Science Guardian

Truth, beauty and paradigm power in science and society

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

News, views and reviews measured against professional literature in peer reviewed journals (adjusted for design flaws and bias), well researched books, authoritative encyclopedias (not the bowdlerized Wiki entries on controversial topics) and the investigative reporting and skeptical studies of courageous original thinkers among academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, filmmakers and journalists.

Supporting the right of exceptional minds to free speech, publication, media coverage and funding against the crowd prejudice, leadership resistance, monetary influences and internal professional politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, HIV(not)AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, information technology, religions and cults, health, medicine, diet and nutrition.

***************************************************

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Halton C. Arp wki/obit/txt/vds/txt/txt/bk/bk, Henry Bauer txt/blg/ blg/bks/bk/txt/bk/vd, John Beard bk, Harvey Bialy bk/bk/txt/txt/rdo/vd, John Bockris bio/txt/ltr/bk, Donald W. Braben, Peter Breggin ste/fb/col/bks, Darin Brown txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/vd, Giordano Bruno bk/bio/bio, Frank R. Buianouckas, Stanislav Burzynski mov, Erwin Chargaff bio/bk/bio/prs, James Chin bk/vd, Nicolaus Copernicus bk, Mark Craddock, Francis Crick vd, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw txt/bk, Roger Cunningham, Charles Darwin txts/bk, Erasmus Darwin txt//bk/txt/hse/bks, Peter Duesberg ste/ste/bk/txt/vd/vd, Freeman Dyson, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman bio, John Fewster, Rosalind Franklin, Bernard Forscher tx, Galileo Galilei, Walter Gilbert vd, Goethe bio/bk/bio, Nicolas Gonzalez tlk/rec/stetxt/txt, Patricia Goodson txt/bk/bk, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Etienne de Harven bk/txt/vd, Alfred Hassig intw/txt, Robert G. Houston txt, Steven Jonas vd, Edward Jenner txt, Benjamin Jesty, Adrian Kent vd, Thomas Kuhn, Fred Kummerow, Stefan Lanka txt/txt/vd, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen vd, Paul Lauterbur vd, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, James Lovelock, Andrew Maniotis, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, Christi Meyer vd, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Luc Montagnier txt/txt/vd, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling prs/vd/vd, Eric Penrose, Roger Penrose vd, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick bio/vd/bk, Robert Root-Bernstein vd, Sherwood Rowland, Otto Rossler, Harry Rubin, Marco Ruggiero txt/txt/intw/vd, Bertrand Russell Carl Sagan vd, Erwin Schrodinger, Fred Singer, Barbara Starfield txt, Gordon Stewart txt/txt, Richard Strohman, Thomas Szasz, Nicola Tesla bio/bio, Charles Thomas intw/vd, Frank Tipler, James Watson vd/vd, Alfred Wegener vd, Edward O. Wilson vd.

ACADEMICS, DOCTORS, AUTHORS, FILMMAKERS, REPORTERS AND COMMENTATORS WHO HAVE NOBLY AIDED REVIEW OF THE STATUS QUO

Jad Adams bk, Marci Angell bk/txt/txt/txt, Clark Baker ste/txt/rdo/vd, James Blodgett, Tony Brown vd, Hiram Caton txt/txt/txt/bk/ste, Jonathan Collin ste , Marcus Cohen, David Crowe vd, Margaret Cuomo, Stephen Davis BK/BK,/rdo, Michael Ellner vd, Elizabeth Ely txt/txt/ste, Epicurus, Dean Esmay, Celia Farber bio/txt/txt/txt/vd, Jonathan Fishbein txt/txt/wk, T.C.Fry, Michael Fumento, Max Gerson txt, Charles Geshekter vd, Michael Geiger, Roberto Giraldo, David Healy txt, Bob Herbert, Mike Hersee ste/rdo, Neville Hodgkinson txt /vd, James P. Hogan, Richard Horton bio/vd/vd, Christopher Hitchens, Eric Johnson, Claus Jensen vd, Phillip Johnson, Coleman Jones vds, William Donald Kelley, Ernst T. Krebs Sr txt, Ernst T. Krebs Jr. txt,/bio/txt/txt/ltr, Paul Krugman, Brett Leung MOV/ste/txt/txt/tx+vd/txt, Katie Leishman, Anthony Liversidge blg/intv/intv/txt/txts/txt/intv/txt/vd/vd, Bruce Livesey txt, James W. Loewen, Frank Lusardi, Nathaniel Lehrman vd, Christine Maggiore bk/ste/rec/rdo/vd, Rouben Mamoulian txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/doc/flm/flm, Noreen Martin vd, Robert Maver txt/itw, Eric Merola MOV, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Michael Moore bio/MOV/MOV/MOV, Gordon Moran, Ralph Nader bk, Ralph Moss txt/blg/ste/bks, Gary Null /txt/rdo/vd, Dan Olmsted wki, Toby Ord vd, Charles Ortleb bk/txt/bk/intw/flm, Neenyah Ostrom bk, Dennis Overbye, Mehmet Dr Oz vd, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos ste/vd, Maria Papagiannidou bk, Thomas Piketty bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk, Robert Pollin txt/vd/bk, Jon Rappoport bio/bk/bk/ste/bk/bk/vd, Janine Roberts bk/bk, Luis Sancho vd, Liam Scheff ste/txt/bk/bk/rdio/vd, John Scythes, Casper Schmidt txt/txt, Joan Shenton vd/vd, Joseph Sonnabend vd, John Stauber, David Steele, Joseph Stiglitz bk/txt, Will Storr rdo Wolfgang Streeck, James P. Tankersley ste, Gary Taubes vd, Mwizenge S. Tembo, John Tierney vd, Michael Tracey, Valendar Turner rec, Jesse Ventura bk, Michael Verney-Elliott bio/vds/vd, Voltaire, Walter Wagner, Andrew Weil vd, David Weinberger bio/bk/blg/blg/BK/bk/pds, Robert Willner bk/txt/txt/vd, Howard Zinn.

*****************************************************
I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing that ever interfered with my learning was my education. I am Freeman Dyson, and I approve of this blog, but would warn the author that life as a heretic is a hard one, since the ignorant and the half informed, let alone those who should know better, will automatically trash their betters who try to enlighten them with independent thinking, as I have found to my sorrow in commenting on "global warming" and its cures.
Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with the bleached skeletons of discarded theories which once seemed to possess eternal life. - Arthur Koestler

One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison. – Bertrand Russell

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. - Samuel Johnson

A sudden bold and unexpected question doth many times surprise a man and lay him open. – Sir Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626)

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform. – Mark Twain

Although science has led to the generally high living standards that most of the industrialized world enjoys today, the astounding discoveries underpinning them were made by a tiny number of courageous, out-of-step, visionary, determined, and passionate scientists working to their own agenda and radically challenging the status quo. – Donald W. Braben

An old error is always more popular than a new truth. — German Proverb

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

When even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition. I doubt if I could do it myself. – Mark Twain

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair

A clash of doctrines is not a disaster, but an opportunity. - Alfred North Whitehead

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. – Samuel Johnson

Man’s mind cannot grasp the causes of events in their completeness, but the desire to find those causes is implanted in man’s soul. And without considering the multiplicity and complexity of the conditions any one of which taken separately may seem to be the cause, he snatches at the first approximation to a cause that seems to him intelligible and says: “This is the cause!” – Leo Tolstoy

The evolution of the world tends to show the absolute importance of the category of the individual apart from the crowd. - Soren Kierkegaard

Who does not know the truth is simply a fool, yet who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal. – Bertold Brecht

How easily the learned give up the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of ideas in their imagination. – Adam Smith

Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned. – Mark Twain

The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. If we watch ourselves honestly, we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. – Arthur Koestler

Whenever the human race assembles to a number exceeding four, it cannot stand free speech. – Mark Twain

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith

There isn’t anything so grotesque or so incredible that the average human being can’t believe it. – Mark Twain

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. – Voltaire

People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.- Blaise Pascal.

Illusion is the first of all pleasures. – Voltaire

The applause of a single human being is of great consequence. – Samuel Johnson

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Human Nature)

Important: This site is best viewed in LARGE FONT, and in Firefox for image title visibility (place cursor on pics to reveal comments) and layout display. Click the title of any post to get only that post and its Comments for printing. All posts guaranteed fact checked according to reference level cited, typically the original journal studies. Full guide to site purpose, layout and how to print posts out is in the lower blue section at the bottom of the home page.
---Admin AL/E/ILMK---

Buy a red Nano, save an African life


Finally, eyeball proof that HAART works: Alicia visits Mombasa, with crew

Child dies on ARVs, after 14 years without ARVs. Why is Bono overlooked by the Nobel Committee?

Have the critics of HIV∫AIDS misled us? That’s what we are forced to ask after today’s Oprah Winfrey show, and NBC news, which was devoted to Bono and his new Red campaign to raise money for ARVs for needy Africans.

Not only did Oprah and Bono demonstrate that buying red versions of cool gear could save the lives of children with AIDS in Africa. But Alicia Keys reported finding out from her emotionally moving visit (with film crew) to Mombasa that some African children are not given ARVs for years after they are born with HIV, and may die as a result, even when they finally are given the drugs.

The clinic is dispensing ARVs to needy children now, however, courtesy of Oprah’s Angel network. But, we are shown, it may be too late. Sudi, one child photographed by her video crew as Alicia sat with his family trying to be encouraging, cried because he hadn’t had drugs until he was fourteen, though now he was getting them. You could see the tears running down his cheeks. Back in the studio, Oprah enquired after Sudi’s health, and Alicia with lowered voice confided that the poor child had “passed away” a week later. Well, it was a miracle that he had survived so long, Oprah pointed out, since he hadn’t been able to get the drugs until he was 14.

Having seen all this eyewitness testimony on screen with our own eyes we feel somewhat aggrieved. How could we have been taken in so easily by all the claims of HIV∫AIDS critics that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, and that the drugs aren’t any good for you? They simply don’t fit what one sees on the screen.

Well, now they can’t keep on saying this, because Oprah, Alicia Keys and Bono have told us and 22 million other viewers how much better the Africans feel when they are discovered to be suffering from HIV and are given ARVs at last, courtesy of those who buy red gear, whereby a portion of the price goes to Bono’s Red movement to deliver ARVs to the needy.

“Now customers can buy the best music player in the world and do something to help the world at the same time,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “We’re honored to work with Bono, (RED) and this team to contribute to an incredibly important initiative and help change the way people think about AIDS in Africa.”

Several other companies are offering red-colored products in support of Bono’s charity. The Gap is selling several red-colored clothing items, and Motorola is offering a red-colored RAZR.

Apple Offers Red iPod to Fight AIDS

(show)

Apple Offers Red iPod to Fight AIDS

By Ed Oswald, BetaNews

October 13, 2006, 2:06 PM

Apple said Friday that it had teamed up with U2 front man Bono to offer a special edition of the iPod Nano. However, unlike the full-size iPod that was designed for the band, this music player supports Bono’s charity Red, which fights diseases in Africa, primarily AIDS.

The 4GB Nano is enclosed in a red case, and will sell for $199 USD. For each unit sold, Apple will donate $10 to the Global Fund to help fight HIV/AIDS in Africa. In addition, the iPod includes a special $25 Red iTunes Gift card, although it didn’t specify what percentage would go to charity.

“Now customers can buy the best music player in the world and do something to help the world at the same time,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “We’re honored to work with Bono, (RED) and this team to contribute to an incredibly important initiative and help change the way people think about AIDS in Africa.”

Several other companies are offering red-colored products in support of Bono’s charity. The Gap is selling several red-colored clothing items, and Motorola is offering a red-colored RAZR. While the some of the products have been available in the UK since April of this year, Friday marks the first day the products became available in the US.

“It’s wonderful to see this incredible level of commitment from companies that are willing to lend their creativity in the fight against AIDS in Africa, the greatest health crisis in 600 years,” Bono said in a statement.

Yes, readers, we are going to go out and buy a red Nano at once, or at least, as soon as we need one. For we saw with our own eyes Oprah Winfrey and Bono today showing us how if they buy a red $79.99 Motorola phone with two year contract, that will yield $17 for ARV medicine for those in need. Oprah scooped up ten, which meant $170, enough for ARVs for one African for one year. This was after she bagged ten red iPods, each of which meant $10 more drugs for Africans with HIV, and before she collected ten Armani red T shirts, and ten Armani Bono type wraparound sunglasses.

“This is so cool!” said Oprah. “Thank you Apple!” as she left the Apple store and with her arm round Bono’s shoulders continued on a Red item shopping tour of Chicago, with crowds of fans kept back behind ropes at the doorways of the stores, some of whom Oprah handed Armani sunglasses.

“That was so much fun!” she said.

Back in the studio, she welcomed Alicia King – “Don’t we all love her?!” – offering her a red T shirt. But Alicia turned it down, because she will buy a red T shirt herself to support the movement. She was just back as mentioned from visiting the family care clinic in Mombasa hospital. We see her visit on camera. She tells them she is so glad that they are feeling better on the medicines the Oprah Angels are able to provide.

On screen, Alicia sits with the HIV doomed family. One is Sudi, with tears running down his cheeks. Sudi hasn’t improved. He is the one that has had HIV since he was born, but only got medicines when he was 14, courtesy of Oprah’s Keep a child alive! network. But HIV has got him in its grip, regardless, and a week after Alicia’s encouraging visit, she reports, he died. But as Oprah notes cheerfully, it is amazing he stayed alive so long without treatment. Alicia agrees. She informs us that he would still be alive today if he had had ARVs when he was 3 years old.

“It is the simplest thing to save a life in Africa. It is so simple!” says Alicia.

Drugs have immediate effect

It wasn’t just Alicia, either, who told us how important and effective ARV drugs are in Africa. The woman in charge of the hospital gratefully described how the ARVs do good visibly and immediately to the chilren. “They start gaining weight, their height just shoots up astronomically, they have no fever, no infections, they no longer cough. A year later you can’t tell the difference between children with HIV and those without.”

How can HIV∫AIDS critics argue with that direct testimony?

Alicia reports that there are 25 million already dead from AIDS in Africa. “These children look at me and say if it wasn’t for you I wouldn’t be alive today.”

At this point, the basic facts having been established and a solution to the AIDS threat in Africa having been provided through shopping, it was time for the entertainment factor to be escalated, and so we were treated to Alicia Keys and Bono singing an unprecedented, never to be repeated duet: “Don’t give up Africa!”

Picture of a skeletal child…slogans appearing on the screen and melting away…”Don’t give up Kenya.”… “Don’t give up Uganda.”… “Don’t give up Zimbabwe.”… Don’t give up South Africa”…as the two mellifluous voices of the two superstars sigh, coo and squeak their way through the sentiment of the day… “It gonna be alright… Don’t give up, Please don’t give up. Whatever may come, whatever may go.. that river’s flowing… that river’s flowing. Don’t give up. There’s no reason to feel ashamed… Somewhere there’s a place. Africa…UHHHH FREEEEE KA AHAHAHAHAHAH….”

Bono’s launch of his Red campaign also won a mention on NBC news tonight. According to NBC announcer Brian Williams, the money “will help save the estimated 6500 Africans that die from AIDS every day.”

So where is the Nobel prize for AIDS?

The only people who seem to be insufficiently impressed so far are the Nobel Peace prize committee, who once again passed over Bono to celebrate a man who has brought a way of making a living to millions.

The lead singer of U2, born Paul Hewson in 1960, was among the favorites for the peace prize in the past two years. This year’s contenders also included former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

“Over 60 percent of the money we took went on Bono, so it’s a bit of a disappointment for punters,” said Ken Robertson, a spokesman for the Dublin-based bookmaker Paddy Power Plc. “I’ve no doubt he’ll win it at some stage, perhaps when they need to re-energize it.”

Do the Nobel Peace Commitee know something we don’t? It’s not just Bono they haven’t favored, but where is the Nobel prize for Robert Gallo, once the most referenced scientist in the world, who first came up with the theory that HIV caused AIDS, and has stuck with that view through a pile up of contrary evidence over 22 years that would have defeated a lesser man?

Perhaps they are thinking of a combined Gallo Bono Peace prize, which would avoid getting into the embarrassing science of the matter.

But this would of course overlook the giant contribution of Anthony Fauci of NIAID in protecting the paradigm from nosy media reporters and others who might discover that it has not so far been proven in the scientific literature, which has on the other hand produced more reasons for rejecting it that you can shake a stick at.

Given that Anthony Fauci has pointed out that the solution to HIV∫AIDS may well be to add more HIV to stimulate the immune system (see previous post, NAR nominates Dr Anthony Fauci for Nobel – he has found the solution to AIDS), not to mention that HIV entry blocks the cell suicide of infected cells, and that antioxidants will stop HIV replication, perhaps he and Gallo, who first showed that HIV was not the cause of AIDS, and who has also shown antioxidants can protect the cells against cell suicide, can share a Nobel in Medicine for their contribution, now endorsed by the glamor and authority of Oprah Winfrey and Alicia Keys, as well as the renowned Bono.

Nobel Peace Prize Overlooks Rocker Bono for Bangladeshi Banker

(show)

Nobel Peace Prize Overlooks Rocker Bono for Bangladeshi Banker

By Sara Marley

Oct. 13 (Bloomberg) — As Muhammad Yunus of Bangladesh won the Nobel peace Prize at 5 a.m. New York time, the Irish rock star Bono announced the Red charity in the U.S., backed by Gap Inc., Converse Inc. and Viacom Inc.’s MTV Networks.

Motorola Inc. and Apple Inc. introduced Red-branded products in separate statements at the same time, with a portion of sales going to HIV and AIDS programs in Africa. Bono is appearing on the “Oprah Winfrey Show” today to promote the initiative.

The lead singer of U2, born Paul Hewson in 1960, was among the favorites for the peace prize in the past two years. This year’s contenders also included former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

“Over 60 percent of the money we took went on Bono, so it’s a bit of a disappointment for punters,” said Ken Robertson, a spokesman for the Dublin-based bookmaker Paddy Power Plc. “I’ve no doubt he’ll win it at some stage, perhaps when they need to re-energize it.”

Last year’s peace prize went to the International Atomic Energy Agency and its Egyptian director general, Mohamed ElBaradei. Wangari Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist, won in 2004.

Bono has been mentioned as a candidate for the peace prize since at least 2003, with the likes of Pope John Paul II, former Czech President Vaclav Havel and Ukrainian President Victor Yushchenko.

Geldof Too

Another Irish singer, Bob Geldof, 55, was nominated by a former member of Norway’s Parliament this year. He set up the 1985 Live Aid and 2005 Live 8 concerts to raise awareness and money in the fight against poverty. Australian bookmaker Centrebet gave each singer the same odds of winning, 33-1.

Bono wrote “Walk On” for 1991 Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar, according to the World Entertainment Network.

Motorola will start selling a red version of its Razr phone in the U.S., donating $17 per handset sold to Bono’s charity, Leslie Dance, a Motorola vice president, said in an interview on Oct. 11.

Apple announced a $199 Red special edition iPod nano with a $10 donation to Bono’s Global Fund for each sale.

Apple has teamed up before with U2, which won five Grammy awards this year with the album “How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb.” The first black U2 iPod, with the band members’ autographs etched on the back, was introduced in November 2004.

To contact the reporter on this story: Sara Marley in London at smarley1@bloomberg.net .

Last Updated: October 13, 2006 09:55 EDT

93 Responses to “Buy a red Nano, save an African life”

  1. Dan Says:

    What a tragedy.

    What can be said and done for those who wield power and influence, and see the world through AIDS-colored glasses?

    We’ll never know what killed that 14 year old boy. Was it malnourishment, diarrhea, malaria, tuberculosis, water-borne illness, AIDS drugs, any other of a multitude of diseases traditionally afflicting Africans, or a combination of the above?

    When you see the world through AIDS-colored glasses, questions and answers become incredibly simple.

    Fourteen years without “AIDS drugs”, then dies a week after taking them? Hmm. If I look at it through my “red” (AIDS-colored) glasses, I’ll marvel at the fact that this boy was alive for so long, and saddened that he died so quickly after life-saving treatment, which unfortunately for him arrived just as HIV had decided to strike its final blow. What a horribly ironic coincidence.

    If I take off my “red” glasses, I may be able to see a more complex picture. Did the boy get enough to eat? Did he have diseases that were treatable with antibiotics? What disease or diseases did he have? Did the “AIDS drugs” kill him? At this point, the timing of his death as he was just starting to take the “AIDS drugs” is looking quite suspicious.

  2. Dave Says:

    I hate to be the skunk at the picnic, but mebbe they should sell red copies of the Reisler Paper so that these clueless airheads could actually learn what devastation antivirals cause to the person taking them.

    From Reisler, we note the following side effects:

    1. Liver damage
    2. Neutropenia (white blood cell loss)
    3. Anemia (red blood cell loss)
    4. Cardiovascular, including heart attacks
    5. Pancreatitus
    6. Psychiatric
    7. Kidney problems
    8. Thrombocytopenia
    9. Hemorrhage

    With medicine (friends) like this, who needs germs (enemies)?

  3. Truthseeker Says:

    Sudi was 17, so he took the meds for three years, presumably with little interest in what was actually attacking him, if anything, other than the drugs. In the beginning, we were told by the attending health worker, he “improved” a little, then he deteriorated.

  4. kevin Says:

    Ugh! It truly is disgusting what passes for philanthropy these days. When uber-rich, out of touch celebrities function as the moral compass for a society, that society is rotting from within.

    Thanks for posting this, however, since the only hope for future generations is if the intellectually honest minority in this country continue to expose the idiocy that threatens our very existence. It really is that bad. The horrors that are perpetrated, all in the name of financial gain. HIV/AIDS is perhaps the greatest of all modern tradedies because we gave it to the whole world.

  5. Martin Kessler Says:

    It’s a shame, but predictable. Africa and Africans are being used to promote the deadly scam that AIDS is contagious. Since AIDS statistics and mortality are going down in developed countries, the AIDS establishment must keep the monied countries contributing to their cause.

    Another scan is calling neucleoside analogues and protease inhibitors “anti-retroviral”. You can’t kill something that isn’t there, but you can kill just about everything else, good and bad. That’s probably why in some cases at least at the begining of “treatment”, some improvement is seen, but deterioration takes over as has been seen. It sickens me to hear the major broadcasters unquestioningly and approvingly announce the introduction of poisons like these to unsuspecting populations almost in the same way that toxic waste was dumped on them years ago – of course everyone knows what’s happening when the words “toxic waste” are used, but when it’s in the form of what is called “treatment for AIDS”, especially for the poor, it’s not only overlooked but eagerly promoted.

  6. Marcel Says:

    Drat. There goes my plan to protest Mr. Bill by making my next operating system a Mac. What about Linux? Have they contributed to Aids Inc. too?

    Is there no way I can compute without helping Aids Inc???

