Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Kary Mullis' Next-Gen Cure for Killer Infection

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
Sorry I don't believe they meet the standards.
Sorry to disagree, but there you go.


Can you give a reason why?




posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 12:51 AM
link   
1.Culture of putatively infected tissue.

2. Purification of specimens by density gradient ultracentrifugation.

3. Electron micrographs of particles exhibiting the morfological characteristics and dimensions (100-120 nm) of retroviral particles at the sucrose (or percoll) density of 1.16 gm/ml and containing nothing else, not even particles of other morphologies or dimensions.

4. Proof that the particles contain reverse transcriptase.

5. Analysis of the particles' proteins and RNA and proof that these are unique.

6. Proof that 1-5 are a property only of putatively infected tissues and can not be induced in control cultures. These are identical cultures, that is, tissues obtained from matched, unhealthy subjects and cultured under identical conditions differing only in that they are not putatively infected with a retrovirus.

7. Proof that the particles are infectious, that is when PURE particles are introduced into an uninfected culture or animal, the identical particle is obtained as shown by repeating steps 1-5.

And win your prize!!!!!!!!!

Otherwise, I suppose this thread is dead.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
1.Culture of putatively infected tissue.

2. Purification of specimens by density gradient ultracentrifugation.

3. Electron micrographs of particles exhibiting the morfological characteristics and dimensions (100-120 nm) of retroviral particles at the sucrose (or percoll) density of 1.16 gm/ml and containing nothing else, not even particles of other morphologies or dimensions.

4. Proof that the particles contain reverse transcriptase.

5. Analysis of the particles' proteins and RNA and proof that these are unique.

6. Proof that 1-5 are a property only of putatively infected tissues and can not be induced in control cultures. These are identical cultures, that is, tissues obtained from matched, unhealthy subjects and cultured under identical conditions differing only in that they are not putatively infected with a retrovirus.

7. Proof that the particles are infectious, that is when PURE particles are introduced into an uninfected culture or animal, the identical particle is obtained as shown by repeating steps 1-5.

And win your prize!!!!!!!!!

Otherwise, I suppose this thread is dead.


All of these steps were followed in four fot he studies I posted and is standard practice in viral research.

I'll ask again, any reason those studies don't reach your "standards"? You obviously didn't read them, so please take a minute to do so.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   
There is no virus period

AIDS ( acquired immune deficiency syndrome ) is coused in people, whose T-cells stops reproducing

T-cells malfunction is coused by benzene in human organ - thymus

Benzene people get from everywhere - even condoms or lubricants (not even counting gay used vaseline and poppers or African drinking water/

No viruses has ever been isolated. They dont excist.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by angelx666

There is no virus period

AIDS ( acquired immune deficiency syndrome ) is coused in people, whose T-cells stops reproducing

T-cells malfunction is coused by benzene in human organ - thymus

Benzene people get from everywhere - even condoms or lubricants (not even counting gay used vaseline and poppers or African drinking water/

No viruses has ever been isolated. They dont excist.


Please explain, then, why antiretroviral treatment causes AIDS patients to develop a higher titer of functioning T-cells, then.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Sorry just a layman, those are the conditions set.

Don't know what your trying to achieve.
If you are so sure of yourself, All you have to do is write it up with references and collect the prize.

How about I just agree with you, is that better?

As posted before much eggier heads than yours seem to think it hasn't been isolated. What's layman to do. Usually we pick the better qualified.

[edit on 23-11-2009 by squiz]



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
Sorry just a layman, those are the conditions set.

Don't know what your trying to achieve.
If you are so sure of yourself, All you have to do is write it up with references and collect the prize.

How about I just agree with you, is that better.



As I stated earlier, I personally witnessed someone present papers to Mullis and ask him why he didn't believe them (this was at Vanderbilt two years ago while he was visiting the head of the medical school, a friend of his, apparently, and he gave an impromptu lecture on genetic medicine). When he was asked about hsi anti-HIV statement, he simply deflected the question, saying that he "didn't want to talk about it".

Obviously, this is just an anecdote, so I can't ask you to believe it. For me, however, it cemented my opinion that he's an opportunist who is unwilling to change his views when science contradicts him.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by angelx666

There is no virus period

AIDS ( acquired immune deficiency syndrome ) is coused in people, whose T-cells stops reproducing

T-cells malfunction is coused by benzene in human organ - thymus

Benzene people get from everywhere - even condoms or lubricants (not even counting gay used vaseline and poppers or African drinking water/

No viruses has ever been isolated. They dont excist.


Please explain, then, why antiretroviral treatment causes AIDS patients to develop a higher titer of functioning T-cells, then.


more drugs- more T-cells to fight, untill they all dies out (with the patient):

...........
How drugs breaks down immune system:
The white blood cells in a body attack anything that is non-itself, anything that is not native to the self. The ingestion of food is even attacked by the antibodies of the self, to break down the food, which makes it digestible and thus, energies are taken from the food and turned into energy for the body. They are called enzymes and in some cases, antibodies.

When there is a foreign body that does not break down easily, as with a disease of some type, the white blood cells around it attack it and destroy it in a kind of massive suicidal attempt or war, to rid the body of this particular foreign element.

