 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / June 2006Waiting for the results of my aids test
Hi I called about the results of my AIDS test and they told me they couldnt give me the information over the phone. I read this means I have AIDS... Thats true huh? Also, it was supposed to arrive by mail and didn't. The AIDS assocation said that was bad news.... Thanks Tom baito7@gmail.com wrote... > Hi > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to arrive by mail and didn't. The AIDS assocation said that was bad > news.... They really don't give test results out over the telephone, no matter what the results. They must inform you in person so someone can "counsel" you and charge the government for that service. If you test HIV- they lecture you to use condoms and if you test HIV+ they lecture you to use condoms, and the government pays them $1500 for giving you that essential advice. Telephone counseling and mailed test results aren't paid for, so that is why they insist on informing you in person. They also oppose do-it-yourself home HIV test kits for that same reason, because it cuts them out of the loop and all the otherwise useless counselors would be out of jobs. > Hi > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Tom First of all, being HIV+ doesn't mean at all that you have AIDS. It just means, at least, that's the official version, that you reacted positively to a test for antibodies your body created to fight against HIV. Normally the presence of antibodies is a very good sign and means that the organism has defences against the disease related to the antibodies. That is by the way exactly why people are vaccinated, i.e. to create antibodies. But with HIV ads AIDS it's all the other way around. They tell us. And HIV-Antibodies are a bad sign. They say. I think it's all bloody nonsense and I suggest you have a thorough look at what others think about the HIV=AIDS equation. You can start here: www.virusmyth.com JS --- www.nightsofarmour.com snip >Normally the presence of antibodies is a very good sign and means that the organism has >defences against the disease related to the antibodies. That is by the way exactly why >people are vaccinated, i.e. to create antibodies. And this is ALWAYS the case in every disease that the presence of antibodies indicates clearance of a disease? Please! Do tell. Most fascinating. All eyes and ears and just can't wait to see your evidence for this remarkable assertion! George M. Carter Le Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:39:22 +0200, GMCarter <fiar@verizon.net> a écrit: > snip >> Normally the presence of antibodies is a very good sign and means that [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > George M. Carter You don't know this, Georgie??? But if you don't know this basic knowledge, then, what do you know? I learned this when I was six or seven years old I guess. Anyway, now it's my turn to give you a reference. How many do want? 10 ? 100? 1000? 100000? Type into GOOGLE something like: vaccination antibodies stimulation Result: 869000 references found Here's one from: http://www.bookrags.com/sciences/biology/immune-stimulation-as-a-vaccine-wmi.html Conventionally, the immune system is stimulated into producing antibodies or other infection-fighting constituents in response to an infection. Immune stimulation seeks to elicit the immune reaction before infection or other malady strikes, as a means of preventing the infection or malady. This approach is analogous to the administration of components of weakened or inactive influenza virus to protect people from the subsequent onset of influenza. JS --- www.nightsofarmour.com >Le Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:39:22 +0200, GMCarter <fiar@verizon.net> a écrit: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >You don't know this, Georgie??? No, I do not. >But if you don't know this basic knowledge, then, what do you know? >I learned this when I was six or seven years old I guess. LOL...I'll bet you learned lots about the tooth fairy too. >Anyway, now it's my turn to give you a reference. How many do want? 10 ? >100? 1000? 100000? As many as you like, dearie. >Type into GOOGLE something like: vaccination antibodies stimulation > >Result: 869000 references found Wow--wait...that's what you're using as evidence? I think it's easier to show that the development of antibodies does not always mean either a) prevention from infection as in the case of those generated by vaccines or b) that in response to an infection, that the infection is cleared. >Here's one from: >http://www.bookrags.com/sciences/biology/immune-stimulation-as-a-vaccine-wmi.html Lovely and pretty basic backgrounder that doesn't dispute the notion above. They also note that "Defense against intracellular infections, which are caused by bacteria invading host cells, requires the stimulation of other immune components, such as phagocytic cells." So what? >Conventionally, the immune system is stimulated into producing antibodies >or other infection-fighting constituents in response to an infection. That's one aspect of immune response, yep. Like what happens when a person is exposed to HIV and an infection sets in. >Immune stimulation seeks to elicit the immune reaction before infection or >other