Jakoyo, HIV History in a Nutshell

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

• Tweet

A report by Patricia Goodson http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00154/full.  Why is she bringing this up when this debate was won when the orthodoxy simply outshouted the detractors of HIV/AIDS?

I am fully expecting her to be fired, ostracized, character assassinated or otherwise persecuted.  I do not harbor any illusions that any of the points she raises will be acknowledged, let alone addressed by the orthodoxy.

I thought that would interest you some. 

[jakoyo]

Termie,

This is not a research article. It is a personal opinion. In scientific world , personal opinion is the weakest form of evidence. I began reading it religiously before i got tired. She does not provide any evidence to back her arguments.  Her references  are dominated with news magazine articles and other opinion makers.

We have seen similar folks before in the name of evangelists.

Bottom line : HIV causes AIDS . HAART saves lives.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Termie,

This is not a research article. It is a personal opinion. In scientific world , personal opinion is the weakest form of evidence. I began reading it religiously before i got tired. She does not provide any evidence to back her arguments.  Her references  are dominated with news magazine articles and other opinion makers.

We have seen similar folks before in the name of evangelists.

Bottom line : HIV causes AIDS . HAART saves lives.

It is not a personal opinion.  Can you counter any of claims she makes?  The article was only changed from a research article to opinion after pressure from the orthodoxy. 

Why did you get tired?  What is your evidence for the bottom line?  Is mere recitation enough?

[jakoyo]

Termie , if you call her article a research paper , please define what type of research it is.

I have underlined two  un referenced statements from her article on HIV testing which are factually wrong. The prescence of an antibodies implies immunological response to an external or internal ( auto immune ) stimulant / factor - current ( on going) or in the past ( resolved ). Immune system has a memory component.

The precence of Hepatitis B or C antibodies there has been an exposure to these viruses that triggered immune response. Some people clear the  circulating virus and become immune. Some people become chronic carriers- identified by prescence of actively and quantifiable circulating viral particles.

HIV diagnosis (  confirmatory test ) involves a positive antibody and antigen ( virus particle ) test.

I don't know where to begin when countering un substantiated personal opinions.

We have ben through similar  this with the 9/11 conspiracy theories.  People make up outrageous un substantiated  allegations and leave it to the mainstream to prove them wrong.

HIV antibodies

The first available tests to screen blood banks for HIV detected HIV antibodies (10). Physicians still use these tests when screening blood for infection and, since 2004, direct-to-consumer home tests have become available for identifying antibodies to HIV using only a saliva sample (e.g., OraQuick) (11). Yet, from the time the first tests appeared, scientists in both orthodox and unorthodox camps reiterated that, according to established immunology principles, antibodies to a virus indicate the immune system has acted to control the invading virus. Antibodies point to previously occurring infection and do not signal active infection.antibodies suggest the immune system has controlled the invading agentswww.frontiersin.org

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Termie , if you call her article a research paper , please define what type of research it is.

I have underlined two  un referenced statements from her article on HIV testing which are factually wrong. The prescence of an antibodies implies immunological response to an external or internal ( auto immune ) stimulant / factor - current ( on going) or in the past ( resolved ). Immune system has a memory component.

The precence of Hepatitis B or C antibodies there has been an exposure to these viruses that triggered immune response. Some people clear the  circulating virus and become immune. Some people become chronic carriers- identified by prescence of actively and quantifiable circulating viral particles.

HIV diagnosis (  confirmatory test ) involves a positive antibody and antigen ( virus particle ) test.

I don't know where to begin when countering un substantiated personal opinions.

We have ben through similar  this with the 9/11 conspiracy theories.  People make up outrageous un substantiated  allegations and leave it to the mainstream to prove them wrong.

HIV antibodies

The first available tests to screen blood banks for HIV detected HIV antibodies (10). Physicians still use these tests when screening blood for infection and, since 2004, direct-to-consumer home tests have become available for identifying antibodies to HIV using only a saliva sample (e.g., OraQuick) (11). Yet, from the time the first tests appeared, scientists in both orthodox and unorthodox camps reiterated that, according to established immunology principles, antibodies to a virus indicate the immune system has acted to control the invading virus. Antibodies point to previously occurring infection and do not signal active infection.antibodies suggest the immune system has controlled the invading agentswww.frontiersin.org

A nice place to begin would probably be with countering her criticism of viral load.  Making a general dismissal of her article without reading it is not any better than Henry Rotich and Eurobond.  To be fair, I expect you to insist on the correctness of the mainstream dogma.  Don't feel any new pressure to defend something you've probably subscribed to, maybe made a living from for the better part of your life.

[jakoyo]

Another un referenced comment.

Despite this host of problems, orthodox scientists and practitioners still claim HAART has changed the face of the AIDS epidemic: once considered a lethal syndrome, testing positive for HIV does not equate to a death sentence any longer; merely to a lifetime of managing a chronic infection (56, 57).

[jakoyo]

Focus on the highlighted sections. If there is no reference to substantiate her comment , it is hog wash.

It is the same as Raila screaming all over EUROBOND has been stolen , yet he cannot table the evidence.

A nice place to begin would probably be with countering her criticism of viral load.  Making a general dismissal of her article without reading it is not any better than Henry Rotich and Eurobond.  To be fair, I expect you to insist on the correctness of the mainstream dogma.  Don't feel any new pressure to defend something you've probably subscribed to, maybe made a living from for the better part of your life.

[/quote]

[jakoyo]

There is nothing controversial here. Diagnostic and monitoring tests are continuosly evolving ( improving). We scientist will never use the Viral Load alone as a diagnostic test for HIV. It is a very delicate , sensitive test and can occasionally give false reading. Hence the reason why different platforms (  testing techniques ) are used to ensure reproducibility. For HIV diagnosis - gold standard is combined HIV antibody and Antigen test. In young  children - it is even more complex.

Nobody denies the fact that some medical conditions can trigger false positive HIV results.

[veritas]

A report by Patricia Goodson http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00154/full.  Why is she bringing this up when this debate was won when the orthodoxy simply outshouted the detractors of HIV/AIDS?

I am fully expecting her to be fired, ostracized, character assassinated or otherwise persecuted.  I do not harbor any illusions that any of the points she raises will be acknowledged, let alone addressed by the orthodoxy.

I thought that would interest you some. 

They don't seem to fire people in the acadamia no matter how opinionated or misinformed they are. Firing is feasible when academics engage in sexual misconduct or talk about gender like Tim Hunt.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

@jakoyo,

I forgot to answer your other question about what the research is about.  It is about HIV and dissenting views to it.  I found it quite remarkable that she would bring it up, given the history of the subject.

[jakoyo]

Just highlighted some of the junk references to support this outrageous article.

References
1. Duesberg PH. Inventing the AIDS Virus. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc (1996). 722 p.
3. Goodson P. Theory in Health Promotion Research and Practice: Thinking Outside the Box. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers (2010). 245 p.

4. Altman L. Federal Official Says He Believes Cause of AIDS has been Found. The New York Times (1984). 1 p.

5. The HJ Kaiser Family Foundation. HIV/AIDS at 30: A Public Opinion Perspectivewww.kff.org

6. Altman L. New U.S. Report Names Virus that may Cause AIDS. The New York Times (1984). 1 p.
10. Altman L. Red Cross Evaluates Test to Detect AIDS in Donated Blood. The New York Times (1984). Section C; Page 2, Column 1.

11. OraQuick. What is OraQuick? [Internet]. Available from: http://www.oraquick.com/What-is-OraQuick
14. Farber C. Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS. Hoboken, NJ: Melville House Publishing (2006).
23. de Harven E. Problems with Isolating HIV. [Internet]. Available from: http://www.altheal.org/isolation/isolhiv.htm

24. AIDS gov. What is Viral Load? [Internet]. Available from: http://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/just-diagnosed-with-hiv-aids/understand-your-test-results/viral-load/

25. Dorak T. Real-Time PCR. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis (2006).
29. Lauritsen J. Has Provincetown Become Protease Town? [Internet]. Available from: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/jlprotease.html
32. Culshaw R. Science Sold Out: Does HIV Really Cause AIDS? Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books (2007).

33. Dictionary.com. Electron-Microscope. [Internet]. Available from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/electron-microscope

34. Barre-Sinoussi F, Chermann J, Rey F, Nugeyre M, Chamaret S, Gruest J, et al. Isolation of a T-lymphotropic retrovirus from a patient at risk for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Science (1983) 220:20. doi:10.1126/science.6189183

CrossRef Full Text

35. Kremer H. The Silent Revolution in Cancer and AIDS Medicine. Xlibris Corporation (2008).

39. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner V, Papadimitriou J, Page B, Causer D. Questions regarding whether the recently reported particles are authentic HIV virions? (2006). Available from: http://www.theperthgroup.com/REJECTED/StructureLetterPG.pdf
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/HIVAIDS/Understanding/Prevention/Pages/vaccineChalle

43. Lauritsen J. Poison by Prescription: The AZT Story. New York, NY: Asklepios (1990).

44. Engel J. The Epidemic: A Global History of AIDS. New York, NY: Smithsonian Books/Harper Collins (2006).

45. Null G. AIDS. A Second Opinion. New York, NY: Seven Stories Press (2002).http://www.theperthgroup.com/REJECTED/AIDScausesHIV3.pdf

http://aras.ab.ca/haart-ineffective.htmlhttp://www.unaids.org/en/resources/campaigns/globalreport2013/factsheet/

59. Chin J. The AIDS Pandemic: The Collision of Epidemiology with Political Correctness. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing (2007).

60. Root-Bernstein R. The Evolving Definition of AIDS. [Internet]. Available from: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/rrbdef.html

63. Kalichman S. Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy. New York, NY: Copernicus Books; Springer (2009).

73. Bauer H. The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers (2007).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1651-7_1http://aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/just-diagnosed-with-hiv-aids/treatment-options/overview-of-hiv-treatments/index.htmlhttp://www.robertogiraldo.com/eng/papers/CoFactorsCauseAIDS.html

84. Sonnabend J. Letter to the editor. Lancet (2000) 355:2163.

85. Duesberg PH, editor. AIDS: Virus- Or Drug Induced? (Vol. Vol 5). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers (1996).

http://kff.org/hivaids/fact-sheet/state-medicaid-coverage-of-routine-hiv-screening/

94. The White House Office of National AIDS Policy. National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States. [Internet]. Available from: www.whitehouse.gov/onap

95. Buchanan DR. An Ethic for Health Promotion: Rethinking the Sources of Human Well-Being. New York, NY: Oxford University Press (2000).

96. Jones JH. Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. New and Expanded Edition. New York: The Free Press (1993).

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Jakoyo,

What is outrageous about it?

[jakoyo]

You can't even answer a simple question correctly. I did not ask you about the title or heading of the topic. You call it a research paper . Is it an RCT , Systematic review or a review article (not strictly research by definition)  ?

What is her research question ?

What is the methodology ?

You will notice that in her references she has included REJECTED papers.

@jakoyo,

I forgot to answer your other question about what the research is about.  It is about HIV and dissenting views to it.  I found it quite remarkable that she would bring it up, given the history of the subject.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

You can't even answer a simple question correctly. I did not ask you about the title or heading of the topic. You call it a research paper . Is it an RCT , Systematic review or a review article (not strictly research by definition)  ?

What is her research question ?

What is the methodology ?

You will notice that in her references she has included REJECTED papers.

@jakoyo,

I forgot to answer your other question about what the research is about.  It is about HIV and dissenting views to it.  I found it quite remarkable that she would bring it up, given the history of the subject.

It is research about HIV dissent. 

[jakoyo]

Calling it a research does not make it a research. You are a joker. Forward this article to your dear brother and fellow HIV  denialist Thabo Mbeki.

You can't even answer a simple question correctly. I did not ask you about the title or heading of the topic. You call it a research paper . Is it an RCT , Systematic review or a review article (not strictly research by definition)  ?

What is her research question ?

What is the methodology ?

You will notice that in her references she has included REJECTED papers.

@jakoyo,

I forgot to answer your other question about what the research is about.  It is about HIV and dissenting views to it.  I found it quite remarkable that she would bring it up, given the history of the subject.

It is research about HIV dissent. 

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

A report by Patricia Goodson http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00154/full.  Why is she bringing this up when this debate was won when the orthodoxy simply outshouted the detractors of HIV/AIDS?

I am fully expecting her to be fired, ostracized, character assassinated or otherwise persecuted.  I do not harbor any illusions that any of the points she raises will be acknowledged, let alone addressed by the orthodoxy.

I thought that would interest you some. 

They don't seem to fire people in the acadamia no matter how opinionated or misinformed they are. Firing is feasible when academics engage in sexual misconduct or talk about gender like Tim Hunt.

Peter Duesberg could not be fired.  He is tenured.  But he has been heavily marginalized and caricatured by the mainstream since his critique of AIDS science first appeared.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Calling it a research does not make it a research. You are a joker. Forward this article to your dear brother and fellow HIV  denialist Thabo Mbeki.

You can't even answer a simple question correctly. I did not ask you about the title or heading of the topic. You call it a research paper . Is it an RCT , Systematic review or a review article (not strictly research by definition)  ?

What is her research question ?

What is the methodology ?

You will notice that in her references she has included REJECTED papers.

@jakoyo,

I forgot to answer your other question about what the research is about.  It is about HIV and dissenting views to it.  I found it quite remarkable that she would bring it up, given the history of the subject.

It is research about HIV dissent. 

How about reading through the article, or opinion or whatever you want to call it.  Then addressing every point she raises.  Is that a robust way of addressing it? 

Leave the name calling to the jubilant youngster.

[mya88]

@TERMI

If the viral load is being used to determine the progression of HIV and when HAART needs to be started after confirmatory test results from Elisa and Western Blot, why would someone need to use (PCR )it to determine HIV infection?

She then further states
PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers.....they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV.

Believed wrongly by who? the likes of herself, what data does she have to back up the claim. If the test can detect proteins then logic tells me it we can count the proteins in a sample of blood. This article is just going in circles. I haven't finished reading so I will be back.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

@TERMI

If the viral load is being used to determine the progression of HIV and when HAART needs to be started after confirmatory test results from Elisa and Western Blot, why would someone need to use (PCR )it to determine HIV infection?

She then further states
PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers.....they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV.

Believed wrongly by who? the likes of herself, what data does she have to back up the claim. If the test can detect proteins then logic tells me it we can count the proteins in a sample of blood. This article is just going in circles. I haven't finished reading so I will be back.

The way I understand her statement.  That the proteins detected by PCR are not unique to HIV.