Re: Insufficient science killed Asimov

From: Pat Fallon (pfallon@ptd.net)
Date: Fri Mar 08 2002 - 08:50:54 MST


> > Pat Fallon writes:
> > > I respectfully disagree. I think the Perth Group
> > > [http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/perthgroup/index.html] provides a good
> > > argument that there are indeed major flaws in current AIDS science.
> >

> I am not a doctor either, but I have been a professional bullshit
> detector in other fields, and most of this AIDS-is-not-HIV stuff sets
> off my alarms pretty heavily.

The "bullshit dectector" in the field of virology used to be Koch's
postulates. Koch's postulates are simply the application of logic to the
problem of determining whether a disease is caused by an infectious agent or
not.

If you abandon Koch's Postulates, than how do you know if a disease is
caused by a common infectious agent?

It doesn't really matter to me HOW someone isolates HIV, only that they
logically prove that the proteins and genetic material to be used to detect
the virus in later tests came from an infectious virus.

IMHO, this has not been done with HIV. That set off the bullshit dectector
of Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos et al [The Perth Group] and others.

You can't put the cart before the horse. Somebody first has to isolate the
candidate virus, prove that it is present in sufficient numbers to cause the
symptoms in the affected cells, characterize the proteins and genetic
material, reinfect host cultures, see increased numbers, reisolate and
compare the proteins and genetic material.

This is not an insurmountable problem. We should follow the logical methods
elucidated by Karl Popper, IMHO. The theory that HIV causes AIDS makes [and
did make] different predictions than the Perth Groups theory. Compare the
predictions of each theory.

When I get a chance, I'll list some of the different predictions of the 2
theories, if anyone cares.

Pat Fallon
pfallon@ptd.net



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:51 MST