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

Skip to comments.

A MYTH THAT KILLS: AIDS INDUSTRY FEEDS ON FEAR
New York Post ^ | July 3, 2008 | Michael Fumento

Posted on 08/12/2008 8:59:23 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

A MYTH THAT KILLS: AIDS INDUSTRY FEEDS ON FEAR

July 3, 2008 --

THE Senate is near to pass ing a massive $50 billion Emergency Plan for HIV/ AIDS Relief - a bill whose priorities are based on myth, just like virtually all anti-AIDS efforts worldwide.

The world's top AIDS bureaucrat recently admitted the truth: "It is very unlikely that there will be a heterosexual epidemic" outside Africa, Kevin de Cock, director of the World Health Organization, told London's Independent newspaper. His bosses at the United Nations issued an official denial - but couldn't truly challenge his science.

The effort to "democratize" AIDS dates back to the mid-1980s, when the media and health officials began a desperate and concerted effort to divert attention and make it seem everyone was at risk. The 1985 Life magazine cover, blaring "NOW NO ONE IS SAFE FROM AIDS" in huge red letters, represents this effort. Surgeon General Everett Koop coined the term "heterosexual AIDS explosion" in 1987, while in 1993 HHS Secretary Donna Shalala told Congress that AIDS may leave "nobody left."...

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aids; bush; congress; corruption; democrats; duesberg; fumento; geopolitics; govwatch; homosexualagenda; mccain; obama; prolife; taxes

If you would like to be added to the RETHINKING AIDS PING LIST drop me a FReepmail.

AIDS is the biggest public health scam in medical history. Like global warming, AIDS is being used to push a powerful leftist political agenda. For over two decades the Public Health Establishment has used your tax dollars and the full power of the federal government to wage a massive propaganda (and intimidation) campaign designed to:

(A) prevent the American public from hearing the scientific evidence that suggests HIV may not cause AIDS
(B) scare the public into thinking "we are all at risk"
(C) coverup the extreme toxicity of AIDS chemotherapy drugs (which are not just used on "fast-track" gays and junkies, but also given to pregnant mothers, infants, and children)
(D)
use this fear to push a leftist social agenda that includes socialized medicine, and the promotion of homosexuality and explicit sex "education" to tender-aged school children
(E)
use their "public health mandate" to bypass the authority of parents and local school boards who object to their social engineering schemes
(F) create a massive federal bureaucracy encouraging the use of addictive drugs, to include prescription heroine
(G) use threats and intimidation to silence dissenting scientists and to keep the press from covering the debate
(H) and finally, to use AIDS as a model to push similar social agendas with respect to future epidemics.

Every single point above can be documented on my profile page.

If you would like to be added to the RETHINKING AIDS PING LIST drop me a FReepmail.


1 posted on 08/12/2008 8:59:23 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stentor; Marty; Fractal Trader; metmom; John Valentine; editor-surveyor; Mr Ramsbotham; Chode; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 08/12/2008 9:01:37 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Smart people are not at risk.

They’re worried about their funding drying up.


3 posted on 08/12/2008 9:07:31 AM PDT by bicyclerepair (ETHANOL SUCKS !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I don’t understand why the opposition to this idea is so rabid. I mean, Duerberg’s work seems to be based on some solid scientific investigation - why can’t the supporters of the traditional view about AIDS just put their research on the table too, and see which is right? Why all the rabid screeching about “pseudo-science” and “flat earth” and whatnot?


4 posted on 08/12/2008 9:14:12 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Here they come boys! As thick as grass, and as black as thunder!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bicyclerepair
They’re worried about their funding drying up.

I think that's the big issue right there. Funding is on the line, just like with AGW.

5 posted on 08/12/2008 9:15:18 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Here they come boys! As thick as grass, and as black as thunder!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bicyclerepair

==They’re worried about their funding drying up.

Precisely. Now that the Republicans are in the minority (which hopefully means they start behaving like conservatives again) they should start demanding a full-scale congressional investigation into the AIDS scandal. Can you imagine how the AIDS establishment will look when the America people find out that AIDS only accounts for 3.7 percent of worldwide mortality, but receives 25% of ALL WORLD HEALTH CARE AID!!! Sooner or later, heads are going to roll. I’d prefer that it be sooner!


6 posted on 08/12/2008 9:17:56 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

HIV/AIDS is like smoking. People and deviants that persist in behaving in a perverted or unhealthy fashion get the disease. Stop smoking, stop homosexual behavior, and both problems go away. Homosexual behaviorists are the #1 vector for human disease in the world including HIV, Herpes Simplex II, gonorrhea, syphilis, chancroid, drug resistant TB, cytomegalovirus, etc but hey, it is their choice and they march in parades, consume fecal material and are proud of it. To think what they do in the privacy of their own bedrooms has no impact on other people is ludicrous. 10s of billions of dollars flushed down a rathole would be better spent.


7 posted on 08/12/2008 9:22:12 AM PDT by Neoliberalnot ((Hallmarks of Liberalism: Ingratitude and Envy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

The AIDS activists were getting away with having it both ways. Anyone who opposed government funding for HIV/AIDS research or help for HIV infected people was accused of being homophobic, while, at the same time, they were denying that AIDS was largely confined to male homosexuals and intravenous drug users in the developed world.


8 posted on 08/12/2008 9:24:25 AM PDT by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

I think the best explanation is the sheer size of government science. Once the number of scientists feeding at the public trough become disproportionate to their private industry counterparts, scientists can be effectively controlled by the political interests that control the money/power.


9 posted on 08/12/2008 9:26:22 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

PS And that money and power is currently held by the virus-hunters (and their leftwing allies) with respect to AIDS.


10 posted on 08/12/2008 9:29:36 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
 

Did, you get a chance to take a look at The Hidden Agenda Behind HIV? This one will make your blood boil (and help answer your question above).

 

11 posted on 08/12/2008 9:33:02 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Daveinyork
==The AIDS activists were getting away with having it both ways.

They still are, but not for long. The public is starting to wake up to their silly game, and it's only a matter of time before the whistleblowers are going to feel safe to start blowing their whistles. As I said above, HEADS WILL ROLL!

12 posted on 08/12/2008 9:35:37 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot

==HIV/AIDS is like smoking. People and deviants that persist in behaving in a perverted or unhealthy fashion get the disease.

You don’t know how right you are! Go to my profile page and read the “Statement.” If you agree that what is contained there deserves to be investigated, drop me a FReepmail and I’ll add you to the RETHINKING AIDS ping list.

All the best—GGG


13 posted on 08/12/2008 9:37:59 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
A MYTH THAT KILLS -AND STEALS $50 Billion: AIDS INDUSTRY FEEDS ON FEAR<.i>

There.
Fixed it.

14 posted on 08/12/2008 9:39:36 AM PDT by Publius6961 (You're Government, it's not your money, and you never have to show a profit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot
People and deviants that persist in behaving in a perverted or unhealthy fashion get the disease.

I am always amazed that beached whales are never included in the shotgun blasts.

Even though their "disease" is costlier than the other two combined.

I just love PC...

15 posted on 08/12/2008 9:41:54 AM PDT by Publius6961 (You're Government, it's not your money, and you never have to show a profit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Nice touch! I would only add “and kills people with it.” See my profile page for more. If you agree with the statement and think the AIDS scandal needs to be investigated, drop me a FReepmail and I’ll add you to the RETHINKING AIDS ping list.

All the best—GGG


16 posted on 08/12/2008 9:43:37 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot; GodGunsGuts
Homosexual behaviorists are the #1 vector for human disease in the world including HIV

I think you need to read GGG's materials at the links he provides. According to GGG's research, homosexual sex IS NOT the cause of AIDS, as HIV is not sexually transmitted and HIV does not cause AIDS (according to the material he links to).

According to the material GGG references as the AIDS Rethinking project, the incidence of AIDS in the developed world is drug related, I think amyl nitrate is mentioned specifically, and in the third world, the incidence of AIDS is related to poverty and its attendant malnutrition.

Do I have that about right, GGG?

17 posted on 08/12/2008 9:47:57 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dmz; Neoliberalnot

==HIV is not sexually transmitted

Not true. HIV is sexually transmitted, but AIDS Rethinker scientists don’t believe that HIV is sufficient to cause AIDS.


18 posted on 08/12/2008 9:51:02 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dmz; Neoliberalnot

==Do I have that about right, GGG?

Mostly. Although, many other drugs are involved, not just poppers (heroine, cocain, etc...and then there is the EXTREMELY toxic chemotherapy drugs they use to treat AIDS patients. Unlike cancer, where you are put on chemotherapy on a temporary basis, with AIDS they keep you on these drugs for a lifetime.


19 posted on 08/12/2008 9:55:02 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot; dmz

See the “Conservative and Libertarian Press” section of my profile page for excellent Rethinking AIDS introductions written for the layman. If you read the statement from “The Group for the Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis” and agree with it, drop me a FReepmail and I’ll add you to my RETHINKING AIDS ping list—GGG


20 posted on 08/12/2008 10:00:54 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dmz

“”According to GGG’s research, homosexual sex IS NOT the cause of AIDS, as HIV is not sexually transmitted and HIV does not cause AIDS (according to the material he links to).””

You are talking to a scientist here and to suggest homosexual activity (I don’t call it sex any more than I call child molestors and beastphilic behavior sex) is not directly responsible for 90% of AIDS cases in US flies in the face of a thousand refereed scientific papers. I am fully aware that fluid exchange carries the virus and so IV drug use and blood sucking insects can play a role in transmission. Homosexual behavior brought and spread the epidemic to the US.

Amyl nitrate is an inhalant and does not spread the virus unless that ampule is perhaps shoved into the rectum of a homosexual prior to inhaling. Malnutrition always has an adverse impact in immune function and likely enhances full blown AIDS.


21 posted on 08/12/2008 10:06:30 AM PDT by Neoliberalnot ((Hallmarks of Liberalism: Ingratitude and Envy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
The world's top AIDS bureaucrat ... Kevin de Cock

For some reason this guy's title and name conjures up an image of gay porn .....

22 posted on 08/12/2008 10:09:46 AM PDT by bassmaner (Hey commies: I am a white male, and I am guilty of NOTHING! Sell your 'white guilt' elsewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bassmaner

Perhaps it was his last name that helped him edge out the competition for his job.


23 posted on 08/12/2008 10:14:50 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot

Given you science background, you may want to read the following science paper, as it summarizes the scientific arguments of AIDS Rethinker scientists:

http://www.duesberg.com/papers/chemical-bases.html


24 posted on 08/12/2008 10:19:42 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Neoliberalnot; GodGunsGuts

My post to you was to point out that you and GGG are not in agreement as to the nature of the disease. According to stuff on GGG’s page, HIV is harmless (I definitely overstated GGG’s position when I stated that HIV is not sexually transmitted, sorry GGG), and does not lead to AIDS. Post 19 of this thread from GGG confirms that.

My brother died of AIDS in 1991. A child of the ‘60s with its attendant drug use and ample sexual activity, who also had a blood transfusion in the early ‘80s prior to testing blood for the disease.

I think you would be very interested to read the stuff on GGG’s page linked from his FR homepage. GGG and I had some less than pleasant exchanges in the old crevo wars, but for the last week or so have been having exceedingly civil conversations on a topic on which we probably don’t agree at all.


25 posted on 08/12/2008 10:23:40 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dmz

I am very sorry for your loss. I’d be very curious to learn the specifics of your bother’s case, but if it’s too personal, I’ll understand.


26 posted on 08/12/2008 10:26:24 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Mostly. Although, many other drugs are involved, not just poppers (heroine, cocain, etc...and then there is the EXTREMELY toxic chemotherapy drugs they use to treat AIDS patients. Unlike cancer, where you are put on chemotherapy on a temporary basis, with AIDS they keep you on these drugs for a lifetime.

Okay. Then I take it you would have no problems with your son or daughter having sex with an AIDS-infected person?

27 posted on 08/12/2008 10:29:10 AM PDT by Citizen Blade ("Please... I go through everyone's trash." The Question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
==Okay. Then I take it you would have no problems with your son or daughter having sex with an AIDS-infected person?

Sorry CB,

I'm going to have to decline to answer that question, as these kinds of deliberately provocative questions lead to flame wars that inevitably get my threads pulled. Let's just stick to the science.

28 posted on 08/12/2008 10:34:28 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I'm going to have to decline to answer that question, as these kinds of deliberately provocative questions lead to flame wars that inevitably get my threads pulled. Let's just stick to the science.

But that is the most important public policy point- If AIDS is not caused by HIV, then we've been wrong to focus on trying to end promiscuous gay sex, since, in of itself, it is harmless.

Put another way, if the HIV virus is not the cause of AIDS, then the promiscuous lifestyle of many homosexuals isn't something we should care about, from the viewpoint of preventing AIDS.

Is that a conclusion you are comfortable with? I'm certainly not.

29 posted on 08/12/2008 10:50:04 AM PDT by Citizen Blade ("Please... I go through everyone's trash." The Question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
==But that is the most important public policy point- If AIDS is not caused by HIV, then we've been wrong to focus on trying to end promiscuous gay sex, since, in of itself, it is harmless.

Not so, there are plenty of serious diseases you can get from their disgusting sexual practices (not to mention the serious Biblical warnings against engaging in sodomy).

30 posted on 08/12/2008 11:07:30 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Not so, there are plenty of serious diseases you can get from their disgusting sexual practices (not to mention the serious Biblical warnings against engaging in sodomy).

Perhaps. But if we're just discussing AIDS here, then based on your view of what causes AIDS, homosexuality is completely irrelevant. Whatever religious or moral aspects there may be regarding homosexuality, the only issue is drug use, so we shouldn't care about homosexuality for purposes of this discussion.

We can have a discussion regarding the health problems associated with anal sex (both straight and gay), but it should be completely separate from the AIDS discussion, if we accept your argument regarding the cause of AIDS.

31 posted on 08/12/2008 11:18:13 AM PDT by Citizen Blade ("Please... I go through everyone's trash." The Question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

Actually, homosexuality is not completely irrelevent. It was the perverted sexual lifestyle of fast-track homosexuals that led to the need for the very drugs that were killing them like flies. They couldn’t sustain the number of sexual partners their perversion required without taking massive amounts of chemicals, which in turn, over a long period of time, destroyed their immune systems. Then, on top of that, the public health authorities told them to wear condoms instead of telling them to stop the drugs that were destroying the immune systems. And if that wasn’t bad enough, then the AIDS establishment sealed their fate by putting them on cytotoxic chemotherapies, like AZT. In short, I would say your side has one hell of a lot to answer for.


32 posted on 08/12/2008 11:26:38 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

All that money headed directly into the coffers of the druggie death squad!

Do you really still believe that they are not in full control of Congress?


33 posted on 08/12/2008 11:29:05 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (Jimmy Carter is the skidmark in the panties of American History)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Actually, homosexuality is not completely irrelevent. It was the perverted sexual lifestyle of fast-track homosexuals that led to the need for the very drugs that were killing them like flies. They couldn’t sustain the number of sexual partners their perversion required without taking massive amounts of chemicals, which in turn, over a long period of time, destroyed their immune systems.

That's certainly an...interesting... take on the situation. But the more rational view is that drugs lower inhibitions, which makes people more likely to engage in the high-risk activities (sex with multiple partners, sharing needles) that are actually the transmission vectors for HIV. But, if we follow your logic, homsoexuals can have as may orgies as they want, so long as they do so while sober, and they are at no greater risk for AIDS than a monogamous straight person.

Then, on top of that, the public health authorities told them to wear condoms instead of telling them to stop the drugs that were destroying the immune systems.

I'm not aware of any public health authorities that take a pro-drug position. But, again, following your logic, the issue of condoms isn't relevant to this discussion, since AIDS doesn't occur due to sexual contact.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, then the AIDS establishment sealed their fate by putting them on cytotoxic chemotherapies, like AZT. In short, I would say your side has one hell of a lot to answer for.

So, if AIDS drugs are so toxic, why do people who do not use them drop dead within months or a few years, while people who stay on the regimen (such as Magic Johnson) continue to live for years and years?

34 posted on 08/12/2008 11:35:36 AM PDT by Citizen Blade ("Please... I go through everyone's trash." The Question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

==But, if we follow your logic, homsoexuals can have as may orgies as they want, so long as they do so while sober, and they are at no greater risk for AIDS than a monogamous straight person.

Actually, no sexual stimulants = no massive fast-track orgies. That level of sexual activity is impossible without immunosuppressive chemicals.

==But, again, following your logic, the issue of condoms isn’t relevant to this discussion, since AIDS doesn’t occur due to sexual contact.

Yes, it is. Without condoms, they leave themselves open to God-knows how many other opportunistic infections.

==So, if AIDS drugs are so toxic, why do people who do not use them drop dead within months or a few years, while people who stay on the regimen (such as Magic Johnson) continue to live for years and years?

Again, not true. And btw, Magic’s wife let it slip he terminated taking his AIDS chemotherapy drugs long ago. It caused quite a stir at the time.


35 posted on 08/12/2008 11:50:28 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

==Do you really still believe that they are not in full control of Congress?

Congress listens to the AIDS establishment because almost none of them have been exposed to our side. If congress ever decided to stop listening to them, this whole thing would be over faster than you can say AIDS SCANDAL.


36 posted on 08/12/2008 11:54:04 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

Thought you might be interested in #32 and #33, etc.


37 posted on 08/12/2008 12:08:04 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Actually, no sexual stimulants = no massive fast-track orgies. That level of sexual activity is impossible without immunosuppressive chemicals.

Totally irrelevant, if we follow your logic. You are still basically arguing that unprotected sex with multiple male partners is harmless vis a vis AIDS. Whether or not the promiscuous behavior is caused by the drug use, it's omly the drugs that are the problem, not the orgies.

Yes, it is. Without condoms, they leave themselves open to God-knows how many other opportunistic infections.

That's a different discussion, since your view is that AIDS is not caused by sexual behavior.

Again, not true. It caused quite a stir at the time.

It's not true that AIDS-infected people are living longer lives now than in the 80's and 90's? That's a laughable claim, I have to tell you.

And btw, Magic’s wife let it slip he terminated taking his AIDS chemotherapy drugs long ago.

Source, please.

38 posted on 08/12/2008 12:11:11 PM PDT by Citizen Blade ("Please... I go through everyone's trash." The Question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
We can have a discussion regarding the health problems associated with anal sex (both straight and gay), but it should be completely separate from the AIDS discussion, if we accept your argument regarding the cause of AIDS.

Not necessarily. AIDS is still, by and large, a gay disease, just not for the reason usually put forward.

39 posted on 08/12/2008 12:17:54 PM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Here they come boys! As thick as grass, and as black as thunder!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

==Source, please (re: Magic Johnson/AIDS Chemotherapy)

Didn’t you ever wonder why Magic never came to look like a chemotherapy patient? At any rate, I can’t find the article where his wife first let the cat out of the bag. She told everyone he was having adverse reactions and decided not to take his chemo anymore. And for a while after, Magic tried to dodge follow up questions about his wife’s statement. But after being peppered with never ending questions, Magic finally broke down and started admitting he was off his AIDS chemo drugs. Here is just one example:

“Citing doctor-patient confidentiality, Mellman will not discuss Johnson’s treatment or current condition. But in an interview with TIME last week, Johnson acknowledged that he has in the past taken AZT, the antiviral drug typically administered when a person’s helper T-cell count drops to 500. (See following story.) Johnson said that he is no longer taking AZT and that his T-cell count is above 500, “but I don’t tell exactly what it is because then I’ll have everybody talking about it.” His health, he says, “has been wonderful. My doctor told me to watch out for things like deteriorating skills. Nothing so far.” Johnson’s added weight is due not to drug treatments, as some have speculated, but to a healthier diet and to muscle mass from his regular exercise sessions.”

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101960212-135465,00.html


40 posted on 08/12/2008 12:30:44 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Didn’t you ever wonder why Magic never came to look like a chemotherapy patient?

I don't know what he looked like at all times during his treatment. Do you?

But in an interview with TIME last week, Johnson acknowledged that he has in the past taken AZT, the antiviral drug typically administered when a person’s helper T-cell count drops to 500. (See following story.) Johnson said that he is no longer taking AZT and that his T-cell count is above 500

All this talks about is the fact that he is not taking AZT at this time becuase his T-Cell count is high. It doesn't talk about the other drugs he is taking, and it does not mean he won't take AZT in the future, if his T-Cell count drops. AZT is not the sole drug used to control AIDS- it is part of a regimen of drugs that is adjusted over time for each patient's situation.

41 posted on 08/12/2008 12:48:01 PM PDT by Citizen Blade ("Please... I go through everyone's trash." The Question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
==I don't know what he looked like at all times during his treatment. Do you?

I don't know about all times, but most times. I followed his case VERY closely.

==All this talks about is the fact that he is not taking AZT at this time becuase his T-Cell count is high.

His wife said he went off of them because of the side effects. I think Magic was trying to spin his decision so as not to become a pariah in the very AIDS community that made him their hero and poster boy.

42 posted on 08/12/2008 12:57:50 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

Ooops...actually I meant #31 and #32


43 posted on 08/12/2008 1:15:14 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

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