HIV/AIDS Myths: Ten More Myths About HIV and AIDS

[TravellerFellow]

I am going to post both ELISA and Weston BLot test done on me for over 20 years. any 411 will be greatly appreciated. also, I have been diagnosed to be a "Medication Naive Long Term Non Progressor". I have always had normal CD4 counts. only twice did I test viral load detectable. but that is another story for another day. btw, I have NO idea what a ARV even is! whatever.

[AIDSvideos]

@TravellerFellow: This is Eric. There are mutations such as CCR5 delta 32 deletion that confer a significant degree of natural resistance to HIV infection. People with this mutation can often go decades without progressing from HIV+ to clinical AIDS. You might have one of these mutations.

[TravellerFellow]

@AIDSvideos thanks for reply, also I cleared Hep C which I was told by a person at NIH about 30% ppl can do, (or actually do?). likewise for two infections of Limes disease. I ***MAY*** participate in a B@& (and B17 B-something else) study at Bethesda. I've gone thru such kaka over the decades that I am weary as all get out. I never took any meds, and glad, but MANY friends (now dead) stopped taking them and simply put, died. That says it all for me. good video. *****

[mpunktb]

Reading from a teleprompter makes it harder to recognize that someone is lying. Nice trick to hide at least some uncertainness. I am NOT saying she is telling the truth. But if you want to convince anybody from anything, start talking free and look your audience in the eye.

[ashish19894]

mam just clear the doubts about using more than one condom at a time

which one is safer

one condom or more than one condom at a time

[VeriteeRH]

Thank you Dr Beccy for being the voice of reason here. If people do not beleve you, and the peer reviewed research you cite what can you or anyone do to convince them. I

But there is no doubt that HIV causes AIDs if untreated and that ARVs are for those of us living with it our only hope, the proof is overwhelming.

It seems to me that those who do not accept this are living in hope that they are right not any reality.

[AIDSvideos]

@VeriteeRH: Thanks Veritee -- You are absolutely right!

Eric

[mrbrit]

Can i just ask? Do you know any resources for the HIV virus being used for genes therapy... I can find news article but not journals.

[AIDSvideos]

@mrbrit: This is Eric; I'm not a doctor, and I'm definitely not an expert on research on possible genetic therapies for HIV. I don't believe that any genetic therapy for HIV has even reached large-scale clinical trials yet, much less been approved by the FDA for general use. However, I believe I've read about early trials in which people were given variants of their own immune cells that had been genetically modified to be partially resistant to HIV. There is definitely research & hope there.

[Dillonmac96]

fast forward to 2:50 and listen to what she says. It makes perfect sense on the graph. The graph clearly states that they gave a placebo ARV to somebody that had HIV. this is a fake graph you cannot give somebody placebo for ARV's thats not legal or possibly legal. somebody explain this? they took a study on HIV patients and gave the ones a placebo and they died. really you let people die wtf they are saying aids is caused by hiv. well HIV is caused by vaccines for polio in africa 1940s

[AIDSvideos]

@Dillonmac96: "Placebo versus ARV" trials were only done at the very beginning when no ARV had yet been tested, shown to be effective, or approved, e.g. the first trials of AZT itself (when at that time no other treatment existed). "Placebo versus treatment" is a standard clinical trial approach for a disease for which no treatment yet exists. Since the approval of AZT, trials have been "new ARV versus existing ARV" or "new ARV plus some existing ARVS versus other existing ARVs."

[AIDSvideos]

@Dillonmac96 (cont'd): The graph is not "fake." It is a graphical representation of the findings from this published, peer-reviewed metaanalysis of multiple studies on ARVs: "Jordan et al. (2002) Systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence for increasing numbers of drugs in antiretroviral combination therapy. BMJ 2002;324:757." Go to aidstruth web site and click article "Benefits of ARVs" to read about it.

[AIDSvideos]

@Dillonmac96 (cont'd): Finally, the "vaccine development" theory of the origin of HIV has long since been debunked. Read the article "AIDS origins conspiracy theories" on wikipedia. Read the "Man-made or iatrogenic origins of AIDS" section, specifically the bullet on "OPV hypothesis." Also go to the AIDSvideos site and click "Myths" and "FAQ."

[Dillonmac96]

no. not one thing you said answers my question. how could their data reveal that more died with a placebo and more were helped with ARV's. it should say more people who didnt take ARV's not placebo. . the ARVs are only going to cause harm. HIV was released directly into human blood through polio vaccines made from chimp organs with SIV in belgium, the 1940s. yes i support the used of ARVs and I would use them if I was infected with HIV. stop refusing the truth. we did this.

[AIDSvideos]

@Dillonmac96: How could their data reveal that more died with a placebo and fewer died with ARVs? Simple. You count the number of people on the placebo who died and divide by the number on the placebo. That gives you the % of people on the placebo who died. Likewise for people on ARVs. Then you compare the two death rates and see if the difference is statistically significant. It was. You're stating what you think the data SHOULD show instead of looking at what it DOES show.

[AIDSvideos]

@Dillonmac96: You're also contradicting yourself. You say "the ARVs are only going to cause harm." Then you say "I support the used [sic] of ARVs and I would use them if I was infected with HIV." If you think ARVs only cause harm (which is wrong, by the way), why do you support their use and why would you use them if you were infected with HIV?

[Allen10579]

@Dillonmac96 you are all over the map for christ sake man, He just told you how they got the figures, and that's a question I would also like to ask, if you think the ARV will do more harm, why would you take them?? is it because you dont know who the hell you want to believe at this point because of all the crap you see here on you tube? well If I were you, thank christ I'm not, but if I was, and I had HIV I would do exactly what the Dr in this video says to do,

[Volovox]

It is probably that HIV come from brain monkey, kidney or testicles. Because in order to make vaccines scientists use these things in the 50's And 60's.

[AIDSvideos]

@Volovox: That's the "oral polio vaccine testing" theory of HIV origins from Edward Hooper's book "The River." This theory has been debunked. Read the article "AIDS origins conspiracy theories" on wikipedia. Read the "Man-made or iatrogenic origins of AIDS" section, specifically the bullet on "OPV hypothesis." Also go to the AIDSvideos site and click "Myths" and "FAQ."

[tonywood25]

This may sound silly, but I have a huge phobia bout HIV transmission. I use public transportation..(city busses) and get worried every time I'm on one of them.

My question is: Do I need to worry about people on busses that are sneezing, have cuts or sores, or wearing Band-Aids. Again, i don't want to sound silly, But I just enlisted in the Army and I am very scared to leave the house.....because I'm scared to catch anything.

CAN SOMEONE GIV EME ANSWERS...ADVICE?

[AIDSvideos]

@tonywood25: This is Eric; I'm not a doctor. HIV is not transmitted airborne by coughing or sneezing. It's also not transmitted by casual social contact such as working together, eating together, or shaking hands. Even if someone else has a sore on their hands, your intact skin will form a barrier preventing HIV transmission. Watch our other vids "Brief Introduction to HIV/AIDS" and "HIV in the Household" for more information. You're at no risk while taking the bus.

[Iamnothingbutlegs]

@tonywood25 You should be worried. In my experience, you could never be too careful using public facilities. In the winter I recommend a long coat that covers your butt, i also suggest wearing gloves. Never wear shorts on public transportation, and ALWAYS look at the seat (for blood, feces, urine, food etc.) before you sit down. Additionally, take a multivitamin everyday.

[RazielKain]

The biggest idiocy I have ever heard from an HIV/AIDS denialist was that when he ignored the test protocol he got false positive results....

Yeah they are this dumb...

[wasteland70]

I still think HIV is a man made ailment.

[dinkolino2]

do you have information on what percentage of HIV positive people develop AIDS?

[AIDSvideos]

@dinkolino2: Go to the AIDSvideos web site and click FAQ. Read "Course of the Disease in an Individual."

[AIDSvideos]

From NIAID "Evidence:" "The median period of time between infection with HIV and the onset of clinically apparent disease is approximately 10 years in industrialized countries, according to prospective studies of homosexual men .... Similar estimates ... have been made for HIV-infected blood-transfusion recipients, injection-drug users and adult hemophiliacs." [Alcabes et al. Epidemiol Rev 1993;15:303] All but a few progress to AIDS within 20 years. ["Course of HIV Infection", NIH, 1995]

[dinkolino2]

could you put links to your references in the side bar, please. "peer reviewed" doesnt mean much to anyone that reads them on a regular basis.

[AIDSvideos]

@dinkolino2: The references are listed in the blue screens at the end of the video; you can read them there.

[dinkolino2]

@AIDSvideos yes, I saw later

[DarkHero187]

I need a cure fast please send me a doc or anything send me a message on my profile please. Im dying fast please help. If u have some info of a doc or any tips, Anything can help. Im 20 years old and I would give or do anything for a second chance.

[AIDSvideos]

See a doctor at a clinic in your area and follow their instructions.

[BizarreFilms]

MEET Ministries in Tennessee, Wildwood Lifestyle Center and Hospital in Wildwood Georgia near Chattanooga, Uchee Pines in Alabama, and Wemar in California are just a few of the places you can try. They use natural remedies such as hydrotherapy and herbals along with prayer. They have had success with AIDS patients in the past without the use of anti-retro viral medications. message me back if you need more info. I am currently a student at Wildwood Lifestyle Center and Hospital.

[virgillevinger]

You should look up 'the placebo effect', if you give someone a pill and say it will cure them, it works on almost as high % of people as the medication works on.

[AIDSvideos]

The placebo effect is real, but to be deemed effective by the FDA, a medication has to be shown to be statistically significantly more effective than a placebo (or than another medication that's already been shown to be more effective than a placebo). So any AIDS medication in use today has been shown through clinical trials to be more effective than a placebo.

[wizduke]

Whats The Risk Of Me Catching Hiv when having sex with a condom?

[AIDSvideos]

This is Eric; I'm not a doctor. It depends on the sexual practice (oral? vaginal? anal?) and whether you use the condom correctly and every time. See our vids "Some Ways You Can Contract HIV and the Risk of Each One" and "The Importance of Condom Compliance."

[tfwc63]

Guidelines for Safe Sex from Soaids, expertise centre for hiv/aids and other stds in the Netherlands - 2009

[philnoll]

its close to zero. Use a condom correctly and get tested with your partner

[djbigkeith09]

Whats The Risk Of Me Catching Hiv When The Girl Is On A Period And I Have Sex With Her.?

[AIDSvideos]

This is Eric; I'm not a doctor. Menstrual blood flow is believed to increase the risk of HIV transmission. Of course, you're only at risk of HIV from that exposure if she has HIV. See our videos "What's the Risk I Have Contracted HIV?" and "Some Ways You Can Contract HIV and the Risk of Each One." CDC says all adults 13-64 should be tested for HIV to be safe. Get tested, follow the doctor's instructions, and practice safer sex if you choose to be sexually active going forward.

[WulfBand]

She's wrong front the start. If anyone could isolate the virus itself then they would have the nobel prize.

2. The US uses the Western Blot is OFTEN a false positive.

3. This person is person NWO pro advicate to keep the sheeple ignorant of the REAL HIV.

HOW DO I KNOW> I've been positive since 1988

[AIDSvideos]

WulfBand - (1) You might be interested to know that in 2008, Luc Montagnier was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for the isolation and discovery of HIV. Like other HIV denialists, you've cocooned yourself in obsolete information from the 1980s that's archived and rehashed on denialist web sites and need to read more recent information from the last 20 years. Like a newspaper, for example ...

[rasaxSF]

Bravo! Thank you for taking some valuable time out to refute denialists' claims. I'm working to contribute some of my own efforts and time to the greater cause.

Congrats to Luc Montagnier and Françoise Barré-Sinoussi!

