The following was posted on bionet.molbio.hiv:
As editor of the Preventive Medicine UP-DATE (PMUD) I met with
a) Dr. Garth Nicolson, Professor of Pathology and Internal Medicine,
Chairman Dept. of Tumor Biology, MD Anderson Hospital and Tumor In-
stitute, Univ. of Texas, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Houston TX 77030 and
b) Nancy Nicolson, PhD, President, Rhodon Foundation for Biomedical
Research, also Texas Univ. same address.
Since the data discussed are of extreme priority, it was agreed that
I would post the key findings on the Net.
The findings are:
1) Working, in a pilot study, with Gulf War veterans who suffered
from a variety of illnesses, they found that these Gulf War Syndrome
illnesses were caused by genetically altered mycoplasmas. While
mycoplasmas are usually not often associated with severe symptoms,
these altered mycoplasmas are dangerous and infectious.
2) The above conclusion was based on the observation that the myco-
plasmas found in blood samples of Desert Storm veterans contain
unusual DNA sequences that are most likely not found in the wild.
Detected were: the HIV-1 envelope gene and/or the HIV-1 polymerase
gene in subsets of Desert Storm veterans AND THEIR FAMILIES as well
as mycoplasma genitalium and mycoplasma incognitus (microorganisms
studied by Dr. Shyh Lo, formerly of Taxon Biosystems, now affiliated
with the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC). The
"pieces" detected were not the entire HIV genome.
PMUD:"Could these mycoplasmas be the elusive Co-factors for HIV to
cause AIDS?"
Researchers:"Definitely!"
PMUD:"How about prof. Peter Duesbergs views that HIV does not cause
AIDS?"
Researchers:"Duesberg was always and totally on target. HIV is only
a trigger."
–
do not regret the past.do not fear the future
In article <cooljurk-1907951249110…@slip141.sirius.com>
coolj…@sirius.com (River Phoenix) writes:
>The following was posted on bionet.molbio.hiv:
>PMUD:"Could these mycoplasmas be the elusive Co-factors for HIV to
>cause AIDS?"
>Researchers:"Definitely!"
>PMUD:"How about prof. Peter Duesbergs views that HIV does not cause
>AIDS?"
>Researchers:"Duesberg was always and totally on target. HIV is only
>a trigger."
>–
>do not regret the past.do not fear the future
Duesberg on a target with an HIV trigger–hmmmmm…
When there was a discussion on misc.health.aids about mycoplasmas not too
long ago I mentioned that I heard this. These researchers claim that the
number of Gulf War Vets coming down with Gulf War Syndrome is skyrocketing
and that only their lab is equipped to dectect these mycoplasmas. I had no
idea that they were also worshippers of Duesberg! In retrospect it makes
sense since Duesberg is the patron saint of the "anything but HIV" crowd.
These researchers were featured on WWCR (World-wide Christian Radio)
5.065 mhz (shortwave). This station is the heartbeat of the Right-Wing
militia movement in the United States. Duesberg has been a guest at least
three times on WWCR’s "Radio Free America", a show sponsored by the
Holocaust revisionists at Liberty Lobby and _THE_SPOTLIGHT_ magazine.
They probably love Duesberg because his parents worked as doctors for the
NAZI’s.
*********************************************************************
-James M. Scutero, original proponent of misc.health.aids
misc.health.aids WWW homepage: http://www.panix.com/~jscutero
Luc Montagnier, the discoverer of HIV, has proposed mycoplasmas as a
cofactor for AIDS. There are now claims that mycoplasmas might play a part
in Gulf War Syndrome.
JAMA – February 22, 1995–Vol. 273, No, 8
DOXYCYCLINE TREATMENT AND DESERT STORM
To the Editor – If the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Technology
Assessment Workshop report on Operation Desert Storm
syndrome/illnesses was meant to address fears that these illnesses are
not being taken seriously and to establish practical working case
definitions for the chronic illnesses associated with Operation Desert
Shield and Desert Storm, it was not an auspicious start. After
listening to the health complaints of numerous veterans of Operations
Desert Shield and Desert Storm, including our stepdaughter and her
colleagues who served in the US Army’s 101st Airborne Division and
complaints about their inability to convince military hospitals and
Veteran Affairs medical centers that they are suffering from a
possible syndrome with the same major symptoms listed in the workshop
report, we attempted to suggest that many of these symptoms can be
explained by aggressive pathogenic mycoplasma infections, such as
Mycoplasma incognitus or Mycoplasma penetrans[1] , and they should
be treatable with multiple courses of antibiotics, such as doxycycline
(100-200 mg/d) or marcolides. In the absence of available, sensitive,
and reliable tests for these mycoplasmas, we suggested that physicians
might consider empirical treatment with drugs like doxycycline[2] that
have minimal side effects and toxicity. In fact, of the 73 Desert
Storm veterans who had the symptoms listed in the report and with whom
we spoke by phone or contacted by letter, approximately 55 indicated
that they had good responses with doxycycline and eventually returned
to normal duty.
