.. Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 this page is still online: http://www.geocities.com/doxyblue/alltrink.html Cheers! Wow, those were great. Thanks for the trip down memory lane PM! Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 Denying a link between AIDS and HIV was not controversial, that was just plain stupid.... A guy who denies AIDS cannot be taken seriously in any matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radioman Posted August 30, 2008 Report Share Posted August 30, 2008 Denying a link between AIDS and HIV was not controversial' date=' that was just plain stupid....[/quote'] A guy who denies AIDS cannot be taken seriously in any matter I always thought that he did not deny A.I.D.S. per se but more the apparently inextricable link that H.I.V. (the virus) leads inexorably to A.I.D.S. (the syndrome) and whether or not that has been proven, to wit, there maybe people with the virus (H.I.V.) that never develop the syndrome (A.I.D.S.), whilst still others might perish from some failure in their immune system without ever having been diagnosed with the virus. Is it really always necessary that one begets the other in a mutually exclusive order or are other scenarios possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCorinthian Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 I always thought that he did not deny A.I.D.S. per se but more the apparently inextricable link that H.I.V. (the virus) leads inexorably to A.I.D.S. (the syndrome) and whether or not that has been proven, to wit, there maybe people with the virus (H.I.V.) that never develop the syndrome (A.I.D.S.), whilst still others might perish from some failure in their immune system without ever having been diagnosed with the virus. Is it really always necessary that one begets the other in a mutually exclusive order or are other scenarios possible? We were told that no one that has HIV dies of old age. All have either been knocked off by accident or tragedy and the rest of an AIDS related illness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shygye Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Denying a link between AIDS and HIV was not controversial' date=' that was just plain stupid....[/quote'] A guy who denies AIDS cannot be taken seriously in any matter I always thought that he did not deny A.I.D.S. per se but more the apparently inextricable link that H.I.V. (the virus) leads inexorably to A.I.D.S. (the syndrome) and whether or not that has been proven, to wit, there maybe people with the virus (H.I.V.) that never develop the syndrome (A.I.D.S.), whilst still others might perish from some failure in their immune system without ever having been diagnosed with the virus. Is it really always necessary that one begets the other in a mutually exclusive order or are other scenarios possible? A very small % of the population have a natural immunity to HIV infections. This is due to their genetic makeup. The study of such individuals has lead to new classes of drugs that block HIV from infecting T-cells. The situation is similar to typhoid. Typhoid is the result of being infected with the typhus bacterium. 100% of the people with typhoid fever have the typhus bacterium. However, about 25% of the population will have no symptoms despite being infected. Just lookup Typhoid Mary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.