> all 11 people that i know who has taken themselves off of the drugs or
> been encouraged to do so has gotten better and stayed better. no that's
> not scientific evidence of anything but it sure is powerful anecdotal
> evidence that should be examined.
I do not doubt that many of the AIDS drugs have toxic side effects (that could be alleviated with medicinal mj, ahem). I also do not doubt that zealous doctors and pharmaceutical companies over-prescribe. And finally, I do not doubt that the political nature of the disease caused a lot of politicians and doctors to declare HIV as causal long before it should have been according to traditional standards.
However, the site Chris linked to is about 3 years behind the times. I only gave it a casual look, but I see no mention of the PCR based HIV assay. Granted, there were AIDS sufferers at one time where no HIV virus could be detected. Hoever all of those make reference to the older immuno-reactive detection techniques. Since invention of the PCR based HIV assay every AIDS sufferer who has been tested with it has tested positive for HIV (rebuttal references welcome).
It should be noted that Chris's assertions have only very recently become unlikely. Doubts about the HIV and AIDS relationships were nothing but healthy skeptical doubt up until a few recent innovations. It is certainly *not* tin-foil hat material.
I can't speak with any knowledge regarding Pres. Mbeki's position. I would wonder if they are using immuno-reactive tests or PCR tests in their country.
Matt
-- Matt Cramer <cramer at voicenet.com> http://www.voicenet.com/~cramer/ If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by a judge, and contrary to the evidence.
-4th Circuit Court of Appeals, US v Moylan, 1969