From: pmmst8+@pitt.edu (Paul M Mweene)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: of human or divine genius  re: AIDS
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:29:13 GMT
Followup-To: alt.folklore.urban
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Nov16.024738.14404@nezsdc.icl.co.nz> derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz (Derek Tearne) writes:
> 
>One wonders if it is possible to _inject_ HIV into a 30 year old non
>living sample and expect it to insert itself into the genetic material 
>on cue.  If HIV can get into dead material who knows what it will do next..
>Derek "Plastic eating viruses" Tearne


There are two questions to be anwered here , if AIDS was always there then did the having of "AIDS" like symptoms comfirm AIDS? 

Nope. According to the CDC, there is no such thing as AIDS like symptoms. 
Full blown AIDS is a condition where the body's immune system has totally
broken down. In that circumstance opportunistic infections present thems
elves and these are the illnesses we see. 

It happens that some of the features associated with AIDS can be found in 
other illnesses, such as certain kinds of TB. I have seen people who tested
HIV- but were totally emacitated, had a chronic dry cough, were losing their 
hair, had continous dairrhoea and other symptoms that are common in AIDS 
patients. The CDC will be the first to tell you that the only way to diago
nise if some body has AIDS OR IS hiv+.

The example above is therefor irrelevant. 


Now supposing some one had created the virus and the heat was on them, what
would they do? They could shift the blame to some one else. But that would
'mean admitting that the disease was lab made. If not they could claim that
the disease was always there. The question of bringing up evidence to support
this would be the least of their problems. 

If some one created the virus in secret, then he had a lot of time to take
precautions against any eventuality. The would try and cover their tracks.
In this case it is a relatively easy matter for some one to come up with
a doctored sample as proof of their case. No one here can say that the ser
um that has been produced had the virus in its DNA. The most common tesrt
for AIDS test for antibodies not the virus. So if some one injects both
antibodies and the virus in an old sample then they would have all the 
evidence they needed. 

And if they chose not to go this way they could hold up any sample in an old
bottle and claim that it is the 70 year old alibi that absolved them of 
blame. How do we know that these samples are as old as claimed? For all we
know they could be from the year before they were the publicised. 

The development of such a virus has to have taken some years. During this
time the powers could store all the blood they required. This nonsense about
old samples just doesn't stand up. 

I have heard that the powers invistigated the Rolling Stone magazine claim
that Wister institute triggered the virus. Subsequently Wister is said to
have been cleared of all blame. This is a farce. If Wister did indeed cau
se the virus what would  make them want to be caught? What we hear is that
they found a teaspoon of the original vaccine which of course was devoid of the
virus. They subsequently touted this as the great proof that proved their
innocence. 

	This is really a circus. What happened between the time between the
publishimg of the magazine and the time a investgative panel was allowed to
reach the vials containing the vaccine? The CIA, Wister and the FBI would
have been at work eliminating all the evidence and even installing that which
exculpate them from all blame.

Can you imagine how many Nuclear weapons and scud missiles would turn up if the
UN allowed Iraq to inspect itself? This is far greater scandal than that.


makala
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.urban:28812 alt.folklore.computers:16327