PDA

View Full Version : the need the HIV test to be renamed



cdm
May 29th, 2009, 10:33 PM
I think there must be a global concern and a consensus about the renaming of the HIV test. The dissidents must not refuse the test because of the unnecessary stigma and pain it induces. This test is a reality. On the other hand they must never succumb to the pressure of the cartel to name it in a misnomer way. So a consensus between dissidents and compliers to the conventional notion must be sought, if any.
Because there is much debate about the significance of this test among the re-thinkers of AIDS, there is no possibility for an agreement on a descriptive term, between us.
The wisest approach, seems to me, would be to name it after the discoverer of it, Robert Gallo. This would satisfy all, except of the zealots.
We say for example Widal agglutination test for the test that screens dubiously for salmonella infection or Wright agglutination test for the brucella screening. It is appropriate to name it like this, the Gallo Eliza test or something like this.
We honor Gallo, this way, for his achievement to describe a test showing specific or unspecific immune stress and on the other hand we create a distance from the current mainstream dubious notion of a virus induced immune deficiency. We need reconciliation and no more fighting ... I wish the pope prayed for it, or even my own orthodox patriarchs...

Expansive Mind
May 29th, 2009, 10:41 PM
The dissidents must not refuse the test because of the unnecessary stigma and pain it induces. This test is a reality.

I must not understand your point here. Why not refuse the test? I have, do, and will continue to. There is no clear medical usefulness to the test that can't be done as well or better through other clinical methods. If the test remains, so do ARV's and a terminal diagnosis. I don't see how I personally, or dissidents in general can accept those terms. Unless you have thoughts how the "orthodoxy" would surrender the notion that the test does not diagnose a terminal condition that can only be treated by ARV's. Also the issue of contagiousness is one that cannot be easily conceded. People are going to jail for supposedly "spreading" hiv, and yet the evidence shows that such a thing is at best an extremely remote possibility.

The test is currently a reality yes, but it hasn't been so for all that long. Many medical tests and procedures come and go. It is important to look toward the day when the "hiv test," no matter what it is called, is gone.

Even if one were to rename it the "Gallo Assay" or some such thing, how does that change the stigma of a contagious, fatal disease?

I don't think anyone should ever take the test for "hiv." Your life depends on it.

cdm
May 29th, 2009, 11:17 PM
I agree with you a lot... but this test is performed daily by thousands of people .. This is reality and probably not so easily changeable. It is equally difficult to change the meaning of the test. Even the dissidents disagree and we see a distance between the Perth group and Duesberg about its significance. Myself I am with the Perth group... I am not sure yet about the significance of the test.

A new notion is more difficult to be found than a new name, that would remind us of a need for reconciliation.

I can not foretell how the acceptance of a new name could alter the meaning in the different groups involved, the various dissident groups and the cartel driven official group. Perhaps my view about renaming the test, is overoptimistic and romantic. I must agree on that. But we have nothing to lose if we succeed in it. And we must not forget : in the beginning there had been Logos. (from the gospel of Johannes)

cdm
May 30th, 2009, 12:21 AM
[QUOTE=Expansive Mind;33594] Many medical tests and procedures come and go. /QUOTE]

As far as I know a test of wide acceptance has not been banned yet. Perhaps a method might have changed but not the purpose of it. A 100 years ago laboratories began to measure amylase and still continue quite usefully although by a different method. With ASTO the same. Widal test also is too old and of dubious character but it is continued the same way it began. A lot of doctors disgrace it but it is performed till now.
Other tests had a very limited appliance because few believed in them. But the situation is different with the Gallo test, permit me to spell it like this. This is a kind of voodoo religion and not science. So it will continue to exist due to the strength of a prejudice. .
We must help it faint and not fight it. This is the strategic.

SheLaughsCarrot
May 30th, 2009, 01:52 AM
I think irregardless whether you are with the perth group or duesberg doesnt really makes a big difference. The main point is the perth group and duesberg dont agree HIV to be the cause of AIDS(whether it exist or not), and therefore making the testing and treatment of ARVs to be redundant, period.

there's no point to rename the testing, it wont change the way medical orthodox think, but for those who have somehow being told to do the test and got positive, just be a living testimony to people. yes, the public at times are stupid, because they dont really think and prefer to rely on the modern medical science, but they somehow have to pay with their lives....in US death by prescription is no. 4, and as times goes by, the public will somehow wake up the medical science isnt there to save people, but to benefit certain parties...

But for those who realize early of this, it might seem that you go against the world, but you do win the game eventually because this is about your live anyway. It has to be realized by majority people, then things will change....it's just like the case of Dr Lorraine Day, she refuse chemotheraphy...and she survived, her doctor colleague died. Until modern medical science realized what they have done, more lives will have to die unfortunately...and yes, continue the lawsuits, that will help make the stupid public to realize.


I agree with you a lot... but this test is performed daily by thousands of people .. This is reality and probably not so easily changeable. It is equally difficult to change the meaning of the test. Even the dissidents disagree and we see a distance between the Perth group and Duesberg about its significance. Myself I am with the Perth group... I am not sure yet about the significance of the test.

A new notion is more difficult to be found than a new name, that would remind us of a need for reconciliation.

