Most scientists believe that there is a retrovirus, "HIV," that causes
more than a dozen old diseases that now get classified as "AIDS."
You can go to www.aliveandwell.org and read their material, which is
designed for non-scientists, but the Perth Group of scientists has
written the best material on "AIDS," so I'll just suggesst you read
that material if you are interested in the subject.
The following is from a web site whose authors "believe" in the "HIV
causes AIDS" claim. What this one passage reveals, however, is how
assumptions lead to "experts" just going along with them. Because the
AIDS industry has so much money pumped into it, they actually do some
experiments now and then, and in this case, the data failed to support
the "HIV causes AIDS" claim. Of course, this does not seem to bother
many of today's "scientists," but at least it demonstrates what an on
point experiment is. The claim predicts that certain protein fragments
will be found in "AIDS dementia" patients' brains, but it is not.
I have pointed out that the claim that DHA is lacking in the brains of
elderly people with dementia is not backed by any on point evidence.
In the case of dementia in elderly people (below) the brains of elderly
people with and without dementia should be studied to see if there is a
difference in DHA content. Until then, what we have are predictions
based on assumptions, none of which have been tested with experiments
that follow the scientific method. I keep pointing out that the
studies that "experts" cite to support the "essential fatty acid"
either do not address the underlying mechanims involved, fail to use
proper controls, or a flawed in a number of other ways I've articulated
more than once on this newsgroup. Science has become more of a
pscyho-social phenomenon in many ways these days, espeically in
medicine/biology/nutrition, mainly because of special interests and the
ease with which "studies" can be "massaged" to obtain an interpretation
one desires. Sometimes, the results contradict the claims made by the
researchers who are generating those same results. I am here to
prevent nebulous claims from going unchallenged - that is what I was
trained to do in grad school. I am willing to put my own money up when
I think I am correct, but nobody is interested in taking me up on these
offers. I know all the tricks employed - they will not be able to play
the usual shell games with me, and they know they will just lose their
money and look foolish.
Here is the passage in question:
"Early studies investigating toxic activities of HIV
proteins focused on gp120. In experimental systems,
gp120 can act synergistically with glutamate (4) to
elicit excitotoxicity mediated by NO (5). However,
evidence from human postmortem studies to support this
experimentally-derived hypothesis has not been
forthcoming. Numerous investigators have failed to
observe gp120 in the brains of HIV infected patients."
Source: www.aidscience.org/neuroaids/
zones/articles/1999/10/Nitricoxide/index.asp