of reading on the National Security Database as well as other government websites where the Freedom of Information Act has allowed the viewing of documents once classified.



You need medical and scientific references to shore up the NSA stuff, and substantiate your contentions - all hidden in plain sight on PubMed. Needs to be brought together.

Good luck.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 02:40 PM
link   


Now I suppose it's time to relax while you go on your cut-and-paste tirade all by yourself. You can blow the "open your mind kazoo" all day


This is from ZZZ. A moderator showing us the example we should all follow. ZZZ, I just want to say I'm done playing your bickering game. Find a new target.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Modern diseases start with a protein that interferes with stem cell differentiation and development, and destroys tissue by causing cell mutations. - quote.

Which protein is it?

I assume a protein that deals with DNA-RNA replication. But I have yet seen a name?

BTW- I am a Dreaded Medical worker of the Evil Establishment. So fill free to attack me with Ad-Hoc arguments. I deal with facts not conjectures.

So name Your protein, and educate me.



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by msnevil
Modern diseases start with a protein that interferes with stem cell differentiation and development, and destroys tissue by causing cell mutations. - quote.

Which protein is it?

...name Your protein, and educate me.




"a-smooth muscle actin"


.

[edit on 19-9-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 07:33 PM
link   
"I'm willing to look at both sides and after doing so, it seems quite clear to me that there is a conspiracy and that AIDS was man-made purposely to control the population here and in third world countries abroad especially Africa."XanaX Aids came from Africa. it was not a so called sythentic genocide device or anything, it was exactly what ZZZ said. People first contracted Aids from eating infected Bushmeat or infected primates. say you're cleaning an infected monkey and you accidentaly cut your self you get the inected blood inside you. It makes me mad when some people think doctors who are trying to protect us and keep us alive are being degraded and bad stuff happening to them like this conspiracy issue. ,just like the military.



posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   


say you're cleaning an infected monkey


I'm sorry, but does anyone else find this comment as funny as I do? Now that would be a lousy job...cleaning infected monkeys. You're meeting with your counselor at the unemployment office and she says, "Hey, we've got something at the Johnson Labs. Yes, it's cleaning infected monkeys. That sounds like something you're qualified for Steve. The pay isn't great but the benefits are good!"

[edit on 20-9-2005 by XanaX]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Interesting article found at www.pubmed.com

Africa and the AIDS myth.

Versi A.

PIP: The recently released television documentary, "Monkey Business, AIDS: The African Story," has created controversy in Europe with its premise that AIDS did not originate in Africa. Although AIDS 1st appeared in New York in 1981 and was not recorded in Africa until 1983, researchers and the media have promoted the theory that AIDS came from Africa through human contact with the green monkey. Subsequent research forced the original champions of this "green monkey connection" theory to acknowledge that the AIDS virus and the green monkey virus are so dissimilar that they could not be historically linked. Then, the focus turned to the theory that a remote pygmy tribe had been endemically infected with the AIDS virus and carried the disease, by airplane, out of the country. This theory, too, was refuted by the failure to locate any HIV-positive pygmies in the Central African Republic. Still determined to prove that AIDS did not have an American or European origin, researchers reported that blood testing conducted in 1984 revealed 50-90% of Africans to be HIV-infected. Retesting with a more accurate procedure revealed the rate of infectivity to be only 0.02%; yet the media have continued to portray Africa as the source of the AIDS scourge. Moreover, it appears that AIDS cases are actually overreported from Africa--not underreported--due to confusion with conditions such as malnutrition and tropical diseases. To some, this relentless drive to vilify Africa reflects racism. Others believe that it represents an effort to cover up the possibility that the AIDS virus is man-made--a result of an accident in gene technology or microbiology.

PMID: 12282947 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

What we have here is a reputable source: The National Library of Medicine, with an article disputing the theory that AIDS came from Africa and observing that it could quite possibly be man-made. This source appears to believe the Africa connection is just a hoax to hide the truth.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 01:45 PM
link   


What we have here is a reputable source: The National Library of Medicine, with an article disputing the theory that AIDS came from Africa and observing that it could quite possibly be man-made. This source appears to believe the Africa connection is just a hoax to hide the truth.


XanaX...looks like you've done some homework that might actually be considered legitimate by the "open-minded" individuals on ATS that have been doing nothing but hassle you up to this point. Nice job!



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 01:54 PM
link   
I'm looking forward to more info Xanax....

