The great HIV/AIDS thread

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by spuriousmonkey, Dec 27, 2006.

  1. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    On what all?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Gallo lied about his test results and he got away with doing crazy things. The idea that anyone has HIV disease is not only based on his test, the test has absolutely no chance of being reliable and wasn't even approved for use to diagnose HIV disease in humans. On that has been built the fantasy that HIV disease exists and causes AIDS. That's what all.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    From your own favourite virus site:
    http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/panel/chapter4.htm

    Prof Montagnier argued that no test is perfect and, moreover, that the current generation of ELISA tests is much more sensitive and more specific than in 1984.

    Dr Magkoba pointed out that the ELISA test has a predictive rate of over 99% in South Africa. Both the predictive rate and the false positive rate of ELISA tests in South Africa compare very well with similar results obtained in the United Kingdom. Screening tests used in South Africa are as good as those used anywhere else in the world. The tests are highly specific, sensitive and reliable.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    The site also explains why the "predictive rate" is so high. Stop cherrypicking.
     
  8. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    It just explains that HIV testing is basically solid because of the strategies employed to not rely on one test or test session.
     
  9. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
  10. Idle Mind What the hell, man? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,709
    Even if Gallo (who stole his research from the French team) lied, it doesn't change anything. So we throw his data out. We would still have the data of the French team, and still have the data of everyone who's done their own research since. This other data is what we're currently basing our work on.

    What if people found a new virus or bacteria while looking for something else. Is that not valid? The results weren't the intended ones, so the data is no good to anyone?
     
  11. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    You do of course realize that your bullet through Bush's head avatar picture has been reported to the Secret Service?
     
  12. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    This is just plain unacceptable. It is a double standard.
     
  13. Idle Mind What the hell, man? Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,709
    How so? What's the difference if we find something tangible while investigating falsified data compared to finding something completely by accident? The point is, even though Gallo was full of shit, he led us to finding something that is now backed up by correct and proper data. Even if his data is completely thrown out, that doesn't falsify the data we have now.

    End of discussion.
     
  14. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    How does it even occur to you to say things like that?
     
  15. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    were all the HIV nonbelievers?
     
  16. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    You have no idea what constitutes proof, do you, Dragon?
     
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,053
    Interesting article draq. I will, however, be moving this to the biology forum.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    -----------------------------------

    I know that you have some kind of HIV(dar), as though you have some kind of radar taking you straight to any article that deals with this topic, but how about you just allow people to discuss this instead of screaming 'lies' from your little soapbox and side-tracking the thread to suit your needs.
     
  18. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Yeah, Bells, like you and SpuriousMonkey would ever allow that.

    It was a reasonable question. I have almost never seen a supporter of the HIV present me with a proof that actually constituted much of a real attempt at a proof, and this leads me to believe that there is a pathological lack of critical thinking or knowledge of anything even vaguely resembling scientific method.
     
  19. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    what more can you ask for?
     
  20. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Standards of evidence, reference to peer reviewed articles, articles that actually contain the evidence that Gallo claims to exist, to name a few things.
     
  21. draqon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    35,006
    go on that site and see yourself
     
  22. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    mod statement: merged threads
     
  23. JeffGoldblum Registered Member

    Messages:
    2
    Can Scientific Inquiry Be Judged Unethical?

     

Share This Page