no scientific evidence HIV causes AIDS, and anti-AIDS drugs kill...

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 11 2003 @ 06:48 AM
link   
www.aras.ab.ca...

everything you didn't know about AIDS and AZT?


(Maybe with a more spectacular title it will get more attention)

[Edited on 31-7-2003 by alienaddicted]




posted on Jul, 14 2003 @ 05:22 AM
link   
more: www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com...


women refusing to give AZT to their children: abcnews.go.com...


What is AZT: www.debating-azt.co.za...

Their effect is wholesale cell death of every type, particularly the rapidly dividing cells of the immune system and those lining our guts. Horwitz found that the sick immune cells went, but with so many others that his poison was plainly useless as a medicine. It was akin to napalm-bombing a school to kill some roof-rats. AZT was abandoned. It wasnt even patented. For two decades it collected dust, forgotten - until the advent of the AIDS era.
..............
In Europe and the US, HIV-positive long term survivors quietly gather to form groups, having sloughed off the terror of the death sentences imposed on them by their doctors. Heres the strangest thing. Without exception, what they find they all have in common is that they all eschewed (or quickly gave up) AZT, related nucleoside analogues like 3TC, and protease inhibitors. Some have pondered the unthinkable: that nearly all medically managed AIDS cases, always terminal, represent that balefully familiar phenomenon in the history of medicine, iatrogenocide - to be killed by the cure.



One starts thinking.....



posted on Jul, 17 2003 @ 12:14 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 31 2003 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I thought this would be interesting,... it definetly could've been used in the HIV Debate tournament.


Dae

posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by alienaddicted

guess he knows something about it...

www.duesberg.com...


Hiya!

Id like to update your thread, Im sure you wont mind if you are still about


Id like to point out that this video HIV = AIDS - Fact Or Fraud? was filmed eleven years ago, but has only recently been hosted on google video (1 hr 55 min 43 sec - Apr 7, 2006).

I would love to read peoples opinions after watching the documentry or reading the Duesberg site and maybe have a healthy discussion on what it is about.


[edit on 11/4/06 by Dae]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Somehow, I highly doubt that a few independent websites outweigh the hundreds of thousands of studies and papers that prove a link between HIV and AIDS. I personally have performed and seen the results of electron microscopy showing the capsids of HIV attached to infected T cells, and these cells were taken from an AIDS patient with extremely low WBC count.

~MFP


Dae

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Somehow, I highly doubt that a few independent websites outweigh the hundreds of thousands of studies and papers that prove a link between HIV and AIDS. I personally have performed and seen the results of electron microscopy showing the capsids of HIV attached to infected T cells, and these cells were taken from an AIDS patient with extremely low WBC count.

~MFP


Thanks for your response. You say you highly doubt but not completely... so theres hope for us yet! Truely I want to believe the HIV=AIDS hypothesis, I want to believe the billions raised and spent is being used in the right direction.

My problem. Researching this topic I run into a brick wall made from of my total lack of medical education.

Did you watch the video or read the website bsl4doc? Peter H. Duesberg isnt some quack channeling information via a rubix's cube, he is actually a real scientist with real medical education and honors... unlike me!


Biographic sketch of Prof. Peter H. Duesberg - UC Berkeley

Peter H. Duesberg, PhD, is a professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley.
In 1968-1970 he demonstrated that influenza virus has a segmented genome. This would explain its unique ability to form recombinants by reassortment of subgenomic segments. He isolated the first cancer gene through his work on retroviruses in 1970, and mapped the genetic structure of these viruses. This, and his subsequent work in the same field, resulted in his election to the National Academy of Sciences in 1986. He was also the recipient of a seven-year Outstanding Investigator Grant from the National Institutes of Health from 1985-1992.
On the basis of his experience with retroviruses, Duesberg has challenged the virus-AIDS hypothesis in the pages of Cancer Research, The Lancet, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Science, Nature, Genetica, Journal of AIDS, AIDS Forschung, Biomed. & Pharmacother., New Engl. J. Med., Chemical and Engineering News, Naturwissenschaften, Research in Immunology , Pharmacology & Therapeutics and the British Medical Journal. He has instead proposed the hypothesis that the various AIDS diseases are brought on by the long-term consumption of recreational drugs and anti-HIV drugs, such as the DNA chain terminator AZT, which is prescribed to prevent or treat AIDS.


Tell me, is it possible, in your opinion, that the HIV=AIDS is a scam? Look into how it started. The Link with HTLV-III/HIV and AIDS was made public without any peer review with a promise of a vaccine in the next two years!

OK, I ask you this, read this page on the Duesberg website and tell me what you think.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 09:14 AM
link   
It is highly coincidental that I found this thread due to the fact that I came across a site that was saying the exact same thing:

www.virusmyth.net...

What the basically say is that the HIV virus has too little genetic material to do all the "elaborate" things that people say it does. And that HIV hasn't even been isolated. They have many quotes from biomedical, biochemists, biologists, virologists under "controversy", it is interesting.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Its wrong to say HIV = AIDS! It should really be HIV --> AIDS. HIV is a disease, AIDS is a syndrome. Its 2 very different things, and all study's out there clearly show that HIV infects and destroys your immuno system. It would be ignorant not to believe it IMO..



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I'd just like to mention that doctors don't prescribe AZT anymore. I'm pretty sure of that at least. The poster above me had it correct. HIV leads to AIDS. I believe some people can develope AIDS without HIV though. Anything that deteriorates your immune system to the point where it can't defend itself can cause AIDS (ACQUIRED IMMUNO DEFICIENCY SYNDROM). This is just my belief...take it with a grain of salt if you wish.


Dae

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch
Its wrong to say HIV = AIDS! It should really be HIV --> AIDS. HIV is a disease, AIDS is a syndrome. Its 2 very different things, and all study's out there clearly show that HIV infects and destroys your immuno system. It would be ignorant not to believe it IMO..


Hiya

Just a quick response to what you say. A person can be identified as being HIV + and not have AIDS. HIV isnt a disease is a virus. People can have AIDS and not be HIV+. Why is this important? Because healthy people have died after being given a death sentence and/or treatment because of a hypothesis.

Did you have a read at Duesberg's site?


Dae

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
I'd just like to mention that doctors don't prescribe AZT anymore. I'm pretty sure of that at least.


Im afriad I hant read this anywhere, if you can find a link for me?


www.thebody.com... AZT (Zidovudine, Retrovir) is very much still in use. Funny, I used to belive that "they stopped using AZT" but I think we were misled. en.wikipedia.org... They use a "cocktail" of drugs now, not "just AZT".



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Really? Are you sure you want to go with that approach...

History seems to cast some doubt on the infallibility of the MI (medical industry
).

Here is an experiment... google something along the lines of mercury poisoning teething powders.

Your links will eventually take you to some pretty dxmx funny accounts of the TOP researchers of the time chasing their tails looking for a virus that simply didn't exist! For years on end! With the obligatory rallying cries... And LOTS of fundraising!


Funny for everyone BUT the victims... lots of trusting children... and their parents.

The teething powder manufacturers had as one of their key ingredients... (drum roll please)... Yes, you GUESSED it... Mercury!

Naturally, the medical industry NEVER admitted they were wrong... The epidemic gradually faded away when the manufacturers stopped adding the insanely toxic special ingredient.

Shhh!!! It's a secret.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I guess I was wrong DAE. So, they hide the AZT in the cocktail drugs? I asked a guy I know who has been HIV + for over 20 years if they still give him AZT and he said no. Maybe he doesn't realize that it's still in the cocktail drugs? No links, I was just speculating from that conversation.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dae

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch
Its wrong to say HIV = AIDS! It should really be HIV --> AIDS. HIV is a disease, AIDS is a syndrome. Its 2 very different things, and all study's out there clearly show that HIV infects and destroys your immuno system. It would be ignorant not to believe it IMO..

Just a quick response to what you say. A person can be identified as being HIV + and not have AIDS. HIV isnt a disease is a virus. People can have AIDS and not be HIV+. Why is this important? Because healthy people have died after being given a death sentence and/or treatment because of a hypothesis.

A virus infection = Disease. And yes, HIV is a virus, and therefore a disease.

