 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in General Chat. |
| User | Post |
| Sweet Kassy Molassy Posts: 653/886 |
Those people are known as quacks. Or maybe idiots.
Read the wikipedia about HIV itself if you want to read a wiki. It talks about most of the things I learned about the virus in cellular/molecular class. THEN tell me how there's no connection between HIV and AIDS. |
| Jilkon Posts: 227/227 |
If it wasn't for the fact that I'm just a doubter and not a fanatic believer in "the other side", coupled with the fact that there are severe restrictions and discriminations in areas for hiv-people, I'd get infected just to prove it wrong.
Well in any case, since you people always like wikipedia, read. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy or anything, I just think there IS in fact reason to research other areas. I don't like being told that "there is evidence". All I've ever heard about the hiv->aids relation is that there is evidence, I've never actually seen/been shown the evidence. If there is evidence it is easy to just show it, there's no reason to keep it secret. (Scientific stuff is usually public material, I think I read that this is not the case for aids research.) |
| Ailure Posts: 2190/2602 |
There's some theories that the fall of WTC was caused by the goverment, or that the holocaust didn't happen, or that we didn't land on the moon.
But of course, thoose theories are quite weak. And I don't really see why there's a need for a AIDS conspriancy.  Please don't even get me started about people who thinks HIV only happens to gay people. |
| Sweet Kassy Molassy Posts: 652/886 |
Originally posted by Jilkon The common cold isn't HIV. HIV mutates rapidly because the reverse transcription process by which it integrates itself into a host nucleus is highly imperfect. Couple this with rapid multiplication and you get a variety of different HIV virii in the body at any one time. Antibodies and whatnot are HIGHLY specific in what they target. The new mutations may be resistant to defenses which are already in place. That's how it works. Originally posted by Jilkon What the fuck are you talking about? *edit* Actually, don't answer that. Please refer to Alastor's comment about not talking anymore =P |
| Alastor Posts: 7711/8204 |
HIV is not a fucking cold, that's slightly the point. Also, loved all your horridly unspecific examples; makes you look really ignorant and it was just very amusing. Please do some research in the future, because, hahaha. It's like you have no idea why AIDS does what it does.
There is empirical evidence that AIDS is caused by HIV. If you have done research and have no found this evidence, it is because your research is selective and you want to be contrary... Which makes you not worth arguing against, so I shall make no further points on this subject. Please do other people a favor and stop talking, though. |
| HyperHacker Posts: 4245/5072 |
Hey, I'm no scientist. I was just pointing out that viruses do mutate. |
| Jilkon Posts: 225/227 |
The entire thing they suggest is that the virus actually mutates inside the body to adapt to the immune system. That's not what happens with common colds, they don't exactly stay in your body your whole life and just learn how to fight against you.
Another interesting thing to note is the cases of aids without hiv, something they've solved by adding more things to the list of "aids diseases" and by actually declaring such cases not aids. Which means a patient with aids + hiv gets the diagnosis of aids immediately, while the other guy with, say, EXACTLY THE FUCKING SAME SYMPTOMS is only sick in the particular diseases and suffering from some weird immune system disorder that is not aids. Also, you guys aren't even willing to accept that there might be a different answer, which proves at least one of my points right. Standard scientific procedure when shit doesn't work out is to try a different way, scientists have been hellbent on this one same thing for decades and no one is allowed to even think that it might be wrong. |
| Sweet Kassy Molassy Posts: 649/886 |
Originally posted by Jilkon Umm... I'm pretty sure that would be because we have better drugs and treatments to slow its effects and it is more widely known about and people with it know how to better take carfe of themselves. Originally posted by Jilkon Ummm... no. Virii are composed of nucleic acids and a protein coat. They are not cells, and do not reproduce on thier own. They insert thier dna into a cells nucleus (or in HIV's case, the viral RNA is transcripted into cDNA which is then integrated into a cell's nucleus, where it can lie dormant for long periods of time. Long story short it tells the cell to make more viral particles, yadda yadda. As for "omg how does it mutate wtf...?" Reverse transcription is very imperfect and that is the reason your mutations are caused. Some of these mutations result in new virii being assembled which resist drugs and current antibodies. Does that about cover it? |
| Lakithunder Posts: 1009/1284 |
I heard a rumor that about oh, say, I think like 10 years ago my school was closed for like a week because the principal found out that a kid had HIV. And apparently he died like 3 years ago...I realy don't know if this is true or not... |
| HyperHacker Posts: 4205/5072 |
Originally posted by Jilkon You mean like the common cold and the flu? |
| Jilkon Posts: 222/227 |
First of all, they are still researching whether or not it actually does cause aids, that's why the "time for it to cause aids" keeps going up every 5 or so years. It was 5-10 years in the start, it's up to 25-30 years now.
Second, viruses don't just lie dormant and wait for decades, viruses cause diseases (if any) after 30 minutes to 30 days or so, this goes for _all_ viruses. (Sidenote: one of the criteria for diseases to be called infectous is that the thing that causes the disease (in this case supposedly hiv) always causes the disease in another host. This is not the case.) Third, the normal treatment of a disease is to remove that which causes the symptoms (note: there are no symptoms until you actually get aids), the problem in this case is that HIV lives on the immune system (doing nothing after the initial infection mind you), so they try to kill it. This kills the immune system as well. This causes aids. Fun huh? Fourth, the way they actually check if someone has hiv is by seeing if their body has developed antibodies for hiv, not actually by looking for hiv. So technically a person "infected" by hiv is instead immune to it. (pre-emptive counter counter argument: why would hiv be able to mutate freely unlike every other virus in the world, viruses are made out of a handful of cells and need most/all of them to reproduce and so does hiv.) Fifth, no other retroviruses (which hiv is) have been proven to cause any form of disease in humans. There's more, but those five are enough to warrant search for alternate causes imo. But like I said, it's taboo to even think outside the box in this issue. Also, for the hell of it, I'll start calling it HTLV-III instead of HIV. |
| Kailieann Posts: 605/808 |
That's kinda like questioning whether the common cold causes coughing. Unless you have some rational basis for this theory that you'd like to share. |
| Jilkon Posts: 219/227 |
While I am one of the few people that dare question whether hiv actually causes aids (good luck finding a bigger taboo) I still have to agree that that is pretty stupid. |
| Metal Man88 Posts: 487/701 |
Originally posted by Rom ManicOriginally posted by Alastor the Stylish Get out the chains! We gotta drag those children to the next grade! Anything to hide the fact those books that say the Soviet Union are out to kill us all are still used! |
| Rom Manic Posts: 441/557 |
Originally posted by Alastor the Stylish Crazy talk! NO child will be left behind THIS term! |
| n3g-Z3r0 theory Posts: 47/80 |
This was in our school newspaper...Our "reporter" for this thought it happened in our school.....he was a fucktard though. Anyway all I want to know is, What was he thinking?!?!? |
| Alastor Posts: 7692/8204 |
Originally posted by KasdarackHa ha, your school must have been behind as hell. |
| Sweet Kassy Molassy Posts: 638/886 |
That's retarded. You don't look at blood cells in grade school bio lab anyway. You swab your fucking cheek.
"He made a big mistake." Yeah, that's an understatement. The kids should have known better in the first place and not volunteered, though. |
| HyperHacker Posts: 4150/5072 |
I have only one thing to say to this guy. |
| Danielle Posts: 6346/6737 |
How amusing... poor guy. How does such an important fact slip his mind? Needles shouldn't be shared! |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | |
