EPThttp://www.kansascity.com/2011/02/12/2651357/tommy-morrison-now-42-still-clings.html
You can tell where his AIDS denial stems from.
AIDS Denialism? - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Capulet
Canada686 Posts
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/02/12/2651357/tommy-morrison-now-42-still-clings.html You can tell where his AIDS denial stems from. | ||
|
EndlessRain
140 Posts
This is exact same as creationism, the anti-flouridation, anti-vaccine, homeopathy morons. | ||
|
muse5187
1125 Posts
| ||
|
tryummm
774 Posts
On February 13 2011 09:54 Crushgroove wrote: People will believe anything. Any individual who actually cares to not be an ignorant retard would study microbiology and the etiology of AIDS prior to misleading others. Having seen the virus under the microscope, most of this strikes me as sad/funny. 1) Everybody is ignorant. People just don't know some things. Your first sentence is now rendered invalid. 2) There are people who study microbiology who are HIV->AIDS deniers. Now your first sentence is completely invalid. 3) Have you ever seen the purified form of HIV under the conditions to classify it as a retrovirus under a microscope? If not, your second sentence is also rendered invalid to this debate. And I doubt you have. | ||
|
AcuWill
United States281 Posts
On February 14 2011 04:20 muse5187 wrote: All the conspiracy theorists are more than welcome to shoot themselves up with HIV tainted blood. I watched my cousin slowly die because of aids in the 90s. It's a horrible disease and it affects millions of people world wide. It kind of pisses me off that someone could think it isnt real. Without the correct medicine it will kill you fairly quickly once your immune system finally starts to go, you'll catch every infection known to man until something minor finally kills you. it's a horrible way to die and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. The fact that some teenagers on a sc forum think they are qualified to dispute such a comPlicated virus is completely laughable. The level of intelligence has seriously taken a hit since sc2. Nobody is denying AIDS, simply that HIV is the causative factor. The foremost retro-virologist in the world, Peter Duesberg, multiple Nobel Prize winners, including Kary Mullis who invented PCR and Luc Montagnier who received the Nobel Prize for "discovering" HIV, David Rasnik who developed the first protease inhibitor, etc. are some of the individuals who question the HIV is the causative factor of AIDS. For all of you stating that a physicist, a mathematician, etc., questioning that HIV is the causative factor of AIDS is irrelevant because they are not scientists in the immediate field are making an asinine argument. By that argument, all of your opinions are invalid as well, because you are not said researchers. This includes MDs, who are not scientists, simply clinicians. Further, by that logic, we should not be allowed our opinions on other topics as well. For example, the right to vote should immediately be stricken from anyone not a politician and all political matters should be left solely to their discretion. There should be no input from the public whatsoever and any decisions leading to wars, death, money allocation, etc., should be solely left to their discretion. Further, having and voicing an opinion on political matters will be leading to the deaths, economic hardships, etc., of millions of people, because they are made by non-politicians. Imagine what type of world that would lead to. That is exactly what the general argument is with regard to science and HIV/AIDS on this board. Why should such matters operate under different rules? | ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On February 14 2011 04:31 tryummm wrote: 1) Everybody is ignorant. People just don't know some things. Your first sentence is now rendered invalid. 2) There are people who study microbiology who are HIV->AIDS deniers. Now your first sentence is completely invalid. 3) Have you ever seen the purified form of HIV under the conditions to classify it as a retrovirus under a microscope? If not, your second sentence is also rendered invalid to this debate. And I doubt you have. No dude there aren't. There's basically no one legitimate having this "debate". It really isn't one. Aids had been proven to result from HIV. The deniers have been at it since it was discovered. This whole spectacle and circus isn't anything new. If reading this thread and just listening to those informed vs those who aren't hasn't convinced you, I suggest following a few of the links provided on page 1. You can even read the links of the nay-sayers if you really have a lot of spare time. But there is no professionals out there saying HIV doesn't lead to AIDS. Edit: On February 14 2011 04:58 AcuWill wrote: + Show Spoiler + On February 14 2011 04:20 muse5187 wrote: All the conspiracy theorists are more than welcome to shoot themselves up with HIV tainted blood. I watched my cousin slowly