Comments on: The high wattage enthusiasm of Myron Cohen http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/the-high-wattage-enthusiasm-of-myron-cohen.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: Jani http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/the-high-wattage-enthusiasm-of-myron-cohen.htm/comment-page-1#comment-3490 Jani Tue, 02 May 2006 06:27:26 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=189#comment-3490 I have been posting some new articles of mine on Gallo etc on my website www.hivaids.plus.com - hope you enjoy them. Janine Roberts I have been posting some new articles of mine on Gallo etc on my website http://www.hivaids.plus.com – hope you enjoy them.

Janine Roberts

]]> By: Richard Jefferys http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/the-high-wattage-enthusiasm-of-myron-cohen.htm/comment-page-1#comment-115 Richard Jefferys Sat, 25 Feb 2006 19:34:18 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=189#comment-115 On further reflection, although perhaps I am doing the immunologists a disservice by using their studies in this context, I think the crux of what I'm trying to get across is as follows: If Duesberg is going to use human immunology in the service of his argument that HIV cannot cause immunodeficiency (which he has done, citing Jonathan Sprent's 1977 paper on T cell regeneration capacity, for example), and the understanding of human immunology advances in such a way that mechanisms by which HIV causes immunodeficiency do suggest themselves (as it indeed has), then Duesberg needs to adapt his argument. Perhaps I have just not looked in the right places, but as far as I can tell neither he nor his acolytes have done so. To follow the logic of the questions you raise about the cites I posted, it would seem that you are suggesting that these immunological studies - and there are many more, from all over the world (with and without controls!), reliably showing the same patterns of immunological peturbations in people with HIV infection - might have all produced these data because HIV infection is coincidentally a marker for these peturbations, which in fact have another cause even though there is no other known condition (including ICL) that has been associated with this pattern of immunogical peturbations (including malnourishment and chronic drug abuse). Well, actually, there is an exception in HIV-2, which causes the same pattern of activation, naive T cell depletion and memory T cell dysfunction but at a slower pace. Anyway, as I said before, to me this is stretching credulity to breaking point. On further reflection, although perhaps I am doing the immunologists a disservice by using their studies in this context, I think the crux of what I’m trying to get across is as follows: If Duesberg is going to use human immunology in the service of his argument that HIV cannot cause immunodeficiency (which he has done, citing Jonathan Sprent’s 1977 paper on T cell regeneration capacity, for example), and the understanding of human immunology advances in such a way that mechanisms by which HIV causes immunodeficiency do suggest themselves (as it indeed has), then Duesberg needs to adapt his argument. Perhaps I have just not looked in the right places, but as far as I can tell neither he nor his acolytes have done so. To follow the logic of the questions you raise about the cites I posted, it would seem that you are suggesting that these immunological studies – and there are many more, from all over the world (with and without controls!), reliably showing the same patterns of immunological peturbations in people with HIV infection – might have all produced these data because HIV infection is coincidentally a marker for these peturbations, which in fact have another cause even though there is no other known condition (including ICL) that has been associated with this pattern of immunogical peturbations (including malnourishment and chronic drug abuse). Well, actually, there is an exception in HIV-2, which causes the same pattern of activation, naive T cell depletion and memory T cell dysfunction but at a slower pace. Anyway, as I said before, to me this is stretching credulity to breaking point.

]]> By: Richard Jefferys http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/the-high-wattage-enthusiasm-of-myron-cohen.htm/comment-page-1#comment-114 Richard Jefferys Sat, 25 Feb 2006 18:03:35 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=189#comment-114 "we have tremendously racist policies toward Africa"No argument from me on that point. In terms of the sex stuff, sure there's been much dismal speculation on that point but the point I was trying to make above is that the explanation is much more likely to be immunological (e.g. STDs increase immune activation and increase risk of acquiring HIV infection, ergo it is not too surprising that in settings where there is increased environmental immune activation there is also an increased risk of HIV transmission). The stuff about the cites perhaps suggests the pointlessness of me posting here in the first place; they were not done to convince hardened skeptics (if that is better than denialists) that HIV causes AIDS, they were done primarily to try and learn something about HIV immunology &pathogenesis. Still, at least some of the information you're looking for will be in the materials and methods sections of the papers. Lots of viruses can cause disease in the presence of antibodies, not just herpes simplex and herpes zoster e.g. hepatitis B &C, dengue virus where the presence of antibodies can make secondary infection worse. “we have tremendously racist policies toward Africa”No argument from me on that point. In terms of the sex stuff, sure there’s been much dismal speculation on that point but the point I was trying to make above is that the explanation is much more likely to be immunological (e.g. STDs increase immune activation and increase risk of acquiring HIV infection, ergo it is not too surprising that in settings where there is increased environmental immune activation there is also an increased risk of HIV transmission). The stuff about the cites perhaps suggests the pointlessness of me posting here in the first place; they were not done to convince hardened skeptics (if that is better than denialists) that HIV causes AIDS, they were done primarily to try and learn something about HIV immunology &pathogenesis. Still, at least some of the information you’re looking for will be in the materials and methods sections of the papers. Lots of viruses can cause disease in the presence of antibodies, not just herpes simplex and herpes zoster e.g. hepatitis B &C, dengue virus where the presence of antibodies can make secondary infection worse.

]]> By: Chris Scheuermann http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/the-high-wattage-enthusiasm-of-myron-cohen.htm/comment-page-1#comment-113 Chris Scheuermann Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:02:39 +0000 http://paradigmoverthrow.com/blog/?p=189#comment-113 I assure you that I will read those works cited. I have read some of them. Again, I am fully aware that some studies purport to use controls. However, The total picture of the subjects is never given. What is their total health status? do they have other diseases? Do they have a history of drug abuse? Are they malnurished? These are questions that need to be answered. Not the least of which is because any of those things will cause a false positive result on an HIV test. And, generally and historically, yes, the presence of antibodies did represent immunity. The only possible virus that has demonstrated a latency period and then reappear is herpes. but again, herpes has actually been seen, in abundance. There are no documented cases of viremia with HIV. If there were, there would be no need for PCR becuase there it would be, millions of them. HIV viremia was popular when David Ho was credible. And PCR viral amplification(which is not quantitative)was seen to represent whole virus. His theory has been pretty much discredited. As to Duesberg, I don't mind saying that I completely disagree. But, if we are going to delve into the realm of conspiracy theory, I posit that it is much more believable that HIV is just a huge cash machine. You don't even have to focus on AIDS to see how broken, not only peer review in this country is, but how broken the safety protocols for the FDA are. Most notably with Vioxx. But, it is pretty difficult to look at the history of AIDS, and its purported Medications, starting with the fraudulent AZT trials, which were completely excoriated in the Concorde Report, all the way up to the very real disgrace that was the Ugandan Nevirapine trials, and not beg the question. Further, from a personal, unvarnished perspective, I believe as do many many others, that the AIDS epidemic in Africa is completely overblown. And you don't have to look very hard to see that. Sub-Saharan Africa was supposed to be wiped off the face of the map. Well, in roughly twenty years, despite the "plague" not to mention all the wonderful poverty, it has increased in population roughly the size of the United States. But, if you can look at Africa, and see Multi-generational civil war, unstable governments, migrating employment, no clean water, no sewage, no sanitation, malnutrition on a massive scale, protein deficiency, not to mention the biggest killers, TB and Malaria, Cholera, Leprosy, and a complete lack, in many places on the continent of even basic medical care, and still see a booming population but say that they are in the midst of an AIDS pandemic; I really wouldn't understand the justification for that. I beleive we use that continent as one big vaccine trial...because African life is cheap. When was the last time we had a "Clean water for Africa" dance marathon? Poverty isn't profitable. Which is why the West, in all of our self-righteousness, can tell Africa not to spend money on infrastructure, and all of the myriad of problems that we have long since forgotten, and tell them that they need sexual education lectures and condoms. Because even though studies have shown that as far as sex goes, We are the whores, who have more sexual partners, and more different types of sex than Africans, somehow, we have convinced them that they just have that dirty animalistic sex, that is so depraved. It was my turn to go off on a bit of a rant, but I think it is much more visible and easily provable, that we have tremendously racist policies toward Africa, and that is the real death cult. I assure you that I will read those works cited. I have read some of them. Again, I am fully aware that some studies purport to use controls. However, The total picture of the subjects is never given. What is their total health status? do they have other diseases? Do they have a history of drug abuse? Are they malnurished? These are questions that need to be answered. Not the least of which is because any of those things will cause a false positive result on an HIV test. And, generally and historically, yes, the presence of antibodies did represent immunity. The only possible virus that has demonstrated a latency period and then reappear is herpes. but again, herpes has actually been seen, in abundance. There are no documented cases of viremia with HIV. If there were, there would be no need for PCR becuase there it would be, millions of them. HIV viremia was popular when David Ho was credible. And PCR viral amplification(which is not quantitative)was seen to represent whole virus. His theory has been pretty much discredited. As to Duesberg, I don’t mind saying that I completely disagree. But, if we are going to delve into the realm of conspiracy theory, I posit that it is much more believable that HIV is just a huge cash machine. You don’t even have to focus on AIDS to see how broken, not only peer review in this country is, but how broken the safety protocols for the FDA are. Most notably with Vioxx. But, it is pretty difficult to look at the history of AIDS, and its purported Medications, starting with the fraudulent AZT trials, which were completely excoriated in the Concorde Report, all the way up to the very real disgrace that was the Ugandan Nevirapine trials, and not beg the question. Further, from a personal, unvarnished perspective, I believe as do many many others, that the AIDS epidemic in Africa is completely overblown. And you don’t have to look very hard to see that. Sub-Saharan Africa was supposed to be wiped off the face of the map. Well, in roughly twenty years, despite the “plague” not to mention all the wonderful poverty, it has increased in population roughly the size of the United States. But, if you can look at Africa, and see Multi-generational civil war, unstable governments, migrating employment, no clean water, no sewage, no sanitation, malnutrition on a massive scale, protein deficiency, not to mention the biggest killers, TB and Malaria, Cholera, Leprosy, and a complete lack, in many places on the continent of even basic medical care, and still see a booming population but say that they are in the midst of an AIDS pandemic; I really wouldn’t understand the justification for that. I beleive we use that continent as one big vaccine trial…because African life is cheap. When was the last time we had a “Clean water for Africa” dance marathon? Poverty isn’t profitable. Which is why the West, in all of our self-righteousness, can tell Africa not to spend money on infrastructure, and all of the myriad of problems that we have long since forgotten, and tell them that they need sexual education lectures and condoms. Because even though studies have shown that as far as sex goes, We are the whores, who have more sexual partners, and more different types of sex than Africans, somehow, we have convinced them that they just have that dirty animalistic sex, that is so depraved. It was my turn to go off on a bit of a rant, but I think it is much more visible and easily provable, that we have tremendously racist policies toward Africa, and that is the real death cult.

]]>