Conference hydra::dejavu

    
    And actually the number of AIDS virus and the number and size of 
    cancer tumors fluctuate constantly throughout the course of
    both diseases. See...where _is_ that reference...?...ah...
    
           "The Regression of Malignancies" by Bedrick, 
    
           _American Laboratory_, Feb., 1982
    
    which includes a lengthy bibliography including several hundred cases
    of spontanious regression of cancer cases.
    
    So just noting that the diseases disappeared doesn't prove much--he'd
    have to prove that the rate of regression is greater than what 
    one would expect from spontanious regression, or that for cancer
    that the disease had remained in remission for greater than 5 years
    (the official definition of a "cure").

    I think the "official" cancer cure rate of 5 years is bogus.  I believe
    the statistics of recurrence -- either of the original type of cancer
    or of a different cancer -- at 7-8 years is rather high.
    
    A friend of mine had cancer 6 years ago.  We won't consider him safe
    until after 8 years.
    
    Mary

Re .0, this was published in 1988, huh? So let's see, between then and
now, the reason we haven't heard of this miraculous breakthrough cure
is that it threatens the scientific establishment, who, therefore,
ridicule and suppress it. Right?

    ... not money per se though... an economic system... don't you think?

HAMER::MONTALVO 
    
>    no. money.
    
     But.... money is just paper, wal...
    
>    can't get out of somolia? you're not paying the officials enough.
    
     That's not a money problem, that's a corrupt system.    
    
>    Helmsley went to jail because she did not grease the right palms.
    
     Helmsley went to jail because she didn't pay her taxes "only the
     little people pay taxes"... remember?
        
>    gotti got off the first time because he bought off some of the jurors.
 
     Once again... you're talking corruption not money.   
    
    

    re: article posted in .0,
    
    Interesting article, Marcos.  Thanks for posting it.
    
>their results are not considered  proof  by the US medical community.  So
>the Medizone Company in New York has taken on the task of doing the
>controlled studies required for the treatment to be approved in the US for
>general use.
    
    Any results published by Medizone since 1988 ?  
    
    Be interesting if they compared the rate of improvement in various areas
    using explicit ozone treatment of the blood with that of a deep breathing 
    regimen.
    
>  Would you expect to read or hear such an announcement from any medical
>journal or media outlet owned by people financially committed to the
>medical  status quo, which is practically all of them?  How many want to
>help their own occupation become unnecessary?
    
    I'd expect the research published and peer reviewed at least, even if 
    torn apart by 'status quo conspirators' and such.  The referenced
    articles seem mostly like pieces on the general mechanisms, not
    medical research on the effects of these specific kinds of oxygen 
    treatment.
    
>  Anti-oxygenation propaganda pieces will probably not mention that over
    
    Has anyone seen any of these ?
    
>  All this has been with virtually no publicity.  The official reason for
>this is that the accepted procedure for publishing medical breakthroughs is
    
    No publicity doesn't mean no peer review in medical journals.
    
    The absolute faith in the legitimacy of yet unreproduced results and the
    repetitive inflammatory social commentary does make the
    information content more suspect than if it was provided in a more
    sober fashion.
    
>and the American Psychiatric Association sees no advantage to ending mental
>illness.
    
    Health Freedom News doesn't happen to be owned by the Church of
    Scientology, does it ?   This is one of their most common arguments
    as well.   
    
    							todd

    Since this material was written, it has been found that the HIV virus
    "hides" within neural cells, and perhaps within other kinds of cells.
    Any purely blood-based therapy like this, is therefore, rather unlikely
    to be effective.  If you removed every HIV virus particle from the
    blood you would therefore not have done much against the disease,
    except possibly in its very earliest stages.  The next flare-up would
    still occur, with the amount of damage diminished little if at all.

				    Topher

    
    ref 5 years for cure...
    
    I don't think the 5 years has any great significance either. It's 
    just an arbitrary cutoff point. (I've also heard incidently that 
    someone located a gene that's associated with a predisposition
    for cancers. If you have the gene, you're never really safe.)
    
    E.

    What are KIVA lights and what do they do?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Robert

>                      <<< Note 1776.7 by VAXRIO::MARCOS >>>
>                                -< disclaimer >-

>The information presented in the basenote is for your perusal only. It does 
>not necessarily reflect the personal views of the poster, nor should the views,
>opinions, statements or claims therein be accepted at face value.

  I'm sorry Marcos, but when you present material like this without
  strong warnings, there are many people who will be blinded by
  irrational hope, and fall prey to this scum. You do a disservice to
  readers and others, whether you agree with this material or not.

  Responsible reporting is more than simply posting material verbatim.
  You have a responsibility to comment when the material could hurt some
  readers. I would be justified, in this case, to "shoot the messenger"
  to insure that he doesn't present more of this trash without comment.

             <<< HYDRA::DISK_NOTES$LIBRARY:[000000]DEJAVU.NOTE;1 >>>
                             -< Psychic Phenomena >-
================================================================================
Note 1776.0                     Hyperoxygenation                         1 reply
VAXRIO::MARCOS                                      683 lines  14-DEC-1992 07:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry folks. This doesn't have much to do with psychic phenomena but might be
interesting (and even important). 

AIDS, Cancer Cured by Hyperoxygenation
 
Reprinted from the June 1988 issue of Health Freedom News
 
by Waves Forest
  
  Several dozen AIDS patients have not only reversed their death
sentences, but are now back at work, completely free of the disease.  
They destroyed the virus in their blood 

IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT THE AMOUNT OF VIRUS IN THE BLOOD FLUCTUATES
DURING THE COURSE OF AIDS. "FREE OF DISEASE" DOES NOT MEAN "CURED."
ALSO, AIDS DOES NOT CAUSE DISEASE WHEN IT IS "IN THE BLOOD." IT
CAUSES DISEASE WHEN IT DISTROYS CERTAIN IMMUNE SYSTEM CELLS FROM
THE INSIDE.

by hyperoxygenation, known in various
forms as oxygen therapy, bio-oxydative therapy or auto-hemotherapy.  This
is a simple, inexpensive and very broad-spectrum healing process that many
feel could force a complete overhaul of the medical industry.  The two
basic types of oxygen therapy are ozone blood infusion, and absorption of
oxygen water (hydrogen peroxide) at very low concentrations.
  It turns out that the AIDS virus cannot tolerate high oxygen levels in
its victims  blood.  Not only that, every other disease organism tested so
far apparently has the same weakness.  Even cancer growths contract and
disappear when the oxygen saturation is sufficiently increased in the
fluids surrounding them, since they are anaerobic.
  AIDS, herpes, hepatitis, Epstein Barr, cytomegalovirus and other
lipid-envelope virus are readily destroyed by hyperoxygenating the
patient s blood with ozone.  This was demonstrated by among others Dr.
Horst Kief in Bad Hersfeld, West Germany.  Dr. Kief has already cured a
number of AIDS victims by drawing blood, infusing it with ozone and
returning it to the patient, at regular intervals until all the virus is
gone.  (He can be reached through Biozon Ozon-Technik GmbH, An Der Haune
#10, Bad Hersfeld, D-6430, Federal Republic of Germany.)  Dr. S. Rilling of
Stuttgart and Dr. Renate Viebahn of Iffezheim are among the growing number
of physicians who have obtained similar results with their patients.  They
are with Arztlich Gesellschaft fur Ozontherapie and JrJ Hansler GmbH,
respectively.

WHERE'D THEY PUBLISH RESULTS? ARE THEY AFRAID TO HAVE THEIR RESULTS QUESTIONED?

"GMBH" MEANS "CORPORATION" DO THEY HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE RESULTS?
IF SO, WHAT IMPARTIAL BODY HAS REVIEWED THE RESULTS?
 
The Basis of Bio-Oxidative Therapies
 
  For many years the health sciences have been seeking to identify the
primary physical causes of all diseases, and the cure-all that this basic
principle would yield.  Now both have been found, but their utter
simplicity makes them difficult to accept at first, since it seems like if
it s that easy, we should have been using them all along.
  Our bodies are composed mostly of water, which is eight ninths oxygen.

THIS IS MISLEADING. THE OXYGEN IS BOUND UP WITH HYDROGEN AND IS NOT AT ALL
SIMILAR TO UNBOUND OXYGEN (TABLE SALT IS SODIUM BOUND WITH CHLORINE. IS
TABLE SALT LIKE CHLORINE GAS OR SODIUM METAL?)