We consider it quite likely that many of the Desert Storm veterans
suffering from the symptoms described in the report may have been
infected with a microorganism, possibly an aggressive pathogenic
mycoplasma. This type of infection can produce chronic symptoms long
after exposure. If they were infected, how they were infected, and the
specific type of infectious agent involved will require careful
analysis. Obviously, other possible biological agents as well as
chemical exposure could result in complex symptoms, and this possible
explanation and treatment could only be expected to be effective for a
fraction of the Desert Storm veterans.
Garth L. Nicolson, PhD
The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
Houston, Tex
Nancy L. Rosenberg-Nicolson, PhD
Rhodon Foundation for Biomedical Research
Kingwood, Tex
*****************************************************************
-James M. Scutero, original proponent of misc.health.aids
misc.health.aids WWW homepage: http://www.panix.com/~jscutero
In article <russell.brill-1907950859240…@rmbrill.jpl.nasa.gov>,
Russell Brill <russell.br…@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>Can anybody tell me the chance of getting AIDS through vaginal sex in one
>encounter with a random person. A solid reference would be very useful,
>or better yet, an authorative text.
The frequency of the virus in the general population (all risk groups
included) is about 1 in 300 (based on the secret 800,000 estimated
infected) and the frequency of transmission per sexual act is about
1 in 1000 (DeVincenzi, NEJM, Aug 11, 1994). So multiply these and
you get an answer of 1 in 300,000. This is a rough estimate and
may be influenced by factors such as:
1. If the random person is a member of a risk group, where the
infection rate is higher.
2. The presence of other (more typical) sexually transmitted
diseases, such as herpes, syphillis or gonorhea (sp?).
3. The stage of AIDS that the random person may be in (later stages
and possibly very recently infected stages are more likely to
transmit).
Basically, if the random person is not a member of a risk group and
is otherwise healthy, the chance of becoming "infected" is probably
about 1 in 500,000 to 1 in a million.
Todd Miller, PhD
In article <russell.brill-1907950859240…@rmbrill.jpl.nasa.gov>
russell.br…@jpl.nasa.gov (Russell Brill) writes:
>Can anybody tell me the chance of getting AIDS through vaginal sex in one
>encounter with a random person. A solid reference would be very useful,
>or better yet, an authorative text.
I see that you work for NASA. Don’t you remember what happened the last time
you guys didn’t check the O-rings? Put on an O-ring, spaceman, and stop
taking chances.
*****************************************************************
-James M. Scutero, original proponent of misc.health.aids
misc.health.aids WWW homepage: http://www.panix.com/~jscutero
In article <3ulski$…@miasun.med.miami.edu>
tmil…@newssun.med.miami.edu (Todd Miller – Pharmacology) writes:
>In article <russell.brill-1907950859240…@rmbrill.jpl.nasa.gov>,
>Russell Brill <russell.br…@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>Can anybody tell me the chance of getting AIDS through vaginal sex in one
>>encounter with a random person. A solid reference would be very useful,
>>or better yet, an authorative text.
The Following is from SKEPTIC magazine Vol. 3 No. 2 1995 p. 76-77
"The AIDS Heresies" by Stephen B. Harris, M.D.
"The estimated risk of transmission of HIV from male to female
during vaginal intercourse in the absence of other sexually transmitted
disease is estimated to be about one in 250 to 500 per act of
intercourse, and around 50% of this risk for transmission from female to
male. This data comes from married couples discordant for the virus. If a
properly used condom fails 1% of the time, this figure would result in an
infection risk of one in 50,000, even with an HIV-infected partner.
(These figures are consistent with studies of HIV-discordant married
couples which show that consistent condom use even over several years
time reduces HIV infection rate to essentially zero.) Since far less than
1% of non-IV drug using women will be infected with HIV, total
HIV-infection risk of heterosexual contact for an American man should be
less than one in five million, which is the range for mortality-risk on
an average commercial jet airline flight.
Concomitant sexually transmitted disease other than HIV does
contribute to HIV transmission risk in a significant way. Studies of
Healthy Thai soldiers who acquire HIV heterosexually from prostitutes
suggest that transmission risk odds for HIV in the presence of other
sexually transmitted disease(s), may approach 1 in 12 per sexual
encounter. In light of such facts the Surgeon General would of course
remind us that limiting one’s number of lifetime sexual partners is a
time-honored (if not always followed) way of decreasing one’s chance of
acquiring sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. Statistically,
however, this strategy works only if one’s partner(s) are doing the same.
