Comments on: Questioning The Validity of HIV & AIDS (continues)

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:31:29 +0000

Hey Nicholas, thanks for your reply! You might find part of the Energy Report for August of 2007 of interest in response to your question here. When you get there, scroll down to just below the caps reading END OF REPORT and you'll see a question that reads: "Can you discuss helpful ways to build the immune system and some holistic ways Troy can improve his health?" I can't wait to get all of that TLE stuff archived in a more searchable database!

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:45:40 +0000

Wow. I am coming to a clearer understanding of why it is so important to QUESTION and not take anything on blind-faith, just because someone else said so. I have a question for you, Troy. However, I understand if you don’t want to share in this format. Before you were diagnosed as being HIV+, would you say that your lifestyle was such that it could have suppressed your immune system functioning? Of course, SO MANY FACTORS contribute to lowering our immune functioning! Lack of good sleep, for example…

Thank you, Troy, for your courage in QUESTIONING publicly, so that people like me can learn and grow…

And thank you, too, John Barrows. The way you responded throughout this discussion helped me to see those parts of myself that will oftentimes respond out of fear and defense…

By: Irene

Irene — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:21:39 +0000

I had not paid any attention to my blog – I finally read your comment and realized the last time I haunted your blog you had just gotten over being out of the hospital. I totally missed any single mention of your Status and when I read this post my eyes stung. My drama is so miniscule compared to this – and you really put it in perspective for me. I have so many questions like the Magic Johnson miraculous recovery and the average person and their dilemmas. There are so many discrepancies in medicine, treatment, for AIDS and other major diseases. We have to always remember that medicine is a PRACTICE. We are allowing people to practice on us. There are no rules, there is what is found so far… and when down the road the pseudo rule of medical practice is found to cause some side effect they practice another rule… Nothing is etched in stone and sometimes something can cause a very different reaction in different people. I understand your feeling on the medicine and I hope in my heart of hearts that one day the truth about HIV and AIDS is found, and there is a vaccine and cure for it.

I think I will be busy playing catch up here this weekend. You are in my thoughts, and my chant tonight will be about you.

Namaste
Irene
.-= Irene chose to share this personal blog entry courtesy of CommentLuv ::: I Did, But I Sort of Didn’t Want to… =-.

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:46:56 +0000

First off, I appreciate your change of tone. I know this is a sensitive issue, which is why I posted the warning at the very beginning of the post. I was also clear in all three of my posts that I am seeking answers. I am not taking any stances. These are tough questions for me to ask while being diagnosed with a terminal illness. There is a need for sensitivity and patience from both sides. The questions and details posed across my three HIV/AIDS posts have yet to be answered for me beyond the pat responses of insults, hostility, and the all-too-familiar “because I said so” mentality. The use of the term “denialists” is also an insulting distraction from the valid scientific and medical “dissenters” whose positions have never been one of denial, but of pointing out the flaws and inconsistencies, and of asking for proof to support the hypotheses. Their position can be summed up more accurately as, “we aren’t saying that HIV doesn’t exist, we are just asking for substantial proof that it does exist.”

If HIV=AIDS is valid, has been isolated, and can be so conclusively presented, then why wasn’t any of this able to be used for the Australian trial on HIV? The Defense for the man being accused of intentionally infecting a partner with HIV pointed out that in any other trial of assault, the alleged weapon had to be proven to exist and to have been used. All they asked was that HIV be proven conclusively to not only exist, but to be contagious. This was not able to be done. The trial was tossed out of court. Gallo’s own testimony undermined the claims that HIV=AIDS, etc.

HIV on TRIAL Transcripts

I just wonder how something like that can happen if the story is as solid as you say.

* Page 1294 where Gallo agrees that he found evidence of HIV in only 40% of the AIDS patients in his original study, and that 40% is not enough to prove HIV is the cause of AIDS:

Attorney to Gallo: “You had…48 out of 119, or 40%?”

Gallo: “I agree”

Attorney: “Do you agree that the isolation of HIV from only 40% of patients is not proof that HIV causes AIDS?”

Gallo: “I would say of course, in and of itself, 40% isolation of a new virus, I would not say is the cause.”

* Page 1300 where Gallo admits to finding low percentages of HIV positivity in people with AIDS symptoms:

Attorney: “For…adults with KS, 30%; for adults…with AIDS opportunistic infections 47%. Do you accept your figures?”

Gallo: “I accept the figures.”

* Page 1317 where Gallo acknowledges finding no HIV in KS lesions or in T cells, and testimony on page 1318 in which Gallo admits that “viral load” tests cannot be used to prove infection with a virus.

