BUYING THIS BOOK WILL HELP TREAT PEOPLE WITH HIV IN AFRICA!!

BUYING THIS BOOK WILL HELP TREAT PEOPLE WITH HIV IN AFRICA!!
Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy

Seeking Stories of AIDS Denialism

Have you or someone you know been harmed by AIDS Denialism? If you, or someone you care about, have been advised to stop taking HIV meds, ignore HIV test results, purchase a 'natural' cure etc., please email me.

aidsandbehavior@yahoo.com

All information will be kept confidential.

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

The Truth, Nothing But the Truth: Celia Farber's Defamation Claim Against AIDS Activist Is Dismissed


Brendan Pierson
November 8, 2011

A state judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a journalist against a prominent AIDS activist for allegedly defaming her in a public dispute over an article she wrote challenging the scientific consensus that AIDS is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Louis B. York ruled last week in Farber v. Jefferys, 106399/09, that the journalist, Celia Farber, was a public figure for the purpose of the lawsuit and that her defamation claims against AIDS activist Richard Jefferys could not survive the heightened scrutiny required for public figures.

Ms. Farber began covering the AIDS epidemic for Spin magazine in the 1980s. While at Spin, she conducted a sympathetic interview with Peter Duesberg, a professor of biology at the University of California at Berkeley who rejects the scientific consensus that AIDS is caused by HIV. Mr. Duesberg claims the disease is caused by recreational drug use, and is sometimes aggravated by antiviral drugs used to treat it. He contends that HIV is a harmless "passenger virus" and has argued that the pharmaceutical industry has suppressed dissent in order to sell antiviral drugs.


Ms. Farber continued to give sympathetic coverage to Mr. Duesberg and write skeptically of the medical establishment on the issue of AIDS, culminating in a 2006 article in Harper's, "Out of Control," in which she castigated "so-called community AIDS activists" who "were sprung like cuckoo birds from grandfather clocks." Ms. Farber and Harper's drew harsh criticism for the article. A group of doctors and activists, including Mr. Jefferys, head of the anti-AIDS Treatment Action Group, published a widely circulated 56-point refutation of the article.

In 2008, the Semmelweis Society International, an organization formed to support whistleblowers in the medical field, announced that it was going to give an award to Ms. Farber and Mr. Duesberg for their dissent about AIDS. The group said the award was prompted by the Harper's article.

After learning of the award, Mr. Jefferys sent a Semmelweiss employee an e-mail saying that Ms. Farber and Mr. Duesberg were "not whistleblowers" but "simply liars." He said he could provide numerous examples of their dishonesty, including "altering of quotes from the scientific literature, false representations of published papers, etc." This e-mail is the core of Ms. Farber's defamation suit. She said the e-mail was circulated among members of Congress and the media, that it was false and that it was intended to destroy her reputation.

Mr. Jefferys filed a pre-answer motion to dismiss the lawsuit. He said the e-mail was true, and that Ms. Farber was a public figure, making her defamation claims subject to a heightened standard of scrutiny.

Justice York agreed. He noted that Ms. Farber has been writing about AIDS since the 1980s and has spoken at conferences on the subject. He also pointed to examples submitted to the court by Ms. Farber of hostile online statements made about her by AIDS activists. These examples, he said, actually hurt her case.

"Although her purpose is to show the animus of the traditional HIV/AIDS community and impugn defendants' motives in making their statements against her, it also illustrates dramatically that, to AIDS activists angry at the dissenters, Farber has a celebrity status and notoriety," he said.

"Finally, Farber acknowledges that the article 'Out of Control' appeared in Harper's magazine, which has a widespread reputation; that the publication of 'Out of Control' generated enormous attention and publicity not only for the article but for her as its author, resulting in a series of articles about both; that internationally known members of the traditional HIV/AIDS community felt compelled to publish a lengthy document refuting the contentions in 'Out of Control,'" the judge wrote.

"Thus, Farber's own complaint and the papers she submits in opposition to this motion establish that, in the limited context of issues surrounding AIDS and HIV dissenters and the question of whether HIV causes AIDS, she is a public figure," he said.

Furthermore, Justice York said, even if Ms. Farber were not a public figure, Mr. Jefferys' e-mail would be subject to a heightened standard because it involved a matter of public concern. Allowing the defamation claims to go forward would have a chilling effect on the public discourse on an important subject, he wrote.

The judge also rejected Ms. Farber's argument that the suit should go forward even under a heightened standard because Mr. Jefferys' e-mail showed gross negligence.

"Here, Jefferys relied on numerous reliable sources," the judge wrote. "Thus, Jefferys did not exhibit constitutional malice or gross irresponsibility when he relied on them and on his own prior professional research to reach his conclusions about Farber's work as a journalist in 'Out of Control' and her other writings."

Ms. Farber had focused on the word "liar" as an example of gross negligence. But Justice York said that "liar" was just an example of the heated rhetoric around the dispute, noting that Ms. Farber had used similar rhetoric herself.

"Through the various references to him and other 'so-called activists' in the Harper's piece, she strongly suggests that Jefferys and others lie, twist facts or hide data in order to remain in the good graces of the pharmaceutical companies which support them financially," he wrote. "She also accuses him of lying about whether there is a debate as to the cause of AIDS. …Indeed, in her affidavit in support of her opposition, Farber hurls accusations at Jefferys which are strikingly similar to those he has hurled at her."

Andrew T. Miltenberg of Nesenhoff & Miltenberg, counsel to Ms. Farber, said in an e-mailed statement that "We are undeterred and looking forward to appealing this important case. Ideology and belief trumped documented facts in this decision, which is precisely the matter at the heart of this lawsuit. To date, neither Harper's itself nor a single source in Farber's article have disputed her facts.

"We will continue to fight to preserve freedom of the press so that those who report true stories that are unpopular, or threaten industries, are not in a position to be professionally assassinated by the very people whose wrong-doings are exposed. This case is not about a single journalist but about the fate of journalism itself, which has been over-run by vested interests who deploy intimidation tactics to control the press."



Mr. Jefferys was represented by Joseph Evall of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher. He declined to comment.

128 comments:

  1. "We will continue to fight to preserve freedom of the press..."

    ... by... err... launching meritless libel lawsuits against anyone who criticises us.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am so glad the judge pointed out that Farber is a hypocrite. Claiming that Jefferys impugned her integrity and credibility by "calling her names" and yet Farber is guilty of the exact same behavior! Every single accusation these Denialists claim we "hurl at them" they "hurl at us" just as the judge pointed out. And let's not forget they hurl even worse at each other as shown by their recent Crazy Conference last minute cancellation!

    Justice was done in this case. I wonder how the Denialists will spin this one...if they even acknowledge it at all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Let's not forget how letigious Ms. Farber is. About a year ago, Ms. Farber filed a lawsuit against a very well respected artist/singer named Diamanda Glass over something silly Ms. Glass wrote on her own Facebook page about Farber. I brought this up on the ReThinking AIDS Facebook page a week ago. Ms. Farber, in trying to slam me regarding my HIV Innocence Project TRUTH site had written that "the internet generally and FB specifically has no impact". I brought up the fact that Ms. Farber had filed a lawsuit and FBI charges against Ms. Glass based solely on comments at Ms. Glass' FB page (on the internet) and Ms. Farber ran and hid and refused to comment further. She refused to explain how her statement could be reconciled with her actions!

    This is their modus operandi. They make stupid, thoughtless and completely moronic statements and then run and hide and refuse to discuss the merits of their statements. Maybe because, like Clark Baker, they know they are liars, as Mr. Jefferys correctly stated while referring to Ms. Farber. I really believe they know they are liars, but are too stupid to realize the rest of us know they are as well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I just read the complete ruling. The judge was incredibly thorough in his castration of the Farber pseudo-publicity stunt.

    Guess who won't acknowledge the ruling now?

    That's right - Clarkie "Idiot" Baker. He will be as silent on this as he was about Karri Stokely's death.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Where did she find this lawyer? A good one would have known to shut his mouth and ditch her after that kind of beat-down.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Friends,

    I was named as a co-defendant in this suit. For the record, I am very disappointed that it took years to get the suit dismissed. I offered in every way to cooperate and to get the judicial system to move. We live in a very difficult system, that requires incredible amounts of money to defend ones self.

    Regardless, we now have a judicial decision that now should be used as collateral estoppel and res judicata to end Clark Baker in every jurisdiction everywhere. This judge has ruled decisively that Baker and Farber are not to be believed.

    I call on all rational scientists to use this decision to end the credibility of Clark Baker every where. He lost this one, and lost it very decisively. He lost on the merits. I call on everyone involved to counter-claim and to discredit Clark. We must not live in fear.

    Go ahead Clark. Do your worst. I am ready.

    Clark Baker and Farber are gulity. Guilty. Guilty Guilty.

    By the way, I am the originator of the "Clean Hands Award." I originated the "Whistleblower Week in Washington." I originated all that was at issue in this suit. It was perverted and mocked by the weak at will.

    I am a founder of the Semmelweis Society. The idea was beautiful. Clark/Farber/Gil perverted all that we worked for.

    I cannot stand that my work was perverted by Clark/Farber/Gil. I will not rest until the guilty are punished.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To any lawyer reading this blog:

    As a co-defendant in this suit, I want to counter sue and recover attorney fees from Farber and Baker. I have documented extensive damages that they have caused to my career and business. Now that a judge has ruled decisively against them, it should be a simple matter to collect the damages that they owe.

    They posted wanted posters against me. They wrote to my employers. They made false accusations. They gleefully claimed that they caused me millions in damages.

    Lawyers, this is an easy case. Contact me. I am willing to undergo any burden to enforce the US constitution against these deceitful tortfeasors.

    This case is and must be the end of denialism. Lawyers, show me the way to leverage this judge's ruling to end Clark Baker and his clients, including Gil.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Here are the actual words of the ruling where it pertains to Clark Baker. The judge refers to him as "Clark Peters":

    D. The Peters Affidavit
    As part of her opposition to the converted motion, Farber submits the affidavit of Clark Peters, founder and principal investigator of The Office of Medical & Scientific Justice (OMSJ)(http://www.omsj.org/). Peters has an honorable background in the Marine Corps and the Los Angeles Police Department. However, his affidavit does not further Farber’s arguments.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Peters holds himself out as an expert in evaluating Farber’s integrity based on his “more than 2500 interviews and physical examinations of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine addicts,” adding—incorrectly and in a conclusory fashion—that courts generally “take judicial notice that drug addicts are pathological liars.” Peters Aff. at ¶ 5. He also points to the fact that he is a licensed commercial pilot and scuba diver as evidence of his general acumen. Id. at ¶ 6, 612 N.Y.S.2d 671. None of these qualifications makes him particularly suited to evaluate the issues at hand.

    ReplyDelete
  10. *15 Peters’ comments about medical and scientific corruption are not directly pertinent to the issue of whether Jefferys acted with constitutional malice or gross irresponsibility when he sent the email in question. That is, Peters presents no evidence which connects the alleged medical or scientific corruption to Jefferys. His observation of Farber, which led him to conclude that she has not manipulated evidence, has no bearing on whether Jefferys defamed her. His comments about the allegedly defamatory claims and nefarious conduct of the non-moving defendants are not pertinent to Jefferys.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Apparently in an attempt to show Jefferys’ malice against Farber, Peters sets forth comments Jefferys allegedly posted about Farber’s award on various websites—which, for the sake of argument, the Court accepts as accurate depictions of Jefferys’ postings and emails. For example, in encouraging people to protest the decision to bestow the Clean Hands Award upon Farber, Jefferys allegedly stated that “the simplest talking points are that Farber and Duesberg aren’t whistleblowers, they’re liars. The examples are many, the quote about stopping ART saving lives is probably the most egregious.” Though this and the other quoted comments demonstrate a genuine desire to keep Farber from getting the Clean Hands Award, Jefferys acknowledges that he did not want Farber to receive the award. This goal does not show malice in a constitutional sense unless Jefferys also demonstrated reckless disregard for or gross indifference to the truth. The quotes Peters ascribes to Jefferys in his affidavit, if accurate, suggest that Jefferys sincerely believed in the truth of what he was saying.Peters has not presented any data which supports his claim that “Jefferys’ intent was ... part of a sustained and coordinated effort among the pharmaceutically-funded activists ...” to silence Farber and Duesberg although he knew he was uttering lies about them. Id. at ¶ 75, 612 N.Y.S.2d 671. Other comments by Peters also do nothing to enhance Farber’s argument.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wow - it looks like this excerpt of the ruling should be presented to anyone who Clarkie advertises his "services" to. Essentially, it looks like, in other words:

    The judge ruled legally and authoritatively that Clark Baker is a douche!

    ReplyDelete
  13. My personal favourite bit was: "Also as her brief in opposition to the converted motion notes, a former website which attacked HIV dissenters prominently featured a photograph of Farber which had been splattered in blood; she annexes a copy of the photograph to her opposition papers. Although her purpose is to show the animus of the traditional HIV/AIDS community and impugn defendants motives in making statements against her, it also illustrates dramatically that, to AIDS activists angry at the dissenters, Farber has a celebrity status and notoriety"

    Talk about how not to play the victim! So nice to see that she used my picture, I might have to do another one with egg on her face.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This will make a nice addendum to my HIV Innocence Project/Group Truth site. Showing just how inept and ineffective Clark Baker a.k.a. Peters is in the legal realm.

    It's also interesting that none of the denialists are discussing this new development. I guess they will deny it is a part of history/reality.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Remember that just one year ago Clark Baker and Dean Esmay were bragging and gloating that the "judge refuses to dismiss libel suit".

    Baker's link:
    http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2010/11/judge-denies-motion-to-dismiss-farber.html

    Esmay link:
    http://deanesmay.com/2010/11/20/farbers-libel-suit-going-forward/

    I will not go into the many, many paragraphs of Baker's bullshit (we all know how he loves to go on and on and rehash the same old tired lies in every post...Pharma Sluts, orthodox conspiracy, HIV tests fraudulent, Gallo on trial...fluff that is never relevant to what he's discussing). Suffice it to say that Baker brags that Farber will be vindicated very soon.

    Esmay, on the other hand, puts all his hopes, dreams and unrealistic aspirations succinctly:

    "I’ve never seen a journalist so blatantly slandered by powerful people with a vested financial interest in stopping reporting they didn’t like. I expect she’s going to do quite well in this suit. The only question in my mind is whether she’ll be offered a settlement or not. I almost hope not. Wealthy and politically powerful people need to know they can’t do this sort of thing, and the 1st Amendment still stands."

    First of all, I love that he still refers to her as a "journalist". Second, I love the "blatant slander" crap which the judge blasted them on. Lastly, I guess Esmay is no medium as he prognosticates with: "I expect she's going to do quite well with this suit."

    Now, the real measure of the test of the manliness of Esmay, Baker and all the other denialists, is if they will even respond to this or just ignore it. I highly suspect it will be ignored. Unfortunately for them, the rest of the Real World is not ignoring it. Farber's "reputation", which she is totally responsible for tanking by the way, is now completely down the toilet.

    I guess the Courts is not where the Denialists will win this "HIV is not real" gambit as Clark Baker predicted at the 2009 RA Conference.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Perhaps it's just spin and sour grapes, but it looks like Celia Farber plans to continue her perfect record of never knowing when to walk away:

    "Meanwhile, people in the know, legally, are aghast at the judgment, and know the difference between a Game Over judgment and something like this, which only sets the stage for an appeal. No skating, just yet. My lawyers are just getting started, and are newly invigorated. I have done considerable work on my self and soul so that I am not overly invested in the outcome, only on the day to day serenity of being, and a full acceptance of whatever comes my way. Thank you all for your continued support."

    http://www.facebook.com/groups/RethinkingAIDS/

    And it seems that one of her supporters has worked out the real reason for the judge's decision - apparently it's because he's Jewish:

    cdm
    Veteran Member (100+ posts)

    Join Date: May 2009
    Location: Greece
    Posts: 957
    cdm is on a distinguished road
    Re: Farber Suit Dismissed

    Is the judge Louis B. York truly a Jew?
    http://www.jewishlawyersguild.org/Governors.asp

    I think this is very serious
    __________________
    Scientists are slaves of the cartel and their work -research or any other form of scientific slavery- constitutes its power. Setting them free equals to the destruction of the cartel"


    http://forums.questioningaids.com/showpost.php?p=58593&postcount=2

    I'm sure Farber, her father Barry, and her counsel Andrew Miltenberg will find this line of approach most helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Seems that Farber's attorney specializes in promoting ludicrous lawsuits on behalf of people with a tenuous grasp on reality:

    Millionaire sues high-class escort for £60,000 after she refused to let him turn her into 'Pretty Woman'

    ReplyDelete
  18. "Scientists are slaves of the cartel and their work -research or any other form of scientific slavery- constitutes its power. Setting them free equals to the destruction of the cartel"

    If research = slavery, and research also = $$, then I am being paid to be a slave. Seems very Zen koan-like.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "I too want to live, we all want to live. Just LIVE. It's all rooted in a really profound unconscious desire to deprive people of their freedom. I have never understood the attraction of that."

    Um no, Celia. The desire to live is because most people find mouldering in the grave to be dreadfully dull.

    ReplyDelete
  20. My personal favorite:

    [Baker] "holds himself out as an expert in evaluating Farber’s integrity based on his “more than 2500 interviews and physical examinations of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine addicts,”

    Umm, okay...

    "... adding – incorrectly and in a conclusory fashion – that courts generally “take judicial notice that drug addicts are pathological liars.” Peters (Baker) Aff. at ¶ 5."

    Wonderful. Baker is explaining to the judge that courts prejudge the testimony of a whole class of people without hearing it. I'd love to have tracked the judge's eyebrows heading skywards when he read that.

    Given that Farber's central (and failed) contention was that it was defamatory in law for Jefferys to call her a "liar", you gotta wonder what her legal team were thinking when they submitted Baker's buffoonery as evidence supposedly supporting Celia's case.

    York observes dryly:

    "He [Baker] also points to the fact that he is a licensed commercial pilot and scuba diver as evidence of his general acumen. Id. at ¶ 6. None of these qualifications makes him particularly suited to evaluate the issues at hand."

    Unless of course the proceedings are to be conducted underwater, or at 30,000 feet.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I guess Celia Farber sobered up. Her rant on the ReThinking AIDS Facebook wall is gone!

    It's amazing to me how these people spout off their tirade of nonsense and then censor what they said. I'm glad some people captured some of the bull and posted it here.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Good analysis of the case here:

    http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/2011/11/new-york-court-rejects-journalists-defamation-claim-against-aids-activist.html

    "In effect, Farber was contending that defamation law can be used to stifle criticism of a controversial position on a matter of great public importance."

    ReplyDelete
  23. Truth Wins Out, if you judge by the facebook group, these people are far more extreme than they would have you believe. Not that denying the existence of a virus we can see and maniplate isn't insane, but these guys are far gone. You have one guy ranting about his rampant meth abuse, but that he is perfectly safe because doesn't feel ashamed of it, someone else claiming she doesn't care if her CD4 count goes to 1, someone else who feels that pneumonocystis is good for you, and of course Kim Cools, who believes that not only HIV but also tuberculosis and athlete's foot are just symptoms of a shortage of Italian food (Garlic, olive oil, basil).

    ReplyDelete
  24. The thread at QA.com is ridiculous, starting with the overtly racial discussion that only Jews are credible. Then the entire thread veers way, way off topic. The three or so comments that are on topic show that these imbeciles never read the judgement! It is so typical the way these dissidents discuss topics that they do not study and have no clue about as if they are pros.

    Best stupid statement goes to Brian Carter:

    "Here, Jefferys relied on numerous reliable sources," the judge wrote.
    Reliable? How so? Reliable means that the judge is in their club. The club of true believers. The analogy is too great; the parishioner relying on bible.

    Again, if anyone does not believe as they do, then they are unreliable, not credible and not worthy. Don't they see the hypocrisy of such outrageous comments about their perceived enemies while discussing the merits of a defamation lawsuit?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Clark Barker's attempts to weigh in on another transmission case can currently be followed live: http://livewire.wlwt.com/Event/Andre_Davis_Trial_Day_3

    ReplyDelete
  26. A little off point, but very interesting. There is a case going on right now (and has been for two days previous) that Baker and OMSJ is involved in; Andre Davis.

    There is a staff writer, Travis Getty, who is blogging live from the court room. The really great part is that Clark Baker is commenting and the staff writer keeps knocking Baker back down! He is doing so very professionally, but it is obvious he is getting sick of Baker's obvious agenda and how Baker keeps sidetracking the case by getting away from what is happening in real time! God, Baker is such a tool.

    Here is the link to day 3:
    http://livewire.wlwt.com/Event/Andre_Davis_Trial_Day_3?Page=6

    ReplyDelete
  27. It is interesting that when you go to the "tribute" page for Kim Bannon, David Crowe wishes his "condolences." Unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Clark Baker is promising something big tomorrow. Anyone want to take bets?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Seth: I actually think it is important to open up comments on Kim Bannon's death. I think it is important to let denialists try to put their spin on it here, so the reader can see for him/herself how absolutely destructive and far-fetched/crazy their views are on such an obvious and preventable tragedy.

    ReplyDelete
  30. notElon:
    I'm sure it will be some stupid irrelevancy which will be insignificant in his minimal involvement in another losing case!

    ReplyDelete
  31. If anyone wants to see what complete assholes these denialists can be, especially Celia Farber, one just has to go to the QA.com thread a year or so ago called "Kim Bannon Gravely Ill". Google it. You'll see them fighting with Kim Bannon's two best friends. Celia Farber is especially out of line. She accuses Kim's father of horrible shit and Kim's friends say she is lying out her ass. Farber never backs down, spewing atrocious lie after atrocious lie.

    And then she goes and files a defamation suit against Jefferys for calling her a liar. Hey, how about that: she's a liar AND a hypocrite!!
    JTD

    ReplyDelete
  32. Check out the fun at the Andre Davis Trial Live Blog Day 6. The moderator has slapped Clark Baker again. Here's one exchange:

    According to the testimony so far, no one has diagnosed Davis yet... Witnesses DID testify that an unknown person reported to other unknown persons that he got an HIV+ test result from an unknown test... Those unknown persons told prosecution witnesses about the result...
    by OMSJ 9:45 AM

    That's one way to describe the events, although those unknown persons are actually known to us. They've all testified.
    by Travis Gettys/Staff 9:45 AM

    Read more: http://livewire.wlwt.com/Event/Andre_Davis_Trial_Day_6#ixzz1eNySZp9q

    ReplyDelete
  33. Truthy - that site is HILARIOUS! Clarkie goes on and on spewing his nonsense again and again!

    I can't figure out how to post on the proceeding blog though. Can someone please post on it a link to the text of the NY Judge bitch-slapping Clarkie on there or send it to the blogger so he knows Clarkie is a blathering idiot that big-talks himself and has no credibility?

    The best part is Clarkie now admits that they are losing and he will "win on appeal." Hilarious.

    ReplyDelete
  34. OMG! Clark Baker is the biggest Drama Queen. He has been writing all weekend long that there was going to be a huge bombshell today, Monday, in the Andre Davis Trial. He was bragging as if it were the Second Coming of Christ (of course Baker thinks he is Jesus Christ)!

    The big, huge bombshell was that Davis was going to get ACQUITTED TODAY by Rule 29 stating that the State did not prove it's case. And what was the defense's argument? They said that Davis did not know he was HIV+ because the state did not prove he ever "physically possessed the HIV test result paper."

    The Prosecuting Attorney, who is obviously better than Coleman, showed they did not need to prove physical possession of a piece of paper because they proved:
    1. The test result was in a safe in the house he shared with his girlfriend/momma of his kids.
    2. He was on HIV Meds.
    3. He went to Stop AIDS, a facility for people who are HIV+ to get financial and psychological help where he signed a statement acknowledging he knew he was HIV+ and had tested positive for HIV.
    4. The police had a phone call (consent from a victim to record) in which Davis admitted he was HIV+ and knew he was for at least one year.
    5. Davis was not allowed to wrestle with WWE because of his positive HIV test.

    Good grief, that was Baker's weekend tease? No wonder Clark Baker has to lie about every case he is involved in with other attorneys. Maybe he should not be involved with attorneys who are as competent as Clark Baker!

    What a complete joke!

    Also, they did not even mount a defense for Andre Davis. They are basing all their hopes on an appeal because they feel the law is unconstitutional. Good luck, idiots!

    ReplyDelete
  35. I think her goal was not really regarding the actual case, but more just using it as a vehicle to advertise the dissident perspective... So thus, she actually has succeeded.

    ReplyDelete
  36. This is HILARIOUS: Jonathan Barnett of Resistance is Fruitful (and moderator at QA.com) is claiming that Townsend Letter (an 'alternative' medical publication) just happened to publish some stupid post they just "found" at Barney's site. But, if you check the submission process, there is no mention of them seeking out bullshit. Also, they require some form of "Peer review".

    Barney is excited because, as he writes, even Gary Null and Mike Adams publish there! WOW! Such esteemed company! Barney has such a low bar to measure his 'accomplishments'!

    ReplyDelete
  37. Gary Null is not prestigious company? He regularly publishes his research in Penthouse, one of the most popular and widely read journals of our time.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Oh no. Not again! Celia "Attention-Whore" Farber's Truth Barrier site is back up. .

    I love Clarkie's comment. Predictable- same structure:
    (1) I'm a big shot and important. I was a police officer.
    (2) I'm special

    (see below)


    "Celia... I am grateful that I have met at least ONE real investigative reporter and writer. As a marine and LA cop, I always appreciated courage and excellence. Indeed, it was you who introduced me to the most remarkable and spiritual investigation of my life. Thank you for reminding me of what courage, honor and integrity look like.

    Semper Fidelis!

    Clark

    ReplyDelete
  39. Don't forget pilot and scuba diver! Those talents were quite impressive in his affidavit for Farber's lawsuit! Well, unless you're the NY Supreme Court judge who had to read it, then, not so impressive!

    ReplyDelete
  40. That's right! He is Steven Seagal and Chuck Norris wrapped up in a 250lb doughy frame with reading glasses!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anyone know if the denialists had their little delusion-party on Dec 1?

    ReplyDelete
  42. They cancelled the conference due to economics. Seems like the financial backers, namely Robert Leppo, believes it is a better investment to donate to Michelle Bachman's Presidential run than paying a DC hotel to give David Rasnick a microphone for his typical pseudoscience rants and Duesberg's out of control self-stimulation.
    Too bad...we had planned a visit for this one (the return of Joe Newton).
    Oh well. Next time.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Doh!!!! I wanted to go! It would be a minimal cost for a comedy-fest!

    ReplyDelete
  44. AIDS patients are simply more CFS patients. And it already well-documented that HIV is not the cause of CFS/ME. The medical establishment will have you believe that Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is some sort of ‘mysterious illness,’ but it’s no mystery to me; CFS/ME leads to HIV-Negative AIDS, idiopathic CD lympocytopena (a clinical diagnosis that I possess). How can the orthodox AIDS establishment continue on with a stale "It's HIV" mantra when there are HIV-Negative AIDS cases dating back to 1992? While millions of ailing immunodeficient CFS/ME patients get belittled and neglected, very healthy HIV+ people are convinced to take a bunch of expensive, toxic medication. It's such a sham, and its so easy to see that the medical establishment simply has their paradigms (CFS, AIDS) backwards. I am living proof that CFS/ME patients are the real AIDS patients. And its not caused by HIV.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Maybe because most CFS patients don't have abnormally low levels of CD4+ T-cells. It's a shame, because it is an elegant theory, but there is no evidence that CFS and idiopathic CD4+ lympocytopenia are related.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Uhhhh - where to begin?

    The irony of your comment in a post below the article about the epitomization of AIDS-denial leading to death from AIDS for refusing treatment - that is sadly amusing.

    Your nonsense reveals you know nothing about biology. "HIV - negative AIDS?" What the heck are you talking about? There are many causes of immunodeficiency. Bone marrow transplant patients become immunodeficient. That doesn't mean they have AIDS.

    I'm not belittling you because of your condition.I reject your nonsense declarations of pseudoscience though - with no backup you blather about "HIV negative AIDS"

    Sure - all AIDS patients in sub-Saharan Africa are dying of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome! Right.....Antiretrovirals did nothing for them, right?

    Maybe you should take some basic science courses. Otherwise you easily fall prey to the likes of other scientific "geniuses" like Clark Baker.

    Of course - Kim Bannon and Christine Maggiore didn't have AIDS. They died of "stress." Farber's love-wave box would have cured them!

    ReplyDelete
  47. The AIDS Denialists are trying to defraud the system again by using a diagnosis they don't believe in to get money for a disease that doesn't exist! Over at ReThinking AIDS facebook, they are discussing how to get money from the gov't eventhough they admit to being in great health! What a bunch of hypocrites.

    Remember that this thing went down at QA.com a few years ago with Jonathan Barnett and Kari Stokely leading the way. If I remember correctly, Stokely claimed she would take the money until she died at 90 years old of old age. I guess reality has a way of getting even.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Victory over denialism is at hand!

    Friends, the denialists at rethinking are obviously rethinking their position. They are demoralized, sick, disorganized. Now is the time for a mop up operation!

    Let's make 2012 the end of Baker-Duesberg denialism. They gave it their best shot, they failed. People died. Baker is responsible for the deaths of the members of his group who died of the disease he claimed did not exist. As a marine, and a policeman, and a scuba driver, it is time for him to obey his own code and tell the truth.

    Every police-marine-scuba divemaster takes an oath: to admit like a man what he has done.

    Even Queen Gertrude would say that he must to his own self be true, then he canst not be false to any other man.

    To be, or not? Can Clark live with the sea of woe he has caused? Has he gone to "to gain a little patch of ground / That hath in it no profit but the name"

    Clark's ignorant armies have clashed by night. Now, I hope the denialists will change, and use all their energy to save the AIDS patients in their midst. It is time for Clarkists to choose life! Duesberg has lost. There is no reason for even one more person to needlessly die for the denialist lie.

    To the denialists: join us! you have nothing to lose but your Clarkist chains! Choose life!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Undercover Police Scuba DiversDecember 15, 2011 at 11:59 PM

    This is a consensus of the underwater Police scuba divers of Rio associated (UPSDRA).

    Until now, the brotherhood of UPSDRA has been a secret organization. But Clark Baker has forced us out of the closet. We denounce this bogus Police Rio loving scuba diver! He is not one of us. We renounce him.

    The UPSDRA is a force for good! We would never align with the evil forces of Gil and Farber and Duesberg. Real Scuba divers would never testify for Farber in court. In Rio, the reality of AIDS is too real. That is why the UPSDRA spends all our time in latex scuba gear!

    Seal team six has been busy, but rest assured, UPSDRA is ready to take Clark down. We are ready to storm his compound and rescue the poor deluded brainwashed denialists that Clark controls. Don't drink the Kool-Aid! We are on the way to rescue you.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Have you seen Clarkie's latest blatherings? He claims that weather forecasts are a conspiracy! He has taken "going off the deep end" to a fine art!

    ReplyDelete
  51. An uneducated climate-denying paranoid AIDS-Denialist Tea-Bagging homophobic delusional gigolo narcissist? Hilarious - Clark Baker makes an art out of being pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Yes, we dinosaurs all knew that climate change was a big hoax. After all, we ruled the planet for 160 Million years, and we knew the climate would never change. Until the very moment we went extinct, and you stupid mammals took over.

    Well, things are looking up! Now you humans are getting a taste of your own medicine! Keep denying that climate is changing. Keep denying the pandemic of AIDS! We love it! You will all be extinct like us!

    Yes, Clark is going back to the future! His efforts to abandon science will level the playing field. Don't learn from us dinosaurs. Instead, join us! Let's all be extinct together!

    That's why we are voting to make Clark an honorary dinosaur. His brain is even smaller than ours. He thinks just like us!

    ReplyDelete
  53. notElon: His latest "OMSJ post". Here:

    http://www.omsj.org/issues/global-warming/hurricane-experts-forecasts-too-unreliable

    ReplyDelete
  54. T. Rex, how could you rule the earth for 160 million years when the earth is only 6,000 years old?

    ReplyDelete
  55. notElon:
    It's Clarkie's latest post on his fake organization's website - he talks about forecasts being "unreliable." Actually, as usual, he just reposts some silly article. But it does demonstrate (once again) his taking of stupidity to an artistic level.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Exactly! Now you are thinking like a dinosaur. Metaphorically, you know we were the rulers for 160 M years. But, Clark's pea-brain dinosaur like mind warps the facts to the more convenient idea of 6,000 years. Brilliant! He knows better, but uses his lizard brain.

    Yes humans, abandon science, abandon real history. Make everything up! Science only slows down your invevitable extinction. And extinct you shall be with Clark as your leader. So, enjoy making everything up. Ignore AIDS. Pretend that denialist leaders are not dying like flies. Your extinction has started, so sit back and enjoy your ride to oblivion. Just be careful to preserve your DNA is a bit of amber. We may need to bring back a couple of human specimens for the zoo we are creating.

    Dinosaurs rock! Join us!

    ReplyDelete
  57. According the Rethinking AIDS Facebook group, there is now a movement to deny the existence of syphilis.

    " There is no history of infection. The tests mean nothing. The cause is uncertain. The clinical symptoms, if present, are not specific. No physician living can tell that his patient has syphilis." I challenge the entire medical world to prove that there ever has been, or is now, in any part of the world, a single case of the disease called "syphilis," as defined and described by "medical science;" I challenge them to prove that the whole thing is not a clever fabrication which has deluded even its fabricators


    HIV, then TB, now syphilis. What disease will they question next? I'd bet $5 on chlamydia. Any takers?

    ReplyDelete
  58. notElon:
    I think the best irony will be when they start claiming that retardation is just incredible genius.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Don't forget they also say that Polio never existed! Is it Janine Roberts who wrote some stupid book making that Polio claim? There are so many of these stupid idiots I can't keep them straight.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Yup, that was her.

    "It had been around for centuries and was long associated with metalworking"

    I had no idea all these people were blacksmiths.

    ReplyDelete
  61. What more proof does anyone need that HIV antibody tests can come up positive for almost any condition one has been exposed to according to the tests own literature. Ask for a pure virus test , that will shut the neysayers up. There isnt one.

    I was given Abacavir , DMP-266 and ddI for one night only , and it nearly killed me. The side effects were horrendous. What did the doctors do ? , they gave me an hiv clasification (CDC-4C2) of full blown aids because of the side effects of those drugs, google the classification , i had none of the aids defining illneses in the stage 4 classification for full blown aids. That was in october 1999. I then read in their next report in my files they wanted to administer Hydroxyurea and ddI to me. Hydroxyurea is a cancer fighting drug which can give rise to leukemia amongst other life threatening conditions. Those bastards where trying to give me aids. Thank fuck i told them where to go. Today , i have been off all meds for over twenty two months and ive never felt better or had a better quality of life since before being diagnosed in 1986.
    I dare you to publish this .
    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  62. So anecdotal evidence from an an unknown source defeats millions of referenced papers?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Who Took my Koolaid?December 27, 2011 at 8:22 PM

    I beleive the "Unknown" source is Andy Lindsay as he signed at the bottom of the entry.

    As for "Millions" of referenced papers, isn't that a slight exaggeration notElon?

    A particularly good example of AIDS "Science" is how scientists are now examining the use of Rapamycin for HIV infection as it has shown anti HIV properties in Vitro and in HIV mice stuides.

    For those who don't know Rapamycin, is licensed as an immune suppressing drug especially for liver transplant patients, it also specifically targets T4 cells. So whilst the viral load may come down the patient eventually dies but that will be due to advanced HIV disease or virologic failure or mutations of the HIV Genome and HIV's uncanny ability to mutate to defeat the wonder drugs blah blah blah blah. It could never ever be due to the drugs.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I can feel a mass Email coming on....., Was wondering if you could hook me up with the Email address for the American Association of Pschologists too please I'm sure they'll want in on this.

    hart.blanton@uconn.edu
    JEFFREY.FISHER@uconn.edu
    blair.t.johnson@uconn.edu
    DAVID.KENNY@uconn.edu
    colin.leach@uconn.edu
    CHARLES.LOWE@uconn.edu
    Kerry.L.Marsh@uconn.edu
    FELICIA.PRATTO@uconn.edu
    diane.quinn@uconn.edu
    REUBEN.BARON@uconn.edu
    mary.crawford@uconn.edu
    V.Bede.Agocha@uconn.edu
    tania.huedo-medina@uconn.edu
    robert.foels@uconn.edu
    lisaanne.eaton@gmail.com
    christopher.burrows@uconn.edu
    fouad.bou_zeineddine@uconn.edu
    atilla.cidam@uconn.edu
    randi.garcia@uconn.edu
    jessica.j.kang@uconn.edu
    jessica.lacroix@uconn.edu
    CARTER.LENNON@uconn.edu
    robert.low@uconn.edu
    justin.mahalak@uconn.edu
    kimberly.mcclure@uconn.edu
    benjamin.meagher@uconn.edu
    nicole.overstreet@uconn.edu
    jennifer.pellowski@uconn.edu
    laramie.smith@uconn.edu
    andrew.stewart@uconn.edu
    erin.strauts@uconn.edu

    The price of your censorship will be the direct marketing of your quality commentry to your peers. Here's a sample of famous Seth quotes, wonder what they'll make of them.

    "I never said Duesberg was a Nazi, just noted that his father was one"

    "Nevertheless, I am brushing up on my German so
    I can understand more of the side conversations."

    "I hope David Crowe sits on a toilet in bleeding anguishing screaming constipation, 10 days for every hour she lies in the hyperbaric chamber."

