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.

 

10 Scientific Reasons why HIV can not cause AIDS

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX
He has a council who advises him on the issue so one has to wonder if his insane or just brave enough to admit the truth.

Gonna go with 'insane' on that one. If he is 'brave', then he'd inject himself with the HIV virus.


South Africa does not have a Aids problem as much as we have the general poverty problem.

South Africa is undergoing an AIDS explosion. Its going to destroy that country, especially if the so-called 'super aids' variant appears there.

There is apparently a large problem with newborns getting AIDS from unifected mothers in S.Africa too, its thought to be resulting from improperly sterilized needles. So that's giving the new generation a double whammy, setting up a set of them that are infected from birth, already, by virtue of the fact that they're in a place that couldnt' properly sterilize their needles, in a low economic sectory, not getting the best medication to treat the disease, living amoung the unifected population that seems to also be picking up the disease and spreading it rapidly...




posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Zed,
You hinted at a real conspiracy in your post...

about false negatives...

My question is regarding the safety of our blood supply
is donated blood safe, or is the test, not as sure as we are told?



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Anyone know how many 'false' positives or negatives there really are? I know that the initial test is not as accurate until you go to the doctor and get your tcell count and viral load and all. Actually, the people who conduct free anonymous tests will tell you to go to your doctor to get a more comprehensive test done to be totally sure. So, I think they would use the more comprehensive tests on the blood supply (at least I would hope they do).



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   
That is the point...
the more accurate tests, all are accompanied by a questionaire...

My question is when blood is given, people lie...
so can they go back and get these blood donations to answer the questionaire?
or do they assume that anyone donating blood tells the truth, and give a false negative...

the gist is this... why bother with a questionaire, if they dont use that to help make the test results more accurate?

and if they do help make the test results more accurate, then the blood supply is NOT SAFE, due to people lieing...



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I think you might be right. The questionaire is used to filter out suspicious blood and have it tested. What about the people who lie? Does anyone work with blood donations that would know the answer to this? I think it's a very good question.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
One thing I found rather interesting was this...


HIV needs a chemically induced process to reactivate.

I wonder speficly what chemical process this is refering to ...*snip*



Yes a reactivation process is necesary since its is in its latent state and nonresponsive to antiretroviral therapies. In order to find an effective way to eradicate the virus you need to reactivate it and then try to inhibit its funtions. Its not an easy cookie. They use cytokines and chemical agents to reactivate HIV. These agents are common in a lot of viral/bacterial studies.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 05:18 AM
link   
A large amount of the blood donated is given to people who die anyway.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 05:32 AM
link   
That's why so many people create their own blood supply before surgery anymore. I used to let them give my blood out when I donated (which was every chance they had to suck me dry since I'm O+), but I know a lot of people that donate, and tell them to save it just for them in case they need surgery.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by wang
 



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Don't know where this thread come from this time but i suppose i owe a response...


Originally posted by Nygdan
Gonna go with 'insane' on that one. If he is 'brave', then he'd inject himself with the HIV virus.


Which he wouldn't do if it actually existed in the AIDS resulting variety.... AIDS is just another name for poverty ( new name for the same old symptoms) and that is part and parcel of why Mbeki REALLY denies the link. If you wish to call Mbeki insane do so for his support for and implementation of neo liberal economic policies which have made the poorest in South-Africa poorer in the last fifteen years.


South Africa is undergoing an AIDS explosion.


South Africa is undergoing a explosion in acute poverty the results being worse than 'AIDS' is doing anywhere else where people are having as much of the same unprotected sex. Why didn't 'AIDS' go anywhere in the US and the rest of the west?


Its going to destroy that country, especially if the so-called 'super aids' variant appears there.


What is destroying South-Africa is TB and the same old poverty related diseases. Nothing has changed but the fact that western medicine finds continued means of treating the same old problems with ever more expensive ( and patentable) health destroying drugs.


There is apparently a large problem with newborns getting AIDS from unifected mothers in S.Africa too, its thought to be resulting from improperly sterilized needles.


And if you believe that you will probably believe anything. Improperly sterilized needle's would be used on babies in which ways exactly? Where in the world are needle's used twice?


So that's giving the new generation a double whammy, setting up a set of them that are infected from birth, already, by virtue of the fact that they're in a place that couldnt' properly sterilize their needles,


What's with the needle sterilization? There used to be a time in South-Africa where bandages were reused ( washed) but that isn't even done anymore because frankly people have become too lazy ( we keeping losing hundred if not thousands of our best traine nurses and doctors to the UK and elsewhere) and funds too easy to come by.

I don't know where people came up with the idea that the South-African medical sector reuses needle's but frankly it's stupid and speaks to the nonsense people will believe about 'the poor' to escape responsibilty for the crimes of the first world upon the third.


in a low economic sectory, not getting the best medication to treat the disease,


Actually the drugs are quite cheap if you are allowed to buy them but since it's hard to suffer the penalties of being outside the WTO you accept it and then pay 200 times more for the patented aids drugs. Basically it then becomes hard or impossible for the government to fund these treatment even if they believed in the root of the problem.


living amoung the unifected population that seems to also be picking up the disease and spreading it rapidly...


Actually the official numbers shows a decline in growth but since it's all just estimations ( exit polls but without simple yes/no answers) based on what you classify as a aids related health issue no one really knows.

Stellar




top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join