spamandham Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Would you consider an alternative explanation to a position you consider solid, consider resting on mountains of good science, and for which you have changed your life? What level of experiment/study would be required to alter your perspective on a firmly established belief? Will you simply reject it outright because "everyone knows that isn't true"? Will you search high and low for counter evidence, accepting any apologetic you come across and without expending a similar amount of effort searching to see if perhaps the contentious point is true? Or, ... will you approach it with an objective perspective and consider points that oppose your biases with the same degree of tenacity as those that support them? Now for the experiment... No, I'm not talking about gods. I'm talking about AIDS. What do you reeeealy know about AIDS, and what instead are simply your biases formed by others? Everyone knows that HIV causes AIDS right? ...well don't they? In fact they don't. Read teh following article: http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller18.html I've heard this theory before and simply wrote the man off as a whackjob. But then, I noticed that some of what he says is true, and totally contradicts the status quo. Non-drug-users who refrain from anal sex almost never suffer from AIDS, regardless of their sexual lifestyle! Neither do mosquitoes cause AIDS as they do with other blood born pathogens. There are precious few cases of AIDS among non-drug-users who do not engage in anal sex. HIV is a real retrovirus, which no-one contends. The contentious point is whether or not it really causes AIDS. My own personal memory is that I heard about HIV and AIDS at the same time. What are the odds that AIDS could have legitimately been identified as being caused by HIV without any real amount of time lapse, particularly when you consider that HIV is a difficult to detect retro virus? How many other diseases do you know of where this is the case? How many retro-viruses other than HIV are said to cause deadly diseases? Isn't it convenient that AIDS was discovered just as the war on drugs was kicking into high gear? It took the medical community what, 50 years maybe, to figure out that ulcers are caused by a bacteria rather than stress? This is a community historically prone to rush to conclusions. I don't blame them really, lives are at stake and it's always best to play conservatively in such a case. But, what if the conservative approach is contributing to pain and death by subjecting HIV carriers to a drug program that is the real cause of AIDS? Slam away please, but try to do so without predjudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest isekrbibel Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I'm no microbiologist, but I have my doubts about this guy. Is there more anal sex and intraveinous drug use in Africa than elsewhere? Seems unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandora Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 So only women who have anal sex get AIDS? I haven't read the article yet, so I will refrain from further comment, but that's just the first question I thought of. Okay, your description threw me off. I have heard of this guy. Some of my pharmacy professors respect him and probably agree with him, at least on the cancer issue. As with most things, the truth is probably somewhere inbetween. I'll have to review my immunology texts and such to properly evaluate his claims about AIDS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spamandham Posted February 24, 2006 Author Share Posted February 24, 2006 I'm no microbiologist, but I have my doubts about this guy. Is there more anal sex and intraveinous drug use in Africa than elsewhere? Seems unlikely. No. In Africa, AIDS is said (by his camp) to be nothing more than malnutrition and other diseases. Remember, no-one ever dies of AIDS. They die of a some other disease said to be caused by a weak immune system said to be caused by AIDS said to be caused by HIV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitchu Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 I'm no microbiologist, but I have my doubts about this guy. Is there more anal sex and intraveinous drug use in Africa than elsewhere? Seems unlikely. First of all, welcome to the forums, isekrbibel. Glad to see you diving right in. ********************* There actually may be more anal sex in certain parts of Africa due to female genital mutilation. In the reading I've done about FGM, anal sex is often the "face saving" means of copulation for the male unable to penetrate the cut and sewn leathery labial shield over the vagina. Sometimes the female prefers it, considering it less painful than vaginal intercourse. Sometimes couples who are ashamed to admit they cannot effect vaginal intercourse initiate a pregnancy by pressing sperm onto (and into, as much as possible) the miniscule opening. As far as the article is concerned, there's much that sounds reasonable to me. Additionally, any scientific postulation which the discredited Robert Gallo calls "absolute and total nonsense" probably has something going for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RankStranger Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Thanks for the welcome Pitchu, but it's just lil' ol' me playing with a new username. I've heard of this guy before... still have my doubt about him. But I did read something interesting several years ago about AIDS in Africa. The article made the case that AIDS statistics from many sources in that region are completely unreliable due to inadequate and inconsistent testing methods. This would seem to support the 'alternative' theory. I just don't know enough about the subject to have much opinion, but surely this has been tested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitchu Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Thanks for the welcome Pitchu, but it's just lil' ol' me playing with a new username. Ol' mischief-maker you, eh? (I thought that Devil Opossum looked familiar.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts