From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Re: AIDS risk/Duesberg
Date: 30 Dec 92 16:47:11 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
Supersedes: <103401@netnews.upenn.edu>
In-reply-to: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU (Stephen Grossman)

In article <C01DJ3.5DF@umassd.edu>, pmsc13sg@UMASSD (Stephen Grossman) writes:
>>That Duesberg, while he has important points, just doesn't know what
>>he's talking about.  

>    The argument from authority is a logical fallacy but Duesberg _is_ an
>an authority: chemistry, molecular & cell bio, identified 1st cancer gene,
>mapped genetic structure of retroviruses, discovered that influenza virus
>change by recombination, NAS member, 7-yr. Outstanding Investigator Grant,
>specialist in retrovirology. He certainly knows more than I on this.
>His alleged error would be an expert's error.

Exactly.  He doesn't know what he's talking about regarding AIDS.  His
knowledge of virology and molecular biology is certainly outstanding.  His
knowledge of immunology and epidemiology is rather weak.

>>HIV kills helper T-cells, causing immune deficiency.
>>This is now known to be a basically false explanation, 

>>The correct reaction is to understand how HIV causes AIDS.  

>    You have not causally linked premise and conclusion. I have asked
>if D's claim that there is NO peer-reviewd paper proving HIV causes
>AIDS can be contradicted. No has identified any such paper. In the
>context of my knowledge, therefore, HIV does not cause AIDS. The
>gauntlet has been thrown!

What do you mean _proven_??  You sound like some moronic creationist
playing stupid philosophical word games.

The ultimate experimental proof--putting people in bubbles and injecting
them with HIV and waiting for several years--will of course never be done.
The closest approximations were the unwitting victims of HIV+ blood and
blood products--for which there have been numerous peer-reviewed studies
in the medical journals, and research experiments with HIV and SCID-hu mice,
for which there are also peer-reviewed papers in the research journals.

D's claim is patently ridiculous.

>>    No one knows, but numerous theories abound.  

>    No one knows how ghosts rattle chains but numerous theories abound.
>Try some respect for logic. You might find knowledge easier to get.

Yup, definitely creationist mentality.  Look here, stupid: I know and use
more logic than you do.  I stated a true fact about HIV, AIDS, and the
researchers.  No amount of brainless innuendo on your part will change
that or make it go away.

>>Whether there are any cofactors is unknown.  If there are, they seem
>>to be very common, considering the high proportion of HIV+ people who
>>come down with AIDS, so searching for them is probably not very useful.

>    "Other people do have that virus but AIDS patients have it more
>often...," says D. (_Full Context_, Feb. 1992)

Like I said, a high proportion of seropositives come down with AIDS.
What's your point?  That Duesberg is unaware of time?

>>You haven't contradicted Ted Frank.  American non-IV, non-homosexuals
>>are just not so exposed to HIV.  In central Africa, they are.

>    D says, "HIV by itself, causes no disease whatsoever in most infections."

This is misleading.  The immune response to HIV, as opposed to the actual
viral cytopathic effect, is the problem, as everyone knows.  What of it?

Of course, HIV by itself _does_ cause illness.  The initial immune response
is your basic viremia, something like the flu or mono.  Many, but not most,
are quite serious and need hospitalization.  Moreover, HIV by itself causes
AIDS dementia complex.

>    On Sunday, TV's "60 Minutes" and Dec. 29 _NYT_ had stories on 
>stress-illness link. It would be odd, queer even, if homosexuals into long-
>term drug "lifestyle" (ie, deathstyle) did NOT get sick.

Yes.  There are certain diseases that were well-known before 1980 to be
associated with the injectables and ultrapromiscuous world.  Only the
viral ones (eg, hepatitis) showed up in the transfusion community.

>	"In that world, you'll be able to rise in the morning with the spirit
>you had known in your childhood: that spirit of eagerness, adventure and cer-
>tainty which comes from dealing with a rational universe."
>                                                              AYN RAND

Ah, this explains many things.  You've got RANDS (Rejectanous Acquired
Neuron Deficiency Syndrome).  My condolences.
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine