Grower.cz je největší autorita v oblasti pěstování konopí na českém i slovenském internetu. Veškeré sekce jsou přístupné pro anonymní čtení. Pokud se nespokojíš s pouhou návštěvou a chceš se aktivně zapojit do diskusí ve fóru a na chatu, odpovídat na inzeráty a šifrovaně komunikovat s tisíci dalších pěstitelů soukromými vzkazy anebo se pochlubit svou fotogalerií - Registruj se! - Získáš inspiraci i cenné rady!
Hned v uvodu se treba pise, ze zvirata infikovana virem HIV AIDS dostanou.
Contents:
* ABSTRACT
* INTRODUCTION: A DIALOGUE IN INDUCTIVE FRUSTRATION
* Medical Induction
* PART I: THE AIDS SKEPTICS AND THEIR CLAIMS
* Defining AIDS
* Redefining AIDS: Acquired Immune Failure Syndrome
* Enter the AIDS Skeptics
* HIV-Free AIDS?
* Why Not AIDS Without HIV?
* Did the Government Create AIDS?
* The Origins of AIDS
* AIDS in the 80s
* Attacks on Straw Men
* SIDEBAR: What Is a Retrovirus?
* SIDEBAR: What Does "HIV-Positive" Mean?
* References
ABSTRACT
Nobelist Kary Mullis once asked for a reference paper with the simple statement "HIV causes AIDS." This article reviews the modern argument for the HIV/AIDS hypothesis, covering main lines of evidence from human epidemiology and experimental animal virus research. Special attention is paid to the issue of how AIDS may be defined so that the possibility of AIDS without HIV may still be theoretically discussed. Major emphasis throughout this article is placed on the arguments of modern HIV/AIDS skeptics, Peter Duesberg and Robert Root-Bernstein, who do not believe that HIV has a central role in AIDS. It is concluded that HIV/AIDS skeptics have chosen overly broad definitions of AIDS which are not clinically useful, and which would, if employed, result in many confusing diagnoses of "AIDS" and "HIV-free AIDS" in people with good prognoses. HIV is one of a closely-related family of viruses which causes AIDS-like immunodeficiency diseases in a number of animals species, and HIV/AIDS skeptics have ignored or minimized this research in order to construct needlessly complicated alternative hypotheses for the cause of AIDS. These alternative views are based on correlations between AIDS and toxin exposure shown by epidemiologists to be artificial a decade ago, but which skeptics still refuse to abandon. Examination of the HIV/AIDS controversy thus allows us to draw some general lessons about how skepticism in science works, and the ways in which it can go pathologically awry.
jojo, pandemie. kazdejch zhruba 30 let chripkovej virus zmutuje v neco fakt nepeknyho. spanelska chripka, honk kongska chripka. nebyla i zluta chripka? mimochodem dalsi pandemie je brzo podle odborniku naspadnuti. chripka mutuje kazdej rok a trochu se meni. ale jednou zacas je hodne destruktivni. vodserou to hlavne deti a stary.
este je zajimavi ze novy kmeny chripky vznikaj skoro vzdiÿ v asii.
Virust spanelske chripky nekdy v minulem stoleti zabil miliony lidi.
tak to mas pravdu, ale virus zabija v priebehu tyzdnov od nakazenia a nie o 10 rokov ako HIV
ale spat k tvojej otazke, pytal si sa: "A proc jeden vir chřipky zabiji a jine zpusobi jen horecku a odejdou? To máme dokonce viry téže choroby - a tak rozdílné účinky. To je to takový problém dokonce v celé rodině rozmanitých retrovirů?"
NEVIEM preco, ALE Peter Duesberg hovoril o retrovirusoch (ze su neskodne) a virus chripky pod tuto kategoriu virusov nespada(narozdiel od HIV), proste patri do inej skupiny virusov
18-04-2005 v 06:33 AM