  7. nohivmeds Says:

    Dave —
    The Reisler paper (which I recall bringing to your attention) is not unequivocal regarding ARVs, and is focused on men in this country who had been taking these drugs for many years.

    Kessler is right to observe that the cytotoxic ARVs may indeed improve someone’s condition initially.

    Therefore, is seems reasonable to conclude, as the South African government has, that ARVs may indeed be helpful for a short course when someone is quite ill.

    Dave’s friend Noreen would likely concur.

  8. YossariansGhostbuster Says:

    Yossarian quietly whistled under his breath, Holy Toledo.

    Yossarian knew that war like life is unfair but that ARV’s have actual clinical merit hasn’t been in the protocols of the anti-HIV, anti-ARV bullies that keep announcing the need to update the hiv software as we all thrust towards hiv nirvana.

    Could it be he asked, that all that’s needed is organic water,
    beetroot juice, and Bono ?

  9. kevin Says:

    YossariansGhostbuster:
    Yossarian quietly whistled under his breath, Holy Toledo.

    Yossarian knew that war like life is unfair but that ARV’s have actual clinical merit hasn’t been in the protocols of the anti-HIV, anti-ARV bullies that keep announcing the need to update the hiv software as we all thrust towards hiv nirvana.

    What is this nonsensical blather? My turn: perhaps you too can be a guest on Oprah someday, Yossarian–a Dr. Phil-like expert who points out everyone’s shortcomings. Oh and definitely retain the self-referencing third-person schtick–it’ll really keeps us laughing through the tough times.

  10. YossariansGhostbuster Says:

    Perhaps Kevin you can address that which you ignored:

    “…that ARV’s have actual clinical merit …”

  11. AF Says:

    YG: I guess they have actual clinical merit if you aren’t interested in treating patients’ specific health problems regardless of “HIV status” with medications that might be just as effective and even less toxic.

    And what exactly does “actual clinical merit” mean? Are you going by how the patients truly feel and their quality of life or their surrogate markers?

  12. Truthseeker Says:

    <i>What is this nonsensical blather? </i>

    The last refuge of the gentleman whose case is without content?

  13. Lise Says:

    Mr. Buster,

    Excuse me, I’m just an old wifee, as it were, easily confused. Is your meaning that organic water, beetroot juice and Bono all are without “actual clinical merit”?

  14. YossariansGhostbuster Says:

    Lise,

    To the moment, kindly consider, YGb’s first comment above was made in response after nohivmeds, with whom I agree:

    “Kessler is right to observe that the cytotoxic ARVs may indeed improve someone’s condition initially.

    Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude, as the South African government has, that ARVs may indeed be helpful for a short course when someone is quite ill.”

    In short, ARV’s do have clinical merit independent of the above and that is a subject matter with which some anti-hiv and anti-ARV bullies willfully ignore .

    It is highly doubtful that you, AF and kevin aren’t aware of those considerations.

  15. Truthseeker Says:

    In short, ARV’s do have clinical merit independent of the above and that is a subject matter with which some anti-hiv and anti-ARV bullies willfully ignore.

    Very good, YG, you have once again returned the discussion to where it should be, the question of why the ARV’s which have such appalling and reliable long term effects, including death, after some quite revolting side effects, should be so reliably reported by patients and their doctors to have some good effects.

    However, it is painful to see that you have ignored the numerous hints that we have given in our posts of late as to why this should be so, so we will have to post on this topic at full length very soon in your honor.

    You are quite right, this is the $130 billion question in HIV∫AIDS, and the bullies of neither side should ignore it. Why do HIV meds appear to offer benefits, now that we know that HIV viral load has nothing to do with CD4 loss, except in reflecting it rather than causing it?

  16. Lise Says:

    YGB

    I see. I failed to grasp that anybody who doesn’t keep restating what NHM and Martin Kessler have already articulated so admirably is per definition one of the “willfully ignoring anti-ARV bullies” who’re into the panaceas beetroot juice and Bono. Are we creationists too by any chance? Just trying to figure out which box you’d like to fit me into.

    Now the point I was restating was the one made by AF, that “clinical merit” is an empty phrase, so you got entirely appropriate, constructive answers from all the bullies you mention.

    Now that you know we are indeed aware of all sorts of considerations and not ignoring any aspect of the issue, though preferring to focus on the under-represented ones all things considered , including Bono, what was your point again? Because you see if we’re not the bullies you’re talking about, then it’s not easy to see what you i>are talking about.

  17. kevin Says:

    It is highly doubtful that you, AF and kevin aren’t aware of those considerations.

    I am fully aware that ARVs appear to have “clinical merit” in cases of extreme and prolonged immunosuppression, but as others here have stated, addressing the acute illnesses responsible for those life-threatening episodes seems far more reasonable than using highly-toxic, broad spectrum microbicides.

    As a non-HIV+, severely immunosuppressed patient, I was not able to recover my health until I began to evaluate every treatment protocol recommended by my long-time physician. Had I been HIV+, I’m sure my treatment protocol would have been quite clear to my doc. Regardless of my status, had I followed his conventional treatment protocols, I would still be gravely ill or worse. Similar to patients who are given ARVs indefinitely, I was given potent broad-spectrum antibiotics several times annually to treat recurring sinusitis. Now, I won’t argue that antibiotics have no “clinical merit”, but I also now recognize that they are very potent and can cause ill-health when prescribed recklessly. The situation with ARVs is even more tenuous, since they are only needed when the real problems are not addressed, or even worse, exacerbated by conventional therapies.

    Your original post in this thread was a worthless, snide comment about a topic of some importance, and I found that insulting. In the future, you might be better served to assume that someone capable of recognizing that has an equally nuanced understanding of the “clinic merits” of ARVs.

    Kevin

  18. Marcel Says:

    U2 avoids taxes with move
    From Bloomberg News
    October 17, 2006

    Bono, the rock star and campaigner against Third World debt, is asking the Irish government to contribute more to Africa. At the same time, he’s reducing tax payments that could help fund that aid.

    After Ireland said it would scrap a break that lets musicians and artists avoid paying taxes on royalties, Bono and his U2 bandmates earlier this year moved their music publishing company to the Netherlands.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    The Dublin group, which Forbes estimates earned $110 million in 2005, will pay about 5% tax on their royalties, less than half the Irish rate.

    Lead guitarist David Evans, known as the Edge, earlier this month defended the publishing company’s move as a sensible decision for a group that makes 90% of its money outside Ireland.

    As residents of Ireland, members of U2 remain liable for personal income taxes.

  19. Henry B Says:

    Toxic substances, and also radiation, TYPICALLY effect some benefit at first and at low dose. The phenomenon is known as hormesis. A plausible explanation is that the low doses stimulate the immune system to a “greater than needed” extent. The efficacy of adjuvants in vaccines may have a similar basis.

    A 1997 video available at the AIDS Wiki (HIV = AIDS: Fact or Fraud?) shows Charles Thomas recalling this point in connection with anti-retrovirals.

    Googling “hormesis” brings much info.

  20. nohivmeds Says:

    Wow. I make a brief appearance and say that ARVs have clinical merit, and mayhem breaks loose. Let me put it plainly:

    1. There are indeed situations in which ARVs have clinical merit (again, perhaps Dave’s friend Noreen’s story could be helpful here — perhaps he could link us to it — whaddya say, Dave?).

    2. Saying that there are times/situations when the ARVs have clinical merit does not mean that other interventions don’t have clinical merit — OMG, could it be true that BOTH traditional and non-traditional approaches have clinical merit! Um, yes.

    From someone who has used both — YES. This blog does tend towards black and white/binary views on these issues, when those sorts of goggles are not very helpful, as most of this is gray.

    oh — and YGB, je t’adore.

  21. nohivmeds Says:

    Oh, and Lise:
    You know what “clinical merit” is when you experience it, darling.

  22. nohivmeds Says:

    And everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that the use of ARVs that I discussed is exactly the use recommended by the S. African government, who had advice from Duesberg, Bialy, etc. I mean, as dissidents, don’t we always hold up Mbeki and South Africa’s stance as the most educated and sophisticated stance on the issue? Or, do we only do that when the stance we are evaluating doesn’t involve ARVs.

  23. nohivmeds Says:

    Something constructive now. Some information on how it is one might choose to take ARVs. My current situation. My CD4s have hovered around 200 for the last year — I didn’t care about the number, I base my responses to all of this on how I feel, and I felt just fine. Same as when they were around 600 many years ago.

    Over the last month and a half, though, something changed. I began to get little infections — nothing dramatic, but many of them started coming at the same time: folliculitis (staph), a sinus infection, then conjuntivitis and then a fungal infection, a stomach bug. Even more irritating, normal ways/means of treating these minor annoyances have been hit or miss. In other words, right now, I’m riddled with little annoying infections that don’t seem to want to go away. It’s not too comfortable, and so I’m not feeling so good anymore.

    I have been here before — 3 times actually. Each time I’ve done the same thing, and it’s worked (although I don’t claim to know why it’s worked). I’ve initiated ARVs for 6-9 months, then gone off of them for at least 2 years. As soon as I initiate, all those pesky little infections that piled up will disappear. My CD4s will increase — but it won’t be an enduring increase, I know. But I will feel well on the ARVs for a bit. I usually terminate my ARV therapy when I start to feel like crap on the meds — it’s usually pretty obvious it’s time.

    So, this is how I’ve lived with whatever all of this is since 1998. I’ve made choices. No more feeling sick and having one little infection pop up after another — a short course of some cytotoxic killers, and somehow, things get better. I am perfectly aware of how toxic the ARVs are. I’ve never had a bad liver or kidney test. Luck? No. Probably not staying on them long enough for real damage to occur. Choices. So, if you’re one of those people who has written or said that you would never take the ARVs, or that others should never take them, ask yourself: How would I cope with multiple bacterial, viral and fungal infections occurring all at once, making you feel quite ill, and not responding to treatments, conventional or otherwise?

    Nothing is black and white about this. It is all shades of gray. If this was too personal for your taste — good. You then must be someone who needs to remember that there are actual people we are all discussing when we have our little theoretical debates and tiffs and throw our opinions in. Ultimately, there are people out there, in the real world beyond cyber-space, having to make tough choices/confusing choices. Real choices everyday.

  24. Lise Says:

    NHM

    I’d love for you to show me the real meaning of ‘clinical merit’ darling, but I see you already ‘adore’ YGB and I’m just not into that kind of thing at my age, although I’m sure my husband wouldn’t mind.

    I see points regarding semantic content isn’t your srong suit – NO-HIV-MEDS , with whom YGB, according to himself, agrees. Get the joke guyz?

    But your last ‘personal’ post at least was on point.

  25. Truthseeker Says:

    My CD4s have hovered around 200 for the last year — I didn’t care about the number, I base my responses to all of this on how I feel, and I felt just fine.

    Alas, this admirable example of independent judgement based on how one feels may not be entirely reliable, at least to our mind according to a fascinating appearance by British hypnotist Phil McKenna on the Ellen Degeneres talk show, where among other tricks he cured two women of terror of snakes and of tarantulas respectively, in unseen back stage sessions lasting about 25 minutes, in which he substituted very positive associations for the fearful ones. Suddenly one had a python draped around her neck with a big smile on her face and the other showed no fear at all as she provided a platform for a large and hairy eight legged beast with her hands.

    Seemed a striking demonstration of how so much of our emotional response is governed by framing and association that one could see how people might be swallowing poison pills while being propagandized into loving the results. Michael Ellner of HEAL New York has always emphasized this hypnotic aspect of HIV∫AIDS, and he feels that the current wave of Test Everybody Now is likely to have mass hypnotic effects.

