A diagnosis of AIDS is made whenever a person is HIV-positive and: he or she has a CD4+ cell count below 200 cells per microliter OR his or her CD4+ cells account for fewer than 14 percent of all lymphocytes OR that person has been diagnosed with one or more of the AIDS-defining illnesses listed below.
Also you're right, I did mischaracterize the quote. I think it's even more absurd with regards to HIV but that's neither here nor there.
Nebu: I definitely agree that more research needs to be done to either prove or disprove the theories set out by Duesberg and friends. Problem is they have been denied all funding to do so.
As for the other diseases you've specified, they seem to be your area of expertise but would you say that we have HIV level knowledge of them or better? Do we know exactly what MS does, can we treat cancer generally in a way that doesn't leave a person having chemo for the rest of their life?
The CDC does not make medical diagnosis. The CDC tracks communicable diseases, and as such, may have differening, functional definitions of disease than actual clinical ones.
I'm not going to continue to argue this issue, though. Clearly you have an agenda to push, and all the talking points at your fingertips.
Sorry if it comes across that way Bruce, I quite honestly have no agenda to push other than trying to have a good debate and maybe learn something new. If you'd like to continue please feel free to address the things I've put up, I'll hold off from responding with new things.
I have no affiliation with any of the dissident groups, I know no one who currently is HIV positive or has AIDS. I merely dislike being misled on something as important as HIV=AIDS and I very much dislike politics in my science.
As my expertise is in Cancer, I'll stick to that topic.
As a global scientific community, hundreds of billions of dollars have been poured into cancer. I think we understand how cancer works and the predictors for many types of cancer but fear we're not a whole lot closer to a cure than we were 10 years ago. Matter of fact, Cancer treatment is still in such a state that it's one of the easiest areas to get a new drug fast-tracked through the FDA and into the clinics. The biggest issues with cancer that I can see are: a) the fact that we lack reliable, inexpensive ways to detect it early and b) complete cancer kill rates are next to impossible without help from our innate immunity (this creates a whole other set of issues).
As for the other diseases, I only have familiarity with Alzheimer's on a scientific level and conduct some sideline research into what homeostatic mechanisms may affect the onset of disease.
I can tell you from my limited knowledge that some similar mechanisms are at play with both MS and HIV. This may explain why both diseases can be diagnosed fairly early, but symptoms don't appear/progress until much further along the viral cycle (years instead of months).
"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."
Author
