Comments on: NAR nominates Dr Anthony Fauci for Nobel – he has found the solution to AIDS http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nar-nominates-dr-anthony-fauci-for-nobel-he-has-found-the-solution-to-aids.htm Reviewing scientific paradigms and other general beliefs in the light of the scientific and professional literature Thu, 05 Jan 2012 05:57:56 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Robert Houston http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nar-nominates-dr-anthony-fauci-for-nobel-he-has-found-the-solution-to-aids.htm/comment-page-1#comment-3053 Robert Houston Mon, 03 Jul 2006 09:05:45 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=242#comment-3053 Note: The data shown above are extracted from Table 1 of the Lempicki study. There were 34 subjects in the Early group and 24 in the Intermediate group. The comparison shows that a 56-fold increase of the viral load occurs with barely a change in the CD4 T-cell count but is associated with an 11% increase in the combined T-cell count, which is enough to bring it up to a normal level. It should also be noted that an HIV viral load of 60,000 per milliliter of plasma corresponds to only a single infectious virus per milliliter (M. Piatak et al. Science 19:1749-54, 1993).Thus, when Truthseeker stated in his post that "adding HIV to the bloodstream increases the T-cell count," he was in fact correct, for he did not specify subtypes. With the addition of antioxidants known to inhibit apoptosis, the proliferative effect of HIV on T-cells might well prove clinically useful. In contrast, certain immunosuppressive drugs widely used in AIDS risk groups, such as corticosteroids, can produce rapid and enormous drops in CD4 T-cell counts (e.g., to 1/3rd in 10 days), which would pose far more of an immunological threat than HIV (M. Al-Bayati. Examining the causes of AIDS. Medical Veritas 3:901-913, 2006. Click <a href="http://justiceforej.com/CausesOfAIDS(Al-Bayati).pdf" rel="nofollow">HERE</a>). Note: The data shown above are extracted from Table 1 of the Lempicki study. There were 34 subjects in the Early group and 24 in the Intermediate group. The comparison shows that a 56-fold increase of the viral load occurs with barely a change in the CD4 T-cell count but is associated with an 11% increase in the combined T-cell count, which is enough to bring it up to a normal level. It should also be noted that an HIV viral load of 60,000 per milliliter of plasma corresponds to only a single infectious virus per milliliter (M. Piatak et al. Science 19:1749-54, 1993).Thus, when Truthseeker stated in his post that “adding HIV to the bloodstream increases the T-cell count,” he was in fact correct, for he did not specify subtypes. With the addition of antioxidants known to inhibit apoptosis, the proliferative effect of HIV on T-cells might well prove clinically useful. In contrast, certain immunosuppressive drugs widely used in AIDS risk groups, such as corticosteroids, can produce rapid and enormous drops in CD4 T-cell counts (e.g., to 1/3rd in 10 days), which would pose far more of an immunological threat than HIV (M. Al-Bayati. Examining the causes of AIDS. Medical Veritas 3:901-913, 2006. Click HERE).

]]> By: Robert Houston http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nar-nominates-dr-anthony-fauci-for-nobel-he-has-found-the-solution-to-aids.htm/comment-page-1#comment-3052 Robert Houston Sun, 02 Jul 2006 09:50:58 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=242#comment-3052 Once upon a time in a strange little land called Bethesda, the media were assured by government scientists that HIV causes AIDS, and that it did so by directly killing helper T-cells (now called CD4+ T-cells) and thereby lowering their count in the peripheral blood. This had a superficial plausibility, and thus became the ostensible reason for the rapid and widespread acceptance of the HIV hypothesis, even though the virus was detected in only 36% of patients with AIDS and at minuscule levels even in those. Subsequently, several other research teams could not duplicate the original findings of cytopathicity, which were later shown to be due to poor procedures in maintaining T-cells in the government labs of Dr. Robert Gallo. Nevertheless, the dogma had become policy and was determining funding and, therefore, scientific opinion. Would this con-job have been so easy had Gallo announced then what is known today? Supposing he had declared in that April 1984 NIH press conference what Fauci says today: that far from killing them, HIV causes the T-cells to proliferate . If on this basis Gallo had proclaimed that it was obviously the cause of AIDS, there would have been many skeptics indeed and he might well have been laughed off the stage. No one is laughing today, because the doctrine has long been set and thus cannot be questioned, except by those annoying "denialists." So, when it was believed HIV killed T-cells, this was said to lower T-cell counts. Now when it's known to make T-cells proliferate, we are assured that such an effect could have nothing to do with T-cell counts. What's being forgotton is that the T-cell count is a function of a number of factors, including the rates of production, proliferation, redistribution and cell death. One of these factors is proliferation, but it can be swamped by compensatory mechanisms maintaining homeostasis (equilibrium of processes). Studies show, however, that HIV infection from its early to intermediate stage is associated with an increase in the overall T-cell count. The CD4 T-cell count remains virtually the same, whereas the CD8 count increases 20%, resulting in an overall increase of 11% in the combined count (CD4 + CD8). This is some of the data that Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of NIAID, communicated to the National Academy of Sciences: HIV Level and Average T-Cell Counts _________________________________________________________ HIV infection_/_Viral load___/_CD4_/_CD8_/_Combined _______________________________________________________ Early................. 1,480........ 390..... 716........ 1106 Intermediate..... 82,286........ 367..... 860........ 1227 Change............. 5,560%...... -6%.... +20% ..... +11% ________________________________________________________ Source: Lempicki et al. Proc Nat Ac Sci 97:13778-83, 2000 Once upon a time in a strange little land called Bethesda, the media were assured by government scientists that HIV causes AIDS, and that it did so by directly killing helper T-cells (now called CD4+ T-cells) and thereby lowering their count in the peripheral blood. This had a superficial plausibility, and thus became the ostensible reason for the rapid and widespread acceptance of the HIV hypothesis, even though the virus was detected in only 36% of patients with AIDS and at minuscule levels even in those. Subsequently, several other research teams could not duplicate the original findings of cytopathicity, which were later shown to be due to poor procedures in maintaining T-cells in the government labs of Dr. Robert Gallo. Nevertheless, the dogma had become policy and was determining funding and, therefore, scientific opinion.

