HIV to go on trial in Aussie court (HIV virus does not really exist)

[seriousstan]

ADELAIDE, Australia, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- An HIV-positive Australian, convicted of endangering the lives of three women, is challenging the existence of the virus in court.

Andre Chad Parenzee was convicted in February of endangering three former girlfriends through unprotected sex and faces up to 15 years in prison. One of the women now has HIV.

But now Parenzee, in what is believed to be an international and legal first, is attempting to turn conventional science on its head by claiming the HIV virus does not really exist.

The Australian newspaper reported Supreme Court Judge John Sulan has set aside two weeks to hear arguments Parenzee's conviction should be quashed.

Two self-styled scientific researchers have already appeared as witnesses to attack the "HIV myth."

http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20061026-025919-3842r

[cigsandcoffee]

1. What the hell?

There are millions of people around the world who will be happy to hear they're dying of nothing, I guess.

[Recursion]

13. That's actually one of the stronger "denialist" arguments

Let me say first I think these australian guys are nuts.

Let me say second that I think that industrial medicine's response to AIDS has been wrong-headed and counterproductive. And that gives the denialists their biggest weapon.

I can tell you exactly what they would say to your response about millions of people around the world dying, and they have a point:

1. Back in the 1980s before AIDS exploded into Africa, 500,000 each year (give or take) were dying in Africa from malnutrition, malaria, and tuberculosis.

2. Today, 500,000 each year people are dying in Africa from AIDS.

Have we suddenly started feeding them? Did we clean up their drinking water? Did we cure their malaria or TB?

No, but we told the governments and health agencies that if they had AIDS patients we would give them money. And, frankly, we have done this because we see a way to make pharmaceutical companies a lot of money in the long run. If we give millions of people with AIDS antiretroviral drugs, they will still die from malnutrition, malaria, and TB. We could probably save more lives by putting that same money into clean water, food, basic health services, and condoms. But we won't.

Anyways, I'm not with these Australian nut jobs, but the fact is that AIDS is bigger than just one virus and its solution is bigger than just some drugs.

[central scrutinizer]

2. good luck with that one

what a moran

[rodeodance]

3. there is some skepticism that the Human immunodeficiency virus

actually CAUSES AIDS. most say it does.
Many say it is only associated with the onset of AIDS.

gosh, it prob. was only a matter of time before a case like this came to the fore.

[closeupready]

5. Undoubtedly, the progression of AIDS varies

depending upon several factors, as with other illnesses. For example, age - it's typical of most illnesses that the elderly succumb more rapidly than the young.

However, it's seems stupid to me to claim that HIV, which as I understand it has never been isolated, just the antibodies, doesn't exist. To the extent that AIDS follows a recognizable pattern and is predictable and somewhat treatable, HIV exists.

[Warpy]

7. No one has ever proven a case of AIDS to exist

in the absence of either the virus or immunosuppressants given in post transplant doses. The latter has become extremely rare thanks to advances in transplant medicine.

However, it has been proven that people with HIV have developed AIDS in the absence of other frequently cited co morbidities like herpes.

The guy hasn't a legal leg to stand on. His self styled experts will be shot down quickly and thoroughly.

[Recursion]

12. Well, that's not quite so simple

There are (very rare) cases of idiopathic immunodeficiency disorders and lymphocytopenias (lymphocytopeniae?) which meet the T-cell levels for AIDS, include most AIDS-defining secondary diseases, and exist in people who do not carry HIV. By definition they are not AIDS since by definition AIDS exists only in people who carry the HIV virus, so in a trivial sense the statement "no one has developed AIDS without HIV" is true, in that people who have developed identical syndromes without HIV are considered to have something other than AIDS.

Here's the problem to me: AIDS is a much more complex situation than just "you get the virus, you get the disease". It's not like cholera or typhus or smallpox. There are a host of factors that relate to the progression and onset of AIDS. The simplest example was the fact that gay men with the virus got sarcoma and wasting while hemopheliacs got pneumonia and dementia. The viral element of AIDS (which is very real) was focused on so exclusively that it took years to even acknowledge the environmental elements of the disease's progression.

