Re: HIV=/=AIDS video
Enigl@aol.com
Thu, 6 Mar 1997 22:08:49 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 97-03-05 13:26:52 EST, you write:
<< In these AIDS indicator diseases that
>are not caused by immunodeficiency >>
By definition, disease is caused by some kind of immunodeficiency or there
would not be a disease. Unless you mean a definition that
non-immunodeficiency is a patient with CD4+ over 1.0. You see, 0.3 is the
AIDS cut-off plus the 0.3 must be declining or the CDC has a problem with an
AIDS diagnosis. CDC says between 0.3 and 1.0 are other diseases (possibly
not fatal as AIDS is) but not AIDS.
BTW, The skeptics use <= 1.0 as the cut-off to make their case against HIV
erroneously stronger, letting non-AIDS patients into their AIDS defined
group. They can then claim some non-AIDS ( CD4+ 0.4-1.0) patients don't have
HIV present. Pretty tricky if you ask me. But then again they are about 200
people fighting against great odds and need some kind of edge since they
their arguments have so far been rejected by peer reviews.
Davin
Davin C. Enigl, (Sole Proprietorship) MEAS
President-Microbiologist
Microbiology Consulting, Hazard Analysis and
Critical Control Points (HACCP), CGMP, and Validations
for the Food, Cosmetic, Nutritional Supplement, and Pharmaceutical Industry
enigl@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/enigl/index.html
March 6, 1997
7:03 pm