No More Aids In Several Years?

[RedAlert 0]

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

It basically says that scientists have found a weakness in HIV that could make it vulnerable to antibodies. I personally think this is a step in a good direction, and I hope they are able to fight it soon. There are too many impoverished nations that have AIDs epidemics...

[zak92 0]

Talking about aids
here is something i had saved on my PC i don't know where i posted this but yeah i did post this some place.

'Found this nice information online. Also gave my overall opinion and my summary at the bottom of it. Thanks and credit goes to whoever wrote this. I actually put this here because we all need to know how we are being affected by this unwanted disease. We can all get together and solve it. Its intresting read the whole thing.

In an extensive article in the Summer-Autumn 1990 issue of "Top Secret", Prof J. Segal and Dr. L. Segal outline their theory that AIDS is a man-made disease, originating at Pentagon bacteriological warfare labs at Fort Detrick, Maryland. "Top Secret" is the international edition of the German magazine Geheim and is considered by many to be a sister publication to the American Covert Action Information Bulletin (CAIB). In fact, Top Secret carries the Naming Names column, which CAIB is prevented from doing by the American government, and which names CIA agents in different locations in the world. The article, named "AIDS: US-Made Monster" and subtitled "AIDS - its Nature and its Origins," is lengthy, has a lot of professional terminology and is dotted with footnotes. AIDS FACTS "The fatal weakening of the immune system which has given AIDS its name (Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome)," write the Segals, "has been traced back to a destruction or a functional failure of the T4-lymphocytes, also called 'helper cells`, which play a regulatory role in the production of antibodies in the immune system." In the course of the illness, the number of functional T4- cells is reduced greatly so that new anti-bodies cannot be produced and the defenceless patient remains exposed to a range of infections that under other circumstances would have been harmless. Most AIDS patients die from opportunistic infections rather than from the AIDS virus itself. The initial infection is characterized by diarrhea, erysipelas and intermittent fever. An apparent recovery follows after 2-3 weeks, and in many cases the patient remains without symptoms and functions normally for years. Occasionally a swelling of the lymph glands, which does not affect the patient's well-being, can be observed. After several years, the pre-AIDS stage, known as ARC (Aids- Related Complex) sets in. This stage includes disorders in the digestive tract, kidneys and lungs. In most cases it develops into full-blown AIDS in about a year, at which point opportunistic illnesses occur. Parallel to this syndrome, disorders in various organ systems occur, the most severe in the brain, the symptoms of which range from motoric disorders to severe dementia and death. This set of symptoms, say the Segals, is identical in every detail with the Visna sickness which occurs in sheep, mainly in Iceland. (Visna means tiredness in Icelandic). However, the visna virus is not pathogenic for human beings. The Segals note that despite the fact that AIDS is transmitted only through sexual intercourse, blood transfusions and non- sterile hypodermic needles, the infection has spread dramatically. During the first few years after its discovery, the number of AIDS patients doubled every six months, and is still doubling every 12 months now though numerous measures have been taken against it. Based on these figures, it is estimated that in the US, which had 120,000 cases of AIDS at the end of 1988, 900,000 people will have AIDS or will have died of it by the end of 1991. It is also estimated that the number of people infected is at least ten times the number of those suffering from an acute case of AIDS. That in the year 1995 there will be between 10-14 million cases of AIDS and an additional 100 million people infected, 80 percent of them in the US, while a possible vaccination will not be available before 1995 by the most optimistic estimates. Even when such vaccination becomes available, it will not help those already infected. These and following figures have been reached at by several different mainstream sources, such as the US Surgeon General and the Chief of the medical services of the US Army. "AIDS does not merely bring certain dangers with it; it is clearly a programmed catastrophe for the human race, whose magnitude is comparable only with that of a nuclear war", say the Segals. " They later explain what they mean by "programmed," showing that the virus was produced by humans, namely Dr. Robert Gallo of the Bethesda Cancer Research Center in Maryland. When proceeding to prove their claims, the Segals are careful to note that: "We have given preference to the investigative results of highly renowned laboratories, whose objective contents cannot be doubted. We must emphasize, in this connection, that we do not know of any findings that have been published in professional journals that contradict our hypotheses." DISCOVERING AIDS The first KNOWN cases of AIDS occurred in New York in 1979. The first DESCRIBED cases were in California in 1979. The virus was isolated in Paris in May 1983, taken from a French homosexual who had returned home ill from a trip to the East Coast of the US. One year later, Robert Gallo and his co-workers at the Bethesda Cancer Research Center published their discovery of the same virus, which is cytotoxic. ( i.e poisonous to cells ) Shortly after publishing his discovery, Gallo stated to newspapers that the virus had developed by a natural process from the Human Adult Leukemia virus, HTLV-1, which he had previously discovered. However, this claim was not published in professional publications, and soon after, Alizon and Montagnier, two researchers of the Pasteur Institute in Paris published charts of HTLV-1 and HIV, showing that the viruses had basically different structures. They also declared categorically that they knew of no natural process by which one of these two forms could have evolved into the other. According to the professional "science" magazine, the fall 1984 annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), was almost entirely devoted to the question of: to what extent new pathogenic agents could be produced via human manipulation of genes. According to the Segals, AIDS was practically the sole topic of discussion. THE AIDS VIRUS The Segals discuss the findings of Gonda et al, who compared the HIV, visna and other closely-related viruses and found that the visna virus is the most similar to HIV. The two were, in fact, 60% identical in 1986. According to findings of the Hahn group, the mutation rate of the HIV virus was about a million times higher than that of similar viruses, and that on the average a 10% alteration took place every two years. That would mean that in 1984, the difference between HIV and visna would have been only 30%, in 1982- 20%, 10% in 1980 and zero in 1978. "This means," say the Segals, "that at this time visna viruses changed into HIV, receiving at the same time the ability to become parasites in human T4-cells and the high genetic instability that is not known in other retroviruses. This is also consistent with the fact that the first cases of AIDS appeared about one year later, in the spring of 1979." "In his comparison of the genomes of visna and HIV," add the Segals, "Coffin hit upon a remarkable feature. The env (envelope) area of the HIV genome, which encodes the envelope proteins which help the virus to attach itself to the host cell, is about 300 nucleotides longer than the same area in visna. This behaviour suggests that an additional piece has been inserted into the genomes of the visna virus, a piece that alters the envelope proteins and enables them to bind themselves to the T4-receptors. BUT THIS SECTION BEHAVES LIKE A BIOLOGICALLY ALIEN BODY, which does not match the rest of the system biochemically. The above mentioned work by Gonda et al shows that the HIV virus has a section of about 300 nucleotides, which does not exist in the visna virus. That length corresponds with what Coffin described. That section is particularly unstable, which indicates that it is an alien object. According to the Segals, it "originates in an HTLV-1 genome, (discovered by Gallo-ED) for the likelihood of an accidental occurrence in HIV of a genome sequence 60% identical with a section of the HTLV-1 that is 300 nucleotides in length is zero." Since the visna virus is incapable of attaching itself to human T4 receptors, it must have been the transfer of the HTLV-1 genome section which gave visna the capability to do so. In other words, the addition of HTLV-1 to visna made the HIV virus. In addition, the high mutation rate of the HIV genome has been explained by another scientific team, Chandra et al, by the fact that it is "a combination of two genome parts which are alien to each other BY ARTIFICIAL MEANS rather than by a natural process of evolution, because this process would have immediately eliminated, through natural selection, systems that are so replete with disorders." "These are the facts of the case," say the Segals. "HIV is essentially a visna virus which carries an additional protein monomer of HTLV-1 that has an epitope capable of bonding with T4 receptors. Neither Alizon and Montagnier nor any other biologist know of any natural mechanism that would make it possible for the epitope to be transferred from HTLV-1 to the visna virus. For this reason we can come to only one conclusion: that this gene combination arose by artificial means, through gene manipulation." THE CONSTRUCTION OF HIV "The construction of a recombinant virus by means of gene manipulation is extraordinarily expensive, and it requires a large number of highly qualified personnel, complicated equipment and expensive high security laboratories. Moreover, the product would have no commercial value. Who, then," ask the Segals, "would have provided the resources for a type of research that was aimed solely at the production of a new disease that would be deadly to human beings?" The English sociologist Allistair Hay (as well as Paxman et al in "A Higher Form of Killing"-ED), published a document