bigbaldbulldog
Banana
i want to get a blood test after my cycle ..what do i ask for? Along with that i will get an HIV test as well for peace of mind...We all should know , cause i am sure some of you have had some pretty dirty sex..unprotected !!!
Blood Test..what to ask for..
- Thread starter bigbaldbulldog
- Start date
supersport
New member
Definately get a liver panel done-this will show your liver enzyme activity. Check kidney function also,maybe even testosterone levels too unless you are going to start a cycle soon. usally you can get a comprehensive test done pretty cheap(70 bucks) that will show somw immune function(monoctes,white cell count,hemoglobin,red cell count, etc. if you have elevated liver values DO NOT TELL YOUR DOC YOU ARE HITTING THE SAUCE!!!Unless you are on very cool terms with him do not admit it-and no matter what DO NOT LET HIM RIGHT THAT IN YOUR FILE!!Believe me when i say there is no such thing as parient confidentiality-especially if he ever screws up and gets investigated the first thing the investigators take is the files.
Now all you guys and gals need to check this out. I am an alternative med researcher-will be starting a newslatter and writing a book on health(particularly immune function) and here comes some serious hardware concerning HIV. If anyone EVER gets an HIV test done do it under an ALIAS. if for some reason your test comes back positive you will be perpetually screwed if you ever try to purchase any kind of health insurance, or life insurance. And besides that, HIV IS NOT THE CAUSE OF AIDS. I have done well over 1000 hours of research(reading scientific reviews and interviewing patients,doctors, and scientists) and there has NEVER been proof that HIV causes aids. Here are some facts that i believe you will find very interesting.
The HIV test is NON SPECIFIC-this means that it tests for particles that are not exclusive to HIV-HIV shares many proteins that are associated with many other viruses and substances
At last count there are over 70 factors that will cause a non infected person to test positive for hiv
some of the causes of false positives are pregnancy,infection by hepatitis-b, people that work around horses,some vaccines.
There is a very high rate of false positives-and once you test positive, that is it my friend-no insurance company will deal with you
of the original blood cultures sent to Dr. Robert Gallo at the NIH by Dr. Montegneir of the Pastuer Institute in france in which the patients were deemed to have aids in 1984 DID NOT CONTAIN ANY LIVE VIRUS AT ALL. Montegnier said after 2 years extra study that"HIV is not the cause of AIDS.
There is a membership of over 1500 doctors and scientists from around the world-The SCientific Group for the Reapprasial of Aids-which includes 3 nobel prize winners, all say HIV is NOT the cause of Aids
Perhaps the most damaging work to the HIV_AIDS model has been by world renouned retroviral expert peter Duesberg. Duesberg's accomplishments include discovering the first cancer gene in 1970-he has a list of accomlades that most scientist only dream of. He was awarded a federal grant in 1986 in which he studied HIV in his own lab at U> CAL. berkely and after reading every published paper on HIV he adressed a world symposium at Amsterdam and said-HIV is harmless-it is an ordinary retrovirus-a passenger virus that exudes no cell killing capability whatsoever. And he added he was so sure of his claims and research "he would not mind being injected with it"(Farber,C."Aids-Words from The Front"SPIN magazine(june,1988)p.73
More on all this tonight. gotta train!
Now all you guys and gals need to check this out. I am an alternative med researcher-will be starting a newslatter and writing a book on health(particularly immune function) and here comes some serious hardware concerning HIV. If anyone EVER gets an HIV test done do it under an ALIAS. if for some reason your test comes back positive you will be perpetually screwed if you ever try to purchase any kind of health insurance, or life insurance. And besides that, HIV IS NOT THE CAUSE OF AIDS. I have done well over 1000 hours of research(reading scientific reviews and interviewing patients,doctors, and scientists) and there has NEVER been proof that HIV causes aids. Here are some facts that i believe you will find very interesting.
The HIV test is NON SPECIFIC-this means that it tests for particles that are not exclusive to HIV-HIV shares many proteins that are associated with many other viruses and substances
At last count there are over 70 factors that will cause a non infected person to test positive for hiv
some of the causes of false positives are pregnancy,infection by hepatitis-b, people that work around horses,some vaccines.
There is a very high rate of false positives-and once you test positive, that is it my friend-no insurance company will deal with you
of the original blood cultures sent to Dr. Robert Gallo at the NIH by Dr. Montegneir of the Pastuer Institute in france in which the patients were deemed to have aids in 1984 DID NOT CONTAIN ANY LIVE VIRUS AT ALL. Montegnier said after 2 years extra study that"HIV is not the cause of AIDS.
There is a membership of over 1500 doctors and scientists from around the world-The SCientific Group for the Reapprasial of Aids-which includes 3 nobel prize winners, all say HIV is NOT the cause of Aids
Perhaps the most damaging work to the HIV_AIDS model has been by world renouned retroviral expert peter Duesberg. Duesberg's accomplishments include discovering the first cancer gene in 1970-he has a list of accomlades that most scientist only dream of. He was awarded a federal grant in 1986 in which he studied HIV in his own lab at U> CAL. berkely and after reading every published paper on HIV he adressed a world symposium at Amsterdam and said-HIV is harmless-it is an ordinary retrovirus-a passenger virus that exudes no cell killing capability whatsoever. And he added he was so sure of his claims and research "he would not mind being injected with it"(Farber,C."Aids-Words from The Front"SPIN magazine(june,1988)p.73
More on all this tonight. gotta train!
supersport
New member
another Duesberg quote-
Retroviruses(this is the class of virus hiv is a member of) are not typically cytocidal,meaning they do not kill cells.
Here is what Harvey bialy,MD,former scientific editor of the journal BIOTECHNOLOGY says-"HIV is an ordinary retrovirus.It only contains a very small piece of genetic information. There is no way it can perform all these elaborate things they say it does"
Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis,inventor of the PCR(Polymerase chain Reaction) says of the HIV causes aids theory-
"Nobody in their right mind would jump into this thing like they did. it had nothing to do with any well considered science. There were some people that had AIDS and some of them had HIV-NOT EVEN ALL OF THEM. So they had a correlation. So what?"Farber,C."Fatal Distraction"Spin magazine,8number39May 92)p36. It should be noted that correlation does not prove causation.
i could go on (and will if anyone is interested) but I think you get the point. So what causes aids then?
DRUGS. Especially cocaine and nitrate inhalants(poppers). UCLA did a study recently where mice were injected with cocaine. The drug induced group saw a 9 fold DECREASE in immune cells versus the control group(non drug injected mice) poppers have consistently been shown to destroy immune function and have been directly linked to Kaposi's sarcoma, a very rare skin cancer found predominantly in gay men. For the record, the gay male subculture is a drug bonanza where poppers especially are used for sexual excitation and relaxing of the sphincter muscle to facilitate anal penetration.
Can there be AIDS without HIV? Absolutely. In the mid nineties there were at least 6 thousand such cases in the US.But because HIV is not present it is not called AIDS. The Center for Disease Control quickly named this new entity "ICL", which stands for IdiopathicCD-4 lymphocytopenia.(Idiopathic stands for"disease of unknown origin"
i have a best friend living in Baltimore who has a brother that suffers from this. He is openly homosexual, a multitude of sexual partners, uses every drug on the planet,antibiotics(to combat all of the infections-antibiotics suppress natural immune response),has Kaposi's and has repeatedly tested NEGATIVE for HIV and his doctor has diagnosed him with AIDS.
So lets take a quick look at AZT,the treatment of choice for hiv infection. AZT is a chemotheraputic drug that was proposed for cancer patients in the early 1960's. it was turned down by the FDA on grounds it was too toxic. If it is too toxic for cancer patients, then why was it rapidly approved for AIDS patients with broken immune systems in 1985?I have seen pictures of bottles of AZT and it literally has a skull and cross bones on it as a representative of its toxicity. AZT is a DNA chain terminator in which it interupts the replication of cells,thus destroying them. Most experts agree that at most 1 t-helper immune cell in 500 is infected by HIV(and keep in mind that just because the cell is infected does not mean it can not perform its job) and for AZT to kill the one infected cell in 500 it also kills the remaining 499 UNINFECTED t-helper cells. AZT cannot differentiate between infected and uninfected cells. Using this example it can be said that AZT is some 500 times more deadly than HIV. Within weeks of beginning AZT therapy the patient usually experiences anemia as bone marrow function practically ceases, dementia, headaches, severe nausea,acute hepatitis,siezures,and the appearance of cancerous lymphomas in 9 percent of users.
Here is a little bit about transmission of HIV. These dessident scientists can talk until they are blue in the face, but i doubt many people will believe them because this HIV_AIDS theory is literally ground into everyones mind. So despite overwhelming evidence that disproves this theory, lets say you are still convinced that HIV is deadly. Well then you better not engage in anal sex according to Stuart BrodyphD,author of Sex at Risk. i have ordered this book, and have read the rave reviews of it by his peers and colleages. He has studied heterosexual couples where one partner is infected by HIV and the other is not. Couples that perform only vaginal penetration experience virtually no transmission(it is something like .0009%) However in couples that perfrm anal sex hiv transmission is virtually guaranteed. EVEN WITH CONDOMS! The hiv virus is about 450 times smaller than a sperm cell and passes through latex condoms,according to Brody. Might want to reconsider the backdoor thing, but hey, HIV is a latent passenger virus that exudes no cell killing capability whatsoever anyway....
Retroviruses(this is the class of virus hiv is a member of) are not typically cytocidal,meaning they do not kill cells.
Here is what Harvey bialy,MD,former scientific editor of the journal BIOTECHNOLOGY says-"HIV is an ordinary retrovirus.It only contains a very small piece of genetic information. There is no way it can perform all these elaborate things they say it does"
Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis,inventor of the PCR(Polymerase chain Reaction) says of the HIV causes aids theory-
"Nobody in their right mind would jump into this thing like they did. it had nothing to do with any well considered science. There were some people that had AIDS and some of them had HIV-NOT EVEN ALL OF THEM. So they had a correlation. So what?"Farber,C."Fatal Distraction"Spin magazine,8number39May 92)p36. It should be noted that correlation does not prove causation.
i could go on (and will if anyone is interested) but I think you get the point. So what causes aids then?
DRUGS. Especially cocaine and nitrate inhalants(poppers). UCLA did a study recently where mice were injected with cocaine. The drug induced group saw a 9 fold DECREASE in immune cells versus the control group(non drug injected mice) poppers have consistently been shown to destroy immune function and have been directly linked to Kaposi's sarcoma, a very rare skin cancer found predominantly in gay men. For the record, the gay male subculture is a drug bonanza where poppers especially are used for sexual excitation and relaxing of the sphincter muscle to facilitate anal penetration.
Can there be AIDS without HIV? Absolutely. In the mid nineties there were at least 6 thousand such cases in the US.But because HIV is not present it is not called AIDS. The Center for Disease Control quickly named this new entity "ICL", which stands for IdiopathicCD-4 lymphocytopenia.(Idiopathic stands for"disease of unknown origin"
i have a best friend living in Baltimore who has a brother that suffers from this. He is openly homosexual, a multitude of sexual partners, uses every drug on the planet,antibiotics(to combat all of the infections-antibiotics suppress natural immune response),has Kaposi's and has repeatedly tested NEGATIVE for HIV and his doctor has diagnosed him with AIDS.
So lets take a quick look at AZT,the treatment of choice for hiv infection. AZT is a chemotheraputic drug that was proposed for cancer patients in the early 1960's. it was turned down by the FDA on grounds it was too toxic. If it is too toxic for cancer patients, then why was it rapidly approved for AIDS patients with broken immune systems in 1985?I have seen pictures of bottles of AZT and it literally has a skull and cross bones on it as a representative of its toxicity. AZT is a DNA chain terminator in which it interupts the replication of cells,thus destroying them. Most experts agree that at most 1 t-helper immune cell in 500 is infected by HIV(and keep in mind that just because the cell is infected does not mean it can not perform its job) and for AZT to kill the one infected cell in 500 it also kills the remaining 499 UNINFECTED t-helper cells. AZT cannot differentiate between infected and uninfected cells. Using this example it can be said that AZT is some 500 times more deadly than HIV. Within weeks of beginning AZT therapy the patient usually experiences anemia as bone marrow function practically ceases, dementia, headaches, severe nausea,acute hepatitis,siezures,and the appearance of cancerous lymphomas in 9 percent of users.
Here is a little bit about transmission of HIV. These dessident scientists can talk until they are blue in the face, but i doubt many people will believe them because this HIV_AIDS theory is literally ground into everyones mind. So despite overwhelming evidence that disproves this theory, lets say you are still convinced that HIV is deadly. Well then you better not engage in anal sex according to Stuart BrodyphD,author of Sex at Risk. i have ordered this book, and have read the rave reviews of it by his peers and colleages. He has studied heterosexual couples where one partner is infected by HIV and the other is not. Couples that perform only vaginal penetration experience virtually no transmission(it is something like .0009%) However in couples that perfrm anal sex hiv transmission is virtually guaranteed. EVEN WITH CONDOMS! The hiv virus is about 450 times smaller than a sperm cell and passes through latex condoms,according to Brody. Might want to reconsider the backdoor thing, but hey, HIV is a latent passenger virus that exudes no cell killing capability whatsoever anyway....
bigbaldbulldog
Banana
Holy Shit Fire..dude you know your stuff.It is nice to get the inside scoop instead of that crap the media throws down our throats . ..look forward to reading more great info from you bro...
supersport
New member
I will be posting more tonight in this thread-just got of a radio show this morning concerning HIV-AIDS. It would be great to hear more input,comments,facts,theories,questions from more members concerning this subject. And you are exactly right about the propoganda the media displays for us concerning HIV-AIDS-kind of reminds me of the same type of propoganda they display concerning AAS...doesn't it?!
supersport
New member
I need to correct a typo in my first post-of the original blood samples sent from the pastuer Inst. to gallo at NIH there were some that did not contain antibodies to HIV and not even half contained any trace of HIV virus....
supersport
New member
Here are some interesting quotes by a few of the scientists that comprise The Group For The Scientific Reappraisal of Aids-
Kary Mullis,Biochemist,1993 Nobel Prize Winner for Chemistry-
"If there is evedence that HIV causes Aids there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact,at least with a high probability. There is no such document". sunday times(london)28NOV 1993
Dr. Serge Lang,professor of mathematics,Yale University
"I do not regard the causeal(no typo-causeal, not casual) relationship between HIV and any disease unsettled.I have seen cosiderable evidence that highly improper statistics concerning HIV and Aids have been passed off as science,and that the top members of the scientific establishment have carelessly, if not irresponsibly, joined the media in spreading misinformation about the nature of AIDS."-Yale Scientific,fall 1994
Dr Richard Strohman,Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology at U.CAL-berkeley
""In the old days it was required that a scientist address the possibilities of proving his hypothesis wrong as well as right. Now there is none of that in standard HIV-AIDS program with its billions of dollars" Penthouse.april 94
Dr. Charles Thomas,former professor of biochemistry Harvard and Johns Hopkins Universities-
"The HIV-causes AIDS dogma represents the grandest and perhaps the most morally destructive fraud that has ever been perpetuated on young men and women of the western world"
Kary Mullis,Biochemist,1993 Nobel Prize Winner for Chemistry-
"If there is evedence that HIV causes Aids there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact,at least with a high probability. There is no such document". sunday times(london)28NOV 1993
Dr. Serge Lang,professor of mathematics,Yale University
"I do not regard the causeal(no typo-causeal, not casual) relationship between HIV and any disease unsettled.I have seen cosiderable evidence that highly improper statistics concerning HIV and Aids have been passed off as science,and that the top members of the scientific establishment have carelessly, if not irresponsibly, joined the media in spreading misinformation about the nature of AIDS."-Yale Scientific,fall 1994
Dr Richard Strohman,Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology at U.CAL-berkeley
""In the old days it was required that a scientist address the possibilities of proving his hypothesis wrong as well as right. Now there is none of that in standard HIV-AIDS program with its billions of dollars" Penthouse.april 94
Dr. Charles Thomas,former professor of biochemistry Harvard and Johns Hopkins Universities-
"The HIV-causes AIDS dogma represents the grandest and perhaps the most morally destructive fraud that has ever been perpetuated on young men and women of the western world"
homonunculus
New member
bigbaldbulldog said:
Looks like supersport covered the HIV test idea. I won't comment on that except to say that the cited data and the last set of quotes seems to be a bit dated - all from nearly 10 years ago or before...
Anyway, as far as lab stuff, ask for a CBC and a Basic MEtabolic Profile (or whatever they happen to call it). They may have a BMP that includes hormonal panels. If that is the case, go with that one. Ask specifically for steroid hormones. (They often put thyroid releated hormones in with a BMP).
That ought to be a start.
-Randy
supersport
New member
hey Randy-saw the pics the other day-awesome bro.
Something that is interesting is the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal for Aids had a membership in or about 1994 of around 600 members. Today there are over 1500.
Here is something from 97-regarding "safe sex"
Drs. Zelig Friedman and Lillian Trivelli of the HIV/AIDS advisory council of NYC Board of Education express grave concerns about condom effectiveness and write:
Although no one would argue that condoms may help reduce the risk of pregnancy and some diseases if used perfectly, a closer look at the circumstances of failure renders this option unacceptable. Condoms have a poor track record as contraceptives (15% failure for youngsters in the first year of use),OFFER NO PROTECTION FOR CHLAMYDIA OR HPV(human papiloma virus) and have a 2.4%rate of tearing,breakage and slippage. WITH REGARD TO HIV THEY ARE NOT IMPERMEABLE.--Freeman and trivelli, "Condom Availability for Youth-a High Risk Alternative". Pediatrics,2/97,p285
Something that is interesting is the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal for Aids had a membership in or about 1994 of around 600 members. Today there are over 1500.
Here is something from 97-regarding "safe sex"
Drs. Zelig Friedman and Lillian Trivelli of the HIV/AIDS advisory council of NYC Board of Education express grave concerns about condom effectiveness and write:
Although no one would argue that condoms may help reduce the risk of pregnancy and some diseases if used perfectly, a closer look at the circumstances of failure renders this option unacceptable. Condoms have a poor track record as contraceptives (15% failure for youngsters in the first year of use),OFFER NO PROTECTION FOR CHLAMYDIA OR HPV(human papiloma virus) and have a 2.4%rate of tearing,breakage and slippage. WITH REGARD TO HIV THEY ARE NOT IMPERMEABLE.--Freeman and trivelli, "Condom Availability for Youth-a High Risk Alternative". Pediatrics,2/97,p285
supersport
New member
Here is something funny-Dr. Gallo allegedly has been tucked away by the NIH so no one can ask him about his "proof" of HIV-AIDS. It is his paper soley that is the document that has established the HIV-AIDS theory, and it was published in 1984. To date no other document has proven HIV_AIDS, and his certainly does not prove it either(not all of the blood cultures had antibodies to HIV, and less than half had detectable live virus)
I have learned in my reading that Gallo has falsified research on at least 2 occasions. This matter did supposedly go to court-i am trying to find the verdict in each case.Also something very interesting is that Gallo holds the patent on the HIV-antibody
test-he has made hundreds of thousands, if not over a million dollars from this patent. Also supposedly no one is allowed to ask him about his research to confirm HIV causes AIDS-the NIH screens all interviews with Gallo and if this kind of questioning is going to be asked, the interview is not allowed. I am going to find out for myself as i am preparing some questions for Gallo that i am sending to NIH through registered mail and I will certainly post whatever feedback is returned....
I have learned in my reading that Gallo has falsified research on at least 2 occasions. This matter did supposedly go to court-i am trying to find the verdict in each case.Also something very interesting is that Gallo holds the patent on the HIV-antibody
test-he has made hundreds of thousands, if not over a million dollars from this patent. Also supposedly no one is allowed to ask him about his research to confirm HIV causes AIDS-the NIH screens all interviews with Gallo and if this kind of questioning is going to be asked, the interview is not allowed. I am going to find out for myself as i am preparing some questions for Gallo that i am sending to NIH through registered mail and I will certainly post whatever feedback is returned....
Similar threads
