posted on 03/19/2004 6:36:45 AM PST
If this weren't so sad it would be laughable.
posted on 03/19/2004 6:40:26 AM PST
("An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last"...)
posted on 03/19/2004 6:45:37 AM PST
by Rodney King
(No, we can't all just get along)
My very liberal SIL stated that the largest growing group of AIDS patients in the US is black women. Anybody have stats that I can slam her with???
posted on 03/19/2004 6:46:15 AM PST
(Jonathansmommie's daughter was born 3-11-04, both home today!)
"Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn't want the disease to be known as "the gay plague," and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution."
This is beyond sad. The truth seems as if it is an oddity anymore.
posted on 03/19/2004 6:56:31 AM PST
(The U.S. Constitution defines a Conservative)
The last paragraph seems unconnected to the rest of the article.
posted on 03/19/2004 7:02:42 AM PST
To: little jeremiah; Pikamax; scripter
posted on 03/19/2004 7:05:15 AM PST
(Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
"Farber exposed... conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution."
Conservatives simply want it acknowledged that AIDS is a primarily a behavioral disease, due to deviant behavior, and the vast majority of those who have contracted it did so knowing the risks.
Of course, the sad stories you read about are of innocent children who've acquired it from their drug-addicted mothers or from contaminated blood from irresponsible (or worse: malicious!) blood donors.
The AIDS "activists" you hear from know d@mn well the funding for AIDS research would have dried up overnight if the majority of people in this country realized that most of those with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome had "acquired" it by putting their d!cks where they don't belong.
posted on 03/19/2004 7:08:35 AM PST
Michael Fumento, who wrote the original 1990 book titled "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS," said, "I'm not waiting for an apology. It's not going to happen."
I read it back in 1990 and for the last 14 years have been recommending it to people who fell for the "everyone will get it" lie.
Next target --- Global Warming.
posted on 03/19/2004 7:10:53 AM PST
( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
Why are we sending ten billion to fight aids in Africa again?
"What do you call a man who got HIV from his girlfriend? . . . A liar."
posted on 03/19/2004 7:23:30 AM PST
(I really have no clue, I just like the sound of my typing.)
Yeah I remember those graphs back in the late 80s showing how we all were going to die from AIDS
Biggest scam job of the 20th century
Course the NYT will not have this on page 1 if any page
posted on 03/19/2004 7:26:44 AM PST
I attended a series of lectures on AIDS by the late Dr. Howard Temin, Nobel Laureate and essentially the first to describe the mechanism by which retroviruses of the HIV sort function. There was a discussion at that time of the breakdown of HIV+ persons - roughly 67% gay, 22% IV drug users, maybe 5% bisexual and a residual group of 6% unknown. These numbers were based on initial CDC survey data. Public health researchers were sent to re-interview those who fell into the "unknown" source category. After further investigation it was found that the unknowns broke down into the same proportions as the knowns (i.e. roughly 67% gay, 22% IV drug users, etc.) and that after several iterations of interviews - the completely unknowns resolved themselves down to a tiny fraction. To my knowledge the most significant change in the source of HIV was the decline in the number of hemophiliacs in the + population as they literally died off and as better blood and blood products screening were instituted. Other than that there seems to have been a remarkably steady sourcing for this deadly virus. Despite all the money wasted on PSA's which reach very low probability audiences.
posted on 03/19/2004 7:42:37 AM PST
(Seldom right, never in doubt!)
Michael Fumento, who wrote
I stopped right there.
posted on 03/19/2004 7:49:01 AM PST
(Terrorists are vulnerable to silver bullets....and any other bullets.)
Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn't want the disease to be known as "the gay plague," and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.
He got 2 out of 4 anyway.
Drug companies lose money on AIDS drugs becuase their forced to give away drugs to be good corporate citizens. Conservatives were just recognizing the truth of what was happening. AIDS is still predominantly a plague on homosexuals, especially the bug-chasers.
Duesberg lost his funding, his laboratory, and his students when he announced in 1987 that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. "He lost everything," said one insider. Duesberg switched to cancer research, and is now touted to win a Nobel Prize.
Of course, he was subsequently and overwhelmingly proved wrong about HIV not being the primary cause of AIDS. In this matter, he was on the phlogiston side of the debate.
posted on 03/19/2004 8:04:46 AM PST
and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.
IIRC, Fumento was defended by conservatives i.e. having his articles published in National Review. I think Rush supported him too.
posted on 03/19/2004 8:41:02 AM PST
(Vote Toomey April 27)
"Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn't want the disease to be known as "the gay plague," and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.
What isn't clear though, is whether straight, morally-correct men and women who DON'T screw around on their spouses (or dates) are at risk from AIDS or not.
Hint: Now that blood supplies are tested, those who follow the Law are not at risk from any VD. Now, are the millions of AIDS cases in Africa actually being spread by mosquitoes and biting flies - like dozens of other blood-transmitted diseases are?
posted on 03/19/2004 9:24:20 AM PST
by Robert A Cook PE
(I can only support FR by donating monthly, but ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
I find this entire discussion absolute lunacy. "Studies" that imply
low or no corelation between heterosexual sex and HIV transmission are highly suspect given the vast amounts of research that indicates the contrary. The information in the article is in no way definitive and absolute. For some reason there seems to be more a desire to vindicate the conservative ideological view of HIV as a behavioral disease by now declaring invalid tons more research that contradicts this viewpoint.
We know that if you put a bullet into the chamber of a 6 shooter revolver, spin it then point it at your head and pull the trigger, there is a 1 in 6 chance you will blow your brains out. If you put 2 bullets in, the chances become 1 in 3, 3 bullets is 1 in 2, etc. Similarly, if you or a clean male or female and have sex with someone that has HIV, there is some chance you will become infected with HIV. The only difference is whereas we know how many bullets the revolver holds and how many bullets are in the gun, but we aren't certain how many times one can have sex with an infected person before he/she contrats HIV. One thing is certain though, the more times you do it, the greater the chances you WILL contract HIV.
Sorry if this post offends but it scares the hell out of me that someone will read this then think, "Ah ha! I knew it!" then go out and have unprotected sex with someone they don't know.
Sorry, no one has been vindicated by this. Nothing has been proven that contradicts the vast bulk of HIV research. And, the Great Flood of Noah didn't create the Grand Canyon.
posted on 03/19/2004 10:11:20 AM PST
I knew this back in the mid-80s, as did anyone savvy enough to see right through the various lobbies and their spin/lies/propoganda. That's all it was.
Thanks for posting!
posted on 03/19/2004 12:47:19 PM PST
by NYC Republican
(The GOP is Finally Engaging the Liars! Yes!!! Let the Battle Begin...)
CAUCASIAN TEEN 'AIDS' CASES (entire USA) BETWEEN July 1983 and December 2001 = 1211 (male and female).
Source: - CDC
TWELVE HUNDRED AND ELEVEN in nearly 18 years or a mere 67 cases a year.
JUST OVER ONE CAUCASIAN TEEN 'AIDS' CASE PER U.S. STATE A YEAR.
HARDLY AN 'EPIDEMIC!
That figure of 1.28 cases per State is lower than gun shotdeaths in the Mac Arthur Park area of Los Angeles in a single month.
Check for yourself (don't take our word for it) at: - http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hasr1302/table7.htm
In the same period people over 60 (caucasian) had 9,338 cases.
Those old folks must be sex mad - Nine times MORE sex than teenagers.
....or could it just be that 'AIDS' is not an std? Surely not? God forbid! Perish the thought!
AND IN CANADA JUST 87 TOTAL CASES IN 18 YEARS
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson