Man Cured of AIDS: "I Feel Good"

en.wikipedia.org...

About 10% of bone marrow transplant patients die of complication so its not without risk.

They have to kill all your bone marrow with radiation before they can do the transplant.

Die slow from aids with all the drugs to suppress HIV or take the chance of dieing fast from a transplant that goes bad

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

The fact that this man had HIV, got AIDS, his HIV was cured and his AIDS disappeared is proof. Consider the claim debunked.

Sorry but this article doesn't provide nearly enough information to debunk his claim. In fact, a more detailed account of this guys experience might even support the author's work.

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
2 words...

Magic Johnson.

Money can cure any disease.

he still has HIV. he never developed full blown AIDS but he is not HIV negative. link to article that discusses his ongoing battle.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by Bone75

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

The fact that this man had HIV, got AIDS, his HIV was cured and his AIDS disappeared is proof. Consider the claim debunked.

Sorry but this article doesn't provide nearly enough information to debunk his claim. In fact, a more detailed account of this guys experience might even support the author's work.

You're going to have to explain that, as the article does indeed debunk the claim. Man got HIV. AIDS developed. Man was given an immune system that specifically prevented HIV from reproducing. AIDS disappeared.

The entire point of this was to prove whether an immune system transplant to make a person immune to HIV would cure AIDS. It worked.

Now how about you give me some information in a logical way to counter that and support your position that this proves AIDS and HIV are not linked.

My personal conspiracy theory states that the weakened form of AIDS was released into the world population over 10 years ago and this has been kept a secret. You can have the weakened form and not be that sick. If you have the weakened form you can never get the full strength form. A secret live vaccine that people spread through sexual contact. It would have been released in the sex industry. Tests for AIDS only show the strong genetic variant.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

You're going to have to explain that, as the article does indeed debunk the claim. Man got HIV. AIDS developed. Man was given an immune system that specifically prevented HIV from reproducing. AIDS disappeared.

The entire point of this was to prove whether an immune system transplant to make a person immune to HIV would cure AIDS. It worked.

Now how about you give me some information in a logical way to counter that and support your position that this proves AIDS and HIV are not linked.

Okay first of all, I never said that this "proves" AIDS and HIV are not linked. I said that a more detailed account "might support" the author's claims.

About the author:

Peter Duesberg is professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California at Berkeley, a pioneer in retrovirus research, the first scientist to isolate a cancer gene, and recipient of the Outstanding Investigator Grant from the National Institutes of Health. His articles challenging the HIV/AIDS hypothesis have appeared in scientific journals including The New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, The Lancet, British Medical Journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and Cancer Research.

One of Dr.Duesberg's principle assertions is that the symptoms of AIDS are caused by the drugs used to treat the condition (AZT in particular), and not HIV.

Do some research on AZT and you'll find that it has horrible side effects. In this case, the one that grabs my attention is the devastation of bone marrow. The guy just received a bone marrow transplant with a mutation that makes him resistant to HIV, so I seriously doubt his doctor kept him on the AZT regimen. The transplant may very well have cured his HIV, but according to Dr. Duesberg, discontinuing the drugs cured his AIDS.

reply to post by Bone75


It would make sense to keep him on the regimen until testing showed HIV levels were no longer noticeable, so that does not fly.

AZT was not used until the 90's, AIDS began in the 80's. Ergo AZT is not responsible for AIDS, something else must be. We have proof here that this man had AIDS and HIV. When his HIV disappeared so did his AIDS.

AZT is also not effective until AIDS has already developed.

Until now, AZT had been shown to be effective only in patients who already had full-fledged AIDS or certain other symptoms, including severely debilitated immune systems.

There is also the fact that many AIDS patients don't use AZT due to the toxicity, so AZT can not be the culprit behind AIDS even if it may mimic AIDS.

''Only a very small percentage of the patients taking AZT had serious side effects -less than 5 percent.'' When patients with full-fledged AIDS take AZT, as many as 50 percent have to discontinue the drug because of severe side effects, including pronounced anemia.

www.nytimes.com...

It does not add up.

reply to post by SoymilkAlaska


Dear SoymilkAlaska

Man Cured of AIDS: "I Feel Good"

This is a totally misleading title.

I work at a center as a volunteer where we have been curing people of AIDS for many years, with the standard HIV treatment.

So the idea of curing AIDS is nothing new.

Now curing HIV is another matter altogether.

However the article on Yahoo as far as I read did not seam to say that this treatment cured HIV.

Originally posted by MAC269
reply to post by SoymilkAlaska

 

Dear SoymilkAlaska

Man Cured of AIDS: "I Feel Good"

This is a totally misleading title.

I work at a center as a volunteer where we have been curing people of AIDS for many years, with the standard HIV treatment.

So the idea of curing AIDS is nothing new.

Now curing HIV is another matter altogether.

However the article on Yahoo as far as I read did not seam to say that this treatment cured HIV.

Medically speaking he is in remission. There is no detectable HIV in his system. For all intents and purposes he is cured of HIV. In fact he is 100% immune to HIV. And by immune I mean immune, you can inject him with HIV infected blood all day and all night and he will never get it. Some people have a natural immunity from a defective gene, it prevents HIV from being able to replicate in their body.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


Dear Occams Razor04

“There is no detectable HIV in his system”

Most people cured of AIDS reach a stage where when they test what they call the Viral Load it becomes un-detectable.

However this in no way means that HIV has been cured it is merely lying dormant and will very much strike again if the drugs are not continued.

