Stem Cell Transplant Cures HIV in "BerlinPatient"

Originally posted by TheFallOfRa
reply to post by KayinAR

 

Sorry for your loss and I hope I have not caused any personal offence.

ok, so far they have made some interesting points.
The concept of people with aids but not having HIV makes no sense and that alone should make people wonder what is going on here.
If HIV is the cause of AIDs, then it should be 100% found in every case...not 99%, not 99.9%..its 100%

Like saying your dying from cancer but with no cancer present...

at the halfway point

reply to post by SaturnFX


Thank you for taking the time to consider my side, I'm not disagreeing with people dying from something, I just don't believe it is HIV causing it. It could be anything from diet, drugs to pharmaceutical drugs. The cure could be as simple as a healthy diet but the AIDS research companies wouldn't make any money if they revealed the cure.

reply to post by KayinAR


Question about your sister
Was she showing symptoms before being tested positive for HIV? Did she do drugs? just trying to get some info to see if this documentry matches up to random real world examples..

also, did she start medding up before it went to AIDS? (use AZT before it turned to AIDS)

Best to your niece, and sympathies for your sister.

Done
Yes, the video was intriguing..alot of questions need to be answered overall. The video itself looks a bit dated, but I think the questions are indeed very valid.

I don't have much more to add at the moment because I am now questioning alot of things I simply accepted as fact (and kicking myself for that).

Incidently, for those that don't want to watch the full video...basically the point is, dont do these drug cocktails, dont do hard drugs (coc aine, heroin, psychotropic), and live healthy...
they suggest (convincingly) that HIV is to AIDS what freckles are to car accidents in a nutshell. but the treatment has shown that a person going from hiv positive with no simptoms to suddenly full fledged symptoms almost overnight is indeed interesting.

T-cells come out to fight body horrors. if you give someone a bit of poison, your blood will be flooded with T-cells. so they give the person treatment, then count the t-cells..of course this will show a decline as the poison is flushed out, and so they give more poison(treatment) and voila..t cells flourish again...as if this is a good thing.

yep..alot to consider. Cheers Ra.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Exactly how me and my friend felt after watching it and through the whole thing I was sitting there going "what? what? what?" I bought in to the whole AIDs epidemic so much that I never had a reason to question it. Sorry to put you through watching it, it is however an interesting watch and food for thought. And I agree, a lot of questions need to be answered. But the public needs to start asking the AIDS "reaserchers" a lot of questions. Thanks again

reply to post by SaturnFX


100% of AIDS patients DO have HIV present. AIDS is defined (and ONLY defined) as three criteria: an HIV viral load, T-cell depletion, and opportunistic infection. You MUST have all three in order to be considered as having AIDS.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

100% of AIDS patients DO have HIV present. AIDS is defined (and ONLY defined) as three criteria: an HIV viral load, T-cell depletion, and opportunistic infection. You MUST have all three in order to be considered as having AIDS.

Not true, the cases for HIV is much higher than the cases for AIDS, they should be exactly the same. Check your source and others.

reply to post by SaturnFX


I'm a Ph.d in virology and microbiology.
I am not a retrovirologist, H.I.V. is a retrovirus, I am whats known as a BSL-3 & 4 virologist.
I have worked with H.I.V. and S.I.V. though however for 18 months, a full year of that time was spent helping out a friend who is self funded.
The conclusion that I came to on the subject, is that H.I.V. is NOT the cause of the syndrome known as A.I.D.S..
I agree with Duesberg on the subject 210%.

H.I.V. is not even nessesary for A.I.D.S., H.I.V. free A.I.D.S. is called "Idiopathic CD-4-lymhocyopenia" or simply just (ICL) its not even reported to CDC anymore.

Before the 1985 press conference given by Dr. Robert Gallo, and held by the Secretary oF Health and Human Services at the time (MARGRET HECKLER) announcing the H.I.V. virus, which at the time was known as
HTLV-III, A.I.D.S. in Africa was simply calked uP to malnutrition by rats like Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Gallo & Fauci both are nothing but total money grubbing frauds, under no uncertain terms. Fauci swept "ICL" completely under rug with the most ignorant tripe filled crap explanation that ANYONE could ever even possibly imagine, never to be mentioned again. >ROME HAS SPOKEN--->CASE CLOSED !<

www.niaid.nih.gov...

exlibhollywood.blogspot.com...

