“I cannot imagine what would be wrong with having an HIV test.”

I cannot imagine what is RIGHT about an “HIV test”:

1. There is no such thing as an “HIV test”. There is no test that can detect HIV. What are called “HIV tests” actually test for antibodies.

2. Antibodies are promiscuous and cross-react with other antigens. The AIDS church has admitted that cross-reactivity of antibodies can yield false positives.

3. The “AIDS tests” admit that there is no gold standard for HIV, and, thus, no established standard for determining the presence or absense of HIV in human blood. The reason there is no gold standard is because HIV has never been isolated. Presense of reverse transcriptase does NOT count as “isolation” because RT is not unique to retroviruses.

4. The results of the “HIV test” are interpreted according to risk group. A “positive” test for a black man may bery well be a “negative” test if it were to have come for a white woman.

5. The proteins that are claimed to come from “HIV” could not have because there is no gold standard. They are merely assumed to have come from HIV.

6. The “HIV proteins” have stayed the same despite the virus having “mutated” many, many, many times.

7. The “HIV test” is actually a combination of ELISA, ELISA + WB, or two ELISAs, depending on where you are geographically. A “postitive” result in one location might well have been “negative” if it were followed up with a “confirmatory” WB test.

8. The “HIV proteins” that indicated a “positive” test are not standardised in the WB. A “positive” WB test in the USA may vey well be “negative” in Australia.

9. The 99.999% accuracy readings are bogus because the “accuracy” is determined by repeating the same test over and over again and declaring it “accurate” if it gives the same result. The only real way to determine accuracy is to compare the test against the gold standard. There is no gold standard becase HIV has never been isolated.

And, despite all of this that I can rattle from MEMORY, the “HIV test” is used as the basis of telling someone that they are going to die a slow, painful death along with having their name added to a federal registry.

DO NOT HAVE AN HIV TEST!

Yesterday the movement decided to allow the blessing of same-sex commitment ceremonies and allow gay rabbis — but disallow anal sex between men.

Bailey, J. M. (1999). Homosexuality and mental illness. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, pp. 883-884.

Ivan.

I value your opinions on HIV to exactly the same extent that I value your opinions on “the gay community”.

That would be the “Men Are Dogs” theory? 🙂

I don’t disagree that those factors all may be relevant to promiscuity. And while I think that heterosexuals (both men and women) are far more promiscuous and homosexuals (both men and women) are far less promiscuous than is believed and claimed by anti-gay activists, I do agree that the CDC risk factors should definitely be considered. And it is probably true that of the four groups, homosexual men probably are the most promiscuous (though this certainly cannot be considered a defining characteristic).

Incidentally, the CDC fails sometimes in accurate information by erring on the side of caution. While it is true that HIV can be contracted through the urethra, the actual instances of this are very very few. (I’m looking for a source on just how few but it’s hard to narrow down the search).

Research shows (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050124004711.htm) that the most significant factor in those who seroconvert by being the active member in penetrative sex (anal or vaginal) is circumcision. This, supposedly, helps explain why Africa and Asia have such huge rates of infection in heterosexual populations.