 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / July 2006HIV causes Aids: fact or fiction ?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7392714813681917173&q=HIV+Fact+or+Fiction JS _________________________ http://www.nightsofarmour.com >http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7392.... What a sad load of sh.t. "This much disagreement" he says. Nonsense. Le Fri, 23 Jun 2006 23:29:31 +0200, GMCarter <fiar@verizon.net> a écrit: >> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7392.... > > What a sad load of sh.t. > > "This much disagreement" he says. Nonsense. My name is G.M. Carter. I swear to defend HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, to the bitter end. Everybody who does not agree with me and/or who endangers the thesis that HIV causes AIDS will be declared "a.shole" by me. I will never fail to name every single line of text, written or spoken, which questions the thesis that HIV causes AIDS, "A SAD LOAD OF sh.t". Why are you such a blockhead, Georgie? JS --- www.nightsofarmour.com >My name is Jan Spreen. I swear to deny HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, >to the bitter end. Everybody who does not agree with me and/or who >endangers the thesis that HIV doesn't cause AIDS will be declared an "ignorant fool" by >me. I will never fail to name every single line of text, written or >spoken, which questions the thesis that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, "A SAD LOAD OF >sh.t". Why are you such a blockhead, Spreen? If you want to understand exactly how various "diseases" are caused (chronic or infectious), go to: http://groups.msn.com/TheScientificDebateForum-/ I cite extensively from studies and reports, and provide actual quotations from the scientists who did the research whenver possible. The essays are listed on the left hand side of the page. It will take a while to read them, because there is technical language involved, but if you take the time you will see that the "germ theory" (which has never even been articulated as a formal hypothesis) is no longer viable. Blaming "pathogens" for a disease is like blaming vultures for the dead water buffalo that the lions killed. Much of the evidence I cite is recent, so a big problem is that the powers that be are unaware, and another major problem is excessive specialization. If you read the essays, it will become clear that the evidence is overwhelming at this point. There is also a newsgroup page where you can ask questions or post studies (if you want me to examine the studies and render an opinion). >If you want to understand exactly how various "diseases" are caused > Blaming "pathogens" for a disease is like blaming vultures for >the dead water buffalo that the lions killed. What? If the lions are the pathogens who have killed the water buffalo, then the vultures are idiots that pick at the bones and pretend nothing harmed them? From your website, you start out great: "What is presented on this forum are my views," It's rapidly downhill from there. "Patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) suffer from a high incidence of cardiovascular disease as compared to healthy individuals, and a markedly increased mortality that cannot fully be explained by traditional risk factors. Recent evidence suggests that end-stage renal disease is a state of systemic inflammation and oxidative stress, both of which appear to play an important role in the development of cardiovascular disease..." Nothing to do with infectious disease there, per se. Though a bacterial infection or such can seriously complicate things. "A series of papers from Popko's lab has demonstrated that interferon-gamma -- a chemical signal used to activate the immune system -- plays a critical role in damaging the cells..." What the hell do you think induces cells to produce interferon gamma? Oh, what the hell. Let's produce some IFN, cell's say. A couple of citations and you've made your case? You're even lamer than I thot. What a load of tripe. George M. Carter > If you want to understand exactly how various "diseases" are caused > (chronic or infectious), go to: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I cite extensively from studies and reports, and provide actual > quotations from the scientists who did the research whenver possible. So how many of the scientists who did the research that you are citing actually agree with your assertions? 0% There are at least two possible explanations. The first explanation is that you have absolutely no understanding of the articles you cite. Another explanantion is that these scientists are all being censored by the pharmaceutical cartels. They are aware of the truth but are too afraid to say anything because of the pharma industry death squads. However they put subtle clues in their papers that only true open-minded geniuses can understand. Chris Noble > >My name is Jan Spreen. I swear to deny HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, > >to the bitter end. Everybody who does not agree with me and/or who [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Why are you such a blockhead, Spreen? I wouldn't be so arrogant if I were you. Many years and billions of dollars later, no cure, no vaccine in sight. Maybe it is time to give another theory a chance. Your current approach keeps running into the wall. Instead of trying to find another way, you just run a little harder and hope you can get through the next time. Joe > I wouldn't be so arrogant if I were you. Many years and billions of > dollars later, no cure, no vaccine in sight. Maybe it is time to give [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Joe Where in the medical texts does it say that if there is no currently effective vaccine for an infectious disease that this means the infectious disease does not exist? Treatment may not be curative, but has turned a progressively fatal condition into a long term, manageable condition with in some cases a normal life expectancy. I guess because there is no cure for diseases such as diabetes (insulin is not a cure) this means diabetes does not exist either. HIV does cause AIDS because the virus attacks the body on a cellular level (cd4 lymthocypte). the virus makes billions of copies of itself and finally the cells die this in turn makes you immnue system weak. you start to get opportunistic infections and this is how AIDS comes to exist. > > I wouldn't be so arrogant if I were you. Many years and billions of > > dollars later, no cure, no vaccine in sight. Maybe it is time to give [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I guess because there is no cure for diseases such as diabetes (insulin > is not a cure) this means diabetes does not exist either. Diabetes is not caused by an infectious agent, therefore, there can not a vaccine for it. Taking expensive and toxic chemicals for the rest of someone's life can not be called treatment. The medication may kill faster than the virus, if there is one. Every large vaccine trial has failed so far. Instead of re-examining their starting hypothesis of hiv causes aids, all these groups came up with some hard-pressed explanation why it didn't work so that they could get money to try it again. Joe snip >Diabetes is not caused by an infectious agent, therefore, there can not >a vaccine for it. Therefore no infectious diseases exist! I said that using your logic "because there is no cure for diseases such as diabetes (insulin is not a cure) this means diabetes does not exist either." > Diabetes is not caused by an infectious agent, therefore, there can not be > a vaccine for it. Perhaps you could surprise yourself. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00057499 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4091399.stm >> >My name is Jan Spreen. I swear to deny HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, >> >to the bitter end. Everybody who does not agree with me and/or who [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I wouldn't be so arrogant if I were you. Many years and billions of >dollars later, no cure, no vaccine in sight. LOL. Gosh, pancreatic cancer doesn't exist either. A film from 1996. Featuring some people who have since died of AIDS. Drugs do not cause AIDS. What a stupid "hypothesis" with no data to support it and quite a bit to refute it. And THAT is what you believe, Jannie-poo? George M. Carter > A film from 1996. Featuring some people who have since died of AIDS. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > George M. Carter Wow, Mr. Carter you've been been on this forum for such a long time...since the late nineties, I can't believe you'd make such an inane, obviously untrue statement as "Drugs do not cause AIDS. What a stupid "hypothesis" with no data to support it and quite a bit to refute it." AZT alias "Retrovir" in large enough doses, over a period of time cause AIDS-like conditions..the drug company that makes Retrovir it printed it in the Physician's desk referance. Well AIDS and AIDS-like conditions I suppose theres a differance but they both result in fatalities. >Wow, Mr. Carter you've been been on this forum for such a long >time...since the late nineties, I can't believe you'd make such an >inane, obviously untrue statement as > >"Drugs do not cause AIDS. What a stupid "hypothesis" with no data to >support it and quite a bit to refute it." I've been around this NG since it began which is the early-mid 90s. >AZT alias "Retrovir" in large enough doses, over a period of time >cause AIDS-like conditions.. What a load of f.cking crap. AZT at 1200 mg per day could quite certainly kill people, but more than anything by screwing up their red blood count and inducing neutropenia. Do you know what neutrophils are? They are NOT CD4+ T lymphocytes. AZT does NOT cause CD4+ cells to disappear. As far as dosage, 600 mg a day doesn't cause nearly the toxicity problems and doesn't kill people. 