Let me start out my post with one question for AIDS denialists, or dissidents, whatever they prefer to be called. If HIV does not cause AIDS are any of you willing to be injected with HIV under any circumstances?
If HIV is harmless as they claim, are they willing to put that claim to the ultimate test?
The answer, I’m willing to bet, is going to be a universal evasion.
I must admit to having had doubts on the issue of AIDS. Among the elements involved are greed and power. The core of the dissident argument rests on the question of would governments conspire with corporations to kill undesirables, blame social problems on promiscuity and drug use, and otherwise execute babies for power and profit, if they could get away with it.
I think we all know that the answer is a sobering and overwhelming yes.
The relevant question however is not are they willing or even able, but simply, are they. I don’t think they are. I think they ignore the problem or otherwise exacerbate it, I wouldn’t even be shocked if evidence appeared which showed that they spread it, or even in a nightmarish extreme created it, but I don’t think it’s a myth.
Is the HIV AIDS link a hoax? For a time I believed it very well could have been. And why is that shocking? I don’t trust doctors because they are rich status quo people from my perspective. I don’t trust the pharmaceutical industry. I don’t trust my government. I remember reading that there isn’t a solid black and white test for AIDS, that it’s actually a combination of things, and that the criteria for having HIV/AIDS varied from country to country. Does that not raise questions? And on the backdrop of such a profound and justified absence of trust, is it really so shocking that a great many otherwise intelligent people would come to the conclusion that it all might be a lie designed to wipe out undesirables?
We have to take scientists on faith and when a simple look at the politics of science reveals that what they say can sometimes, especially in highly politicized arenas, be predicted by who provides funding, that faith is sometimes hard to come by. After all, doctors went on TV telling us how certain brand of cigarettes were good for you.
However. Logic must not be ignored. In the case of AIDS the faith issue can be side stepped entirely because of the simple fact is when you treat an AIDS patient with AIDS drugs, they get better, when you take them off them they get sick. That closes the debate. When you couple that with the question asked at the beginning of this post, faith stopped being an issue.
The matter now becomes one of public health and money.
I recommend development of chemical synthesis technologies that revolutionize how drug are manufactured. This is an approach I recommend for most problems. Exit, and circumvention. Genetically altered plants, or synthetic bacteria for mass production of drugs is an option that I think will really change things.
Brazil got lower prices on antivirals at one point because they had labs to make their own drugs. The drug companies knew that Brazil may very well say fuck your laws I’ll make my own then you’re up shit creek.
That is the only way to win. Disruptive technologies. Force those who can, to do, and if that fails, enable yourself.
AIDS and sickness generally is an issue of national and global security. We need to start acting like it.
The virus is our enemy. Our ignorance of it is it’s chief weapon.
Poverty is not a capitol crime. Science is our best weapon.
First of all, I don’t need to inject myself… I’m already “positive”.
Secondly, not everyone who takes the AIDS drugs get better. Read my story, or ask Karri Stokely for starters.
Finally, I have buried dozens of friends who did take the AIDS drugs and got sick and died.
Logic only works well when it is based on factual information. Yours seems to be based on press releases from the same government and pharmaceutical industries you claim to distrust.
*facepalm* Then the challenge doesn’t apply to you does it.
My demand still stands. I want to see HIV negative dissidents stick out their arm and welcome massive HIV injections secure in the knowledge that they won’t ever get AIDS as a result. To date I don’t think I’ve ever even seen one. I’ve never even heard anyone say they would be willing.
I don’t care if every person you’ve ever laid eyes on got sick on the AIDS drugs, that still is not sufficient evidence of anything which could apply to humanity as a whole. This is why we have science because personal impressions can be VERY misleading.
Nothing that can be said about you or your friends translates as a rule to all humanity in the context of medicine.
Your metabolism and physiology is in many meaningful ways unique. That’s why we have studies over time with large numbers of participants. That’s part of why AIDS is such a pain in the ass because it takes decades to conclusively establish even the most intuitive of facts.
No one disputes the lack of a cure, and that’s pretty much all your reply seems to claim.
If you’re going to speak to me about logic you should be aware of the concept of representative sample and selection bias. As explained above, your personal experiences in their entirety are not sufficient to make claims about humanity.
If you deny the existence of a link between HIV and AIDS then you should be able to prove it, by either causing AIDS in some way other than HIV or by demonstrating the harmlessness of HIV.
The drug company government greed conspiracy is just smoke, its an emotional argument and nothing more, as explained in my original post.