MortalWombat

Ah yes, including all those drug-using, promiscuous hemophiliacs, babies born to HIV+ mothers, and health care workers that got stuck with contaminated needles.

Paul5204

To all:

I too am one who simply does not believe that the so-called human immunodeficiency virus is responsible for the collapse of the immune system of those diagnosed with AIDS. And Peter Duesberg does not simply believe that "mere" sex and drugs are at fault. From what I have read, he would attribute what I will call African AIDS to generally poor health, with the key being chronic malnutrition. As concerns homosexual men, he attributes their AIDS to chronic use of antibiotics [such as tetracycline] and "poppers" [amyl nitrate], as well as possibly fungal infections and foreign protein contamination. As concerns hemophiliacs, foreign protein contamination would be the likely cause of immunosuppresion.

And the rather sad and tragic fact of the matter is that while some here apparently see the pressing need for more and more spending on AIDS, the explosion into the heterosexual population in Western Europe and the U.S. has simply not occurred and as concerns the so-called third world, more people will die of malaria in the next year than will die of AIDS in the next ten. Some here will have to either forgive or indulge me [or both], but I have much more sympathy for the child with malaria than I do for those who simply fail to use adequate protection during sexual intercourse and/or shoot-up rather dangerous and addictive drugs.

Dr Rick

*sigh*

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that anywhere from 1.5 to 2.7 million people will die next year from malaria, with the actual number depending in great part upon the weather and mosquito populations

22 million people worldwide have died of AIDS since 1981, and the WHO estimates that 25 to 35 million more will die from AIDS over the next decade in sub-Sahara Africa alone.

The overwhelming majority of HIV cases are transmitted via heterosexual contact, not by intravenous drug use or homosexual sex. Many of those who have contracted or will contract HIV sexually are the faithful wives of men that frequent prostitutes, and they in turn have already infected or someday will infect their children antenatally.

Rick

[ July 29, 2002: Message edited by: rbochnermd ]</p>

theyeti

The problem with Duesberg's logic is that AIDS is not merely afflicting the malnourished or those who live in unsanitary conditions. It's affliciting middle and upper class Africans who are in their prime, who would otherwise never contract such diseases as pneumonia, and whose condition can only be explained by severe immunosuppression. Very strange how these people also have HIV.

But again, "protein contamination" would apply to any large number of people, from your average joe who takes antibiotics, to your car accident victim who gets a blood transfusion. Why don't they all get AIDS? Simply because they don't get HIV. Since 1986, blood supplies have been screened for HIV antibodies, and the number of AIDS cases from blood transfusions has dropped accordingly. Who does get AIDS? People tend to contract it from either intravenous drug use or sex; or babies can get it from their mothers in the womb. What all of these have in common is the tranmission of bodily fluids which carry HIV. HIV is present in effectively 100% of AIDS cases, minus only what can be expected from imperfect detection methods. The only way that jackasses like Duesberg can claim otherwise is to broaden the definition of AIDS so that people with only mild and temporary immunosuppresion will qualify. True AIDS, on the other hand, is marked by a dramatic, steady, and permanent decline in the immune system. And it just so happens that HIV attacks immune system cells and is known to destroy them. You think there's a connection?

The "alternative" theories put out by the HIV Denialists, when they're not totally preposterous, never explain the epidemiology. The "protein contamination theory", aside from having no evidence whatsoever, could potentially explain AIDS caused by blood transfusion, but it wouldn't explain why people contract it during sex. Sex has been around as long as we have; AIDS for about 20 years. There are a dozen or more theories put out by the Denialists, each one of which could potentially explain the prevalence of AIDS among one group, but none of which could explain its prevalence among all the groups that it afflicts. There is only one theory which explains that: HIV.

pangloss

So, I guess those monkeys that contract the simian version of AIDS are just amyl popping, malnourished buggery boys?

pangloss

Also note this name:
Richard C. Strohman, Ph.D. (Prof. Cell Biology, Univ. Cal. Berkeley, CA


Wells' supposed podt-doc advisor....

pangloss

Oooo - here is another goodie:


Chr. Anti-Com. Crusade
Also notice that the bulk of the signatories, at least the newest batch, all seem to be regular citizens...

nogods4me

So then we should be distributing condoms free all over the place so these folks can use proper protection. Right? RIGHT? the same folks who spew this line of garbage are the same ones fighting tooth and nail to keep sex education out of schools, who want the US to withdraw it's funding from the UN because they distribute birth control devices and counsel folks concerning *gasp* abortion.
get a grip, save some cash and buy a freaking clue. condoms should be as readily available as pokemon cards. they should have baskets of the things in high schools, maybe even junior high and middle schools. Education is the most powerful tool we have, and the religious right is the single greatest opponent of education in the US and probably the world. They don't want evilution, or any other science that might threaten their views taught, no sex or public health education, and heaven forbid (pun intended) that serious look be taken at their fairy tale belief system.
Too many of these folks are talking out their assholes, and they need to be told so. I am sick and tired of hearing undereducated buffoons pontificate on matters in which they not only have little knowledge, but what knowledge they do have is incorrect.

[ July 30, 2002: Message edited by: nogods4me ]</p>

Camaban

People who've watched Drop the Dead Donkey will probably recognise this quote from Henry:

Personally, I believe there's a certain truth to that statement.

scigirl

Paul5204,

One major major problem with your theory: If HIV is not the cause of AIDS, than what about the epidemiology studies? You would have a LOT more people who were virgins to both drugs and sex (or born to an HIV negative mother) who still had AIDS. How do you explain the correlation between testing positive for HIV, finding out the person did something to contract HIV, then the person getting AIDS?

I have never once read a case where someone had AIDS but didn't do something that could caused them to become infected with HIV. I watched a talk show once where people were claiming to be 'virgins' with AIDS, but then it came out that they sort of had sex, or they had oral sex, or did some action that could have caused transmission of HIV. Why? Because AIDS is caused by HIV.

I noticed you are an attorney - I don't know if you have any science background, but I encourage you to read about this virus before jumping to conclusions. Did you know that we understand the mechanism for the immune suppression pretty darn well, thanks to David Ho and other brilliant scientists? Read all the literature, not just the kooky conspiracy stuff, before finding scientists guilty of being wrong.

thanks,

scigirl