new deadly human-to-human-transmissible coronavirus emerges out of China
POSTED BY: 1KIKI
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 22:21
VIEWED: 203741
PAGE 48 of 283
Quote:I don't worry. He's a big boy. If he wants discussion he needs to post something resembling reality. If he insists on having his fantasies coddled, he's not going to get that from me.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
KIKI, leave SIX alone about this. I worry about his emotional state and his sobriety, He may be drunk-posting again.
eta: But he definitely has a very glitchy response to anything that makes him feel threatened/ overwhelmed. And he's decided he's going to get rid of his anxieties by denying reality. Because he's only got 2 responses: either your COWERING BEHIND A MASK or THERE'S NO SERIOUS CORONAVIRUS. In his mind, there's no such thing as taking precautions without any cowering. Either you're A TERRORIZED LITTLE BOY or THERE'S NO SUCH THINGS AS HIV/ AIDS. In all his years he can't grasp the middle ground that says you can take precaution without being terrorized. And so on.
Eh. His problem. But I don't have to tolerate the nonsense either.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
stupidity
fify
Unless you post relevant UP TO DATE FACTS to back your religion up, I'll not discuss this further and I'll simply mock your ignorance.
You're worse than an idiot about HIV/ AIDS.
Belief is for wimps and mental midgets!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Good.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Nope. Not drinking.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yup. I'm not going to start drinking because somebody is trying to force their religion on me.
If that were the case, I'd have been drinking all this time since the Jehovah's Witnesses haven't gotten the hint after 8 years. 
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, still, don't be offended if I ignore everything you post about AIDS. Just because someone weaponized it ("Never let a good crisis go to waste") doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
*****
Total cases in Italy 2000
Virus in 7 USA states
South Korea has more than 2000 infections, adherents to the sect thru which it spread concentrated in southern California
More than 30 nations across the globe, with "new cases" exceeding China's
AND YET, WHO, AND TEDROS, STILL HAVE NOT DECLARED A PANDEMIC.
Someone should really look into those "pandemic bonds".
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:fify
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Yup. I'm not going to start drinking because somebody is trying toforce their religionpost their factsonto me.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Belief is for wimps and mental midgets!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The irony.
Beliefs which have not and cannot be proven are known as Religion, or Cult.
Quote:So you rant on about your AIDS Religion.
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Unless you post relevant UP TO DATE FACTS to back your religion up, I'll not discuss this further and I'll simply mock your ignorance.
You're worse than an idiot about HIV/ AIDS.
Quote:And then your signature makes fun of yourself.
Belief is for wimps and mental midgets!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Meaning the following 4 pillars are equally loaded, and the failure of any one pillar collapses the premise/hypothesis/belief.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Where is your EVIDENCE? Bring your cites and links here, so we can discuss them, because everything I have read says otherwise.
In order to meet the criteria that the HIV virus causes disease, it meets the following criteria:
Quote:Here you are tiptoeing carefully round the facts. I don't have my books or references handy right now, so I must recall what I can. Of the correlations of "the disease" (meaning the symptom package), the presence of the HIV Antibody ranks 3rd, with around 80% correlation among those not subjected to "AIDS Medications" (aka Drugs). The 2 correlations which are greater are one at about mid-80's and the other about 92%. I forget the order of the 2, but the correlations are for Marijuana Abuse, and for Cocaine Use/Abuse. Not the greatest or most convincing argument for any virus causing any "desease" - although in reasearch, correlation is a useful clue.
1. The presence of the virus is correlated with the disease.
Correlation does not equal causation.
Quote:This is not true. If it were true, then far more folk would have less reason to dispute the premise. Not all who have the symptoms have the HIV Antibody (which is the "test for HIV"). Since the 1920s or 1930s, many thousands of those who have had the symptoms did not have the HIV Antibody (known) although they did still have the known causes of these symptoms - just like these "AIDS" cases continue to have the same known causes, known and listed in DSM-IV since the 1950's.
2. While not everyone who has the virus has the symptoms, everone who has the symptoms has the virus.
But you have chosen to dismiss these known causes of the known immuno-deficiencies because you want to shove these known causes under the "gay lifestyle" umbrella, despite them being well-documented for decades, if not centuries.
Quote:This is not true. For groups who were "exposed" and tested positive for the HIV Antibody, and then LEFT UNTREATED for decades, symptoms and "disease" never presented and they had normally healthy lives.
3. Those who previously did not have the virus (demonstrated) later acquire both symptoms and virus after exposure.
Quote:So, of the 4 required pillars (as you stated), 3 are failures, so your premise collapses. As does your denomination/sect of your AIDS Religion.
4. Focusing treatment on the virus (with anti-retrovirals and other anti-virals) reduces both symptoms and assayed viral load.
Quote:To help move this discussion along a bit, can you name the person who developed the hypothesis that "AIDS" was caused by HIV? If you wish to include the year, that is fine as well.
It seems to me that the person with th religion is you, so bring your arguments forth and we can discuss them.
*****
Now, I'm well aware that there are many "diseases" that aren't caused by germs: Heart disease. Nutritional deficiencies like pellagra disease. Rhuematoid arthritis and other autoimmune "dieases". Genetic and mitochondrial diseases.
Still, you can't dismiss the "germ theory of disease" in relationship to AIDS. Well, maybe YOU can, but you shouldn't.
If you are looking for information to enlighten yourself, I noticed virusmyth.com - which I had not seen before, but I recognize many of the authors.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I have no idea WTF you're writing about. Maybe you need to drill down a little on what the "symptom package" is, and what is being correlated to what, because I am not thinking about generic symptoms like "diarrhea" or "weight loss". So be specific... WHAT is being correlated to marijuana and cocaine?
Where is your EVIDENCE? Bring your cites and links here, so we can discuss them, because everything I have read says otherwise.
In order to meet the criteria that the HIV virus causes disease, it meets the following criteria:...
JSF: Meaning the following 4 pillars are equally loaded, and the failure of any one pillar collapses the premise/hypothesis/belief.
1
SIGNY.... The presence of the virus is correlated with the disease...
JSF: Here you are tiptoeing carefully round the facts. I don't have my books or references handy right now, so I must recall what I can. Of the correlations of "the disease" (meaning the symptom package), the presence of the HIV Antibody ranks 3rd, with around 80% correlation among those not subjected to "AIDS Medications" (aka Drugs). The 2 correlations which are greater are one at about mid-80's and the other about 92%. I forget the order of the 2, but the correlations are for Marijuana Abuse, and for Cocaine Use/Abuse. Not the greatest or most convincing argument for any virus causing any "desease" - although in reasearch, correlation is a useful clue.
Correlation does not equal causation.
I'll leave the rest for later.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
Happy New Year, WISHY. I edited out your psychopathic screed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I have no idea WTF you're writing about. Maybe you need to drill down a little on what the "symptom package" is, and what is being correlated to what, because I am not thinking about generic symptoms like "diarrhea" or "weight loss". So be specific... WHAT is being correlated to marijuana and cocaine?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:have read says otherwise.
Where is your EVIDENCE? Bring your cites and links here, so we can discuss them, because everything I
In order to meet the criteria that the HIV virus causes disease, it meets the following criteria:...
JSF: Meaning the following 4 pillars are equally loaded, and the failure of any one pillar collapses the premise/hypothesis/belief.
1
SIGNY.... The presence of the virus is correlated with the disease...
JSF: Here you are tiptoeing carefully round the facts. I don't have my books or references handy right now, so I must recall what I can. Of the correlations of "the disease" (meaning the symptom package), the presence of the HIV Antibody ranks 3rd, with around 80% correlation among those not subjected to "AIDS Medications" (aka Drugs). The 2 correlations which are greater are one at about mid-80's and the other about 92%. I forget the order of the 2, but the correlations are for Marijuana Abuse, and for Cocaine Use/Abuse. Not the greatest or most convincing argument for any virus causing any "desease" - although in reasearch, correlation is a useful clue.
Correlation does not equal causation.
I'll leave the rest for later.
Short answer: All of the 30+ diseases with their known symptoms and known causes which have, post-1980, been redefined as "AIDS" - even though all of the same exact causes are present, and all of the same exact symptoms are present.
The so-called "AIDS" cases were defined and classed by the "AIDS" advocates to support their AIDS epidemic hysteria, so whatever they used as definition was what was used for the correlation. Since the AIDS hoax was not scientific, it is not like we can retroactively make scientific the illogical diagnosis, they were merely accepted for the criteria of determining correlation.
Somebdy mentioned 2 examples earlier - Kaposi's Sarcoma, and pneumocystis carinii.
I cannot pretend surprise if diarrhea or weight loss were used by AIDS advocates to define their "AIDS" cases, so if that is what the AIDS movement chose to define the cases, then nobody has been able to talk sense into them, then or now.
eta:
WHO’S RECOMMENDED CASE DEFINITION FOR AIDS
Different case definitions are used in different countries, depending on population factors (children, adults, relative occurrence of opportunistic infection) and on the laboratory infrastructure and training available. Current most used case definitions include for countries with... more sophisticated laboratory facilities
CDC 1987 (1)
CDC/CD4 (2)
European (3)
limited laboratory facilities
Abidjan/WHO (4)
Bangui/WHO (clinical) (5)
Caracas/PAHO (6) revised Caracas/PAHO (7)
1. 1987 CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION SURVEILLANCE DEFINITION FOR AIDS
Without laboratory evidence of HIV infection (in the absence of other causes of immune suppression)
Indicator disease diagnosed definitively
Candidiasis of the oesophagus, trachea, bronchi, or lungs
Cryptococcosis, extrapulmonary
Cryptosporidiosis with diarrhoea persisting > 1 month
Cytomegalovirus diseases of an organ other than liver spleen, or lymph nodes in a patient >1 month of age
Herpes simplex virus infection causing a mucocutaneous ulcer persisting > 1 month; or bronchitis, pneumonitis, or
oesophagitis for any duration in a patient > 1 month of age
Kaposi’ s sarcoma in a patient < 60 years of age
Lymphoma of the brain(primary) affecting a patient < 60 years of age
Mycobacterium avuim complex or M .kansasii disease, disseminated
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME