Re: Is this so hard to answer?

Hi Don!

Welcome to the list. Sounds like you still have a lot of research to do, but your questions are pretty sound. I know I'm pretty lax on this list lately, but like Allen mentioned, I do have a life outside of this list and find little time lately to be an active part of it.

But since I have some spare time tonight, I'll see if I can address some of this.

___________

||||>> I am a non HIV infected lister thats deeply interested in all immunity related conditions and what humans can do to fight and defeat them.I have followed the "HIV doesnt equal AIDS dialoge for years now and have to say I still have burning questions that have as of yet never been answered in this regard,to my
satisfaction.||>>


I guess my first question would be to ask what are you non-infected by?

Certainly not HIV, since there is no proof that HIV exists, and every test for HIV says clearly on the label that it is in fact, not a test for HIV. HIV has never been isolated according to the accepted scientific standard for virus or retrovirus isolation. Not to mention the tests are sadly innaccurate.

So how do you know you're non-infected?



As for your burning questions, I should think that the answers are out there already for the most part. If you want a good place to research, go to virusmyth.com and type in the keywords of your burning questions. That's what I've done andI've been more than satisfied with most of it.


___________

||||>> I would like to ask if anyone here can give all of us a straight forward answer that without any doubt shows that HIV
doesnt equal AIDS?||>>


Actually, this is quite difficult. It's very hard to give an answer to a question that is recursive by definition. AIDS is thirty different conditions that have always exsisted. But now, if you have a positive "antibody test", and one of these conditions you have AIDS. AIDS coincides 100% with HIV because it is defined by that test.


Unless you live in Africa, and then you don't have to test postive for HIV to be defined as having AIDS.


So, no, it is rather difficult to prove that HIV does or doesn't cause AIDS when the definitions are looser than an African Green Monkey so to speak. I think the whole problem isn't trying to prove this theory strictly false, but to reexamine all the facts and stop trying to heal people based on this ridiculous farce of a theory that one, undetectable virus causes anything and everything, but we don't know how and we don't know why, and there are no facts to hold it up. We make a lot of money and sell a lot of drugs. But our knowledge is sadly lacking.



But where is the proof that HIV causes Immune Dysfunction?

There's very little that I can see.

___________
||||>> I am well aware of the exceptional cases where people have had AIDS without HIV infection but truth be told, most cases have HIV as part of the picture whether a causitive or not? Here are some hard questions I would love to see well discussed here if possible?||>>



Again, we're talking about definitions. There is no AIDS without HIV because it's not AIDS unless it's accompanied by HIV. There are plenty of women who get cervical cancer. There are plenty of people who get pneumonia. There are plenty of people who get yeast infections and candida, and maleria and tuberculosis.


It's only AIDS if this non specific test ringsthe right combination of bells. Of course, that combination is different everywhere you go. So I can have just a yeast infection in Australia, and have full blown AIDS in Canada.... and never actually change my health.

However, there seems to be quite a lot of people who are "HIV Positive" without AIDS. Take the people on this board. Quite a few. There are a couple who have some pretty serious health problems. But I know plenty of people right up close who have even worse health problems and don't test positive.

So in fact, ALL AIDS cases have HIV as part of the picture, because otherwise they're something else. In the US anyway. In Africa, if you have a week long sniffle, you have AIDS. Test be damned.

___________

||||>> 1. If HIV does not cause AIDS then why do researchers such as Bob Beck claim that by using his electronic devices that the HIV loads are lowered to the point of non detection and the people who formerly were in bad shape, recovered?||>>



There's a wonderful book called "Dancing Naked in the Mind Field" by Dr. Kary Mullis. Just a kick in the ass. He's great. He won the Nobel Prize for inventing the Polymyrase Chain Reaction test. It's astounding. Very good for court cases and detecting DNA. PCR is what is used for Viral Load. It's wonderful technology.
It takes something that's very small, and replicates it untill there's so much, you can easily see it. The problem is, it's not numerically accurate. It's imperfect in counting. He says as much. It can not accurately count "HIV" not only because it was not made to do such a thing... but because there is no gold standard HIV for it to use as a template. Half of what it detects is protein garbage found in the Human Genome.

I don't know who this Bob Beck is, but is his claim backed by substantial clinical trials? Placebo and non? Also... maybe his electronic device helps to cure the real illness a person might have. How much money does he make on his little devices?

How many hopeful "Pozers" buy this little device and cure their yeast infections and such? If it's so effective, why isn't it required as a treatment in AIDS labs?
Of course, we could go off on a whole new tangent here. I doubt this Bob Beck is any better than Hulda Clark or anyone else. He's made something that heals, and uses HIV and Cancer as his selling tools.


___________

||||>> According to Beck himself he also agreed HIV did not cause AIDS then pray tell, what does that tell us about his research? Totally baffles me!||>>


Exactly! What does that tell us about his research? There are plenty of people out there who say they're dissidents. Unfortunately, just like anything else, we get the quacks along with the geniouses. I'm not saying Beck is a quack. But he's not the be all and end all of HIV research.


___________
||||>> 2.Many claims are thrown about that the people who get the AIDS symptoms are basically the people who lived hard and rough and basically shot their immune systems all to hell.||>>



Well women who get cervical cancer ... HIV positive or not, are certainly not always those kind of people.

But if they test for HIV, then by god, it's AIDS. Sure there are some people out there who led fairly decent lifestyles and got sick. I have a friend (negative) who lives healthier than most people I know and he's been dealing with a horrendous eczema rash all over his body, ear infection, sinus infection. The doctors can't figure it out. He's a healthy man. So what happened? The only reason it's not AIDS is because he didn't get the positive test.



It's not like it doesn't happen, but I find in my research, that it's been more the exception than the rule.

___________

||||>> While I certainly see a correlation here I also have to look at miriads of Women children who didnt use drugs,stay out till all hours at night without proper rest, didnt have parasites, live in poverty and squalor etc etc. and still have AIDS?

Whats the story here?||>>




Miriad? Miriads of woman and children? Where? Where are they? 90% of the people who have AIDS are men, and 85% are drug users. This means 85% of the women who have AIDS are drug users. There are almost no babies ever with AIDS.

Where are they? Did they by chance do the AIDS drugs? Maybe that's where the problem lies.


___________

||||>> 3.It would be interesting to see if memebers here who are positives were all drug users, drinkers, carrousers and generally burned the candle on both ends and truthfully feel that was the cause of AIDS like conditions that they may have?||>>


There are quite a few. I know many in our Heal Group. One boy, I know had AIDS, was on his death bed from the San Fran Gay Bathhouse lifestyle. He was afraid of the drugs though. He watched 35 friends and lovers die, while he lived through it.

Today he's healthy as can be. Many stories like this, but not mine to tell I'm afraid. I had an impacted colon, got Mono, tested positive (even though all my partners were negative) and got better when I found the problem. I still have some colon problems, but otherwise, I'm healthy and happy.


___________
||||>> I realize you might be poz but dont have AIDS and we all know that HIV > is spread from body to body through various means.||>>


Do we? I don't. If my lovers were all Negative, how did I get the proverbial "IT"?

HIV hasn't been found in Semen and in the only research of its kind, when they tested 500 serodiscordant (one negative and one positive) individuals, no one passed it to the other. That's where the orthodox got the famous, though rarely spouted statistic of 1 in 1000 unprotected contacts with an HIV positive. So what is it we all know?



___________

||||>> I am generally interested to know if in fact any AIDS patients here feel that it was definately their lifestyle that got them here or did they in fact have to have the HIV to get to this point? I am just tired of seeing all the theories that are about without any real on the street interviews that can clearly dispute or repudiate the claims?

Where does the real truth lay here?||>>

I would love to see more of that too. Unfortunatel, only a couple of people on this list actually have ever had to deal with AIDS related conditions. Paul and Michael are the only ones I know of.

I know a lot of people here in Colorado who have had that experience, but unlike me, they're tired of the fight and just want to live their lives in peace, without being hammered by orthodox crap and all the stress that comes with it. It is stressful being a dissident. Especially an active one. It's not always fun.

I'm sorry Don. There are no straight answers really. But it seems that you still have quite a lot of studying to do before you understand all the facets of this. It's just not black and white. It's not like there's one definitive answer. You actually have to go study all sorts of scientific sh...tuff. You have to read and read and read and understand.

HIV Positive doesn't mean nothing. It's stupid to think that a positive test means nothing. As far as I'm concerned, it means that you're antibody level is high and therefore, something is most likely wrong. However, it could just mean that you were sick recently and it caused a positive test. But it certainly doesn't seem to mean that you will die of some disease in 2 to ten years. I think it's a warning to take more care of yourself. We do too much to our own bodies, thinking we can take the abuse. Eventually the body has to do something about it.

Good luck in your search. I hope this helped a little. If you have more specific questions, don't hesitate to ask.

Caer