Really, the argument isn't that HIV and AIDS are unrelated..but that AIDS is now a term used to name any "incurable" disease or illness and that billions are being made from this. The doc gets progressively one-sided as it goes in, but it offers room for skeptics the whole way through.
Thats kind of what I thought too. Like in the first half where it goes on about African countries and how the number of people who actually have HIV/AIDS is inflated for reasons like seemingly jumping to conclusions from initial symptoms.
At that point it isnt arguing the non-existence of HIV/AIDS. Kinda similar to the US gay community and the connection between poppers and Kaposi's Sarcoma instead of HIV.
Eventually however, you have some people Neville Hodgekinson pretty much saying flat out that HIV doesnt exist. By the end it did seem to be getting into AIDS denialism, maybe the more extreme nature of those parts made it more memorable and made people forget about the (at least IMO) more plausible problems talked about in the beginning :dunno:
Anyway, it didnt convince me that HIV/AIDS is a lie and I'm not going to go out and bang large numbers of HIV positive prostitutes after watching it. A problem in this thread is WCTWasPulled saying things like
Well watching the documentary in full really shows to me that HIV is nothing. Aids is just a generic term to lump so many things together.
or
Aids is already 100% cured. Don't take the drug cocktail. And detox your body and eat healthy. DONE!
which doesnt accurately represent the opinions of many of the people interviewed in the film IMO. I guess his reputation here has put people off watching it, but a decent amount of the film isnt as tinfoil hat wearing/basement dwelling conspiracy theorising as people may think (then again, some of it is).
If WCT posted that other film he mentioned,whatever it was called, as the original post, the arguments might be more relevant.
Or maybe the entire thing is BS, I'm no expert in any case.