Wade;

 
First of all, Gallo's research is not to be trusted. There are many government reports and even a large, detailed book written about the corruption in his research.

 
John Crewdson's book indicates how Gallo adjusted his antibody results to get the best accuracy on a test with the CDC, so he may have done the same in his scientific paper.

 
He couldn't have known, in any case, that these were HIV antibodies, without purification of HIV, injection of HIV into an animal, and proof that the antibodies only arose after injection.

 
- David

 
David,
 
        What I think is that "HIV" co-discover Robert Gallo only found  88% of Antibodies not HIV itself. What I think is he never found HIV in humans from an AIDS patients. what I also think is he could found 88% of antibodies could be anything else but not "HIV" itself. Do you think the same way as I am?
 
Wade
 

 

Wade;


 
Well, if HIV does not exist then there can be no transmission, period.

 
But let's say that it did exist, and that HIV tests were accurate indicators. Even so, just because a person is HIV- on day 1 and HIV+ 6 months later does not prove that just because they had sex with an HIV+ person during that period, or shared a needle, or had sex with a person who might be HIV+, does not PROVE that sexual transmission occurred.

 
And in the Padian study, during the observational period, not a single seroconversion was found (someone going HIV- to HIV+). But even if there had been seroconversions it would only be an assumption that they were due to sex.

 
- David

 

 
so Liam is saying there is 0 (zero) sexual transmissions even there was blood invovled period.
 
Wade
 
----- Original Message -----
From: David Crowe
To: Wade Morris
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: Another Question...

 
Wade;

 
Liam, like me, does not believe that HIV exists. You can contact him at liamscheff@gmail.com.

 
If HIV does not exist it can't be transmitted. The Padian study is good evidence for this, a 10 year study by mainstream scientists that found 0 (zero) transmissions among couples where only one was HIV-positive, despite many not regularly using condoms.

 
- David

 

 
I was listening to Liam Sheff.... Did he said that there is no evedince that this so called HIV isn't transmitted or did he say that they don't know how it was transmitted?
 
 
 
Wade
 

 

Wade;


 
A few are believed to be, but the majority are not.

 
Note that AIDS is 30 diseases plus one non-disease, but the factors that can cause a false positive HIV test are about 70 in number, and many of them are not diseases at all or, if they are, are not infectious or cancers.

 
- David

 

 
David,
 
    Also these 30 to 70 Diseases are not Sexual Transmitted, Right?
 
Wade
 
----- Original Message -----
From: David Crowe
To: Wade Morris
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: Question on my mind.

 
Wade;

 
Yes, nobody has ever purified HIV from blood or anywhere. And without purification you can't know that there's a virus in the blood.

 
The 30 to 70 things you listed are mostly not viruses, they are diseases or medical conditions. They can all cause false positive HIV test results ... in fact we can't know that there is such a thing as a true positive unless HIV is purified.

 
Whether people without a positive HIV test can have AIDS is a matter of definition. Some diseases, like KS, result in an AIDS diagnosis without a test, but others require an HIV test. So when there's an association, it's artificial. TB+HIV=AIDS; TB-HIV = TB.

 
- David

 

 
David,
 
 
 
So the real truth is that "Scientists and Dr.s" has never found this so called "HIV" virus in human blood in AIDS Patients period end of story.... and these 30 or 70 different virus that was I listed is not sexually transmitted? and what I have also read is that 50% of people died of AIDS that they don't have HIV. that tells me that HIV virus don't actually exists.
 
 
 
Wade
 
----- Original Message -----
 
From: David Crowe
 
To: Wade Morris
 
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 10:00 AM
 
Subject: Re: Question on my mind.
 

 
Wade;
 

 
Yes, and there are probably more too, but nobody's looking too hard, so even these 70 or so are just accidental findings, when doctors find test results that they can't believe, and realize they were probably associated with some other event or condition.
 

 
- David
 

 

 
So what they are looking for is antibodies to these symptoms or viruses:
 

 
 
