Re: PJ and AIDS

From: Kamilla Ludwig (kamillal@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Tue Jan 04 2000 - 13:41:32 EST

  • Next message: dfsiemensjr@juno.com: "Re: Exceptional Measures"

    Tim,

    Thanks. I always knew I was a bit of a crack pot about this. I have
    found Root-Bernstein to be more credible and restrained than Duesberg.
    His multi-factorial model made more sense to me than Duesberg's theory.
    It does bother me how politicized this disease is, and I still fear that
    has colored some of the science. How many diseases get announced at
    press conferences rather than in peer-reviewed journals, after all?

    But I still have a few questions. Are there any know retroviral diseases
    in humans? Why does a disease that is caused by one virus manifest
    itself so differently in different parts of the world? Are there any
    other viruses that do this in humans?

    I know I just haven't read enough on this and am a bit lazy. If you have
    a chance to answer before I have a chance to go over to the web sites,
    I'd appreciate it.

    Kamilla

    Tim Ikeda wrote:

    > Kamille wrote:
    > [...]
    > > Root-Bernstein posited a multi-factorial model.
    > >
    > > I dug out one of my Duesberg books this morning to review some
    > > of it and, as I understand it, there are objections he has to
    > > the HIV/AIDS theory that have not been answered. Three of them are:
    > >
    > > 1. The HIV/AIDS model contradicts what is known experimentally
    > > about retroviruses. Most notably, they have a generation time
    > > of 24-48 hours which is inconsistent with the long latent period.
    > >
    > > 2. There are no other known retroviral diseases outside of
    > > the laboratory.
    > >
    > > 3. HIV does not kill T-cells.
    > >
    > > Have these three assertions of Duesberg's been answered? I would
    > > appreciate anyone that can point me to the literature.
    >
    > Yes, they've been answered, and quite some time before the Johnson
    > et al. article of 1995.
    >
    > For further reference, see:
    > http://www.aids.wustl.edu/aids/HIVaids.html
    > and
    > http://www.aids.wustl.edu/aids/relhivaids.html
    > (These are the FAQs associated with the newsgroup,
    > sci.med.aids. I recall Johnson posting to this group
    > around 1994-1996. I would also recommend searching
    > web sites at the National Institues of Health).
    >
    > 1) I know that #1 is incorrect. As stated by James, other viruses
    > such as the feline leukemia virus produce problems long after the
    > initial infection. The generation time is irrelevant. HIV integrates
    > into the host chromosome and continues to propagate. Antivirals
    > medications can severely reduce the reproduction of HIV but can
    > never eliminate the reservoir within infected cells.
    >
    > 2) Diseases caused by retroviruses outside the laboratory:
    > There are quite a few and their numbers are increasing as we
    > develop better methods of detection. For example, various simian
    > immunodeficiency viruses have been found which produced AIDS-like
    > problems in apes. These also have "latency" periods that can be
    > measured in years. Such references go back to the mid- to late-
    > 1980's and early 1990's.
    >
    > 3) The destruction of T-cells by HIV has been documented. Those
    > references go back to the mid-1980's.
    >
    > My experience with Duesberg (I've followed his rants since the
    > late 1980's and heard his talks at UC Berkeley), is that one
    > shouldn't expect to see well-represented commentary from
    > the man. Most of his arguments were dealt with by the early
    > 1990's (I think earlier). Root-Berstein now limits his dissent
    > to suggest that HIV isn't the *sole* cause of AIDS symptoms.
    > And to some extent, that is correct. A disease that leads to
    > the impairment of the immune system is not likely to "kill"
    > directly. Other mechanisms, such as opportunistic infections and
    > cancers, will do that. That is one reason why symptoms may
    > vary between individuals and even regions of the world. Yet still,
    > the disease associated with HIV infection, do follow common
    > themes and have easily recognized patterns.
    >
    > Personally, I am very disturbed by Johnson's comments and involvment
    > in the HIV/AIDS debate. Despite the fact that AIDS is "blooming"
    > in Africa (something Johnson said he expected to see if the
    > HIV/AIDS connection is real), or that all the criteria of Koch's
    > "Postulates" have been met, I've not heard him make any retractions
    > or corrections. In fact, I haven't read anything about his
    > current position for the past several years.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Tim Ikeda
    > tikeda@sprintmail.hormel.com (despam address before use)



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 04 2000 - 13:42:09 EST