whose authenticity has been confirmed by the US Congress, showing that a representative of the Pentagon requested in 1969 additional funding for biological warfare research. The intention was to create, within the next ten years, a new virus that would not be susceptible to the immune system, so that the afflicted patient would not be able to develop any defense against it. Ten years later, in the spring of 1979, the first cases of AIDS appeared in New York. "Thus began a phase of frantic experimentation," say the Segals. One group was working on trying to cause animal pathogens to adapt themselves to life in human beings. This was done under the cover of searching for a cure for cancer. The race was won by Gallo, who described his findings in 1975. A year later, Gallo described gene manipulations he was conducting. In 1980 he published his discovery of HTLV. In the fall of 1977, a P4 (highest security category of laboratory, in which human pathogens are subjected to genetic manipulations) laboratory was officially opened in building 550 of Fort Detrick, MD, the Pentagon's main biological warfare research center. "In an article in 'Der Spiegel`, Prof. Mollings point out that this type of gene manipulation was still extremely difficult in 1977. One would have had to have a genius as great as Robert Gallo for this purpose, note the Segals." Lo and behold. In a supposed compliance with the international accord banning the research, production and storage of biological weapons, part of Fort Detrick was "demilitarized" and the virus section renamed the "Frederick Cancer Research Facility". It was put under the direction of the Cancer Research Institute in neighbouring Bethesda, whose director was no other than Robert Gallo. This happened in 1975, the year Gallo discovered HTLV. Explaining how the virus escaped, the Segals note that in the US, biological agents are traditionally tested on prisoners who are incarcerated for long periods, and who are promised freedom if they survive the test. However, the initial HIV infection symptoms are mild and followed by a seemingly healthy patient. "Those who conducted the research must have concluded that the new virus was...not so virulent that it could be considered for military use, and the test patients, who had seemingly recovered, were given their freedom. Most of the patients were professional criminals and New York City, which is relatively close, offered them a suitable milieu. Moreover, the patients were exclusively men, many of them having a history of homosexuality and drug abuse, as is often the case in American prisons. It is understandable why AIDS broke out precisely in 1979, precisely among men and among drug users, and precisely in New York City," assert the Segals. They go on to explain that whereas in cases of infection by means of sexual contact, incubation periods are two years and more, while in cases of massive infection via blood transfusions, as must have been the case with prisoners, incubation periods are shorter than a year. "Thus, if the new virus was ready at the beginning of 1978 and if the experiments began without too much delay, then the first cases of full-blown AIDS in 1979 were exactly the resultthat could have been expected." In the next three lengthy chapters, the Segals examine other theories, "legends" as they call them, of the origins of AIDS. Dissecting each claim, they show that they have no scientific standing, providing also the findings of other scientists. They also bring up the arguments of scientists and popular writers who have been at the task of discounting them as "conspiracy theorists" and show these writers' shortcomings. Interested readers will have to read the original article to follow those debates. I will only quote two more paragraphs: "We often heard the argument that experiments with human volunteers are part of a barbaric past, and that they would be impossible in the US today... We wish to present one single document whose authenticity is beyond doubt. An investigative commission of the US House of Representatives presented in October 1986 a final report concerning the Manhattan Project. According to this document, between 1945 and 1975 at least 695 American citizens were exposed to dangerous doses of radioactivity. Some of them were prisoners who had volunteered, but they also included residents of old-age homes, inmates of insane asylums, handicapped people in nursing homes, and even normal patients in public hospitals; most of them were subjected to these experiments without their permission. Thus the 'barbaric past` is not really a thing of the past." "It is remarkable that most of these experiments were carried out in university institutes and federal hospitals, all of which are named in the report. Nonetheless, these facts remained secret until 1984, and even then a Congressional committee that was equipped with all the necessary authorization needed two years in order to bring these facts to life. We are often asked how the work on the AIDS virus could have been kept secret. Now, experiments performed on a few dozen prisoners in a laboratory that is subject to military security can be far more easily kept secret than could be the Manhattan Project."

So basically AIDS is the main disease that is plaguing our mankind. This is because we humans did not follow the rules of god. If we would have done it the nice way we would be good. Plus AIDS is so dangerous that if you get AIDS you are completely exposed to Cancer and all diseases and no one can save you. Its better to be safe than to regret the rest of your life when you will be lying on the bed bleeding thinking only if i used a condom or only if i wouldn't have done that. I personally know my old cook who is dead may god rest his soul in peace but he was Gay and he died of AIDS. He was so pathetic he had a nice built before but after he was affected his skin was so gross and when he used to take a crap he used to bleed. No one let him enter their house. He died one day and i felt so bad. He was not a bad human just one mistake and he paid with his life. So guys before going into any sexual relation get a AIDS check and marry. Then you may do what you want.
I hope i got my message through.'

[cangor 0]

yeah, there's a lot of crap involved with AIDS. It'd be great if there was a cure, but I don't know if that's really likely to happen. Like zak92, i'd rather be safe than dead.

[FolkRockFan 0]

We'll have better results if we focus on preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS. We should still research cures, yes - we might actually be able to cure AIDS someday - but keeping the virus in check is the best bet for the people who are alive today.Why is that?Because we can't count on a cure. We cannot reasonably sit here and say, "Well, it's all good because the brilliant scientists and researchers will have a pill or an injection for us in a few years that will cure HIV/AIDS." We can't guarantee that this is going to happen. We've been trying to cure the virus for the last two decades - and we haven't succeeded just yet.So: try to find a cure, yeah, but we really need to stop spreading the virus around. If infected people don't pass it on to other people, then the virus will eventually stop spreading. If we manage to find a cure before that happens, then great. But we need to do everything that we can to stop it today.

[CinnamorollTK 0]

Aren't there virii that soon become immune to new "cures"? How can we be sure it will work for a long time? I'll be glad if that really is a new and permanent cure but it would have to work for at least 5 years straight before I'd believe it truly was a cure.

[Watermonkey 0]

There was recently a news story that broke regarding a president of Gambia claiming to have a cure for AIDS. I'll quote the story from that link below in cause you're too lazy to *click*:

Global Challenges | Gambian President Claims To Cure HIV/AIDS, Prompts Concern Among Some Public Health WorkersFeb 22, 2007


Gambian President Yahya Jammeh since January has claimed that he can cure HIV/AIDS with an herbal remedy, prompting concern among some public health workers in Africa who already are "struggling against faith healers dispensing herbal remedies," the AP/Monterey County Herald reports. The treatment -- which is applied over several weeks -- involves application of a green paste, as well as application of a gray-colored solution splashed on the people's skin and drinking a yellowish tea-like liquid. In addition, Jammeh said people taking the treatment should refrain from drinking alcohol, tea and coffee; eating kola nuts; and having sex, the AP/Herald reports. The biggest concern among public health workers is that Jammeh asks HIV-positive people to stop taking antiretroviral drugs, which weakens their immune systems and makes them more prone to infections, according to Antonio Filipe, World Health Organization regional adviser in Senegal. Jammeh has sent blood samples from the first nine people who have taken his treatment to a laboratory in Senegal to be tested for HIV. According to a letter from the laboratory, four blood samples had undetectable viral loads, one had a moderate viral load and three had high viral loads. The technician who conducted the tests said the results are not conclusive because the individuals' viral loads were not tested before undergoing Jammeh's treatment. "There is no baseline ... you can't prove that someone has been cured of AIDS from just one data point," Coumba Toure Kane, head of the molecular biology unit at Senegal's Cheikh Anta Diop University, said, adding, "It's dishonest of the Gambian government to use our results in this way." Jammeh said, "Whatever you do, there are bound to be skeptics, but I can tell you my method is foolproof." He added that the treatment is "not an argument, [it]is proof. It's a declaration. I can cure AIDS and I will." Filipe said WHO respects Jammeh's views but added, "As the World Health Organization, we would like to state quite clearly" that "so far there is no cure for AIDS" (Callimachi, AP/Monterey County Herald, 2/21).

It would be interesting to see if there's any merit to his claims... Meanwhile stop with the dangerous lifestyles promoted in Hollywood and MTV already!

[Lyon2 0]

I saw that news here in Portugal, i really hope the cure is close.Many millions die every day, and many more get infected daily.Perhaps we are close, perhaps not, but if more people contributed with money for the research, i am sure we would had the cure by now, and that is the problem, the ones that have power and money do not help, and the ones that do not have much or none, strugle to find the cure, that is just our world, the most cruel world i am sure!

Edited March 8, 2007 by Lyon2 (see edit history)

[jopak134 0]

have heard before that there was a cocktail of drugs that will let your aids to pause and not to infect people but its for the rich only.i think if this story is true the only dilemma is if this is for humanity or greediness. imagine if this drug must be taken 10 months a day like tb and one pill casue 1 dollar. multiply it to 1 million people and this = to OWNED! richer than bill gates.

