I'd prefer to let the evidence speak for itself. When Peter Duesberg,
one of the top virologists in the world and a member of the Academy of
Science, spoke out against the HIV/AIDS hypothesis, he was attacked in
every way imaginable, as was Nobel Prize winning biochemist Kary Mullis
(they said his surfing was problematic, for example). If these guys
are going to be attacked simply for asking for evidence to support
claims that lead to people taking highly toxic medication that they may
not need, and in fact might kill them, why should anyone want to "go
public?" That is why I am using this forum. I do hold a Ph.D. from a
major U.S. university. The most important thing is to get people
thinking for themselves, and I'm trying to show you all that there is
an underlying mechanism involved in "chronic disease" that is directly
tied to real, basic science. Proton and electron type stuff, not
surrogate marker multivariate correlation coefficient type stuff.
Always ask for the raw data, and if you can get it (once I was told
that I could not see the blank survey forms used in one study due to
"confidentiality" even though it was BLANK and I could never know who
was in the study!), start asking yourself what the basic science to it
is. Understanding and knowledge are two very diffferent things. You
don't need to be a walking encyclopedia to have a tremendous amount of
understanding, and in fact what is contained in books is often very
wrong. Try to read the following: start with Bruce Fife's good, basic,
"Saturated fat may save your life," then go on to Peter Duesberg's
"Inventing the AIDS Virus," and then go on to Gilbert Ling's "Life at
the cell and below-cell level." "The Modern Nutritional Diseases" by
Ottoboni and Ottoboni is okay as well. "The Cookbooks Decoder" by
Grosser is also good and very basic (though as usual, some of it is
incorrect). You can read biochemist Ray Peat's work on the internet.
Just do a google search for Ray Peat Newsletter. Some of his writing
is complicated and some is much more accessible. However, as I said,
if you do a search in this newsgroup for montygram, you will see how I
have tried to explain things very simply. Sometimes I do a better job
than other times, but if you read a lot of them, I think things will
begin to make sense.