The white blood cells do quite well with foreign objects that are introduced to the body, but when toxins such as drugs, vaccines, either recreational drugs or pharmaceutical drugs are introduced into the body, the white blood cells end up sacrificing themselves in great mass, with very little benefit or result against the toxins of these drugs and become weakened and the body has difficulty producing them fast enough to handle all the toxins that may be coming into the body.

.As time passes the body’s immune system becomes weaker and weaker because the white blood cells are the main part of the immune system.

..



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:08 AM
link   


more drugs- more T-cells to fight, untill they all dies out (with the patient):


How would an antiretroviral drug produce more T-cells unless there was a retrovirus reducing their numbers in the first place? You understand that these drugs are designed to only target specific proteins found in HIV, right?



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Sounds like a bit of a leap of logic, if you ask me.
Perhaps he has changed his mind?

Let me ask how this detracts from this revelation? you know the actual subject of the thread.

Perhaps we should just ignore it because he's controversial? maybe he was wrong about other things too!! BURN HIM!!!!!

COLLECT YOUR PRIZE!!!


[edit on 23-11-2009 by squiz]



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Sounds like a bit of a leap of logic, if you ask me.
Perhaps he has changed his mind?

Let me ask how this detracts from this revelation? you know the actual subject of the thread.

Perhaps we should just ignore it because he's controversial? maybe he was wrong about other things too!! BURN HIM!!!!!

COLLECT YOUR PRIZE!!!


[edit on 23-11-2009 by squiz]


Believe it or not, I just e-mailed him (via his contact address on his site) to ask whether or not the prize still stands =). If it does, I may be spending my non-clinical months this summer making a little cash, a la Mullis.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa


more drugs- more T-cells to fight, untill they all dies out (with the patient):


How would an antiretroviral drug produce more T-cells unless there was a retrovirus reducing their numbers in the first place? You understand that these drugs are designed to only target specific proteins found in HIV, right?


wat you talking about?

more drugs- more T-cells to fight toxins, you dont need those T-cels if you are healthy. T-cels is a responder to a disease or 'intruder agent'

hiv has never been isolated, therefor designer drugs, targeting 'unisolated/unexciting' whatever makes no other sense, but to make money



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:21 AM
link   



wat you talking about?

more drugs- more T-cells to fight toxins, you dont need those T-cels if you are healthy. T-cels is a responder to a disease or 'intruder agent'


You ALWAYS have a constant level of circulating T-cells in your body, which then elevate the immune response when you encounter a virus (which is nearly every day).

Taking antiretroviral drugs when you have a retrovirus infection (HIV) helps eliminate these viruses and prevents the destruction of your T-cells.


hiv has never been isolated


Yes, it has. Please see the dozen or so links I've posted throughout this thread.


therefor designer drugs, targeting 'unisolated/unexciting' whatever makes no other sense, but to make money


I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here, there might be a word or words missing. Can you elaborate?



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Cool, maybe you can stop derailing this thread.
Like I said Kary's only claim was regarding the original set of publications that led up to the hypothesis. That's it.

He's not putting up the money, for an educated guy you don't pay much attention.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Cool, maybe you can stop derailing this thread.
Like I said Kary's only claim was regarding the original set of publications that led up to the hypothesis. That's it.

He's not putting up the money, for an educated guy you don't pay much attention.


I haven't derailed this thread anymore than you have, my friend. I've simply tried to educate you. Isn't this site about denying ignorance?

And yes, he has contributed some money to the Duesberg fund offering the prize.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Right, let us when you've won it.


Here's what I learnt, the original papers leading up to the hypothesis still haven't been found. And that HIV has never been isolated to gold standard.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
Right, let us when you've won it.


Here's what I learnt, the original papers leading up to the hypothesis still haven't been found. And that HIV has never been isolated to gold standard.


Then you must not have read anything I posted. Interesting. Even Dr. Duesberg has given his submission to Mr. Russell (the holder of the prize) for proving HIV exists, using Mr. Russell's standards, and was denied the prize for an unknown reason. Sounds fishy to me.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
whatever, im no arguing with VneZonyDostupa , durak

probable angry at himself for wasting all years at medschool, we all been there.. at first..

let them isolate the 'virus' then and deal done !



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by angelx666
whatever, im no arguing with VneZonyDostupa , durak

probable angry at himself for wasting all years at medschool, we all been there.. at first..

let them isolate the 'virus' then and deal done !


I'm actually quite happy with the time I've spent in medical school. The feeling of knowing that I'm helping a complete stranger combat an illness, recover from a wound, or make life-improving nutritional changes in their life is a wonderful thing.



posted on Nov, 23 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by angelx666
whatever, im no arguing with VneZonyDostupa , durak

probable angry at himself for wasting all years at medschool, we all been there.. at first..

let them isolate the 'virus' then and deal done !


I'm actually quite happy with the time I've spent in medical school. The feeling of knowing that I'm helping a complete stranger combat an illness, recover from a wound, or make life-improving nutritional changes in their life is a wonderful thing.


yea, sure, nutrition by feeding with them toxic retrovirals, that grow buffalo hump on them

took your mirracle vaccine then yet ?






top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join