I can not foretell how the acceptance of a new name could alter the meaning in the different groups involved, the various dissident groups and the cartel driven official group. Perhaps my view about renaming the test, is overoptimistic and romantic. I must agree on that. But we have nothing to lose if we succeed in it. And we must not forget : in the beginning there had been Logos. (from the gospel of Johannes)

Brian Carter
May 30th, 2009, 03:20 AM
What this? A call to and about renaming HIV Tests? I doubt that has any relevance. People were screaming and demanding what we finally got from Gallo et al. back in the golden years of virus hunting 1982. Now that they have it, they ain't going to give it up.

The old phrase goes: "Be careful what you ask for........." Now everyone's on the bandwagon. The best anyone of us can do is chip away at the stone, i.e. turn one mind at a time, look for common ground and kill them with kindness.

cdm
May 30th, 2009, 06:37 AM
Brian you are clever enough, I believe, to realize that as long as you fight something you give strength to it. Friedrich Nietczhe blamed Luther for fighting the medieval church that finally helped the popes to survive till today. It is in a way similar with our case.
I am sure I am right. Giving a neutral name to this test we would induce its fainting. But from this experiment I made, posting this thread, I got no positive feedback from the dissident group. If this idea of renaming is losing, then the war will continue and the strongest has more chances to win. Who is the strongest at the moment? ... Anyway I myself must admit I lose the battle, because in similar situations here in Greece, with Gilles-saint-Pierre and Maria P. and other dissidents, nobody agrees for peace. So be prepared for war! And I wish mercy to be given...

Expansive Mind
May 30th, 2009, 04:10 PM
Brian you are clever enough, I believe, to realize that as long as you fight something you give strength to it. Friedrich Nietczhe blamed Luther for fighting the medieval church that finally helped the popes to survive till today. It is in a way similar with our case.

CDM, without speaking for Brian, I understand and agree with your maxim in principle. However, the fight is not merely dissidents vs. orthodoxy, but the Orthodoxy vs. people who are sexually active, gays, blacks, and all of Africa. Even if dissidents disappear tomorrow, I do not see how hiv/aids would be in the least harmed. The fighters are the orthodoxy. They started this war and basically run unopposed. At least that is what I see. Maybe you see more clearly than I, and if something as simple as renaming the test would shift the balance of power, then I am all for it.


Giving a neutral name to this test we would induce its fainting.

I don't see any harm to dissidents in changing the name, especially if doing so would deflate the test's influence. I wonder, how would we go about changing the name? Do people simply write an e-mail to Gallo and suggest he takes the honor of the test and apply his name to it? How can we change the name of the test without a "battle?"



If this idea of renaming is losing, then the war will continue and the strongest has more chances to win. Who is the strongest at the moment? ... Anyway I myself must admit I lose the battle, because in similar situations here in Greece, with Gilles-saint-Pierre and Maria P. and other dissidents, nobody agrees for peace. So be prepared for war! And I wish mercy to be given...

Peace at what cost I wonder? Aren't people already being killed by treatments? Aren't people's lives being destroyed by their diagnosis? Would Maria even be alive if it weren't for dissidents? Will any of those deaths be prevented or lives restored if we change the name of the test?

The dissidents are the merciful ones. We do not chase people around the world to brand them with a death sentence. We give healthy skepticism that results in people successfully reclaiming their lives. That is merciful.

CDM, I too wish for peace, but, as a "gay man", a "Target" of the Orthodoxy, I am not allowed peace. If I were not a dissident, I would be hunted by the orthodoxy to be tested and eventually to be killed off. But it isn't even about gays only these days is it? Look at the innocent women, and children (http://liamscheff.com/daily/2009/04/03/the-village-voice-buries-the-bodies/) who are killed off by diagnoses. There is no peace for them. And this is how the orthodoxy treats those who believe in them!

Still, if progress can be made with your idea, I see no reason to oppose it. But the question remains: "HOW do we change the name?"

cdm
May 31st, 2009, 11:54 AM
How do we change the name?

That is a good question expansive mind. I do not know yet.
I only know that a long trip begins with a small step, like the old chinese proverb says.
I call it the Gallo-Montaigner test. They own it and they became rich and famous by it. So they are worth of being given their names to it . ( If the dissidents comply to refer to this test in every speech, in every article, thread, post, etc by this name then this small step has been followed by a larger step. And a specialist on the chaos theory may predict what would come next, not myself.. the small and ambitious butterfly that blew its nose hoping to create a tornado:);):))
Yet the significance of this test is not owned by anyone. Anyone of us may give to this test his/her own significance. So if I were allowed to build a manifesto I would begin like this:
Nobody can force anyone to interpret a test against his scientific or human conscience. We, the dissidents, disagree that this test shows the cause of a disease, called human immunodefficiency. So we are not compelled to name it in a misnomer way.
We respect the owners and the salesmen of it, we agree with them only in that a lot of scientific research is needed to find its accurate significance for the health of men and women. So we do not agree with them to name it like the way they want.
If I understand the history well this is the case with the Widal test. It is not called a salmonella test.

straightguyantiauthority
June 14th, 2009, 11:24 PM
Brian's answer is dead on.

The late 70's and early 80's lifestyle was clamoring for an answer - despite the obvious solution that no one wanted to accept - and got it in the form of HIV, AID$, and AZT.

SheLaughsCarrot
June 15th, 2009, 03:37 PM
i mean that is fine....but i find that the HIV testing as a gateway to discrimination and ban of entry needs to really be changed...why cant any US congressman look into this ? Ron Paul maybe ?


Brian's answer is dead on.

The late 70's and early 80's lifestyle was clamoring for an answer - despite the obvious solution that no one wanted to accept - and got it in the form of HIV, AID$, and AZT.