Would this con-job have been so easy had Gallo announced then what is known today? Supposing he had declared in that April 1984 NIH press conference what Fauci says today: that far from killing them, HIV causes the T-cells to proliferate . If on this basis Gallo had proclaimed that it was obviously the cause of AIDS, there would have been many skeptics indeed and he might well have been laughed off the stage. No one is laughing today, because the doctrine has long been set and thus cannot be questioned, except by those annoying “denialists.”

So, when it was believed HIV killed T-cells, this was said to lower T-cell counts. Now when it’s known to make T-cells proliferate, we are assured that such an effect could have nothing to do with T-cell counts. What’s being forgotton is that the T-cell count is a function of a number of factors, including the rates of production, proliferation, redistribution and cell death. One of these factors is proliferation, but it can be swamped by compensatory mechanisms maintaining homeostasis (equilibrium of processes).

Studies show, however, that HIV infection from its early to intermediate stage is associated with an increase in the overall T-cell count. The CD4 T-cell count remains virtually the same, whereas the CD8 count increases 20%, resulting in an overall increase of 11% in the combined count (CD4 + CD8).

This is some of the data that Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of NIAID, communicated to the National Academy of Sciences:

HIV Level and Average T-Cell Counts
_________________________________________________________
HIV infection_/_Viral load___/_CD4_/_CD8_/_Combined _______________________________________________________

Early…………….. 1,480…….. 390….. 716…….. 1106

Intermediate….. 82,286…….. 367….. 860…….. 1227

Change…………. 5,560%…… -6%…. +20% ….. +11%
________________________________________________________
Source: Lempicki et al. Proc Nat Ac Sci 97:13778-83, 2000

]]> By: Gene Semon http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nar-nominates-dr-anthony-fauci-for-nobel-he-has-found-the-solution-to-aids.htm/comment-page-1#comment-329 Gene Semon Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:58:12 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=242#comment-329 Richard, you say, "depletes the naive T cell pool and leads to increasing numbers of dysfunctional memory T cells" as a result of "persistent immune activation"; Hellerstein says, "disinhibition of T-cell profileration in tissues, allowing greater release of dividing cells into the circulating pool" caused by HAART. The point is, if you bother to read all my posts over at Tara's, the total network dynamics are consistent post-Hellerstein. Dr Fauci says, "enhanced T cell proliferation", (not always a good thing) and I add a twist to truthseeker's satire by supporting Dr Fauci; HIV as HTLV3, right? The definition of leukemia is consistent with Hellerstein's "disinhibition". Celia's point is correct given the statement of a leading immunologist in JAMA (1981): measurements of subpopulations of T-cells have no clinical meaning. I trust this is sufficient explanation, but of course you can always attack me again. Richard, you say, “depletes the naive T cell pool and leads to increasing numbers of dysfunctional memory T cells” as a result of “persistent immune activation”; Hellerstein says, “disinhibition of T-cell profileration in tissues, allowing greater release of dividing cells into the circulating pool” caused by HAART. The point is, if you bother to read all my posts over at Tara’s, the total network dynamics are consistent post-Hellerstein.

Dr Fauci says, “enhanced T cell proliferation”, (not always a good thing) and I add a twist to truthseeker’s satire by supporting Dr Fauci; HIV as HTLV3, right? The definition of leukemia is consistent with Hellerstein’s “disinhibition”.

Celia’s point is correct given the statement of a leading immunologist in JAMA (1981): measurements of subpopulations of T-cells have no clinical meaning.

I trust this is sufficient explanation, but of course you can always attack me again.

]]> By: Richard Jefferys http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nar-nominates-dr-anthony-fauci-for-nobel-he-has-found-the-solution-to-aids.htm/comment-page-1#comment-328 Richard Jefferys Sun, 25 Jun 2006 16:34:35 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=242#comment-328 You're joking, right? T cells are central to the functioning of the adaptive immune system and the field took off in the 50s. Perhaps "cellular immunology" is the more familiar term? If I recall correctly, the NIH-funded researchers Don Mosier and Jonathan Sprent published on the erroneousness of Ho's model in the letters pages of Nature in 1995. You’re joking, right? T cells are central to the functioning of the adaptive immune system and the field took off in the 50s. Perhaps “cellular immunology” is the more familiar term? If I recall correctly, the NIH-funded researchers Don Mosier and Jonathan Sprent published on the erroneousness of Ho’s model in the letters pages of Nature in 1995.

]]>