I'm replying anonymously since I'm replying from work.

- HIV tests are unreliable and can show a positive result with many other conditions or no conditions whatsoever.

This is true, some tests can give false positives. The way a person is currently diagnosed with HIV. I'd say pregnant women sometimes came up as positive on our analyses. These tests look for antibodies to the virus that are present in the blood of infected individuals. ELISA, which stands for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, is the primary test used and if it comes up positive, we usually run a Western blot to confirm the presence of HIV. ELISA is quite sensitive in chronic HIV infection, but because antibodies aren't produced immediately upon infection, a person may test negative during a few weeks to a few months after being infected. The combination of ELISA and Western Blot used for the diagnosis of HIV is remarkably accurate, with very low false-positive and -negative rates.

The antibodies assayed by ELISA include but are not limited to those developed against p24 antigen, part of HIV gag which forms part of the capsid, gp120 which forms the viral envelope and Tat protein which is the transcriptional transactivator.

- there is NO test, to proove the presence of HIV, only supposed HIV antibodies - HIV was never trully isolated (there is a reward to be collected for anyone who can isolate it, or even proove it already was by showing the documents) Since it wasn't isolated, how can we then test for it, or even prove it's existance?

We have the viral sequence and so forth... There's have isolated samples from blood, spleen and various brain tissues. It's isolated via density gradient. This is one part I do not understand of the whole conspiracy. Trust me when I say there is no reward of any kind. Otherwise, let me know where we can go claim it as I can surely use the money. The NIH is spending a lot of dough on grants dealing with HIV infection. You can isolate the virus, sequence it, use it to infect cells, run a TCID assay (Infectivity dose), heck even infect another person with the concentrated virus stock you isolated.

- "virus count" tests are in reality DNA multipliers (PCR) and are not supposed to be used in a quantifying manner (says Kerry Mullins - the discoverer of PCR, who won the nobel prize for it. He also believes HIV doesn't cause AIDS) Since they multiply the DNA (or DNR in this case) they multiply it's numbers, and if you then coun't the multiplication you get the result of it, and not the original number

Another way to quantify the virus is through the activity of its reverse transcriptase, the enzyme responsible for viral replication by converting viral RNA into DNA. After this crucial step, Integrase will add the viral DNA into the cell's own DNA.



Just wanted to clear up on those matters. Now, as to how HIV causes AIDS... Infect a person with the isolated virus, heck a rhesus macaque or a SCID mouse might work too , and see how long it takes for the CD4+ T cells to be depleted. AIDS stands for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, meaning something is causing it. That something in this case is HIV. HIV is able to infect these cells using the CD4 receptor and CXCR4 as a coreceptor. After replication, CD8+ T cells (cytotoxic) and macrophages recognize the infection inside the CD4 and decide to get rid of them. Most commonly, by apoptosis or programmed cell death. No CD4 means no antibodies, therefore the immune system goes bye bye and can't get rid of the remaining virus. This virus can create reservoirs by using our own cells but that's another story.

DeeZee i couldn't agree with your thoughts more

the kicker is that the connection between HIV causing AIDS is much less likely when you avoid taking medications that weaken your immune system and simply make healthier choices (and don't already have some sort of disease) the HIV drugs lead to conditions within your body that encourage the formation of the disease. The majority of patients who have lived with AIDS over 10 years don't take the drugs.

The other kicker is that some aids patients don't have HIV. AIDS patients usually have HIV along with a host of other debilitating immune conditions. Hiv may not technically go away but many virus's don't "go away" yet become of minimal health concern.

There are a significant group of people out their that are so money hungry that they will knowingly promote HIV medications to people that give them a greater chance to fall much more ill. Ignoring this reality does not make it go away. Most doctors just follow protocol, most are well meaning and would be less likely to be willing to believe the MEDS are a conspiracy between the drug makers and the elite scientific establishment (some malicious intent most others, confirmation bias) who will not waiver in their rush to judgement to find the cause/effect relationship between HIV/AIDS because there is more pressure to stay within the ranks, especially w/ such a big issue, and that would stop most Docs and/or scientists from entertaining the thought, because of the changes the changes they know their conscience would beg them to make and this would be a tough road for doctors to take (plus their families) , should they allow themselves to think about it, subconsciously many understand this, so they will fight adamantly when shown evidence to the contracy . Congnative bias is powerful and this is taken advantage of brutally. It is what allows large conspiracy's to exist with many people unknowningly involved.

[edit on 28-7-2008 by cpdaman]

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS

Just wanted to clear up on those matters. Now, as to how HIV causes AIDS... Infect a person with the isolated virus,

Q: how do you isolate something as fragile as HIV without potentially allowing other agents to pass as well? please understand that f-ex. mycoplasma is roughly the same size, so filtration won't work.