    "Ignore Duesberg-he is insane. I plan to watch Dr. Strangelove tonight...so much like Duesberg."

    "anti-establishment, paranoids....Duesberg, Rasnick, Bauer, Crowe, Farber, Bake, Liam... They are special.... Special Cases..."

    "JTD, I wonder why Mandela did not get 'AIDS' when he was brutalized in prison?"

    "Duesberg/Bauer/Crowe/Rasnick spit this crap into JB's mouth and he vomits it back."

    "Yep, Clark Baker, champion of justice and all around good guy! So how many old men did he beat up before the LAPD canned him?"

    "Clark is an asscrack. There is something wrong with anyone who listens to anything he says."

    "I think Henry is scared of increasing circumcision because he fears decapitation. Rightly so."

    "Henry Bauer is also upset because I say he is one of several old German men who have their heads up Peter Duesberg’s butt"

    "Bauer is really Austrian-born. His family left Austria when he was a young boy, so that must be why he fails to realize that Austria was incorporated into the Third Reich and ceased to exist as an independent state in 1938. From about when Bauer was born in 1931 (yes, that long ago) Austria was essentially Germany. Hitler himself was born in Braunau Am Austria. The truth is upsetting to Henry Bauer because he a Denialist and Denialists are anti-truth."

    "Duesberg Network which is almost entirely made up of German cronies and Berkeley sympathizers."

    "Yes, just like Holocaust Denialists."

    "Also, I am not sure I would say calling someone an asshole over and over is a smear campaign."

    "spreading misinformation, misusing science to promoting a personal agenda, using common pet mice in lab research, sexist/homophobic actions, harboring a fugitive"

    "So sad that Peter's following in Germany has to see this happening to him."

    "Now you sound more like Peter the Homophobic Duesberg. Or Clark the Internalized Homophobic Baker."

    ReplyDelete
  65. It's Time Seth....
    I think you are looking for the American Psychological Association not "the American Association of Pschologists". It would probably help if you spelled Psychologists correctly.
    You might also remind folks that many excellent Seth Quotes can be found in my book Denying AIDS - although I think they all have a copy.
    Thanks again for spreading my words.

    ReplyDelete
  66. So Seth's boss and colleagues actually knows what he says publicly? Color me amazed.

    We should probably protect your colleagues from the spambots that will now find all the email addresses, though.

    ReplyDelete
  67. And actually if you google ''American Association of Pschologists," the first link is the APA. But that would require doing research.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Those are some great quotes, Seth! I think your colleagues would enjoy them. I'm not sure why this person is anonymous...maybe even he/she is actually embarrassed by such stupid threats. Who am I fooling? This idiot is probably not capable of actual human emotions.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Oh,look,we got us another Emery Taylor(RIP),Cristine Maggiore(RIP) and Karri Stokely(RIP) aboard.

    I read you`r story over at David Crowe`s site,Andy Lindsay,and understand that you stopped you`r ARV`s in march 2010 after using them for years.

    Well,i really hope that you`r denial dont go as deep as with those other three that i mention earlier because im afraid that we will not know you for a very long time then.

    Maybe you do as the greek lady with the difficult name did and started ARV`s again when her health started falling apart.At least i hope you do.We had enough ignorant and desperate people dying in denial now.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Seth, there is a lot of crazy out there recently to write about:

    Jonathan Barnett is at it again at his site. He claims to have had several "out of body experiences"...one at a Radical Fairie Gathering! And another due to a seizure brought on by IV Vitamin C. And he did that same "treatment" two more times, each time complete with duplicate seizures! That's what I call "adverse events"!

    Clark Baker wrote about Flow Cytometry and it's hilarious! Really, it's sooooo stupid it boggles the mind. I have written one part of two parts so far at HIPTruth.

    Baker has also posted some ridiculous video interview of Dr. Nancy "Bigot" Banks in which she claims "most vaccines are useless"!

    And all sorts of crazy is busting out at RA Facebook page!

    The holidays are over, let's get back to the fun! :)

    ReplyDelete
  71. I liked that page of an HIV denier who argued with Baker and said that CD4 counts do prove something, so long as you look at long term trends. Course his long term trend was straight down, but what can you do?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Have you read about David Dean Smith, the HIV+ man in Michigan who turned himself in to police claiming he slept with 3,000 men and women trying to intentionally infect them with HIV?

    I wonder how long until Clark Baker sets him free? One day? Maybe two?

    Poor little Clarkie!

    ReplyDelete
  73. Seth, here's another great subject to post on:
    http://forums.questioningaids.com/showthread.php?t=7868

    The people at QA.com are wanting to fund their own experiments! That alone made me guffaw!

    But the real fun comes from Jonathan Barnett who has accessed the financials of RA and OMSJ from 2009. ReThinking AIDS lists all their donors. OMSJ however, only states he had almost $39,000.00 but does not say where it came from!

    Robert Leppo funded most of RA for the last three years to a tune of over 100K!

    I am tempted to give QA.com a few grand myself just to see what kind of "experiments" they would do! Can you imagine? IV Vitamin ZAPPER!
    hahhaahahaaaaaa

    ReplyDelete
  74. Happy New Year Lunatics !

    Andy Lindsay here , the only thing im denying is a bunch of psychopaths from making anymore money off of watching my health decline. Your all fuckin insane.

    Try telling Audrey Sorrano and Ozzy Osbourne and Tommy Morrison about the others , if theyr anything like me , they dont forget the faces of those that destroyed those lifes and their families lifes and the lifes of their friends. We know who you are , one day , someone will take pride in having your guts for garters and im going to be alive when that happens thanks to those you conspired to murder.

    ReplyDelete
  75. And another thing , belittling and suppressing verifiable information that rightfully belongs to the public, whose understanding and co-operation are essential for the control of this man-made menace to the health of the younger half of the world's population is nothing short of ignorance and disrespect for humnan life by a bunch of mind controlling psychopaths lead by greed and and an agenda to control population through propaganda, misinformation and life threatening drugs. You lot should be fucking ashamed of yourselves. Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  76. While I admit, if there was anyone who would make a garter out of someone's intestine, it would be Ozzy Osbourne, I never met him. So even though his drug-addled mind is great at remembering faces, I don't see any danger. Besides, he's doing fine career-wise, so I don't see how I destroyed his life.

    ReplyDelete
  77. The establishment you and others represent and their tests that dont detect what they say they detect nearly did though , the same as they did with countless others.
    There is maxim in law which states the burdeon of proof is on he who affirms and not he who denies.
    In that case , heres some proof for you denialists in the AIDS Inc camp; quote "
    A commercial enzyme immunoassay (EIA) kit was compared with an immunofluorescence test for the detection of antibodies directed against human T-cell lymphotropic virus type III (HTLV-III). The EIA kit is recommended for the screening of blood and plasma products only and is not suitable for diagnostic purposes because of the problem of nonspecific reactions. It is also recommended that the EIA kit not be used for screening immunoglobulin preparations for anti-HTLV-III antibodies because of the problem of false-positive reactions" unquote.
    There you are , deny your institutions own conclusions if you must but fuckin lay off those that never where informed of this. Your a bunch of no users who have nothing to give to the world at large except for heartache. I wouldnt be surprised if the majority of you had your sweeties taken off you at school ! Cetainly Geffen and Moore did by the way they conduct themselves and as for the fat ugly bastard that started this site , i can only imagine he tried to lure young boys with the sweeties he stole from the likes of the rest of you and was caught by a woman doing so and now he you and others exert your dissatisfaction towards women who literaly blow you all into the weeds. There isnt one of you who could stand and be counted as trying to help others. And history has and will continue to show this.
    Andy Lindsay .

    ReplyDelete
  78. Mr. Lindsay sounds like the lunatic. Did you trade your HAART in for some thorazine or lithium? Maybe you should consider some thorazine or lithium.

    ReplyDelete
  79. And to the fucker that hopes im around a little longer than friends of mine who died , who knows , because the agents of the greater good who supplied us with DNA terminating pills that kill us off know fine well there is no aftercare for the destruction of ones DNA . Especially since the DNA chain terminating drugs make their own DNA . So i guess ill die too , eventually , but at least ill die with dignity.
    Your a bunch of psychopathic Fuckers !
    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  80. @Andy Lindsay, I read your story on David Crowe's website:

    http://aras.ab.ca/articles/popular/andylindsay.html

    It seems to me that you think you were misdiagnosed with HIV because you had negative p24 antigen tests in 1992 and 1993, six years after your original diagnosis.

    Negative p24 antigen tests do not mean you don't have HIV. P24 antigen tests only come up positive when viral loads are very high. When viral loads are low to medium the p24 antigen test comes up negative.

    P24 antigen tests usually come up positive for a few weeks not long after infection and before antibodies are produced. After that the p24 antigen levels in the blood are usually too low for the test to pick up, and they typically remain like that for several years. Later, the viral load may increase again and p24 antigen becomes high enough to be detectable again.

    Back in 1992-3 viral load tests were not available, and doctors used p24 antigen tests as a crude substitute. A "negative" p24 antigen result meant "a low or medium viral load" and a "positive" p24 antigen meant "a very high viral load".

    P24 antigen tests aren't used much these days, except as part of the screening (4th generation ELISA or Ag/Ab Combo) tests. The reason they're used there is that for a week or so before antibodies can be detected shortly after infection the p24 antigen levels are usually very high. By using a test that looks for both antibodies and p24 antigen you can shorten the window period for the test.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_period

    ReplyDelete
  81. Another reason why p24 antigen tests are usually negative in people in the earliest years of HIV infection (once they're a few months past the seroconversion period) is that most of the p24 antigen in the blood is bound to p24 antibodies. Most p24 antigen tests can't detect the antigen if it's already bound to antibodies.

