224724 Bullies, 3729 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 122
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 12 345612 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. chaosexmachina is offline
    chaosexmachina's Avatar

    Unexpected Elbow

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    4,450

    Posted On:
    7/22/2004 4:29am

    Join us... or die
     Style: MMA/Pankration

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    pwned?
    "The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I'll never be as good as a wall." - Mitch Hedberg

    El Guapo says dance!
  2. Beatdown Richie is offline
    Beatdown Richie's Avatar

    game dog

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,886

    Posted On:
    7/22/2004 9:16am

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    SuperSport: for anyone to make any sense of this article, one critical number is missing: the probability that a non-infected person will test positive for HIV, for whatever reason.

    Why do you post this? Are you trying to imply that AIDS is not a real danger, or that HIV is not responsible for AIDS, or any other bullshit along the same lines?
    There are no wrong threats, only wrong answers. (Strategy game truism)
  3. PizDoff is offline

    .

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    18,598

    Posted On:
    7/22/2004 10:06am

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: Grappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Originally posted by chaosexmachina
    pwned?
    \

    I don't internet battle, but I was attempting to clarify my position.
    Surfing Facebook at work? Spread the good word by adding us on Facebook today! https://www.facebook.com/Bullshido
  4. SuperSport28405 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Posts
    119

    Posted On:
    7/22/2004 2:30pm


     Style: Aikido/Ground and pound

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Originally posted by Beatdown Richie
    SuperSport: for anyone to make any sense of this article, one critical number is missing: the probability that a non-infected person will test positive for HIV, for whatever reason.

    Why do you post this? Are you trying to imply that AIDS is not a real danger, or that HIV is not responsible for AIDS, or any other bullshit along the same lines?
    I posted this so that people would be aware that there are things that can cause a false positive reaction on an HIV antibody test(s).


    I am not trying to imply that AIDS is not a real danger.


    While HIV is a fantasy, AIDS is very real.

    HIV has never been proven to exist. While it is en vogue to repeat the lie "HIV causes AIDS" it has never been proven.

    I was questioning the HIV/AIDS model in the Alkalizing for Health thread in this forum. The thread was closed because we got off subject quite a bit -something I will take the majority of the responsibility for. I had stated in that thread that i would make this post regarding the 66 known reasons for causing a false positive reaction on an hiv antibody test.

    There are many lengthy posts over there in regards to the HIV/AIDS sham.....some members may be interested, some may not.

    Brandeissanoo recomended that I start individual threads pertaining to the many topics of discussion in that thread....so that is what I am doing.

    NOTE-Beatdown Richie-in regards to the the probability that a non-infected person will test positive.
    Since HIV has never been proven to exist that would mean there is no infected people with this so-called HIV and that all of the positive tests are in fact false-positives.

    I follow the opinion of many of the scientists and MD's in The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of AIDS.

    Many microbiologists, biochemists, virologists, and MD's are adamant that HIV does not exist.

    To prove the existence of a retrovirus there is an established protocol that is followed to properly isolate such a virus.

    HIV has never been properly isolated-not even once.
    The self alledged discoverer of HIV-Robert Gallo of NCI-merely found reverse transcriptase and some protiens that are not unique to HIV. Reverse transcriptase is not unique to retroviruses either, btw.

    None of the testing is specific. We have been lied to IMO...and I am on Bullshido-a board dedicated to exposing BS and fraud-trying to prove just that.
  5. Beatdown Richie is offline
    Beatdown Richie's Avatar

    game dog

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,886

    Posted On:
    7/22/2004 3:19pm

    supporting member
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    > In regards to the the probability that a non-infected person will
    > test positive.
    > Since HIV has never been proven to exist that would mean there
    > is no infected people with this so-called HIV and that all of the
    > positive tests are in fact false-positives.
    You, sir, are not only an idiot, but also a dangerous idiot.

    Which of the following facts would you dispute?

    1. Many people die of an immunodeficiency disease whose trademark is steady decline of T-cells.
    2. Many of these people can be verified to have had contact (sexual intercourse, blood transfusions) with others who developed the disease.
    3. An HIV test in people who suffer from this disease is positive with overwhelming probability.
    4. An HIV test with people who do not suffer from the disease, nor develop it in a few years time, is negative with large probability.
    5. The people who had contact with sick people, but do not test positive, do not develop the disease with overwhelming probability.
    6. The mortality of people with a positive HIV test who are treated with antiviral drugs is much lower than that of HIV+ people who are not treated.
    If this chain holds, the claim that the HIV virus has not been properly isolated (not sure if that is true or not, by the way) is irrelevant to the conclusion that there is a deadly viral infection that causes AIDS, and HIV tests are at least somewhat specific to it.