[Mermaid711 0]

They might have found a weakness in that paticular strain of HIV. But the problem is that HIV can under go as much genetic change as humans can in a couple million years in a decade. So the HIV that doctors were fighting HIV years ago are fighting a different virus today.But are these mutations bad? Not always. Sometimes when the virus mutates it can be bad for the virus. . . but do be aware that the mutations can benifit the virus.And your body does make antibodies for HIV. But it can only attack certian types of it. So your body can keep HIV at bay for a while, but if you are found positive for the virus, it is in your best interest to start ant-retrovial drugs ASAP.Of course, there have been- and always will be- people who claim that they have the cure. About a year ago, the president of Gambia claimed he had the cure for AIDS, which required people to stop their anti-retrovial drugs. The treatment consisted of rubbing a thick green paste on the chest of a patient, and the having the patient drink a bitter yellow liquid, and then eat some banannas. But as FolkRockFan stated, right now, we REALLY need to worry about preventing the spread of HIV because right now we don't have a for-sure cure and so it makes more sense to educate people about the disease right now and tell them how you can- and can't- get it.

[Forbez 0]

This is great news, but everyone knows only a new disease will take it's place though.

[rayzoredge 2]

I just want to point out that "Magic" Johnson has had HIV/AIDS since 1991. Any possibility that if you have money that you can actually purchase an existing "cure" or a medium that counteracts its adverse effects OR an alternative immunodeficiency device of some sort?I'm rather convinced that, after having this as well as many other diseases and epidemics having been around for long enough, that we do have some sort of countering agents or even cures for these diseases, but as I think many propogandists would like to say, it's not economically viable to throw out a cure because 1.) the medical sector will not make as much money due to a lack of a need for symptomatic medicines and/or treatments, 2.) our worldwide population will explode as we have less and less to keep our numbers in check (if you want to look at it from the numbers game perspective), 3.) and there isn't enough of an audience to warrant a lucrative payoff by introducing cures. Once we have the cure for AIDS, no one is going to need it; therefore, why not keep a stimulus of the economy going instead of actually ridding the world of an epidemic? I'm sure that most people will read this and think I'm much of the *bottom*, but in all reality, wouldn't you think that this makes sense as far as viewing it on a larger scale? No one wants their parents, friends, relatives, or significant others to die if there is a cure for what ails them, but on a larger scale, it's just one less mouth to feed, one less person to support, one less person on welfare, one less person to account for on paper. It's an inhumane way of thinking, much like how the practical mind would maximize efficiency of our existence by employing the survival of the fittest and the most productive by activating a genocide of the weaker of our species. But as Socrates, Aldous Huxley, and George Orwell, as well as many other authors and philosophers of our time have pointed out, we are degrading ourselves from reaching a utopia and an ultra-efficient society.So with all that being said, maybe we'll actually find a cure, or maybe someone is being paid enough to keep quiet about a cure we already have. On the grand scheme of things, it makes sense for the latter, so it wouldn't surprise me if we are continually teased with a cure for AIDS, a cure for cancer, or a cure for anything, really.One argument against that thought is the fact that we have and issue vaccines for yellow fever, tetanus, TB, and other diseases that kill. Then again, those are diseases that are airborne and that could wipe out a good number of us rather quickly, decreasing our populace as opposed to keeping us in check.My two cents.

[minimcmonkey 0]

Even if they cant find a cure now, or cant exploit this, with greater understanding in science in years to come, scientists are bound to either cure it, or make drugs to make it have no effect or virtually no effect on people.Science is moving at such an alarming rate. Now long until there isnt anything human kind cant do?

[steff 0]

did any of u hear bout the man in africa not sure wen it happend but he cured his own aids the only man ever 2 do so so natural remedys must have some part of beatin aids nobody knows how he did it but he did so therefor we shud look back at that rele shunt we n think wat cud he of dun 2 beat aids in the african bus alone....

[SpiderVV 0]

Never heard of him. But I also never heard of a cure to AIDS, or either I am too late or idk. Also @ the topic title: I don't think AIDS will ever disappear, it was a disease that lasted centuries and almost more than 5 million people died of it, so I don't really know if even a cure will make it disappear, it's just... too strong.