In <Pine.3.89.9502151846.F13054-0100000 at Leslie-Francis.tenet.edu> dashley at TENET.EDU (Don Ashley) writes:
>>>Ageing and AIDS have immuno deficiency syndrome in common.
>>As cells stop dividing in upper years, immunity diminishes.
>>The elderly face the same sentence as the AIDS population. For some
>reason more money is funded for AIDS cure than for AGE cure.
>>Talk about the cure for AIDS gets received well in the media and
>social conversation. Mention arresting the aging process by whatever
>means or calling it 'disease' or genetically programmed cellular division
>cessation, or God's Plan, and the subject is emotionally dismissed as
>>It took awhile to educate the public on the benefits of giving up smoking.
>It is and has been an emotional challenge.
>>How long will it take to interest the public, and more specifically the
>decision makers, to consider funding research to stop the aging process?
>>Decision makers include congressmen to direct govt funding and investors in
>sector who would like to benefit financially from R&D breakthroughs.
>>Is it acceptable for someone to profit by investing capital in research
>that would benefit mankind? There would be windfall profits overnight if
>some privately held biotech corp could manipulate telomerase into healthy
>cells for perpetual division.
>>Show me a company that I can buy stock in that focuses exclusively on
>such research and I'll quickly grab some of my sleeping IRA's to invest at
>obviously increased risk. Not only will I increase my chance of living
>longer, but my chance of sharing in the profit structure.
>>We all stand to benefit by increased funding for ageing research. We all
>face the challenge of communicating the feasibility of it. There are an
>overwhelming number of skeptics. Which is natural. The world was flat
>once, before CC did some communication tactics.
>>Please e-mail comments to:
>>dashley at tenet.edu>>more importantly, send to group for discussion and creative energy
NEED TO RE-EVALUATE THE HIV-AIDS HYPOTHESIS.
With literally every prediction made on the basis of the HIV-AIDS
hypothesis (that 150 chimpanzees inoculated with HIV would get AIDS,
AIDS would occur only in people infected with HIV, prostitutes would
give AIDS to their clients, and more, much more) proven wrong, the
need to reappraise the HIV-AIDS hypothesis is established. Ref.:
"Infectious AID - Stretching the Germ Theory Beyond its Limits", P.
Duesberg, Berkeley, in Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1994:103; 118-126.
We devoted an entire issue of our Preventive Medicine UP-DATE to what
we call "the biggest blunder in modern medicine", namely the HIV-AIDS
hypothesis. If you'd like to see it but can't afford a subscription
of $ 23.95, just send us s.a.s. envelope (2 stamps, no letter required)
and I'll send you this issues without charge. Dr. Hans Kugler, IAHHM,
218 Ave. B, Redondo Beach, CA 90277.
In parting: How come alternative med doctors are healing AIDS patients
with immune-enhancing modalities similar to the anti-aging approach
outlined in my book "TRIPPING THE CLOCK, a practical guide to anti-aging
and rejuvenation" ?? Why, after 12 years of research based on the
HIV-AIDS hypothesis, billions spent, are there no results, no cure,
no clues, no vaccine ?? Would you call this another success - - as
so many claimed - - by the health experts of the Clinton Administration??
Hans J. Kugler, PhD, IAHHM president.