Introduction to AIDS Dissent -- Part 1

Introduction to AIDS Dissent -- Part 1, by Darin Brown, AIDS Wiki, http://www.reviewingaids.org/awiki Think of this as the "Cliff's Notes" guide to everything that is wrong about HIV and AIDS. A PDF version of this video will soon be available at the AIDS Wiki!

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• HIV
• AIDS
• dissent
• dissident
• wiki

[mrkurt13]

how is it I amplify the HIV genome at work from people with AIDS if it doenst exist?

[AIDSWiki]

@mrkurt13 Putting the words "HIV" and "genome" together next to each other doesn't imply the existence of an "HIV genome" anymore than putting the words "HIV" and "antibody" next to each other implies the existence of "HIV antibodies". No doubt you are amplifying nucleic acid. That's not the issue. The issue is whether that nucleic acid can be shown to have originated in a unique, exogenously acquired retrovirus. Google Perth Group's article "HIV Genome 2" to find out where the genome came from.

[jtheis6]

ok, please tell me what i have if not hiv after having unprotected...yes...unprotecte­d sex (about 20 years ago) with my lover who was hiv+ and died within 2 years after his diagnosis? also, the meds that i have been on for over a decade make me feel a WHOLE LOT BETTER than not being on them.

[AIDSWiki]

I am a scientist, therefore I can only deal in what's available in the published literature, not anecdotes. What you "have" is an antibody test made from recombinant proteins manufactured in a lab that reacted with some of your serum antibodies. No more, no less. As for your drugs, they do have some antimicrobial properties (NOT antiviral) e.g. against PCP, and affect different people differently. Many others have died of liver failure on the drugs. So again, I deal in data, not anecdotes.

[AIDSWiki]

The data speak for themselves. And you're right, we DO know how AIDS "came to be" -- it was an invention of the wild imaginations of Donald Francis and Robert Gallo. I suppose you believe it "came to be" when little black children in Africa were playing games with monkey corpses.

[sadunkal]

Of course, it is extremely apparent. I guess I forgot to throw several "scientific" ad hominems like he does. :)

I do not feel the need to help others find evidence if they're not already interested in the debate themselves. There are many scientific papers out there for those who're interested, really not that hard to reach. Just an intention to learn is enough to make you spend some time and find the relevant information. And I really suggest that you read that text about dissent.

[sadunkal]

Yes, there is no real debate and that's the whole problem actually. The reason consensus exists is not because all has been rigorously debated and scientific conclusions have been reached, it's because the questions were ignored.

You won't understand what I mean unless you gather some courage and take some time to inform yourself. Take a look at how the whole thing started as a consequence of a press conference for example... Nobody except the dissidents are interested in an honest discourse.

[Clempt90]

I find this some what amusing. HIV-subtypes are isolated everyday in labs around the world directly FROM HIV patients. It would be hilarious if these idiotic denialists hadn't help kill thousands of HIV patients prematurely with their pseudo science bullshit

[ccr5cxcr4]

sadunkal - Except he is correct and you are wrong. 20+ years of research. There is no question about a causal relationship.

"Nobody except the dissidents are interested in an honest discourse." - So say something worthwhile. He has said 4-5 times for you to post something interesting and you haven't. Probably because you don't have anything.

You denial cultists are just pathetic. Do some real science. Get a job. Do SOMETHING worthwhile.

[IlSeFousDeTaGuele]

sadunkal - And you still seem to miss the point. There is no "debate" over whether HIV causes AIDs or not.

It does. That is the consensus of the scientific community, reached over a dozen years ago using *gasp* the scientific method.

If the "denialists" were interested in an honest discourse it could be an interesting conversation. But that is not what I am seeing. I am seeing preaching, not science.

That isn't dissent, it is deliberate ignorance. The opposite of science.

[IlSeFousDeTaGuele]

sadunkal - It is apparent from your comments that you do not understand the scientific method, and that conotoxin does.

HIV has been established as the cause of AIDs by multiple lines of evidence.

Science is ALWAYS open to be corrected, so if you have evidence that HIV does not cause AIDs, then feel free to present your evidence.

There is no such thing as "dissent" in science. You either have evidence, or you don't. And you obviously don't.