Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

AIDS Patients Face Downside of Living Longer (effects of AIDS drugs "worse than having AIDS")
New York Times ^ | January 6, 2008 | JANE GROSS

Posted on 01/15/2008 6:18:55 AM PST by GodGunsGuts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-281 next last
To: Paleo Conservative
It's like cancer, if the disease doesn't kill, the medicines taken to fight it will."

No truer words spoken

My family has discovered that if the doctors hasn't cured you in 90 days of what ever ails you then you will suffer with it unto the day you die, either from the disease or the medical care

We have learned the the hard way, believe me,
101 posted on 01/15/2008 12:25:51 PM PST by RedMonqey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rusty millet
Hi Rusty:

Sorry - the issues I raised are not in there. I am responding to the gentleman in the original article who has a medical condition and is complaining that his 73 year old self is not reacting well to medication. Not really sure what you are attempting to say through all this discussion. Have a blessed day!

I can tell you exactly what GodsGunsGuts is trying to say. He repeatedly posts on FreeRepublic any article on HIV/AIDS so he can promote his pet theory that HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

He pretends that there is some conspiracy and that it is a conservatives versus liberals issue, which is ironic, since it is mostly the crystal wearing, commune living, Berkenstock wearing Lefties who started this whole conspiracy theory.

So he's saying that HIV is harmless; AIDS is something only gay people get; and if you disagree with him, all you have to do is read his 15 year old article which proves he's right.

And the rest of the global medical research community? They are all in on the conspiracy too.

jas3
102 posted on 01/15/2008 12:31:48 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
As regards to the gentleman who has made it to 73 years of age, I suspect that he either tolerates chemotherapy EXTREMELY well, or he stayed off the same.

More medical analysis of people you've never met, GodsGunsGuts?

The alternative and simpler theory is that ARVs work, albeit with serious side-effects.

jas3
103 posted on 01/15/2008 12:33:51 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
Science has never figured out how to stop a Virus.

Geez, and I just got a Yellow Fever vaccine a few days ago.

Is your theory that Yellow Fever is not really caused by a virus or that the vaccine that scientists figured out doesn't work?

I would be interested in your theories on Smallpox too.

Since Smallpox has been eradicated from the planet, I'm curious how that was not stopped, by your definition.

jas3
104 posted on 01/15/2008 12:38:29 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: jas3

==More medical analysis of people you’ve never met

What do you think you have been doing on behalf of the AIDS establishment? And yet, when you are asked to debate Duesberg, or any number of hundreds of other MDs and scientists who share his point of view, you put your tail between your legs and scamper away into the shadows. When you finally agree to debate Duesberg et al, I’ll finally have a reason to take you seriously. Until then, you’re just an ankle-biting chihuahua.


105 posted on 01/15/2008 1:41:33 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I remember hearing stories about them. How are you connecting it to this story?

Bug chasers were of the opinion that AIDS could be managed in the same way that diabetes can be managed, so they went out and got infected on purpose. 20 years ago the AIDS cocktail cost $10,000/month and now it's $100 or so. So it seems a little less horrible that gays are getting infected while expecting their insurance group to cover their costs. Now we hear that those bug chasers are going to cost how much money to all of our insurance groups as they get every desease in the book?

106 posted on 01/15/2008 2:16:21 PM PST by DungeonMaster (WELL I SPEAK LOUD, AND I CARRY A BIGGER STICK, AND I USE IT TOO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
What do think is the best evidence that failure to use ARVs is fatal for those who are HIV positive.?

Clinical evidence. HIV+ people who don't take ARVs

Consider the late editor of Continuum magazine who published Duesberg's works. He's dead today because he refused to take ARVs. Talk to physicians who treat the HIV+, including those who are FREEPERS and post on this board. They report that HAART therapies are extremely effective at keeping their patients alive and that those who don't take ARZs die.

Here's a representative sample of people who believed that tripe that GodsGunsGuts passes off as truth:

Ken Anderlini

Ken Anderlini was a co-moderator of the “AIDS Myth Exposed” message board on MSN. Anderlini died in April of 2007. Denialist David Crowe from the “Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society” wrote an announcement of his death, saying: “Over the past couple of years his health had declined rapidly with a strange neurological disease for which nobody could pinpoint the cause (except doctors who claimed it was HIV related, of course).”

http://groups.msn.com/aidsmythexposed/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=28789&LastModified=4675620632766605055

Fela Anikulapo-Kuti

Fela Anikulapo-Kuti, the great Nigerian music star, “died in 1997 of a disease he claimed didn’t exist, and certainly not in Africa: AIDS. No matter that Fela’s older brother, Professor Olikoye Ransome-Kuti, had served as the country’s health minister and launched Nigeria’s much-lauded early AIDS program. . . . There was hardly an illness African herbs couldn’t cure, Fela maintained, and he dismissed condoms as unnatural, unpleasurable, and a white plot to reduce the black birthrate. He believed, says Olikoye, that “all doctors were fabricating AIDS, including myself.” Fela was 58.

(Mark Schoofs, “A Tale of Two Brothers Part 2: Fela Didn’t Believe AIDS Existed. But then he died of the disease. His brother is still trying to convince Fela’s fans that HIV is real.” Village Voice, November 10 - 16, 1999.)

Michael Bellefountaine

A member of the denialist ACT UP/San Francisco, Michael Bellafontaine died on May 10, 2007. He was 41. His Bay Area Reporter obituary said that “According to Andrea Lindsay, a friend and fellow activist, Mr. Bellefountaine died of a sudden systemic infection, though the exact cause has not been determined.” http://ebar.com/obituaries/index.php?sec=ob&article=252

Sophie Brassard

Sophie Brassard, a Canadian, was the HIV-positive mother of two HIV-positive, perinatally-infected sons. Citing the influence of HEAL, Alive and Well, Duesberg and Mullis, she refused to allow her children access to medical care when the became ill and fled the country with them. She consequently lost custody and parental rights. She died of AIDS on September 16, 2002, at age 37. http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000186.html

Ronnie Burk

Ronnie Burke was a member of the dissident group ACT UP/San Francisco (which has been denounced by other legitimate ACT UP groups). He died from AIDS in March of 2003 at the age of 47.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/09/DDGEAJ9IH61.DTL

Sylvie Cousseau

Sylvie Cousseau contributed to a list of testimonials from people who tested HIV positive but embraced AIDS denial and rejected HIV treatment. This list of testimonials features on several different websites, including HEAL Toronto and the personal web pages of Rudolf Werner, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the University of Miami.

http://molbio.med.miami.edu/HIV-Aids/stories.htm
http://healtoronto.com/testimonials.html
http://www.garynull.com/documents/Continuum/LustForLifeLeapOfFaith.htm

Sylvie Cousseau was the partner of Mark Griffiths. Sylvie died in 2001 at age 41. Cousseau’s death was reported in postings to AIDS denial message boards in France.

http://www.onnouscachetout.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=6706

Mark Griffiths

Mark Griffiths ran a denialist website called Altheal (along with a French version, Sidasante), until he died in October 2004. In the article linked below, the AIDS denialist Liam Scheff ponders the cause of his death, suggesting Griffiths may still have been using heroin (because he seemed a “bit groggy” sometimes); this is despite the fact that Griffiths had undergone successful recovery in the late 1980s. Scheff ultimately concluded that Griffiths died because he was abusing alcohol. http://www.altheal.org/altheal/markmemorial.htm

Another associate, Emma Hollister, suggests Griffiths death was related to a course of antibiotics taken several months before for dental work: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/emma_holister/2005/01/07/aids_dissidence_movement_loses_a.htm

Robert Johnston

Robert Johnston was a co-founder of HEAL Toronto and a co-author of the self-described “rebuttal” of the Durban Declaration that was posted to HEAL Toronto’s website in 2000. At the time, he wrote: “Robert Johnston is a co-founder of HEAL Toronto, and has been HIV-positive since 1985 yet has suffered no unusual illness since that time. He attributes his good health to not taking any anti-HIV medications and to not believing that his positive antibody test has much significance.”

Johnston died three years later on April 3, 2003. As with all other similar cases, Johnston’s colleagues claim his death was not caused by HIV infection. David Crowe wrote that he died of “liver failure completely unrelated to AIDS.”

Kelly Jon Landis

We regret to report that Kelly Jon Landis died December 3, 2007 in Santa Monica, CA, at age 39 after suffering for several months with lymphoma and other AIDS symptoms. Self-described as the “dissident saint,” he was a health food fanatic and avid bicycle rider who avoided standard medical care and sought alternative therapies. He felt that simply leading a drug-free healthy lifestyle would protect him from disease.

Although a “dissident” himself, Kelly Jon Landis vocally opposed the homophobia rampant among HIV/AIDS denialists.

http://people.tribe.net/aca8f528-05d6-44fc-898e-1e64320fd60a
http://www.ldsfiles.com/link/?1030952187 http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?msg=139.1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-saltlakecity


Jack Levine

Jack Levine was a regular poster to the “Virusmyth” message board. When he became sick and began to question denialism, the other board members turned on him, which eventually led to the Virusmyth message board being taken permanently offline in order to hide the appalling record of what happened. Levine died from AIDS in March of 2002 at the age of 47. http://www.thebody.com/cgi-bin/bbs/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=living&Number=41833&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=9&o=&vc=1

Raphael Lombardo

Raphael Lombardo was a gay man who believed Peter Duesberg’s claims that HIV was harmless. Lombardo wrote to Duesberg on May 30, 1995, noting that he had never used any recreational drugs or pharmaceuticals and was not sick, despite testing HIV positive (the letter was titled “Life without AZT !”). Duesberg published the entire letter in his book “Inventing the AIDS Virus” and wrote of Lombardo: “His letter proves that true science does not depend on institutional authority.” (The letter is posted at: http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/pdazt.htm.

Raphael Lombardo died of AIDS a little over a year later, on June 11, 1996. When asked about Lombardo’s death, Duesberg wrote: “In hindsight, I think his letter was almost too good to be true. I am afraid now, he described the man he wanted to be [e.g. that he did not use recreational drugs] and his Italian family expected him to be, but not the one he really was. I think he died from Kaposi’s.” (Source: Email to Richard Jefferys from Peter Duesberg, Wednesday, April 05, 2006)

When this correspondence was published on the internet, Duesberg was contacted by Raphael Lombardo’s sister, Regina, who was incensed by Duesberg’s claim that her brother had covertly used poppers or other recreational drugs (as Duesberg was implying). Duesberg wrote back to her and told her that she was wrong, too.

Peter Mokaba

Peter Makoba, a senior politician in South Africa’s African Nationalist Congress Party and a prominent denialist, died in 2002 at the age of 43 from AIDS-related pneumonia after a “long illness.” He denied that he had AIDS and rejected antiviral drugs as poison. http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,7369,753812,00.html

Marietta Ndziba

Marietta Ndziba was used by the vitamin salesman Matthias Rath to market multivitamins as an alternative to antiretroviral treatment. In a pamphlet distributed by Rath and his agents in Cape Town, South Africa in September 2005, she was quoted as saying that her CD4 count rose from 365 to 841 due to Rath’s vitamins. She implied that these vitamins treated boils on her arm, her grey skin, diarrhoea and vomiting. She said “I just thank God that he brings vitamins here to South Africa to help our lives.” As far as the South African AIDS activist organisation Treatment Action Campaign could ascertain Ndziba never took antiretrovirals. She died in about October 2005. One family member reportedly claimed that she died of a stress headache. Rath’s vitamins clearly did not help Ndziba. She should have been treated by qualified doctors in the public health system, not Rath or his agents.

Astoundingly, a video recording of Ndziba claiming the benefits of Rath’s vitamins continued to be available on the front page of Rath’s South African website until January 2006. (Source: TAC)

David Pasquarelli

David Pasquarelli, a leader of the denialist group “ACT UP San Francisco” developed PCP, anemia, thrush, meningitis, mycobacterium and disseminated CMV before he died in March of 2004. He was 37. http://www.davidpasquarelli.com/

Casper G. Schmidt

Casper G. Schmidt was a psychiatrist who published “The Group-Fantasy Origins of AIDS” in the Journal of Psychohistory in 1984. The article, which claimed that AIDS was not a real disease but a product of “epidemic hysteria,” is still regularly cited by AIDS denialists. Schmidt died from AIDS in 1994.