And like I pointed out, HIV can lead to AIDS. AIDS certainly doesnt have to be caused by HIV.

Did you have a read at Duesberg's site?

Yes.


Dae

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
I guess I was wrong DAE. So, they hide the AZT in the cocktail drugs? I asked a guy I know who has been HIV + for over 20 years if they still give him AZT and he said no. Maybe he doesn't realize that it's still in the cocktail drugs? No links, I was just speculating from that conversation.


Do you still know him? Did he used to take AZT and his doctor stopped treatment? Did he say he still took treatment but not AZT?

I asked my friend, who worked in the mental health sector, how many people she knew who was diagnosied as HIV+, she told me ten. I asked her how many were given treatment and she told me nine, then she told me that those nine are dead and the other one having had no treatment was still alive and healthy today.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Yes, he's still alive. I see him ever day usually. He used to take AZT and still takes the cocktail drugs.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   
HIV clearly causes AIDS, everyone with the aids symptoms have the HIV infection, and its only in special cases where people are unaffected by HIV that they carry but don't get AIDs, and in those situations its amoung populations that have the highest selective pressure for aids resistance; prostitutes in africa.

No one actually beleives that HIV doesn't cause AIDs, because no one saying so has ever infected themselves with HIV.


what they find they all have in common is that they all eschewed (or quickly gave up) AZT,[...] One starts thinking.....

THen think about how the only peopel that are long term survivors are ones that are taking drugs that are designed to attack the HIV virus.


AIDS diseases are brought on by the long-term consumption of recreational drugs and anti-HIV drugs

Except that AIDs the disease only exists in people with HIV infections, and only occurs after the infection has destroyed their immune system, and people who aren't recreational drug users have AIDs.


griff
Anything that deteriorates your immune system to the point where it can't defend itself can cause AIDS

HIV is a virus that destroys the immune system, HIV is the infecfious agent, AIDS is the fullblown symptomatic disease caused by HIV infections. There are other auto-immune diseases, but we wouldn't call them AIDs, they aren't quite the same in their symptoms either. But yes, a person with an HIV infection gets AIDS, and dies from pneumonia and some types of cancers and the like.


golemina
History seems to cast some doubt on the infallibility of the MI

Who said anything about infallible? The evidence supports that HIV infections cause AIDS, and that to prevent AIDs you need to get rid of the infection.


Dae
then she told me that those nine are dead and the other one having had no treatment was still alive and healthy today.

Anyone that is a doctor for a patient like that would report it in the medical journals and the person's immune system would be studied to find out why. Obviously this is an anecdote, but is there anyway to demonstrate that this story is true?


[edit on 12-4-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   
>Who said anything about infallible? The evidence supports that HIV infections cause AIDS, and that to prevent AIDs you need to get rid of the infection.

All you have to do to prevent AIDS is get rid of the infection... Really?

It's always good to have someone from the MDs perspective clear things up for us lay people...

Exactly which HIV cure/treatment is that Nygdan?




posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dae

Originally posted by Griff
I guess I was wrong DAE. So, they hide the AZT in the cocktail drugs? I asked a guy I know who has been HIV + for over 20 years if they still give him AZT and he said no. Maybe he doesn't realize that it's still in the cocktail drugs? No links, I was just speculating from that conversation.


Do you still know him? Did he used to take AZT and his doctor stopped treatment? Did he say he still took treatment but not AZT?

I asked my friend, who worked in the mental health sector, how many people she knew who was diagnosied as HIV+, she told me ten. I asked her how many were given treatment and she told me nine, then she told me that those nine are dead and the other one having had no treatment was still alive and healthy today.


thats only 10 people not enough to make a case study and that 1 person that didnt take the treatment was likely a long term non progressor I know a few of them, not only that hiv effects everyone different as do the meds.

I can say this however if I was a longterm non progressor that was put on meds early wich was common a few years back and felt sick from them and stoped takeing them and saw there wasnt any progression I would probly be a dissident also however thats not the case with everyone.

and these links to the dissident sites are old and have outdated information that people read and suddenly think they are experts on the issue however if you use the ats search you will find links that debunk them.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join