What is Holding Scientists Back For Curing AIDS?

Lots of very brilliant people with tons of credentials have tons of theories, doesn't mean they are all correct. It does have to stand up to the rigors of testing by other people in the field.
There may be very good and viable reasons his theories haven't been widely accepted yet.

I haven't read the book,
So in a nutshell, what are his theories?
Does he propose that AIDS was a "manufactured" virus or that people altered it in order to produce AIDS.
A little more info about what he claims would be nice.

 

The fucking hell with AIDS! There's a cure, it's called prevention. Cancer deserves more funding although lifestyle choices also contribute greatly to cancer risks, it's not the only factor.

 

The government

 

It's a syndrome and not a virus. That's what the "S" means in the word AIDS.
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. And HIV is not AIDS, there is only statistical evidence that links HIV to the Syndrome.

 

Technically true, but contextually I was referring to the suspected cause of the array of symptoms that comprise the syndrome.
Please do forgive me.

But my other points about all the "conspiracy" ideas related to it and immunizations still hold as valid.

 

He proposes that initial symptoms of the HIV virus, such as Kaposi's sarcoma, are products of lifestyle and environment rather than the HIV virus.

He goes into the political environment of the scientific community at the time, in which virologists were being given massive funding and jumped all over the excuse to isolate the HIV virus and connect it to symptoms like Kaposi's sarcoma in order to receive funding.

He proposes that the symptoms of full-blown AIDS are actually caused by toxic medication such as AZT....which really isn't that far-fetched, considering it was pulled off the market as a cancer drug for being too toxic.

To be honest I don't know if I believe his theories, but he makes a good case and there is definitely a lot of credibility to his ideas. I would recommend reading it if you're interested in the HIV virus at all. Its an intriguing read.

 

Statistical evidence proves it beyond any doubts that I have....

OP, I expect wikipedia would answer your questions.... HIV mutates too fast for even our own immune system, which is why we can't fight it off in the first place. This makes wiping it out, without an adapting immune system but only chemicals, very very very hard.

Or you can just not believe in it, seems to work for some people, who would like to believe that it's all just the government.

 

You're pretty brave saying that on the internet. Tell that to my friend who contracted HIV from a rapist.

 

Sounds like that's some sort of "if you where here in real life" keyboard cowboy comment....

Sucks your friend got HIV from a rapist. Sorry. But most people don't get HIV from a rapist. Other than smokers, most people don't choose to get cancer, most people do choose to get HIV. Simple.

 

I'm a lawyer and have been one for more years than most of you have been alive. Having said that, when I read everything about AIDS, I can recognize the "style" of the language. As such, I'm left with a question asking if these are scientists and doctors writing about a malady or a law firm?

Therefore if there is indeed a conspiracy of sorts. I suspect that it's the age old conspiracy of trying to get money from poor people. These so called AIDS experts talk like politicians and they use terminology that is more inline with propaganda than it does with normal scientific debates; Referring to colleges that question the orthodoxy as dissidents, dangerous, potential murderers, etc. It should be above reproach when I say such behavior is not acceptable from people entrusted with the medical decisions and lives of others.

Back to your commentary about statistics,
I've seen statistics that state beyond all and any reasonable doubt that cars are responsible for the majority of motor vehicle accidents. But of course we all know that cars never cause accidents. It's the people involved in those accidents that do.

 

What if an Intravenous Injection of premium unleaded gasoline cured everything??..

 

Boy if that isn't a remark based on erroneous stereotyping, I don't know what is.

 

Maybe because of the fact that it was engineered to be difficult to cure?

 

All science is based on "statistical evidence".
Just because we see something always happening the same way doesn't mean it will always happen in the same way. There is no evidence that can prove a theory as absolutely true.
So if you think that statistical evidence is not enough, you can discard ALL of science (Well, maybe you can get as far as - i think, therefore i am). In the case of AIDS/HIV it provides a very strong link.

I did look into Inventing the AIDS virus, read the first 100 pages or so. Not enough to draw any conclusions, but thus far it hasn't been very convincing. I found it suspicious that the statistics in the book don't agree with anything else i found on the internet.
I do agree with his point that research has been politicized, but i suspect that his own text is biased.
This sounds a lot like the climate change flop, where there are tons of pop-science books with widely contradicting data and it is impossible to tell who is right about anything or if any of those books are actually true at all. Yet they all make a convincing case - not unlike Hubbard with his Dianetics. But making a convincingly sounding case doesn't make it true. The book also makes a lot of logically fallacious arguments that are easy to believe if you don't really think about them and i'd say it is only a few steps away from works like The Secret and The Holographic Universe.

Googled Duesberg and it can't be said that he is currently a RESPECTED scientist.

 

If people only died of HIV if they took AZT, there would be no need for AZT because it wouldn't have killed thousands of gay men and (now) millions of people in Africa. Think a little, guys.

:afro:

 

AZT has been used since early HIV treatment.

 

Aids is a virus... viruses are near impossible to cure, especially when this one targets your central immune system... you know the thing that's keeping all the other viruses out?

The best we can hope for is a treatment, or a mixture of treatments unified to cater to individual needs.

Otherwise it's about as hopeless as brain cancer.

Also AZT is highly toxic, and can kill the patient itself, aside from the aids.