More proof that HIV does not cause AIDS (long)

[Fu-Pow]

Because drug companies have to recoup their Research and Development costs which are very high especially for something like an HIV drug (we're not talking a new version of exlax here!). Also, the FDA is largely to blame because the cost to get new drugs approved for sale through them is prohibitively expensive.

Then once the R and D costs are recouped the company still has to turn a profit to keep its stock holders happy.

So even if a drug company had the best intention of helping people they still wouldn't be able to give out their product for free or they would quickly cease to exist.

Thats what these AIDs activists fail to realize. Someone also has to foot the bill for this type of research.

[Ford Prefect]

Pharmaceutical companies are by far turning some the largest profit margins in the world. Time did a big write up on it with the numbers. R&D is recouped many times over. That excuse is pure BS.

[Fu-Pow]

Bleaaahhhhh!!!!!

[Toby]

Fu-pow,

I hate statistics . Your argument sucks . It's the exact same argument politicians use here against legalising marijuana. Simply take a bunch of chemical drug users (heroin, speed, e, whatever) test their blood for THC. Take a equal number of non-chemical drug users and test their blood for THC and what will be the outcome?

I'd venture to guess that ALL of the chemical drug users have THC and some of the non-chemical drug users would have it as well (although they are not showing signs of chemical drug use yet). If you did a statistical analysis then it would overwhelmingly show that chemical drugs and cannabis are positively correlated. And further more you could statistically show that if you conducted the exact same experiment again using different patients that you would run a very high chance of getting the exact same result again....called in a statisitcal terms a low P-Value.

Therefore, cannabis use leads to hard drug use? Causality or correlation? I used to know plenty of cannabis users who weren't into hard drugs, although I didn't know many hard drug users who weren't into cannabis (except girls). Also, almost every hard drug user I knew drank water - causality or correlation?

Bear in mind I'm not saying you're wrong. In fact, with my limited understanding of the issues I'd agree totally that HIV -> AIDS is a causality relationship. I just hate statistics.

[dwid]

Way to derail a thread into your own political agenda.

Nothing wrong with statistics. People with agendas get ahold of them and twist them up. Worry about those people.

[bungle]

http://www.mercola.com/2004/may/26/aids_cure.htm

Kinda interesting. Wong Kiew Kit also reckons he can cure it.

[Toby]

Originally posted by dwid
Way to derail a thread into your own political agenda.

Nothing wrong with statistics. People with agendas get ahold of them and twist them up. Worry about those people.

*Ahem* Sorry. Wasn't trying to get any message across. I was just pointing out the most common example of misuse of causality that I frequently see. Drugs have been a non-issue for me for many years. I used to hate hearing that argument though.

[dwid]

I understand. Correlation does not equal causation. It's fundamental to really understanding statistics, but is one of the most common things people screw up (sometimes intentionally) and make data seem to say something they really don't.

[Fu-Pow]

I'd venture to guess that ALL of the chemical drug users have THC and some of the non-chemical drug users would have it as well (although they are not showing signs of chemical drug use yet). If you did a statistical analysis then it would overwhelmingly show that chemical drugs and cannabis are positively correlated. And further more you could statistically show that if you conducted the exact same experiment again using different patients that you would run a very high chance of getting the exact same result again....called in a statisitcal terms a low P-Value.

Therefore, cannabis use leads to hard drug use? Causality or correlation? I used to know plenty of cannabis users who weren't into hard drugs, although I didn't know many hard drug users who weren't into cannabis (except girls). Also, almost every hard drug user I knew drank water - causality or correlation?

If that was your data then it would not support your conclusion. What are you testing? What is the null hypothesis? If you set up the experiment the way you described then you would be testing whether or not hard drug users more frequently ALSO use cannabis, not whether cannabis is a gateway drug. You see? When you are not clear on your original hypothesis and you give liberal interpretation to your results then that is what we call BAD SCIENCE!!!

Bad science and poorly used statistics exist....but correctly used statistics and well planned experiments are a very useful tool for understanding physical phenomenon in an objective way...so don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

[Liokault]

Originally posted by IronFist
Why don't they make the drugs more affordable? I bet there's a lot of people who would be interesting in buying them.

As well as what has already been posted about recouping cost, it should be pointed out that huge amounts of drugs are given to Africa (mainly but also other third world areas)for (more or less) free. Whats the out come? Africa develops a large drug export industry, undercuting the very companys that make the product and HAVE to supply to give to Africa.

[Toby]

Fu-Pow, in case you missed it, I took your post word for word and substituted "HIV" and "AIDS" for "THC/cannabis" and "hard drugs". You were implying that HIV->AIDS is a causality relationship. I was showing the flaw in reasoning by illustrating a common argument that cannabis->hard drugs is causality. As I said, I agree that there is causality for the HIV->AIDS. I just disagreed with your argument for it.

[rubthebuddha]

toby, you're such a *****.

[Xebsball]

I read about a brzlian doctor who agrees with that guy of hiv non-aids thing

basicly its a romophobic, conservative
dumb
****

oh yeah id like to add,
yes definately there are slow virus
we could enlist even more than that other dude enlisted

[freehand]

Toby: "Fu-Pow, in case you missed it, I took your post word for word and substituted "HIV" and "AIDS" for "THC/cannabis" and "hard drugs". You were implying that HIV->AIDS is a causality relationship. I was showing the flaw in reasoning by illustrating a common argument that cannabis->hard drugs is causality. As I said, I agree that there is causality for the HIV->AIDS. I just disagreed with your argument for it."

That's not the complete argument for it. We also know much about *how the virus causes AIDS. And what Fu-Pow said is true for *every case of AIDS. As much as the political conservatives would wish otherwise, not every "hard drug" user starts with cannabis or is using cannibis when tested.

Check this out:
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm

If any of you have any real question on this, ask yourself which is most likely: that all of the medical researchers, medical doctors, nurses, lay experts, and social workers like Red Cross and Doctors without Borders are lying about this (to get rich!), or that the one voice of dissent is trying to get famous and sell books?

Freehand

[Toby]

Like I said, I agree that there is causality with HIV->AIDS. Just not the argument presented.

Dunno about where you're from, but here in Oz I'd say you'd be safe in saying that pretty much all hard drug users also use cannabis regularly. The only exceptions might be girls. Most girls I knew were into speed and e's and the nightclub scene but not smoking much. Smoking dope is very common in Oz. It's also been decriminalised in most states i.e. you only get a warning if you have less than 1oz on you and you're allowed to grow 2 plants. That's what I gather, anyway.