johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:07:19 +0000, Andrew Walley
> <awalley at radius.jr2.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >
> >
> >johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:02:33 +0000, Andrew Walley
> >> <awalley at radius.jr2.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Just for you and your colleagues information:
> >> >
> >> >Neutralizing and enhancing activities of human respiratory syncytial virus-specific
> >> >antibodies.
> >> Thank you, now please explain their role in the HIV=AIDS issue. jb
> >
> >Enhancing antibodies may
> That's what I thought, more b.s. jb
I think it's far more obvious that you don't understand this subject and anything you don't
understand you describe as b.s. Just because your colleagues weren't taught about something
doesn't mean it is fictitious. As this is the basis of your arguments about HIV and AIDS
being unrelated I would have thought you would understand that. Equally, they will not have
been questioned on hundreds of rare disorders and diseases because medics need to know what
they will come across every day and not once in their career.
The fact that I said "may" simply means that the majority of scientists agree it is the best
theory to explain published evidence. You are obviously don't accept how science works and
are unable to present logical arguments in a coherent manner, rapidly resorting to ad
hominem attacks as soon as you feel threatened.
If you want to discuss the theory that HIV does not cause AIDS then I suggest you return to
the library and learn enough to be able to debate the matter openly and rationally.
Dismissing subjects like "enhancing antibodies" as pseudoscience only alienates the very
people you are trying to communicate with and does your cause untold harm.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your basic argument just that the bionet newsgroups are
for scientific discussion and they are not an appropriate place for personal attacks.
Andrew Wallet