Most nutritional studies tend to get caught up in the small details of
biochemistry and overlook our most abundant and essential element, and the
fundamental role of its depletion in causing illness.  Of all the elements
the body needs, only oxygen is in such constant demand that its absence
brings death in minutes.
  The main difference, for healing purposes, between benign micro-organisms
(including our own cells), and those which cause disease, is that the
latter require much lower oxygen levels.  This is due to their more
primitive evolutionary origins, during the ages when free oxygen was far
less abundant.  Now their descendants can only survive in low-oxygen
environments such as accompany stagnation and decay.  To become a growth
medium for such parasites, one has to have allowed the oxygen saturation of
the body s fluids to drop well below the optimum level for healthy cell
growth and function.


ACTUALLY, NO. THE DISEASES COULDN'T HAVE EVOLVED BEFORE THERE WAS A 
HOST FOR THEM TO LIVE IN. ALSO, MOST DISEASES ONLY LIVE UNDER A VERY 
NARROW RANGE OF CONDITIONS (TEMPERATURE, ACIDITY, ETC.)--WHICH ARE
THE SAME AS THE CONDITIONS INSIDE THE BODY. (WHICH IS WHY YOU GET 
A FEVER WHEN YOU'RE SICK--IT HELPS KILL THE GERMS. THE COUPLE OF
DEGREES OF HEAT THROWS OFF THEIR METABOLISM)SOME DISEASES GROW BETTER 
UNDER LOW OXYGEN PRESSURE, BUT MOST DON'T LIKE LOW OXYGEN LEVELS ANY BETTER 
THAN YOU DO.

  The simplest substances available for restoring one s oxygen balance to a
healthy range are ozone (03), and hydrogen peroxide (H202), which is much
easier to obtain and use.  These are both highly toxic when concentrated,
which has tended to obscure their germicidal value except as a skin
antiseptic.  But when diluted to therapeutic levels (for H202, 1/2 of 1% or
less), they are not only non-toxic but uniquely beneficial.
 
Ozone Blood Treatment
 
  Ozone overcomes the AIDS virus by a fundamentally different process than
usually attempted with drugs.  Instead of burdening the liver and immune
system with more elaborate toxic substances, ozone simply oxidizes the
molecules in the shell of the virus.
  The treatment is remarkably simple.  The ozone is produced by forcing
oxygen through a metal tube carrying a 300-volt charge.  A pint of blood is
drawn from the patient and placed in an infusion bottle.  The ozone is then
forced into the bottle and mixed in by shaking gently, whereupon the blood
turns bright cardinal red.  

WHAT THIS COLOR CHANGE MEANS IS THAT THE HEMOGLOBIN HAS _ABSORBED_
 THE RELEASED OXYGEN. THE OXYGEN IS BOUND UP IN THE HEMOGLOBIN--IT 
ISN'T CIRCULATING FREELY IN THE BLOOD!

As the ozone molecules dissolve into the blood
they give up their third oxygen atom, releasing considerable energy which
energy which destroys all lipid-envelope virus, and apparently most other
disease organisms as well, while leaving blood cells unharmed.

OXYDATION MEANS THE MOLICULES HAVE ABSORBED AN ADDITIONAL OXYGEN
MOLICULE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE "ENERGY IN THE BLOOD." (AND
ONCE AGAIN, THE OXYGEN HAS BEEN ABSORBED BY SOMETHING. IT ISN'T FREE IN THE
BLOOD AND MAY NEVER HAVE BEEN)

  it also oxygenates the blood to a greater degree than is usually reached,
what with poor air and sluggish breathing habits.  

YOU DON'T "OXYGENATE THE BLOOD;" YOU ADD OXYGEN TO THE HEMOGLOBIN. THERE IS
NEVER "OXYGEN IN THE BLOOD" OR ANY FREE GAS OF ANY KIND. EVER HEAR OF 
"THE BENDS?" IT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THERE _IS_ FREE GAS IN THE BLOOD--
THE GAS BUBBLES COLLECT IN THE JOINTS AND TISSUES. IT'S QUITE PAINFUL
AND SOMETIMES CRIPPLING OR FATAL.

