Pat Fallon, firstname.lastname@example.org, writes:
> The HIV antibody test might simply be picking up on
> human-produced “HIV” material. In this case, a positive
> test would mean that cells of the body had been
> sufficiently damaged to generate a reaction. A positive test
> would be a marker of disease — not necessarily that
> “HIV” is the cause of AIDS.
Would this theory predict that AIDS is non-infectious? Each person is manufacturing his own endogenous retrovirus?
How would it explain the epidemiological trail seen in AIDS, which Steve Harris describe? One infected person has sex with another, and then the other guy gets it?
If there is no such thing as HIV, why would everyone's self-manufactured retrovirus be the same? Don't we all differ in our genome?
Why do the anti-viral drugs which arrest HIV in the test tube work so well on people? Isn't this the bottom line, that mainstream theories of HIV infection have produced therapies which have greatly reduced the death rate from AIDS?
What about the monkeys, and the SIV? Does that not exist either?