Obviously Crowe does not understand or will not accept the role of semen
in AIDS. Or deliberately misinterprets the PG view.
times do we have to tell him the drug theory of AIDS is ours? It is a
subset of the oxidative theory. As is semen. It does not belong to Peter
D although Peter to his credit has come up with much supportive
regard to HIV seropositivity: It is incredible that someone who claims
to have conducted intensive research on AIDS still does not know that a
positive antibody test is predictive of having or developing AIDS. This
is a well established, undeniable fact. What Crowe cannot see is that
this does not mean the antibodies are "HIV" and hence "HIV" is the cause
of AIDS. Non-specific tests can be very useful in medical practice. Just
think of taking a person’s temperature. This is why Peter D’s
haemophilia and military experiments may well backfire on Peter and
hence all of us (because conveniently the HIV experts lump us all
states: "Clearly the drug-AIDS hypothesis has more evidence than the
semen-AIDS hypothesis and is more plausible".
Crowe explain the overwhelming epidemiological evidence, to which we
have repeatedly drawn his attention, that AIDS in gay men is directly
related to passive anal intercourse with ejaculation?
states: "Besides, most of the evidence provided to me was of an
association between semen and HIV seropositivity, not AIDS, which
implies that the Perth Group believe that HIV seropositivity is a
reliable marker of the development of AIDS".
saying he doesn’t accept "that HIV seropositivity is a reliable marker
of the development of AIDS"? If so, he does not agree with Duesberg.