The treated blood is
then given back to the patient.  This treatment is given from twice a week
to twice a day, depending on how advanced the disease is.  The strengthened
blood confers some of its virucidal properties to the rest of the patient s
blood as it disperses.

WHAT ARE THESE "VIRUCIDAL PROPERTIES?" THE OXYGEN IS BOUND IN THE HEMOGLOBIN
OR THE VIRAL COAT--IT ISN'T GOING ANYWHERE. LIKE YOUR BURNED STEAK SUDDENLY 
GIVES OFF OXYGEN AND HEAT AND TURNS BACK INTO RAW MEAT...

  The disease will not return, as long as the patient maintains his blood
in an oxygen-positive state, through proper breathing, exercise, and clean
diet.

"OXYGEN POSITIVE STATE" IS MEANINGLESS GIBBERISH.

  A Dr. Preuss, in Stuttgart, has written up ten case histories of AIDS
patients he has cured by this method.  But his and the other physicians 
report of cures are all anecdotal rather than in the form of  controlled
studies , since they could not be expected to treat some patients and deny
treatment to others just for the purpose of accumulating evidence.  Thus
their results are not considered  proof  by the US medical community.  

THE AZT TRAILS WERE EVENTUALLY
EXPANDED TO TREAT EVERYONE IN THE STUDY AND THE RESULTS WERE CONSIDERED
"PROOF BY THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY." OBVIOUSLY CONTROLLED STUDIES ARE NOT
ALLWAYS NEEDED FOR A TREATMENT TO BE ACCEPTED AS VALID. AND WHERE WAS THIS
WRITTEN UP? AND WHAT DOES PREUSS DEFINE AS A "CURE" FOR AIDS?

So
the Medizone Company in New York has taken on the task of doing the
controlled studies required for the treatment to be approved in the US for
general use.

(Continued)

    re: Mike Glantz, and more general comments on pros and cons of article.
    
    I disagree, Mike.  Personally I welcome almost any properly documented 
    and appropriately introduced article for discussion, even if it happens
    to be sensationalistic or happens to somewhat abuse the use of emotional 
    appeal (which I don't  neccessarily apply all that much to Marcos' article 
    in this case).  
    
    In this case, if Marcos had insufficient medical data to
    introduce the pros and cons of the oxygenation theory, along with the
    article, then he probably did a service to us to post what he did have 
    without extensive editorial comment, to let it be reviewed on its own
    merits.
    
    As it is, it makes or implies several good, if not exactly revolutionary 
    points;
    
    1.  The incestuous relationship of the medical community and the drug
    	companies, and the longstanding reputed bias in *some* of the leading
    	journals (such as JAMA and New England Journal of Medicine)
    	toward publishing research favorable to their advertisers.
    
    2.  The research into the beneficial effects of various kinds of
    	oxygenation, including breathing therapy, on health.
    
    Places where it seems to me to be weak include the conspiracy theory
    Jamie alluded to that the medical community conspires to keep us in
    ill health, which I find much less credible; and the implication that
    particular technologies of oxygenation have anything special about them
    that is not found in other ways of achieving the same kinds of results 
    (the potential 'scam' aspect).
    
    						kind regards,
    
    						todd

> 1.  The incestuous relationship of the medical community and the drug
>     companies, and the longstanding reputed bias in *some* of the leading
>     journals

> 2.  The research into the beneficial effects of various kinds of
>     oxygenation, including breathing therapy, on health.

If these were the main points of the article, and were thoughtfully
presented with supporting material, I would have no complaint.

Re Marcos (that readers of this notesfile are probably not at risk of
being sucked in), probably not, but they may reproduce this article and
show it to friends and relatives, some of whom *will* fall prey to the
con. Without *any* commentary or disclaimer (the way .0 was posted),
the posting is only slightly less irresponsible than the original
article. In fact, however, it had *positive* commentary, which, in my
opinion, renders the posting inexcusable:

.0> doesn't have much to do with psychic phenomena but might be
.0> interesting (and even important).

Yes, important to alert everyone to the scam, maybe, but Marcos would
have made that quite clear if that were his intention. The ambiguity
betrays his complicity.

Question: what are the limits of "freedom of speech"? There *are*
limits, you know. For example, you can't claim "freedom of speech" in
defense of verbally assaulting someone. Nor can you use it as a defense
when you cheat people.

    And there I was drifting through life thinking that Tiny Tim was a
    fictional character.

    Jamie.

    re: .22,.23,
    	Well, in a 'phenomenological' sense, any written case history is a 
    	work of fiction.   
    								todd

    Hey you lot, lighten up! As if anyone noting in here is gullible...
    
    Laurie.

    I have also removed my replies.

    Jamie.

I'll leave mine. Marcos's decision to delete the basenote is a
commendable example of responsible noting.

    	Ok, given the general nature of this particular conference, and the
    	fact that medicine is not its direct focus, I can respect Marcos'
    	decision, though it makes me a little uneasy.  If it were a
    	::MEDICINE conference, or a more technical one, I'd more strongly 
    	support the contention this smells a bit like censorship.  
    
    							kind regards,
    
    							todd

    
    
    	I also would like to read whatever Marcos has to post,
    	and I can decide for myself the merits of the article
    	I never for one minute assumed that Marcos was endorsing 
    	or even advocating what he posted.  If anyone thinks we
    	need censorship, that's what the moderators are here for,
    	let them decide.  

    Marcos' decision to withdraw his post is not censorship.  No real
    pressure (i.e., threats of retribution) were made to him that I know
    of.  Rather it was argued to him that this was not something he would
    really want to post.  He accepted these arguments and responded as he
    saw fit.  Discretion is not the same as censorship.

    So saying, I make a not-too-adament appeal to Marcos to repost the
    piece with appropriate qualifications, and the same to Jamie and anyone
    else who has chosen to delete there notes.  I think that this makes
    an interesting and informative "case study".

    I would also like to emphasize that there is no evidence here of a
    "scam" per se.  Many people who present so-called "quake therapies"
    sincerely believe, however wrongly, in their efficacy.  They have
    "seen cures" and have been convinced by them, despite the fact that
    the cures have alternate explanations or may be false.  You cannot
    conclude from the fact that they make money (as is assumed) from the
    cure makes them dishonest.  Many doctors get rich with treatments which
    they (and the medical community as a whole) believe are legitimate.
    Some of these stoop to questionable, misleading, high-pressure
    techniques, so even from such sleaze can only conclude that the people
    involved are sleazy -- not that they do believe that the technique
    isn't valid.  And, of course, that someone is using the technique as a
    scam does not mean that everyone involved is.

					Topher

    re: .31,
    	Thanks for that, Topher.  *My* choice of 'censorship' was probably
    	ill chosen.  What bothered me was that Marcos seemed to base his
    	decision to withdraw on premature information, seemingly because
    	he assumed, rightly or not, that the accusations of fraud were from 
    	people who had a definitive or authoritative judgement on the case 
    	study at hand or even the topic in general, which they do not, or at 
    	least have not yet proven it to my own satisfaction, anyway.  
    
    	Bottom line is I'd love to hear more experimental data reviewed or 
    	the principles discussed further.
    
    	I withdraw my hasty comment about it 'smelling of censorship,'
    	and extend my apologies to Mike and Jamie and anyone else who
    	the comment have have been taken to apply to.
    
    						kind regards,
    							todd

    Marcos,
    
    re: somewhere around .18  (5 year remission/official "cure")
    
    I wasn't responding to the basenote. I was responding to someone else's
    reply in which they quoted the 5 year remission=cure (which I think is
    bogus)

    While you are correct Topher in saying there is no scam here there
    most definitely was one in Germany where totally useless treatment was
    being sold to AIDS sufferers in the full knowledge that it would not
    help them. No one seems to have mentioned the point that if this
    treatment had worked there would be an almost endless number of cured
    people pouring out of Germany. But four years down the line and we have
    none.

    Jamie.

Well, I alluded to it in .4.

    
    I think it's unfortunate that .0 and other replies were deleted.
    
    The one good thing is that if someone presents some information and
    others get to point out that it isn't true, in a public forum, then all
    who read the note string will be served.  
    
    What happens in a read-only environment, such as a magazine or a
    newspaper, is that there isn't much of an opportunity for people to
    write back and respond in realtime, hence the reader does not have 
    the access to immediate refuting of the original manuscript as we do 
    in notes conferences.  
    
