 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / April 2007Definition of AIDS
"HIV Positive" claims that he does not have AIDS because of where he lives. I can find no evidence to support this contention that the UK (?) does not use the CDC/WHO definition of AIDS. Is there any such evidence? Good article here. http://www.link.med.ed.ac.uk/RIDU/Hxaids.htm George M. Carter >"HIV Positive" claims that he does not have AIDS because of where he >lives. I can find no evidence to support this contention that the UK >(?) does not use the CDC/WHO definition of AIDS. > >Is there any such evidence? Found it: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/322/7296/1226.pdf "In 1993 the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the USA extended the definition of AIDS to include all persons who are severely immunosuppressed (a CD4 count < 200 ´ 106 cells/l) irrespective of the presence or absence of an indicator disease. For surveillance purposes this definition has not been accepted within the UK and Europe. In these countries AIDS continues to be a clinical diagnosis defined by one or more of the indicator diseases mentioned. The World Health Organization (WHO) also uses this clinically based definition for surveillance within developed countries. WHO, however, has developed an alternative case definition for use in subSaharan Africa. This is based on clinical signs and does not require laboratory confirmation of infection. Subsequently this definition has been modified to include a positive test for HIV antibody. These case definitions are complex and any clinician who is unfamiliar with diagnosing AIDS should study the documents describing them in detail." George M. Carter George, As I am sure you know, the situation used to be that those with counts below 200 commonly developed AIDS-defining illnesses, so a CD4 below 200 used to correlate fairly well with advanced disease. However with the widespread use of opportunistic infection prophylaxis vs PCP, toxo, MAI etc from the late 1980s, quite a large number of individuals found that they had dropped their counts quite low, but despite having quite a few health problems, none of these were actually AIDS-defining. (eg you could have a count of 50 but because you never experienced PCP/toxo because you were on effective prophylaxis, you did not have defined "AIDS". In the US the CDC case definition was changed to account for this anomaly, but this was partly politically driven (so I understand) asince at that time someone was only eligible for health care free of charge if they had full blown "AIDS". This meant there were large numbers of individuals who did not recieve these benefits because although their counts were low and they may have been quite ill, they did not yet have CDC-defined "AIDS". The UK and Europe decided to persevere with the clinical definition, because in Europe there was no need to change, and health care is free for everyone irrespective of whether they had "AIDS" or just were HIV positive. "HIV positive" may comfort himself in the fact that as yet he has not developed an AIDS defining illness so does not have AIDS, but he is being extremely irresponsible in not seeking appropriate therapy considering he has a CD4 count of below 100 (or at least that's what he claims) snip >The UK and Europe decided to persevere with the clinical definition, >because in Europe there was no need to change, and health care is free [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >considering he has a CD4 count of below 100 (or at least that's what >he claims) Thanks David--I agree with all you say. It's a pity we do not have a single payer healthcare system in the United States--it would save lives and money. But the United States is nothing but a corporate feudalism run currently by thieves, liars and murderers. George M. Carter > snip > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Thanks David--I agree with all you say. Of course you agree with David, he is your boss, and you are both paid shills for the drug industry peddling toxic anti-HIV drugs. > It's a pity we do not have a > single payer healthcare system in the United States--it would save > lives and money. > > But the United States is nothing but a corporate feudalism run > currently by thieves, liars and murderers. Ha! This is a typical deflection ploy to avoid appearing as the paid shill you really are. How much did the drug industry pay you, Carter? Dont deny it. see this video: http://www.hiv-aids-factorfraud.com/ http://aidsmyth.addr.com/enteraidsmyth.htm We are a global-reach voluntary group. Our goal is ensuring the interests of AIDS-diagnosed people are no longer secondary to the interests of drug suppliers, service providers and the AIDS research industry. Did You Know that many experts now contend AIDS is not a fatal, incurable condition caused by HIV? We bring you the voices of alternative scientists and reforming campaigners worldwide. We are independent of vested pharmaceutical and medical interests -offering readers and forum members, global news and leading edge views on diagnosis and treatment. Most of the information you receive is commercially driven and based on misleading assumptions or unfounded estimates and predictions. The symptoms associated with AIDS are treatable using non-toxic, immune enhancing therapies that have restored health and have enabled those truly at risk to remain well. rocketscience snip >Of course you agree with David, he is your boss, and you are both paid >shills for the drug industry peddling toxic anti-HIV drugs. Nope. He's not my boss. I do not make money from pharma. To the utter contrary. You're lying again--but then that's what I expect from cowards like you. > snip >>Of course you agree with David, he is your boss, and you are both paid [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You're lying again--but then that's what I expect from cowards like > you. I think you're right; this one is Fred. B/ > On 12 Apr 2007 06:52:08 -0700, "rocketscience" > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > You're lying again--but then that's what I expect from cowards like > you. You are the liar Carter. Why dont you admit your IV drug use? >> On 12 Apr 2007 06:52:08 -0700, "rocketscience" >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >You are the liar Carter. Why dont you admit your IV drug use? LOL...I have never denied that I was an IV drug user! Or that I'm queer. You on the other hand are a chicken sh.t coward who can't even sign his own name any more. Pathetic little troll. > George, > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > charge if they had full blown "AIDS". This meant there were large > numbers of individuals who did not recieve these benefits Incorrect. There is no benefit from HIV drugs which are poisons and cause severe side effects. >because > although their counts were low and they may have been quite ill, they [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > considering he has a CD4 count of below 100 (or at least that's what > he claims) Both Carter and DT are paid shills for the drug industry. The HIV posiitve may comfort himself in the fact that by avoiding conventional medical therapy with poisonous, toxic anti-HIV drugs, he or she has the best chance to remain healthy. Alternative thereapies make more sense. The HIV drugs are poisons and cause a list of adverse side effects leading to liver failure. HIV drugs are a form of iatrogenic genocide. The HIV drugs (intentionally or not) such as AZT eliminated a segment of the population considered as "undesirebale", namely IV drug addicts, minority groups and homosexuals like your partner, Carter. see this video: http://www.hiv-aids-factorfraud.com/ http://aidsmyth.addr.com/enteraidsmyth.htm We are a global-reach voluntary group. Our goal is ensuring the interests of AIDS-diagnosed people are no longer secondary to the interests of drug suppliers, service providers and the AIDS research industry. Did You Know that many experts now contend AIDS is not a fatal, incurable condition caused by HIV? We bring you the voices of alternative scientists and reforming campaigners worldwide. We are independent of vested pharmaceutical and medical interests -offering readers and forum members, global news and leading edge views on diagnosis and treatment. Most of the information you receive is commercially driven and based on misleading assumptions or unfounded estimates and predictions. The symptoms associated with AIDS are treatable using non-toxic, immune enhancing therapies that have restored health and have enabled those truly at risk to remain well. rocketscience |
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.