And yes, there are nutcases out there who say things like "HIV doesn't exist", but there are plenty of reasonable researchers who lean more towads the model of "HIV is strongly associated with the onset of AIDS" than "HIV is *the cause* of AIDS".

[Ian David]

18. There are other VERY RARE AIDS-Like diseases not caused by HIV.

Just like there are other kinds of cervical cancer not caused by HPV.

But that does not change the fact that HIV causes AIDS. Period.

[Ian David]

17. No, there is no skepticism that HIV causes AIDS...

any more than there is skepticism that the Earth is round and that humans descended from primates.

Only whacked-out idiots believe such stupid fringe ideas.

[Odin2005]

4. The crap has been around for a long time.

It's mostly peddled by ideologues with an axe to grind.

[Hobarticus]

6. Desperate times call for desperate measures...

Knowing that he sentenced another human being to death, he's trying to save his own skin.

[William769]

8. HIV is a virus.

Next someone is going to tell me that the FLU & the common cold is just a hoax! :eyes:

[hedgehog]

9. There was a lot of confusion in the early years because the disease

itself wasn't properly defined. That's why there were a lot of early claims that it was a form of syphilis. The confusion was made worse by the fact that the Americans at NIH were racing the French at the Pasteur Institute to be the ones to discover the cause of AIDS. There was some implication that the Americans stole the virus from the French, re-named it and claimed victory. At this pint though, it's pretty clear that a virus is involved.

[rail]

10. Next up: class action suit against the bird flu virus

Plus I wannna sue for back rent from what ever virus I was unwittingly hosting last month.

Seriously, a court determining the existence of a disease is akin to "wikiality" wherein a fact is proclaimed if enough people agree to it, reality-based world notwithstanding.

[kimmerspixelated]

15. There is a book

out called The Great Bird Flu Hoax- went to the top of NYT bestseller's list. Rummy has stock in Tammiflu...evil at play!

[WindRavenX]

11. oh jesus

Not this bullshit again :eyes:

[peace13]

14. Well I for one

Hope that they get this wrapped up quickly so that we can get on with deciding just how long the world has been flat. Peace, Kim

[damntexdem]

16. But it doesn't say who the "self-styled scientific researchers" are.

I'd like to know whether they are any of the American self-styled researchers who also promote ID. For that matter, I'd like to know whether they are Australian promoters of ID. The Discovery Institute has perpetrated 'no-HIV' nonsense as well as Intelligent Design nonsense. But doing so in a court of law is a whole different level of evil.

[nodehopper]

20. to the best of my knowledge

ID proponents and AIDS deniers are radically different groups, demographically. Not that the logic isn't similar, but the populations are not. AIDS deniers started out as a particularly out there offshoot of ACT-UP, and were kicked out of ACT-UP eventually. Today they recruit at support groups for newly diagnosed people, and I guess get members because they can offer freaked out and desperate people a message of empowerment and agency. They are also very much rooted in conspiracy theory (not that I don't drink from that well, but LIHOP is far from AIDS denial, although to some dude in an SUV with an American Flag who voted for W, the two might seem equally out there) about big business pharmaceuticals. They don't deny that the virus exists, they just deny that it causes AIDS, they claim AIDS is a constellation disease, where a bunch of different symptoms are diagnosed as a syndrome, but really they are not, in conjunction, caused by a virus. Many of them are followers of Peter Duesberg, the molecular biology professor at Berkeley, you can read up on his stuff re: AIDS here
http://www.duesberg.com/faq.html

and here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Duesberg

AS his followers, they are very into science, just...not "mainstream" science, but they are not likely to embrace ID.

[IndyBob]

19. I've been HIV+ for over 8 years

And on the same meds for nearly as long. T-cell count over 850, and viral count undetectable - yes, every 4 months they do check the viral load, an actual count of the virus per cc blood. I haven't had as much as a good cold for nearly as long.

In the words of the gun nuts, you will need to pry my meds from me from my cold dead fingers.

HIV does not cause AIDS - IMHO, a load of crap. Brought to us by the same folks that call for teaching ID as science in our classrooms.