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.

 

HIV not causing AIDS

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger


Weird indeed, and i do take tha as compliment


Old time pharmacist and doctors had often more common sense, now they threaten doctors who think with own brains to loose medical license....like Peter McCullough, MD. Odd times ....






posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Kenzo

If it's fraud, then please by all means explain to me how it's committed?

Don't be afraid to go into as much technical detail as possible, I'm all ears.

Seriously, explain the exact process from start to finish of how you would go about faking the data in tens of thousands of independently run labs in dozens of countries.



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Asmodeus3



Strawman arguments.


I'm afraid that you're going to need to explain this one to me.



Several scientists have criticised the medical establishment


Several people out of what ... hundreds of thousands of researchers going back decades, doesn't really mean very much.

It's like all of those people would claimed that the triple MMR vax caused autism, who were then faced with data from Japan that showed near identical autism rates to the US, despite them not using the MMR shot at the time.



he science behind the causation of AIDS by HIV is still controversial


99 percent of it isn't.



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Asmodeus3



Strawman arguments.


I'm afraid that you're going to need to explain this one to me.



Several scientists have criticised the medical establishment


Several people out of what ... hundreds of thousands of researchers going back decades, doesn't really mean very much.

It's like all of those people would claimed that the triple MMR vax caused autism, who were then faced with data from Japan that showed near identical autism rates to the US, despite them not using the MMR shot at the time.



he science behind the causation of AIDS by HIV is still controversial


99 percent of it isn't.


More strawman arguments...

You need to read before you post on these matters. You clearly haven't read anything and you parrot official lines without understanding the syndrome at all.

This conversation has been repeated several times in the past on various platforms and even long before the internet was invented.

Perhaps you could tell the audience who is credited for the causation of AIDS by HIV. Who is the scientist who has proved it or the scientists who have proved causality before you engage in these conversations.

Luc Montagnier got the Nobel Prize for the discovery of the virus but who are those who proved causation of AIDS by HIV.
If they were around we would have known them by now.

Or perhaps you can tell us how retroviruses kill the cells they infect. What is the mechanism and who has proven the this mechanism exist and kills these types of cells. And what is this mechanism.

Take your time on this. Other have been looking for 35+ years and still haven't found the answers.
edit on 13-11-2022 by Asmodeus3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Sorry dude, but i am not going for the trouble , explaining all critty details, because...

I know your stand on issues, and i dont beleive you can change your mind, even when someone would hand it to you.

Secondly, it`s free and easy to find anyway if wants, from the WWW wonderland...i provided few links allready in OP to get you started. You can use also Yandex search engine, since google is wanting to hide information about this. Follow the rabbit.

Thirdly, may i remind you that the original hucksters did not give the evidence at all in first place....dont you think they are the one who should first prove the scientific hypothesis to be true ? Just claiming something X without scientific verifications was how this get started back then. Dont you think that in all these decades there would be someone who could give the evidence, to stop the accusations that has been going on from start.



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Kenzo

Dad had to make ointment, press caps (me too to help as an 8 yr old)...all by hand and a typewriter to type the labels. No pharm techs back then. No computers. Phones calls only to docs for verifying.

Different world. *Im retired from U of M Medical Center/20 yrs and my City 10 years. At U of M, I was in on the A.I.D.S. epidemic (or call it what you will).

I(we'd) see many things...strange, unusual and different as the University is a learning institute. There were so many variables and what ifs...that to this day...we still have those questionable variants.


Sorry, Ive digressed here...but thanks for allowing me to.

Best



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kenzo
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Sorry dude, but i am not going for the trouble , explaining all critty details, because...

I know your stand on issues, and i dont beleive you can change your mind, even when someone would hand it to you.

Secondly, it`s free and easy to find anyway if wants, from the WWW wonderland...i provided few links allready in OP to get you started. You can use also Yandex search engine, since google is wanting to hide information about this. Follow the rabbit.

Thirdly, may i remind you that the original hucksters did not give the evidence at all in first place....dont you think they are the one who should first prove the scientific hypothesis to be true ? Just claiming something X without scientific verifications was how this get started back then. Dont you think that in all these decades there would be someone who could give the evidence, to stop the accusations that has been going on from start.



The most important question is who gets credit for the statement that HIV causes AIDS. Who is the scientist or who are the scientists who have proved causation?

We would have known them by now and they would have been awarded the Nobel Prize for proving cause and effect.

But there isn't any to get the credit.

Luc Montagnier got the Nobel Prize for the discovery of the virus.

en.wikipedia.org...

It is worth noting that Professor Montagnier was awarded the Nobel Prize for the discovery of the virus not for proving causation of AIDS by HIV.
In the same page the same brilliant scientist is criticised by Wikipedia because of his stance that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab... He is now a conspiracy theorist or let's say engaged in conspiracy theories despite the fact that recently the US senate report concluded that the virus probably came as a result of research in the Wuhan institute. There are several others papers and one I have posted making a thread on SARS-CoV-2 not being a result of zoonosis. The paper was written by three very credible scientists and since then there are many around.
edit on 13-11-2022 by Asmodeus3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger


I can imagine to see all kind of things in that kind of work environment. Different World yes. No problem for digress and thanks for you input

I feel the old World worked better , i recently tryed to get doctor's appointment from my county medical service, they decided to not give me appointment . Last 2-3 years been clearly downhill ....this could not happen like 10 years ago.

I am baffled, what will it be like 5 years from now



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kenzo
...
I am baffled, what will it be like 5 years from now


Oh ?

Have you spent any time around a Doctor™ lately ?

As Ksihkehe posted : BDS™ - Baffled Doctor Syndrome, seems to be "going-around".




posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Kenzo


I know your stand on issues, and i dont beleive you can change your mind, even when someone would hand it to you.


Or, to put it another way, you absolutely won't commit to putting anything down in writing because you know full well that I could pull it apart and demonstrate how it was incorrect.

It's the same with maths and statistics. You are quick to tell other people that the answer is wrong but won't commit to saying how it is wrong, or correcting it.

Remember the 0.002 percent?

Yeah, you remember it good.



may i remind you that the original hucksters did not give the evidence at all in first place....dont you think they are the one who should first prove the scientific hypothesis to be true ? Just claiming something X without scientific verifications was how this get started back then. Dont you think that in all these decades there would be someone who could give the evidence, to stop the accusations that has been going on from start.


If you would be so kind as to specify exactly what you're referring to I can go find it for you.

This isn't my first time around; I know that whatever I link to you are just going to say that you're referring to something else, so you're going to have to tell me who this "huckster" is, what it is that they're supposed to be providing evidence for, and what exactly their claim is.



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Asmodeus3

They literally made a movie about this.



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin


Not actually for long time, i usually avoid them
But needed some basic blood test, so needed doctor to write the test for me. No can do..



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Kenzo

The whole Medical-System™ has really gone downhill here in Canadakistan™ as well, and even accelerated it's downward spiral since the beginning of the GillBatesitis™ Scamdemic™.

We used to just get the blood-test form from our Doc™, then walk0in to the local Hospital™ during certain time-ranges, and if we planned it right, be done and out in 15 minutes.

Now : My Doc™ still won't see patients in person, despite the Provincial Health-Minister™ said that the nothing but by the phone approach was over sometime last-year.

So the secretary then sends the form by email, which we have to print ourselves, because the hospital won't accept it otherwise.

We have to sign-up through an online, 3rd party Organization™, whom are probably selling our Data™ on the side.

First attempt at booking : nearest appointment was 7 weeks away, halfway across town.

After some swearing, backed-up, and refreshed the page : 4 weeks away ...

Ohhhh : so it's like AirB&B then, where the prices change everytime you look at the same property from a different approach eh ?

So managed to refresh enough to get one for next week, but 7 AM ??
Not good for a night-owl, so we'll see ...

Virtually impossible to change your assigned Doc™ as well.




posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 05:23 PM
link   
HIV can cause AIDS, or not. There are strains of HIV in Africa that those infected live a normal life, but then 15 million have died from AIDS in Africa too all having other strains of HIV. I read years ago a vaccine might be to use one of the more asymptomatic strains to block out the more lethal strains that wear your body down over a long period of time. Is there any cases of AIDS where the person is not also HIV positive? If there are they are very rare.


edit on 13-11-2022 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
HIV can cause AIDS, or not. There are strains of HIV in Africa that those infected live a normal life, but then 15 million have died from AIDS in Africa too all having other strains of HIV. I read years ago a vaccine might be to use one of the more asymptomatic strains to block out the more lethal strains that wear your body down over a long period of time. Is there any cases of AIDS where the person is not also HIV positive? If there are they are very rare.



You may want to read my posts above but I would ask you the same questions as you seem not to have read the very large literature that exists on the subject. By stating that HIV is the cause or the sole cause of AIDS you maybe contributing in the propagation of a hypothesis that may be in trouble.

Let's start with the basics.

Luc Montagnier is credited for the discovery of HIV and has been awarded the Nobel Prize for it. He shared this with his colleague Francoise-Barre Sinoussi.

The Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of the virus. It was first called LAV and HTLV-3 before renamed as HIV.



But the first major question is who gets credited for proving the causation of AIDS by HIV?

I am sure that if you try to find the answer on who has proved cause and effect you will be looking forever. As there is nobody to get credit for it and become famous. We would have known him/her by now and there would have been several prizes awarded to the scientists who proved the causation of AIDS by HIV.



Second question.

What is the mechanism by which HIV kills the T helper cells?

The mechanism is unknown almost 40 years after the discovery of the virus. How is it postulated that HIV is dormant for almost 10 years or even more and then afterwards it starts killing the cells described above? And by what mechanism?


Finally retroviruses are known for not being pathogenic in the vast majority of cases if not in all cases. They have been pinpointed as potential causes of human cancers and the war on cancer back in the 70s has to do with research on retroviruses. Scientists knew that retroviruses don't kill the cell they infect. It was proposed that somehow with some mechanisms the cells could proliferate creating cancers after initial infection. This turn out not to be true. The only virus associated with human cancer is HTLV1 but the association is weak only a small fraction of those infected develop a rare type of leukemia or lymphoma. Another one called HTLV2 is being reported for some conditions but there is no much evidence on this.

Retroviruses copy their genome to the genome of human cells they infect through a process called reverse transcriptase.

How is HIV killing cells when retroviruses are known for not killing the cells they infect?



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Retroviruses copy their genome to the genome of human cells they infect through a process called reverse transcriptase.

How is HIV killing cells when retroviruses are known for not killing the cells they infect?


Lots of words not saying much...

Robert C. Gallo helped establish that HIV caused AIDS, though Luc Montagnier was first to isolate the virus, so got the Nobel Prize.

Also to start all this off... Show me a case of AIDS where the person is not also infected with HIV?

HIV uses CD4 cells to reproduce. As you say they retro the cell to produce the virus RNA by inserting a DNA strained into host genome to replicate the virus RNA and in the process of the virus leaving its host cell it damages it. Also, a good number of infected cell will home in on peripheral lymph nodes that also removes them from the blood and die in extravascular tissues.

There are also 3 types of retroviruses, what you describe as not killing the cell, but causing cancer is actually the Oncoretroviruses where HIV is the Lentiviruses that acts very differently, and yes does kill cells or triggers them to leave the blood.

With the loss of CD4 cells over time the body enters into Immunodeficiency and once the CD4 count falls below a certain level, a person receives an AIDS diagnosis. What this means is AIDS is just identifying low CD4 count of about 200 cells/mm, so I really do not understand your questions you have about it.

Lastly... HIV and AIDS do not kill people... other diseases actually do that with TB being the one that has killed the most. A simple way to explain it is HIV turns people into the bubble boy where everything infects them with zero immune defense anymore.



posted on Nov, 13 2022 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Kenzo

Hey, God Bless ya friend.



posted on Nov, 14 2022 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Retroviruses copy their genome to the genome of human cells they infect through a process called reverse transcriptase.

How is HIV killing cells when retroviruses are known for not killing the cells they infect?


Lots of words not saying much...

Robert C. Gallo helped establish that HIV caused AIDS, though Luc Montagnier was first to isolate the virus, so got the Nobel Prize.

Also to start all this off... Show me a case of AIDS where the person is not also infected with HIV?

HIV uses CD4 cells to reproduce. As you say they retro the cell to produce the virus RNA by inserting a DNA strained into host genome to replicate the virus RNA and in the process of the virus leaving its host cell it damages it. Also, a good number of infected cell will home in on peripheral lymph nodes that also removes them from the blood and die in extravascular tissues.

There are also 3 types of retroviruses, what you describe as not killing the cell, but causing cancer is actually the Oncoretroviruses where HIV is the Lentiviruses that acts very differently, and yes does kill cells or triggers them to leave the blood.

With the loss of CD4 cells over time the body enters into Immunodeficiency and once the CD4 count falls below a certain level, a person receives an AIDS diagnosis. What this means is AIDS is just identifying low CD4 count of about 200 cells/mm, so I really do not understand your questions you have about it.

Lastly... HIV and AIDS do not kill people... other diseases actually do that with TB being the one that has killed the most. A simple way to explain it is HIV turns people into the bubble boy where everything infects them with zero immune defense anymore.