    Later in the course of the disease the total amount of p24 antigen not only tends to increase but the amount of antibody tends to fall away. However, even among people with AIDS there is only enough free p24 antigen to be detectable about half the time.

    Nowadays there are p24 antigen tests that first split the antigen from the antibody, making them a little more sensitive. But I don't believe they were in use in 1992 or 1993, and even those more sensitive tests still come up negative in about half of asymptomatic people with HIV.

    A good overview is here (although it's a little out of date now):

    http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb-02-02-02-02#S3.3X

    ReplyDelete
  82. Seems Andy has made the only sensible comments here for quite some time. Perhaps we should now hear from Truthy McTruthendeshong to give us his particular rant on how Clark Baker stole his sweeties too.

    Of Course $eth will deny the correlation between Todd and his new alter ego or will simply fail to publish this as he does so many countless times in direct contravention of his early promises to post everything, but hypocrisy is as hypocrisy does.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Ahhh - back to the fun!!! I guess the Denialists are crawling out of the woodwork again!
    Andy should hook up with the premier expert in his theory of conspiracy and loony-mongering based on uneducated blatherings: Clarkie Baker! The two will get along famously! They will start the superhero group "The Dynamic Duo of Narcissistic Lunacy"!!! I bet their "special power" will come from taking vitamin juice and sitting in a Celia Farber "love wave box" and then die prematurely.
    Sadly, this series then will only have one episode.
    But miraculously - Clarkie will find a new partner to do the same! And then his new superhero partner will die. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.

    ReplyDelete
  84. If i wasnt educated enough to know the first test i took was lousy and didnt mean a thing ,"A commercial enzyme immunoassay (EIA) kit was compared with an immunofluorescence test for the detection of antibodies directed against human T-cell lymphotropic virus type III (HTLV-III). The EIA kit is recommended for the screening of blood and plasma products only and is not suitable for diagnostic purposes because of the problem of nonspecific reactions. It is also recommended that the EIA kit not be used for screening immunoglobulin preparations for anti-HTLV-III antibodies because of the problem of false-positive reactions" unquote , im fuckin educated enough to know i was not informed about the validity of it now, and if i wasnt educated enough to know then that they needed my consent to take my blood and test it for virus (antigen is virus dumdums ) , then i sure as hell am now. And even if i never knew back then that they tested me negative for a so called virus that there is no cure for that kills of the immune system by producing antigen all the time until one has no immunity left to fight anything off , then i sure as hell am now knowing they hid those negative results. Go baffle somecunt that gives a shit about the shit you talk. There can be no antibody without the presence of an antigen ya fuckin bampots , and if i had one thats incurable , why the fuck wasnt it there and why the fuck didnt your pharma whores tell me ? When someone required all available data relating to testing and its denied , and they withheld results from tests , theres something far wrong . Especially when doctors can plainly see whats written in front of them. Your mob you protect clearly failed (again) in their duty of care . Go read a biology book to see how a virus works dumdum.

    ReplyDelete
  85. I love all the guys claiming Seth censors this blog when he publishes "sensible" comments attacking his religion, his assumed sexual orientation, and death threats.

    ReplyDelete
  86. And another thing , you all have plainly ignored the information i provided regarding the HTLV test above. Do you deny your own camps literature ? Of course you dont , you cant , you just choose to ignore facts.
    So how does one coming up with an orthodox fact and presenting that fact make one a denialist ? It doesnt. The denialist comes in and ignores that fact in favour of a belief . Its pretty clear to anyone reading and watching you lot operate that you all follow the beliefs and guidlines that are in every single pro aids organisation out there. Yet your pro aids organisations dont disclose facts , theyr hidden , from the limitations of the test kits, to the drugs which were never tested on a virus of any sort but still were given the marketing authority based on the opinion of those with the same beliefs, not to mention conflicts of interest.
    Religeon is used to control the masses and AIDS Inc is a religeon to you all , you all practice the same language of that religeon and it verges on sectarianism against the non-believers when those non-believers come up with facts and question those with the beliefs. So if the opinion of christians is that moses seperated the sea , then it must be correct if you believe it , because its the accepted opinion of your religeon. Even though nobody saw it happen. So who is in denial when one finds verifiable literature from manufacturers which come from the very sources you base your belief system upon ? Yep , all of you.
    In law , no one is bound to give information about things he is ignorant of , but everyone is bound to know that which he gives information about.
    The best one ive heard you lot come up with so far is that "the virus is very clever , it hides from the immune system" haha , really , you found it hiding out didnt you when the most sophisticated mechanism on the face of this earth couldnt. Do you realise how rediculous you all sound.
    As for all your deadly merchandise , there is no rule of law that protects a buyer who willfully closes his ears to information , or refuses to make inquiry when circumstances of grave suspicion imperatively demand it.
    In future , when your labelling those who make inquiries denialists because they found something out , just remember this , he who questions well learns well.
    What is not proved and what does not exist are the same , so as far as dissenters from your religeon on HIV/AIDS is concerned who can read , it is not a defect of the law , but of proof. To cling to an error , or defend an error when one has a reason to suspect it may be error , reveals a heart that does not fully love the truth for the truths sake. Knowledge is power ! People are waking up to the knowledge that has been suppressed by your religeon for years , and when it gets a grip , it wont be occupy wall street , it'll be occupy the front gardens of you lot with a lynch. It will be your turn to be terrified !
    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Ok, I found your rant online, during which you admit to invading a hospital, and threatening to call the police on the staff. All I can say is Real Life is not the Da Vinci Code, and you need to calm down.

    Aside from that, antigen is NOT virus. An antigen is a protein that antibodies respond to, and most viruses produce several. HIV is no exception. You seem to be under the misimpression that all tests are testing for the same thing.

    Specifically, you were tested for the HepB surface antigen and found negative, and for antibodies against two different HepB antigens and found positive. This means that you were exposed to Hepatitis B, and probably recovered from it.

    You also tested positive for some antibody against some HIV antigen, but you don't list enough details for me to say anything about that. The plasma antigen test in 1993 was to test for the presence of loose p24 in the blood. p24 is the HIV capsid protein and it is found buried in the virus. When HIV replicates and buds out of cells, it produces p24 in excess, and it is this loose, excess, p24 that the antigen test detects. A negative test either means that you were never exposed to p24, (unlikely as you had several other positive HIV tests) or it means that the immune system is vigorously responding to p24 and binding the loose protein in the blood. That is what Snout tried to tell you.

    The PCR test is a rough estimation of how much viral replication is going on in the blood. It tests for the amount of viral nucleic acid in the blood. You can see that this was high before you started the medicine, and it was much lower right before you stopped the medicine.

    The tests for cytomegalovirus show that you were exposed to it, also, but that in 1999, you were keeping it under control. Cytomegalovirus is a herpesvirus, so it is lurking in your cells somewhere.

    The frequent tests for Hepatitis C, which you seem to claim also doesn't exist, shows that you do have a chronic Hepatitis C infection which you should probably get treated, as the doctor told you, before you threatened to call the police on her staff.

    Also in you email, you could not bother to spell your doctor's name (Leen, not some long name like Zabatinsky) correctly, and frankly between the careless spelling and frequent threats, you come off as a kook. I am not surprised you were ignored.

    ReplyDelete
  88. "Come across as a kook." Demonstrably a kook! Too bad the kook won't get the medical care for HIV and Hep C that the kook should get. Now the kook is on the path to become one of the long list of dead kooks that could have lived.
    Cytomegalovirus. Heb B. Hep C. HIV. Wow - pretty dirty. Actually...kooky.

    ReplyDelete
  89. First of all i had an appointment , hardly an invasion.
    Secondly , actually , an antigen is the capsid of a virus, without which , there would be no virus.
    I dont know what school you went to but im sitting here with a thesis of the automatic control of the radioimmunoassay process of hormone detection ,1984 ,and it clearly states ;
    " When a substance, taken from a donor species(eg a man), is transferred to a recipient species (eg a rabbit), the recipient may develop antibodies against the substance. If this phenomenon takes place , the substance is said to be immunogenic between the species.

    When a particular substance is immunogenic with another species , the antibodies developed by the recipient will react with the foreign substance to form antigen-antibody (Ag;Ab) complexes. In this context therefor , we can say that the particular substance is an antigen to the antibodies produced by the recipient.

    It is possible to isolate particular antigens from the body, and label them with a tracer. Antibodies may also be isolated from foreign species".

    There you have it , so if theres no fuckin antigen in the first place then there wouldnt be an antibody to that antigen and there certainly wouldnt be any infectious deadly virus if theres no antigen and since the HTLV test millions took was not specific then it was invalid for the detection of a specific antibody to a so called deadly virus (antigen)that kills off the immune system.

    All the details listed are actual data from the hospital, details i had to get a lawyer to get for me because those that invaded my life with the same bullshit you spew out would not give me them when requested through the correct channels.

    Go back to school sonny.

    ReplyDelete
  90. And i keep the CMV under control the same way 95% of the population of children do around the world , with a good immune system !

    ReplyDelete
  91. Furthermore ,specifically, I tested positive on the "NON SPECIFIC" HTLV 3 test in 1985 for more than one reason , that being i was an IV drug user , ive had jaundice , ive been innoculated against TB , etc,etc,etc , and the data your lot provided concurs with that. Just as it did in the fiasco with Ozzy Osbourne and countless pregnant women.

    Specifically , i tested negative for HIV in the blood , 3 times , because i never had an infectious virus in the first place , which would have been rampant by 1992/93. In fact i was in great health.

    Regarding viral load which you mention , as was already proved by the above , what was obviously being measured was the antibodies in my blood , and if you look at the data , you will clearly see that the chemotherapy started to eradicate my immune system.

    The data i have tells me your fucked pal , you have nothing reliable to go on , especially since all the data i requested was kept from me, which in itself tells me that your organisation you represent are a bunch of fuckin psychopaths.

    As for Andre Davis , his team fucked up by not producing evidence in court , that and the fact they consented to a statute which only has the force of law by the consent of the governed.

    Go figure .

    ReplyDelete
  92. Andy, Hello.. Almost all of this is true but very little if any is new. Along with a very small bunch of highly professional expert colleagues and some reputable journalists, I have been providing evidence about the verifiable flaws in the HIV hypothesis ever since 1983 when, at the request of WHO, I began OFFICIALLY to monitor and analyse factual data and medical evidence about the outbreak which began in the USA, spread on a lesser scale in Europe and erupted uncontrollably in sub\saharan AFRICA from about 1990 onward. All this is a matter of record and all, repeat ALL the editors of mainline professional journals, the Press, BBC and all the main national and international health authorities know it. Talk to them, not to me because if I try to talk to them even about farming, they shut up like clams, or trusted bankers - or Presidents of Royal Colleges or learned Societies. Try the Royal Society, the BMJ, the CMO's but beware of activists who are exploiting doubts and hard cases. Confine your questions to the validity of the tests and registrations eg in Africa. You might find that some of those who defend the HIV hypothesis have conflicts of interest. I expect you know about secret fears eg of withdrawal of benefits, as in the banking scandal.
    Try also the Scotsman, TIMES (NY and London) etc. Quote me if you wish, but let me know to whom, and the outcome.. With best wishes, Gordon Stewart."

    ReplyDelete
  93. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  94. "Regarding viral load which you mention , as was already proved by the above , what was obviously being measured was the antibodies in my blood"

    Um, no. Because nucleic acid ≠ antibody. Honestly, since your friend Kary Mullis invented the PCR test, I would have thought you'd give it more credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Gordon Stewart, your "medical advice" is homicidally negligent.

    Here we have a guy with two life-threatening medical conditions, and your response is to see him as further fodder to exploit for your insane cult.

    You are a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Actually ,the Gordon Stewart reply was in response to this below after it was copied to him by mistake,but i thought his words were relevant to the crap you lot are spewing out. Just to confirm what Gordon Stewart was on about , heres the link below;

    http://www.chicagolandsportsradio.com/NEWS-FLASH---HIV-Test-Victim--Tommy--The--/10534992

    Theres a grand bit about Karri Mullis's PCR test in there too and the viral load of crap you lot keep going on about.

    As for your post Snout , you obviously can not distinguish between opinions and advice . Gordons opinions only suited your lot when the cash comes rolling in , i think he hinted in there at the loss of benefits , and i suppose as your a little foot soldier Snout that youd be right to be worried of having your daily fix taken away from you. Poor Snout. Never mind , you can always have some of my old toxic HAART to keep your addiction going , it might even cure the brain bug youv got from blowing that other piece of shit CJD Spongey or whatever his name is , i cant keep up with all the fake namess you have , but not to worry , we know who you are after we investigated you from the last attack .

    ReplyDelete
  97. I just remembered , heres another wee one fur you notElton and certainly notAble, read this one and weep , youl have heard of this lot, the "ASCLS Consumer Panel Inquiry HIV"? ,well i sent them some "specific" questions. Here is their reply, note how the first question was totally ignored in favour of the common purpose answer;

    Thank you for asking your question at the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) web site. The questions posted here are answered by a group of laboratory professionals from across the United States. We volunteer to help patients and their families understand laboratory tests and their interpretation.

    I will try to answer your questions as best as I can without going into too much detail or leaving out too much. Please see below.

    Who , where and when isolated HIV and how was this done ?

    HIV is transmitted through infected bodily fluids. Blood, semen, vaginal fluid are the most common and infectious fluids HIV has been isolated from. Saliva can also transmit the virus, but only if there are open sores in the mouth. Transmission is from injection drug use, sexual intercourse, body fluid contamination (needle stick or blood spill on open wound) or crossing the placenta during pregnancy. Isolation is done by polymerase chain reaction tests, (PCR) which are tests looking specifically for HIV viral RNA; the virus' genetic material. Blood or saliva can be tested for antibodies as well. Antibodies are proteins your body makes in response to an infection; it is what fights the infection. The presence of these, or the HIV viral RNA would indicate infection. Samples are taken either by a health care provider or a phlebotomist which are then transferred to a clinical laboratory for testing.

    Are these tests you speak of specific to HIV ?

    These tests are specific to HIV. The antibody test does have some chance of a false positive as there are other antibodies that may cross-react, but this is rare. The viral tests are more specific to HIV.

    Do they require confirmitory testing ?
    Yes, there are confirmatory testing. The most common confirmatory testing after an antibody test is called the HIV Western Blot. This test looks for specific proteins the virus makes. If positive for some or all of the these proteins, the result is confirmed.

    What is the HIV Antigen ?
    The HIV antigen is a piece of the HIV virus that causes your body to make antibodies; it is what your body recognizes as foreign and starts to attack.

    What does it mean if a blood test is HIV Antigen positive ?
    A positive HIV antigen test would indicate there is HIV present in your body and a confirmatory test should be performed in order to ensure accurate results.

    What does it mean if a blood test is HIV Antigen negative ?
    A negative HIV antigen result would indicate there is no HIV virus circulating in your body at the time of the test.

    I hope this information is help. Please visit our site if you have any further questions.

    Take care,
    James March-Mistler


    Now i dont know about you lot , but do you think the HIV is hiding when i asked him that last question , and if it is , how do you know it is hiding if you cant find it ? I mean , if you cant find it , there would be no antibody to it because there is no cure for your "infectious virus" . hahaha Your a bunch of fannies !
    Am outa here , am away to check out the fodder of having a better quality of life since going through the horrendous withdrawals of the drugs your cult leaders marketed unlawfully which nearly killed me !

    Over and out ,
    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  98. While you little foot soldiers are running around doing John P Moore and Nathan Geffens common purpose work , just remember this , he who does not forbid a crime while he may, sanctions it.
    But as luck would have it for you little foot soldiers ,those sinning secretly are punished more severely than those sinning openly.

    A.L.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Just for you notElton but notThatclever and for the rest of you little foot soldiers.
    This is what all Aids Inc DNA chain terminating drugs terminate ;

    http://www.chem4kids.com/files/bio_nucleicacids.html

    Honestly notElton but notThatclever ,your "medical advice" is homicidally negligent .

    A.L

    ReplyDelete
  100. Andy, you tell us that you received the following advice from the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science:

    "What does it mean if a blood test is HIV Antigen negative ?
    A negative HIV antigen result would indicate there is no HIV virus circulating in your body at the time of the test."


    If you have accurately and completely quoted the advice you got from the ASCLS then there are no two ways about it - the advice they gave you was dead wrong. Most people who have HIV circulating in their bodies at any one time will test negative on p24 antigen tests.

    The information that notElon has provided you is quite correct: the only thing I would quibble with is that your test results posted on David Crowe's website indicate a past infection with hepatitis B. The results you have provided (positive hepatitis B surface antibodies - twice - but no result for core antibodies) may be from a past resolved hepatitis B infection or they might be the result of vaccination against hepatitis B.

    I doubt you will accept my advice, and in a way that's kind of sensible given that I'm an anonymous internet commenter on a blog. However what I suggest is this: Talk to people face to face and not on the internet. Talk to people who are familiar with your complete medical history and who have recognised qualifications, training and experience in the areas of medical science that are relevant to your concerns.

    You are of course free to make your own decisions about what advice and treatments you will and won't accept, but you are more likely to get the accurate information you need to make informed choices if you tone down the belligerence a touch.





    If you have correctly and completely reported the

    ReplyDelete
  101. Noted how the administrator of this site didnt publish the Tommy Morrison link i sent with all the data on the test kits.

    I guess it didnt suit your common purpose agenda Seth.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Wow - Mr. Andy (anonymous)!

    Your rants solidify you as a true kook! No wonder you are ignored! Perhaps all the drugs, Hep B, CMV, and HIV are affecting your mind?

    Maybe you have some neurosyphilis as well? Is that also a scam? What about cancer? A scam of the pharmaceutical companies?
    I better turn the kook-alarm off now - it is blaringly loud.

    ReplyDelete
  103. If I have accurately and completely quoted the advice I got from the ASCLS then there are no two ways about it - the advice they gave me was dead wrong ! Oh really ??? THEN THAT MAKES YOU THE DENIALIST .

    James March-Mistler, BS, CLS also adds;

    Thank you for asking your questions at the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) web site. The questions posted here are answered by a group of laboratory professionals from across the United States. We volunteer to help patients and their families understand laboratory tests and their interpretation.

    Thank you again for using the ASCLS Consumer Information Web Page. As a member of this profession, I am pleased to represent thousands of clinical laboratory scientists who perform millions of laboratory tests yearly. The clinical laboratory is composed of several subspecialty areas: Chemistry, Hematology, Immunology, Microbiology, & Transfusion Services, and provides over 70% of the objective data that physicians need for accurate diagnosis and treatment.