[AIDSvideos]

(2) Testing is specific & accurate. "A large study of HIV testing in 752 U.S. laboratories reported a sensitivity of 99.7% and specificity of 98.5% .... and studies in U.S. blood donors reported specificities of 99.8% and greater than 99.99% (46, 47). With confirmatory Western blot, the chance of a false-positive identification in a low-prevalence setting is about 1 in 250 000 (95% CI, 1 in 173 000 to 1 in 379 000) (48)." (Chou et al, Annals of Internal Medicine, 5 July 05, vol 143, #1, p 55-73)

[AIDSvideos]

re: how you know: glad to know that you are apparently still healthy in spite of having been HIV+ since '88. Hope that remains true. However, that proves nothing about whether HIV is the cause of AIDS. You may be one of the lucky people with innate genetic resistance against HIV, such as a CCR5 delta 32 deletion mutation for example.

[milkandhoney927]

Can you elaborate on the "innate genetic resistance against HIV", please. Are you suggesting that the lack of the receptor inhibits the virus' ability to infiltrate?

[AIDSvideos]

This is Eric; I'm not a doctor. Yes. Go to wikipedia and search for "CCR5 delta 32" to learn more.

[AIDSvideos]

From NIAID "Relationship:" The course of HIV varies. About 5% show "no signs of disease progression even after 12 or more years." [Pantaleo et al,N Eng J Med 1995;332:209-16.Cao et al,N Engl J Med 1995;332(4):201-8.] Patient age and genes, viral strain, and other infections may "determine the rate and severity of HIV disease expression in different people." [Fauci,Science 1993;262(3136):1011-8.Pantaleo et al,N Engl J Med 1993;328(5):327-35.]

[thevoid1231]

Hi doctor kuhn. I have a simple question for you. I have read on wikipedia(i know wikipedia is not a reliable source and therefor i ask) that its like 0.05% to get hiv if you have orlsex with a hiv positive man/woman, and if u have viginal sex its like 0.10% chance if the partner is hiv positive. Is this really true?(i wont stop having safe sex becouse of this, im just curious)

[FlashDotDash]

Don't you mean Vaginal Sex?

X's

[AIDSvideos]

This is Eric; I'm not a doctor. See our video "Some Ways You Can Contract HIV and the Risk of Each One" and the wikipedia article on "HIV" for accurate risk estimates. You can't assume that everything you read on wikipedia is accurate, but the per-exposure risk estimates in the wikipedia article on "HIV" are accurate.

[43470anbetsi]

WHAT ABOUT A SITUATION, WHEN i WANTED TO SHAVE IN THE MORNING, I WENT INTO THE BATHROOM AND FOUND THAT MY COUSIN HAD HIS SAVE RAZOR. I USED IT. AFTER 3 WEEKS I EXPERIENCED MANY OF THE SYMPTOMS YOU SPEAK ABOUT. IT TURNED OUT, BECAUSE I SPOKE TO HIM THAT HE IS INFECTED WITH HIV, BESIDES HE SCOLDED ME DOWN THAT I USED IT WITHOUT PRIOR ASKING HIM IF I COULD SHAVE. IS IT POSSIBLE SHOULD I GO FOR THE TEST?

[AIDSvideos]

See our vid "HIV in the Household." There is one documented case where HIV is believed to have spread this way. Get tested and never share razors just to be safe.

[MilkyManMooky]

Wasn't AZT originally created to fight Cancer?

[AIDSvideos]

Yes. See wikipedia article on "Zidovudine." It was originally being researched as a cancer treatment, but it proved ineffective against cancer. Then researchers discovered that it could interfere with HIV's life cycle, and it became the first ARV used against HIV.

[gouldenshow]

@MilkyManMooky yes it was originally an experimental cancer drug.

[newhotmailit]

@MilkyManMooky yes

[garybooker]

Thank you Dr. Kuhn for jumping into this discussion on Youtube. Myself and some other youtubers have been responding to AIDS Denialists with rebuttal videos, and I have three videos from where I interviewed HIV researchers addressing the same myths that you have addressed in this video. Denial does not save lives... responsibility does.

[tynoobi]

Isn't it ironic how, after several of the best doctors and scientists in the world looked and reviewed HIV and AIDS, people cling to their delusional beliefs that HIV was man-made --

a retrovirus with such capability is too complex to have been made last week-- it's highly more likely to have "trained" with the monkeys and jumped species

[part2themovie]

Was that an argument? AIDS is too complex to be man made? Complex as in what?

And it's thousands of doctors still with no cure. That alone is suspect. Human beings aren't that complex. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many man made chemical and biological weapons.

[AIDSvideos]

Complex as in: it's a retrovirus that integrates itself into nuclear DNA so it's safe from destruction by the immune system; hides within brain cells that are immune privileged; attacks the immune system itself, impairing the body's fight against it; and mutates quickly so it can evolve to overcome treatments. No virus the body can't eliminate itself has EVER been "cured" AFAIK, so it's unsurprising that HIV also hasn't been cured.

[AIDSvideos]

Human beings are ABSOLUTELY complex. If you'd studied genetics and protein expression you'd understand this. There are an estimated 50-100,000 proteins; we don't even know HOW MANY, let alone what they all are, all their interactions, or what they do. The fact that it's easy to create chemical/biological weapons IN NO WAY shows that humans are simple. It's EASY to kill a person, but hard to heal them. "Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a carpenter to build one."

[AIDSvideos]

Chemical weapons usually destroy tissue (e.g. chlorine/mustard gas effect on lungs) or interrupt nerve signal transmission (VX, etc.) leading to muscle spasms and asphyxiation due to the effect on the diaphragm. These are relatively simple things to do: you're destroying life-critical tissue or blocking life-critical nerve signal transmission, resulting in death. Truly "curing" HIV would require eliminating it from throughout the entire body, including from within neural DNA. That's hard!!!

[AIDSvideos]

Finally, note that no biological weapon to date has been truly "man made" in the sense of being something created anew from scratch by humans. All of them are just pre-existing biological agents we found in the environment (viruses like Marburg or smallpox, bacteria like anthrax, etc.) that are either used as-is or modified through repeated culturing and selection to improve lethality, stability in powder form (e.g. anthrax), resistance to treatment, or other desired properties.

[Rabidpie]

Aw man, I can't seem to find the answer I'm looking for.

I want to know if it is possible to get aids from Food, if the food has some amount of HIV blood and the given food was soup. Is it possible to contract aids outside the body like that? Everyone says you can't, but I know that Aids can live outside the body for some time. Can it be contracted through soup if there is some blood in the soup, and your mouth may have had some cuts?

[AIDSvideos]

Go to the AIDSvideos web site and click "FAQ."

[SHAOLINSHADOWBOXER80]

Aids can be cure via a 30 year quarantine. After 30 years these patients will have died off, and society will be allowed to return to normal. Aids / hiv is an epidemic, and the carriers are killers who take 2.5 million lives a year without being prosecuted. If you have aid -or- hiv, you can give to as many people as you want and the law will stand down. How many people have you heard of being prosecuted out of 2.5 million? Nearly nobody is held accountable, this is why quarantine is the answer.

[AIDSvideos]

First of all, there's no public health justification for quarantining HIV+ people at all. It's not like XDR-TB--a disease that highly contagious and airborne. Second, if people knew that if they tested HIV+ they would be exiled, would they get tested? No. So no one would know their status, so no one would change their behavior and/or get treatment to reduce the risk of transmitting it, so the disease would spread MORE. Also, stop making generalizations. Lots of HIV+ people try to prevent spread.

[AIDSvideos]

Also, people HAVE been criminally prosecuted for knowingly infecting others with HIV through sex without informing them of their HIV+ status (which is a crime in many places). Google "Criminal Deliberate Reckless HIV Transmission" to see examples.

[AIDSvideos]

Huh? I have no idea why you posted this comment; it's a non sequitur. Also, don't post the same comment on multiple videos in the future.

[EvelcyclopS]

great video, its a shame that the wrold is largely ignorant of science, andso vunerable to pseudoscientific conspiracy theorists.

[thuddas]

So how is that there are those doctors/professors who say AZT can actually cause aids?

There was in the British news about 2 years ago a young man who was diagnosed with HIV. Later his tests showed no HIV in his system. This story was on all major media. The hospital treating him wanted him for tests to help them understand why this could happen but he refused and the story died away. One thing I do know, the people who originated the HIV/aids theory are now very rich.

[AIDSvideos]

(1) Unfortunately being a doctor or professor is no guarantee that you won't say or believe scientifically groundless things. The mere fact that some docs/profs somewhere say something counts for little. See "Myths" page at AIDSvideos dot org. (2) I recall reading media publicity about that case and have also seen no follow-up. Most likely, either his first test was false positive or his second test was false negative.

[thuddas]

Where point 3? Refute that.

[AIDSvideos]

(3) You claim to "know" that "the people who originated the HIV/aids theory are now very rich." Which "people" are you referring to? Gallo and Montagnier? You didn't specify. Then, how would you "know"? Are you their accountant, tax attorney, or financial adviser? And what do you define as "very rich"? Your statement doesn't contain enough specifics to be refutable. Nor, BTW, am I on call to refute every claim made in YT comments by random individuals.

[malachitransfer]

Not all doctors are perfect. Some of them are easily misguided despite having a very technical understanding of their teachings. Some just estrange to plain naivety. It happens all the time.

HIV is occasionally misdiagnosed. Tests are perfect. They do very rarely give a false positive. The chances of a false positive are increased by accumulation of general antibodies used to fight other types of disease. So it happens.

This doesn't mean aids isn't caused by aids. It IS.

[sararevolution]

They probably used a group of people who didn't want to take ARV's anyway.

[AIDSvideos]

Actually, determining the control group via patient choice would not be a good methodology because the test group and control group might no longer be well matched. e.g. if sicker people chose ARVs, and healthier people chose no ARVs, the results would be biased. Most likely these were randomized selection with the patient and doctor blind to the experimental condition.

[AIDSvideos]

To understand why clinical trials with placebos (or control conditions other than placebos) are necessary, read the wikipedia article on "placebo." Controlled trials are how we find out whether new drugs help, hurt, do nothing, or even kill the patient. When new drugs or procedures enter clinical use without doing trials first, later we sometimes find they're actually harmful, as happened with the use of bone marrow transplants to treat breast cancer in the 90s.

[mihigola]

Here in Uganda people are dying of organ (mainly liver) failure because of ARVs. The deaths are reported as caused by "AIDS" implying that a virus known as "HIV" , lab tests of which can not detect "viral load", only fragments of DNA/RNA. Surely this also amounts to iatrogenocide. Organ transplant business would be booming more if the laity could afford.

[AIDSvideos]

If you meet the criteria for being prescribed ARVs, then your risk of dying from ALL CAUSES COMBINED (including liver failure) is lower if you take ARVs as prescribed than if you don't. Yes, ARVs can increase your risk of liver problems (including death from liver problems), but they reduce your total risk of death by much more by reducing the effects of HIV, opportunistic infections, etc.

[AIDSvideos]

From AIDStruth: A meta-analysis of 54 ARV clinical trials showed that using one ARV reduced progression to AIDS or death by 30% compared to a placebo, using two ARVs reduced progression by an additional 40% vs. one ARV, and using three ARVS reduced progression by an additional 40% vs. two ARVs. [Jordan et al, "Systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence for increasing numbers of drugs in antiretroviral combination therapy." BMJ 2002;324:757.]

[AIDSvideos]

Unless you compare a new treatment against a control condition (current standard of care, or a placebo), you'll never know whether the new treatment helps patients, hurts them, or makes no difference. AZT was the first AIDS drug, so there was no alternative treatment option, so trials compared "best possible care plus AZT" vs. "best possible care plus placebo" in double-blind trials. That's how we proved that AZT saves lives. Today, the control will be other AIDS drugs, not placebo.

[SABRINAJS]

I have a question they put the swabs in your mouth to test weather you have aids or not is that real results ? You only wait 4 about 1hr and they tell you.. should people trust that instead of waiting for 7 days ?

[AIDSvideos]

The various approved HIV tests (oral, blood) in current use are all quite accurate, so you should have confidence in their results (positive or negative). However, you need to follow your doctor's instructions for any confirmatory tests (e.g. a Western Blot to confirm an initial HIV+ test on an ELISA) or repeat tests (e.g. another test 6 months after a possible exposure, even if you initially test HIV- on the first test).

[SABRINAJS]

Ohh thank you soo much !

[dnmehay]

BTW most of the "questions" here smell of being planted by your MD cohort...they just seem fake.

[AIDSvideos]

You're wrong. I wrote the original draft of the script. Dr. Kuhn then reviewed the script for accuracy. The questions were not "planted" by her. In fact, I based the questions and myths on questions and claims in YouTube comments on our previous "Top Ten Myths About HIV/AIDS" video.

[dnmehay]

I take issue with your claims about false positive results. It's simple statistics: with a really low prior probability of having HIV (i.e., in a low-risk population), the joint probability of having HIV when testing positive is going to be REALLY low even with a 99.9% accurate test. Go to any intro stat's book and see the standard false positive example, if you don't believe me. I can't derive the formula(e) in 500 char's.

If you take issue with THAT, then you are suspect.

[AIDSvideos]

The statistic we cite was drawn from Roger Chou et al, "Screening for HIV: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force," Annals of Internal Medicine, 5 July 05, vol 143, #1, p 55-73. This is a study that passed scientific peer review and was accepted for publication in the Annals of Internal Medicine. If you think it's flawed, I suggest that you do an analysis and submit a letter to the journal. You may learn something in the process. ;-)

[jawa0621]

I'm a physicist who graduated with math minor from NYU. I CAN explain the formulae.

Let's assume the percentage of 99.9 is correct. Here then is how it works:

If you are positive or negative, the chances of the test giving you the wrong result are 1/1000. Each sample is tested twice (I know, I've been tested). This is done to reduce the odds of false results through the principle of multiplication of probablities.

[jawa0621]

So, the chance of the first test being wrong is 1/1000, the chance of then the second test being wrong is also 1/1000, the chance of both being wrong are 1/1000 X 1/1000 = 1/1000000 (literaly one in a million), or an error rate of .001%. Population has nothing to do with it.

[jetmanisme]

This is a great video but I have a quick question. How can PCR tests be used to determine how many particles of HIV are present per ml of a person's blood? I thought PCR was a method of amplifying DNA so it could be studied? Thanks...and *subscribes*.

[AIDSvideos]

Good question. There are different ways of using PCR for different goals. Some just detect a target at low levels without quantifying amount. Others can quantify the amount of the target in the original sample. See wikipedia articles on "Polymerase chain reaction" and "Quantitative polymerase chain reaction" for overviews.

[jetmanisme]

Hi, I took your advice and I just learned something new. Thank you.

[bizzyvictor]

so basically humans caused aids cause they were dumb enough to have sexual intercourse with chimpanzees

[AIDSvideos]

No. Rather, it's believed that SIV jumped to humans when a hunter was killing a chimpanzee for food (the "bush meat" trade). If the hunter had a cut on his hand, there could have been blood-to-blood contact during meat preparation. Go to AIDSvideos dot org and click "FAQ" for more info and source study citations.

[AIDSvideos]

It sounds like a couple in which one partner is HIV- and the other partner is HIV+. They should be using barrier methods like condoms and dental dams to reduce the risk of HIV transmission. Even if the HIV+ person is on ARVs and has a low viral load, there's a risk of transmission. Even couples where both partners are HIV+ should use condoms to reduce risk of superinfection with multiple strains and/or the creation of a new hybrid strain that's more aggressive or drug resistant.

[hydroBigBud]

can you only catch hiv off someone who already has it?

[AIDSvideos]

You can't spontaneously develop HIV. You have to be exposed to the virus, most commonly via exposure to an infected person's bodily fluids during sex or needle sharing. Many people are HIV+ without knowing it, have no symptoms, and look healthy. Also, if a person just contracted HIV, they may test HIV- for up to six months on a typical oral/blood antibody test (and be able to transmit the virus to others during that time) before they test HIV+.

