Activism Change

[Fwd: Re: Shaw.]

Question:

Hi Fred! Your back trying to get another dance going, eh? What’s the real matter, Fred? Had another slip of the old needle? Do you think such gutless accusations are worth making? I know the old story that if you tell a lie long enough people will start believing. No Rudolph, if you haven’t noticed (that is, if you have bothered to pull your head out of your ass yet), Carter’s organization affiliation is "Free Radical Enterprises"!

Hi Fred! I can see you’re trying to live up to your foul-mouthed reputation! I saw a really interesting post you sent related to SIV: that has a much more acceptable tone and clearly more relevant than this post of yours. As to your attacks on George, I’m not dancing with you: you seem to like treading on people’s feet. Should we tell people that you are peddling unreason and fear? Nope! Just truth, justice and the American way — but what would you know about that, eh ‘Dolph?

Is that "truth, justice and the American way" as in "rape, pillage and destroy" as in Vietnam, Cambodia, Lebanon, Guatemala, Nicaragua and numerous other holiday resports? Or is that wholesome trying to get things done serously and efficaciously without needless waste of time and energy. I would love to think it’s the latter, but your gung-ho approach doesn’t suggest it. What do you stand to make out of it? Keep people from dying an early death —

If your altruism is misguided, and from the posts I’ve read, it seems to be, then you ain’t gonna do no such thing. You may just be pushing people into dying faster. You know the medical approach is: if you can’t stop it, slow it down while looking for a way to stop it. which seems to be the opposite of what YOU and your buddy Carter "make out of it"!

Sorry, Fred, 1) you don’t seem to have any data to analyse on my actions, unless you read tea leaves as well as do acupuncture, and 2) I was under the impression that George was your buddy. Or are there actually people with somewhat altruistic motivations? Not on the pro-drug side of this one there ain’t!

You haven’t made any serious analyses on this list as to the real situation with regards to the use of cocktail combinations. Yes, I’ve seen a few abstracts bandied about, but your use of them hasn’t evoked a rush on the stockmarket to unload Glaxo shares. Stop the wind and cough up with something exciting. If there are such beasts, Fred, and you are one of them, perhaps you are misguided into thinking that noone else is. No Dolpho — you are the one that needs the Guide Dog until you get that head of yours loose.

Actually Fred, from your position you can’t say where my head is, you can’t say what state my eyes are in, and you probably have difficulties saying what state you’re in (California, I believe, just to help you along). Fred, all you can do is be abnoxious: I guess that reflects your helplessness and frustration. Therefore you accuse anyone else who doesn’t hold to your creed to be agents of Chaos. Get smart, Fred. No, not chaos. Just agents of the Grim Reaper who get off on death and suffering. But hey, when was that new to humankind, right Adolph?

You aren’t going to ingratiate yourself so easily, Fred. All you’re going to do is to reinforce what a lot of people think: you are vulgar and have nothing constructive to say. Though this impression may not reflect the real situation, you aren’t helping with this sort of advanced cretinism. You seem to be one of your own worst enemies. I wouldn’t go into advertising if I were you, Fred. Get back to useful posts. Toodle-loo! R

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some of these approaches have the added benefit of inhibiting HIV (e.g., a micronutrient like alpha lipoic acid as part of a carefully crafted antioxidant regimen). Carter will sell it to you. Hi Fred! Your back trying to get another dance going, eh? What’s the real matter, Fred? Had another slip of the old needle? Do you think such gutless accusations are worth making? I know the old story that if you tell a lie long enough people will start believing.

No Rudolph, if you haven’t noticed (that is, if you have bothered to pull your head out of your ass yet), Carter’s organization affiliation is "Free Radical Enterprises"! Now since Carter is promoting an antioxidant, and as you should know, these are free radical scavengers, well, ‘Dolph…. it doesn’t stretch the brain too much to see the link. After all, despite my many requests, Carter refuses to offer a statement of no conflicts of interest, so until he does, look for similar commentary in the future (that is, once you solve the cranial-rectal inversion problem). fred Should we tell people that you are peddling unreason and fear?

Nope! Just truth, justice and the American way — but what would you know about that, eh ‘Dolph? What do you stand to make out of it?

Keep people from dying an early death — which seems to be the opposite of what YOU and your buddy Carter "make out of it"! Or are there actually people with somewhat altruistic motivations?

Not on the pro-drug side of this one there ain’t! If there are such beasts, Fred, and you are one of them, perhaps you are misguided into thinking that noone else is.

No Dolpho — you are the one that needs the Guide Dog until you get that head of yours loose. Therefore you accuse anyone else who doesn’t hold to your creed to be agents of Chaos. Get smart, Fred.

No, not chaos. Just agents of the Grim Reaper who get off on death and suffering. But hey, when was that new to humankind, right Adolph? Warm Personal Regards Asshole! fred

Response:

[...] Some of these approaches have the added benefit of inhibiting HIV (e.g., a micronutrient like alpha lipoic acid as part of a carefully crafted antioxidant regimen). Carter will sell it to you.

That’s the crafty part. He’ll certainly take a holiday on his commission.  John — "Maybe if we just stop it altogether people will be better off."   Donald I. Abrams, Prof. of Clinical Medicine, UCSF, about AZT

Response:

Some of these approaches have the added benefit of inhibiting HIV (e.g., a micronutrient like alpha lipoic acid as part of a carefully crafted antioxidant regimen). Carter will sell it to you.

Hi Fred! Your back trying to get another dance going, eh? What’s the real matter, Fred? Had another slip of the old needle? Do you think such gutless accusations are worth making? I know the old story that if you tell a lie long enough people will start believing. Should we tell people that you are peddling unreason and fear? What do you stand to make out of it? Or are there actually people with somewhat altruistic motivations? If there are such beasts, Fred, and you are one of them, perhaps you are misguided into thinking that noone else is. Therefore you accuse anyone else who doesn’t hold to your creed to be agents of Chaos. Get smart, Fred. Yours, R

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] Some of these approaches have the added benefit of inhibiting HIV (e.g., a micronutrient like alpha lipoic acid as part of a carefully crafted antioxidant regimen). Carter will sell it to you. That’s the crafty part. He’ll certainly take a holiday on his commission.  John

Oh John, why don’t you talk about something you know about, like… , like… , like… well, John, what exactly is it that you do know something about? Yours, R

Response:

A paragraph ago, AZT was "shit", but now it is "effective" if used in the right "populations". Now what, exactly are the right "populations"?

People with AIDS. It works sometimes when people with AIDS use it in combination with another nuke, have not previously used it and with a protease inhibitor. Its efficacy is limited. Long term, it is not clear what the effects will be. But as I mentioned, the lower dosage may enhance its beneficial effects while minimizing toxicities. Do you understand that dose makes the difference to a certain degree? For example, would you take a bath in a 70% solution of DNCB? With the introduction of the protease inhibitors, I’ve seen many cases–and the clinical literature backs this up–of people who very likely would be dead if they had not started a combination therapy. As with almost every therapy, from kombucha mushroom to SPV-30, one of Carter’s favorites. Of course, immune-suppressing drugs have a way of making people feel great … until they break through with an OI.

This statement is rife with inaccuracies. I’ve never seen a combination of other drugs or herbs do what the nuke/protease inhibitor combinations have done. I have no opinion on kombucha but don’t see much value in HIV/AIDS and the potential for aspergillosis or other contaminants if it is not prepared correctly. NONE of the drugs or therapies–DNCB included–are a guarantee that AIDS will not develop or an OI might not occur. Or do you assert that DNCB will prevent OIs from occurring? Perhaps early in the disease process, interventions that improve host response will be more effective and prevent people from EVER having to do the drugs. DNCB.

I doubt this. Provide the evidence to support this assertion. Meantime it is just opinion and based on poorly understood science. Carter will sell it to you.

I don’t sell anything. THis is a lie. If I didn’t post Haase, Carter wouldn’t be reading him.

Nonsense. I have a subscription to Science and read it before you posted it. Fortunately, I do not have to rely on you for information! We also still need interventions that get rid of the HIV from infected macrophages, out of tissues and, for some, out of the CNS. That’s nice. Another opinion.

