If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#231
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On Thu, 17 May 2012 15:43:45 -0300, James Warren
wrote: There are exceptions to every rule. I know the rule you play by: Heads, I win; Tails, you lose. Works for me! -- 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 |
#232
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On May 17, 11:58*am, Dogman wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2012 15:00:40 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger wrote: Dogman wrote: Doug Freyburger wrote: Dogman wrote: To disprove this theory what it takes is for a person who is otherwise healthy but has suffered an injury to receive a transfusion of HIV infected blood, then recover from their injuries and be healthy again and then later become symptomatic and die of AIDS. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, why does he need to have suffered an injury? Who gets a transfusion when there is no need? No one that I know of. But why is a transfusion or injury neccessary to your example? *Why not just a syringe full of HIV+ blood? No, I'm afraid I don't see where you're heading with that. You might want to look up something called Koch's Postulates. Experiments on both monkeys and chimps (our closest cousins) have done pretty much what you describe above, and they didn't get AIDS. There are related viruses that infect other primate species. *Various of the resulting diseases have ranges of symptoms worse or less than AIDS. I do not take this as good evidence. It's just part of the story, Doug. The doctor (Wilner) was so certain that HIV couldn't possibly cause AIDS that he was willing to be human a guinea pig. He injected himself with the blood of HIV+ people many times, and it's too bad that he eventually died of a heart attack. No, it's not. Because there is no guarantee that he actually did inject himself with HIV infected blood and most likely it was faked. Only the true loons would take an ALLEGED case size of one as evidence to dispute the mountains of credible, real scientific evidence that HIV is the cause of AIDS. And Wilner died a year or so after injecting himself from a heart attack, so it prove absolutely nothing with a disease that can take a long time to manifest itself. One thing is for sure and that is that he had his medical license pulled for quackery. So much for his credibility. He would have been hard to ignore. No he was very easy to ignore because no sane, credible scientists would ever be party to verifying what he actually injected himself with. He was a mere stage show, however he was good enough to fool you. *On the other hand, today we have thousands of HIV+ people who have been positive for up to 26+ years, and they have never gotten AIDS. Because they refuse to take AIDS drugs. And we have tens of millions that have died that did not take drugs. And we have many millions more alive and healthy today with the latest drugs that are finally highly effective. There goes that red herring. And a doctor in Florida injected himself with HIV and didn't get AIDS. Some percentage of the infected people never go symptomatic. None of them would go "symptomatic" if they avoided IV drugs, prophylactic antibiotics, amyl nitrates, got enough sleep, ate healthy foods, drank clean water, and avoided taking AIDS drugs. Such total nonsense. Where is the study that supports that? Why is it that if it's antibiotics and diet, that these AIDS patients just started suddenly appearing, simultaneously, around 1982? Did antibiotics suddenly just arrive? Diet change? I mean this nonsense from the likes of Duesburg was barely plausible in the early 80s. The theory that it's drugs, diet, not enough sleep that suddenly in the early 80s produced these exceptional patients. Ones with no T cells, unable to fight common infections. And despite every attempt to treat them, they died. It was this sudden appearance in major hospitals that began the search for the cause. And from early on, an infectious agent was the prime suspect. Then HIV was isolated. A virus that attacks and kills T cells. You have the vectors for a virus transmitted from blood or bodily fluids showing up in exactly the places a reasonable, thinking person would expect: Hemophiliacs, people who received blood transfusions, IV drug users, people with many partners and unprotected sex. It's like a freaking roadmap that you'd have to be blind to not recognize. And now with the latest drugs, we have patients finally with actual HIV vrius counts near zero and they are healthy and living relatively normal lives. Since the start of blood screening, hemophiliacs are no longer acquiring AIDS. Nor are celebrities like Arthur Ashe or Isaac Asimov who acquired HIV from blood transfusions. Again, it would be one hell of a coincidence for a disease that was spreading via those routes to mysteriously stop just as screening of blood for HIV went into effect. But to be a denialist you have to just look the other way or come up with all kinds of case by case bizarre BS explanations instead of accept the obvious. That's how evolution works. *Eventually the resistance genes will pervade the population. *It's how every species has survived every plague before the invention of vaccines. Every human being on this planet already has these "resistance genes." Like James and Trader, most scientists haven't read Duesberg's book. But thousands of them have, and thousands of them agree with Duesberg, Rasnick, Mullis, et al. There a Scientific American interview with him a year or two ago. That's all the study on the topic I'm likely to do. That's too bad, because there's much more to learn. No there isn't. Because he's a discredited hack from the 80s with no basis for his claims. I'd like you to outline for us right here, right now, the answers to how hemophiliacs were getting infected with HIV, dying of AIDS and all that stopped once blood was screened for HIV. How people who had blood transfusions were having the exact same thing happen, and again it stopped once blood was screened. Avoiding all of the known infection vectors is my plan. *Conveniently that addresses both the virus theory and Duesberg's advice. That's actually a pretty good strategy. You'd think by now that more people would adopt a similar stategy. Think about that, Doug. Plus, if you read Duesberg's book though, which explains who the cast of characters are, how we got in this mess in the first place, etc., you could even help to end this hoax. My hunch is that Duesberg will get the last laugh(s), even if it's posthumously. The scientific method does eventually assure the one who's correct gets the last laugh. *My hunch is the virus folks are the correct ones but I do get that the science on the topic is immature and the conclusions can still change over time. The "virus hunters" are not only wrong, they're making a mockery of science. Because they got away with pinning a disease (AIDS) on mere antibodies to HIV (some of which are not even unique to HIV), not we've got Hep C, HPV (cancer, no less!), FeLV, FIV (none of which cause any disease), and I'm sure they'll find a way to blame heart attacks and diabetes on some innocuous antibodies some day, all because too many of us are incurious. The lie repeated. HIV virus itself has been recovered from actual patients. Where the hell do you think Gallo and Montaginer isolated it from? Moon rocks? Today we can actually measure THE VIRUS, not just antibodies. What a fool! But then you also deny that HPV is a cause of ovarian cancer. In fact, you deny that any virus can cause cancer at all. What a shock that must be to the hundreds of thousands of scientists in the field of oncoviruses. There's a new word for you. Look it up and learn. PS: Thanks for being able to discuss this topic without calling me a "loon" or a "moron" or a "denialist." Now that's a hoot. Given all the vile you've spread like manure here. |
#233
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On May 16, 8:34*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 17:25:33 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: [...] Look, you claimed "he never said any such thing." Well, he did, and I gave you the citation. Never means never, eh? No, you claimed he said it in the contemporary video that you linked to. No, I didn't. Here is the exact sequence: Trader: Of course the obvious problem for you is that the video doesn't show Montagnier denying that HIV causes AIDS. Dogman: He said that it is not required, Trader: He never said any such thing. Dogman: What part of "HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS" do you not understand? That quote is nowhere to be found in the video. So there you are caught in another lie. That's why I'm not discussing HIV or AIDS with you anymore. We've all heard that one before. Yet here you are again. I'm still waiting for the AIDS denialist credible explanations for: A - Hemophiliacs suddenly becoming infected with HIV in the 80s and dying. Once HIV was indentified as the cause, a test developed, and routine screening of blood products begun, that all stopped. Ryan White, the kid was an example of the above. Was he just suffering from poor diet? Not enough sleep? A drug abuser, when he acquired AIDS B - People who were otherwise basicly health becoming infected with HIV in the 80s and dying from AIDS following routine surgical procedures where they received blood transfusions with HIV contaminated blood. As soon as screening for HIV in blood was implemented, this too stopped. Arthur Ashe, Isaac Asimov are examples. Mighty mysterious coincidences these events. C - Why are people still occasionally being infected with HIV and acquiring AIDS via the above routes in third world countries. There are incidents where again the infected blood has been tracked back to the source. D - Why if HIV is just a harmless virus that people can just shrug off with diet and sleep have many AIDS infected denialists died following their own loony advice? E - Why is it that we had young people infected with HIV wasting away and dying of pneumonia and a whole host of opportunistic infections. Yet now that we have a cocktail of drugs that specifically target the HIV virus, reduce that to near zero levels as measured in these patients, these people are living fairly normal lives as long as they remain on the drugs that keep HIV down? F - Why is it that people with AIDS that don't receive that drug treatment almost always die as evidenced in third world countries? And that similar people, living in similar conditions, that are not infected with HIV don't get AIDS? You're too stupid, and you can't read. You claim: HPV isn;t a cause of cancer in women No virus can cause cancer. Monkeys don't get AIDS #2 is my favorite. There is a whole world of biology out there devoted to oncoviruses. That alone is enough proof that you don't know much at all. Yet you want us to believe your denialist nonsense? How much other sound science do you reject? And no, don't ask me to read that fool Duesburg's book. I'd just as soon read a book from a holocaust denier. If Doug wants to discuss it, okay. But I'm not wasting my time on you anymore. We've all heard that before, but here you are. Just one more lie. Doug has made it clear that he doesn't agree with you. Gee, why is it that you now have 3 people here that disagree with you and not one that agrees? |
#234
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On Fri, 18 May 2012 11:12:12 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: [more of the same ol' drivel snipped to spare the senses] Doug has made it clear that he doesn't agree with you. Gee, why is it that you now have 3 people here that disagree with you and not one that agrees? And I've made it clear to you that The Scientific Method doesn't give a hoot about who agrees or doesn't agree with a theory. And whether Doug agrees with me or not, he's apparently taking precautions that allow for Duesberg being right. Probably because he's smart enough to not put all of his apples in one basket, unlike doofuses. Doofuses like you, asshole. -- 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 |
#235
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
|
#236
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On Fri, 18 May 2012 16:26:30 -0300, James Warren
wrote: [...] Aw c'mon, he quotes Feynman. How can he be wrong? I can be as wrong as anyone...but you. And Trader, of course. No one else on earth could be that wrong. Not even Barbra Streisand. -- 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 |
#237
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On 18/05/2012 4:32 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Fri, 18 May 2012 16:26:30 -0300, James Warren wrote: [...] Aw c'mon, he quotes Feynman. How can he be wrong? I can be as wrong as anyone...but you. And Trader, of course. No one else on earth could be that wrong. Not even Barbra Streisand. Why don't address Trader's remarks about hemophiliacs? -- -jw |
#238
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
Dogman wrote:
" wrote: Doug has made it clear that he doesn't agree with you ... And I've made it clear to you that The Scientific Method doesn't give a hoot about who agrees or doesn't agree with a theory. Sometimes I write comments about the maturity of fields of science. In a mature field the conclusions change very little. In the atomic theory of chemistry we now have photographs of individual atoms. Advances in inorganic chemistry are now in fields in battery storage. Very much edge material compared to the common industrial processes in wide use. No one is ever going to overturn theories about mixing dissolved salts to produce precipitates. Because I observe that the conclusions of climate science continue to change decade to decade and thus we should not make large political changes based on the predictions of thise decade as they are still likely to change next decade, I get called a climate change denier by some. And whether Doug agrees with me or not, he's apparently taking precautions that allow for Duesberg being right. Probably because he's smart enough to not put all of his apples in one basket ... I remember the world before AIDS appeared. I remember the time before AIDS was correlated with HIV. I have long accepted that HIV is the primary cause or AIDS but I do get that this theory is still young and may be disproved. I'm not betting my farm on it. That part of the medical field is immature. Most of medicine as a science is immature compared with several other sciences. I know that something like 15% of all people who are HIV infected nevre become symptomatic with AIDS. No way am I allowing myself to be injected hoping to become a part of that 15%. But the other causes are stuff that should be avoided for health reasons. Duesberg's hypothesis adds to that motivation a little even though I disagree with him on that topic. |
#239
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On Fri, 18 May 2012 17:40:52 -0300, James Warren
wrote: [...] Why don't address Trader's remarks about hemophiliacs? I did, but as usual, you can't read. -- 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 |
#240
|
|||
|
|||
About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks
On Fri, 18 May 2012 20:50:33 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
wrote: Because I observe that the conclusions of climate science continue to change decade to decade and thus we should not make large political changes based on the predictions of thise decade as they are still likely to change next decade, I get called a climate change denier by some. That's because the people who call you that are stupid. No one disputes that the climate is changing. Probably from the precise moment that earth even had a climate, it started to change. And the people who call me an AIDS "denialist" are stupid too, because no one disputes that AIDS exists. And whether Doug agrees with me or not, he's apparently taking precautions that allow for Duesberg being right. Probably because he's smart enough to not put all of his apples in one basket ... I remember the world before AIDS appeared. I remember the time before AIDS was correlated with HIV. And we all know that correlation does not equal causation. Well, everyone but Trader, James, and maybe Barbra Streisand. I have long accepted that HIV is the primary cause or AIDS but I do get that this theory is still young and may be disproved. It's already been disproved, and via The Scientific Method, which Duesberg's book clearly illustrates. No one can possibly fully understand this topic (and Hep C, HPV, FIV, FeLV, prions, etc.) without reading his book. I'm not betting my farm on it. That part of the medical field is immature. Most of medicine as a science is immature compared with several other sciences. Not so much immature as CORRUPT, which Duesberg's book PROVES. I know that something like 15% of all people who are HIV infected nevre become symptomatic with AIDS. [...] As long as they don't take AIDS drugs, take steps to strengthen their immune system, and avoid the risk factors, e.g., abuse IV and other recreational drugs, if you're a man, having promiscuous sex with other men, inhale amyl nitrates, take antibiotics prophylactically, practice good hygiene, eat healthy food, drink clean water, etc., they won't get AIDS. -- 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Supplemental Natural Diet Support | Meeks | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | May 28th, 2008 01:44 PM |
Looking for a few friendly faces | justme | General Discussion | 4 | August 12th, 2006 05:46 PM |
Chicken recipes that are WW friendly AND kid friendly | Julia | Weightwatchers | 32 | March 10th, 2006 02:08 PM |
Friendly Server who really tried.... | Pat | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 3 | October 5th, 2004 08:12 PM |
Induction-friendly gum? | Mo Geffer | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 6 | September 8th, 2004 09:39 PM |