reply to post by JohnJasper
The Ross Horne chapter/article was written in 1987, and although the Aids denialists still recycle such dated material, many former skeptics have
changed their minds, and the scientific establishment considers those canards long resolved.
What is really terrible about this article is how it ascribes a ruinous lifestyle to every high-risk group, and assumes such behavior in every
individual who has AIDS.
It also fails to mention the major differences between HIV/AIDS and Yuppie Flu: mainly, HIV usually leads to AIDS which kills people, while fatigue
and Yuppie Flu do not.
It's a ridiculous comparison.
ARC is really a dated concept, and hardly used today.
In this Horne article much emphasis is placed on marijuana as a major immune-suppressor and cause of AIDS, which is just as ridiculous as blaming
poppers or misdiagnosed Syphillis (as other self-styled denialist "experts" - who have seemingly been living under a rock for two decades - still do
on this thread).
Yeah, blame pot - that should really go down well with all the other supporters of AIDS denialism.
No wonder the gay movement stopped supporting AIDS denialism around 1988, when it became an increasingly right-wing pseudoscience that had homophobic,
racist and prohibitionist undertones.
But the article also says fear of AIDS causes AIDS, presumably in HIV positive people.
In fact, anything causes AIDS except HIV (but since they don't believe the HIV tests work, they can't really test this hypothesis by their own
arguments, or perhaps the tests only work when it suits their circular arguments?).
I assume this is the same Ross Horne who was a famous Australian fruititionist, who died of prostate cancer at 79 after a writing a book on how to
cancer-proof your body?
Many would not see this as a spectacular achievement for a specific diet.
My grandpa died older than this without a fad diet.
Seems to me the "health-hygienists" are not in agreement on whether a pure vegan diet is harmful or beneficial, and some are not fans of Ross Horne,
with concerns that such diets may have harmed children and will lead to deficiencies in the long run (just the thing for AIDS patients, many of whom
can increasingly no longer eat in any case - no wonder so many died under "denialist care" in SA):
naturalhygienesociety.org...
But some naturopaths are already onto the next fad - the "blood group diet", which virtually prescribes meat for some people.
In fact, the "hygienists" seems to bicker a bit amongst themselves.
What you end up eating is dependent on which one you follow.
I've been a vegetarian for well over a decade, although I do still eat seafood at times.
I think it is healthy, and my CD4 counts remain stable for now.
For people who can no longer eat because their mouths and guts are full of Candida, it wouldn't really matter anymore whether they try to eat meat,
dairy and eggs or not.
At least the people you mention also question the larger "germ theory" and other aspects of science, and don't latch onto HIV/AIDS as the ultimate
conspiracy for everything they perceive to be wrong with "big pharma".
Why not latch on to Malaria, or TB or indeed, Syphilis?
Why not sell a vegan diet in a TB ward (without a big dollop of butter)?
OK those diseases had treatments, while HIV had none that worked long-term until 1996.
But now we do, and it works.
It's far from perfect, but it works better to reverse AIDS than many other medications do for other chronic conditions.
If marijuana could be further discussed on ATS I would quote the part of your Horne article here (which says it contributes to AIDS and leukemia),
because that would highlight the unpleasant agenda of the 3000 or so AIDS denialists, and their otherwise general appeal to conspiracy theorists on
the Internet (the only space where they still have a vast representation). Suffice to say that AIDS is one condition where doctors and long-term
survivors have actually praised the effects of prescribed medical marijuana, especially in maintaining appetite and treatment adherence.
Horne was simply wrong on almost everything, except perhaps that a plant-based diet can help to reduce heart diseases and some cancers.
However, going to extremes on veganism can (let me guess) also cause AIDS-like symptoms of malnourishment.
Well, under Mbeki's official support for denialism and an influx of conmen into SA, our Health Minister said we should treat AIDS with beetroot,
garlic, lemon juice, olive oil and African Potato.
Unfortunately it didn't work.
We first battled big pharma to get treatment, and then our own government.
But luckily for us, AIDS denialism is truly over.
Since 1996 modern medicine can treat AIDS, and people have made remarkable recoveries on ARVs known as the "Lazarous effect": AIDS patients literally
rose from their deathbeds.
The only conspiracy is how big pharma distributes its medicines, and whether profits come before people.
For the alternative health industry there are no unified ethics - one is virtually at the mercy of the self-styled guru that claims to provide
treatment. There is also a focus on self-promotion which prevents any real unified counter-science, or monolithic advertising. Only our advertising
standards authority has recently stepped in to stop products from making unproven and simply made-up claims. That being said, some more established
industries do try to maintain a set of standards, like homeopathy.
I am not
the spokesperson for a certain position, and I do hope that some others who gave their HIV/AIDS testimonies will return to further the
discussion.
While people can believe or do what they like, I do find it is important that people also hear from the treatment success cases, and that the science
of HIV/AIDS does not become a scapegoat for concerns about "big pharma". Many people in SA still remain without treatment, and the struggle for poorer
nations continues.
On the denialists: I think Wikipedia actually gives a general overview, and indeed mentions SA, as well as the many loopholes in their argumentation:
en.wikipedia.org...
Otherwise I find it interesting that so many still quote dated articles, and AIDS denialism deserves much more research, so I don't mind if the
disparate theories keep coming.
None of these theories agree with each other, but I seem to attract the responses, rather than the fact that they cannot agree amongst themselves.
Fortunately, few HIV-positive people fall for the denialist lies these days, and many change positions before becoming martyrs to ungrateful and
spiteful denialist gurus.
www.aidstruth.org...
However, there are well meaning people beyond politics out there, and I wish them all the best for their research, both for their own health and
especially that of their clients.
I think everything has a benefit and a limitation.
Diets that reduce coronary heart disease may not necessarily be appropriate to wasting diseases, and so forth.
I would agree however that diet and HIV management are very important issues, especially in our SA situation, where medication is only freely
available as a last resort.
edit on 1-2-2012 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)