Take a look at number 4 in the below link.
quod.lib.umich.edu...

A copy of the NIH reply to the above letter is avalible upon request at the CDC website, its called the "DONNA E. SHALALA" letter.

If your interested I can show you more than just a few things, starting with this here below ?

*HIV ASSUMED TO KILL T-CELLS*

Based on early observation by Gallo et al., HIV is assumed to cause immunodeficiency by spcifically killing T-cells (Gallo et al., 1984; Weiss and Jaffe, 1990). Gallo observation was restricted to primary T-cells (Gallo et al., 1984) but not established T-cell lines (Rubinstien, 1990) However, according to Montagnier, the discoverer of HIV, "In a search for a direct cytopathic effect of the virus on (primary) T-lymphocytes, no gross changes could be seen in virus producing cultures, with regard to cell lysis or impairment of cell growth" (Montagnier et al., 1984). Others have confirmed that HIV does not kill infected, primary T-cells in vitro (Hoxie et al., 1985 Anand et al., 1987 Langhoff et al., 1989 Duesberg, 1989c). Moreover, HIV-infected primary T-cells are concidered the natural "reservior" of HIV in vivo (Schnittman et al., 1989)
Thus, Gallo's controversial observation probably reflects the notorious difficulties experienced by his labratory in maintaining primary blood cells alive in culture insted of a genuine cytociadal function of HIV (Crewdson, 1989; Culliton, 1990 Rubinstien, 1990, Hamilton, 1991).
Gallo showed in a later study from his labratory that about 50% of the uninfected T-cells died within twelve days in culture (Gallo, 1990). Indeed the assumption that HIV is cytocidal is incompatable with generic properties of retroviruses and with specific properties of HIV:
1.) The hallmark of retrovirus replication is to convert the viral RNA into DNA and to deliberately intergrate this DNA as a parasitic gene into the cellular DNA (Weiss et al., 1985). This process of integration depends on mitosis to succeed, rather than on cell death (Rubin and Temin, 1958; Duesberg, 1989c). The resulting genetic parasite can then be either active or passive just like other cellular genes (Duesberg, 1987). Transcription of viral RNA from chromosomally integrated proviral DNA also works only if the T-cell survives infection, because dying cells are not transcriptionally active. Thus, this strategy of replication depends entirely on the survivival of the infected cell (Duesberg, 1987)
Noncytocidal replication is the reason that retroviruses were all concidered potential carcinogens before AIDS (Weiss et al.,1985; Duesberg, 1987)
Alternatively, it has been proposed that HIV protiens are directly toxic because of stuctural similarites with scorpion and snake poisons (Gallo, 1991; Garry et al., 1991, Garry and Koch, 1992). However, no such toxicity is observed in millions of asymptomatic HIV carriers, and there is no reason why it should occur, if it did, only after latent periods of ten years.
2.) The propagation of HIV in indefinitely growing T-cells for the "AIDS test" was patented by Gallo et al. in 1984 (Rubinstien, 1990) and was confirmed by Montagnier (Lemaitre et al., 1990). It is totally incompatable with Gallo's claim HIV kills T-cells. Such HIV producing T-cells have been growing in many labratories and companies since 1984 producing viruses at titers of up to 10-6 virus particals per. mL, which is many orders of magnitude more than is observed in humans with or without AIDS (Duesberg, 1989c, 1991a).
In view of this, Gallo postulates that T-cell lines in culture have all aquired resistance to HIV killing (Gallo, 1991).
However there is no precedent for this ad hoc hypothesis, as no other cytocidal virus has ever been observed that is cytocidal in vivo and in primary cells in vitro, but is noncytocidal in cell lines in culture. It is also implausable that a potentally life saving cellular mutation, such as resistance to the hypothetical "AIDS virus," would be restricted just to cell lines in culture, particularly if these mutations occur so readily that they are found in all T-cell lines. (Duesberg, 1991)
HIV, like all other retroviruses, does not specifically infect T-cells. It also infects monocytes, epithelial cells, glial cells, and macrophages, ect., and none of these are killed by HIV (Levy, 1988; Duesberg, 1991a)
Most other retroviruses also infect T-cells, which is why so many of them are suspected "T-cell leukemia" viruses
(Weiss et al., 1985; Duesberg, 1987; Blattener, 1990). Thus the assumption that HIV causes AIDS by killing T-cells is not tenable (Duesberg 1991)

