axel wrote:
>> HIV is a myth. there is no proof that the virus does anything at all. it is
>> just a myth and a hoax. viruses are not beings or living entities! it is
>> impossible that they DO something, for the same reason it is impossible
that
>> chairs or rocks DO something to somebody, like "the chair hurted me", or
>> "the rock attacked me",
alan:
>Ever been near a volcano or an avalanche?..rocks sure can attack you. ;-)
axel:
>> or "a tiny piece of dead tissue hurted me".
>> how can dead pieces of matter get out of control? do chairs get out of
>> control?
>>
>>
>> i am not very knowledgeable on health matters, but i do have my common
>> sense,
alan:
>Well your common sense should tell you that your belief that a
>virus is inactive or inert rather than a living organism is totally
>irrelevant. We have the ability today to be able to actually
>see viruses reproducing..meaning to be able to see viruses
>entering and reprogramming cells to produce more viruses rather
>than something else.
i just do not believe this at all. please point me to a book or video or
anything where i can SEE the virus clearly DOING anything. are you telling
me you have seen a non-living thing, that just happens to be around cells,
REPROGRAMMING a cell? seriously, i want to see such an incredible thing. i
have heard that they said the same with the "aids virus", meaning that
actually the cell was engulfing (sp?) the virus, and they said "look, the
virus is invading the cell". but now you say REPROGRAMMING? i have to see
it. please indicate some references. honestly, i am just kidding, for there
is NO WAY something dead ever does anything. there are no misteries like
this. there are loads of things we human beings do not fully understand,
etc, but come on, how did they convinced us of the virus thing? it does not
make sense! organic matter cannot do things to living beings! am i being
too extremist here? what is so fascinating about the virus explanation of
disease, that we go to such extremes of imagination? it is not a being,
then it cannot do anything. beings do things, like moving, eating,
changing, adapting, healing, breathing, fighthing, etc etc etc, but
non-living THINGS, do not.
alan:
Viruses may not be live organisms as we
>know them (i.e. which contain a nucleus) but they are certainly
>capable of carrying pieces of DNA and using these pieces to
>reprogram the DNA in a cell to make the cell produce more copies
>of the virus.
axel:
again, please tell me of concrete proof for this. i want to see the virus
doing all this you say. i do not take the scientistīs word for it ;)
alan:
As viruses need live cells to propagate and
>viruses have been found in both live and dead cells, it is not
>unlikely that viruses actually play some important role within
>each and every cell (although it is not yet quite known what
>useful role they play). It could be that each cell keeps a
>stock of certain viruses containing certain pieces of DNA as
>a sort of spare parts store to repair any serious damage to
>some vital parts of the cell DNA. All this is of course merely
>theory at the moment
but it is certainly a fact that viruses
>both exist and are able to program cells to produce copies
>of themselves.
axel:
bring the proof so i can see it. i want a video to see the virus doing
anything.
alan:
>Using our common sense we could at least say that viruses are
>most probably not supposed to be dangerous to humans. Why should
>a god or evolution develop some organism which is dangerous to
>another except if that organism needs the other as a food
>source?
axel:
do you think that some organic matter is an organism? i do not.
alan:
The answer is twofold I think. Firstly: Humans have
>an inbuilt mechanism for dealing with any foreign viruses it
>does not want or need, i.e. a healthy immune system. Secondly:
>Specific organisms all have their own specific viruses living
>in specific environments. So why should viruses be dangerous
>to man? Again common sense alone provides several answers:
>
>- A child has not been weaned properly and thus has not been
>given enough antibodies from the mother as a "starter kit" in
>life, i.e. before developing enough of its own. There are
>enough studies around which point to bottle-fed children
>being less resistant to virus infections.
>
>- Man himself may weaken his or her immune system by unhealthy
>eating and other detrimental activities. Again there are
>many studies which document this aspect.
>
>- Man, through his feeding habits, may have subjected himself
>to foods containing virulent viruses which are well endowed
>with the capability of mutating fast to quickly form the "key"
>which a cell needs to be entered. In other words these viruses
>are merely attempting to find a possible home within a foreign
>organism (i.e. man). They do not mean to harm man, they are
>merely displaced from their normal environment and attempt to
>survive in the new environment (even though their survival
>attempts may harm man).
axel:
but, but... how can they do all this? how do they actually DO all this?
they cannot move by themselves, they cannot do anything whatsover, so how
do they manage to perform this things?
alan:
It is strongly suspected that Ebola,
>for example, is an otherwise harmless virus that normally
>lives in some organism up high in the trees of certain
>jungle regions of Africa. Chimp troops in the jungle have
>been seen by researchers to die from Ebola
axel:
what does it mean to die from a piece of organic matter? i do not believe a
human body can die from organic molecules alone. no way, the body is too
good for that.
alan:
A strain of the HIV virus has
>also been detected in apes BTW, and AIDS is also said to
>have first broken out in Africa.
axel:
i think your posts are interesting and at least I have learned new things
from them, but it seems that you have not read the anti-AIDS literature.
hiv is a hoax and a myth, there is no science to back up anything about
hiv. AIDS does not exist as a separate disease. let me say it more clearly:
AIDS DOES NOT EXIST!
what i mean, is that just because they invented a virus, invented a
worthless test, terrified the world, invented a deadly worthless treatment,
and also say that sex and other things can transmit aids (100 percent
false), this does not mean that the disease really exists.
i write this because it is my feeling that in general people who question
the prevalent food paradigm also question other health-related topics. if
anybody in this list feels my points about aids are too off-topic, i will
refrain from saying anything else about it.
regards,
axel makaroff
|