Tony Tompsett

Tony Tompsett wrote for the denialist newsletter Continuum from 1993 until just before his death in 1998 at age 39 from Kaposi’s sarcoma, toxoplasmosis and possible pneumonia. http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com/cgi-bin/res.pl?keyword=Tony+Tompsett&offset=0

Huw Christie Williams

Huw Christie (Huw Christie Harry Williams) was an editor of Continuum, a long-running AIDS denialist newsletter from the UK that folded when all the editors died. Huw Christie developed Kaposi’s sarcoma and died in August of 2001. He was 41. http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/mbobituaryhc.htm

In an email, Peter Duesberg described Christie’s death as follows: “Did you know Hugh* Christie? Also a gay friend of mine from London, filmmaker and editor of the very popular British gay-interested journal, Continuum. Christie campaigned actively against the health and AIDS hazards of poppers in Continuum. Like me, he was invited by Mbeki, to discuss the causes of AIDS in Africa in 2000. And a year or two later he passed away with Kaposi’s, from long-term over- use/addiction to poppers!”* (Source: Email to Richard Jeffreys from Peter Duesberg, Wednesday, April 05, 2006. *Name misspelled and exclamation point in the original.)

Jody Wells

Jody Wells was the founder of the U.K. denialist newsletter Continuum. He had multiple bouts of PCP before he died in August of 1995. http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/continuum/obituary.htm

Scott Zanetti

Scott Zanetti, Morristown NJ, died October 6, 2002 at age 52. Scott Zanetti is another contributor to the list of testimonials mentioned in the entry on Sylvie Cousseau, above. Zanetti also wrote to POZ magazine about being inspired by the writings of Celia Farber, and contributed to the “personal stories” on the HEAL San Diego website.



There are hundreds more dead Americans who contracted HIV from a variety of sources who are dead because they believed the nonsense that GodsGunsGuts posts here on FreeRepublic.

Most of the "HIV is Harmless" sites are no longer updated, in large part because the founders/owners of those sites were HIV+ and decided to refuse HAART. They are by and large now dead.

jas3
107 posted on 01/15/2008 2:16:37 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Be prepared to go on forever with jas3. He claims to be a scientist, and yet I kicked his you know what in a 500+ reply debate re: AIDS. Unfortunately, the thread was pulled. But be prepared for jas3 to go on forever using a scattershot approach designed to keep you chasing your tail. If you are going to engage him, my suggestion is to ignore his scattershots and focus on one thing at a time, and don’t leave the point until you have thoroughly proved him wrong. Just a little advice from your friendly, neighborhood GGG.

Translation from GodsGunsGuts fantasy language into English:

* I, GodsGunsGuts, repeatedly posted the same long disproven conspiracy theory in another thread that was pulled by JimRob and/or the Moderators, and for which I was personally warned by not to post on HIV/AIDS conspiracies again.

* I, GodsGunsGuts, less than 24 hours later am ignoring that warning, and am in great jeopardy of being banned in reposting the same tired conspiracy theories.

* I, GodsGunsGuts, think that posting Conspiracy Theories to the premier conservative website is a way to advance scientific knowledge, even though nobody in the scientific community or medical community(save about 3 people) agree with those theories.

* My last post promoting this topic was by a Loch Ness Monster promoter who is a retired professor.

* The only Freeper who treats HIV/AIDS patients in a clinical practice wrote the below in the last thread.




Just in case anyone's mind is still open on this question: I saw my first AIDS patient in 1982. In 26 years, I've treated over a thousand.

Between 1985 and 1995, I had between 40 and 80 deaths a year in my practice. These included some of the best, and some of the worst, human beings on earth, and everything in between.

I started using three-drug combinations in October 1995.

The last death in my practice from AIDS or its complications was two days before Christmas 1995.

That was twelve years ago.

If it's the drugs that cause the disease, how is that possible?

As you might imagine, I've had ample opportunity to discuss the ideas on this thread in other venues, and I don't wish to post replies on this thread.

The content of this post, then, is just FYI. Make of it what you will.


* I, GodGutsGuns, have no experience as a clinician or scientist and do not even read HIV/AIDS articles. In fact I am completely unqualified to post or comment on HIV/AIDS. However I will ignore the findings of fellow Freeper Jim Noble, since they disprove my theories, and insist that you believe my conspiracy theories instead of reviewing clinical evidence.

jas3
108 posted on 01/15/2008 2:30:38 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup

couldn’t find a better choice of words huh?