    The article was presented in .0, and refuted in other notes while citing 
    real life examples where it did not work (and in the process, may have
    saved others from a similar fate).  I think this is great.  Had I read 
    the article in a magazine somewhere, I would not have been able to get 
    the kind of interactive feedback that happened here.  Even worse, if I
    had AIDS, I might even be inclined to give it a try. Now though, having
    read through everything before it was deleted...if I had AIDS, I would
    probably not give it a second thought...or would now at least have some 
    valuable contacts through Jamie to find out more about the treatment 
    firsthand.
    
    Deleting the article, or not putting it in at all - these are not real
    solutions.  It's unfortunate that it came to this.
    
    Cindy

    
    	RE: .36
    
    	Those are my sentiments exactly, I wholeheartedly agree
    	with your comments.  How am I supposed to learn if I'm
    	not allowed to make my own mistakes, if I'm prevented
    	from experiencing a cult, for example, then I'll never 
    	recognize one when I see it.

In my opinion, both deleting and never posting are preferable to even
the *minute* risk that someone would see the base note (with it's
mildly positive endorsement), miss the criticism, and *one single
person* would fall prey to this disgusting scam. I'm normally strongly
in favor of "caveat emptor", but in certain circumstances (most notably
con games), it's clear that the buyer may not be able to reason clearly
enough to protect themselves, and the consequences of falling into the
trap too severe.

Now I know that some of you folks who decry the deletion also happen to
favor some form of gun control. How do you square this position with a
sudden appeal to freedom of speech for an equally atrocious crime? As I
asked before: what *are* the restrictions of freedom which a society
can tolerate?

    Mike, I saw no endorsement of the treatment in the base note.  And at
    least readers of this file have the opportunity to read both sides.  By
    deleting the note altogether, they would have had the possibility of
    reading the base note somewhere else, but without the rest of the
    information supplied here by Jamie and company.
    
    As to the difference between censorship and gun control (which I don't
    favor), in the case of the former, I can make a choice to read or not
    read material and I can make a choice to believe it or not believe it. 
    However, if some nut or decides to shoot me, I don't get much choice in
    the matter.  

    Marcos,
    
    I read some time ago (no memory of where) of someone experimenting with
    heat to kill the virus in the patient's blood.  They would remove the
    blood, heat it to very high temperatures, then return it to the
    patient.  It was very risky (if the blood didn't cool sufficiently
    before returning to the patient, the heat could kill), although the 
    doctor experimenting with it was very up front about the risks
    involved.  Supposedly had favorable results with those who survived,
    although survival odds were probably on the order of 50/50.
    
    However, as others have mentioned in this file, the virus does not only
    infect blood, it can hide out in other organs.  So treatment of blood
    is not a cure.

             <<< HYDRA::DISK_NOTES$LIBRARY:[000000]DEJAVU.NOTE;1 >>>
                             -< Psychic Phenomena >-
================================================================================
Note 1776.16                    Hyperoxygenation                        16 of 39
TPTEST::GLANTZ "Mike @TAY 227-4299 TP Eng Littleton" 16 lines  15-DEC-1992 05:44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  >Responsible reporting is more than simply posting material verbatim.
  >You have a responsibility to comment when the material could hurt some
  >readers. I would be justified, in this case, to "shoot the messenger"
                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  >to insure that he doesn't present more of this trash without comment.


	I find this more threatening than the article.

> Mike, I saw no endorsement of the treatment in the base note.

Then perhaps you missed the first sentence, which said that the
information might be "important". Now, in the absence of anything like
"beware this possible con", what exactly might that "important" mean,
hmmm? Or are we pretending to be robots, here, who don't understand
things like connotation, insinuation, and reading between the lines?
"Might be important", while not an outright endorsement, is a long way
from *clearly* warning readers about the possibility of fraud. At the
very least, it implies hope. This is endorsement enough.

> Freedom of speech doesn't force anyone to listen

Sorry, but once you've read a sentence, you no longer have the option
to "not read it". Is it ok for me to verbally assault you in the first
sentence? After all, you only have to press "next unseen". And how
about those "heavy breathers" who call you at 3:00 AM? Freedom of
speech, wouldn't you say? We wouldn't want to restrict them unfairly,
would we? No, sorry, con artists prey on people who are incapable of
"just saying no", and that's one reason why we have laws which restrict
freedom of speech in some instances.