    Not suggesting this is all that is happening in each case, of course, merely that there might be some difficulty in judging one’s own experience accurately if it involves how one feels. Of course it is important for everyone to make up their own minds about the medications rather than follow medical advice blindly when it is based on very questionable science, but one can imagine that one could be influenced mentally by outside factors. So some self checking is in order.

    Present company excepted, of course.

  26. German Guest Says:

    @ nohivmeds:

    There is something strange going on with ARVs. A lot of people almost automatically tell you that AIDS-patients benefit from ARVs (HAART). But the facts simply don’t match.

    In Germany the life expectancy of HIV/AIDS-patients “increased” from an median age of 40.1 years in the pre-HAART era to astonishing 42.8 years after the introduction of HAART. That’s what is called “dramatic improvements in the HAART-era”. The Robert-Koch-Institut (comparable to the CDC in the US) repeatedly mentions these numbers particularly in order to avoid the impression that AIDS is a manageable “chronic disease”. In fact they insist on the their finding that media and general public are under the false impression that AIDS may not be a fatal disease anymore.

    But on the other hand, only a small number of patients actually dies from AIDS-defining illnesses. That’s beause nowadays 75 % of all deaths among HIV/AIDS-patients are not caused by AIDS but by side effects of treatment, drug abuse and other sexually transmitted diseases (numbers from the Robert-Koch-Institut).

    Further, the Robert-Koch-Institut declares: Due to the fact that statistical records are not sufficient to count the high numbers of non-HIV-related deaths in AIDS patients it is necessary to rely on theoretical calculations and estimates combined with the defacto life expectancy (42.8 years after introduction of HAART).

    Let me give you one example for the HAART-myth. In 2006 a study was conducted among AIDS patients who were transmitted to ICU because of PCP (Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia) in order to figure out survival rates. PCP is probably the most common AIDS-defining illness. The results:

    1) Survival rates among PCP patients dramatically improved after 1995/1996.

    2) There were no differences between patients with and without ARV treatment. Both groups of patients benefit equally from the improving survival rates.

    “The observed improvements in outcome from ICU for patients with severe PCP occurred in the absence of intervention with HAART and probably reflect general improvements in ICU management of respiratory failure and ARDS.”

    Miller et al, Thorax 2006;61:716-721

  27. nohivmeds Says:

    @ german guest — I’m aware of most of what you’ve written, but of course, none of what you’ve written concerns evaluations of “pulse” type therapies of the kind I am engaging in, so I wonder how much of it actually applies to me and so many other men I know who are pulsing their therapies.

    And, as most people on this site know, I lost a friend to complications from the ARVs in 2003 — liver failure. He had been on the meds since high-dose AZT without a break.

    I guess, ultimately, it would be hard for any of you to tell me something about ARVs I don’t know already — after all, most intelligent people, I don’t think, woudl take such clearly dangerous drugs without doing their homework first.

    My central point was that blanket condemnation of the ARVs is naive at best. I’m glad to see that folks seem to be restraining themselves from such thinking. Open minds, I think, work best.

  28. nohivmeds Says:

    TS wrote:

    “Not suggesting this is all that is happening in each case, of course, merely that there might be some difficulty in judging one’s own experience accurately if it involves how one feels.”

    A patently silly statement, TS. When exactly does one judge one’s experience without reference to how one feels? I know you were restraining yourself (and of course I appreciate that), but that really is a silly statement.

  29. German Guest Says:

    @ nohivmeds:

    Please regard my post rather as an addition to your personal experiences with HAART. Unlike you, most patients and even physicians do not have sufficient knowlegde about the mode of action of HAART and it’s (adverse) effects on the immunesystem. They are not aware of the inconsistent scientific literature and the consequences thereof.

  30. Glider Says:

    Nohivmeds,

    It seems to me you’re taking a conservative and well-considered approach, and I, for one, support what you’re doing. I’ve never taken meds in my 12+ years of being poz, but I would consider it—meaning I would research it thoroughly—if my health began to decline.

    For what it’s worth, I think the most valuable lesson the dissident side can teach HIV+ individuals is to be conservative in their treatment choices, do their own research, and be critical of the information they’re being given.

    TS,

    I second Nohivmeds last post too. Preserving the right to gauge one’s health by how one feels is a vital part of staying sane in this whole mess (I’m not saying it’s infallible though). For far too long HIV+ people have wholly ceded to doctors their ability to self-diagnose their well being, and I think this is an insidious trap. Once you begin to lose trust in your own instincts, or once you hand over to someone else the power to judge your condition, you are on your way to becoming a victim.

    Glider

  31. nohivmeds Says:

    Thanks german guest and glider. german guest — I fully agree that most individuals stuck inside AIDS Inc. don’t know enough about the ARVs and that is something that outrages me so very much, I can’t even tell you. For example, I met a man recently who has been on them for over 15 years, and the adverse effects were obvious — he was so ill, and taking so many secondary medications to deal with the side effects of the ARVs, but he would never consider going off them because his doctors have scared the s*it out of him. It’s awful how little patients actually know. It’s a disgrace. This is why whenever I discuss them with anyone, I always refer to them as “chemotherapy” to try to get the toxicity point across. And they are FDA Class 4 meds, but so few people know what that actually means.

    And Glider — I couldn’t agree more about exposure to dissident thought being helpful in making treatment decisions. Being exposed to Duesberg and others has made me re-evaluate everything and constantly reminds me to reexamine critically things that are happening to me or are suggested to me by medical professionals. For what it is worth, when I tested positive, I was adamant about not using the ARVs because I had already researched their toxicity and I was appalled at the side effects — but situaitons change. Plus, I’ve had many friends throughout the years who have used these drugs in various ways, and several that haven’t used them at all, and I do think that the common denominator in maintaining good health, with or without them, is, as you suggest, listening carefully to your body.

    I personally wish that folks knew how dangerous they were and so knew, if they were going to use them, that they would have to take breaks, but doctors discourage that. On a personal note, my ex was on them for over 5 years when his triglycerides shot to over 900 — I told him if he didn’t go off them, he would die. I told him a break would not kill him — but so many doctors give such dire warnings about going off of them. In the end, he went off of them, and is still off of them as far as I know, and is doing fine. Glider knows, like I do, what kind of crazy s*it docs says to patients who want to do things in a non-traditional way. Again, it’s a disgrace.

    Sites like these help best, I think, when the present a balanced approach to the debate. Radicalism just frightens already frightened people.

  32. Truthseeker Says:

    A patently silly statement, TS. When exactly does one judge one’s experience without reference to how one feels?

    NoHIVMeds, this site sets out to be a home for silly statements, on the principle that established wisdom always decries alternative views as “silly”, when in fact in science they can and frequently do win the Nobel in the end. But despite our restraint and the qualifications we made, you seem to mistake what we were hinting at, which is simply that a feeling of improvement associated with ARVs may be misleading. Overall this appears to be the case since people are dying at roughly the same rate (as just pointed out here in German guest’s impressive post) even though they initially leap out of beds and wheelbarrows and climb mountains or go back to work. But as we said, we recognize that personal judgement and testimony is key in this matter, even so. Your own is invaluable. We were simply pointing out one way the inconsistency between science and subjective experience has to be resolved.

    I guess, ultimately, it would be hard for any of you to tell me something about ARVs I don’t know already — after all, most intelligent people, I don’t think, would take such clearly dangerous drugs without doing their homework first.

    Lack of homework by intelligent people seems to be a characteristic of this field.

    My central point was that blanket condemnation of the ARVs is naive at best

    The fundamental point is that if ARVs have some positive effect, we need to state what it is and why and whether alternative medications and supplements without deleterious effects should be substituted.

  33. kevin Says:

    nohivmeds (mail):
    TS wrote:

    “Not suggesting this is all that is happening in each case, of course, merely that there might be some difficulty in judging one’s own experience accurately if it involves how one feels.”

    A patently silly statement, TS. When exactly does one judge one’s experience without reference to how one feels? I know you were restraining yourself (and of course I appreciate that), but that really is a silly statement.

    This is not a silly statement. Perhaps, it doesn’t resonate with you, but you are an exception since you are well-educated to both viewpoints. Nevertheless, psychosomatic considerations are absolutely relevant to the discussion given the uncertainty regarding the efficacy of conventional HIV treatments and the life and death insinuations that accompany such treatments. As you said yourself, even patients who are in tune with their body still must endure some “crazy s*it” if they want “to do things in a non-traditional way.”

    I do applaud you for providing a face, so to speak, to the difficult situation of deciding when and how to use ARVs. You are right to challenge those who categorically deny that they would not take ARVs even when faced with declining clinical health; however, you must also concede that it is difficult to gauge the ultimate import of your own health status, completely independent of the rhetoric of the HIV/AIDs paradigm. Hell, even those who haven’t tested positive are subject to the ill-health effects of such rhetoric. For example, my doctors were incredulous that I was HIV- considering that I was clinically presenting with symptoms consistent with the severe immunosuppresion they ONLY associated with HIV, not to mention that I was in a perceived high-risk group. This absolutely affected my health and my ability to recover it. I too am in tune with my body, but it was difficult to judge how I felt, clinically-speaking, in light of such negativity. I was tested for HIV nearly every time another sinus infection appeared, under the pretense that I was bound to positive at some point.

    This is how I came to learn of the dissent viewpoint and whole lot of other information outside of the mainstream. Once I learned that most of my problems stemmed from a long-standing iatrogenic fungal infection, I slowly came to realize that I had to separate myself from the negativity of my old doctor and begin anew, particularly since he would not prescribe the medication I needed. After all, I could not have a systemativ fungal infection; I was not positive, nor was I on chemo, so how could I have this illness? I finally found a physician who would treat the fungal infection and who espoused a holistic approach to recovering my health. I know I would have never gotten well without the highly-toxic, prescription anti-fungal, no matter how many vitamins I took. On the other hand, I would never have needed the anti-fungal had I not been sickened by conventional therapies, in the first place. In addition, I know I wouldn’t have gotten better even with the anti-fungal without a doctor who encouraged me to be and to feel well. After an entire life of dehabilitating ill-health and no hope for recovery, learning to read my body anew was like learning to play an instrument for the first time. I wish you well and keep “pulsing” the ARVs if that’s what it takes to clear your multiple infections. I’ve since had one recurrence, but taking a shorter cours of the anti-fungal worked again. As you stated before, one knows “clinical merit” when one experiences it.

    If this was too personal for your taste — good. You then must be someone who needs to remember that there are actual people we are all discussing when we have our little theoretical debates and tiffs and throw our opinions in. Ultimately, there are people out there, in the real world beyond cyber-space, having to make tough choices/confusing choices. Real choices everyday.

    After years of misinformation from AIDs Inc., those of us who have been made ill by the wonders of modern medicine absolutely must tell our stories. Otherwise, this insanity will continue. Nothing about AIDs is too personal to share, if it brings enlightment to others who are otherwise ignorant of the real details that Fauci and his cronies are so desperate to censor.

    Kevin

  34. Dan Says:

    Kevin,
    nice read.

    You’ve touched upon the incredible importance of psychological and emotional factors in relation to health and healing…from any condition.

    “AIDS” for me, is a combination of fear, hysteria, psychology, self-loathing and victim-mentality all loosely bound together with duct tape and chewing gum, (also known as “AIDS science”).

    The fluid nature of “AIDS” definitions through the years and across the globe creates a lot of “grey”. This is a good thing for those that financially and professionally profit from this nightmare. It also creates incredible confusion.

    Despite all this “grey”, the issue can be extremely simple. You either believe in it (even just a little), or you don’t.

  35. nohivmeds Says:

    Kevin — your experiences are so fascinating and such an important part of this whole story. I find myself side-by-side with you in many ways, although I will point out clearly that “feeling well” subjectively is a tough question given the rhetoric, but my current situation — a spate of diagnosed infections, one right after the other, is not really so subjective — it’s not to hard to judge that I both feel bad — and look, cultures and test provide evidence that there is a reason. The rhetoric does not interfere with seeing thrush in your throat and on your asshole, in other words. Note gentile, but to the point.

    Dan — I’ll just draw the reader’s attention to this statement of yours and then say a word or two:
    “Despite all this “grey”, the issue can be extremely simple. You either believe in it (even just a little), or you don’t.”

    Dan — If you think that anything about this is simple, then you are either delusional or in denial. Simple, it is most definitely not. And if you, when you talk about “belief” are referencing HIV, you need not bother to reference it, as Kevin just pointed out. Do you believe Kevin was ill? It (HIV) was unnecessary to create Kevin’s suffering — not correlated. It (HIV) is correlated with mine. Do you believe I am ill? He had a negative test, I had a positive one, and we have similar problems. Does that sound “simple” to you, Dan? It doesn’t sound simple at all to me. Stop talking down at everyone as if you have all the answers, Dan. Because when you do talk down at everyone else posting (especially when you so reliably attack me), it actually makes it clear just how few “answers” you actually have. Please, attack me again so we can showcase more of your ignorance.

  36. nohivmeds Says:

    To TS, you said:
    “We were simply pointing out one way the inconsistency between science and subjective experience has to be resolved. ”
    I thought that Kessler had already explained that several posts ago. I found his explanation quite adequate. Something about them being initially useful. That jives very well with my subjective experience, in which something about them is initially useful in improving my health, but then the side effects overwhelm, and I exit my use of them.

    You also mentioned:
    “The fundamental point is that if ARVs have some positive effect, we need to state what it is and why and whether alternative medications and supplements without deleterious effects should be substituted.”
    It’s not “if” TS — ARVs do have, as you’ve written and I’ve relayed, and so many others would as well “some positive effect.” That quesiton too has been resolved. And I also think that you have made several posts on the benefits of “alternative medications and supplements” and have show more than adequately that those too can have “some positive effect.”
    Your final question, about whether one could be substituted for another, seems also to have been answered. Glider has not used ARVs and is doing well using other methods. Perhaps if I had not succumbed to the initial pressure to take them, I’d be in the same place he is. Perhaps not, though. Your final question is an empirical one, truthfully, that has not yet been thoroughly investigated, and so of course, has not been thoroughly answered.

  37. Dan Says:

    NHM,

    we’ll just have to “agree to disagree”.

    You see complexity. I see simplicity.

  38. YossariansGhostbuster Says:

    Dan,

    Is that your bestest answer ?

    Like you didn’t have any problems combining fear, hysteria, psychology, self-loathing, victim mentality and loosely bound duct tape and chewing gum.

    Kindly put all your oars in the water should you chose to answer.

  39. nohivmeds Says:

    Oh, let’s leave it YGB. Like I said in my post, Dan doesn’t have any answers. It isn’t kind to poke fun at simple people.

  40. nohivmeds Says:

    We don’t disagree, Dan. That would be giving you too much credit. You really should learn to stop when you’ve talked your self into an inextricable corner.

    Now — with compassion — Dan — here’s what you appear to think about HIV+ people:

    oh they’re all a bunch of drugged-up, anorexic faggots with victim complexes

    In the interest of real honesty, Dan, you should have the guts to come out and say it. Better yet, examine why you hate HIV+ people so much. Maybe you haven’t known enough of them? Maybe the ones you know you just don’t like? Maybe (gosh, could it be) you are evidencing jealousy? That’s one of many well-documented responses to being HIV-negative these days (try reading some Walt Odets), and it quite understandable. It does not however, NOT give you the right to attack people for no reason and direct hatred at HIV+ individuals. Here, Kevin and I both have massive fungal infections, but you hate me and love him, and all because of a confusing little test, an area of science in jumbles, and perhaps some issue in yourself. Deal with it. Maybe make your own blog where you can become the Ann Coulter of HIV. Whatever it is you need to do to stop being a jerk here, please do.

  41. Truthseeker Says:

    You see complexity. I see simplicity

    This is a sign of intelligence, is it not – perhaps the sign of intelligence.

  42. kevin Says:

    nohivmeds (mail):
    ……I find myself side-by-side with you in many ways, although I will point out clearly that “feeling well” subjectively is a tough question given the rhetoric, but my current situation — a spate of diagnosed infections, one right after the other, is not really so subjective–

    I am glad to provide input, nohivmeds. When I first began reading this blog, I expected to find others who shared my health history, but I half-expected more than a few of them to be test-negative. I know they’re out there but apparently they aren’t compelled to comment or to reveal that on this blog. So, I thought that perspective was missing. Thank you for finding it worthy.

    I’m very sorry to hear that your health is poor, right now. I’m sure our histories have many overlapping dynamics, as you suggests. You can recover good health, but it’s never easy, I do know that. I was very, very sick when I first started the anti-fungal treatment. Long-standing fungal infections can be extremely difficult to eradicate. That first time, I had to take fluconazole at very high doses for over four months, without the recommended treatment interuptions normally observed. I also suffered secondary bacterial infections during the anti-fungal treatment. Antibiotics being counter-indicated, I made many lifestlye changes hoping it would bridge that gap. Interestingly, had I known about ARVs anti-microbial properties, I may have tried them short-term, if they were available to me. That said, I don’t intend to ever get to that state again. I think their use should be limited to people with mutiple acute infections and for as short of a time as possible.

    I’ve been mostly well the last 18 months…one minor bacterial sinus infection and a brief relapse of the fungal infections which I successfully treated less aggressively this time. The improvement in my health has been dramatic, to say the least, but the lifestyle changes have been difficult to maintain. I was always health-conscious (had to be), athletic (health-permitting) and never did hard drugs (other than those prescribed), but now I’m a virtual saint. I eat very healthy and I get plenty of rest–no exceptions. That’s the only truly simple part about this. Once you recover from the brink, doing those two things will go a long way to sustain you. The margin of error is varied for different people, I think.

    Stress was the other key factor I needed to deal with and that’s also where the fear rears its ugly head, i.e. no more monthly HIV tests and no more high-risk group mojo. I made tough changes, especially early. Besides my doctor, I ended other relationships that were burdensome, some longstanding, and I concentrated on myself, more than ever. The progress was slow, but I finally began to get well. However, alleviating the very real physical symptoms was paramount to getting to an optimist vantage point. So, use the ARVS if you need them, but do the other things, as well. I did and do take lots of antioxidants, too. One other thing that worked for me and which is certainly not glamorous is colon hydrotherapy, or colonics. When we are sick and when we take toxic drugs, colonics can play a crucial role in the detoxification process by physically removing the toxins from our bodies. The “clinical merits” were, once again, obvious.

    Incidentally, my recurrence happened during an extremely stressful period a couple months ago. I can’t stress enough (no pun intended) how important limiting stress is in helping our damaged immune systems to operate more normally, which should be our goal. I hope you continue to find merit and practical insight from my posts. Perhaps, others won’t find them too personal and can find the same merit. I can’t imagine someone who has experienced this, not being able to relate to a personal account of it. Unfortunately, the inverse is also true.

    Oh…I do agree with Dan that fear is a major component of understanding HIV/AIDS as a social phenomenon and as a psychosomatic consideration for individuals, but how it all fits together, including that fear, is anything but simple.

    Kevin

  43. kevin Says:

    You see complexity. I see simplicity

    This is a sign of intelligence, is it not – perhaps the sign of intelligence.

    That’s a witty observation, TS but it is a bit of an oversimplification, in and of itself. Though it’s often true that many of the most insightful intellects have provided simple answers to questions otherwise considered more complex, it is by no means true in every case. Apropos, plenty of ignorant people happily adopt simple explanations for very complex issues, i.e. some people actually believe that HIV is sufficient to explain the various immunosuppressive conditions we are currently discussing.

  44. nohivmeds Says:

    Kevin, I find your advice sterling and will set myself to the task of following it while I do my short course ARV treatment. Our paths sounds so very similar — I think that our stories are being revealed here at this time is no coincidence. Thank you for your input — it is much appreciated — and you’re right to assume that it is the antimicrobial properties of the ARVs that I am depending on right now.

  45. nohivmeds Says:

    To inject some levity – and because humor, I think, is so important — I can’t believe that I revealed that I have thrush from my “mouth to my asshole!” It’s not funny, but it is. It’s likely the first infection that will go away — i’ll start diflucan with the ARVs tomorrow. Humor – that is the ingredient that both you and I have failed to mention, but that helps so much. I am more than willing to laugh at my predicament and at myself.

  46. nohivmeds Says:

    Oh and TS, I agree with Kevin regarding your oversimplification — you do sound like those who propose that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS. I mean, that was the ultimate oversimplification, wasn’t it? I know it’s not correct in my case, and is clearly not correct in Kevin’s, and the existence of our two cases alone argues against any such simplification, I’m afraid.

  47. Dan Says:

    Funny, strange and ironic how every time I’m accused of “attacking” NHM , that he sees fit to go on the attack. I’m sure that he can clearly see that he’s doing what he accuses me of doing, since he’s a psychologist and all 🙂 .

    Truthseeker, I’ll have to refrain from posting here when NHM is on a posting spree. I become a lightning rod, and the discussion quickly degrades as NHM’s ego and insecurities (that he projects onto me) become the center of attention.

    As a gay man who’s been able to not get dragged into this self-loathing, self-denying, victim-mentality gay death cult for 25 years, I find I have less and less time for those who have been “absorbed” and have no desire to free themselves. Like the insecure believers of some faiths, they must try and take others with them. But no matter how many they “convert”, it never eases their insecurity and the fear lingering in the backs of their minds that they are wrong.

  48. Dan Says:

    NHM,

    although it may do nothing to change your perceptions, I’d like to state a few things.

    First, I don’t hate HIV+ people. I’ve never said such a thing. Please find a reference where I’ve used the word “hate” towards any person or group.

    My “frustration”, to put it mildly, is with the larger gay community that deeply believes in this death cult. It obviously encompasses “positives” and “negatives”.

    I’ve had friends die. I’ve told the story of two close friends (partnered) over and over many times in different places on the web. I’ve told about my feelings of utter helplessness while watching them die from something that just wasn’t making sense to me. I don’t know if this has any effect on your views of me as somebody who hasn’t been touched by this tragedy, and seemingly has no compassion. Time will tell.

    Back in the “olden days”, I was the only person I knew who wasn’t afraid to be intimate with my “HIV+” friends. It was difficult as they became withdrawn and unaccepting of intimacy (think about what that does to their physical health and emotional/spiritual well-being).

    So, NHM, you can continue to say ugly things about me, putting words in my mouth, but they just aren’t true.

    This will be my last post for a while if I see a flurry of tirades coming on the heels of these last two posts.

    For fun…anybody spot the subtle reference to an original Star Trek series my post above? Bonus points, if you do. And if you do , you’ll notice some interesting parallels between it and the “AIDS” cult.

  49. Glider Says:

    nohivmeds,

    If you haven’t already, please read the chapter “Recovery from AIDS”, particularly the part under the subhead “The Yeast Syndrome” in John Lauritsen’s book “The AIDS War”. You can find it here: http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/jlrecovery.htm

    Glider

  50. nohivmeds Says:

    Glider — thank you! That reference is a great help!

    Dan — I think if you’ll read your own posts, you’ll see you threw the first stone with all of your condescending reference to my allusion to all of this as “gray.” Try being honest with yourself, please. And yes, I think you’ve mentioned any number of times how much you dislike the gay community. That must be hard. I’d hate to feel like such an outsider in my own community — I draw so much support from it. Perhaps if you could let go of your resentments, you could too.

  51. nohivmeds Says:

    Oh and Dan — please don’t stop commenting just because I’m around again. Because you see, I’m not going anywhere. I’m sure you can find a way to make your views known without demeaning mine — then, I wouldn’t feel such a need to attack back. Simple, really. Or perhaps not so simple, if you are using me to vent your resentments against the gay community? Something to think about. I certainly value everyone’s contributions here, whether I object to them or not.

  52. Truthseeker Says:

    As a gay man who’s been able to not get dragged into this self-loathing, self-denying, victim-mentality gay death cult for 25 years, I find I have less and less time for those who have been “absorbed” and have no desire to free themselves

    With all due respect, NotHIVMeds, this seems to be a very accurate remark from Dan if your last stream of posts are any guide. The bottom line is that you continue to take these meds on the theory that they are antibiotics? Did we not see that in one of your posts, which we are forced to skim too rapidly because they do not as requested concern the science and the literature alone but include insults and emotionalism of a high order which interfere with the cool objectivity with which this topic has to be dealt if truth is to emerge. Mention of your unmentionable body parts is also verboten for the same reason, and is not even humorous, as you appear to believe.

    If we are correct in recalling that you are taking ARVs despite your moniker because you fondly imagine they have some antibiotic effect, let’s remind you that our remark above was serious. In the face of the proven and admitted deleterious effects of ARVs you have to have a very good reason to take them. This does not include that you imagine you feel better, especially when you are in a self-demonstrated highly emotional state. There should be objective measurement of your improved health and also clear reasons why you should not prefer to take conventional antibiotics or whatever else in conventional medicine achieves the same objectives.

    As far as we can detect from your muddled emotionalism you are simply reluctant to give up a false belief you nurtured for so long in close proximity in your paralyzed brain to your desire to survive, so that the two got blended emotionally and you cannot tear them apart now. If you want to continue being a self flagellating nincompoop then continue believing that HIV does something, and take ARVs for it. If you want to be a ‘scientist” in the way you loudly profess to know and love then be one, and grasp the nettle. You were a fool and a sucker to believe in HIV causing harm for so many years and it is time to relinquish the beloved belief, as a viper in your bosom.

    If our impatient language shocks you, it is no more than you deserve for papering this blog with narcissistic double think when you have been specifically asked not to several times. If you wish to reply amd refute what we say in a style which answers the point, then refrain from emotionalism, insults and double think, and make clear scientific points, and we can do likewise, and perhaps stand corrected. But first, you have to take our points in hand, and not wallow in emotionalism and narcissism to the extent of attacking Dan for trying to bring home to you the cool and simple reasoned conclusions of the science you profess to love.

    If we are too rude perhaps you will forgive us if you learn that we were exposed to this kind of emotional thinking by several people at a GMHC meeting last night in New York City, and they were, like you, admirable human beings who did not deserve to be so misled by themselves, and we are especially tired of it today.

  53. nohivmeds Says:

    TS — Just so you know, I don’t take anything you write about ARVs seriously. You’ve never been on them, and were never faced with the decision. You’re heterosexual, you’re assumably healthy. You have absolutely no insight at all thought into my thought processes — your conjectures are mostly sad to me. But, I wouldn’t expect you to understand. I don’t come here for that.

    All that said — that is the 11th time you’ve lectured me on what somehow you perceive I don’t understand. Aren’t you tired of repeating yourself? Both Glider and Kevin and Kessler and YGB understand. If you can’t, then you can’t. But let’s agree to forego the 12th lecture, shall we? In return, I won’t made (educated) hypotheses about what moves you. That should be worth quite a lot.

    It is astounding to me how little you do understand about me. Gardner says that Interpersonal Intelligence shows large individual differences. You’re great on the nuts and bolts of microbiology, epidemiology, immunology — don’t try psychology. It’s embarassing.

  54. nohivmeds Says:

    And some advice, TS — Kessler, Glider, YGB, Kevin — all bright guys, obviously. Dan too — but can you not see that Dan is the only one here who seems to have a need (which strangely, you also seem to have) to demean gay men? I would find it hard to ally myself with such clear distorted and negative judgement and disdain, but perhaps that’s comfortable for you? After all, I did hi-jack this strand, didn’t I? Don’t worry, TS. You’re in charge. I’ll try to keep my “emotionalism” and all that other blither-blather you wrote about above, that all really just translates into “gay” on a lower setting, so as not to upset your sensibilities (or Dan’s for that matter). I pledge to give it my all to pass for cool, scientific, and above all, heterosexual! It will be my pleasure. What is it Bialy says about me in comparison to you when it comes to scientific reasoning?

  55. nohivmeds Says:

    Oh — and another thing you might be noticing about now — your attacks, Dan’s — they don’t faze me anymore! It’s great, because now I can still enjoy participating regardless! So plan on hearing from me. I feel really comfortable here. You’re a very gracious host, that I must say.

  56. Truthseeker Says:

    TS — Just so you know, I don’t take anything you write about ARVs seriously. You’ve never been on them, and were never faced with the decision

    That is precisely what we mean. You have little or no respect for others’ objective thinking, and too much respect for your own subjective thinking, particularly when you are in a dangerous situation, or so you are persuaded, and also are actually ill, a predicament which throws everyone off their normal level of mental performance.

    It is astounding to me how little you do understand about me. Gardner says that Interpersonal Intelligence shows large individual differences. You’re great on the nuts and bolts of microbiology, epidemiology, immunology — don’t try psychology. It’s embarassing.

    Again, you have no respect for objective observation when it involves your subjective feelings and beliefs. The fact that our analysis fits your behavior and predicts it time and again on this blog should weigh something, but no, you deny it as vehemently yet unspecifically as ever.

    The objective here is not to understand you, but to get you to discuss what you believe and what you are doing more obectively, and for you to stop attacking outside views of your belief in yourself and your subjective perceptions and in what others have told you, with overreactive insults, defensiveness, and doublethink. It is your own story which informs our comments, the story you told, of how you as a “scientist” never had an inkling that you were sold a bill of goods until enlightened by Celia Farber’s article in Harpers.

    If there is a better example of the fallibility of your subjective perceptions, we can’t imagine what it would be. Maybe it is time to separate, finally, your giant bag of conflicting emotions, including all the complex ones that you seem to have inherited as a gay, as described by Dan, who is a gay, and therefore cannot be outright rejected as a nonauthority as we mere heterosexuals can be, as well as your pride in being “scientific” (rather intermittently in our experience), as well as the great flux of fear and anger and fatigue that is caused by actually being ill, from your analysis, and at least listen to others who are not involved in such complexities, simple minded though they might appear to you.

    The HIV issue is not complicated in any way in its origin. A bad idea which should have been rejected immediately at the outset by reviewers and editors was given federal endorsement. All the complications arose because this gave many people a powerful reason to rationalize it, and gays – who had a powerful political reason to run with it – then proceeded to sacrifice themselves to it, rather than take responsibility for their own unprecedented ways of attacking their own health.

    You are part of a gay culture of apoptosis, as long as you support one inch of this irrationality. Stop doing it, if you want to lay claim to the status of ‘scientist’.

  57. nohivmeds Says:

    TS — I don’t have to “claim” the title “scientist.” Unlike you, I actually am one.

    And I would ask you, once again, kindly stop demeaning gay men. It’s really very unbecoming, and in this last rant, you actually sound positively homophobic.

    As for what you believe and what I believe regarding HIV, AIDS, whatever — your beliefs don’t bother me, TS — you’re entitled to them. And conversely, I’m entitled to mine.

    And that was the 12th lecture. Want to try lucky #13? I don’t think you’re getting it, TS.

  58. nohivmeds Says:

    Lemme just repeat that first part, so we’re all straight on it:

    TS — I don’t have to “claim” the title “scientist.” Unlike you, I actually am one.

  59. nohivmeds Says:

    …and to think we must suffer all of this because I won’t blanketly condemn ARV therapy……so much time wasted for so little. I mean, TS — why do you even care what I think?

  60. nohivmeds Says:

    Here’s my guess at this frisson, TS. You didn’t like hearing personal testimony from someone who is actually sick. You like those people to remain abstractions only. Well, I’m no abstraction, what is happening to me is not a bizzarre psychodrama, and what I’m doing about it is my business. I don’t demean your health choices. I don’t even ask about them. But my choices happen to be the real-world equivalent of everything that goes on in here — all the knowledge and information and yes, even the “emotionalism.” I’m living it, TS, and I’m living it here, for the world to see, with you, as my hopefully less angry and more benevolent host. This is the real world come knocking, and it won’t stop until it’s let in.

  61. Truthseeker Says:

    NTM, you are just digging a very large hole for yourself. Until you can read and respond to comment replies objectively, you cannot lay claim to being a “scientist”. Until you do that, you only reinforce the suspicions of many that psychologists are often incapable of rigor in science or out, and are therefore often unworthy of the label.

    Why should this blog be a parade ground for the fears, worries, misapprehensions, and imbalance of one who sees homophobia in every mention of gays, or who cannot discuss the value of ARV drugs without bringing in the accusation? We are trying to advance science here, not discuss your victimhood.

    The accusation is absurd anyway. You have already been through all this nonsense earlier. The software is set to bar you for 24 hours to cool down if you continue with this narcissistic exhibitionism.

    But we have prevented it with an override because we know you will return to your usual scientific objectivity immediately.

  62. nohivmeds Says:

    Well, I’ll take the lack of lecture 13 as a sign that something got through to you, TS. I do wish, for your own sake, that you would stop making pronouncements on gay culture and the gay community — I mean, you write as if you are well-acquainted with what is wrong with the gay community; so much so that one might be tempted to guess that you’re a member. Really, such intimacy in your writing.

    If you’re not a member, your sources are giving you very BAD info. I am involved in a gay community that is thriving — where I see political battles won, social battles won, a level of organization that has actually never previously been seen to fight for marriage (it surpasses the community’s level of organization for AIDS by far) — so, all I can do is tell you that you’re receiving some real downer info on the gay community that I doubt very much many gay men would agree with. And this info comes from — oh yes, Dan. Our friend who too, seems so very down on the gay community. Well then, no suprise concerning your views, TS. I’d just vet my sources more thoroughly if I were you — or even better — leave the gay community out of it? How bout that.

  63. nohivmeds Says:

    …..oh, and TS, I’m sure that you and I are digging this hole deeper together — I could never have done it without you! I hadn’t thanked you for your effort yet — let me do that: Thanks for your great work with the shovel.

  64. nohivmeds Says:

    Am I banned now, dear TS? Or should we call this one quits. Cuz you know if you ban me, I’ll just come back in some other form. I feel satisfied. How bout you?

  65. Truthseeker Says:

    We have removed the override. One more blatant flouting of regulations and the software will block your posts for a 24 hour cooling off period.

    The regulation referred to is 10 (c) 2a section 133 (p.541) which reads as follows:

    “No commenter shall distort the views of the blogger in any exchange in Comments”.

  66. nohivmeds Says:

    Please, Daddy — Do it!

    But block yourself for distorting my views too!

    It’s only fair.

    (And don’t you think I can get around the block?)

    Come on, TS, give it a break. Stop riding me, and I’ll stop giving you a hard time. And I nominate your faux (almost gay, really) tone of authority for knocking the dial off of the laughometer! You really are a kick.

  67. nohivmeds Says:

    Where is YGB when you need him? YGB — did you love the “Daddy” bit? I have to admit that I loved it just a little bit. Okay — enough fun — must run. Dinner plans.

    Bon soir, Truthseeker. Let’s torment each other a bit again some time. It really is a stitch. And this blog could use the levity.

  68. Dan Says:

    I’ll have to refrain from posting here when NHM is on a posting spree. I become a lightning rod, and the discussion quickly degrades as NHM’s ego and insecurities (that he projects onto me) become the center of attention.

    NHM, with nearly every post since this quote above, you’ve proven my statement to be correct.

    Truthseeker, I think you already understand, and you may have understood this for quite some time…but, for NHM, “AIDS” is practically inseparable from gay identity. This is why he and I butt heads.

    The intertwining of “AIDS” to our identity runs so deep for so many gay men, that they cannot even imagine a world without “AIDS”. It’s ours . We own it . Don’t you truthseeker, a heterosexual, even try to take away this most basic, fundamental part of our character/identity.

    Well, NHM, I don’t want it. You can have it. And you can foam at the mouth, and call me all sorts of names if it makes you feel better. “AIDS” is yours. It’s not mine. I understand if that makes me a “homophobe” in your book. I can live with that.

  69. kevin Says:

    First, I think the discussion in this thread is exceedingly important for a number of reasons that I plan to address in this post. Each contributor–TS, Dan, nohivmeds, Glider–you’ve all added to my understanding of this issue. Thank you. That said, as relevant as personal accounts are, personal attacks are completely irrelevant, and I hope a truce can be found between those of you who are bickering. As something of an ‘outside observer’, or in the least, a newer voice on this blog, I assure you that you all agree more than you might like to admit.

    Dan, your insights into the self-loathing that is rampant in the gay community are spot-on and in no way did I take them to be homophobic. Sometimes, honesty is unpleasant. I also did not take the comments personally, and I too am a gay male. I found them affirming, actually. Among several other comments that resonated with me, you wrote :

    My “frustration”, to put it mildly, is with the larger gay community that deeply believes in this death cult. It obviously encompasses “positives” and “negatives”.

    I completely understand this frustration and I fight it everyday with friends who are both believers in the paradigm and even with many of my more enlightened friends who question it. I’ve ended more than a few friendship with extremely intelligent gay friends because they were simply incapable of considering their irrational addiction to the self-loathing that HIV engenders, both in themselves and in the gay community in which they seek support. For me, the “sheeple” tendencies of the gay community, at large, are just not my cup of tea, with or without HIV; however, I would like to be more involved, but I’ve found, time and time again, that “the community” is not accepting of those who do not fit the stereotypes. I’m okay with that, but it is frustrating with an issue like HIV, where the stakes are so high.

    Nohivmeds, you are unwell and your first order of business is to change that. You must learn to tune out those who hinder your health progress or perhaps, taking a break from this blog might be in order. I enjoy your posts, but I know firsthand the task before you. From my own experience, I understand that your symptoms are certainly not imaginary. Anyone who doesn’t understand how difficult your predicament is simply hasn’t had to face such a situation, namely they’ve never had a systemic yeast infection. At first, I too wanted to say to you, “don’t use the ARVs”, “why not just try the anti-fungals”, but when I gave greater consideration to how I felt during my own sickest period, I reconsidered. As I stated previously, I might have used them myself since a severe fungal infection combined with secondary bacterial infections is a bit of catch-22. People who are unfamiliar with fungal infections may not understand, but in a nutshell, antibiotics must be strictly avoided if one ever hopes to fully recover from a fungal infection. I would implore you to limit the ARVs to as short a course as is needed since I whole-heartedly believe they do as much damage as they do good, even as an anti-microbial. Nobody really knows what the tipping point is regarding their deleterious effects, but I imagine it’s different for each person. It’s a risk that I wouldn’t wish on anyone. Nevertheless, you must overcome the fungal infection if you are to break the cycle and truly achieve good health. If you’d like to email me for further details on what has worked for me, I’d be happy to discuss the details further. I know what you are going through. There is much that others could learn from truly considering the following quote from you:

    …my choices happen to be the real-world equivalent of everything that goes on in here — all the knowledge and information and yes, even the “emotionalism.”

    Conversely, TS wrote:

    There should be objective measurement of your improved health and also clear reasons why you should not prefer to take conventional antibiotics or whatever else in conventional medicine achieves the same objectives.

    I’d say that I agree completely with this statement since I believe that the conventional therapies for most of these opportunistic infections are sufficient to achieve improved health without the use of ARVs. However, many people, whether positive or negative, do not respond to anti-fungal therapy as I did. Once again, for those of you who are ignorant to the matter, long-standing fungal infections are pernicious and somewhat impervious to treatment, and I believe they account for a significant part of the immune suppression that is currently attributed to HIV. Since I’ve stated that ad naseum, I’ll move on, but it really is important to understand that if you are going to criticize HIV+ people for using ARVs. That said, the nature of the beast might lead some to develop defeatist attitudes and to wallow in self-loathing, whether willfully or subconscious. Very few who are severely ill will survive their HIV+ diagnosis unless they eventually reach a point where they can give up all belief in the dogma of paradigm. Make no mistake, I believe ARVs are as dangerous as the opportunistic infections, particularly if you use them in lieu of achieving the freedom of spirit to be well, but everyone deserves respect when it comes to navigating these very tough treatment decisions.

    Kevin

  70. nohivmeds Says:

    Thanks, Kev. That was lovely and amazingly well-considered. Thanks for your advice concerning my predicament — I’m confident that my strategy will work, as it’s worked previously. But it is true that the “tipping point” is unknown. I feel like I “sense” when that point is approaching, if that makes any sense.

    I’m sad to hear that you too feel disappointment in some gay men and in some ways at the community as a whole. I understand, actually, the feelings you and Dan express and have felt those things — but I started volunteering really actively in youth and other programs in my community many years ago now, and in general, I don’t hold members of my community to a higher standard than I would hold anyone, I allow for mistakes of the past without condemnation, and perhaps because I work with you, I lay the seeds for a positive future. I have found, as I let go of my feeling “disaffected” within the gay community, that I am more generous in my assessments of others. Where some might see “Disability Queens,” I see men who have been stripped of their confidence and detached from the world. Of course they participated in that — that they have a role to play in the fact that it happened — but that is in the past, and I am someone now, who for everyone, focuses on a hopeful future.

  71. nohivmeds Says:

    To expand a bit: I even understand and don’t feel anger at people like Gregg Gonsalves anymore either. I think a major thing happened in the gay community, we called it AIDS, and it sent a lot of people spinning in a lot of different directions. Some fought. Some felt like victims. So many responses. But I can’t look at those reponses and pretend that everyone should have chosen the responses I think would be best. And I can’t stand around and pretent that I always choose the right responses. If there was less judgement between us gay men about how we all respond to this, there would be so much more brotherhood. So — bottom line — I don’t judge and I don’t assign blame. I am, by discipline, a Developmental Psychologist. Each person develops uniquely. I might find some developmental outcomes unfavorable, but I can also understand where they came from, and have humility in the face of the choices of others, and in the face of my own. What more can we do for one another?

  72. Glider Says:

    Kevin,

    Excellent post. Thank you.

    Like you, I really hope Dan &NHM, who are two of my favorite posters, can patch up their differences. What do you say guys? There’s so much we can learn from one another.

    Moving on, you wrote: “Once again, for those of you who are ignorant to the matter, long-standing fungal infections are pernicious and somewhat impervious to treatment, and I believe they account for a significant part of the immune suppression that is currently attributed to HIV.”

    I’d go even further than that. I think systemic fungal infections, which can compromise the lining of the gut, taxing the immune system and disabling the nutrient-absorbing function in the process, account for MOST of the progressive immune suppression attributed to HIV.

    Glider

  73. Glider Says:

    NHM,

    Well done to you too! I’m pulling for you. Start drinking lots of kefir (it’s much better than yogurt) once you’re through pulsing 😉

    Glider

  74. nohivmeds Says:

    Glider,
    Thanks. I think that the fundamental problem is that I’m a multifactorialist, and I don’t take HIV out of the picture. I always say (have said) that HIV CANNOT be the sole necessary and sufficient cause of AIDS. But I don’t believe I can affirmatively say that it’s not involved somehow. Rebecca Culshaw and I discsused it as perhaps a signal, rather than a thing, the poz ab test — maybe it’s a biological signal of advancing oxidative stress — there are so many ways to view it. But this view is not consistent with this blog’s view, where HIV plays no role at all.

    So Dan and Truthseeker — what else can I say — they make fun of my views, at best, or say that I hold them because my thinking is immature, or because of my “emotionalism,” etc., etc., etc. None of those things are true. I hold them because I’m not taking any chances. I want all of it in play. And I don’t believe it’s been eliminated as a variable, from a purely scientific perspective — at least, not to my satisfaction, and I am a scientist, so I’ve a right to make that assertion.

    I’m not the only multifactorialist close to this blog either — Celia Farber describes her veiws that way as well. But for some reason, when I do it, it’s because there is some fundamental fault in me.

    I grant TS and Dan, I believe, legitimacy for their views. I don’t think they hold them because they don’t know enough, or are emotional because they’re not feeling well. That would be foolish. I would like the same legitimacy granted to my views. Clearly, we won’t agree, but there is no reason for the mocking and belittling I receive for holding these views (TS’s posts are too good an example of this). I find that kind of behavior unjustifiable and totally unnecessary. I don’t believe I have all the answers, so I don’t act like I do by telling others that their answers are wrong. TS and Dan don’t like my answer, which is fine with me, but does not appear to be fine with them.

    Thus, the difficulty of making things better between all parties.

  75. YossariansGhostbuster Says:

    NHM

    What criteria did you use to decide to restart ARV’s ?

    The candidiasis ? the staph infection ? or CD-4 count ?

  76. nohivmeds Says:

    the infections alone (there was also a conjunctivitis that kept moving around from eye to eye, and a sinus infection). the cd4 count has been stable (albeit on the low end) for over a year now. i never make these decisions based on those numbers.

    the infections coming all at once indicated to me that something was amiss. i’ve been through this before. i’ll terminate the ARVs when the side effects overwhelm — usually about 6 months.

  77. nohivmeds Says:

    YGB — good to hear from you, by the way.

  78. YossariansGhostbuster Says:

    Tell us about the antibiotics you took for the staph etc..

  79. Truthseeker Says:

    Everyone talking sense again, Thank God. We were afraid NTM was having some kind of gay transport from hand to hand combat. Almost every sentence was a double entendre. Is this entirely necessary? Perhaps it is a live example of what other posters have just established, which is that some gays tend to infuse almost every issue and act with gayness, including AIDS itself, as if it was a necessary part of their gayness without which they would lose their identity. It all sounds very plausible to us.

    However, on this blog one would like to keep comment clear of gay sexual exhibitionism, if you don’t mind, just as one would want to keep it clear of straight sexual exhibitionism. This is a science blog, not a gay cruising area, as we have explained before. In fact, given what more than one poster has now established as the tendency for AIDS to be part of the gay identity of some gays, this must be kept out or it will muddy discussion further, as in NHM’s case, except as an important topic in itself. Important because something has to account for the lemming like behavior of so many gays, other than gullibility.