109 posted on 01/15/2008 2:32:02 PM PST by Rightly Biased (Courage is not the lack of fear it is acting in spite of it<><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts; Lead Moderator
Sorry about that. I didn’t know the NYT had to be excerpted. I excerpted it to draw attention to Larry Kramer. Won’t happen again.

I'm somewhat skeptical when you type that it won't happen again.

You were warned not to post on this topic less than 24 hours ago, were you not?

And yet you dug up a NINE day old NYT article to post in News/Current Events so you could push your conspiracy theories all over again.

jas3
110 posted on 01/15/2008 2:34:54 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
For instance, if you look at his “AIDS denialist” diatribe in poste #76, you will notice that he is still posting a link to “Does drug use cause AIDS?.” I showed how Duesberg et al not only thoroughly destroyed the Ascher paper, but demonstrated that it is actually powerful evidence in favor of the drug-AIDS hypothesis. And yet, jas3 continues to post it.

Unfortunately you don't get to grade yourself in what you "showed".

Out here in the real world where people actually read NIAID and other scientific studies, there is no evidence that drug use is the cause of AIDS, despite your extensive scientific expertise as an former intern for a now retired Congressman.

jas3
111 posted on 01/15/2008 2:38:53 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: jas3

I was never warned against posting threads about AIDS. Jim told JS1138 and myself that he was tired of us pinging him to settle our dispute. He settled our dispute by telling us not to ping him any more. That was the long and short of it.


112 posted on 01/15/2008 2:47:30 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Duesberg and other scientists have been submitting papers to the journals, but they have not only banned him and others from publishing, but they have banned him from replying even when it is the AIDS establishment is writing about him. Thus, it is necessary for this controversy to leave the hallowed halls of science and be taken directly to the public. This is happened many times before, and it will happen again, just as it is happening now.

There are dozens of open access journals where Duesberg can publish at no cost. In the physics community, for example, there has been excellent work published in the New Journal of Physics. PLoS Biology has many important articles in the biologic sciences. Why has Duesberg not published his so-called banned work there?

He has a website. Why doesn't he self-publish his work?

Unfortunately, for you and for Duesberg, the problem with Duesberg's work is like the problem with Hillary. It is not access to people or media, it is that the more you learn about it/her the more crazy you realize it/she is.

Nearly everybody was familiar with Duesberg's work 10 years ago, and he convinced next to nobody that he was right then. As time has passed and further evidence has accumulated against Duesberg, he's left pushing his theory to former Congressional interns, who are the only people left he can convince.

jas3
113 posted on 01/15/2008 2:49:44 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: jas3

I was never told not to publish about this topic again. Where are you getting your info? Jim kindly told JS1138 and myself to quit pinging him to settle our disputes. I can’t speak for JS1138, but the point has been taken to heart by me.


114 posted on 01/15/2008 2:49:59 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
What do you think you have been doing on behalf of the AIDS establishment? And yet, when you are asked to debate Duesberg, or any number of hundreds of other MDs and scientists who share his point of view, you put your tail between your legs and scamper away into the shadows. When you finally agree to debate Duesberg et al, I’ll finally have a reason to take you seriously. Until then, you’re just an ankle-biting chihuahua.

I post "on behalf" of myself.

There are not "hudrends" of scientists who believe Duesberg's theories. The sites you posted in the last thread completely misprepresent the views of many if not most of the people they quote. I gave you SPECIFIC examples in the last thread, which you ignored.

Why do you continue to refer to HUNDREDS of scientists, when the actual number who believe that HIV doesn't cause AIDS is less than 100 worldwide? If you disagree, the onus is on you to PROVE that there are more than 100 scientists who believe that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. And neither the Albertan site nor the Rethinking site are current nor reflect the views of the people they quote. You'll actually have to get current quotes that answer the specific question of whether HIV causes AIDS.

Regarding the "ankle-biting chihuahua" comment, I'm not surprised you jumped right into the ad-hominem attacks. Whenever your CONSPIRACY THEORIES are challenged on this or any other of your conspiracy theory threads, the first thing you do is resort to personal attacks.

jas3
115 posted on 01/15/2008 2:57:03 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
"...we have good reason again to be really scared.”

Should have thought about that before you 'pulled' down your fellow man's pants.

116 posted on 01/15/2008 2:59:38 PM PST by Mr Apple ( "VIDEO CHINAGATE" http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2970981220206109356)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jas3
Sorry jas3, I will not be responding to you anymore other than to point out that you refuse to debate Duesberg. You are free to post whatever you like, but I will not be responding to it. I find you dishonest, and I can’t stand people who go running to the moderators every time they encounter someone they disagree with. Goodbye, and good riddens.
117 posted on 01/15/2008 3:02:10 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I was never told not to publish about this topic again. Where are you getting your info? Jim kindly told JS1138 and myself to quit pinging him to settle our disputes. I can’t speak for JS1138, but the point has been taken to heart by me.

A long time ago I stood on the sidelines and watched someone who thought he was doing the right thing tell somebody else that her condition was really harmless and that she shouldn't believe the doctors and scientists who told her he was actually sick.

Not my business, I told myself. Free country. People make bad decisions all the time.

The short version is that she suffered the rather severe medical consequences, and recognize now that I was morally obligated to have said something at the expense of a lost friendship, which is inconsequential in comparison to a human life lost.

I made a promise to myself that I would not let people who do not know what they are talking about to convince others to make bad decisions that cost them their lives.

I'm the kind of person who is always the designated driver and who ends up driving home people who've had too much to drink and are a danger to themselves.

In this case, and in the case of the last thread, GodsGunsGuts, you are the danger. You are dangerous to people who read this thread.

There are assuredly people who read this thread who have relatives or children or are themselves on HAART therapy which is quite literally saving their lives.

Every drug has side effects, and the HAART drugs have very nasty side effects indeed. However if you convince people to withhold medication from their children or themselves, you are actively contributing to their early and needless death.

I know you THINK you are doing the right thing, but you are not. You really need to get out in the clinic and see with your own eyes the benefits of HAART therapies on HIV+ people who have developed AIDS. The benefits are extrordinary.

I know you won't take my word for it. Nor will you consider the evidence presented by Jim Noble, a practicing MD and FREEPER who specializes in infectious diseases such as AIDS and who has treated hundreds of AIDS and HIV+ patients over decades.

So get off your couch and go look at the evidence yourself. You are in California. Go to the Glaser Pediatric AIDS foundation.

Besides yourself, you owe it to the people whom you are trying to convince that you know what you are talking about. Because if you are wrong, and in this case you are DEAD WRONG, then if you convince anybody else they will be both wrong and DEAD.

jas3
118 posted on 01/15/2008 3:14:39 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Sorry jas3, I will not be responding to you anymore other than to point out that you refuse to debate Duesberg. You are free to post whatever you like, but I will not be responding to it. I find you dishonest, and I can’t stand people who go running to the moderators every time they encounter someone they disagree with. Goodbye, and good riddens.

Yes, I refuse to give any credibility to Duesberg or any other Conspiracy Theorists in a formal debate. That goes for you too. You'll not find any scientists who are willing to debate Duesberg for the same reason no Republicans will debate David Duke.

However I will absolutely continue to counter each and every falsehood that you post on Free Republic with the actual truth. For example every time you claim that HIV isn't infectious, I will counter that falsehood. Every time you claim that AZT is a DNA end chain terminator, I will point out to you that it is actually a reverse-transcriptase inhibitor.

In the last thread I posted 61 different instances of your dishonesty, none of which you challenged. Your response was that you wouldn't read it.

You also confessed that you have no qualifications or relevant training to make any judgement on the science HIV/AIDS, except that you were once an intern for a Congressman.

You also confessed that you don't read scientific journals and were unfamiliar with any recent work on HIV/AIDS. You said that you don't read Science, or Nature, or have a subscription to PubMed.

You don't read JAMA or NEJAMA nor do you have any information whatsoever on the efficacy of HAART treatments.

Lastly the phrase you wanted was "good riddance" not "good riddens" which has no meaning (but is highly indicative of the level of your written language skills).

jas3
119 posted on 01/15/2008 3:31:10 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: jas3

If nothing else, he is at least posessed of immaculate chronometry.


120 posted on 01/15/2008 4:13:31 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: jas3; GodGunsGuts

GGG’s agenda was apparent, but his thought process was murky and not open to debate using reason. He was not willing to give any credence to other’s experiences. It was not worth my time to continue the discussion. Ping to GGG for courtesy.


121 posted on 01/15/2008 4:50:49 PM PST by rusty millet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: jas3

jas3, please do no send messages to me anymore, and please do not follow me around from thread to thread. Thanks you—GGG


122 posted on 01/15/2008 4:51:04 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

Comment #123 Removed by Moderator

Comment #124 Removed by Moderator

To: rusty millet

My mind is open to anything you are willing to discuss. I believe Duesberg to be correct because I believe he has discovered a profound scientific truth with respect to AIDS. If you are an honest person, then I welcome any questions/challenges you might have. And whatever you might think, one way or the other, this is most definately a conservative issue.

POLICY REVIEW (Hoover Inst.):

http://www.duesberg.com/about/pdpolicy.html

NATIONAL REVIEW:

http://www.duesberg.com/articles/tbcure.html

AMERICAN SPECTATOR

http://search.opinionarchives.com/Summary/AmericanSpectator/V25I5P18-1.htm

REASON MAGAZINE:

http://www.duesberg.com/articles/kmreason.html

REGNERY PUBLISHING (Largest conservative publisher in the USA)

http://books.google.com/books?id=pRWVZJKO0NsC&dq=regnery+duesberg+inventing+the+aids+virus&pg=PP1&ots=0mkvQbR7FV&sig=PWeCq416dis6Oo-05B1emK3gTr8&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=regnery+duesberg+inventing+the+aids+virus&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPP1,M1


125 posted on 01/15/2008 5:06:24 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

Comment #126 Removed by Moderator

To: jas3

Please stop following me from thread to thread, and please stop posting to me, jas3. Thank you.


127 posted on 01/15/2008 5:16:50 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: jas3; GodGunsGuts

It’s a curious philosophy that wants science “left to the free market” and then wants to be protected from the comptition.


128 posted on 01/15/2008 5:31:57 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

Comment #129 Removed by Moderator

Comment #130 Removed by Moderator

To: jas3

Don’t do that again! By the time I got back from being this other person my dog had bitten me.


131 posted on 01/15/2008 6:23:04 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

I am perfectly willing to discus this issue with anyone who has honest doubts or questions. This is a conservative issue. I will grant that it has not yet broken through to mainstream conservatives, but in order for it to do that it first has to have a chance to have it’s day in the sun. As I pointed out above, Duesberg’s challenge to the failed HIV-AIDS hypothesis has been published in National Review, Policy Review, American Spectator, Reason Magazine, World Magazine, and his book was published by Regnery, the largest conservative book publisher in the country. Surely that qualifies this issue to be discussed on FR????


132 posted on 01/15/2008 6:26:06 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Rightly Biased

couldn’t find a better choice of words huh?

Totally unconscious, but let’s face it....


133 posted on 01/15/2008 6:28:49 PM PST by Chickensoup (If it is not permitted, it is prohibited. Only the government can permit....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

Hah...looks like the dog bit post #130 too !

I wonder what was wrong with it?

:-/

jas3


134 posted on 01/15/2008 6:29:53 PM PST by jas3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

The nuts and bolts of the science itself should be neither “liberal” nor “conservative”. It’s one thing to oppose someone else’s politicizing science to further a political agenda. It’s quite another to try and hijack the process for your own and claim it’s a matter of “principle”.


135 posted on 01/15/2008 6:34:30 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

PS post #125 and look into the issue for yourself. If you have any questions or challenges, I am most willing to give it my best shot. If, on the other hand, your only interest is to belittle and poke fun, I’m not interested. The choice is up to you.

All the best—GGG


136 posted on 01/15/2008 6:36:35 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

You are quite right. But if the science says one thing but the “experts” say something different, and the “experts” want to use said junk science to promote liberalism, then it most definitely is a conservative issue. Same goes for human caused global warming, etc.


137 posted on 01/15/2008 6:41:15 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
But if the science says one thing but the “experts” say something different,

There's more to establishing that to be the case than simply declaring the opposition to be wrong. If the guy's research and findings aren't withstanding peer review, the place to settle it is in the lab, not in th public square.