Hi, I have asked the question who is credited for establishing that HIV causes AIDS. And there is nobody as it seems. There is nobody who is credited for proving cause and effect. If there was you would have known him as he would have been awarded the Nobel Prize and several other prizes for the discovery.

Robert Gallo together with Luc Montagnier worked in finding the virus. Luc Montagnier got the Nobel prize for its discovery.

That's a pretty weird situation as first you need to prove causation of AIDS by HIV and if this not proven then the whole hypothesis is in trouble.

My question to you is still the same:

Who has proved that HIV causes AIDS?

Retroviruses in general are not known for killing cells. There are no retroviruses other than HIV that allegedly kill the cells they infect. If anything they are known for integrating their genome to the genome of the cell they infect and become part of it, living peacefully with the cell, apart in the case of HIV.

As I said before these viruses where pinpointed in the 60s and 70s as targets of human cancers. But it was proved that retroviruses don't have much to do with cancers. Only HTLV1 is associated with a rare type of leukemia/lymphoma but only a very small number of those infected with the virus develops the conditions which obviously doesn't prove causation.

Retroviruses are actually the same in the way they act. They integrate their genome to the genome of the cell through reverse transcriptase and they are given different names such as lentiviruses or oncoviruses. But that's doesn't prove that they cause cancer or other diseases. Even infection with HTLV1 results in alleged cancer only in a very small number of infected people several decades later on. That's hardly proof that HTLV1 causes leukemia or lymphoma.

Before any discussion you have to be able to show causation of AIDS by HIV and the mechanism of pathogenesis. Nobody knows who has proved causation and what is the mechanism of pathogenesis. How is HIV kills the T-helper cells what you have called CD4+ T cells.

AIDS stands for acquired immune deficiency syndrome and to have 200 of the CD4+ cells per cubic millimetre (not per mm as you said) on its own doesn't mean you have AIDS. You can have a lower or higher number of these cells in your blood for a number of reasons. It doesn't mean you have disease or you are going to get disease just by looking at this indicator.

AIDS is a complex syndrome which seems to be multifactorial as infection with HIV only doesn't necessarily lead to AIDS especially if you don't belong to the risk groups such as being an intravenous drug user or male homosexual. And yes there are many cases of AIDS without HIV. The condition is known as


Idiopathic CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia


www.autoimmune.com...

You can have a low white blood count below 200 per cubic millimetre and still don't have AIDS.

In Africa for example AIDS is very different to the AIDS here in the West. Old diseases have been renamed as AIDS in the presence of HIV antibody. The same has happened here in the west but the diseases are different in these different parts of the world. For example if you have tuberculosis and are HIV positive then you are an AIDS patient, if you don't then you have just tuberculosis. This is a circular definition as the presumption is that all these diseases are caused by HIV which is not correct.

I don't think you understand the syndrome well and it takes a lot of reading to realise what it is. Coming back to my questions, you will search a lot to be able to find who has proved causation as there is nobody to get credited for it. If there was such a person or persons they would have been famous by now.It's not Robert Gallo who proved causation. Robert Gallo was working to find the virus. If it was him then he would have had a Nobel Prize (at least) for the discovery. There is a controversy as it is thought that Gallo has misappropriated the virus...

Finally, the name lentinvirus is a misnomer for 'we dint know what is going on' in order to buy time to see what is happening. Viruses don't wait 10 years or several decades to cause disease. These are assertions unfortunately produced in the literature for which there is no much evidence to them.
edit on 14-11-2022 by Asmodeus3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2022 @ 01:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Nothin


HAHA.....total sh.t show , quite same here actually . What a clown world this is ..







posted on Nov, 14 2022 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero


Maybe this subject just triggered some discomfort to you, and your mind is trying to compensate by trying to stay in the old state-of-thinking




Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds



Anyway
...


Holy Grails, Unicorns, and HIV Vaccines Posted by Henry Bauer on 2013/08/22


HIV TESTS CANNOT DIAGNOSE HIV INFECTION


There are abundant scientific publications explaining that there are more than 70 different documented conditions that can cause the antibody tests to react positive without an HIV infection



CITATIONS


CONTROVERSY


The Greatest Criminal Fraud in Medical History: Where’s the Virus?


HIV Does Not Cause AIDS





The Perth Group

Rethinking AIDS


No amount of articles, opinons etc can change people who dont want to accept new concept .

The AIDS belief system is like glue , dogma they learned earlyer and is " trust the science " blind when it believes things without evidence, trusting authoritys is not allways beneficial or wise.




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join