AIDS: A Second Opinion

Epicurus said:
SM you're a fucking dumbass. It says right there HETEROSEXUAL CONTACT.

I know you can't think, but I am shocked to find that you cannot read either.
Click to expand...
Dooood, what don't you comprehend? It says hetero sex with someone with AIDS or at a high risk of having AIDS.

The chart shows that AIDS is spread by overwhelmingly by gays, drug users and by people who have risky sex with them. "Other" is just above 1%. *shrug*
 
This again? It's like BAC and 9/11, or AHZ and the massive power of Jews to make us into Noahide zombies.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Here's the bottom line:

junkies have for years contracted AIDS because they destroy their immune systems.

The initial cases of AIDS among the gay community were those who killed their immune systems via long work hours, poor diet, specific "recreational" drug use, little sleep and unprotected sex with random partners.

Intially, Karposi Sarcoma was a key indicator of AIDS...this was exactly what happened to junkies. As the years went by, more and more diseases that were among the general population for decades (and non-fatal for the most part) were added (and then later subtracted) as "AIDS indicators".

When HIV was announced as the pre-cursor to AIDS, being typed for HIV anti-bodies was considered an eventual/inevitable AIDS development. However over the years, you've had people who were NOT HIV positive develop aids...people who were HIV positive, stopped or took no medication and NEVER developed AIDS.

The HIV test for Africans is different from that of Europe and North America. Odd, since every other type of virus can be identified with one type of test world wide.
Click to expand...

I have a question, after reading this post, my question is this, if a person is on auto-immune suppressant, a med that mess's with the immune system, is it possible for a person to get HIV if they are on these meds work long hours have a poor diet ect...?
 
AssHatZombie said:
Look. Gay sex is riskier because it involves tearing asses open and the resulting bleedout.
Click to expand...

LOL now you got the attention of the liberal males. They love an anus-tearing good time.
2rmmes6.jpg
 
Epicurus said:
You guys are too stupid for words.

hiv_2005.jpg


It is not an exclusively "gay disease". Heterosexuals constitute a huge proportion of new diagnoses every year.

Which, as I said, might concern you morons if anyone cared to fuck you.
Click to expand...
It's a pretty sad tribute to their ignorance that you had to post this to educate them.
 
Jeff said:
What I posted was a joke, guess it went over many heads here :rolleyes: and yes heterosexuals can get aids threw non protected sex also, but tell me, where this shit started spreading, threw queers and junkies, ooo let me explain junkies = people shooting dope, LOL
Click to expand...
More ignorance. AIDS was first diagnosed in the USA in Haitian immigrants who were neither homosexual or intravenous drug users.
 
Taichiliberal said:

But remember, Koch's postulate was used to verify the HIV-AIDS scenario (ie, Gallo)...and when the HIV-AIDS scenario DID NOT fit the equation, suddenly the equation is called into question. So a time tested method that has been successful in identifying/tracking viruses in the past is suddenly thrown out. If what you say is 100% true, then now all viruses that have been successfully tracked and identified are now in question....and that includes the very basis for the AIDS epidemic

And also remember, the basis for the whole HIV-AIDS hoopla is identifying anti-bodies....this means that a virus entered the system, went through the whole gambit, and is now present in genes. And yet....you have patients tested positive at one point suddenly become HIV free...and patients who develop the EXACT same indicating diseases attributed to HIV-AIDS patients with NO HIV in their systems.

The information/proof is out there...but if it's automatically rejected and ignored, no one will know otherwise.
Click to expand...
That sounds a lot more like conspiracy theory then sound science to me. I don't think you're getting my point. I question the credibility of applying Koch's postulate to HIV/AIDS. I believe you may be arguing from a false premise.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
and another salute to ignorance.
Click to expand...

This was a song sung by a heavy metal band years ago, Megga Death I believe was the name of the band, I use to work with a guy that sang the song all the time

If this was found in Immigrants that you know never used IV drugs or had unprotected sex, how did they get it? Call it ignorance if you wish, but I am curious
 
Mott the Hoople said:
That sounds a lot more like conspiracy theory then sound science to me. And there lies the rub....the nano-second you point out the inconsistencies and contradictions in trying to maintain the HIV=AIDS, HIV-AIDS, people try to make you out to be a conspiracy nut. It's not a conspiracy, just a blatant display of intellectual/moral corruption/stubborness by the medical/pharmaceutical establishment. And let's be honest.....a LOT of people have made/are making a shitload of money on this. I don't think you're getting my point. I question the credibility of applying Koch's postulate to HIV/AIDS. I believe you may be arguing from a false premise.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, but you miss MY point....if you throw out all together Koch's postulate, then you throw out the very system that was used to establish HIV= (-) AIDS! That's the problem......the status quo wants to be able to use and deny standards and information as they please to keep their theory intact as a reality. You would have to literally rewrite how viruses are ID'ed, tracked, etc., in order to keep HIV/AIDS alive.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Why is Tai Chi liberal pro aids? He acts as if somehow this dangerous virus has "gotten a bad rap". It's the same fucking moronic theme with him, over and over.
Click to expand...

He's probably been fooling around, on the "down low", and his last Doctor's report had a little surprise in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top