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.

 

Mutant HIV Wave Threatens Decades of Drug Progress, Study Finds

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


i dont know how to react to your posts. its like your saying to me, you dont have HIV, you got it because of bad drinking water, stop taking your medication, dont worry about your t-cell count because you wont get AIDS.

the past 5 years alone i have done everything i can to keep my immune system up and keeping myself free from every virus i can.

if the doctor says you can beat HIV with antioxidents and healthier living, im sorry but i dont buy it.

im getting sicker and sicker for longer and longer.

so tell me, what do you think i should do?




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 


If I were diagnosed with HIV and I were personally given medicine for it I would NOT take it. I won't give medical advice to others because that is a legal can of worms but I'm not just bluffing when I say I wouldn't eat the stuff and I genuinely feel anyone taking some of these medicines are killing their own immune systems and killing themselves. Doctors even voiced the same opinions which I quoted on the last page.

I'll tell you something else, if I developed cancer, I wouldn't undergo radiation therapy or any of that other toxic crap they do to you either. I understand this is very painful for many people because it puts their trust in authority on the line for all the marbles so to speak but that is where I personally stand and I know I'm not alone.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
If I were diagnosed with HIV and I were personally given medicine for it I would NOT take it. I won't give medical advice to others because that is a legal can of worms but I'm not just bluffing when I say I wouldn't eat the stuff and I genuinely feel anyone taking some of these medicines are killing their own immune systems and killing themselves. Doctors even voiced the same opinions which I quoted on the last page.


o so if the medication is killing people why are they prescribing them?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 

Hi! I don't think for one moment that ARVs are poisonous. The science on HIV/Aids is all over the web (whatever implying it is inferior, unsatisfactory, unscientific and so forth by denialists actually means). Just for one site that rebuts the claims made by the Denialists (I'm collecting others) see www.aidstruth.org... .
We have many Aids survivors who made astounding recoveries with ARVs, and we have hospices and orphanages filled with HIV-positive patients. Some arrived very late and in their disease progession and are struggling, while others are recovering well with ARVs.
I also did not come on this thread to prove to anyone that HIV causes Aids (I am backed up by millions of publications and the general consensus of countless medical practioners, many of whom work with HIV/Aids on a daily basis). I can only give my opinion, and I do have a decreasing CD4 count (particularly in ratio to my other T-lymphocytes) and will take the medical treatment when the time comes.
I was just re-reading Lesley Lawson's "Side Effects: The Story of Aids in South Africa", particularly the chapter on the President's Advisory Panel on Aids (first meeting was in May 2000), which included both the dissidents/denialists and the medical establisment. Unfortunately it's not on the Internet, but it's quite telling how nasty things became, particularly when the various dissidents turned on each other: some argued that HIV did not exist, others that HIV existed but did not cause Aids, while others were just anti-ARVs. For me the detailed treatment success narratives are telling enough, rather than the guided vox-pops in the trailer above. In my reading the poor councilor doing the screening-test was merely trying to be reassuring, while somebody who claimed he was low-risk (in a Western sense) was waiting for his test result. Apart from showing the existence of two different opinions, it didn't prove or disprove anything on HIV/Aids at all. In fact the trailer is so disjointed that I don't know which position the actual film promotes, or whether it attempts neutrality. I just know what it didn't show: Aids survivors and people with Aids. At least in South Africa where the dissidents were given official backing the accusations of "conspiracy" and "Aids-industry" cut both ways.

All the best for the future!


[edit on 21-1-2010 by halfoldman]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
o so if the medication is killing people why are they prescribing them?


Because the pharmaceutical industry does not care about whether you live or die so long as they are making money, and in fact the sicker you are, and the more treatment and care you need, the more money they make. That's why they approve so many drugs for so many mundane things that have side-effects that cause worse problems than what you originally had, and that later have to have recalls because no one really investigated them that well in the first place. That's why the FDA hounds any cancer treatment that is actually successful despite them being allowed in other countries. That's why they put chemicals in your water and food and poison you even though the same chemicals (fluoride for example) are banned in many other countries. That's why most beef you eat is completely unhealthy in this country and that's why it's banned in Europe.

