> From: todd33 at ix.netcom.com (Todd Miller )
> Subject: Has HIV really been isolated?
...
> The Australians argue that the phenomena (PCR and antibody)
> associated with "HIV" are artifacts of either endogenous retroviral
> activity, or as I posted recently, of the body's antibody response
> to other microorganisms, notably yeast, fungi, and mycobacteria.
> Their theory is that oxidative stress, coming from various sources
> common to the known risk groups for AIDS, can result in many of
> the phenomena (AB+ and PCR+).
What are these "risk groups"? Do they include "sexually active
people in Africa and Asia", or "babies born of HIV+ mothers" who are
not:
a) homosexual
b) IV drug abusers
c) users of amyl nitrate in any manner or form
d) haemophiliacs?
If they do not, then how can anybody claim these people - who
presently constitute the largest grouping of people with AIDS - have
any risk factors in common other than being infected with HIV,
acquired during normal sexual intercourse, or by being born to / fed
by, an HIV-infected mother?
More absolute bullshit by those too stubborn or deluded to believe
simple proofs.
Ed Rybicki, PhD
Dept Microbiology | ed at molbiol.uct.ac.za
University of Cape Town | rybicki at uctvms.uct.ac.za
Private Bag, Rondebosch | phone: x27-21-650-3265
7700, South Africa | fax: x27-21-689 7573
WWW URL: http://www.uct.ac.za/microbiology/ed.html
"Out here on the perimeter, there are no stars..."
