Re: Where is the proof that the Hepatitis C (HCV) virus really exists? (same goes for HIV, the aids retrovirus)

 I have heard these claims before, but I disagree.

Sorry Hv, but how can you disagree with something you have only heard of without a deep study? This forum is called The Truth in Medicine.

How could they have produced electron microscope images of these viruses without isolating the viruses?:

Here´s your answer (for the HIV virus):

www.theperthgroup.com/FAQ/question3.html

and

www.theperthgroup.com/FAQ/question7.html

To address a few of their claims:

3. In no HIV "infected" cultures to date are there particles which fulfil the Gelderblom definition.  That is, that display both principle morphological characteristics of retroviruses, that is "a diameter of 100-120nm" AND surfaces which "are studded with projections (spikes, knobs)".

Yes, the "knobs, spikes" have been found:

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/news/news/303/

4.  In the only EM study, either in vivo or in vitro, in which suitable controls were used and in which extensive blind examination of controls and test material was performed virus particles indistinguishable from "HIV" were foundin 18/20 (90%) of AIDS as well as in 13/15 (88%) of non-AIDS or no risk of AIDS related lymph node enlargements.This led the authors to conclude:  "The presence of such particles do not, by themselves indicate infection with HIV" [7].  Seehere andhere.  Can you distinguish the AIDS from the non-AIDS patient?

Where they are making a mistake here is in thinking that AIDS is a disease, which it is not.  AIDS is a syndrome, which is a group of symptoms.  Therefore there is not a singular cause, and therefore virus WILL NOT be found in all cases of AIDS.  In fact the most common cause of AIDS has nothing to do with a virus, it is drug induced.  The drug AZT and its analogues destroy the bone marrow leading to a collapse of the immune system and thus AIDS.

I have discussed this and the problems with antibody testing numerous times in previous posts.  So I do agree with them as far as the antibody testing, but they are ignoring a lot of other evidence.

Normal cells also possess reverse transcribing enzymes which are not RT.

I noticed that they keep ignoring the fact that the virus has been genetically sequenced.  In order to genetically sequence the virus the virus must first be isolated.  And one fact they have ignored is that the virus has the gene for the production of RT, not just the enzyme.

I wish you got interested in the matter and read at least the links I sent in my initial post. 

I did, but they were not evidence.  They were opinion articles overlooking a lot of evidence.  Although as I said there are some statements I did agree with and had addressed numerous times in previous posts.  For example the fact that HIV cannot cause AIDS under the original definition of AIDS.  The definition of AIDS was changed to fit the virus after Gallo lied about HIV being the cause of AIDS.  This does not mean though that the virus does not exist.

www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2003/07/05/hepatitis_c_epidemic_where_is_the_virus.htm

This is old information I have seen posted before on the AOL boards when I use to post on there.  A lot has been learned since that time.