Comments on: Nicholas Kristof still hasn’t caught up with HIV?AIDS reality http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nicholas-kristof-still-hasnt-caught-up-with-hivaids-reality.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: Gene Semon http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nicholas-kristof-still-hasnt-caught-up-with-hivaids-reality.htm/comment-page-1#comment-215 Gene Semon Mon, 05 Jun 2006 21:54:52 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=222#comment-215 Shocking indeed. The headlines, of course, are made up and I apologize if anybody wasted serious time looking for them. Yes, David Ho has been challenged within mainstream AIDS research (e.g. Ascher, Anderson and Shepard) by timid scientists who won't go the distance for guess what reasons. It was Dr Ho who convinced true believers with his "sink" model of the non-stop war in the immune system, caused by the virus with 9 heads, when the lentivirus model was discarded. On one of the boards, someone responded to a true believer by saying "you guys don't know how funny you are". Shocking indeed. The headlines, of course, are made up and I apologize if anybody wasted serious time looking for them. Yes, David Ho has been challenged within mainstream AIDS research (e.g. Ascher, Anderson and Shepard) by timid scientists who won’t go the distance for guess what reasons. It was Dr Ho who convinced true believers with his “sink” model of the non-stop war in the immune system, caused by the virus with 9 heads, when the lentivirus model was discarded.

On one of the boards, someone responded to a true believer by saying “you guys don’t know how funny you are”.

]]> By: Truthseeker http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nicholas-kristof-still-hasnt-caught-up-with-hivaids-reality.htm/comment-page-1#comment-214 Truthseeker Tue, 30 May 2006 07:24:59 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=222#comment-214 Neither headline yields an article on the Times search engine. We are shocked - shocked! - that you point out that the editors and writers at the newspaper of record are behaving as the puppets of the paradigm purveyors. If the Times can't behave properly, who can? One would think that they would have more respect for themselves, their institution, their profession and their professed principles. But expecting the Times to have any spine these days is like expecting a large pudding to retain its shape when sat on. Neither headline yields an article on the Times search engine.

We are shocked – shocked! – that you point out that the editors and writers at the newspaper of record are behaving as the puppets of the paradigm purveyors. If the Times can’t behave properly, who can?

One would think that they would have more respect for themselves, their institution, their profession and their professed principles. But expecting the Times to have any spine these days is like expecting a large pudding to retain its shape when sat on.

]]> By: Martin Kessler http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nicholas-kristof-still-hasnt-caught-up-with-hivaids-reality.htm/comment-page-1#comment-213 Martin Kessler Tue, 30 May 2006 00:46:22 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=222#comment-213 I can't believe that the "journalists" at the NY Times aren't paying attention. I believe they are deliberately ignoring anything that eliminates HIV from the constellation of AIDS causes. Both of the headlines above refer to articles that (I believe because I haven't access to the articles) do not refute HIV as the cause of AIDS and may acutally "strengthen" the premise. By this I mean that showing that this or that portion of the research has been shown to be either flawed or wrong, means that the "scientific" process is working and the the fundamental premise that HIV causes AIDS remains intact. I would believe that the NY Times "filters" any potentially dissident article to prevent looking like they might be skeptical about the HIV/AIDS paradigm. I can’t believe that the “journalists” at the NY Times aren’t paying attention. I believe they are deliberately ignoring anything that eliminates HIV from the constellation of AIDS causes. Both of the headlines above refer to articles that (I believe because I haven’t access to the articles) do not refute HIV as the cause of AIDS and may acutally “strengthen” the premise. By this I mean that showing that this or that portion of the research has been shown to be either flawed or wrong, means that the “scientific” process is working and the the fundamental premise that HIV causes AIDS remains intact. I would believe that the NY Times “filters” any potentially dissident article to prevent looking like they might be skeptical about the HIV/AIDS paradigm.

]]> By: Gene Semon http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/nicholas-kristof-still-hasnt-caught-up-with-hivaids-reality.htm/comment-page-1#comment-212 Gene Semon Thu, 25 May 2006 22:41:07 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=222#comment-212 Journalists, especially at the NY times, are not paying attention. Years ago, studies, (see my posts of 5.18.2006 and 5.20.2006 at Larry Kramer/apology thread), were done which should have had an effect on consensus reporting, given the lead position of the Times and so-called expertise of Altman and Wade. Does anyone recall their headlines: <b>Ho and Wei Refuted by Direct Measurement of T- Cell Dynamics</b>; or <b>Natural Remedy Offers Promise for AIDS Treatments</b>? Journalists, especially at the NY times, are not paying attention. Years ago, studies, (see my posts of 5.18.2006 and 5.20.2006 at Larry Kramer/apology thread), were done which should have had an effect on consensus reporting, given the lead position of the Times and so-called expertise of Altman and Wade.

Does anyone recall their headlines:

Ho and Wei Refuted by Direct Measurement of T- Cell Dynamics;

or

Natural Remedy Offers Promise for AIDS Treatments?

]]>