Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
You should take a trip to Haiti and have unprotected sex with as many hookers as possible just to prove everyone wrong. That'll show 'em.
HIV A Lie and a Farse? House Of Numbers
- Thread starter WTC7WasPulled
- Start date
- Status
Damn it! It was addressed in the documentary! Africa has no AIDS/HIV either! No one does. It's all a mind fuck man!
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5207700&postcount=159
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5208335&postcount=160
Pay attention and stop reading what new tags are at the bottom with your name in them!
:hatsoff:
Damn it! It was addressed in the documentary! Africa has no AIDS/HIV either! No one does. It's all a mind fuck man!
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5207700&postcount=159
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5208335&postcount=160
Pay attention and stop reading what new tags are at the bottom with your name in them!
:hatsoff:
You may be trying to be funny, but you are basically on target. HIV is retrovirus that the body builds natural immunity to and does not cause what is known as AIDS which is a host of symptoms and cancers. AIDS is the body breaking down from toxic overload and stress HIV patients go through on the toxic drugs they're given.
So nice work.
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
I'll rephrase that, idiot. I challenge you to go to Haiti, screw as many hookers as you can without any precaution and then tell us AIDS is a myth.
I'd love to but bacterial infection would be my worry. Gonnoreaha (bad spelling I know) and other bacterial infections are real. So that would be bad to do in an unsanitary environment. But give me a girl that is diagnosed HIV positive and I could care less. Of course one that was smart enough to get off the cocktail of drugs.
Damn it! It was addressed in the documentary! Africa has no AIDS/HIV either! No one does. It's all a mind fuck man!
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5207700&postcount=159
http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=5208335&postcount=160
Pay attention and stop reading what new tags are at the bottom with your name in them!
:hatsoff:
Hey Whimsey did you actually watch the documentary? This was all addressed in detail.
WTC7WasPulled, what boils down to the premises in the documentary is:
1. CDC Wanted funds and FOR THAT they required an epidemic like plague.
2. There is no definitive definition about HIV.
3. Any AIDS test is to go through two phases. First deterministic, then Confirmatory.
4. Probability test is ELISA, and the same test is used for several other deceases.
5. Several countries does not have the resource to have the confirmatory check but the patients are lumped as HIV positives.
6. The HIV definition has been changed several times and brought in more and more people under the cover of AIDS. Thus bringing it to an epidemic proportion. That was in 1993.
If I've missed something please correct me.
What it failed to do is:
1. To firmly state that there is no Immunodeficiency phenomena.
2. That there is no virus that may cause auto-immune deceases in humans.
3. It provided lots of conjectures but no definitive medical proof.
It is a well known fact that a person WILL die of some known decease if the person is affected of Immunodeficiency. That is, his immunity system is almost non-existent.
If I'm to believe in conjectures why not be safe than sorry? Why not take precaution about AIDS and not be promiscuous?
1. CDC Wanted funds and FOR THAT they required an epidemic like plague.
2. There is no definitive definition about HIV.
3. Any AIDS test is to go through two phases. First deterministic, then Confirmatory.
4. Probability test is ELISA, and the same test is used for several other deceases.
5. Several countries does not have the resource to have the confirmatory check but the patients are lumped as HIV positives.
6. The HIV definition has been changed several times and brought in more and more people under the cover of AIDS. Thus bringing it to an epidemic proportion. That was in 1993.
If I've missed something please correct me.
What it failed to do is:
1. To firmly state that there is no Immunodeficiency phenomena.
2. That there is no virus that may cause auto-immune deceases in humans.
3. It provided lots of conjectures but no definitive medical proof.
It is a well known fact that a person WILL die of some known decease if the person is affected of Immunodeficiency. That is, his immunity system is almost non-existent.
If I'm to believe in conjectures why not be safe than sorry? Why not take precaution about AIDS and not be promiscuous?
Well sure why not take precautions. However after seeing what others went through, the only thing I'd be worried about is an annoying bacterial infection. I am convinced HIV is not harmful.
I suspect in future there will be some sort of false flag terror attack pulled on the porn industry where they will magically diagnose a large number of porn stars with HIV. What I want all porn stars to know is when this happens, stay OFF the drugs! That's what kills is the drugs and psychological feeling of a death sentence. Like Rihanna says in one song "Just live your life."
PirateKing
█▀█▀█ █ █
Is this your way of coping with your own affliction of HIV?
No I once had an HIV test when I was 19 being so scared of having a condom break with this chick I didn't know. I was so brainwashed by the establishment I remember it giving me anxiety about even having sex. It was negative but for me to even have had my young sex life ruined by propaganda makes me sick.
I will forever hate the Government/big pharma for all their lies. I only wish I could've watched House of Numbers when I was 18.
ForumModeregulator
Believer In GregCentauro
Okay, sorry I just thought it was amusing. Anyways, heres something a bit more "on topic'...
"The New York Times was more critical, describing the film as "a weaselly support pamphlet for AIDS denialists", "willfully ignorant", and "a globe-trotting pseudo-investigation that should raise the hackles of anyone with even a glancing knowledge of the basic rules of reasoning." The Wall Street Journal cited the film as part of "this season's fashion in conspiracy theories."The Portland Oregonian criticized Leung for "not being entirely honest with viewers," and decried the film's reliance on "selective editing, anomalies and anecdotes, unsupported conclusions... and suppression of inconvenient facts."