Not your statement that he has become immune is another matter and I did see a documentary a few years ago now with work being done by a British boffin on that, however I have heard nothing since.

It would be real nice to see the proof of that.

Originally posted by MAC269
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Dear Occams Razor04

“There is no detectable HIV in his system”

Most people cured of AIDS reach a stage where when they test what they call the Viral Load it becomes un-detectable.

However this in no way means that HIV has been cured it is merely lying dormant and will very much strike again if the drugs are not continued.

Not your statement that he has become immune is another matter and I did see a documentary a few years ago now with work being done by a British boffin on that, however I have heard nothing since.

It would be real nice to see the proof of that.

edit on 11-6-2012 by MAC269 because: (no reason given)

Read about this case and you will see. What they did was transplant the immune system of someone who had a natural immunity to HIV. With no drugs the viral load is undetectable. For pureply scientific reasons they will never say he is cured, as that is not proveable. He has an immune system withy natural immunity, he is off drugs and has no detectable viral load. You be the judge, for all intents and purposes he has been cured of HIV. The method used is not ideal for HIV use, it is a proof of concept case, not an actual cure. This will NEVER be used in HIV treatment.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Bone75

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

The fact that this man had HIV, got AIDS, his HIV was cured and his AIDS disappeared is proof. Consider the claim debunked.

Sorry but this article doesn't provide nearly enough information to debunk his claim. In fact, a more detailed account of this guys experience might even support the author's work.

You're going to have to explain that, as the article does indeed debunk the claim. Man got HIV. AIDS developed. Man was given an immune system that specifically prevented HIV from reproducing. AIDS disappeared.

The entire point of this was to prove whether an immune system transplant to make a person immune to HIV would cure AIDS. It worked.

Now how about you give me some information in a logical way to counter that and support your position that this proves AIDS and HIV are not linked.

An immune system transplant might cure both independently, there is still no telling if one causes the other.

Correlation =/= Causation.

reply to post by Laokin


You can't simply say that. Prove it to be true. In fact show me someone immune to HIV with AIDS.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

It would make sense to keep him on the regimen until testing showed HIV levels were no longer noticeable, so that does not fly.

There is also the fact that many AIDS patients don't use AZT due to the toxicity, so AZT can not be the culprit behind AIDS even if it may mimic AIDS.

Your arguments only lead us back to my original point that there is not enough information in that article to debunk Dr. Duesberg's claims.

Well hate to letcha in on this,, but not only can every disease be cured, money will make you live longer, healthier, absent most the issues we face in the 1st place.

Just like in the movie " In time " where everyone is measured in actual years, months, weeks, days, hours, mins, secs for their lifespan, and the rich live for centuries.

This is an actual threat scientists are afraid of, in the world of tomorrow, where medical issues are just a stop by the shop and get a tune up so to speak, the rich will be able to live longer, and vastly different than the not rich, creating two separate species.

We are at a cusp so to speak in our evolutionary timeline. We can go many directions from here, where we go is up to us.

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrented
Well hate to letcha in on this,, but not only can every disease be cured, money will make you live longer, healthier, absent most the issues we face in the 1st place.

Tell that to Steve Jobs.

Tell that to Steve Jobs.

Can't, he's dead, he died from cancer, which all of his billions couldn't cure.

This is impressive if it worked, although I didn't read the article in the OP, I'm going to assume from posts it is related to a story I read recently about the bone marrow transplant curing the guy.

To those claiming HIV and AIDS aren't related I suggest you do some research.

AIDS is a condition resulting from having HIV.

HIV = Human immunodeficiency virus

AIDS = Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

In other words AIDS is a syndrome, it is a series of infections (colds, bronchitis, etc etc) that result from a lack of immune system, the end product of HIV.

Keep in mind my statement only was addressing this quote.

The fact that this man had HIV, got AIDS, his HIV was cured and his AIDS disappeared is proof. Consider the claim debunked.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Laokin

 

You can't simply say that. Prove it to be true. In fact show me someone immune to HIV with AIDS.

edit on 11-6-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)

You can simply say that, that's how science works.

Let me frame it another way....

You get cat scratch fever... the lymph-nodes on your head swell up. Shortly after, you break a wisdom tooth, and it gets infected.

You go to the dentist and he tells you it's infected and it must be removed, but before he can remove it, you need to take anti-biotics to kill the infection. You take the anti-biotics and it cures your cat scratch fever too.

Did the broken wisdom tooth cause the cat scratch fever? No, the cat scratch was there first. Did the cat scratch cause you to break a molar? No... certainly not.

By your argument, since both situations were cured with the same procedure they must be causing each other.

Correlation =/= causation. Correlation can sometimes warrant an investigation to see if it really is the cause... but just because there is a correlation doesn't necessarily mean that correlation is your cause.

I didn't say it's not, in the case of HIV and AIDS. All I said was, just because this man had an immune system transplant that cured both, doesn't mean that HIV causes AIDS. It's likely even if HIV and AIDS weren't correlated that an immune system transplant would cure both anyway.


Don't be a fool.

There is also a growing pool of scientists and researchers who are now saying that HIV doesn't cause AIDS... There is a metric tonnage of research out there supporting it too... The consensus is split. In other words, nobody knows... not even the scientists... they all have their theories though.

reply to post by Laokin


That is ridiculous, read my post above. AIDS is not a disease, it is the by product of having a weakened immune system, which the HIV kills off, and not being able to cope with other infections.

HIV does lead to AIDS if not treated, period.

reply to post by Laokin


How about you put your money where your mouth is and volunteer to be infected with HIV? That would pretty much end the argument.