138 posted on 01/15/2008 6:49:54 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

But what if the AIDS establishment has used its full weight to shut said scientist down. What if they have used their influence to take said scientist’s grants away? What if they have used their considerable influence to deny said scientists right to publish? What if they have used their influence to deny said scientists right of reply to science journal papers that have been published about him? What if they leaned on said scientist’s university to take away his grad-level courses? Where does said scientist to go then?


139 posted on 01/15/2008 6:54:43 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: ConorMacNessa

Actions have consequences, so do drugs....all of them including advil have side effects.


140 posted on 01/15/2008 6:57:29 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
But what if the AIDS establishment has used its full weight to shut said scientist down. What if they have used their influence to take said scientist’s grants away? What if they have used their considerable influence to deny said scientists right to publish? What if they have used their influence to deny said scientists right of reply to science journal papers that have been published about him? What if they leaned on said scientist’s university to take away his grad-level courses? Where does said scientist to go then?

Lots of speculation there, Chief. What if he was just plain wrong, and just won't admit it?

141 posted on 01/15/2008 6:59:08 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

That’s always a possibility. But my brief recounting is not speculation. I can prove it chapter and verse. But you have not answered my question, where does a scientist go when they have been shut down by the establishment? Where would Galileo go in today’s day and age? Where would Dr. Goldberger go? Where would all the other scientists who have figured something out, only to be persecuted and muzzled, go in today’s day and age? Do you really think the editors of National Review, American Spectator, Reason Magazine, World Magazing, and conservative publishers/think tanks like Policy Review and Regnery are that stupid?


142 posted on 01/15/2008 7:09:39 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Historically, scientists go to other scientists. If his theories are valid, and his methodology sound then the results will be reproducible. Peer review will reproduce the results and support his conclusions. How long has it been since these references were published, and has any subsequent work produced the same results?


143 posted on 01/15/2008 7:17:19 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: jas3
Clinical evidence. HIV+ people who don't take ARVs

I guess I didn't make myself clear. What I'm after is clinical evidence or studies where there are controls in place. Anecdotal evidence, while interesting, is really not of any value. After all, we had lots of anecdotal evidence that the earth was flat. That evidence was wrong.

So I'll restate the question: Do you know of any controlled clinical studies showing the effectiveness of ARV drugs on otherwise healthy people.

And note that you cannot prove effectiveness unless you have a control group that does not take the drug that does worse.

144 posted on 01/15/2008 7:18:05 PM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

But what if the AIDS establishment prevents him from carrying out such studies? What if, for instance, they block him from carrying out a study that controls for drug abuse? For AZT? For cocktail drugs? What does a scientist do then?


145 posted on 01/15/2008 7:24:20 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

PS These are not idle speculations. This really happened.


146 posted on 01/15/2008 7:26:11 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
How long ago were these references published? Has there been time to do a peer review, was it peer reviewed, and were the results reproducible?

There have been cases where scientific work has been suppressed by political forces, but it's always a temporary condition. There have always been scientists outside that sphere of influence willing to look at and pursue the work if it proves to be valid.

147 posted on 01/15/2008 7:31:26 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
There are many scientists and medical doctors who have sided with Duesberg et al. But they all say the same thing. The massive, federally funded (and protected) political forces that have been arrayed against them are currently preventing their findings from seeing the light of day. Again, what are these scientists and medical doctors to do under such intensely adverse (and potentially career ruining) circumstances?
148 posted on 01/15/2008 7:39:04 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
The massive, federally funded (and protected) political forces that have been arrayed against them are currently preventing their findings from seeing the light of day.

Scientific knowlege is a difficult thing to bottle up in this day and age, and scientists tend to ignore political boundaries where science is involved. What gets suppressed in one place will re-surface somewhere else, out of reach of the political influence. What you're telling me doesn't add up.

149 posted on 01/15/2008 7:45:43 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
==What gets suppressed in one place will re-surface somewhere else, out of reach of the political influence.

It’s resurfacing right here. Will you at least give a serious look to the articles I posted from pedigreed conservative sources? Will you at least give a hard look at the scientific papers I posted? That’s all I’m asking. If you still think that this information should be ignored/shut down, I will respectfully agree to disagree agreeably.

150 posted on 01/15/2008 7:52:46 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-281 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson