AIDS - Is the HIV virus man made?

by Stephen John Gault 55 Replies latest members adult

EvilForce

Black Sheep -

HIV does not fulfill Koch's postulates?

Postulate 1: An infectious agent occurs in each case of a disease in sufficient amounts to cause pathology.
It is said that there are many cases of AIDS without HIV. It is to be expected that there would be other causes of immune suppression and so there would be AIDS-like diseases without HIV. Nevertheless, the overwhelming majority of AIDS-like immunosuppressive diseases occur in HIV-infected persons.

Postulate 2: A specific infectious agent is not found in other diseases.
This was later abandoned by Koch when it was found that one agent can cause more than one specific disease.

Postulate 3: After isolation and culture, the infectious agent can induce the disease in another individual.
In the case of HIV which only causes disease in humans, this is difficult to do as there is naturally a lack of volunteers. In the case of SIV, cloned virus does induce disease in healthy monkeys. This has now, in fact, been done with HIV as the result of the accidental infection of laboratory workers with cloned HIV.

With regard to Koch's postulates, One must argue that the following criteria must be met to show that HIV causes AIDS

1. The microorganism must be found in all cases of the disease.
2. It must be isolated from the host and grown in pure culture.
3. It must reproduce the original disease when introduced into a susceptible host.
4. It must be found in the experimental host so infected.

It is now apparent that:

1. Virtually all AIDS patients are HIV-infected
2. HIV can be isolated from virtually all AIDS patients, as well as in almost all seropositive individuals with both early- and late-stage disease
3. Health care and laboratory workers accidentally infected with concentrated purified HIV have developed AIDS
4. HIV has been isolated from many of these individuals

It should also be noted that:
1. HIV has always preceded AIDS in a population.
2. HIV is the single common factor between AIDS sufferers who are gay San Franciscans, African female heterosexuals, hemophiliacs, children, intravenous drug users.
3. Within any risk group only the HIV+ individuals get AIDS. It could be argued that all members of these groups are subject to immunosuppression but this is not the case with wives of hemophiliacs.
4. There is a better correlation between HIV and AIDS than between cigarettes and lung cancer.
greendawn

The fact that women get infected with AIDS shows that there is an infectious agent involved not just immuno suppressant chemicals.

But was ever an HIV virus actually detected by an electron microscope? I read somewhere that it never has really been detected.
Stephen John Gault

Abaddon - As far as I am aware, there are not loads of people dropping dead of an AIDS-identical syndrome who do not have HIV.

To the contrary - people die by the millions in Africa from AIDS symptoms without being HIV positive. I will find you some stats.

EF - I am not too sure on your "Some people with HIV go 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years without any symptoms. Some people come down with AIDS in a few months."

Incubation is said to be years and years.

Here is my research on Koch's Postulates - "Three criteria need to be met before a virus can be said to function as a pathogen. It must be biochemically active. It must infect or intoxicate more cells than the host can regenerate or spare. And the host must be genetically and immunologically permissive. Yet almost none of the accumulated data on the "Human Immunodeficiency Virus" (HIV) demonstrate that the virus satisfies any of these criteria.

HIV also fails to meet the second criterion since it actively infects fewer than .01% of susceptible lymphocytes and since 5% of T cells are regenerated during the 2 days it takes the virus to infect the cell. Moreover, it is truly paradoxical that HIV is said to cause AIDS only after an asymptomatic incuba-tion period of at least 5 years, although antiviral immunity is induced within a few weeks. Ever since Jenner discovered the principle of vaccination, anti-viral immunity (the basis of the AIDS test) has been considered the ultimate weapon against rather than an indication for, future disease.......

The virus-AIDS hypothesis also totally fails to explain how the virus depletes T-helper cells, and why it takes at least 3-5 years to do so. Unlike all other animal viruses, retroviruses need mitosis to initiate infection. Moreover, no HIV gene remains inactive during replication, which takes about 1-2 days, as with all other retroviruses. Thus HIV would be expected to kill T cells and cause AIDS when it first infects an organism and not 5 years later when it is biochemically inactive and suppressed by antiviral immunity.

The 5-year latency presents proponents of the hypothesis with two bizarre options: either old T cells die 5 years after infection, or the offspring must die in the 50th generation, given a one-month generation time for the average T cell.It seems clear from the foregoing that the virus-AIDS hypothesis fails to make a case for sufficiency. It offers no explanation for why less than 1% of antibody-positive persons develop AIDS and why the mean latency between infection and disease is 5 years, whereas antiviral immunity is established in a few weeks. A latent period for pathogenicity that exceeds the latent period for immunity is unambiguous evidence for a co-factor or another causative agent altogether. Finally, the hypothesis cannot support a claim that the virus is even neces-sary for AIDS in view of the fact that it is barely present and consistently latent even in persons with the disease"

I will respond to the double blind study argument tomorrow - right now I am off to the Gypsy Kings concert!
EvilForce

I have no idea where you heard that it has not been seen under an electron microscope....

Here's a free site that has some pics:

http://www.virology.net/Big_Virology/BVretro.html

There are plenty more.
greendawn

I believe it was an Australian virologist that wrote an article on this.

However others claim that the virus exists but is harmless and AIDS is actually caused by toxic therapy drugs.
EvilForce

SJG - please provide statistics including references for said deaths....for there are not millions...also no crackpot website crap allowed. You must use CDC, JAMA, or other scienticially authentic statistics. Thanks.

Also SJG, you did not read my postulates above before posting. You also only mentioned side effects of AZT there are many available drug therepies outside of AZT.

Greendawn....use your common sense girl. Before these so called toxic drugs HIV/AIDS was a death sentance. Now, it's a somewhat managable disease with incidence of deaths down 90% !!! You assume all doctors and scientists are covering up a huge conspiracy about a cure. The Prez of the United States can't get a blow job in the oval office without everyone finding out about it....how can something like this get covered up? Any crackpot can write a paper....that's why they do.... to get exposure...to sell books....to get on talk shows....but there is no real science behind their claims.
Black Sheep

If very few people are symptomatically identical to AIDS, but have no HIV, not any other disease that would produce such symptoms, then statistically speaking it is rather high that the presence of HIV is the major factor in the disease.

Correct, but it is difficult to put a number on them. Reporting systems don't appear to be as good as for HIV and stats. are harder to find. In the past I mostly found estimates, which are bound to be influenced by the bias of the researchers.
At the other end of the scale there are the Long Term Non Progressors. Once again, reliable stats. can be difficult to find.
The existence of both groups has to be patched over with theories, but, until proven, that is all they are, theories.
One of the problems is that most of us are converts to the doctrine including the media. Whenever I found mainstream newpaper and magazine articles that made me think and have doubts about the current AIDS dogma they have never been on page one in bold type, always tucked away in a corner well into the journal.
.
One thing I can state with confidence is that a false positive will have a devastating effect on your life. I have seen a TV doco one on poor chap that this happened to. What a mess. If you think it's rough being labelled an Apostate by the JWs when you have JW family, getting a false positive can be just as psycologically damaging + you get pressured to use anti-retrovirals. Not so bad now, as they have backed off on the Hit it Early, Hit it Hard regime, but there is still the nocebo effect of having a rapidly approaching Armageddon implanted in your head by people you love and trust.
The big problem here is that once you have tested positive, the current dogma is that you will always be positive and the last time I looked there was still no protocol for periodic retesting as there is for negatives in high risk groups. If this is still the case, there is only a small chance that you will be asked to retest and it is only these retests that pick up the original false positives, sometimes many years later.
I would be cautious basing my future, or my beliefs, on the theories of any organisation, scientific or religious, that demonises its detractors and denies them access to data, research, funds, or facilities to test those theories.
Chris
EvilForce

SJG.... you are not using Koch's postulates at all !!

What you are quoting is a research paper By Peter Duesberg from Bio/Technology Nov. 1987. This paper is almost 20 years old and dubious to be sure. When you hear Peter Duesberg, Ph.D., you should know: His ideas are rejected by almost 100% of AIDS scientists and doctors. They are not taken seriously. Dr. Duesberg and his followers are not medical doctors; they do not treat patients. As far as I know, there is not a SINGLE doctor in the U.S. or anywhere else who treats patients according to Duesberg's ideas. He holds other unconventional ideas on cancer as well. Remember he and Dr. Gallo...one of the first doctors / scientists charged with finding answers by Pres Reagan....were friends but had a huge falling out. It's important to know who's who in any research field.
Black Sheep

SJG - please provide statistics including references for said deaths....for there are not millions...also no crackpot website crap allowed. You must use CDC, JAMA, or other scienticially authentic statistics. Thanks.

EF
What you are asking is equivalent to my father requiring me to disprove 607 without referring to Apostate websites and only using the Watchtower publications.
Chris
Black Sheep

EF
Black Sheep -

HIV does not fulfill Koch's postulates?
Please read carefully, that is not what I said.
The treatises I have read have failed to do this. Sure, they may quote some experts, but do they provide you with the research or the references to that research?
Has it passed Koch's Postulate? I have seen 'expert opinion' that it has, but have never been directed to a source that provides the methods used so that the tests can be repeated to verify the theory. I, and others like me, strongly suspect that the reason for this is that one doesn't exist.

AIDS - Is the HIV virus man made?

Share this