[edit on 21-9-2005 by _Uforia_]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Uforia_
XanaX...looks like you've done some homework that might actually be considered legitimate by the "open-minded" individuals on ATS that have been doing nothing but hassle you up to this point. Nice job!


I'm assuming you've also done your homework, Uforia?



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Thanks Uforia...here's more from the same site:

As I see it. Africa not to blame for AIDS.

Ochieng P.

PIP: The author finds the British government's threat to screen visitors from Central Africa for HIV infection to be racist and counterproductive to the international effort against the spread of AIDS. While Britain's actions suggest that Central African nations are the origin of AIDS, and that they hold the greatest number of people with AIDS, the earliest cases were detected in the U.S. and later in Europe. Africa is merely being used as a convenient scapegoat to explain the origin of AIDS and the present global epidemic. Moreover, present British actions merely constitute a thinly veiled attempt to bar Zambian, Tanzanian, and Ugandan nationals from Britain. Were AIDS truly to originate from Africa in its present epidemic proportions, it would have been endemic on the continent for hundreds of years. National and European doctors and other health practitioners would surely have at least remarked on a syndrome of such devastating effects.

from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Also found at The National Library of Medicine:

AIDS--what've monkeys got to do with it? [letter]

Wiki G.

I was appalled by Aminatta Forna's review on AIDS which appeared in the January issue. The Central African theory leaves a lot of questions unanswered, people in Central Africa have been living close to monkeys and other game since their existence. Why did the virus decide to jump across the Atlantic to attract the Americans and not the Zaireans? Or is the virus a racist? Kenyan scientists (some of whom are from the West), have shown that there is no connection between monkeys and AIDS transmission (Weekly Review: 13 September, 1985). The few cases reported have been found mainly among prostitutes in the cities who engage in sexual contact with Western tourists. Those who are closer to the monkeys in the rural areas have not suffered, nor have their ancestors. Most people, especially Africans will have realized that the Western media has engaged in a deliberate and calculated propaganda to lay this "white man's burden" on Africans as usual. What is most disturbing is to see an African falling prey to this propaganda.

from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

It appears there are many in the medical community that believe the whole Africa connection is a hoax or propaganda or whatever you would like to call it. In my opinion, to hide the fact that AIDS was and is a man-made disease for the sole purpose of depopulating the planet as well as to be used as a biological weapon.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Nice find, Xanax.

Please note though, that the article is reporting a TV show relating to AIDS - neither the article nor the author are stating anything related to confirmation or denial of the information contained therein.

They're just reporting (noting) that the TV show existed, and was shown.

That's all, really.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Uforia_
XanaX...looks like you've done some homework that might actually be considered legitimate by the "open-minded" individuals on ATS that have been doing nothing but hassle you up to this point. Nice job!


Give me a break.

Why is it that because I am a staff member, I am not allowed to have an opinion?


How is it that because someone claims to have "easy to find proof" that AIDs was created by the US government and then produces nothing but conjecture and rumors...is so "open-minded?" Oh, I can find White House memos and tons of "proof," it's real easy. That was the actual claim, remember? Helloooo?

I have stated a number of times (did you read any of my posts?) that there could be some shadowy practices involved. Is that not being "open?" I have also done a tremendous amount of research on the matter an posted quite a bit of evidence that demonstrates a high probablity that AIDS was not man made.

I never claimed to know it all and HAVE SAID SO, and I didn't just cut and paste a bunch of conjecture paragraphs that only support what I want to believe. It has been said that the conspiracy it is man-made is "known truth" and only references that SUPPORT that argument will be looked at or believed. That is not "open."

It's more like selective hearing. You hear what you want to hear.

I have stated pros and cons.
I have challenged claims of "easy to find proof."
I have challenged claims of the "I just know the truth" argument.
I have even done vast amounts of research and posted MY OWN CRITICAL THOUGHT which is exactly what this site is about and I am "hassling" people?


Not one person looked at a god-damn thing and said "Here is a issue Zedd" or "Here is something you overlooked," and provided some evidence to back that up, which I would then say "Oh, good point...I never considered that" (because I am not perfect have stated that) and the whole matter gets DISCUSSED.

Oh Jesus No! It's just "blah, blah Zedd you closed-minded person. I KNOW the truth. You're just hassling people."

I am disgusted and for the first time ever here...really pissed about the veiled insults that I can't have a damn opinion because it doesn't align with what people WANT to believe. Yeah, I'm closed-minded. Bah!




top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join