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

johnburgin at worldnet.att.net johnburgin at worldnet.att.net
Tue Nov 3 19:51:28 EST 1998


Carlton, I repeat, you suck big time.  You will never understand that
life is not in
a test tube.  When you have the time(which obviously you do because
you're sending
pointless emails and answering newsgroup messages with individuals who
don't give a
shit about what you say or think), read about the story involving the
Maine mother
who won her court fight against HIV doctors.  Her name is Valerie
Emerson, 27.  When
there is a basic disagreement in ideology, as there is with you and
me, there can be
no reason, or proof that will satisfy either of us.  I assure you, if
I thought, for
a moment, that there was any validity in the "research" that you do or
the argument
that you have, I would have the time, intellect and resources to
understand.  But,
your belief is motivated by money and career advancement.  You
philistines are all
alike.  But, just because you seem slow at understanding where I stand
on things:
1)There is no relevance in the argument that you seem to want to
pursue about
antibodies producing a life long immunity to disease.  There are
instances when we
lose immunity over time  with little or no reexposure to the antigen
for a
significant period of time.  These "revaccinations" are called booster
injections(hepatitis b and tetanus).  However, I stand by my
statement, there must be
immunity with antibody formation, at least in the immediate(I consider
years) term.
That is why HIV, cannot cause AIDS. Especially if one is constantly
"reexposed" to
the antigen by a "mutant" strain.   What one is doing at the time we
are "diagnosed"
HIV + makes all the difference.  If our immune system is all fucked up
because of IV
or oral drugs(as in 90% of the cases of AIDS), that has nothing to do
with HIV.  If
some lameass physician places an HIV+ person on AZT monotherapy,
Cocktail therapy or
whatever the poison du jour is, that will certainly not encourage the
immune system
to flourish.  As a matter of natural progression with poisons, the
individual will
eventually succumb or become so sick that they will be forced to stop
taking it.  You
will note that in the accompanying article.
2)Enhancing antibodies, I don't care if you find fifty thousand
references to them.
My point was and still is, they don't make a difference.  There are
some things that
I trust to others, information on enhancing antibodies from people
that I respect
would be in line. If pathologists don't use them or haven't heard of
them, why in the
crap should I worry about it?  You're an epicyclist with spin that is
so
unbelieveably incredible that you're getting like Clinton, you can't
even tell
yourself when you're lying.
3)Nucleosides, AZT in particular, I have demonstrated, have been
reduced in dosage
from the monotherapy levels, but not enough(zero is the correct
amount).  If I gave
you a hundred case studies it wouldn't change your mind that higher
amounts were
given before the PI's came along.  You've already shown that by the
ones that I have
indicated.
You don't have a conscience.  You never will.  I hope that when the
scientific world
has to pay for their arrogance and iatrogenicide, you will be the
first in line to
pay and I will be in the front row watching(I'll be the one with the
bag of
popcorn).  As I've said before, the truth is like an airplane, it has
to land
sometime.

