"AIDS Treatment News" online * New Issue #302 (searchable/indexed)

johnburgin at worldnet.att.net johnburgin at worldnet.att.net
Tue Nov 3 18:57:50 EST 1998


On 2 Nov 1998 19:37:52 GMT, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton
Hogan) wrote:

>In article <36367faa.99068159 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> <johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:11:36 -0700, marnix at u.washington.edu (Marnix L.
>>Bosch) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <36364960.85168152 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>>johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 27 Oct 1998 17:49:13 GMT, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton
>>>> Hogan) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> >
>>>> >You are a silly and amazingly ignorant man. In the below you state:
>>>> >
>>>> >">If, assuming that you are correct, which I don't believe, that
>>>> >>antibodies do "not" always mean that you have conquered infection, as
>>>> >>I stated before, how can you arbitrarily recommend using them to
>>>> >>signify protection one time(as with prophylactic vaccination against
>>>> >>Hepatitis B and not with HIV?  What, please tell me, would an
>>>> >>individual "vaccinated" against HIV present as proof of immunization?
>>>> >>He would be HIV + of course!  Again, are these "non-neutralizing"
>>>> >>antibodies in the latter case or neutralizing antibodies in the first
>>>> >>case?"
>>>> >
>>>> >Your stupidity is amazing. I never have said that I "reccomend using them
>>>> >to signify protection". 
>>>> I never said that YOU did.  You don't treat patients, remember?
>>>> Not only are you a pompous ass, you're a defensive pompous ass.  Talk
>>>> to me, us, about "enhancing" antibodies.  A few of my other ignorant
>>>> medical colleagues, including 2 board certified medical pathologist
>>>> and a molecular biologist are laughing their asses off at your
>>>> bullshit.  Do you really believe that because you say something in
>>>> scientific jargon that people believe it?  If they can't understand
>>>> what you are saying, and they don't know who you are, why should they
>>>> believe you?  Come on, talk to us all, o.k., just me about "enhancing"
>>>> antibodies.  Make your case.  No references to medline searches.  They
>>>> don't bring up the term. 
>>>
>>>PubMed search: enhancing antibodies: 421 hits; enhancing antibodies AND
>>>HIV: 43 hits. 
>>>
>>>> MY stupidity is amazing?  
>>>
>>>Indeed
>>Give us a few sites to get started, big boy. jb
>
>Can't you just be a man, and admit you are wrong? Such realistic humility
>is the first step to learning.
Can't you just agree to a one on one debate with someone like Rasnick
or Duesberg that will cut your balls off?jb
>
>Carlton




More information about the Immuno mailing list