    As far as using ARVs for other purposes than to chase down HIV, that seems very worth exploring as a topic because it will throw light on whatever it is about ARVs that recommends them to patients so much. If fungal infections are impervious to antibiotics, or even they go hand in hand (sounds wrong to us, but that’s what you posted, certainly possible if other flora are needed to defeat it soundly), one has to decide if the fungi arose because of the immune dysfunction, or whether they help cause it, initially or later.

    There is a lot of chicken/egg mystery in AIDS, it seems clear. Surely giving up sex for a time should be one move. But the idea of using ARVs because they are lethal for fungal infections which won’t go away otherwise is a new one to us. Given all the science, it seems absurd to risk it, but if you have thought it through, that’s your decision. All this blog argues is that the fundamental HIV justification for ARVs has nothing to recommend it. The literature indicated that in the beginning and now indicates it more than ever. What does the literature indicate for using ARVs for fungal infection? Or is this all hearsay medicine?

  80. nohivmeds Says:

    YGB — zithromax and flagyl.
    TS — the ARVs are potent antimicrobials — that’s not new — one thing we all agree on is how incredibly cytotoxic they are. And fungal infections are notoriously hard to treat — that’s not new either — and are associated with immunosuppression themselves, as are the drugs normally used to treat them. I don’t think the science is heresay. I think people are experimenting. I see what I’m doing as an experiment — it’s the only real way to know. We can discuss trying it (whether it’s “absurd” may be a little strong) till we are blue in the face. Unless someone gives it a shot, it’s just talk. I think Kevin might agree that with immunosuppression of mysterious origin one has to keep an open mind and be willing to take some risks.

  81. nohivmeds Says:

    If you think about it, TS, people take these sorts of risks with cancer all the time. When I was first diagnosed, I knew that the cure was worse than the disease, in all likelihood. But that didn’t mean that there wasn’t a time and place for use of the “cure.” We use thalidomyde now to treat some cancers. Taking poisonous substances to cure disease is not a new concept.

  82. nohivmeds Says:

    In other words, we have a long history of understanding that sometimes you must bring the body low in order to build it up again. We’ve been doing it for centuries, across a wide variety of cultures.

    And thanks for the alteration in tone. It’s much appreciated.

  83. Truthseeker Says:

    Clearly, we won’t agree, but there is no reason for the mocking and belittling I receive for holding these views (TS’s posts are too good an example of this).

    Not belittled as a human being. You are mocked only for your emotionalism, projected psychology of homophobia, etc, but doubly so because you claim so often to be a scientist, although you show no sign of it in a) your history of unthinking acceptance of HIV and ARVs, or now b) in your current emotionalism when your view is challenged as psychically based uncertainty by those who are more decided, based on the literature and common sense, which show a perfect lack of justification for your fear of HIV, if one rejects social and emotional pressures on judgement.

    If you wish to escape being judged on this score as emotionally driven, you must demonstrate here the professional scientific reasoning mode you claim and avoid getting hepped up by exciting gay thoughts and anxieties that others are tilting against you as a hysterical queen or whatever it is you imply and keep your posts scientific, which you have demonstrated you can do when in the mood.

    The difference between a professional and an amateur is that the professional can maintain standards even when not in the mood. Your posts appear to be partly mood driven. This makes them interesting in their variety but not terribly persuasive as science, even though they provide grist for endless smug sermons from Mount NAR.

    For this you are entirely forgiven a) because you are ill (a very disturbing mental influence) and b) suffering the unfortunate consequences of believing for years that ARVs are manna from heaven, or the wafer handed out in kneeling Communion in the Church of the Holy Paradigm of Gay Emancipation from Blame, or whatever it is in your mind that still carries over to your reluctance to let go, so you fall between two stools – the HIV stool and the not HIV stool – with what you are now describing as a Multifactorial Theory.

    Which theory you apparently don’t recognize even now is equivalent to a non-HIV theory in even in the mind of Dr Fauci, for the very good reason that he believes that there is no way of shoring up belief in HIV unless it is the ONLY cause of “AIDS”, the sufficient and necessary cause, and “AIDS” does not include the immune impact of other causes, which must be ignored, all of which incredible and silly logic is the fundamental root cause of the increasing laughable state of the paradigm, which claims to be airworthy by virtue of additional wings stuck on its nose, fuselage belly and each of its wheels when its two main wings have been lopped off by the papers published by mainstream researchers.

    However, you still insist that it flies because as it was sitting on the ground with its engines roaring for the last twenty two years you couldn’t see out of the windows since Dr Fauci had drawn every blind, and you were convinced by loudpeaker messages from the captain describing its altitude and air speed that it was in fact flying, so you cannot believe even now that you were not up in the air, but sitting on the runway blocking other flights.

    You are still sitting on the ground expecting to take off, because you haven’t troubled to get off the plane and examine its absurd configuration. That is why you are mocked. As a human being, of course, you are totally respected, and sympathized with. But why you and so many others feel and think in this way is a key topic and must be explored to the hilt, which is why we keep bringing it up. You might be the best person to explain, from the horses’s mouth, as it were, and that is why we wish you would testify, and why we try to release you from your hypnosis.

    But until that happens others commenting as they have above are being very helpful, thank God, since our own researches are rather ineffective, as the post we are writing about last night’s party will explain, if you ever let us write it.

  84. Truthseeker Says:

    And thanks for the alteration in tone. It’s much appreciated

    Oops. Hope the above didn’t spoil this relief. We really appreciate the new theme of using poisons as medications, which we agree offers much to debate which is relevant here.

  85. nohivmeds Says:

    You did spoil it, TS. Why do you think you spend so much time dissecting my personality? It’s like you’re an 8th grade girl passing notes about a boy you pretend not to like, but secretly wonder about. Again, very gay behavior, TS. Gossipy. Ridiculous. I am not psychanalyzing you — please refrain from doing the same to me. At this point, your incredulity at my views is just plain silly.

    Your new post crosses the line. You are a homophobe — and by the way, so is your friend Dan. Just because someone is gay, doesn’t mean they can’t have distorted feelings about gays.

    I’m not hypnotized and if you keep (this was lecture #14) insisting that I am, I will keep disrupting your precious little blog. Drop it. Move on. You know about as much about gay men and gay culture as I do about her Royal Highness, the Queen (not referring to you, of course, but to Elizabeth). Stick to what you know.

  86. nohivmeds Says:

    Oh, and TS — I didn’t ask for your forgiveness. You are really a piece of work. It is you who should be asking for mine.

    We established, with Kessler’s help, why ARVs, acting as potent anti-microbials, might have some positive effect. Yet, you seem to keep forgetting that FACT. That SCIENTIFIC FACT. Perhaps a little emotionalism on your part?

    Had I wanted to, I could have ripped your pathetic psychology to shreds–I know you know that’s true. I haven’t done that, but it hasn’t stopped you from your armchair psychoanalysis –which is much less than impressive, to be kind.

  87. kevin Says:

    TS wrote:

    If fungal infections are impervious to antibiotics, or even they go hand in hand (sounds wrong to us, but that’s what you posted, certainly possible if other flora are needed to defeat it soundly), one has to decide if the fungi arose because of the immune dysfunction, or whether they help cause it, initially or later.

    Fungal infections are CAUSED by overuse of antibiotics–broad spectrum antibiotics, in particular. Anti-fungals are a completely different animal than antibiotics. The connection between the two is that the natural balance of flora in the body is disrupted by repeated use of antibiotics which kills the good bacteria, thereby creating an environment favorable for fungal overgrowth and immune disfunction and poor nutrient absorption (as Glider pointed out previously). I’ve lived it.

    I’m not sure if others have corrected your misunderstanding on this issue, TS, as I haven’t read the most recent posts. If so, I apologize, but understanding the causative role of antibiotics is crucial to understanding what I and Glider believe to be the missing component in all this. Other things can certainly cause flora imbalance but antibiotics are the ubiquitous offender.

  88. Truthseeker Says:

    Are you saying that overuse of antibiotics is a cause of immune dysfunction, fungal infection and malabsorption of nutrients?

  89. kevin Says:

    Personally, I cannot vouch for ARVs as being anti-microbial but many people seem to benefit from their use, initially. Their anti-microbial effects is born of clinical speculation which I have learned is usually more compelling than numerical data alone. That said, I can vouch for the indisputable improved health after resolving a fungal infection using anti-fungals. My life has completely changed.

    Beginning as a child with frequent ear infections, I was spoonfed antibiotics constantly and there is no doubt in my mind that my subsequent immune problems are tied to my history of using potent antibiotics so freely (doctor approved, of course). The anti-fungal medication worked for me because I made the other changes necessary. These infections are pernicious and impervious because you must maintain a strict diet avoiding simple carbs and other food sources for the fungus and you must otherwise treat your body with great care during recovery. Most people in today’s society are not willing to take responsibilty for the health to that degree. The antifungals absolutely will not work if you do not follow the diet. I know this is new for a lot of people but many quality health care professionals have known of and treated this condition since the late 70s–BEFORE Aids. Please seek out a book entitled The Missing Diagnosis by Dr. Truss for proof of that. He was a pioneer.

    My generation, gen X, is the first generation to grow up from womb to tomb with so much chemical intoxication in so many areas of our lives: the food we eat, the products we use on and in our bodies, the countless pills we take, the cumalatively polluted air we breath and on and on….. Is it any wonder that immune problems are so common.

    In my mind, HIV is undoubtedly not responsible for AIDS. I’ve been tested and tested and tested again…always negative but my immune problems were very real and hopefully a thing of the past now that I understand why I was sick. Make no mistake, I am not and never have been a willing victim.

  90. kevin Says:

    Are you saying that overuse of antibiotics is a cause of immune dysfunction, fungal infection and malabsorption of nutrients?

    Maybe.

    Facetiously Yours,
    Kevin

  91. Glider Says:

    Kevin,

    Thank you, thank you, thank you. Since I began posting here a year or so ago I’ve often felt as if I was the only one who “got it” and who realized how very important improving the health of one’s gut is for people who are immune suppressed. I think having a severely out-of-whack ecology in the gut is the primary condition that underlies AIDS. As I’ve written on this and other boards, I think this condition a) causes immune suppression; b) predisposes sufferers to test HIV+; and c) causes the illusion of gradual t-cell decline.

    Although I agree that antibiotic overuse is the prime culprit, I strongly suspect that other factors which are commonplace in at-risk subsets of the gay community also play a necessary role in forming the basis for the condition that results in the unique type of ‘AIDS’ seen in gay men. (I won’t discuss these other factors on this board because TS has asked that I not write about graphic subject matter.)

    Glider

  92. kevin Says:

    You’re welcome, lol. You’re certainly not crazy. I was also glad to learn of someone else on this blog who is educated regarding the yeast component of this illness. I think we’ll be vindicated in the end and fungal infections will be accepted as a major cause of severe immune dsyfunction and all the health problems that flow from that. You’re probably right about the co-factors and I could guess many of them correctly, I imagine.

    I think the test are just complete bunk. Still, I suppose I’m lucky that I didn’t test positive considering how sick I was during that time and how many times I was tested.

  93. Truthseeker Says:

    I won’t discuss these other factors on this board because TS has asked that I not write about graphic subject matter.

    No, we just implored posters not to be graphic, but to use euphemisms and other arms length ways of protecting the innocent and the squeamish from exposure to the obscene (ie something that should be offstage) while they may be eating their lunch.

    Special Note: The software of this blog has gone wrong recently and cannot display Comments for editing very well, so a host of comments deserving of the green border have gone unsaluted.

    Everyone who has posted in the past two days is hereby awarded five green borders.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 1331 access attempts in the last 7 days.