If you feel like taking your medicine is the best thing you can do then don't let me stop you from taking it, it's your call ultimately.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11


Because the pharmaceutical industry does not care about whether you live or die so long as they are making money, and in fact the sicker you are, and the more treatment and care you need, the more money they make.


what about countries like mine where healthcare is "free"?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
what about countries like mine where healthcare is "free"?


Someone is still making money off you just the same. Who are the companies that make your medicine? Are they companies that are local to your country, or are they international medical corporations?



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 

After some more time-consuming reading I must apologize to bsbray11 for indeed misinterpreting, misreading or overlooking his exact wording and examples of his wider reading.
In hindsight, I had no given reason or evidence that the member only followed reading on his own position(s).
This is my personal apology and was not prompted by anyone.
Pesonally I still feel that HIV/Aids was a given in the thread title, and that the specific debate and differences in entire world-views (regarding medicines in general) should be headed differently, and hopefully it will then attract people who are far more qualified than myself to provide "proofs" for specific questions.
Well, I believe in academic freedom and fairness, and if I was wrong somewhere, I was wrong.
However I do not believe my position or opinion to be wrong, just my mistaken reading that the member refused to read wider opinions.
My humble apologies.



posted on Jan, 24 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 

As a general reply to the pharma-cartel industry "makes money" argument(and yes I agree, they do profit from Aids, as they profit from everything) inventing "Aids" for profit is not as lucrative as one may think. Before Mbeki went on the dissident "side-show", government and HIV/Aids organizations took on big pharma, following the lead of Brazil (which simply began producing its own ARVs). In the the 2000's activists also flew to India and brought back pills. It was a whole rigmarole of activism and court-cases, added to the dissident views of government.
However, if one has Aids and a collapsed immune system, then how should one treat it according to the denialists/dissidents?
We had this growth of a whole "alternative industry".
Some (by no means all) of the solutions tried were:
- vitamins, which range in price but are not for free last time I checked.
- Virodene - turned out to be an industrial solvent and now banned.
- Revivo tea - concoctions based on "Chinese medicine" removed by the Advertising Standards Authority of South Africa for making unproven claims last year.
- Ozone treatment, healing waters (R500-R2000 over per monthly dose, treatment), or even "blood-cleansing".
- Countless "immune boosters", usually with some vitamins, olive leaf and African Potato - all are very expensive, even more so than ARVs. Some of the ingrediants like African Potato (Hypoxis, I think) have been proven to cause liver damage long term.
- Products based on African "muti" (witchcraft), like Ubejane (means Rhino in Zulu). It came to the original maker in a dream and has dozens of herbs. Ranges to R500 per bottle.
- Sutherlandia, claims now not to "cure" Aids, but to offer some "boosting", R60-80 for 30 pills (2 per day advised).
None of this stuff is cheap or proven in any scientific study.
During the Canadian international conference on HIV/Aids our (now deceased) Health Minister ordered all medicine displayed in South Africa's stand to be removed and to be replaced with lemons, beetroot and garlic. So this was our "solution" to Aids - a vegetable stand!
Considering that most South Africans earn under R2000 a month, how can anyone not call these shams an industry?

So how should Aids be treated? People once smuggled in anti-fungal drugs from India. Should that also be stopped when people can no longer eat because their mouth and gut is full of Candida?
Can we at least treat the symptoms with medical drugs that make it go away in a day?
Or must we keep trying to swallow lemons and garlic and beetroot?
Or maybe we should treat nothing and just pray. Maybe we should ban the HIV-test and there'll be no more Aids, and then we'll "die" of something meaningful, like Parks Mankahlana (Mbeki's spokesman, who died of "anemia" aged 36, despite a fat-cat salary - we all know what he died of). Perhaps we should ban emergency treatment and all hospitals. Forgiveness, I'm being sarcastic.

Well, people can moan about the medical industry, but most alternative treatments are even more of a rip-off, and that industry is hardly regulated with no quality control at all in most countries.

But nobody can come here and say the dissidents are not an alternative billion-Dollar industry.




[edit on 24-1-2010 by halfoldman]



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join