Talk:Human immunodeficiency virus

I recently came across what I see as some compelling evidence compiled by a biochemist named Duesberg that HIV is not actually the cause of AIDS -- but rather, AIDS is a chemical disease brought on by extended recreational drug use and AZT (a drug used to treat AIDS). Obviously this is a controversial position. Would you be open to discussing some of this evidence at the end of the article? Ungtss 21:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As long as you don't imply that it is a creationist position. ~ MD "Webster" Otley (talk) 21:20, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Certainly. I don't imagine Duesberg would classify himself as a creationist:).  Ungtss 21:46, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How'd I do? Ungtss 22:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. I suppose next we should critique the criticism.  My first two questions would be:  first, What about the folks that got HIV/AIDS from a blood transfusion, and secondly, why did AIDS rates go down in Uganda (unlike the rest of Africa) after sustained promotion of sexual abstinence?  Also, the presence of antibodies does not mean that the body has immunized itself, it only means that it has begun to react to the infection. ~ MD "Webster" Otley (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent points -- I'm certainly no expert and am still trying to figure all the nuances out. Here's what I have:
 * 1) The argument here is that foreign proteins in factor VIII clotting agent are immunosuppressive.  scientists had observed unusually widespread illnesses indicative of a suppressed immune system in the 60s and 70s, and concluded that "transfusion is immunosuppressive in an as-yet-unknown way."  Until recently, commercially produced factor 8 had 99-99.9% foreign protein content.  In 1983 (before HIV) a study had found an inverse correlation between the amount of factor VIII a patient had been administerred, and the T-Cell count.  A study in 1991 found immunosuppression reversed among both HIV positive and HIV negative patients who received purified Factor VIII clotting agent.  There are no studies showing that HIV+ hemophiliacs have increased mortality + morbity over HIV- hemophiliacs.  CDC reports hemophiliac mortality had been decreasing steadily from the 60s to the 80s, and then suddenly jumped 2.5 fold between 1987 and 1989.  That corresponds to the introduction of AZT, the toxic HIV-treatment drug.  That's just a taste of the paper, and I haven't had time yet to substantiate his citations, but if true it's pretty solid stuff I think.
 * 2) The "AIDS control program" in Uganda began at the end of its devastating civil war. Given the Bangui definition of AIDS, and how most of its symptoms are nothing more than the common diseases of malnutrition and poverty, it doesn't really surprise me that people had better immune systems after the war ended and they were able to rebuild their country.
 * 3) True, but the presence of antibodies in the absence of a virus does mean immunity has been achieved -- and that's what's observed right until the end of an AIDS patient's life -- when the immune system goes into total shutdown, and all infections (even the harmless ones) are free to run wild.  Ungtss 14:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)