die because of aids in the 90s. It's a horrible disease and it affects millions of people world wide. It kind of pisses me off that someone could think it isnt real. Without the correct medicine it will kill you fairly quickly once your immune system finally starts to go, you'll catch every infection known to man until something minor finally kills you. it's a horrible way to die and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. The fact that some teenagers on a sc forum think they are qualified to dispute such a comPlicated virus is completely laughable. The level of intelligence has seriously taken a hit since sc2. Nobody is denying AIDS, simply that HIV is the causative factor. The foremost retro-virologist in the world, Peter Duesberg, multiple Nobel Prize winners, including Kary Mullis who invented PCR and Luc Montagnier who received the Nobel Prize for "discovering" HIV, David Rasnik who developed the first protease inhibitor, etc. are some of the individuals who question the HIV is the causative factor of AIDS. For all of you stating that a physicist, a mathematician, etc., questioning that HIV is the causative factor of AIDS is irrelevant because they are not scientists in the immediate field are making an asinine argument. By that argument, all of your opinions are invalid as well, because you are not said researchers. This includes MDs, who are not scientists, simply clinicians. Further, by that logic, we should not be allowed our opinions on other topics as well. For example, the right to vote should immediately be stricken from anyone not a politician and all political matters should be left solely to their discretion. There should be no input from the public whatsoever and any decisions leading to wars, death, money allocation, etc., should be solely left to their discretion. Further, having and voicing an opinion on political matters will be leading to the deaths, economic hardships, etc., of millions of people, because they are made by non-politicians. Imagine what type of world that would lead to. That is exactly what the general argument is with regard to science and HIV/AIDS on this board. Why should such matters operate under different rules? Actually there are a good many things that shouldn't be left to 'democracy'. If I need to see a doctor for an illness, I don't get a jury of my peers to come to a consensus about the diagnosis. If I need my toliet fixed, I call a plumber, I don't take a random survey of suggestions from friends. The overwhelming majority of experts agree. Those you name, I believe, either don't support the position you're proposing or their expertise is suspect. Provide links with their supposed support - and not from a propaganda blog - real sources please. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On February 14 2011 04:58 AcuWill wrote: Nobody is denying AIDS, simply that HIV is the causative factor. The foremost retro-virologist in the world, Peter Duesberg, multiple Nobel Prize winners, including Kary Mullis who invented PCR and Luc Montagnier who received the Nobel Prize for "discovering" HIV, David Rasnik who developed the first protease inhibitor, etc. are some of the individuals who question the HIV is the causative factor of AIDS. For all of you stating that a physicist, a mathematician, etc., questioning that HIV is the causative factor of AIDS is irrelevant because they are not scientists in the immediate field are making an asinine argument. By that argument, all of your opinions are invalid as well, because you are not said researchers. This includes MDs, who are not scientists, simply clinicians. Further, by that logic, we should not be allowed our opinions on other topics as well. For example, the right to vote should immediately be stricken from anyone not a politician and all political matters should be left solely to their discretion. There should be no input from the public whatsoever and any decisions leading to wars, death, money allocation, etc., should be solely left to their discretion. Further, having and voicing an opinion on political matters will be leading to the deaths, economic hardships, etc., of millions of people, because they are made by non-politicians. Imagine what type of world that would lead to. That is exactly what the general argument is with regard to science and HIV/AIDS on this board. Why should such matters operate under different rules? You pretty obviously don't know what a clinician actually does. Ever heard of Cochrane? | ||
|
Blacktion
United Kingdom1148 Posts
If not, hard luck guys, you've been dealt a rough hand. | ||
|
Jayjay54
Germany2296 Posts
ok what I didn't really get is, if AIDS is not caused by HIV. what does cause it? I mean the creationists have god to blame. but how does this play out with AIDS. god punishing all the sinful children in africa because they are black? seriously. there is just one mayor cause and it is HIV. | ||
|
AcuWill
United States281 Posts
On February 14 2011 05:08 Ghostcom wrote: You pretty obviously don't know what a clinician actually does. Ever heard of Cochrane? http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/doctors-aren’t-scientists-and-medicine-isn’t-science/ Written by Henry Bauer. Here is his CV for your perusal: http://henryhbauer.homestead.com/VITA.pdf And your ad hominem attack is baseless. You have no idea of my knowledge, profession or clinical experience. | ||
|
HardCorey
United States709 Posts
| ||
|
MedivacRush
United States15 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On February 14 2011 05:35 AcuWill wrote: http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/doctors-aren’t-scientists-and-medicine-isn’t-science/ Written by Henry Bauer. Here is his CV for your perusal: http://henryhbauer.homestead.com/VITA.pdf And your ad hominem attack is baseless. You have no idea of my knowledge, profession or clinical experience. I don't know what you tried to prove with your article? Except that you don't know what cochrane is and neither does Henry Bauer... But congratz on proving just that and making my point for me. And making my ad hominem attack anything but baseless in the process. I'll give you (and Henry Bauer) as much as that it is true a lot of medicine is still based on anecdotes and historical succes, but cochrane which is now considered more or less the holy grail of good medical practice is exactly the attempt at making up for that. | ||
|
AcuWill
United States281 Posts
On February 14 2011 05:32 Jayjay54 wrote: nice. we're still discussing this. ok what I didn't really get is, if AIDS is not caused by HIV. what does cause it? I mean the creationists have god to blame. but how does this play out with AIDS. god punishing all the sinful children in africa because they are black? seriously. there is just one mayor cause and it is HIV. Thank you for your post. That is a very broad question. There are a number of opinions and theories regarding the actual cause of AIDS. The issue is that the burden of proof rests on those touting HIV is the causative factor of AIDS, not those with dissenting opinions. The causative factor of AIDS varies from region to region, lifestyle to lifestyle, and country to country. After all, it is simply a failing of an individual's immune system. It does not need to have only one cause. For example, for healthy individuals who test positive to HIV on the (imo) non-specific tests, then have high viral load levels (which have been shown to not correlate to CD4+ lymphocyte decline, see citation below which is a .pdf of the JAMA article), they begin chemotherapy (which is what antiretrovirals are) for the rest of their life. These chemotherapeutic agents are the causative factor to their immune decline and lead to the primary cause of death of Western AIDS patients, liver failure. In Africa, AIDS presents very differently, the primary cause of death of "HIV+" individuals are TB and dysentery. I use the quotes to indicate HIV+ because they are not even diagnosed with the (imo) non-specific tests. They are diagnosed by clinical signs which are as follows: Major signs: - weight loss 10% - chronic diarrhoea 1 month - fever 1 month (intermittent or constant) -herpes zoster -non-healing genital sores Minor signs: - cough for > 1 month - generalized itching - recurrent herpes zoster - oro-pharyngeal candidiasis - chronic progressive and disseminated herpes simplex infection - generalized lymphadenopathy Diagnosis criterion requires at least 2 major signs and 1 minor sign or cryptococcal meningitis. Well, diarrhoea, weight loss and TB or any cough are not exactly new to or specific diagnostically in Africa. Therefore the causative factors in Africa are likely poverty, lack of clean drinking water, caloric deficiency and respiratory ailments. Also, any death relating to any of the conditions above in Africa is automatically counted as an AIDS death. One can see how African statistics can get out of hand rapidly. Here is a video of Luc Montagnier, the Nobel Prize winner and "discoverer" of HIV commenting on how the best method to treat AIDS in Africa is: . If you are interested in more specifics, I encourage you to read up on more yourself. http://www.reviewingaids.com/awiki/files/RodriguezJAMA2006.pdf | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 14 2011 05:35 AcuWill wrote: http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/doctors-aren’t-scientists-and-medicine-isn’t-science/ Written by Henry Bauer. Here is his CV for your perusal: http://henryhbauer.homestead.com/VITA.pdf And your ad hominem attack is baseless. You have no idea of my knowledge, profession or clinical experience. I don't care for his CV really. His general point is correct, but many of his arguments are stupid. Yes, medicine is not science, it is to science like engineering is to science. So yes there are regional differences, but the core should be the same, and if it is not than one of them is doing something wrong. In engineering the color of the car or its shape might depend on cultural differences, but none of the cars should have randomly exploding engines. In medicine bedside manner or placebo handling might differ but for treating a disease the same most efficient procedure should be selected where variables are patient dependent, not doctor or country dependent. If countries differ in those core procedures one of them is doing something wrong or the science does not give any inclination to which is proper one. Basically there is no relevant point in that article. And that does not inspire any confidence in his other insights. | ||
|
shaunnn
Ireland1230 Posts
On February 14 2011 04:08 EndlessRain wrote: Yawn, another so called "controversy" driven up by idiots with no background in science backed up by arguments appealing to emotion and 5 minute youtube clips. This is exact same as creationism, the anti-flouridation, anti-vaccine, homeopathy morons. Pretty much my views exactly, just plain ignorance of anything to do with science and disrespect for people much smarter then them that dedicated their lifes to studying these things | ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On February 14 2011 05:35 AcuWill wrote: http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/doctors-aren’t-scientists-and-medicine-isn’t-science/ Written by Henry Bauer. Here is his CV for your perusal: http://henryhbauer.homestead.com/VITA.pdf And your ad hominem attack is baseless. You have no idea of my knowledge, profession or clinical experience. Saying it's an ad hominen attack is a stretch. You've neither shown nor stated that you have any knowledge or training as a clinician. It's a reasonable assumption to me. As for Peter Duesberg, he's a fairly discredited maverick whose arguments were repudiated here source And Luc Montagnier has disavowed the claims from denialists that he has sympathy for their position. A read of his Nobel Lecture clears up his position anyway source Yeah and Bauer is a guy whose degree is in Chemisty, believes in UFO's and the Loch Ness Monster, was against affirmative action, who once said of homosexuality "I regard homosexuality as an aberration or illness, not as an ‘equally valid life-style’ or whatever the current euphemism is" and whose views on HIV/AIDS have been rejected by members of the scientific community, with Seth Kalichman saying "Bauer is unfamiliar with the scientific literature on HIV/AIDS and has performed no AIDS research, presenting his ideas only at conferences on fringe science and without supporting evidence." and that his arguments "rest on flawed analytical methods and misuse of data sources". | ||
|
ggrrg
Bulgaria2716 Posts
On February 14 2011 04:58 AcuWill wrote: Nobody is denying AIDS, simply that HIV is the causative factor. The foremost retro-virologist in the world, Peter Duesberg, multiple Nobel Prize winners, including Kary Mullis who invented PCR and Luc Montagnier who received the Nobel Prize for "discovering" HIV, David Rasnik who developed the first protease inhibitor, etc. are some of the individuals who question the HIV is the causative factor of AIDS. Let's see: Neither Karry Mullis nor David Rasnik have ever done any research on HIV/AIDS. Luc Montagnier does not question the relation between HIV and AIDS. A brief search in google reveals that. As far as Duesberg is concerned, he indeed is a well-known retro-virologist. However, basically every other well-known retro-virologist does not agree with Duesberg's hypothesis. And honestly claiming that drugs cause AIDS and that there is no AIDS in Africa is kind of crazy in my eyes... For all of you stating that a physicist, a mathematician, etc., questioning that HIV is the causative factor of AIDS is irrelevant because they are not scientists in the immediate field are making an asinine argument. By that argument, all of your opinions are invalid as well, because you are not said researchers. This includes MDs, who are not scientists, simply clinicians. If you'd like that better, let's consider only arguments from people doing any research on HIV/AIDS valid. So we have Duesberg and let's say a dozen others on the one side and tens of thousands of researchers on the other side... Plain probabilisticly who is more likely to be wrong? | ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On February 14 2011 04:03 Capulet wrote: Back to Tommy Morrison, here's another recent article that shows a bit of his story: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/02/12/2651357/tommy-morrison-now-42-still-clings.html You can tell where his AIDS denial stems from. Interesting read and, sad. The guy is clearly delusional. And not very intelligent it seems. Or he's mind is gone from drugs and despair. | ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On February 14 2011 06:28 Subversive wrote: Interesting read and, sad. The guy is clearly delusional. And not very intelligent it seems. Or he's mind is gone from drugs and despair. I feel bad for the girlfriend, unprotected sex? With someone that has HIV? | ||
| ||