  • Anti-carbohydrate antibodies (52, 19, 13)
  • Naturally-occurring antibodies (5, 19)
  • Passive immunization: receipt of gamma globulin or immune globulin (as prophylaxis against infection which contains antibodies)(18, 26, 60, 4, 22, 42, 43, 13)
  • Leprosy (2, 25)
  • Tuberculosis (25)
  • Mycobacterium avium (25)
  • Systemic lupus erythematosus (15, 23)
  • Renal (kidney) failure (48, 23, 13)
  • Hemodialysis/renal failure (56, 16, 41, 10, 49)
  • Alpha interferon therapy in hemodialysis patients (54)
  • Flu (36)
  • Flu vaccination (30, 11, 3, 20, 13, 43)
  • Herpes simplex I (27)
  • Herpes simplex II (11)
  • Upper respiratory tract infection (cold or flu)(11)
  • Recent viral infection or exposure to viral vaccines (11)
  • Pregnancy in multiparous women (58, 53, 13, 43, 36)
  • Malaria (6, 12)
  • High levels of circulating immune complexes (6, 33)
  • Hypergammaglobulinemia (high levels of antibodies) (40, 33)
  • False positives on other tests, including RPR (rapid plasma reagent) test for syphilis (17, 48, 33, 10, 49)
  • Rheumatoid arthritis (36)
  • Hepatitis B vaccination (28, 21, 40, 43)
  • Tetanus vaccination (40)
  • Organ transplantation (1, 36)
  • Renal transplantation (35, 9, 48, 13, 56)
  • Anti-lymphocyte antibodies (56, 31)
  • Anti-collagen antibodies (found in gay men, haemophiliacs, Africans of both sexes and people with leprosy)(31)
  • Serum-positive for rheumatoid factor, antinuclear antibody (both found in rheumatoid arthritis and other autoantibodies)(14, 62, 53)
  • Autoimmune diseases (44, 29, 10, 40, 49, 43): Systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma, connective tissue disease, dermatomyositis
  • Acute viral infections, DNA viral infections (59, 48, 43, 53, 40, 13)
  • Malignant neoplasms (cancers)(40)
  • Alcoholic hepatitis/alcoholic liver disease (32, 48, 40,10,13, 49, 43, 53)
  • Primary sclerosing cholangitis (48, 53)
  • Hepatitis (54)
  • "Sticky" blood (in Africans) (38, 34, 40)
  • Antibodies with a high affinity for polystyrene (used in the test kits)(62, 40, 3)
  • Blood transfusions, multiple blood transfusions (63, 36,13, 49, 43, 41)
  • Multiple myeloma (10, 43, 53)
  • HLA antibodies (to Class I and II leukocyte antigens)(7, 46, 63, 48, 10, 13, 49, 43, 53)
  • Anti-smooth muscle antibody (48)
  • Anti-parietal cell antibody (48)
  • Anti-hepatitis A IgM (antibody)(48)
  • Anti-Hbc IgM (48)
  • Administration of human immunoglobulin preparations pooled before 1985 (10)
  • Haemophilia (10, 49)
  • Haematologic malignant disorders/lymphoma (43, 53, 9, 48, 13)
  • Primary biliary cirrhosis (43, 53, 13, 48)
  • Stevens-Johnson syndrome9, (48, 13)
  • Q-fever with associated hepatitis (61)
  • Heat-treated specimens (51, 57, 24, 49, 48)
  • Lipemic serum (blood with high levels of fat or lipids)(49)
  • Haemolyzed serum (blood where haemoglobin is separated from the red cells)(49)
  • Hyperbilirubinemia (10, 13)
  • Globulins produced during polyclonal gammopathies (which are seen in AIDS risk groups)(10, 13, 48)
  • Healthy individuals as a result of poorly-understood cross-reactions (10)
  • Normal human ribonucleoproteins (48,13)
  • Other retroviruses (8, 55, 14, 48, 13)
  • Anti-mitochondrial antibodies (48, 13)
  • Anti-nuclear antibodies (48, 13, 53)
  • Anti-microsomal antibodies (34)
  • T-cell leukocyte antigen antibodies (48, 13)
  • Proteins on the filter paper (13)
  • Epstein-Barr virus (37)
  • Visceral leishmaniasis (45)
  • Receptive anal sex (39, 64)
Not HIV itself. Because I know for a fact Anti-bodies are good for us anyways. They are hidding that information to the public and to their patients. Right?
 

 
 
Wade Morris
 
----- Original Message -----
 
From: David Crowe
 
To: Wade Morris
 
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:00 PM
 
Subject: Re: Question on my mind.
 

 
Wade;
 

 
Doctors have to believe their tests or their entire system of medicine, the only thing they're trained in, would collapse in uncertainty.
 

 
Imagine what would happen if they said even something mild like ... You have tested positive for HIV. There's an 80% chance this test is accurate. If it is, there's an 80% chance that you will get sick between 10 and 20 years from now and, if you do, there's an 80% chance that you will die. If you'd like we can do CD4 tests and viral load tests, and there's an 80% chance that the test results are meaningful.
 

 
Nobody would take AIDS seriously if that was the case. Now substitute "0%" for a couple of those 80%s and you'd see that people would laugh at their doctors.
 

 
Medical schools train their doctors to believe in their tests and machines, and pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars ensuring that doctors believe in their drugs.
 

 
- David
 

 

 
David,
 

 
 
        This question has been on my mind lately. I know that HIV does not exists. I know that HIV Test does not prove that HIV exists in human body with the body has antibodies in the blood. when a person tests poz. then why doctors tell their patients that they have HIV but they really don't?
 

 
 
Wade