Do you agree or disagree? Or are you simply exercising your remarkable powers of perception to identify an aspect of a comment? And we still have to address the immunological dysregulation, lymph node and thymic deterioration and other aspects to truly obtain a holistic approach that will cure AIDS–not just eliminate HIV. self-contradictory — a true holistic approach wouldn’t focus on eliminating HIV…

No, you misunderstand yet again. The above statement makes it clear that I do not  subscribe to the notion of "eliminating HIV" as the best or only option. Such an idea is not mutually exclusive with improving immune function. However, how does this opinion correlate with the pro-drug commentary in Carter’s litany of drugs as above???

Yes, but apparently you wish to try to distort my views to suit your agenda. I don’t think you are so stupid that you cannot understand how people might seek to eliminate HIV and help the body work better. I make the distinction between the pathogenesis of HIV and the pathogenesis of AIDS. Do you understand this distinction?                 George M. Carter

Response:

George Carter belongs to Act Up New York, a pro-treatment lobby To be clear. I am not "pro-treatment." ACT UP/NY, however, has a long history of advocacy for "drugs into bodies." No question. This has modulated over the past few years. However, a singular aspect of the treatment activism by ACT UP/NY has been to provide more rapid access to such treatments.

No different than storming the FDA to stop the trials and get AZT out "NOW!". Being a member of ACTUP New York does not offer much latitude here — remember: birds of a feather…. Personally, I have not been so gung ho. When AZT was pretty much all there was, I had no problem identifying it as second rate shit that was poisoning people. I still believe it can be horribly misused and has been. And that many physicians knowingly and/or indifferently prescribed it (and STILL do) at doses higher than necessary (e.g., 300 mg/day appears to be plenty.)

from this…. to this: That said, it became clear to me in the past couple of years that both that class of drugs (nucleoside analogs or "nukes" that includes AZT, ddI, ddC, d4T, 3TC, FLT, FIAU, FIAC, DHPG, foscarnet, acyclovir and others) could be used more effectively and wisely and target the right populations.

A paragraph ago, AZT was "shit", but now it is "effective" if used in the right "populations". Now what, exactly are the right "populations"? With the introduction of the protease inhibitors, I’ve seen many cases–and the clinical literature backs this up–of people who very likely would be dead if they had not started a combination therapy.

As with almost every therapy, from kombucha mushroom to SPV-30, one of Carter’s favorites. Of course, immune-suppressing drugs have a way of making people feel great … until they break through with an OI. Now we have to wrestle with the question of who should  use them. Is the hit em hard philosophy appropriate? I have my doubts. I seriously feel we need to address both the host factors and the virus.

Opinionated anti-science and nonsense. Perhaps early in the disease process, interventions that improve host response will be more effective and prevent people from EVER having to do the drugs.

DNCB. Some of these approaches have the added benefit of inhibiting HIV (e.g., a micronutrient like alpha lipoic acid as part of a carefully crafted antioxidant regimen).

Carter will sell it to you. The idea of eliminating all HIV from the body is tantalizing.

But ridiculous — the lines are blurred. But the Haase article on a technique for measuring virus load in lymph tissue shows 10^8 log of virus in tissues tested (people were doing nukes). While interventions that knock out 2-3 log from the periphery are having significant benefit in many, it isn’t yet adequate.

If I didn’t post Haase, Carter wouldn’t be reading him. We also still need interventions that get rid of the HIV from infected macrophages, out of tissues and, for some, out of the CNS.

That’s nice. Another opinion. And we still have to address the immunological dysregulation, lymph node and thymic deterioration and other aspects to truly obtain a holistic approach that will cure AIDS–not just eliminate HIV.

self-contradictory — a true holistic approach wouldn’t focus on eliminating HIV… However, how does this opinion correlate with the pro-drug commentary in Carter’s litany of drugs as above???