300 mg a day doesn't either and probably works just as well. >the drug company that makes Retrovir it >printed it in the Physician's desk referance. What are you talking about? Do you know who makes it? Who used to make it? Or are you just parroting some crap spattered about on some denialist website that the probably got wrong yet again? >Well AIDS and AIDS-like >conditions I suppose theres a differance but they both result in >fatalities. You bet there's a difference. And AIDS will kill quite handily without a person ever touching AZT. It happens every single day because Pharma is so intent on profits, they do not giving a flying f.ck how many people in developing nations die. Unless they can make money off of PEPFAR--then a few people can get treated. George M. Carter > >Wow, Mr. Carter you've been been on this forum for such a long > >time...since the late nineties, I can't believe you'd make such an [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > What a load of f.cking crap. "Bone marrow problems, such as decreased production of red blood cells and/or white blood cells, can occur in people talking Retrovir. Contact your doctor immediately if you develop unusual fatigue, pale skin, sore throat, fever, or chills, which may be signs of bone marrow problems. These problems are more likely to occur if you combine Retrovir with other drugs that cause these same side effects. Examples of other drugs that can cause bone marrow problems include ganciclovir (Cytovene®), SMX-TMP (Bactrim; Septra®), and various chemotherapy drugs used to treat cancer. · A rare but potentially serious side effect of Retrovir is myopathy (damage to the muscles, including the heart). People who use Retrovir for a long period of time, meaning several years, are at the greatest risk for myopathy. General symptoms of myopathy include weakness of limbs, usually proximal (located close to the center of the body). · Lactic acidosis, which can be fatal, and severe liver problems (fatty liver) have been reported in people taking nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs). Contact your doctor immediately if you experience nausea, vomiting, or unusual or unexpected stomach discomfort; weakness and tiredness; shortness of breath; weakness in the arms and legs; yellowing of the skin or eyes; or pain in the upper stomach area. These problems are more likely to occur in HIV-positive people taking Zerit® (d4T), or Zerit in combination with Videx®/Videx EC® (ddI). However, there have been some reports of these potentially serious side effects occurring in people taking Retrovir. · Feeling tired (fatigue), rash, trouble sleeping (insomnia), nausea, and headache can also be caused by Retrovir. Side effects are more likely to occur in people who have low T-cell counts at the time therapy with Retrovir is started. · Anti-HIV drug regimens containing NRTIs, including Retrovir, can cause increased fat levels (cholesterol and triglycerides) in the blood, abnormal body-shape changes (lipodystrophy; including increased fat around the abdomen, breasts, and back of the neck, as well as decreased fat in the face, arms, and legs), and diabetes. These side effects of anti-HIV drug therapy are reviewed in our lessons on Lipodystrophy, Facial Lipoatrophy, and Risks To Your Heart (Hyperlipidemia)." A list of possible side effects of "retrovir" , taken off the internet. All these symptoms resemble symtoms reported by people suffering from AIDS in the U.S during its outbreak here. I looked at newer referances on Retrovir in the "Physician's desk reference manual", but the information has changed...I could have sworn in the early in earlier copies of the PDR, I think it actually states that " Side effects of AZT or retrovir resemble AIDS symtoms" I'll have to look in the library, to get the actual copy. > AZT at 1200 mg per day could quite certainly kill people, but more > than anything by screwing up their red blood count and inducing > neutropenia. Do you know what neutrophils are? A fatal type of anemia? > They are NOT CD4+ T lymphocytes. > > AZT does NOT cause CD4+ cells to disappear. Being that AZT/Retrovir prevents cell division why wouldn't it? Any proof that HIV causes CD4 cells to disappear? > As far as dosage, 600 mg a day doesn't cause nearly the toxicity > problems and doesn't kill people. 300 mg a day doesn't either and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Do you know who makes it? Who used to make it? I think I was looking a Glaxco-Welcome..in an old PDR like 90's or maybe in the 80's > Or are you just parroting some crap spattered about on some denialist > website that the probably got wrong yet again? Afraid not dumbo. > >Well AIDS and AIDS-like > >conditions I suppose theres a differance but they both result in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > is so intent on profits, they do not giving a flying f.ck how many > people in developing nations die. Well the controversy I'm reading about suggest that HIV might not even cause AIDS. Theres some evidence that some of the drugs given for AIDS treament maybe too toxic, and probably contributed to alot of deaths more than HIV ever did....Of course I'm reading more about Peter Duesberg these days. To suggest that these so called miracle drugs are going to save anybody might be just misguided as for the drugs companies to deny treatment of these drugs for those you deem eligible to recieve them. > Unless they can make money off of PEPFAR--then a few people can get > treated. > > George M. Carter >> >Wow, Mr. Carter you've been been on this forum for such a long >> >time...since the late nineties, I can't believe you'd make such an [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >> What a load of f.cking crap. >"Bone marrow problems, such as decreased production of red blood cells >and/or white blood cells, can occur in people talking Retrovir. snip... > >A list of possible side effects of "retrovir" , taken off the internet. Taken from where? None of that material represents AIDS or HIV infection. >All these symptoms resemble symtoms reported by people suffering from >AIDS in the U.S during its outbreak here. No, they don't. Neutropenia is not CD4 loss. Fatigue as a symptom can be MANY things. The one overlapping area between AZT toxicity and HIV effects is mitochondrial toxicity. That happens when people use nucleoside analogs. People in the early 80s before AZT was even considered a possibility were developing AIDS obviously. AZT is not AIDS. >I looked at newer referances >on Retrovir in the "Physician's desk reference manual", but the >information has changed...I could have sworn in the early in earlier >copies of the PDR, I think it actually states that " Side effects of >AZT or retrovir resemble >AIDS symtoms" I'll have to look in the library, to get the actual copy. Then you are mistaken. You probably read it on some bullshit denialist website. >> AZT at 1200 mg per day could quite certainly kill people, but more >> than anything by screwing up their red blood count and inducing >> neutropenia. Do you know what neutrophils are? > >A fatal type of anemia? Neutrophils are not a fatal type of anemia. The anemia associated with AZT use is not fatal. >> They are NOT CD4+ T lymphocytes. >> >> AZT does NOT cause CD4+ cells to disappear. > >Being that AZT/Retrovir prevents cell division why wouldn't it? AZT does not prevent cell division. The effects on nuclear DNA are extremely minimal. AZT does NOT cause T cells to deplete. >Any proof that HIV causes CD4 cells to disappear? There is an enormous amount of evidence underscoring that HIV infection results in CD4 cell counts to decline persistently toward zero, if left untreated. >> As far as dosage, 600 mg a day doesn't cause nearly the toxicity >> problems and doesn't kill people. 300 mg a day doesn't either and [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I think I was looking a Glaxco-Welcome..in an old PDR like 90's or >maybe in the 80's Wrong. Burroughs-Wellcome was the company that Sam Broder handed the license to and who started charging $10,000 per year. That company has merged and turned into the conglomerate, Glaxo-SmithKline. >> Or are you just parroting some crap spattered about on some denialist >> website that the probably got wrong yet again? > >Afraid not dumbo. You should provide citations for your sources, moron. >> >Well AIDS and AIDS-like >> >conditions I suppose theres a differance but they both result in [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >more than HIV ever did....Of course I'm reading more about Peter >Duesberg these days. Peter Duesberg wrote a lot of that crap 18 years ago or more. There are LOTS of people taking combinations of these supposedly fatally toxic drugs and doing quite well. There are many others using ARV who are experiencing pretty rough side effects. Antiretroviral therapy is NOT AIDS. And refusing it when one is HIV+ is almost 100% guaranteed to result in an early death. >To suggest that these so called miracle drugs are going to save anybody >might be just misguided as for the drugs companies to deny treatment of >these drugs for those you deem eligible to recieve them. Darling, I have experience of nearly two decades watching people use and not use ARV. I have read hundreds of clinical studies. Between my experience and the data, it is demonstrably clear that ARV saves lives. You may believe any nonsense you wish, read whatever you wish, but I heartily recommend that you talk to people living with HIV and do a hell of a lot more research. George M. Carter > >> >Wow, Mr. Carter you've been been on this forum for such a long > >> >time...since the late nineties, I can't believe you'd make such an [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Taken from where? Not from the PDR. But a respactable source. > None of that material represents AIDS or HIV infection. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > No, they don't. Neutropenia is not CD4 loss. Fatigue as a symptom can > be MANY things. Sure it does...the warnings for AZT talk about crippling loss of energy related to the use of Azt, along with anemia unto death for use of AZT, among other things In fact it is Duesberg contention that USE of AZT coincides with some of symtoms of AIDS which resulted in the deaths of alot of people using it, indeed its was as people like Peter Duesberg said. That truth has been was even written in Physicians Desk Reference manual on the Drug AZT. If I recall correctly in some of the older versions of the PDR it actuallys says that ...Overuse or symtoms of toxicity resulting from the use of Retrovir resembles some of the symptoms of HIV diesease..... I was quite sure I read that. I wrote a report in college, questioning whether the HIV hypothesis was true and I used that quote from the PDR on it. Unfortunately when I turned to look back at the Library where I got that PDR manual wiith that reference , the Library updated the PDR with a newer version (2005) and in that version ( and my guess newer versions) That phrase was written out of the drug description, for toxic warnings on the use of AZT/Retrvir., Maybe another reason that warning wasn't there is because a different pharmaceutical company is manufacturing the drug..it is also a bad time of the times for people to revise out, or exclude information that might implicate their product. > The one overlapping area between AZT toxicity and HIV effects is > mitochondrial toxicity. That happens when people use nucleoside > analogs. People in the early 80s before AZT was even considered a > possibility were developing AIDS obviously. > > AZT is not AIDS. I didn't say that , however there was that warning in the PDR, that AZT toxicity resemble symtoms of HIV disease. > >I looked at newer referances > >on Retrovir in the "Physician's desk reference manual", but the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Then you are mistaken. You probably read it on some bullshit denialist > website. Its possible that you are mistaken. Perhaps YOU are the denialist. > >> AZT at 1200 mg per day could quite certainly kill people, but more > >> than anything by screwing up their red blood count and inducing [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Neutrophils are not a fatal type of anemia. The anemia associated with > AZT use is not fatal. I don't believe that true, prolonged use of AZT, with the presence of that particular kind of anemia probably is fatal. > >> They are NOT CD4+ T lymphocytes. > >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > AZT does not prevent cell division. The effects on nuclear DNA are > extremely minimal. How can that be true. Peter Duesberg calls AZT a "DNA chain terminator" meaning that its prevents cell growth. Duesberg probably isn't the only one who says this. AZT is used as an "Anti-retroviral" for AIDS precisely because of its effect on prevent cell division. Isn't it true that AZT was originally designed has an a therapy for Cancer? Isn't the main purpose of Chemotherapy drugs are to kills cells in the body? > AZT does NOT cause T cells to deplete. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > infection results in CD4 cell counts to decline persistently toward > zero, if left untreated. Just basically corellation. HIV might be a kind of marker for people living a kind of a lifestyle that might result in AIDS. Duesberg et al , calls it an passenger virus. Whether HIV directly or indirectly causes AIDS might be questionable. Dueberg and his studies says ... "Retroviruses don't kill cells because they depend on viable cells for the replication of their RNA from viral DNA intergrated into cellular DNA. Thus, T-cells infected "in vitro" thrive, and those patented to mass-produce HIV for the detection of HIV antibodies and diagnosis of AIDS are immortal!. Also "only antibodies against HIV are found in most patients. Therefore, "HIV infection is identified in blood by detecting antibodies,gene sequences, or viral isolation." But, HIV can only be "isolated" from rare, latently infected lymphocytes that have been cultured for weeks "in vitro"-away from the antibodies of the human host. Thus HIV behaves like a latent passenger virus." So my question is if HIV is implicated in causing AIDS, or killing CD4 tells or CD8 cells, wouldn't there be a hint of the virus there? > >> As far as dosage, 600 mg a day doesn't cause nearly the toxicity > >> problems and doesn't kill people. 300 mg a day doesn't either and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > license to and who started charging $10,000 per year. That company has > merged and turned into the conglomerate, Glaxo-SmithKline. > >> Or are you just parroting some crap spattered about on some denialist > >> website that the probably got wrong yet again? > > > >Afraid not dumbo. > > You should provide citations for your sources, moron. I told you the Physicians Desk Referance manual, the manufacturer of the drug... back in the earlier days. > >> >Well AIDS and AIDS-like > >> >conditions I suppose theres a differance but they both result in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >> is so intent on profits, they do not giving a flying f.ck how many > >> people in developing nations die. Well that a good question, is there ever any cases of people dying of AIDS where they are NOT using AZT or other DNA chain terminators? But that could also be alot of bleeding heart bullshit when for example prescription of some drugs ( like AZT) might be implicated in alot of deaths of AIDS patients in the U.S, simply because of the toxic effects of the drug, and not HIV. > >Well the controversy I'm reading about suggest that HIV might not even > >cause AIDS. Theres some evidence that some of the drugs given for AIDS [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > toxic drugs and doing quite well. There are many others using ARV who > are experiencing pretty rough side effects. Oh..... > Antiretroviral therapy is NOT AIDS. And refusing it when one is HIV+ > is almost 100% guaranteed to result in an early death. Well I,'d question that, if the drugs being given to treat HIV disease are very toxic.Possibly more dangerous than the disease it is intended to cure. Or that the drugs given are used to eradicate a virus that doesn't directly play a role in causing AIDS. > >To suggest that these so called miracle drugs are going to save anybody > >might be just misguided as for the drugs companies to deny treatment of > >these drugs for those you deem eligible to recieve them. A disclaimer? Do you work for the drug companies? One thing you can be sure of is that these drugs are toxic. ANd If I recalled the drug companies used to proved a very loud disclaimer on all there anti-HIV drugs...they dont garanted them to work. > Darling, I have experience of nearly two decades watching people use > and not use ARV. I have read hundreds of clinical studies. Between my > experience and the data, it is demonstrably clear that ARV saves > lives. You may believe any nonsense you wish, read whatever you wish, > but I heartily recommend that you talk to people living with HIV and > do a hell of a lot more research. > George M. Carter > Just basically corellation. HIV might be a kind of marker for people > living a kind of a lifestyle that might result in AIDS. They called him Ryan "White" because of the White Parties he constantly attended as a fetus. B/ snip... >> >"Bone marrow problems, such as decreased production of red blood cells >> >and/or white blood cells, can occur in people talking Retrovir. snip... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Not from the PDR. But a respactable source. If you don't recall, just say so. I doubt I'd respect your source, however. Be that as it may, here is one source: http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/rxdrugprofiles/drugs/ret1375.shtml where they note: Retrovir side effects Side effects cannot be anticipated. If any develop or change in intensity, inform your doctor as soon as possible. Only your doctor can determine if it is safe for you to continue taking Retrovir. The frequency and severity of side effects associated with the use of Retrovir are greater in people whose infection is more advanced when treatment is started. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish side effects from the underlying signs of HIV disease or the infections caused by HIV. * Side effects may include: Cough, diarrhea, difficult or labored breathing, ear pain, discharge or swelling, enlarged liver, enlarged spleen, fever, general feeling of illness, headache, loss of appetite, mouth sores, nausea, nasal discharge or congestion, rash, swollen lymph nodes, vomiting .... As such, your comment that side effects may mimic late-stage HIV disease symptoms is accurate. That means it is not always clear whether the symptom is a result of HIV disease or a result of a zidovudine side effect. snip... >Sure it does...the warnings for AZT talk about crippling loss of energy >related to the use of Azt, along with anemia unto death for use of AZT, >among other things In fact it is Duesberg contention that USE of AZT >coincides with some of symtoms of AIDS which resulted in the deaths of >alot of people using it, indeed its was as people like Peter Duesberg >said. LOL. Cart before horse. MANY people develop the symptoms like fatigue and anemia WITHOUT taking AZT. That's caused by HIV. AZT does not cause AIDS. > That truth has been was even written in Physicians Desk Reference >manual on the Drug AZT. If I recall correctly in some of the older >versions of the PDR it actuallys says that ...Overuse or symtoms of >toxicity resulting from the use of Retrovir resembles some of the >symptoms of HIV diesease..... I was quite sure I read that. Apparently you did. Sadly, you didn't take two minutes as I just did to do a quick search and present your source. And it has been nearly two weeks since we were having this discussion. Now that I see it in a source I trust--I ALSO see the context in which it is written. Indeed, it's not the first time a prescribed drug can sometimes have the side effect that it is designated to treat. Depression or anxiety arising from use of antidepressants, for example. Cancer arising from radiation or chemotherapy. Does that mean depression or cancer don't exist? If that's the kind of argument you're making, it's pretty lame. >I wrote a >report in college, questioning whether the HIV hypothesis was true and >I used that quote from the PDR on it. Yes, but the point is misconstrued and doesn't really make a case. >Unfortunately when I turned to >look back at the Library where I got that PDR manual wiith that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >also a bad time of the times for people to revise out, or exclude >information that might implicate their product. I doubt that removing that phrase would have any particular impact on litigation against Glaxo or other makers of AZT. >> The one overlapping area between AZT toxicity and HIV effects is >> mitochondrial toxicity. That happens when people use nucleoside [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I didn't say that , however there was that warning in the PDR, that >AZT toxicity resemble symtoms of HIV disease. So you agree at least that AZT is not AIDS. Then what is your point? >> >I looked at newer referances >> >on Retrovir in the "Physician's desk reference manual", but the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Its possible that you are mistaken. Perhaps YOU are the denialist. Nope. When presented with compelling evidence, I'll change my view. Sadly, I had to actually look up those data myself. Indeed, the most useful bits for people using AZT are what to look out for, including: Some people taking Retrovir develop a sensitization reaction, often signaled by a rash. If you notice a rash developing, notify your doctor. Contact your doctor immediately if you develop shortness of breath, muscle weakness, abdominal pain, or any unexpected problems while being treated with Retrovir. again from http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/rxdrugprofiles/drugs/ret1375.shtml >> >> AZT at 1200 mg per day could quite certainly kill people, but more >> >> than anything by screwing up their red blood count and inducing [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I don't believe that true, prolonged use of AZT, with the presence of >that particular kind of anemia probably is fatal. OK. You're making another claim--actually several claims. Why not back them up? >> >> They are NOT CD4+ T lymphocytes. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >How can that be true. Peter Duesberg calls AZT a "DNA chain terminator" >meaning that its prevents cell growth. Duesberg said this crap years ago...and happens to be wrong. DNA has a LOT of other proteins that it needs in order to say, express a gene. Among that panoply of proteins includes enzymes that help repair damages in breaks in DNA. AZT incorporation into the DNA gets fixed. However, the bigger problem is in the mitochondria where the DNA does not have a repair protein system. >Duesberg probably isn't the only >one who says this. AZT is used as an "Anti-retroviral" for AIDS >precisely because of its effect on prevent cell division. Isn't it >true that AZT was originally designed has an a therapy for Cancer? >Isn't the main purpose of Chemotherapy drugs are to kills cells in the >body? Yes--and killing cells with cancer chemotherapy is meant to kill fast dividing cells, which is why high doses are given. But such VERY high doses of AZT that might affect cancer cause too much other damage to healthy cells. Lower doses don't do that. >> AZT does NOT cause T cells to deplete. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Just basically corellation. HIV might be a kind of marker for people >living a kind of a lifestyle that might result in AIDS. sh.t. WRONG. I have known people from every walk of life, rich/poor, black, white, latino, Asian, male, female, straight, gay, democrat, republican, drug users and saints. This is just nonsense. If "lifestyle" caused AIDS--I'd have more living friends and a lot more dead ones. >Duesberg et al >, calls it an passenger virus. Whether HIV directly or indirectly >causes AIDS might be questionable. Dueberg and his studies says ... Duesberg, schmuesberg. The man's a f.cking idiot. >"Retroviruses don't kill cells because they depend on viable cells for >the replication of their RNA from viral DNA intergrated into cellular >DNA. Thus, T-cells infected "in vitro" thrive, and those patented to >mass-produce HIV for the detection of HIV antibodies and diagnosis of >AIDS are immortal!. This is old news and inaccurate. >Also "only antibodies against HIV are found in most patients. >Therefore, "HIV infection is identified in blood by detecting >antibodies,gene sequences, or viral isolation." But, HIV can only be >"isolated" from rare, latently infected lymphocytes that have been >cultured for weeks "in vitro"-away from the antibodies of the human >host. Thus HIV behaves like a latent passenger virus." This is a series of mis-statements and inaccurate comments culled from ancient texts of a guy who was wrong about this crap when he wrote it, I'd guess maybe 10+ years ago? I've included a few abstracts below for your incomprehension. >So my question is if HIV is implicated in causing AIDS, or killing CD4 >tells or CD8 cells, wouldn't there be a hint of the virus there? There is. See for example, http://compbiol.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/jour nal.pcbi.0020064 or Ochieng W, Ogoyi D, Mulaa FJ, Ogola S, Musoke R, Otsyula MG. Viral load, CD4+ T-lymphocyte counts and antibody titres in HIV-1 infected untreated children in Kenya; implication for immunodeficiency and AIDS progression. Afr Health Sci. 2006 Mar;6(1):3-13. 1. Centre for Virus Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya; Department of Biochemistry, University of Nairobi, Kenya. Background: There are limited reports on HIV-1 RNA load, CD4+ T-lymphocytes and antibody responses in relation to disease progression in HIV-1 infected untreated children in Africa. Methods: To describe the relationships between these parameters, we conducted a longitudinal cohort study involving 51 perinatally HIV-1 infected children aged between 1 and 13 years. HIV status was determined by ELISA and confirmed by western blot and PCR. Antibodies were quantified by limiting dilution ELISA, plasma HIV-1 RNA load by RT-PCR and CD4+ T-lymphocytes by FACSCount. Results: Asymptomatic and symptomatic disease had, respectively, a rise in median HIV-1 RNA load from 1,195 to 132,543 and from 42,962 to 1,109,281 copies/ml in children below 6 years. The increase in viral load was 10-fold higher for asymptomatic compared to other categories and 2-fold faster for children less than 6 years than those above. Similarly, symptomatic children below 6 years had initial median CD4+ T-lymphocyte counts of 647 (22%) cells/muL, declining to 378 (20%) while those above 6 years had initial values of below 335 (15%) but which increased to 428 (17%). Median viral load correlated significantly with median CD4+ T-lymphocyte percentage in children above 6 years (p=0.026) but not below. Conclusions: Viral load is lower in older than younger children and correlates significantly with percentage CD4+ T-lymphocytes. Survival by HIV-1 infected children requires a competent immune response early in infection to counter the rapidly replicating virus. Interventions aimed at boosting the naive immune system may prolong survival in these children. >> >> As far as dosage, 600 mg a day doesn't cause nearly the toxicity >> >> problems and doesn't kill people. 300 mg a day doesn't either and [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >I think I was looking a Glaxco-Welcome..in an old PDR like 90's or >> >maybe in the 80's Look it up. >> Wrong. Burroughs-Wellcome was the company that Sam Broder handed the >> license to and who started charging $10,000 per year. That company has [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >the drug... >back in the earlier days. That's not a citation. That's just a lame, unsupported assertion. You don't even know who distributes the drug, do you? >> >> >Well AIDS and AIDS-like >> >> >conditions I suppose theres a differance but they both result in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Well that a good question, is there ever any cases of people dying of >AIDS where they are NOT using AZT or other DNA chain terminators? Sigh. Yes. About 3 million people died in 2005 alone of AIDS who didn't have access to much in the way of medical care, let alone ARV. >But that could also be alot of bleeding heart bullshit when for example >prescription of some drugs ( like AZT) might be implicated in alot of >deaths of AIDS patients in the U.S, simply because of the toxic effects >of the drug, and not HIV. Ask denialist buddy David Pasquarelli what he thinks! Oh--wait. You can't. He died of AIDS. >> >Well the controversy I'm reading about suggest that HIV might not even >> >cause AIDS. Theres some evidence that some of the drugs given for AIDS [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Oh..... You might actually talk to people living with HIV and find out for yourself? What city do you live in? >> Antiretroviral therapy is NOT AIDS. And refusing it when one is HIV+ >> is almost 100% guaranteed to result in an early death. > >Well I,'d question that, if the drugs being given to treat HIV disease >are very toxic.Possibly more dangerous than the disease it is intended >to cure. Wrong. And the data do not support such an absurd assertion. If you have data to support that notion, present it. Otherwise, you're just talking out your a.s and being a little Duesberg parrot. >Or that the drugs given are used to eradicate a virus that doesn't >directly play a role in causing AIDS. The drugs--antiretrovirals--used to treat HIV do NOT eradicate the virus unfortunately. But that does not mean that the HIV does not exist (even Duesberg recognizes that it does) nor that HIV does not cause AIDS. >> >To suggest that these so called miracle drugs are going to save anybody >> >might be just misguided as for the drugs companies to deny treatment of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >companies used to proved a very loud disclaimer on all there anti-HIV >drugs...they dont garanted them to work. I do not work for the drug companies. Yes, the drugs are toxic. AIDS is more toxic. And no, the drugs do NOT cure AIDS. But they give a person a shot at a normal life span. NOT taking them with HIV disease will most likely result in the CD4 count going toward zero, opportunistic infections to develop and death to ensue. Take your pick. Darling, I have experience of nearly two decades watching people use and not use ARV. I have read hundreds of clinical studies. Between my experience and the data, it is demonstrably clear that ARV saves lives. You may believe any nonsense you wish, read whatever you wish, but I heartily recommend that you talk to people living with HIV and do a hell of a lot more research. George M. Carter **** Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2005 Jan;48(1):49-52. Related Articles, Links Early detection of HIV-1 in infants by PCR. Sahni AK, Gupta RM, Jena J, Nair MN. Department of Microbiology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune 411040. ajaysahni@vsnl.net Infants of HIV-infected mothers are at great risk of becoming infected with HIV during childbirth. Many infants acquire HIV during labor and delivery. Others can acquire HIV through the mixing of fetal and maternal blood as the placenta separates. The duration of membrane rupture, acute chorioamnionitis and invasive delivery techniques that increase the baby's contact with the mother's blood have been associated with higher risks of MTCT during labor and delivery. HIV is present in breast milk and risk of its transmission during breastfeeding depends on several factors, including: infant age, pattern of breastfeeding, breastfeeding duration, breast health, maternal viral load and maternal immune status. Infants born to HIV infected mothers carry their mother's antibodies in their blood into the second year of life, even if the infants themselves are not infected. For this reason, standard HIV antibody tests cannot reliably confirm HIV infection in infants until after the maternal antibodies have disappeared. Tests that can diagnose pediatric HIV infection accurately during the first year of life include HIV-PCR, CD4/CD8 counts, P24 antigen tests, and viral cultures. PCR offers an effective tool to reliably diagnose HIV in a pediatric age group. Nineteen infants born by normal delivery to HIV-1 seropositive mothers were studied by PCR for the HIV1 env gene. Thirteen babies (68.5%) were negative whereas 6 babies were found to be positive (31.5%). Although PCR is one of the most useful tests for this clinical situation, it is not definitive. Therefore, PCR should be interpreted with caution and repeated at regular defined intervals, preferably lasting until the HIV antibody status of the infant is resolved. *** Peut V, Kent SJ. Fitness constraints on immune escape from HIV: Implications of envelope as a target for both HIV-specific T cells and antibody. Curr HIV Res. 2006 Apr;4(2):191-7. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, 3010, Australia. vpeut@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au Sterilising immunity against HIV-1 infection, whilst ideal, appears an unrealistic vaccination goal in the short term. More achievable is slowing the progression to disease and decreasing transmission by mounting strong T cell and neutralising antibody responses to maintain low viral loads. However, in both acute and chronic infection, mutant virus is selected to escape both arms of the adaptive immune system. Each mutation away from wildtype virus likely incurs at least some reduction in replicative capacity ("fitness") of the virus. Rapid reversion to wildtype of some immune escape mutations upon transmission, suggests fitness costs may be significant. HIV-1 Envelope is unique in that it is subject to both neutralising antibody and cell-mediated immune responses. Although Envelope is variable between strains, considerable serial pressure and mutational escape from both neutralising antibody and cytotoxic T lymphocyte attack may result in impaired structure and function. This could ultimately be exploited in HIV vaccine design. *** Kato S, Hanabusa H, Kaneko S, Takakuwa K, Suzuki M, Kuji N, Jinno M, Tanaka R, Kojima K, Iwashita M, Yoshimura Y, Tanaka K. Complete removal of HIV-1 RNA and proviral DNA from semen by the swim-up method: assisted reproduction technique using spermatozoa free from HIV-1. AIDS. 2006 Apr 24;20(7):967-73. Department of Microbiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. BACKGROUND: Use of antiretroviral drugs has reduced the mortality rate for HIV infection and many HIV-discordant couples wish to have children. It is possible for an HIV-infected man to father children without risk of HIV transmission if HIV-free spermatozoa can be obtained from his semen. METHODS: An improved swim-up method was used to collect HIV-free spermatozoa from the semen of HIV-positive males. Diluted semen was layered over a Percoll solution with a continuous density gradient of 30-98%, and then centrifuged. The bottom layer was collected by cutting the end from the tube and the sperm suspension was collected using the swim-up method. Spermatozoa were tested by nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for HIV-1 RNA and DNA, with a detection limit of one copy. Spermatozoa were used for assisted reproduction in 43 couples. RESULTS: HIV-1 RNA and proviral DNA were not detected by nested-PCR assay in all 73 of the collected spermatozoa samples from 52 patients. The HIV-1-negative sperm was used for in vitro fertilization in 12 couples and for intracytoplasmic sperm injection in 31 couples. No detection of HIV-1 RNA or proviral DNA in the culture medium of the fertilized eggs was confirmed again before embryo transfer. Of the 43 female partners, 20 conceived and 27 babies were born. HIV antibodies, HIV RNA and proviral DNA were negative in all of the females and babies. CONCLUSIONS: HIV-negative spermatozoa could be obtained from semen of HIV-positive men. The method involves no risk of HIV transmission to female partners and their children. > snip... > >> >"Bone marrow problems, such as decreased production of red blood cells [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > snip... > >Sure it does...the warnings for AZT talk about crippling loss of energy > >related to the use of Azt, along with anemia unto death for use of AZT, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > to do a quick search and present your source. And it has been nearly > two weeks since we were having this discussion. Had to do some research to find the entry I was talking about. > Now that I see it in a source I trust--I ALSO see the context in which > it is written. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > arising from use of antidepressants, for example. Cancer arising from > radiation or chemotherapy. That must make the drug particularly effective.... Its also one of the Big Issues, Dueberg talked about back then, I mean: how can a drug actually mimic the disease its supposed to cure? > Does that mean depression or cancer don't exist? non seqitur.... > If that's the kind of argument you're making, it's pretty lame. You were the one who said "DRUGS DON"T CAUSE AIDS, THATS A LOAD OF BULLSHIT !" > >I wrote a > >report in college, questioning whether the HIV hypothesis was true and [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I doubt that removing that phrase would have any particular impact on > litigation against Glaxo or other makers of AZT. Perhaps... > >> The one overlapping area between AZT toxicity and HIV effects is > >> mitochondrial toxicity. That happens when people use nucleoside [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > So you agree at least that AZT is not AIDS. Then what is your point? Well if AZT were AIDS then we'd have a cure for AIDS, but has you know AIDS is a whole constellation of illnesses connected with HIV and CD4/CD8 counts > >> >I looked at newer referances > >> >on Retrovir in the "Physician's desk reference manual", but the [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > OK. You're making another claim--actually several claims. Why not back > them up? I have... > >> >> They are NOT CD4+ T lymphocytes. > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > However, the bigger problem is in the mitochondria where the DNA does > not have a repair protein system. In Wikipedia it says this about AZT. "The azido group increases the lipophilic nature of AZT, allowing it cross cell membranes easily by diffusion and thereby also cross the blood-brain barrier. The cellular enzymes convert it into the effective 5'-triphosphate form. Studies have shown that the termination of the formed DNA chains is the specific factor in the inhibitory effect. The triphosphate form also has some ability to inhibit cellular DNA polymerase, which is used for replicating DNA as part of cell division.[13]" In Virusmyth it says this in an snippet from an article it says this... "DR. ROBERT HOFFMAN (Professor Cancer Biology, University of California, San Diego): "Well the effect of AZT on body cells as a whole is very deleterious because it prevents cells from replicating. There's a second point in that cells that may survive AZT may themselves become cancerous so there is a double danger for AZT the way I see it." > >Duesberg probably isn't the only > >one who says this. AZT is used as an "Anti-retroviral" for AIDS [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > This is just nonsense. If "lifestyle" caused AIDS--I'd have more > living friends and a lot more dead ones. Maybe not if they believe the information your putting out here.... > >Duesberg et al > >, calls it an passenger virus. Whether HIV directly or indirectly > >causes AIDS might be questionable. Dueberg and his studies says ... > > Duesberg, schmuesberg. The man's a f.cking idiot. Really ? I squeaked past a college chemistry class maybe years back, with a "C". I only had intermediate algebra as a math background. In Organic chemistry your using a visually part of the brain alot. I'm 43 I never got to organci chemistry, I would have like to study medicine, but considering present politics in Medicine, its just as well I didn't. Considering that Peter Duesberg is a PH.D in Molecular Biology , I'd say they deserve a certain amount of respect. Beside that Duesberg has alot of credentials as well. > >"Retroviruses don't kill cells because they depend on viable cells for > >the replication of their RNA from viral DNA intergrated into cellular [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > This is old news and inaccurate. Whats so old about it.. I guess he basing his information on some basic biological concepts.. > >Also "only antibodies against HIV are found in most patients. > >Therefore, "HIV infection is identified in blood by detecting [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > ancient texts of a guy who was wrong about this crap when he wrote it, > I'd guess maybe 10+ years ago? It was taken from the Durban declaration so its not that old, and its still accurate. > I've included a few abstracts below for your incomprehension. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > See for example, > http://compbiol.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/jour nal.pcbi.0020064 cut for brevity..... > >> >> Or are you just parroting some crap spattered about on some denialist > >> >> website that the probably got wrong yet again? [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Oh--wait. You can't. He died of AIDS. Sorry didn't know him...What about that Christine person , she's still "alive and well". > >> >Well the controversy I'm reading about suggest that HIV might not even > >> >cause AIDS. Theres some evidence that some of the drugs given for AIDS [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > You might actually talk to people living with HIV and find out for > yourself? What city do you live in? Oakland > >> Antiretroviral therapy is NOT AIDS. And refusing it when one is HIV+ > >> is almost 100% guaranteed to result in an early death. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Wrong. And the data do not support such an absurd assertion. If you > have data to support that notion, present it. I think I just proved it . > Otherwise, you're just talking out your a.s and being a little > Duesberg parrot. Okay I'm glad you admit to my point, about there being a referance to as to AZT toxicity resembling AIDS, in patients affected with "HIV disease"..there is a referance for it in the PDR ( Physicians desk referance manual) I found it in the 1995,6 version I believe. The entry for Retrovir, made by, Pg 1533. It reads... "WARNING: Retrovir (zidovudine) may be associated weith hematologic toxicity including Granulocytopenia and severe anemia requiring transfusions. Particulary in patients with advance HIV disease (see warnings). prolonged use of Retrovir has also been associated with symtomatic myopathy similar to that produced by human immunodeficiency virus......... So from reading that you can assume that there is a drug that can case symtoms like that produced in AIDS, oddly enough its a drug used to treat AIDS. This is just the thing Duesberg was writing about in his book "Inventing the AIDS virus. The alarming thing is this kind of wording is not present in the present day desk manual, for instance in the 2006 PDR, For Retrovir , produced by Glaxosmithkline, Pg 1533 the same warning reads..... "Warning . Retrovir (zidovudine) has been associated with hemologic toxicity including neutropenia and severe anemia particulary in patients with advanced HIV disease. (see warnings). Prolonged use of Retrovir has beem associated with symptomatic Mypathy......." The words "similar to that produced by HIV" has been left out, conviently. > >Or that the drugs given are used to eradicate a virus that doesn't > >directly play a role in causing AIDS. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > exist (even Duesberg recognizes that it does) nor that HIV does not > cause AIDS. Well yeah and Snake venom in small doses can cure just about anything. > >> >To suggest that these so called miracle drugs are going to save anybody > >> >might be just misguided as for the drugs companies to deny treatment of [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > George M. Carter > **** > Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2005 Jan;48(1):49-52. Related [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Infants of HIV-infected mothers are at great risk of becoming > infected with HIV during childbirth. ...Snipped for brevity One of the reason I left the debate on this hair brained crap was reading those abstracts. Hell, I got a life to live , AND I 'm not a doctor ( and ot likely to become one real soon0, but it seems to me some of this stuff is common sense and you don't need to read this hare-brained sh.t to know... "Prediction: AIDS should be a pediatric edidemic now,becuase HIV is transmitted "from mother to infant" at rates of 25-50% (44-49), and because " 34.3 million people worldwide" were already infected in 2000. To reduce the high maternal transmission rate HIV-antibody-positive pregnant mother are treated with AZT for up to 6 months prior to birth (section 4. Fact: But less than 1% of AIDS in the U.S and Europe is pediatric. Thus HIV must be a passenger virus in newborns" Why dont you give it a rest, heh? snip >Had to do some research to find the entry I was talking about. Excuse me--there is no pronoun in that statement. So far, I'm the only one in this conversation sharing any research. >> Now that I see it in a source I trust--I ALSO see the context in which >> it is written. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Big Issues, Dueberg talked about back then, I mean: how can a drug >actually mimic the disease its supposed to cure? But AZT does NOT mimic AIDS--just some of the symptoms. AZT does NOT cause T cells to go away. That's the hallmark of HIV disease. >> Does that mean depression or cancer don't exist? > >non seqitur.... Sorry, dear, it's very sequitur. Your claiming otherwise means nothing. >> If that's the kind of argument you're making, it's pretty lame. > >You were the one who said "DRUGS DON"T CAUSE AIDS, THATS A LOAD OF >BULLSHIT !" Yep. And I stand by that. You have offered NOTHING to suggest that AZT or any drug causes CD4 counts to drop to zero. (Hint: Cyclosporin is NOT a wild party club drug.) snip >> So you agree at least that AZT is not AIDS. Then what is your point? > >Well if AZT were AIDS then we'd have a cure for AIDS, but has you know >AIDS is a whole constellation of illnesses connected with HIV and >CD4/CD8 counts Wow....does this mean YOU also recognize that HIV causes AIDS? snip >> >I don't believe that true, prolonged use of AZT, with the presence of >> >that particular kind of anemia probably is fatal. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >I have... Where? What? Data? snip,,, >In Wikipedia it says this about AZT. Please provide the URL when you add a quote. >"The azido group increases the lipophilic nature of AZT, allowing it >cross cell membranes easily by diffusion and thereby also cross the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >polymerase, which is used for replicating DNA as part of cell >division.[13]" And what does that statement mean to you? >In Virusmyth it says this in an snippet from an article it says this... > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >themselves become cancerous so there is a double danger for AZT the way >I see it." So what? When did Hoffman say this? In what context? This is not what I would call evidence. Evidence would be understanding the sources of information that Hoffman used to make the claims he makes. And what, if any, clinical relevance the comments may have. snip.. >> This is just nonsense. If "lifestyle" caused AIDS--I'd have more >> living friends and a lot more dead ones. > >Maybe not if they believe the information your putting out here.... Well, there's a statement that means just about nothing at all. >> >Duesberg et al >> >, calls it an passenger virus. Whether HIV directly or indirectly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Really ? In my opinion, yes. > I squeaked past a college chemistry class maybe years back, >with a "C". That's fairly apparent. >I only had intermediate algebra as a math background. In >Organic chemistry your using a visually part of the brain alot. I'm 43 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I'd say they deserve a certain amount of respect. Beside that Duesberg >has alot of credentials as well. I see. So you worship at the Altar or Letters. Darling, if you start to look at the literature of the THOUSANDS of researchers working in the field of HIV/AIDS, you'll find a whole gaggle, a slew, a welter of letters and accolades and honors attached to the names of many people. Some deserved, some not. Eh. If that is how you judge it--the guy that says the stuff you like has a PhD--then this is a pretty sad commentary. You need more than to declare your ignorance and laziness. >> >"Retroviruses don't kill cells because they depend on viable cells for >> >the replication of their RNA from viral DNA intergrated into cellular [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Whats so old about it.. I guess he basing his information on some basic >biological concepts.. He's wrong. Retroviruses can and do cause disease in humans. Again--you provide no citation. When was this statement made? In what forum or context? Maybe you just made it up? Because it's hard to imagine even Duesberg making such a stupid comment at this point. However, is he does--then it affirms my view that the man is a f.cking idiot. It's up to you, since your his lapdog, to clarify the comment. snip.. >> Ask denialist buddy David Pasquarelli what he thinks! >> >> Oh--wait. You can't. He died of AIDS. > >Sorry didn't know him...What about that Christine person , she's still >"alive and well". Her daughter died of AIDS. And she'll probably die soon? I don't know. I hope not. I'd rather see her realize that what is threatening her health is denialist cant and failing to recognize that her plunging CD4 count is due to HIV. Her life, her choice. Sadly, a rotten set of choices for her kid. snip.. >> >Oh..... >> >> You might actually talk to people living with HIV and find out for >> yourself? What city do you live in? > >Oakland California? Then there are ample opportunities to meet people with HIV. >> >> Antiretroviral therapy is NOT AIDS. And refusing it when one is HIV+ >> >> is almost 100% guaranteed to result in an early death. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >I think I just proved it Wow. Where? When? How? That's the thing that stuns me. Denialists squeal for the most rigorous proof, rejecting all evidence presented and then claim they KNOW the truth based on the flimsiest arguments. That's just f.cking psychotic. >> Otherwise, you're just talking out your a.s and being a little >> Duesberg parrot. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >symtomatic myopathy similar to that produced by human immunodeficiency >virus......... Now THIS is a citation. But it does NOT support your point. Myopathy is a muscle wasting. It is caused by mitochondrial toxicity. That happens with HIV in some people and in people on AZT than not. It is not really a hallmark of AIDS, per se. >So from reading that you can assume that there is a drug that can case >symtoms like that produced in AIDS, oddly enough its a drug used to >treat AIDS. This is just the thing Duesberg was writing about in his >book "Inventing the AIDS virus. But he's just wrong. None of that suggests that AZT causes CD4 counts to decline. This is a simple but crucial point. >The alarming thing is this kind of wording is not present in the >present day desk manual, for instance in the 2006 PDR, For Retrovir , >produced by Glaxosmithkline, Pg 1533 the same warning reads..... Hmmmm....really....the same page number? Synchronicity. >"Warning . Retrovir (zidovudine) has been associated with hemologic >toxicity including neutropenia and severe anemia particulary in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >The words "similar to that produced by HIV" has been left out, >conviently. No. Because it's not particularly relevant. Look further in your old PDR. Look at drugs that treat psychosis. Or depression. Again, some of the very symptoms the drug is intended to treat may arise as side effects of the drug in some people! It's a really LAME argument, dear. If this is the kind of evidence you need to settle into the happy mire of denialism, then you might as well get your information from the Weekly World News. >> >Or that the drugs given are used to eradicate a virus that doesn't >> >directly play a role in causing AIDS. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Well yeah and Snake venom in small doses can cure just about anything. No. Snake venom in small doses can act as an antidote to snakebite. Snake oil may have some medicinal uses. Neither are claimed to cure everything. By contrast, it appears statins can cure everything from cancer to macular degeneration to hepatitis C to flagging stock values. snip... >> **** >> Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2005 Jan;48(1):49-52. Related [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >some of this stuff is common sense and you don't need to read this >hare-brained sh.t to know... wait...here you go again. Another quote that is unattributed. When was it made? By whom? Based on what? >"Prediction: AIDS should be a pediatric edidemic now,becuase HIV is >transmitted "from mother to infant" at rates of 25-50% (44-49), and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Fact: But less than 1% of AIDS in the U.S and Europe is pediatric. Thus >HIV must be a passenger virus in newborns" LOL. That may be due to the fact that there are FAR fewer newborns infected with HIV because of drugs used to prevent mother-to-child transmission. In short, you're using unattributed claims to derive a point that is not based on current conditions. It's stunningly delusional. >Why dont you give it a rest, heh? Give what a rest? So I provided a lot of citations you were incapable of understanding. Yet you feel qualified enough to trust one guy's opinions on HIV. And you'll risk your life on that? Or try to convince others to not ever use ARV? That, of course, is fatally stupid. If anyone needs a long rest and some time to actually study and comprehend the issues, dear, it is you. George M. Carter > snip > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > But AZT does NOT mimic AIDS--just some of the symptoms. AZT does NOT > cause T cells to go away. That's the hallmark of HIV disease. But using AZT in conjunction with HIV , in large doses has what happened in the early part of the AIDS epidemic in the U.S might have caused fatalities...mostly due to AZT. Its written in the pharmacuetical inserts for Retrovir, that Retrovir can cause muscle wasting that resembles HIV disease. If I recall correctly some of the symtoms for full blown AIDS at that time was Muscle wasting, and Dementia , ( probably due to AZT). I believe its also true that one of the reasons AZT was used to treat AIDS was because people using it got an intial rebound , in that it actually increased white blodd cell counts, and other things, but that might have been the Human body's reaction to the toxicity of the AZT, rather than a benefit. > >> Does that mean depression or cancer don't exist? > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > or any drug causes CD4 counts to drop to zero. (Hint: Cyclosporin is > NOT a wild party club drug.) Well, perhaps its possible YOU dont know what is dropping CD4/DC8 counts to zero, perhaps its not HIV... If people like Duesberg and his ilk are saying that HIV doesn't do anything to demonstrate its pathogenicity to CD4 cells. But You think Duesberg is an idiot. > snip > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Wow....does this mean YOU also recognize that HIV causes AIDS? I'm not quite ready to buy that yet. > >> >I don't believe that true, prolonged use of AZT, with the presence of > >> >that particular kind of anemia probably is fatal. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Where? What? Data? Prolonged use of AZT is fatal, what are you an dope? I guess I didn't back it up cause its common sense. You want several claims for this? In the PDR listing (by the manufacturere of retrovir 1995-6) page 802, it reads ........ "Arnaudo reported that AZT recipients with myopathy (characterised by distinctive `ragged-red' fibres on biopsy) had severely depleted mitochondrial DNA in muscle biopsy specimens, which may be reversible on discontinuation of AZT. Results of studies in rats and mice administered high doses of AZT indicate that AZT has a cancer-causing effect (vaginal neoplasms) in some rodent species. However, these results do not establish that AZT causes cancer in humans. Pluda found that 8/55 patients with AIDS or severe ARC developed a high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) of B-cell type, a median of 23.8 months after starting antiretroviral treatment with AZT or regimens containing AZT. The Kaplan-Meier estimated probability of developing lymphoma by 30 months of therapy was 28.6% and by 36 months, 46.4%. Prolonged survival in the setting of profound immunosuppression with substantial CD4 cell depletion is probably an important factor in the development of these lymphomas. Although a direct role of AZT therapy in the development of NHL cannot be totally discounted, it now seems unlikely. For more details see the entry on Lymphoma. " Here's an interesting groups of articles about AZT. http://www.thenhf.com/articles_52.htm "There's been time to measure the effect of AZT. It has been given to hundreds of thousands of gay men in the US who tested HIV-positive, whether they were sick or not. United States AIDS deaths increased by thousands annually after the mass-introduction of AZT in 1987, from 11,000 in 1986 to nearly 50,000 in 1994-the height of AZT use. Sharp criticism of AZT began appearing in the press. Patients and physicians complained openly of the drug's effects and cut doses or discontinued it altogether. The death rate declined-substantially-and before the introduction of protease inhibitors, which the industry likes to credit for the decline. Was it a coincidence? I don't know. You can't ask dead people what they died of. I do think it's worth looking into." Bone Marrow Suppression: RETROVIR should be used with caution in patients who have bone marrow compromise evidenced by granulocyte count <1,000 cells/mm3 or hemoglobin <9.5 g/dL. In patients with advanced symptomatic HIV disease, anemia and neutropenia were the most significant adverse events observed. There have been reports of pancytopenia associated with the use of RETROVIR, which was reversible in most instances after discontinuance of the drug. However, significant anemia, in many cases requiring dose adjustment, discontinuation of RETROVIR, and/or blood transfusions, has occurred during treatment with RETROVIR alone or in combination with other antiretrovirals. Frequent blood counts are strongly recommended in patients with advanced HIV disease who are treated with RETROVIR. For HIV-infected individuals and patients with asymptomatic or early HIV disease, periodic blood counts are recommended. If anemia or neutropenia develops, dosage adjustments may be necessary (see DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION). Myopathy: Myopathy and myositis with pathological changes, similar to that produced by HIV disease, have been associated with prolonged use of RETROVIR. Lactic Acidosis/Severe Hepatomegaly with Steatosis: Lactic acidosis and severe hepatomegaly with steatosis, including fatal cases, have been reported with the use of nucleoside analogues alone or in combination, including zidovudine and other antiretrovirals. A majority of these cases have been in women. Obesity and prolonged exposure to antiretroviral nucleoside analogues may be risk factors. Particular caution should be exercised when administering RETROVIR to any patient with known risk factors for liver disease; however, cases have also been reported in patients with no known risk factors. Treatment with RETROVIR should be suspended in any patient who develops clinical or laboratory findings suggestive of lactic acidosis or pronounced hepatotoxicity (which may include hepatomegaly and steatosis even in the absence of marked transaminase elevations). All these symtoms w o u l d appera to be Fatal if prolonged, and at certain doses. > snip,,, > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > And what does that statement mean to you? It tells me that AZT is a DNA chain terminator, primarily meaning it can stop cell division. What does that above quote mean to you? > >In Virusmyth it says this in an snippet from an article it says this... > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > claims he makes. And what, if any, clinical relevance the comments may > have. It was a quote from Virusmyth..gawd.. Azt can cross the Blood-Brain barrier.... Is there something wrong with your cognitive faculities? > snip.. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, there's a statement that means just about nothing at all. Well Duesberg mentions also, a possible connection between gay lifestyle and Karposi Sarcoma/AIDS. He thought KS and AIDS might be chemical in origin, based on the use of "poppers" . You don't hear of K/S and AIDS cases in the U.S anymore, nor do you hear much about it in Africa much., possibly because people don't use poppers any more? You think thats true? It tends to give credibility that AIDS in the US was more of a lifestyle disease. Snipped for brevity.... > I see. So you worship at the Altar or Letters. Darling, if you start > to look at the literature of the THOUSANDS of researchers working in > the field of HIV/AIDS, you'll find a whole gaggle, a slew, a welter of > letters and accolades and honors attached to the names of many people. > Some deserved, some not. Eh. Oh.... > If that is how you judge it--the guy that says the stuff you like has > a PhD--then this is a pretty sad commentary. You need more than to [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > that the man is a f.cking idiot. It's up to you, since your his > lapdog, to clarify the comment. That statement was part of the dissents view of HIV/AIDS in the Durban declaration Whoops gotta go back at you later... snip >> But AZT does NOT mimic AIDS--just some of the symptoms. AZT does NOT >> cause T cells to go away. That's the hallmark of HIV disease. > >But using AZT in conjunction with HIV , in large doses has what >happened in the early part of the AIDS epidemic in the U.S might have >caused fatalities...mostly due to AZT. High dose AZT caused some fatalities (specifically 1200 mg). But that dose was dropped. Not that many people had access to it and none before 1987 when so many were dying of AIDS. >Its written in the pharmacuetical inserts for Retrovir, that Retrovir >can cause muscle wasting that resembles HIV disease. If I recall >correctly some of the symtoms for full blown AIDS at that time was >Muscle wasting, and Dementia , ( probably due to AZT). AIDS wasting is NOT the same as AZT wasting tho there are similarities. But I could SEE the difference between the horrific wasting of AIDS and the somewhat less worse but still awful loss of the a.s that AZT would cause, for example. They are similar--not the same. And MANY people developed wasting without ever seeing a mg of AZT. >I believe its also true that one of the reasons AZT was used to treat >AIDS was because people using it got an intial rebound , in that it >actually increased white blodd cell counts, and other things, but that >might have been the Human body's reaction to the toxicity of the AZT, >rather than a benefit. Support these statements? With facts of any kind? Sigh. You really have no clue what you're talking about. snip >> Yep. And I stand by that. You have offered NOTHING to suggest that AZT >> or any drug causes CD4 counts to drop to zero. (Hint: Cyclosporin is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >ilk are saying that HIV doesn't do anything to demonstrate its >pathogenicity to CD4 cells. But You think Duesberg is an idiot. Yes. Because I HAVE READ thousands of papers in the last 17 years of doing this work. And Duesberg fails to convince. The aggregate of all that work by so many other researchers in so many other disciplines is a LOT more convincing--let alone the fact that I work with people who are gay, straight, homeless, current or former substance users--and the ones with HIV tend to develop AIDS (unless, these days, they start ARV and remain clinically stable). If you read JUST Duesberg, then you are biased and ignorant. snip >> Wow....does this mean YOU also recognize that HIV causes AIDS? > >I'm not quite ready to buy that yet. Don't then. If you're HIV+, you'll find out for yourself. You can believe whatever you wish. snip. >Prolonged use of AZT is fatal, what are you an dope? Not at a 600 mg dosage. The chances of dying of AIDS if you don't treat it are MUCH higher. And guess what? AZT is only one of over 20 drugs that have been approved to treat HIV disease. >I guess I didn't >back it up cause its common sense. You want several claims for this? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >mitochondrial DNA in muscle biopsy specimens, which may be reversible >on discontinuation of AZT. Yes. Not the same as AIDS-related wasting but more like a subset of it. See, for example: Grinspoon S, Mulligan K; Department of Health and Human Services Working Group on the Prevention and Treatment of Wasting and Weight Loss. Weight loss and wasting in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Clin Infect Dis. 2003 Apr 1;36(Suppl 2):S69-78. Program in Nutritional Metabolism, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA. sgrinspoon@partners.org Weight loss and muscle wasting remain significant clinical problems, even in the era of potent antiretroviral therapy. In patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), wasting, particularly loss of metabolically active lean tissue, has been associated with increased mortality, accelerated disease progression, loss of muscle protein mass, and impairment of strength and functional status. Factors that may contribute to wasting include inadequate intake, malabsorptive disorders, metabolic alterations, hypogonadism, and excessive cytokine production. Evidence now demonstrates that nutritional counseling and support, appetite stimulants, progressive resistance training, and anabolic hormones can reverse weight loss and increase lean body mass in HIV-infected patients. Despite a growing body of evidence on the importance of nutritional intervention to prevent wasting in adults, maintain growth velocity in children, and promote restoration of weight and lean body mass in stable, low-weight patients, no therapeutic guidelines currently exist for the management of weight loss and wasting in HIV-infected patients. Principles and guidelines for assessment and management of weight loss and wasting in patients with HIV/AIDS are presented. And further, the myopathies related to AZT and HIV are distinguishable upon analysis: Sheikh RA, Yasmeen S, Munn R, Ruebner BH, Ellis WG. AIDS-related myopathy. Med Electron Microsc. 