On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 12:53:35 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

[...]
Yeah, but that's never going to happen, so wish on.

The reasons it's never going to happen are this: HIV is already
harmless. Retroviruses don't kill cells (that would be like committing
suicide),

Another outrageous lie. It's been demonstrated both
in the lab and in patients that HIV kills T cells. Just
like holocaust deniers saying Auschwitz never existed.
It's not a legitimate debate when you refuse to accept
the most basic proven facts.

"People with AIDS are indeed losing t-cells. Because these were the
cells that HIV effects, it was ASSUMED that HIV was the culprit. But
Retroviruses do not kill their hosts. Only under rare laboratory
conditions is it possible to make HIV kill its host cell. AIDS
researchers actually use t-cells to grow the virus in their reacearch
because both live together very compatibly. It was this notion that
initially made Duesberg and over 600 other scientist, including 181
that have advanced degrees question the whole thing in the first
place. Truth is, HIV is not a killer virus. Viruses that
kill a cell couldn’t cause cancer. If HIV were a killer cell then
those with AIDS indication diseases would not have some form of cancer
as some of the defining diseases do."

or the retrovirus would die off almost immediately (it needs
the cell to survive and replicate!), with no help needed from the
immune system.

Besides, if AIDS, Inc. claimed that a vaccination had been developed,
and people maintained the same lifestyle that Duesberg describes,
and/or were given AIDS drugs, we'd be right back where we presently
are. People would still be dying of opportunistic infections and
diseases caused by having your immune system destroyed by drugs and
lifestyle, vaccination or no vaccination.

Still waiting for the study that shows AIDS is caused
by drugs.

And I'm still waiting for the study that proves that HIV causes AIDS.

yawn

The fact that HIV causes AIDS is entirely consistent
with and explains the transmission of AIDS in:

gay men with many partners

because those partners are long-term drug abusers, too, etc.

See: gay liberation, Stonewall riots, etc.,

IV drug users

HIV is not necessary.

hemophiliacs like Ryan White

have taken impure Factor for years, causing their immune systems'
destruction

blood transfusion recipients like Arthur Ashe

people get *antibodies* from blood transfusions

prostitutes

only if they abuse drugs

soccer moms with a partner who is HIV+

false positives, liars, etc.

heterosexuals in Africa

Banqui definition of AIDS (but you're prabably a racist, too, and
think Africans are sex fiends)

babies

babies get antibodies passed to them from their mother

lab workers accidentally infected

only if they take AIDS drugs do they ever get AIDS

6 patients of the FL dentist who was HIV+

they didn't get AIDS until they started to take AIDS drugs

We know it's HIV spread by blood and sexual contact
and from mother to child at birth.

HIV *ANTIBODIES*!

Sheesh.

What a maroon.

Someone who obviously doesn't understand what antibodies are, and
aren't, should never try to understand HIV, AIDS, the germ theory of
disease, etc. Someone like you, Trader Boy.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman