On 13 Oct 98 18:58:33 EDT, holzmr01 at mcrcr6.med.nyu.edu (ROBERT S.
HOLZMAN) wrote:
>In article <7000vc$k0o$1 at news1.tc.umn.edu>, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton Hogan) writes:
>> In article <362286f7.536167326 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>> <johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>On 12 Oct 1998 17:48:25 GMT, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton
>>>Hogan) wrote:
>>>>>>>In article <362204f5.502879737 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>>> <johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 11:25:39 -0700, marnix at u.washington.edu (Marnix L.
>>>>>Bosch) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>In article <3607e5c8.49487590 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>>>>>johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 1998 10:44:00 -0700, marnix at u.washington.edu (Marnix L.
>>>>>>> Bosch) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >In article <3607ded5.47708518 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>>>>>> >johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>At least Bob Gallo's 'proclamation' was based on some
>>>>>That's soooooo scientific!
>>>>> evidence. Whcih was
>>>>>>subsequently peer
>>>>>That "AIDS" is caused by HIV? Show me the money! The exact
>>>>>scientific paper that has been "peer reviewed" and says, without a
>>>>>doubt, that HIV causes "AIDS".
>>>>>>>>Please show me the one, peer-reviewed paper that shows T. Pallidum
>>>>causes syphilis.
>>>You can see those little squiggly fellows all over the place under the
>>>microscope, (how about the mysteriously absent HIV?)
>>You can see plenty of HIV under the EM.
YOU, may be able to see them. What you see YOU may call HIV. The
Perth Group disagrees, rather convincingly I might add, that you are
mistaken.
You expect to see them by light
>microscopy?
>>And what about late syphilis, you don't find treponemes in many of the late
>stages?
Define late. After drug therapy? After the damage to the body has
been done(secondary and tertiary)? jb
>