malady strikes, as a means of preventing the infection or malady. That's the idea, dearie, sweetie, dumbass. >This approach is analogous to the administration of components of weakened >or inactive influenza virus to protect people from the subsequent onset of >influenza. It's called "vaccination." Works great for a number of diseases, modestly well for others while a good collection of infections have no vaccine. ...wait...that's it????? Wow. That was pathetic. See--if you didn't try to pass yourself off as some kind of expert, I'd be more forgiving. But you supposedly taught people--what a horrid idea. So I find you really noisome and have little sympathy for you when you spatter this kind of pointless crap that does not support your idiotic assertions. George M. Carter > >Le Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:39:22 +0200, GMCarter <fiar@verizon.net> a écrit: > > [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > > George M. Carter You are really incredible, George. You know, Aids and HIV, I don't really bother anymore and if you want to believe the nonsense, you're free to do so as is everybody else. What I find most fascinating though is the way people like yourself behave when they discuss with people who do not agree, especially their inifnite creativity to develop arguments that are, objectively spoken, absolutely bullshit. In my previous posts I wrote basically that: A) Since Louis Pasteur it is said that antibodies are a sign that a person's inmunity system knows how to handle the disease related to the antibodies. B) It may be useful to vaccinate a person who does not dispose of antibodies so he or her will develop them and in doing so increase the person's defences C) With HIV it's the other way around: The more HIV Antibodies one has, the worse it is. Elisa and Western Blot are designed to detect the presence of antibodies. HIV puts things upside down. Which in itself is amazing. But why do you have to make an a.s of yourself in attacking me on this? JS --- www.nightsofarmour.com snip >You are really incredible, George. You know, Aids and HIV, I don't really bother anymore >and if you want to believe the nonsense, you're free to do so as is everybody else. I'd rather not believe in it. But it is a grim reality. >What I find most fascinating though is the way people like yourself behave when they >discuss with people who do not agree, especially their inifnite creativity to develop >arguments that are, objectively spoken, absolutely bullshit. Do tell, sweetums. Please be as specific as you can manage, dearie. >In my previous posts I wrote basically that: >A) Since Louis Pasteur it is said that antibodies are a sign that a person's inmunity >system knows how to handle the disease related to the antibodies. "It is said" you say. By whom? I had asked you a rather specific question: >> >> And this is ALWAYS the case in every disease that the presence of >> >> antibodies indicates clearance of a disease? You avoided it. That's what a denialist does. >B) It may be useful to vaccinate a person who does not dispose of antibodies so he or her >will develop them and in doing so increase the person's defences The syntax is fairly dense but I gather you're saying that you believe vaccines sometimes work, yes? Well, golly gosh gee--there are some matters upon which we agree. >C) With HIV it's the other way around: The more HIV Antibodies one has, the worse it is. >Elisa and Western Blot are designed to detect the presence of antibodies. LOL...no, there are no data that I am aware of that say the "more antibodies" is worse. What do you mean by that? Where is that stated? >HIV puts things upside down. Which in itself is amazing. But why do you have to make an >a.s of yourself in attacking me on this? HIV puts nothing upside down. It is merely, like a variety of infectious diseases, capable of eliciting an antibody response that unfortunately does NOT result in "sterilizing immunity." Which is to say, antibodies are there but so are the HIV antigens that...gosh...generate antibodies. Do you think that is unusual? Based on what? Knock yourself out, kiddo. Show me the data. George M. Carter TOGETHER, you and your sex partner -- get tested for a VARIETY of sexually transmitted infections a. oral b. urethral c. anal d. Get vaccinated for hepatitis B e. Get vaccinated for hepatitis A http://notb4weknow.blogspot.com > I called about the results of my AIDS test and they told me > they couldnt give me the information over the phone. > > I read this means I have AIDS... Thats true huh? Also, it > was supposed to arrive by mail and didn't. The AIDS > assocation said that was bad news.... Share all the tests results with your sex partner... for . Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome human immunodeficiency virus . A VARIETY of sexually transmitted infections . Oral . Urethral . Anal . Get vaccinated for hepatitis B . Get vaccinated for hepatitis A . TB tuberculosis > I called about the results of my AIDS test and they told me > they couldnt give me the information over the phone. > > I read this means I have AIDS... Thats true huh? Also, it > was supposed to arrive by mail and didn't. The AIDS > assocation said that was bad news....
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.