Oh No, Not Another HIV thread

[thegman]

I just watched an interesting documentary on HIV/AIDS called "House of Numbers"

 

 

http://www.houseofnumbers.com/site/

 

 

Raised some interesting questions which "experts" couldn't answer. Anyone else seen it / got any opinions on it ?

 

Sorry if it has been discussed before but a search turned up nothing.

 

 

Cheers

[xrayspecs]

It's a very biased and misleading documentary - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Numbers

[thegman]

That Wikipedia article doesn't have any real substance. Of course a film of this nature will be controversial and criticised.

 

There is no evidence that HIV exists - it has never been isolated. That means that no scientist can show you a picture of the HIV virus.

 

When you are tested, the test is for the presence of antibodies not the virus itself. And as the virus has never been isolated, it follows that the antibody test is non-specific with a high risk of a non positive.

 

There is no evidence linking HIV to AIDS, only the word of Dr. Robert Gallo and it's worth scrutinising his background. Many people were diagnosed with HIV in the mid 80's and didn't take toxic AZT are still alive and healthy now.

 

In another study over a 10 year period of 100 HIV+ people in heterosexual relationships there was no infection to the partners.

 

And before anybody mentions anything similar, I do personally know someone that supposedly "caught" HIV in Pattaya from a girl many years ago (15 years ago and is still healthy without drugs), which leaves me even more confused.

 

I am not advocating barebacking or non use of condoms, merely suggesting that people watch this film as it is a real eye opener.

 

Cheers

Edited April 17, 2011 by thegman

[Harry Brown]

If Aids and HIV do not exist, then pull your condom off and go to the AIDS hospitals in Thailand , shag as many as you can , then we will see if you change your mind

[thegman]

Rooster did you watch the film yet ? If so, which part did you disagree with ?

 

I am only interested in opinions from people that have watched the film already.

 

Cheers

[Harry Brown]

Yes I watched the film, that is a few edited clips of people in the medical field making staments that could have been about any one of many medical topics, not just HIV, AIDS.

 

and even if AIDS HIV was not proven conclusively it would be best to err on the side of caution,

 

 

SO thegeeman what is your take on this are you a disbeliever on AIDS , HIV. do you think it is BS if so why do you believe that( because this guy told you)

 

Are you trying to convert everyone to your way of thinking on this subject.

 

 

no offense intended just want your take on things, for me I happen to believe that there is AIDS and HIV out there .

[thegman]

Hi,

 

Valid questions you ask.

 

I am not trying to convert anyone as I am not yet convinced. I don't feel confident myself to bareback every girl after watching a 90 minute film, so I wouldn't advocate anyone else doing it. But I personally found it very interesting and cannot dismiss the content.

 

There were many questions that the film raised, and as this board seems to have a huge fear factor of HIV, with Dr Winston O Boogies almost fear mongering posts et al I thought it worthy of discussion that in fact perhaps the risks are infinitely smaller that we have been socialized to accept, if there are any risks at all.

 

Certain huge facts remain undisputed

 

HIV has never been isolated.

 

Quite hard to get past that IMO.

 

And I totally agree about erring on the side of caution.

 

 

Cheers

[Highlander]

Yawn, another keyboard genius

 

Just wondering why you singled out the Doc as an example, is it because the title Dr in his title?

[Harry Brown]

I do agree that there is a lot we ( medical profession) do not know about AIDS/ HIV, but then again there could be no cure, ( man has not found a cure to any virus yet) only immunization and prevention, but alas no drugs invented yet that can immunize us against AIDS/ HIV yet.

 

 

There have been reports of some people that carry the virus but the virus does not seem to affect them. Maybe the scientific community can study these people to find out what protects them.

 

I don't think it is a case of eating a lot of broccoli ( joking) more a case of IMHO that there are a few people that this virus can't kill and if this virus was around hundreds or thousands of years ago then it would have been survival of the fittest or Darwin's theory of evolution as it would kill off all others and then maybe the virus would die out .

 

[xrayspecs]

I have seen this documentary and another one like it and thought it was very interesting until I did further reading on the people who promote these views and other people responses and opinions. I feel it is always good to look at both sides of an argument.

 

While I think debating most things is interesting things that cause people to bury their heads in the sand when life threatening illnesses are concerned are very wrong.

 

One of the women in the film Christine Maggiore had HIV. She was a prominent active denialist for years and refused to take medication even when she was pregnant. As a result her daughter died of AIDS when she was only three. She and her family still lived in denial and would continue to promote her view that HIV does not cause AIDS until she actually died of AIDS too. Her family still denied it.

 

Sorry but I want to live. I have no hope of understanding and researching such complicated matters myself so I choose to believe the bulk of the medical establishment.

Edited April 17, 2011 by xrayspecs

[UN4GIVN]

It's pretty easy for a scientist to throw bogus arguments at non-scientists (ie, most of us) and have them sound plausible. But we can always fall back on logic. Lot's of previously very healthy people died emaciated. If you don't know any personally, then ask yourself, what happened to Freddy Mercury? Rock Hudson? And many others. How did they end up with infections and cancers that almost no one had ever gotten before? Mycobacterium Avium Intracelulare, Kaposi Sarcoma, etc. What happened to recipients of blood transfusions who who came down with the same symptoms?

 

Also, how is it that many people with "fake" AIDS responded to combination anti-retroviral therapy? If these drugs were combating a non-existent disease/virus, how did these people recover? Is it reasonable to assume that every laboratory and hospital on the planet is conspiring to fool us?

 

I'm not one to believe anything the government tells me. Of course there can be a lot of deception about AIDS regarding modes and ease of transmission, risk factors, high risk groups, etc. The government ALWAYS has an incentive to fear-monger and use every opportunity to increase the public's dependency and confusion. AIDS can be used for that purpose and it has been. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And scientists are not perfect. Maybe what we refer to as HIV is in fact a group of loosely related viruses. But that doesn't mean it (or they) wont kill you.

 

Lastly, I'm not one to lecture anyone about bare-backing or whatever. It's a choice between you and your girl. But do not deceive yourself about the risks. Good Luck.

[thegman]

All very good points raised.

 

But these facts remain indisputable :-

 

HIV has never been isolated (no scientist can show you what the virus looks like)

 

The HIV test does not test for the HIV virus

 

There is no proven scientific link between HIV and AIDS - as nobody knows what HIV is, looks like or what it's actions are.

 

 

Cheers

[xrayspecs]

... (sigh) ...

[thegman]

Sighman,

 

 

Yes, I agree.

 

 

Cheers

[Highlander]

You still have not answered my question about why you singled out Dr W?

 

Surely in this day and age when ALL the facts are not known about this virus it is better to err on the side of caution, so I would hardly call it scare mongering.

 

I look forward to your feedback.

 

Regards

 

HL

[Scumbag]

All very good points raised.

 

But these facts remain indisputable :-

 

HIV has never been isolated (no scientist can show you what the virus looks like)

 

The HIV test does not test for the HIV virus

 

There is no proven scientific link between HIV and AIDS - as nobody knows what HIV is, looks like or what it's actions are.

 

 

Cheers

Is that correct? Here is an image that claims to be an electron microscope image of the HIV virus (source).

 

[thegman]

You still have not answered my question about why you singled out Dr W?

 

Surely in this day and age when ALL the facts are not known about this virus it is better to err on the side of caution, so I would hardly call it scare mongering.

 

I look forward to your feedback.

 

Regards

 

HL

 

 

Highlander here is my "feedback" you have been looking forward to :-

 

 

Being as you opened your post #8 questioning why I singled out Dr W with this

 

 

"Yawn, another keyboard genius"

 

 

I concluded because of you're initial rude, dismissive and patronising response that you were not interested in any real debate or discussion on this issue, therefore I didn't bother to respond. Also please bear in mind I have no obligation to explain myself to you or anybody whether you're a mod or not, though FWIW I do regard Dr W as one of the best posters on this forum in other areas, so no axe to grind against him personally.

 

And as for your remark about erring on the side of caution may I refer you to my last line of post #7

 

"And I totally agree about erring on the side of caution."

 

 

Hope that clears things up

[thegman]

Is that correct? Here is an image that claims to be an electron microscope image of the HIV virus (source).

 

 

 

HIV has never been isolated so it is impossible to show what the virus looks like.

 

The HIV test kit does not test for the virus. It tests for non specific antibodies. Why does it not test for the virus ? Because no-one knows what the virus is. It has never been isolated. Surely anyone with any logic or vaguest scientific background would find this somewhat interesting ? That this virus does all these terrible things, but after billions spent, no one can even show a lab picture of the virus or understand its function ?