Response:

George Carter belongs to Act Up New York, a pro-treatment lobby

To be clear. I am not "pro-treatment." ACT UP/NY, however, has a long history of advocacy for "drugs into bodies." No question. This has modulated over the past few years. However, a singular aspect of the treatment activism by ACT UP/NY has been to provide more rapid access to such treatments. Personally, I have not been so gung ho. When AZT was pretty much all there was, I had no problem identifying it as second rate shit that was poisoning people. I still believe it can be horribly misused and has been. And that many physicians knowingly and/or indifferently prescribed it (and STILL do) at doses higher than necessary (e.g., 300 mg/day appears to be plenty.) That said, it became clear to me in the past couple of years that both that class of drugs (nucleoside analogs or "nukes" that includes AZT, ddI, ddC, d4T, 3TC, FLT, FIAU, FIAC, DHPG, foscarnet, acyclovir and others) could be used more effectively and wisely and target the right populations. With the introduction of the protease inhibitors, I’ve seen many cases–and the clinical literature backs this up–of people who very likely would be dead if they had not started a combination therapy. Now we have to wrestle with the question of who should  use them. Is the hit em hard philosophy appropriate? I have my doubts. I seriously feel we need to address both the host factors and the virus. Perhaps early in the disease process, interventions that improve host response will be more effective and prevent people from EVER having to do the drugs. Some of these approaches have the added benefit of inhibiting HIV (e.g., a micronutrient like alpha lipoic acid as part of a carefully crafted antioxidant regimen). The idea of eliminating all HIV from the body is tantalizing. But the Haase article on a technique for measuring virus load in lymph tissue shows 10^8 log of virus in tissues tested (people were doing nukes). While interventions that knock out 2-3 log from the periphery are having significant benefit in many, it isn’t yet adequate. We also still need interventions that get rid of the HIV from infected macrophages, out of tissues and, for some, out of the CNS. And we still have to address the immunological dysregulation, lymph node and thymic deterioration and other aspects to truly obtain a holistic approach that will cure AIDS–not just eliminate HIV.                 George M. Carter

Response:

[ Carter's indefensible behaviour ] [David's attack on GMC] Absolutely. The only way to counter these corrupt exploiters of desperate, vulnerable victims of the "Aids" myth is to get them into the open and hammer them.

Hopefully I understand the situation here: David Pasquarelli belongs to Act Up San Francisco, an anti-drug treatment lobby George Carter belongs to Act Up New York, a pro-treatment lobby John, himself, belongs in jail for vicious misinformation — no, no seriously: he’s a Continuum reader, and that’s a magazine that is anti-drug treatment. Yours, R

Response:

[Not worth repeating] OK, Fred, come out with it… for the sake of newcomers to the list, myself included, why exactly are you being so acidic with regard to George? He is not the only one who supports the mainstream approach to dealing with AIDS, so it’s not that. So, if it’s not what he says, what is your gripe? I for one would like to know what your performance is about. Yours, R

Gee, maybe it’s the fact that George has been caught in the act of lying numerous times on this board about everything from his identity to the toxic effects of current AIDS therapies. Perhaps it’s that good ol’ George dispenses his poisonous medical advice as though it were candy despite the fact that his so-called "scientific support" is nothing but unsubstantiated propaganda spoon-fed to him by drug manufacturers. Or it could be because George has engaged in conflict of interest by accepting perks financed by the pharmaceutical industry, such as free vacations to France, as pay-offs to pimp dubious herbal treatments like SPV-30. Or maybe it’s that George continually barfs up pompous, myopic antiviral bullshit as some sort of useful "AIDS advice" to the frightened and uninformed who pass through this corner of cyberspace looking for help. My bet, however, is that it’s due to George’s insipid, asinine opinions about DNCB, an unpatentable, unprofitable, alternative treatment that has withstood the test of time. Rather than encourage the use of a nontoxic contact sensitizer as part of an overall protocol to strengthen the cellular immune response, curious George perpetually recommends annihilating the allegedly omnipotent viral invader by poisoning its host. Whatever the reason, those such as Mr. Shaw who arduously work at keeping George’s megalomania from claiming more HIV-positive victims should be congratulated for their informed scientific contributions to this newsgroup. Dave Pasquarelli ACT UP San Francisco

Response:

[ Carter's indefensible behaviour ] Whatever the reason, those such as Mr. Shaw who arduously work at keeping George’s megalomania from claiming more HIV-positive victims should be congratulated for their informed scientific contributions to this newsgroup.