                                Letter from Valerie Emerson
from the October issue of Reappraising AIDS, 1998

Dear David Rasnick:
    There are no words strong enough for me to express the depth of my
gratitude to
you.  My son has a new lease on life now thanks to you and all my
other supporters.
    My daughter Tia was sick before she took AZT, but after she
started taking it she
went downhill fast.  I asked about all the new problems that suddenly
appeared along
with it.  The answer  to all of my questions was --HIV.
    My son NIkolas was nowhere as sick as Tia had been, so when he got
worse while
taking AZT, it was obviously the AZT, not HIV.
    I knew little then about HIV and AIDS, just what the doctors told
me.
    I read Duesberg's article, "With Therapies Like This, Who Needs
Disease?"  That
is what finally convinced me 100% that my ideas weren't ludicrous.
Duesberg writes
about Cheryl Nagel's baby girl Lindsey, and compares her with Doug and
Nancy Simon's
daughter, Candice.  if you look at my two children and those two
children, the
experiences are exactly the same.  That was the first time I had any
evidence backing
my ideas about these drugs.  it felt so good to realize that I was not
alone with my
ideas, that I was not "making up notions to disregard AIDS" as I had
been told.
    I am just a country girl and mother.  The only education I have is
I graduated
from high school with honors. if I can come up with the same
conclusions that you and
Dr Duesberg and Dr Giraldo have with all your expertise, why is it so
hard for
everyone else?  To me it is as clear as black and white based on my
experience and
the limited amount of research I've been able to do.  Why do doctors
with all this
information at easy access so adamantly reject your ideas?  Yours is
the only
conclusion that makes any sense at all.
    You and Dr Giraldo are the first to accept my beliefs without
question. You gave
me the self confidence I needed to get through this court battle.  I
was so scared my
son's life was going to be sacrificed just like Tia's, for a bad idea.
As the judge
wrote, "She feels that she has willingly and in good faith surrendered
up the life of
one child to the best treatment medicine has to offer and does not
want to do the
same with the next."  He also wrote: "Dr McIntosh best sums up the
medical
observation of having to suffer a terminal illness by statin that all
people suffer
from the terminal illness called life.
    Awesome judge--I think!
    His decision has set a precedent that will help other parents
protect their
children from the HIV doctors.  But it can't help them if they don't
know about it.
This is why I speak to reporters every chance I get.  This is the way
I can help
others, the way you and Dr Giraldo and Hillary Billings helped me.  I
feel it is my
duty as a human being, my "calling".
    I can remember my grandmother sitting in the kitchen on the old
homestead peeling
apples for an apple pie. She said to me, "Val, for everything in life
there is a
purpose--we may never know what that purpose is, but God has a purpose
for everything
in life."  I believe the purpose of my family's ordeal is to help save
others to
live.  This eases the pain in my life, and makes me welcome it.
    Thank you so much for enriching my life.  You and Dr Giraldo are
my heroes.
Please tell Dr Duesberg how much he has helped.  If it wasn't for
doctors like you
three , my child might be on death's door right now.  I cannot express
the depths of
my gratitude.
    Sincerely,  Valerie Emerson

This, Carlton, is life outside of the test tube.  You suck bigtime. jb



On 2 Nov 1998 20:36:17 GMT, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton
Hogan) wrote:

>In article <363a015d.328914173 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> <johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>On Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:58:55 -0700, marnix at u.washington.edu (Marnix L.
>>Bosch) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <363928d8.273477005 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>>johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:46:20 -0700, marnix at u.washington.edu (Marnix L.
>>>> Bosch) wrote:
>>>
>>>> >The point you were trying to make was that presence of antibodies
>>>> >signified protection. You were shown to be wrong. Anything else you can't
>>>> >explain ? 
>>>>
>>>> Marnix, Marnix, Marnix.  What have I been shown wrong for?  
>>>
>>>see above
>>I repeat, where have I been wrong?  I said that you can't have it both
>>ways.  You can't use the immunity defense when things work and forget
>>about it when things don't.  I repeat, what will the HIV serologic
>>status be for a person "immunized" against "a" strain of HIV?
>
>I really don't have the time for this crap anymore. I just keep 
>correcting you so that, god forbid, some vulnerable, just-tested-
>positive person doesn't stumble in to this group and hear all these 
>lies unanswered.
>
>I will make this brief:
>1.Antibodies are to antigen, not to whole microorganisms. There is not 
>"a" HIVantibody, but rather Abs to gp120, gp41, p24, p17 etc. etc.
>
>2. Abs are not the be-all and end-all of the immune system - in the case
>of HIV (and most other obligate intercellulars) cell mediated
>immunity is much more critical.
>
>3. Nobody has ever been immunized with "a" strain of HIV. Vaccines
>use recombinantly created antigen, or stripped down denatured HIV,
>both with a variety of adjuvants. Nobody has ever been inoculated
>with whole HIV (living or dead) as the risk is simply too high.
>
>Take your meds.
>
>Carlton




More information about the Immuno mailing list