[Aaron518]

Deniers aren't concerned with facts and studies and research,they enjoy conspiracy theories and opinions from people who have never spent a single second doing AIDS research themselves. Great video!

[padude64]

I am pissed! You know what makes me mad? When gays and straights go around having unsafe sex! Barebacking is extremely dangerous! I have HIV and I am suffering so bad! Wake up! What is the matter with you people having dangerous sex practices!

You wanna know what HIV neuropathy feels like? NO you dont! It is extremely painful! I have had celluitis which almost killed me! I have had pancreatitis which almost killed me!

[drvasudeva]

She is slave to the Drug Mafia. What happened to the death warrants these people used to give to HIV + people in the late 80s are still living without taking any drugs.

[AIDSvideos]

From NIAID "Evidence:" "The median period of time between infection with HIV and the onset of clinically apparent disease is approximately 10 years in industrialized countries, according to prospective studies of homosexual men .... Similar estimates ... have been made for HIV-infected blood-transfusion recipients, injection-drug users and adult hemophiliacs." [Alcabes et al. Epidemiol Rev 1993;15:303] All but a few progress to AIDS within 20 years. ["Course of HIV Infection", NIH, 1995]

[drvasudeva]

These Estimates (Guesstimates to be precise) are completely inconclusive. It doesnt take much intelligence to see this. First the death warrant was 6 Months in the 80s, then slowly it progressed to 1 year , 2 -- now it is 20 years.

[AIDSvideos]

There was never a "death warrant" issued by medical doctors except in the imagination of HIV denialists. But the reality is that before the advent of ARVs, people with HIV were dying after a much shorter period on average than they are now since there was no effective treatment once they did progress to clinical AIDS.

[drvasudeva]

Myth: ARVs have prolonged the lives of HIV affected. Reality 1: Most long term survivors dont take ARVs. Reality 2: ARVs have evolved to be less poisonous than it was in the 80s so the chances of suriviving ARVs are now higher.

[AIDSvideos]

First, there's no question that ARVs prolong life. Study citation follows. Even if your statement about long-term survivors is true, it's irrelevant and misleading for judging the effectiveness of ARVs because you WAIT to prescribe ARVs until the HIV+ person is sick enough (IIRC, CD4 count below 350, or has opportunistic infection) to require them. You could just as well claim that "Bypass surgery doesn't prolong lives because most people with heart disease don't get bypass surgery."

[AIDSvideos]

From AIDStruth: A meta-analysis of 54 ARV clinical trials showed that using one ARV reduced progression to AIDS or death by 30% compared to a placebo, using two ARVs reduced progression by an additional 40% vs. one ARV, and using three ARVS reduced progression by an additional 40% vs. two ARVs. [Jordan et al, "Systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence for increasing numbers of drugs in antiretroviral combination therapy." BMJ 2002;324:757.]

[AIDSvideos]

Your "Reality 2" is in some sense correct although couched in misleading language (poisonous, evolved, surviving). ARVs with fewer side effects have been developed. Also, since they're used in combination, AZT in particular can be used at lower doses, with fewer side effects, than when it was the only drug available and prescribed as monotherapy. Main point: studies show that if you're sick enough to need ARVs, you'll on average survive longer on them than without them.

[inevitablekiller]

yea. if people wont take them then u cant find the rate of arv benfits because there was never any use among these patients. but the patients that do get are claimed to live longer. i bet that the certain wave length could cure it. u could prolly patten a DIY machine knowing wat we know today.

[AIDSvideos]

Clinical studies prevent the selection bias problem you refer to by randomly assigning test subjects and control subjects to the "test new medication" condition or "test standard of care without new medication" condition. There's no reason to think radiation of any wave length could cure HIV. HIV integrates itself into the DNA of cells within your brain. If radiation were killing integrated HIV within the DNA, it would be killing healthy DNA (and therefore cells) as well.