By: John Barrow

John Barrow — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:11:12 +0000

Troy,
Those who tell you that the virus has “never been isolated,” and “never been captured in an image” are lying to you.
The virus has been isolated many, many times, and this is done routinely in research studies, especially in vaccine studies. Vaccine concepts have been engineered which are HIV virions with genetic deletions to make them not replication competent.
As for “seeing” them, they are seen by electron microscopy. Now, electron microscopy looks at things that are really, really small, and of course, you’re actually looking at the chemicals used to create images. …..just as you do for fingerprints, or many types of cells which are much, much larger, and not readily visible under the visible light spectrum.
Even if nobody had “seen” the virus itself, what would that mean? Nobody has ever seen an atom, yet the evidence for their existence is pretty convincing.
I don’t want to sound angry with you, personally. It’s true that most of the articles I sent are old……..because the science of this question was settled in the 80s and 90s……and the depth of knowledge has only grown more profound.
Meanwhile, the “denialists” are caught in some twilight zone…….they have not produced a new thought since Deusberg……..and that was more than 20 years ago.

By: John Barrow

John Barrow — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:51:52 +0000

I’m not being an angry asshole, I’m trying to stop people from thinking the denialist “stuff.”
I would ask you to look at one thing on “denialist” sites. They are always criticizing this or that trial, usually for entirely bogus reasons, but they focus on trying to discredit research done in thousands of clinical trials.
The clinical trials to prove the denialist claims would be simple, fast, and revealing. There has never been a single “research” study to validate these flimsy hypotheses……..
Meanwhile, it is safe to say that in South Africa alone, thousands of people died unnecessarily because the government swallowed this garbage.
Yes, in fact, that does make me angry…….

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:18:52 +0000

@John, okay, I just read those articles and they are compelling, but they lead to the same place that I always find when following references supporting the mainstream hypothesis of HIV/AIDS. They all reference organizations and people who benefit entirely from the so-called "epidemic" (which by definition it never was), references to articles over 10 years old, and the worst is that they reference themselves, similar to the way Christians claim that the Bible is true because it says so, itself. I really want to see the independent research and scientific papers that support the claims.

The second article was heartbreaking and I feel for those peoples' stories. I think in any situation where there is no solid information and no solid reference, there are going to be potential casualties from extremists on both sides. I'm not an extremist, and most dissenters I know are not extremists. They only want proof and answers, and not the typical responses of "because I told you so," or the Martian Argument that says if you can't prove it DOESN'T exist, then that's proof that it DOES exist.

Along with the recent details about Gallo's forging false documents for his press conference in his eagerness to take credit for the HIV discovery when the tests did not prove to support his theories, just makes it very difficult to roll over.

I'm on my meds; I take care of myself as best I can... but the questions remain unanswered. I mean, just the very simple fact that HIV has never been isolated and that no image has ever been able to be captured of the virus... Every other virus in existences that we claim is connected to the cause of a disease can be seen. The fact that HIV is so elusive that we can't even test for it, let alone photograph it, leaves me very confused.

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:40:45 +0000

@John, thank you for these… I will read them thoroughly and respond. I’m sorry you feel compelled to be such an angry asshole about all of this. I’m trying to find my own path to some conclusive answers and people like you make that sensitive process a lot more complicated and painful. I’m sorry you feel threatened by my questioning, or if you think that what you know should be immediately accepted without question, but some of us see this as more than just a matter of religious zeal and blind faith in medicine and drug companies. This is my life we are talking about, and for you to be so insensitive is part of the very reason I continue to question. When those who claim that HIV/AIDS should not be questioned, and the reprimanding for questioning is delivered with such hostility and insult, it makes me doubt even more. Because when the truth is the truth, there’s no need for such anger and insult. Facts stand as facts and all you would have to do is kindly and compassionately offer up your sources.

By: Troy

Troy — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:30:57 +0000

@John, you are reacting the same way as a religious zealot reacts in that all you are saying is that we are stupid, absurd, wrong, and that there is no room for questioning… yet, there’s no tangible evidence or references. There is no need for name-calling, hostility, and insults. I have no idea why that seems to be the modus operandi from people who have found peace with their conclusions. When I feel I KNOW something and someone else is asking for clarity and information, I don’t insult them or call them ignorant and stupid for asking. I kindly direct them to sources where they can draw their own conclusions and I share what I know, but why so much hostility?

And you kind of lost some credibility with me on this last reaction because it’s a common, well-known fact that is openly admitted and discussed within the scientific and medical industry, and INCLUDED as a disclaimer in the HIV TESTS themselves,that the tests have no standard, and that they cannot conclusively detect the presence of HIV. At present, not only is lifestyle and personal history taken into account if that information is available, but a person can be diagnosed as HIV Positive in one state or country and HIV Negative in another.

By: John Barrow

John Barrow — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:01:02 +0000

http://www.aegis.org/topics/mdelaney.html

This is another good summary.

The evidence is solid. HIV is the cause of AIDS.

To deny this at this point is not “brave,” “controversial,” or “daring.” It is merely obnoxious.