    Even if HIV had never been *proven* to exist, that does not mean it does not exist.
    There are no wrong threats, only wrong answers. (Strategy game truism)
  6. SuperSport28405 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Posts
    119

    Posted On:
    7/23/2004 7:17am


     Style: Aikido/Ground and pound

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Originally posted by Beatdown Richie
    > In regards to the the probability that a non-infected person will
    > test positive.
    > Since HIV has never been proven to exist that would mean there
    > is no infected people with this so-called HIV and that all of the
    > positive tests are in fact false-positives.
    You, sir, are not only an idiot, but also a dangerous idiot.

    Which of the following facts would you dispute?

    1. Many people die of an immunodeficiency disease whose trademark is steady decline of T-cells.
    2. Many of these people can be verified to have had contact (sexual intercourse, blood transfusions) with others who developed the disease.
    3. An HIV test in people who suffer from this disease is positive with overwhelming probability.
    4. An HIV test with people who do not suffer from the disease, nor develop it in a few years time, is negative with large probability.
    5. The people who had contact with sick people, but do not test positive, do not develop the disease with overwhelming probability.
    6. The mortality of people with a positive HIV test who are treated with antiviral drugs is much lower than that of HIV+ people who are not treated.
    If this chain holds, the claim that the HIV virus has not been properly isolated (not sure if that is true or not, by the way) is irrelevant to the conclusion that there is a deadly viral infection that causes AIDS, and HIV tests are at least somewhat specific to it.

    Even if HIV had never been *proven* to exist, that does not mean it does not exist.
    Not sure how you can say that these are facts per se, but I would dispute 2, 3, and 6 for sure.

    Richie-first we need to ascertain that HIV exists. So far it has failed miserably at each and every attempt at isolation.

    If someone can prove HIV exists by viral isolation, which is a simple, cheap, established way of ascertaining the existence of a retrovirus we would then need to verify that it is present in all cases of AIDS.
    I will address items 2, 3, and 6 now .

    2-AIDS has never been proven to be contagious (ie no killer microbe). However i will say that receiving anal sex may be immune compromising (the jury is still out on this) and that blood transfusions in general are immune suppressing. If a patient receives blood from a drug addict or habitual user of nitrate "poppers" there is a very real possibility that immune suppression will occur in the blood receipient.

    3- it may appear that this is true....however there is some smoke and mirrors here.
    First-the HIV tests, whether antibody or viral load, are not specific for what is called HIV. The reason for this is because HIV has never been properly isolated. I will make a post with the proper rules and criteria for isolating a retrovirus after posting this.
    Now for the smoke and mirrors- we have the mysterious cases of people with AIDS and no HIV is detectable. This is called Idiopathic T-cell Lymphocytopenia (ICL). AIDS with no HIV. Of course idiopathic is the name given to a disease of unknown origin. The CDC has been collecting data in regards to people with ICL since around 1992 and so far they will not release any actual numbers. That is very odd indeed. However I have a document from Japan that states there is about 30x more people with ICL than there are people with low CD-4's and are HIV positive.
    Same disease....2 names. Isn't that strange??

    Of course the reason the CDC won't release any numbers is because it will destroy the HIV/AIDS hoax. My opinion of course.
    A girl that i worked with several years ago has an older brother with this ICL. He is gay,a drug abuser to the 25th power, has been told by his doc several years ago he has AIDS, has Kaposi's sarcoma ( a rare skin disease common to gay men that abuse poppers), but yet he has always been HIV negative.

    #6-I would like to see your sources for this. The Concorde study in Europe found differently-AZT has no life quality improvement or lifespan increase.
    Check out www.chronicillnet.org/online/intervention.html for more info. I have alot more I could post in regards to AZT...If you are interested just let me know.

    Why treat a lifestyle disease with antivirals anyway? And...AZT is not a true antiviral, it is a cancer chemotherapuetic drug that was denied FDA approval in 1964 on grounds that it was too toxic.
    But yet it was rapidly approved for AIDS patients deemed HIV positive.
    AZT is a DNA chain terminator. It kills cells, especially ones in the bone marrow and digestive system.
    A paradox that it kills key immune cells in the bone marrow-red cells too of course which brings on blood transfusions in many cases. More immune suppression for the already immune suppressed. Odd.
  7. SuperSport28405 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Posts
    119

    Posted On:
    7/23/2004 7:22am


     Style: Aikido/Ground and pound

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Isolation of retroviruses-
    To analyse their constituents and to prove they are truly viruses, retroviral-like particles must first be purified. This is done by a process called density gradient ultracentrifugation, something that may sound complicated but which isn't. A test tube containing a solution of sucrose, ordinary table sugar, is prepared light at the top, but gradually becoming heavier towards the bottom. A drop of fluid from a cell culture is gently placed on top and the test-tube is centrifuged for several hours at extremely high speeds. This generates forces many thousands of times that of gravity and any tiny particles present are gradually forced through the sugar solution until they reach a point where their buoyancy prevents them penetrating further. For retroviral particles, this occurs where the density reaches 1.16 gm/ml, the point where the particles concentrate or, to use virological jargon, band. The 1.16 band can then be selectively extracted and photographed with an electron microscope. So, to prove the existence of a retrovirus one is obliged to:

    1. Culture putatively infected cells.

    2. Purify a sample in a sucrose density gradient.

    3. Photograph the 1.16 band proving there are particles of the right size and form, and there is no other material.

    4. Extract and analyse the constituents of the particles and prove they contain reverse transcriptase by showing they can make DNA from RNA.

    5. Culture purified particles with virgin cells demonstrating that a new set of particles appears with the same morphology and constituents as the originals.

    There are many awards available to the person or persons that can isolate HIV. I know of at least 35K in cash awards, and I found out recently that there may be a 100K award available also.

    I sure hope someone can isolate this HIV thing and then find it in all cases of AIDS. I would sleep better at night knowing that the US gov't has not spent 115 billion dollars of tax payer money while killing hundreds of thousands of americans and millions of Africans with antiviral drug therapy along the way
  8. SuperSport28405 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Posts
    119

    Posted On:
    7/23/2004 7:31am


     Style: Aikido/Ground and pound

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You, sir, are not only an idiot, but also a dangerous idiot.


    lol. I understand that when I post information of this nature that it elicits a knee jerk response by a few people.

    You have been mislead Richie. No biggie, we all have been. 5 Years ago I felt the same way you do.....but since then I have read a good bit of info and corresponded with several scientists and MD's who have questioned this HIV/AIDS hypthesis.

    There is no scientific substance to the hypothesis of HIV causing AIDS. There is no relevant data in the laboratory or in the real world to maintain such a hypothesis.
  9. knight_errant is offline
    knight_errant's Avatar

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    The Styx, SW Wales.
    Posts
    472

    Posted On:
    7/23/2004 7:38am


     Style: MMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    How the hell can something that isn't a virus:
    be transmitted in blood
    be passed from mother to child
    give ANY kind of viral positive on an antibody test?
  10. SuperSport28405 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Carolina Beach, NC
    Posts
    119

    Posted On:
    7/23/2004 7:48am


     Style: Aikido/Ground and pound

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Also-In regards to the testing. I would also like to mention that many people in the fighting community and bodybuilding community use performance enhancing compounds. I have no proof that these compounds could possibly cause a positive reaction on an HIV antibody test, but who knows?
    It is not like there are any human trials of any type with vet compounds such as tren and EQ you know.

    Think about that when you get you HIV test done.

    BTW-these antibody tests are not yes or no tests. They are not black or white, they are grey. If you meet or exceed the threshold you are positive, if not you are negative. What exactly is the threshold? I dunno....must be an arbitrary number.

    Here is a little quote by an MD/PhD student I had a discussion with at another board. This student runs a HIV vaccine research lab at a major US university.
    Check this out.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by supersport
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by einstein1905
    [B] A positive will turn into a negative at various dilutions depending on how high of a viral titer the person has.

    The testing is not HIV specific, and it is not reproduceable. You can have a blood draw performed and send part of the blood draw to one lab, the rest to another, and get 2 totally different readings.

    Wanna play Russian Roulette with the HIV testing? Thanks, but NO THANKS!!!!
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 12 345612 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.