...

>> I would be justified, in this case, to "shoot the messenger"

> I find this more threatening than the article.

Why? Did you think I actually meant to shoot with a gun?

If English is not your native language, then I apologize. Permit me to
explain: when an expression appears in quotes, as mine did, it
indicates that it is not to be taken literally. It means that "shoot
the messenger" is being used as a figure of speech, and that no actual
shooting with a weapon is intended or implied. The use of quotes makes
it unambiguously clear that no threat is intended. Literate readers of
English know this. Again, if your command of English is possibly
somewhat less than a native speaker, I apologize, and hope you now
understand that my meaning was purely figurative.

    Re .40

    >One could always argue that if they  had really had 4 years of
    >complete failure then they would most likely be closed by now and the
    >FDA would never have granted them anything.

    As this scam was being run in Germany, it has nothing to do with the
    FDA. I know that all Americans seem to think that their Federal
    institutions are actually global ones, but this in not the case.

    >Ozone water filters are effective. It's said that one could even drink
    >sewage after it has been made to pass through such an ozone filter.
     
    I think that passing blood through an ozone filter may have a few
    problems if the filter is as efficient as you claim. It would have a
    tendency to filter out all the red and white cells which are a vital
    part of the blood.

    As has pointed out in other replies the virus is also present in the
    soft tissues of the body and the lymphatic system. As the ozone would
    not reach these parts, these would live on. BTW any free gas must be
    removed from the blood before it is returned to the body. Any failure
    to do this will result in an "air embolism" (a blockage of a blood
    vessel by a bubble of gas) which, depending on its location, could
    cause serious problems.  

    Now over the years I have become steadily more involved with AIDS
    patients, this is not something that I seem to have chosen, it just
    happened. I find it very difficult to watch someone die in this way.
    The aging process seems to accelerate at an incredible pace and soon
    you are left with what appears to be a very skinny old man.

    As conventional medicine can provide only palliative treatment at
    present the victims clutch at any straw. I am not capable of denying
    them this hope by telling them that the treatment will be useless. Nor
    am I capable of saying "I told you so" when it does fail. However I
    most decidedly am capable of doing everything within my power to
    challenge false claims of the fake cures.

    I am sorry but callously taking the money from people who are desperate
    and extremely vulnerably, knowing that what you are selling is totally
    useless, is a really vile thing to do. BTW most doctors here receive a
    salary. Providing treatment that is unnecessary and expansive provides
    the doctors with no extra income, so don't bother making the
    comparison again.

    Jamie.

    
    
    	RE: .43
    
    	Thank you for your clarification on "shoot the messenger",
    	the more I learn the more I recognize how ignorant I am.
    

    All of this is very interesting, but misses one vital point. Was this
    the appropriate conference for the base-note in the first place?
    
    Laurie.

You should take it as a high compliment that your writing is so clear
that it never even occurred to me for an instant that you might have
another mother tongue.

And to Marcos, I also apologize. However you must know that, even in
Portuguese, to say something like "might be a good idea" is quite
different from saying "is positively a bad idea". The mere possibility
of hope which you hinted at is what I objected to. I realize this may
be subtle, but an understanding of subtleties (I mean here shades of
understanding, not deception) is a good deal of what this notesfile is about.

    I must still confess confusion over ozone filter. How could you set it
    to pass blood cells, relatively large objects and easily seen on a
    light microscope, while stopping viruses which are *VERY* much smaller
    and are too small to be seen by a light microscope and are said to be
    too small to be stopped by a filter?

    A further point about blood, it is rather fragile and doesn't take too
    much knocking around. Mine and the extra that was donated to me, got a
    real bashing just going through the heart/lung machine. It left me with
    a jaundiced look for ages.

    You are also in error in thinking that they hang about in the blood
    first then spread to the rest of the body. Entering via the mucus
    tissue they have a good chance of entering the lymphatic system
    initially and from there spreading to the blood. In any event they will
    be in more than the blood stream very quickly.

    Remember it requires only one virus to cause the infection. Once inside
    a T cell that one virus can reproduce thousands.

    Jamie.