Anyone with any questions regarding whats above, please feel free to ask.

reply to post by TheFallOfRa


No worries. We'll keep on keeping on till there's a cure!!!

reply to post by alpha68


Sorry, I'm not as good a reader as I am a listener. I understood some of what you said but not all. Would it be possible for you to put it in 'dummy' form so I have a better understanding of what you're saying?

What a terrible disease - a sad situation for so many afflicted wherever in the world they are. I want to say thanks to the OP for highlighting the case, and for the contributers who have shared their thoughts so far.

I wasn't aware that anyone was 'immune' to HIV, and will be looking into this further. Very interesting that this case (if genuine) doesn't appear to have been mentioned in the UK media, considering we don't tend to object to stem cell treatments over here in the way that the US populace (overall) generally does...

S & F.

NB - note regarding the poster above who mentions details of his work as a virologist; I am extremely interested in this whole subject and will be U2Uing you for more info at some point if that's okay. In the meantime could you post some further links and references for us all to have a look at pls? It would be very much appreciated.

I saw a document some time ago which suggested that the original viral outbreaks in Africa were fueled by artificially developed viruses, and that it was a plot to introduce some kind of population control agent into a test group. These documents were patent documents and government reports of some sort as I recall. I had a link to one of them in my signature once then I removed it when I changed a load of stuff in my ATS account. Will have a look around and see if I can dig it out.

This was already being discussed I believe,

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Another win for Adult Stem Cells.

Embrionic stem cells???? Nothing.

reply to post by TheFallOfRa


Sure, what all that scientific info pretty much says up there, is quite simply that----> Not only does H.I.V. not kill the T-Cells it infects, it's actually incapable of it.

Labs actually grow H.I.V. in CD-4 T-Cell cultures, so how can the virus actually be grown in the exact cells its supposed to be killing to cause A.I.D.S. without harming them ?

Many people believe that H.I.V. only infects CD-4 white blood cells and kills them in-order to cause A.I.D.S.,
NOT TRUE ! See above for the other blood cells H.I.V. infects without killing.

Any questions, please ask.

reply to post by alpha68


Thank you, I thought that's what you were saying but just wanted to make sure. I've sent you a message by the way

reply to post by alpha68


i suffer from cfs/me and my immune system is often weak, i am only 25 but have had pneumonia on various times and different kinds of gastric problems etc.... i have been told by doctors that this should make no difference to how long i live but i have always been paranoid of my immune system just closing down in the way that an aids patient's does.
i was just wondering if you had any knowledge of this problem and if my fears are warranted.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


I almost didn't catch that, But sure, go right ahead.

Originally posted by TheFallOfRa

Not true, the cases for HIV is much higher than the cases for AIDS, they should be exactly the same. Check your source and others.

edit on 14-12-2010 by TheFallOfRa because: (no reason given)

Why would the cases of HIV and AIDS be the same? AIDS is defined as an end-stage form of a progressive HIV infection. Thus,. only a subset of HIV patients (those having a high viral load, low CD4+ count, and an opportunistic infection) will be considered AIDS.

I don't know what to think now, I am feeling a bit disillusioned at the moment.

Alpha...make a thread already

Great a cure that kills 20% of the people that try it.

About 20% of stem cell transplants fail due to the new cells not taking or other complication from the transplant.

What they do is high-dose chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy.to kill the blood producing cells in the body
then a couple days later they infuse the new stem cells.
The problem is the patients have no immune defences during that time and funguses, viruses, bacterial, infections can kill the patients before the new stem cells take hold.

Also these transplants can cost $200.000+ and you have to find a donor match to get the stem cells.