 

There is definitely something going on out there though, people are wasting away and dying. Of that there is also no dispute.

 

 

Cheers

[Joltin' Joe]

HIV has never been isolated so it is impossible to show what the virus looks like.

 

The HIV test kit does not test for the virus. It tests for non specific antibodies. Why does it not test for the virus ? Because no-one knows what the virus is. It has never been isolated. Surely anyone with any logic or vaguest scientific background would find this somewhat interesting ? That this virus does all these terrible things, but after billions spent, no one can even show a lab picture of the virus or understand its function ?

 

There is definitely something going on out there though, people are wasting away and dying. Of that there is also no dispute.

 

 

Cheers

 

So.....If a punter and a BG go to Patts International Hospital and both get a panel of tests for STDs done (if they do that) or just HIV tests done and they test 'clean', would barebacking be relatively low risk for a month or so after the test? All advice welcome.

[Scumbag]

HIV has never been isolated so it is impossible to show what the virus looks like.

 

What I posted is an image of the HIV virus!! How can they take a photo of something that can not be isolated?

 

I don't know what sources you are using for your information but I would trust what the Noble Prize committee has to say rather than some random websites: Nobel Prize Surprise

 

The Nobel committee credits Montagnier and Barré-Sinoussi for first isolating the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) from a French patient with swollen lymph nodes.

 

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2008

 

There is a lot of mis-information on the internet.

[Highlander]

Highlander here is my "feedback" you have been looking forward to :-

 

 

Being as you opened your post #8 questioning why I singled out Dr W with this

 

 

"Yawn, another keyboard genius"

 

 

I concluded because of you're initial rude, dismissive and patronising response that you were not interested in any real debate or discussion on this issue, therefore I didn't bother to respond. Also please bear in mind I have no obligation to explain myself to you or anybody whether you're a mod or not, though FWIW I do regard Dr W as one of the best posters on this forum in other areas, so no axe to grind against him personally.

 

And as for your remark about erring on the side of caution may I refer you to my last line of post #7

 

"And I totally agree about erring on the side of caution."

 

 

Hope that clears things up

Rude, dismissive and patronising maybe, but in internet forums I am sure you are familiar with the terminology Troll (Source) and I saw you as such, so as a Mod on the forum and if I believe you are trying create such a troll type situation or to discredit another BM by singling them out, it is my duty as a moderator to request a 'Please Explain" where as if you had mentioned no names and just said "opinions on here are blah blah, blah" I might have sat back a bit longer before saying anything.

 

If you are unhappy as to this happening, there are other forums where the IQ is much lower and most people will just agree with you.

 

As I previously said this is a topic that the greatest minds in the world are working on and this documentary was literally pulled to bits by these such minds.

 

Documentaries as previously mentioned can quote some facts, omit others and change the point of view of a person, who could use this theory to go and look on the internet to see why others have disagreed with their theories.

 

As Scumbag has posted, the virus has been identified by an electron microscope no less, and the 1st man has been officially cured of HIV Source including the Nobel prize winners also mentioned. This is also another moderating duty to monitor that information posted is factual.

 

The forum is here to talk about Pattaya related things and one of which is promoting safe sex so we take a dim view of people saying that things aren't as bad as almost all of the world health professionals say it is.

 

Without prejudice

 

Highlander

[Devil Plaything]

HIV has never been isolated so it is impossible to show what the virus looks like.

 

false

 

The HIV test kit does not test for the virus. It tests for non specific antibodies. Why does it not test for the virus ? Because no-one knows what the virus is. It has never been isolated.

 

false

 

Any more questions?

[pattayaguru]

For those who want to watch the documentary here is a link fast download

 

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6160762/House_Of_Numbers_-_Full_-_The_truth_about_HIV_AIDS

[Joltin' Joe]

"Any more questions?".

 

Yes, one more.

 

 

 

So.....If a punter and a BG go to Patts International Hospital and both get a panel of tests for STDs done (if they do that) or just HIV tests done and they test 'clean', would barebacking be relatively low risk for a month or so after the test? All advice welcome.

 

Or....should one view the tests as inconclusive?

[Highlander]

Having sex bare back is looked down upon on this forum.

Any BG that is happy to go bare back is a walking time bomb IMHO