1999 Sep;32(2):79-86. Department of Medicine, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA. Infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is often associated with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), and wasting is one of the defining clinical features of AIDS. Muscular weakness due to myopathy may develop at any stage of HIV infection. We report two illustrative cases of HIV-associated myopathies. One was due to inflammatory myosits most likely directly related to the HIV infection, and the other was most likely the result of mitochondrial damage due to zidovudine, a nucleoside analogue commonly used in treating HIV infection. Biopsies from both patients showed alterations of myofiber structures, of varying severity, culminating in necrosis, lipid droplets, and lymphoplasmocytic inflammatory response. The zidovudine-treated patient also showed distinctive mitochondrial changes, predominantly enlargement, variation in shape and size, and disorganization of the cristae. These two types of HIV-associated inflammatory myopathies are reviewed, along with other HIV-associated myopathies, including HIV wasting syndrome, nemaline rod myopathy, pyomyositis, rhabdomyolysis, cardiomyopathy, and other miscellaneous myopathies associated with HIV infection. >Results of studies in rats and mice administered high doses of AZT >indicate that AZT has a cancer-causing effect (vaginal neoplasms) in >some rodent species. However, these results do not establish that AZT >causes cancer in humans. Yes, that's probably correct. >Pluda found that 8/55 patients with AIDS or severe ARC developed a >high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) of B-cell type, a median of 23.8 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >in the development of NHL cannot be totally discounted, it now seems >unlikely. For more details see the entry on Lymphoma. " Right--AZT probably does not contribute to the higher incidence of NHL among people living with HIV. I don't think we can 100% exclude a role in facilitating its development, but clearly, AZT use is not needed for it to develop. >Here's an interesting groups of articles about AZT. >http://www.thenhf.com/articles_52.htm [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >for the decline. Was it a coincidence? I don't know. You can't ask >dead people what they died of. I do think it's worth looking into." Well, by all means! Look into it. There is a wealth of clinical data. This is not a reliable resource but merely the ditherings of someone who at least is honest enough to state his ignorance of the matter upfront. >Bone Marrow Suppression: RETROVIR should be used with caution in >patients who have bone marrow compromise evidenced by granulocyte count [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >during treatment with RETROVIR alone or in combination with other >antiretrovirals. Yep. We've been over this. AZT can cause neutropenia and anemia. No question about that! These conditions, however, are not AIDS. And indeed, the most important argument for Duesberg would be that AZT caused CD4 cells to deplete to zero. It does not. Ergo, AZT is not the cause of AIDS. >Frequent blood counts are strongly recommended in patients with >advanced HIV disease who are treated with RETROVIR. For HIV-infected [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >that produced by HIV disease, have been associated with prolonged use >of RETROVIR. See abstract above. >Lactic Acidosis/Severe Hepatomegaly with Steatosis: Lactic acidosis and >severe hepatomegaly with steatosis, including fatal cases, have been [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >All these symtoms w o u l d appera to be Fatal if prolonged, and at >certain doses. They could be fatal if the dose was too high for too long, you bet. But mostly they are not. However, there ARE serious issues about some of the toxicities of the ARV regimens that CAN be fatal. No one argues that. But the notion that these are AIDS or that these toxicities are a greater risk than leaving advanced HIV disease untreated is not demonstrated by listing the side effects--nor is it supported by the clinical literature. And again--I do NOT rely on the clinical literature alone. I base my view on years of talking with hundreds of people living with HIV. Many who ARE still alive today because combination therapy came along in time. >> snip,,, >> > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >can stop cell division. >What does that above quote mean to you? It means that AZT can damage mitochondrial DNA but doesn't cause very much damage to nuclear DNA. Most of that is repaired. snip >> >Maybe not if they believe the information your putting out here.... >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >lifestyle and Karposi Sarcoma/AIDS. He thought KS and AIDS might be >chemical in origin, based on the use of "poppers" . Again, a theory that was looked at and basically ditched over a DECADE ago. Partly because a lot of people with KS did not do poppers. >You don't hear of >K/S and AIDS cases in the U.S anymore, nor do you hear much about it in >Africa much., possibly because people don't use poppers any more? LOL...no, because poppers don't cause KS. HHV-8 does. KS has decreased in incidence largely due to ARV. KS still exists. >You >think thats true? It tends to give credibility that AIDS in the US was >more of a lifestyle disease. No, it doesn't. To the contrary. Poppers use persists in the US but overall prevalence of KS has declined. Br J Cancer. 2006 Apr 10;94(7):1000-6. Martinez V, Caumes E, Gambotti L, Ittah H, Morini JP, Deleuze J, Gorin I, Katlama C, Bricaire F, Dupin N. Remission from Kaposi's sarcoma on HAART is associated with suppression of HIV replication and is independent of protease inhibitor therapy. Service de Dermatologie, Hopital Tarnier-Cochin, AP-HP, UPRES 1833, Universite Paris V 89, rue d'Assas, Paris 75006, France. valerie.martinez@psl.ap-hop-paris.fr Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) reduces the incidence and improves the prognosis of Kaposi's sarcoma (KS). This study was designed to identify factors associated with KS clinical responses in HIV-infected patients during HAART. We reviewed the files of 138 HIV-1-infected patients with KS. Epidemiologic and HIV-related clinical and biological parameters were recorded at KS diagnosis (baseline) and every 6 months thereafter. In a subset of 73 antiretroviral-naive patients, we compared the clinical outcome of KS according to the use or nonuse of protease inhibitors (PI). After 6 months of follow-up, KS remission was more frequent in patients who were naive of HAART and who were at ACTG stage S0 at baseline (P = 0.03 and 0.02). Undetectable HIV viral load was strongly associated with KS remission (P< or = 0.004 at all time points), while CD4 cell count was not. Among the 73 antiretroviral-naive patients at baseline, and who were studied for 24 months, KS outcome did not differ between patients who were prescribed PI-containing and PI-sparing regimens. Intercurrent multicentric Castleman's disease was associated with poor outcome after 60 months of follow-up (P< or = 0.0001). Fourteen deaths occurred after a median follow-up of 37.5 months, eight of which were KS related. Suppression of HIV replication appears to be crucial to control KS. Non-PI-based regimens were equivalent to PI-based regimens as regards the clinical and virological outcome of antiretroviral-naive HIV-infected patients with KS. Mbulaiteye SM, Atkinson JO, Whitby D, Wohl DA, Gallant JE, Royal S, Goedert JJ, Rabkin CS. Risk factors for human herpesvirus 8 seropositivity in the AIDS Cancer Cohort Study. J Clin Virol. 2006 Apr;35(4):442-9. Epub 2006 Jan 18. Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH/DHHS, 6120 Executive Blvd, Executive Plaza South Rm. 8006, Mail Stop Center 7248, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. mbulaits@mail.nih.gov BACKGROUND: Cigarette smoking has been associated with a decreased risk for AIDS-related and classical KS, but whether it is associated with decreased risk of human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8) infection is unknown. STUDY DESIGN: We evaluated factors associated with HHV-8 seropositivity in 2795 participants (132 with KS) in the National Cancer Institute AIDS Cancer Cohort, including 1621 men who have sex with men (MSM), 660 heterosexual men and 514 women. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among non-KS subjects, HHV-8 seropositivity was 6%, 13% and 29% among women, heterosexual men and MSM, respectively. HHV-8 seropositivity was decreased in heavier (> or =1/2 pack/day) compared to lighter smokers among women (5% versus 8%; adjusted OR (aOR) 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8) and MSM (27% versus 32%; aOR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-1.0), but not among heterosexual men (12% versus 16%; aOR 0.7; 95% CI 0.4-1.2). HHV-8 seroprevalence was increased in heavier (> or =1 drink/day) compared to lighter consumers of alcohol among women (16% versus 4%; adjusted OR 5.2; 95% CI 2.3-12), but not among MSM (33% versus 28%; aOR 1.2; 95% CI 0.9-1.6) or heterosexual men (13% versus 13%; aOR 1.1; 95% CI 0.6-2.0). In analyses adjusted for smoking and drinking, HHV-8 seropositivity was positively associated with chlamydia infection (OR=4.3; 95% CI 1.2-13) and with marital status among women p(heterogeneity)=0.03, and with hepatitis (OR=1.6; 95% CI 1.2-2.1), gonorrhea (OR=1.5; 95% CI 1.1-1.9), genital warts (OR=1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.0) and nitrate inhalant use (OR=1.7; 95% CI 1.3-2.3) among MSM. CONCLUSIONS: Inverse association of HHV-8 seropositivity with cigarette smoking may indicate protective effect of tobacco smoke on HHV-8 infection, whereas positive associations with alcohol may reflect either behavioral factors or biological effects modulating susceptibility. Smoking and drinking may influence KS risk, at least in part, by altering the natural history of HHV-8 infection. You really ought to read the more recent literature instead of just being like a Duesberg puppet. You start to look and sound as stupid as Cheney's miserable little dork puppet, Dubya. George M. Carter > snip > >> But AZT does NOT mimic AIDS--just some of the symptoms. AZT does NOT > >> cause T cells to go away. That's the hallmark of HIV disease. Hallmark or not..."is there any proof of that ..Is there any proof or evidence that HIV causes CD4 cells to disappear? > >But using AZT in conjunction with HIV , in large doses has what > >happened in the early part of the AIDS epidemic in the U.S might have [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > wasting of AIDS and the somewhat less worse but still awful loss of > the a.s that AZT would cause, for example. Dumb question then , How is the muscle wasting in AIDS different than the "symptomatic Myopathy" about by AZT?...are you going to just say CD4 loss? Oh..you mention it later.. > They are similar--not the same. And MANY people developed wasting > without ever seeing a mg of AZT. Well then what did thay waste away from? > >I believe its also true that one of the reasons AZT was used to treat > >AIDS was because people using it got an intial rebound , in that it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Support these statements? With facts of any kind? Duesberg mentions this in his book and I read it again on a website that mentions that fact. > Sigh. You really have no clue what you're talking about. > > snip > >> Yep. And I stand by that. You have offered NOTHING to suggest that AZT > >> or any drug causes CD4 counts to drop to zero. (Hint: Cyclosporin is > >> NOT a wild party club drug.) That wasn't my key sugestion , I did suggest that prolonged use of AZT would be fatal, and you said you want to see the citations about that. . > >Well, perhaps its possible YOU dont know what is dropping CD4/DC8 > >counts to zero, perhaps its not HIV... If people like Duesberg and his [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > If |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message