Reaction from the scientific community was similarly negative. Lancet Infectious Diseases criticized the film's arguments, calling them a "toxic combination of misrepresentation and sophistry." Aidstruth.org, a website created by HIV researchers to address AIDS denialism, criticized the film as concealing its "agenda behind a false veneer of honest inquiry", and published a rebuttal to some of the film's claims. Ben Goldacre, writing in The Guardian, described House of Numbers as "a dreary and pernicious piece of Aids denialist propaganda."
Eighteen scientists interviewed in the film state that their answers to Leung's questions were selectively edited to convey a false sense that the scientific community disagrees on basic facts about HIV/AIDS. Two interviewees, Neil Constantine and Robin Weiss, cite examples supporting the allegation that Leung misrepresented their words in a "surely intentional" manner.
House of Cards =
The creator of the film simply has NO credibility in this field. So, why should we believe anything he says? Hes in SHOW business, hes not a doctor. Since when is it a good idea when people in Hollywood start mouthin off stuff like this?...
Anyways this Leung character's illustrious career :
As and Editor:
2005 CMT: 20 Greatest Country Bands (TV special)
2005 THS Investigates: Love Behind Bars (TV documentary)
2005 50 Steamiest Southern Stars (TV documentary)
2004 CMT 20 Sexiest Men (TV special)
2004 CMT: 20 Sexiest Women (TV special)
2004 CMT: Greatest Road Trips (TV movie)
2004 CMT: 40 Sexiest Videos (TV special)
Camera:
House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic (documentary) (camera operator)
2004 Robot Movie (short) (second assistant camera)
Director:
House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic
Producer:
House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic
Would you expect anything less from The New York Times? New York Times is the ultimate establishment media source. All those scientists saying they were taken out of context would say that because their living depends on the HIV myth.
Watch the film and see for yourself.
ForumModeregulator
Believer In GregCentauro
but its not enough to just attack the credibility of the man who's making this pseudoscience gibberish up...
so...
http://www.aidstruth.org/denialism/myths/harmless
If you were to read this entire piece (with citations) I WOULD HOPE TO GOD, that you find this a much more scholarly, and logical approach to examining such a topic. Im not saying hollywood money trend films are not a good source of scientific knowledge, but this might be a bit better.
so...
http://www.aidstruth.org/denialism/myths/harmless
If you were to read this entire piece (with citations) I WOULD HOPE TO GOD, that you find this a much more scholarly, and logical approach to examining such a topic. Im not saying hollywood money trend films are not a good source of scientific knowledge, but this might be a bit better.
ForumModeregulator
Believer In GregCentauro
So wait, I shouldn't trust the "ultimate establishment media source"?
I better stop watching ESPN too...
"selective editing, anomalies and anecdotes, unsupported conclusions... and suppression of inconvenient facts."
I am beginning to think that the film maker and you share common criticisms...
All I am saying is REALLY do some research before you convince yourself you know the truth. That advice heeds to anything in this world, not just this topic. Ask yourself, how much money/attention did this film receive? What was the real purpose of the film? Money? Publicity? Entertainment? Can I really just pretend to ignore the other side of the argument and discount it as "on the man's side"?
See even before seeing House Of Numbers, I had my doubts about HIV. I already watched a film called HIV = Aids Fact Or Fraud on Google Video.
But after seeing the guys interviewed on House Of Numbers that discovered the virus, I saw right through them. Sometimes your gut tells you the most. Gallo is a fraud I can tell.
Watch this film. This is the one that woke me up.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8142733917997460212
In some ways it's even better than House Of Numbers.
I just watched it and, honestly, I urge everybody to do the same. It's on Netflix Instant.
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.
There are men, healthy men, who laugh at the fact that they are diagnosed with AIDS because they are, again, healthy, yet have everything from rent, medication, laundry and parking taken care of by the city (San Diego and San Francisco) because of their diagnosis. This isn't some Ventura-esque "the man vs us" bullshit. It's much broader and much less inflammatory.
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.
There are men, healthy men, who laugh at the fact that they are diagnosed with AIDS because they are, again, healthy, yet have everything from rent, medication, laundry and parking taken care of by the city (San Diego and San Francisco) because of their diagnosis. This isn't some Ventura-esque "the man vs us" bullshit. It's much broader and much less inflammatory.
ForumModeregulator
Believer In GregCentauro
http://www.aidstruth.org/features/2...esearch-findings-t-cells-destruction-and-aids
"In late 2007, ScienceDaily reported that three prominent research teams had published papers in the Journal of Immunology, challenging the theory that the sudden loss of T-cells triggers disease and AIDS.”
“If the sudden loss of T-cells in HIV positive individuals can’t explain why people get disease, then there must be co-factors that cause people to get sick and die. Or, factors that have absolutely nothing to do with HIV.”
The document on the screen was indeed from ScienceDaily, a popular science news website. However, the headline and first paragraph of that article, which was itself based on a press release from Tulane University, did not accurately represent the research: notably, it failed to mention that the research was done with non-human primates. Leung and his crew disregarded the rest of the ScienceDaily article, which clearly recorded that non-human primates were used and stated that the particular strain of SIV infecting these particular simian species behaves differently from HIV in humans.
This isn't a huge concept to overcome. THIS FILM MAKER is going to edit, cut out, and make his movie look good at the sake of REAL scientific evidence and research. BECAUSE IT SELLS...
Your point? I didn't take a side, I commented on the structure of the film. Many of the doctors interviewed do not dispute an HIV connection. All of the contradictory posts in this thread don't address the claims that 20% of South Africa has "AIDS" yet "AIDS" in South Africa can be diagnosed by symptoms such as rapid weight loss or chronic coughing. Or that HIV testing in places like Africa and S.C Asia is a joke.
Did you watch the documentary?
- Status
Similar threads