Requiring formal HIV testing before the beginning of any monogamous
sexual relationship helps these statistics, and a rapid saliva HIV test
is under development in Thailand and soon may be available on the U.S.
market."
***************************************************************************
-James M. Scutero, original proponent of misc.health.aids
misc.health.aids WWW homepage: http://www.panix.com/~jscutero
In <3uoj9h$…@panix.com> jscut…@panix.com (James Scutero) writes:
>>In article <russell.brill-1907950859240…@rmbrill.jpl.nasa.gov>,
>>Russell Brill <russell.br…@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>>Can anybody tell me the chance of getting AIDS through vaginal sex
>>>in one encounter with a random person. A solid reference would be
>>>very useful, or better yet, an authorative text.
>The Following is from SKEPTIC magazine Vol. 3 No. 2 1995 p. 76-77
>"The AIDS Heresies" by Stephen B. Harris, M.D.
> "The estimated risk of transmission of HIV from male to female
>during vaginal intercourse in the absence of other sexually
>transmitted disease is estimated to be about one in 250 to 500 per act
>of intercourse, and around 50% of this risk for transmission from
>female to male. This data comes from married couples discordant for
>the virus.
What is the reference for this 1 in 250 to 500 figure? The article I
cited (DeVincenzi, NEJM, Aug 11, 1994) was one of many that have
independently arrived at the 1 in 1000 figure for risk per sexual act.
Were *all* the couples really married?
> Concomitant sexually transmitted disease other than HIV does
>contribute to HIV transmission risk in a significant way. Studies of
>Healthy Thai soldiers who acquire HIV heterosexually from prostitutes
>suggest that transmission risk odds for HIV in the presence of other
>sexually transmitted disease(s), may approach 1 in 12 per sexual
>encounter.
The only reference I could find that was close to this 1 in 12 figure
was a 1 in 20 (actually a probablity of 0.056 per sexual act) figure.
But 1 in 20 does "approach 1 in 12", so I guess Harris must be taking a
little liberty here. This is exactly the kind of thing one must be
aware of when reading Harris. Unless you check every reference (the
ones he *does* give), you really can’t be sure he is citing the article
correctly. You can be sure he will cite things in favor of HIV though.
Just out of curiosity, what is the mechanism by which HIV becomes
almost 100 times more infective due to the presence of other *real*
STD’s? Are there any examples of other infectious agents whose
infectiousness varies so dramatically due to extraneous conditions,
unrelated to the alleged pathogen? Or is this just another of the
amazing things about HIV that set it aside from virtually every other
pathogen known to man?
Todd Miller
In article <3uvv6u$…@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>,
tod…@ix.netcom.com (Todd Miller ) writes:
> Just out of curiosity, what is the mechanism by which HIV becomes
> almost 100 times more infective due to the presence of other *real*
> STD’s?
Actually it was not the "real" diseases, as I recall, but the ones associated
with genital ulceration that were originally reported to increase the risk of
aquiring hiv in africa. The mechanism was believed to be a break in the skin
which, believe it or not, does increase the liklihood that an infectious agent
will succeed in crossing the integumentary or mucous membrane barrier.
This is basic stuff. Didn’t your parents tell you about keeping cuts clean?
In article <3ukt2d$…@gateway.ecn.com>, chrisp…@gateway.ecn.com writes:
> I have tried to get some information regarding the AIDS virus
> however all I can find is generic literature for the general public, even
> the CDC’s 800# AIDS hot line was no help. Here is what I wish to know:
> I am told the aids virus is reasonably fragile, is this correct?
Yes and no. It is readily killed by disinfectants but may remain culturable
for several days in a dry open test tube (although the total amount of virus
falls during that time). In a suspension in a closed test tube it remained
cultureable for 10 days or more. There is an article in the lancet in the last
half of the 1980s that documents this.
> I am also advised, except for direct blood contact (blood to
> blood), it *generally* takes multiple contacts to become infected.
It only takes one. But the probability of transimssion during a single act is
low. Multiple contacts are not *required*. The same misunderstanding comes up
for many infectious diseases.
> Percentage wise, how does oral sex compare to penile/vaginal sex
> in relation to risk factors in contracting the AIDS virus?
There are only rare reports of oral transmision so the risk is deemed much
lower that genital transmision but there are no good quantitive estimates of
the risk of oral transmision.