    James March-Mistler, BS, CLSASCLS Response Team


    Snout , your obviously more eminent than Mr Misteler so why dont you tell the ASCLS who represent the likes of Seth Kalichman,John P Moore , Nathan Geffen and all the rest of them that they are all dead wrong . You obviously know a great deal more than them.

    As for you Kralc Rekab , (what were your parents thoinking about when they gave you that name ?) , actual data ive provided from your very own AIDS Inc orthodoxy movement is now starting to backfire on the lot of you and your house of cards is beginning to crumble . Anyone reading this blog can see that.

    When you lot are presented with your own facts you dismiss them and attack others because the truth hurts. Perhaps if you could accept your own data the same as Rodney Richards has then youd be able to live with yourselves and acctualy help others instead of destroying their lifes with your insane drivel.

    Its been entertaining.
    Andy Lindsay. (not annonymous , not a fiction )

    p.s. If anyone of you ever get accused of an HIV crime , if you dont like Clark then get in touch and ill get you off in court , its not rocket science :-)

    ReplyDelete
  104. A quote from Seth Kalichman, "combination antiretroviral therapy brought new life to HIV-positive people who thought they had none left. " unquote.

    Actually , all my friends who had a life before starting therapy died from the toxic side effects of that combination antiretroviral therapy and i almost died from them too. These drugs slowly debilitated my health over the course of twelve years . I stopped taking them and my health gradually improved after suffering the horrendous mental and physical withdrawal symptoms.

    By stopping those drugs and not listening to those very psychopaths pushing them, this clearly brought back the quality of life i enjoyed before being pressurised into taking them.

    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Look, I don't know the context of what you told Mr. March-Mistler, but I do know that Snout is right. From your laboratory results, you clearly have HIV. The negative p24 test is indeed normal and expected post-window period. If you don't believe him on the HIV, at least believe him on the Hepatitis C. PCR doesn't lie. Fact is you have RNA from two different chronic viruses running through your veins, and you had less of it while on the anti-virals. If you want to keep it that way, stay on them.

    ReplyDelete
  106. I know Andy - Clark Baker has an esteemed post office box!

    I too wonder why my parents gave me the name Kralc Rekab! I also wonder why Snout's parents gave him the name "Snout" and what an odd legal name "notElon" is as well! "Truthy McTruthenstein" is also a weird name.

    You just made me laugh so much Andy!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  107. @ james Murtagh , but you were booted out of your own society for your involvement in fraud , it was you who was Guilty Guilty Guilty.

    Clark Baker now resides as the secretary and treasurer on the board of directors at The Sewmmelweis Society International.

    ReplyDelete
  108. @ notElton but notThatclever , "Look, I don't know the context of what you told Mr. March-Mistler" ?
    I didnt tell him anything. I asked the ASCLS a few specific questions as you can see below , and he replied on their behalf. Cant you read ? The questions were mine , the answers are theirs.

    Thank you for asking your question at the American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science (ASCLS) web site. The questions posted here are answered by a group of laboratory professionals from across the United States. We volunteer to help patients and their families understand laboratory tests and their interpretation.

    I will try to answer your questions as best as I can without going into too much detail or leaving out too much. Please see below.

    Who , where and when isolated HIV and how was this done ?

    HIV is transmitted through infected bodily fluids. Blood, semen, vaginal fluid are the most common and infectious fluids HIV has been isolated from. Saliva can also transmit the virus, but only if there are open sores in the mouth. Transmission is from injection drug use, sexual intercourse, body fluid contamination (needle stick or blood spill on open wound) or crossing the placenta during pregnancy. Isolation is done by polymerase chain reaction tests, (PCR) which are tests looking specifically for HIV viral RNA; the virus' genetic material. Blood or saliva can be tested for antibodies as well. Antibodies are proteins your body makes in response to an infection; it is what fights the infection. The presence of these, or the HIV viral RNA would indicate infection. Samples are taken either by a health care provider or a phlebotomist which are then transferred to a clinical laboratory for testing.

    Are these tests you speak of specific to HIV ?

    These tests are specific to HIV. The antibody test does have some chance of a false positive as there are other antibodies that may cross-react, but this is rare. The viral tests are more specific to HIV.

    Do they require confirmitory testing ?
    Yes, there are confirmatory testing. The most common confirmatory testing after an antibody test is called the HIV Western Blot. This test looks for specific proteins the virus makes. If positive for some or all of the these proteins, the result is confirmed.

    What is the HIV Antigen ?
    The HIV antigen is a piece of the HIV virus that causes your body to make antibodies; it is what your body recognizes as foreign and starts to attack.

    What does it mean if a blood test is HIV Antigen positive ?
    A positive HIV antigen test would indicate there is HIV present in your body and a confirmatory test should be performed in order to ensure accurate results.

    What does it mean if a blood test is HIV Antigen negative ?
    A negative HIV antigen result would indicate there is no HIV virus circulating in your body at the time of the test.

    I hope this information is help. Please visit our site if you have any further questions.

    Take care,
    James March-Mistler

    Again , i dont see how you can adhere to the phantasy i told Mr Mistler anything or that i have a virus circulating when the data has been provided that says otherwise.

    Your steaming pal.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Basically , AIDS Inc is busted !!! And your wee excuse of inventing a virus is busted too and its hitting the headlines for all and sundry to see , worldwide !!!!

    The money in fines should go to giving fresh water ,nutrition and sanitation to those in Africa. (And to feed those of you who'll end up behind bars while your getting raped and terrorised) (because we have a conscience)

    ReplyDelete
  110. @Anonymous:

    What a prestigious position Clarkie holds! Such a prestigious society!

    ReplyDelete
  111. @ steaming pile:

    If you have any doubt, I'm sure you can find a local clinic willing to test you for HIV for free. Then you can confirm your diagnosis.

    I hope you are taking measures to control the various diseases you seem to have contracted.

    Have a great day!

    ReplyDelete
  112. I concur with you Kralc , he obviously did a damn good job if he was offered and now holds such a position on such a society !

    ReplyDelete
  113. I wrote this ode , I call it FAIL.

    "HIV sat on a wall ,
    HIV had a great fall,
    All the HIV soldiers and psychotic men,
    Couldnt put HIV together again".

    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Well at least there is one person who thinks Clark Baker could do a good job at something. That's a start, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  115. I call this one NOUT !

    "There was a wee soldier called Snout,
    He never knew much about nout,
    He screems like a pharma whore
    Aout p.24,
    But in reality it probably was gout !"

    Andy Lindsay

    ReplyDelete
  116. Heres the beauty of the arv drugs , they terminate your DNA , there is no aftercare for the side effects from the health care providers other than take more of the same drugs.

    MADNESS !!!

    ReplyDelete
  117. I don't think you know what "Terminate your DNA" actually means. If you mean nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors inhibit DNA polymerase and mitochondrial DNA polymerase as well as reverse transcriptase, this is true but the DNA polymerases have much lower affinities to the drug. DNA polymerase also has the ability to remove the inhibitor and continue transcription. The binding affinity is something like 2000 times lower to DNA polymerase than to reverse transcriptase.

    If you mean they destroy DNA, they don't do that.

    The other antivirals use a completely different mechanism, and have no effect on DNA polymerase whatsoever.

    Also aout and nout aren't words. You can't make up new rhymes just cause you are bad at limericks.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Ye ken , jis cos a kin write the way a speak in a Scotch tongue disny mean thur no words.

    And if the pulling one up on spelling is the best ye kin dae then ye really ur fucked.


    By the way , the drugs fuck yer DNA , they interfere wae the building blocks of life as ive demonstrated above in a link just fur you.

    What a want tae ken is , Is there any way of reversing the effects of the DNA "CHAIN TERMINATING" drugs ? Is there any after-care for the ones who suffer the horrendous effects of the DNA chain terminators and the effects this has on the body ?

    I ask this not as a dissident , but as a human being.

    Anyone ?

    ReplyDelete
  119. There are no effects to reverse. They interrupt the TRANSCRIPTION of new DNA. They do NOTHING to existing DNA. You have no idea what they actually do, do you? Give me the mechanism of your supposed DNA destruction.

    ReplyDelete
  120. I don't think you know what "CHAIN TERMINATING" means. Nucleoside analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitors stop transcription of new DNA. They don't degrade existing DNA. If you don't take them, no replication is stopped, viral or cellular. The side effects are temporary.

    What do you think they actually do? Give me your purported mechanism, and I can go through it with you. Can you give me any evidence of the lasting side effects you think they cause?

    ReplyDelete
  121. "The side effects are temporary."

    Death is hardly a temporary situation you moron.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure why you sent me the link, when the only mention of death was a severe allergic reaction to a drug I wasn't talking about. But thanks for proving my point.

      Delete
  122. Lasting side effects. Liver failure leading to death. Lactic Acidosis leading to death. Lypodystrophy. Cell death. Oxidative stress. Heptatic liver. Do you want me to go on ? Withdrawal symptoms include suicidal thoughts amongs other things ive mentioned in my youtube videos.

    @ Elons Gran . You said it all. Thankyou.

    Look at this fantastic link below were Snout gets owned yet again.

    http://www.pharmaphorum.com/2011/12/01/hiv-aids-statistics-in-south-africa-and-the-possible-implications-for-the-tx-and-dx-industries-part-1/

    Andy Lindsay.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Looks like all the flatearthers have been truly flattened , my work is done here.

    And , good day to ya Kralc if your reading this. See ya in the blogusphere dude ;-)

    Andreas Lindseas

    ReplyDelete
  124. Bibi & Celia Farber stumping for Ron Paul:

    http://www.nextworldtv.com/videos/enlightened-simplicity/ron-paul-on-health-freedom.html

    ReplyDelete