Absolutely. The only way to counter these corrupt exploiters of desperate, vulnerable victims of the "Aids" myth is to get them into the open and hammer them. Fred is right on target.  John — "Maybe if we just stop it altogether people will be better off."   Donald I. Abrams, Prof. of Clinical Medicine, UCSF, about AZT

Response:

Gee, maybe it’s the fact that George has been caught in the act of lying numerous times on this board about everything from his identity to the toxic effects of current AIDS therapies.

Gee maybe this is a lie. I’ve never lied about my identity or used a false account to try and "smear" Fred. I have never lied about the toxic effects of drugs. Perhaps it’s that good ol’ George dispenses his poisonous medical advice as though it were candy despite the fact that his so-called "scientific support" is nothing but unsubstantiated propaganda spoon-fed to him by drug manufacturers.

Perhaps I don’t dispense advice but rather provide information you simply disagree with. There is always scientific evidence which you reject. Maybe this is another lie that Shaw engages in. Or it could be because George has engaged in conflict of interest by accepting perks financed by the pharmaceutical industry, such as free vacations to France, as pay-offs to pimp dubious herbal treatments like SPV-30.

Gee. Maybe this is another lie. I accepted no "perk" or "payoff" from ANY pharmaceutical company. And the trip to France was work. I attended two conferences, one on immune hyperactivation in Reims and one with Arkopharma and made clear that part of it was funded by Arkopharma. The ONLY time I accepted money. And I hardly would call my opinions on SPV-30 "advocacy." Or maybe it’s that George continually barfs up pompous, myopic antiviral bullshit as some sort of useful "AIDS advice" to the frightened and uninformed who pass through this corner of cyberspace looking for help.

Maybe people are scared more of dying of AIDS and they want a range of information and options. Not your group’s brand of just say no and weak (utterly worthless?) options like DNCB. My bet, however, is that it’s due to George’s insipid, asinine opinions about DNCB, an unpatentable, unprofitable, alternative treatment that has withstood the test of time. Rather than encourage the use of a nontoxic contact sensitizer as part of an overall protocol to strengthen the cellular immune response, curious George perpetually recommends annihilating the allegedly omnipotent viral invader by poisoning its host.

Tell me just EXACTLY what’s wrong with those opinions? If you can answer the questions raised in other posts, go right ahead. But even your group realizes that DNCB–even if it does what you people claim is NOT the whole answer. The combination drugs WORK for some people for some time. But THEY aren’t the whole answer either. Whatever the reason, those such as Mr. Shaw who arduously work at keeping George’s megalomania from claiming more HIV-positive victims should be congratulated for their informed scientific contributions to this newsgroup.

The only megalomaniac around here is Fred Shaw. The man makes his pronouncements  and the sits around and fantasizes shit about me that has no bearing on reality at all. So are you going to take up the cudgel and begin a campaign of personal harrassment? I will forward these messages to your ISP admin and abuse people because I won’t put up with it. My views are shared by MANY others and are not unique to me–so attacking me does NOT achieve any goal of eliminating that perspective. And harrassment will not stop me from doing my work and what I think is right to try to end this goddamned plague. So I will ask you only this once: please fight the disease. Please disagree with my viewpoints on drugs. But DON’T waste my time, this group’s bandwidth and your time with personal attacks on me and the kind of psychotic fantasizing, slander and cruelty that characterized much of Shaw’s contributions to these newsgroups. That won’t stop AIDS.                 George M. Carter

Response:

Filed under: Activism

Related Posts

• THIS IS WHAT I SAID AND I STAND BY IT. RE: THIS IS WHAT I SAID AND I STAND BY IT.
• pacifism
• activism on Radio New York International
• activism ???
• Who is Jewish? -- Jewish racism revisited!
• You want activism...
• Anti Aviation
• BOOK: Brian Willson Autobiography
• Merry Christmas to all the homeless BUMS and phony "Vietnam Vets" begging for change!!!
• The Crimes of Nicaragua: The Literacy Campaign