    How about re-posting the base note, or some modified version of it
    in ::MEDICAL or ::BIOLOGY ?   I'd like to hear more about it, if
    there's more to hear ...
    
    						todd

    Re .52

    >An ozone filter is not a particle filter.

    So it can pass large objects and trap small ones?

    Jamie.

    re: .49 - Marcos
    
    I agree with you.  Well said.

> If you leave them you could be called an accomplice to a
> con and maybe posting these references would even be gainst DEC policies.

You would have no problem if you accompanied the posting with
statements like "The claims here sound impressive. Does anyone have any
information on whether there's any truth to the information presented
in this article?" In this way, you would (correctly) raise honest
questions about the validity of the material *before* anyone gets their
hopes up about it, and avoid language (like "might be important") which
might raise hopes before this is warranted.

    Mike,
    
    Stating that information "might be important" does not imply an
    endorsement.  It means exactly what it says, and leaves open a number
    of possibilities:
    
    .  might be good information, valuable to be aware of
    .  might be bad information, still valuable to be aware of
    .  might not be of any value 
    
    I understand your outrage against con artists.  However, that does not
    give you the right of censorship.  At least, not in the U.S.

    No one has, to my knowledge, proposed any form of censorship.  Jamie,
    among others, proposes that the consequences of posting certain kinds
    of notes be considred before (or if necessary, after) posting.  I quite
    agree with that -- but I still think that the original note should be
    reposted while making it clear that no endorsement is implied.

				    Topher

    re: re-Posting elsewhere (Marcos)
    
    I notice it was re-posted in VAXCAT::HOLISTIC, where the base note
    and early replies were also deleted and discussion turned away from the 
    particulars of the case study.  I'm curious about this blood treatment 
    idea in general, but not interested enough to want to risk being accused 
    of helping to perpetrate a cruel hoax.  If Mike feels that strongly about 
    it, maybe there's something to it, he doesn't seem the type to hyper-react 
    without good reason.  So I'm not going to persue it further in the 
    DEC conferences.
    
    It certainly did bring out some interesting issues, though, Marcos,
    I do thank you for bringing it up.
    
    						kind regards,
    
    						todd

    How about "reverse censorship" then?  Mike has suggested repeatedly
    that the only responsible reporting of this information is in a way
    that *he* deems is appropriate.  
    
    By the way, Mike, I make the choice to open a given notes conference. 
    If it contains something offensive to me, that's a risk I've chosen to
    take.
    
    I don't think the heavy breather on the phone (hey, how'd you know
    about that? ;-) is a good analogy.  Other rights than freedom of speech
    come into play here.  Such as the right to privacy.

    Sorry Marcos I still don't think that your ozone filter will be
    effective. The first thing that the AIDS virus does on entering the
    blood stream is enter a T cell. There it replicates itself and as T
    cells do not take up oxygen they should be safe from your filter.

    One other point on supersaturating the blood with oxygen. As part of my
    training in SCUBA diving we were taught about oxygen poisoning. This
    can affect you when you dive below 50 meters, the point where the
    partial pressure of oxygen in your air passes one atmosphere. This
    manifests itself as something closely resembling an epileptic seizure
    and can be fatal. Could the same condition be induced by running the
    blood through a ozone filter?

    Yesterday Harry managed to talk to our friend who had the first hand
    experience of the "treatment" described in the base note. He was
    understandably rather reluctant to talk about it, but did confirm that
    was the same treatment. Apparently you have to go into a special
    clinic, whose daily charges seemed to be about the same as I was
    charged for being in the Intensive Care Unit, blood is removed, treated
    and replaced. The doctor's honorarium for this is really very modest
    and all the money goes on charges for staying in the clinic and lab
    costs for treating the blood. He believes that the clinic and lab are
    owned by the doctors.

    Out of curiosity I ran the doctors' names through the computer to find
    out if they had published any results and was not surprised to find
    that they had not. While I was in there I checked for other articles
    published in the same journal but found that it was not listed at all,
    this is rather bad as many non "main stream" publications are on the
    database. Finally I thought that I would have a look and see if
    anything was listed under hyperoxygenation. I found several articles
    but none were anything to do with killing micro organisms, they were
    more trying to bring the oxygen levels up to normal when they were very
    low, one example was cyanide poisoning.

    Jamie.

    Marcos,
    
    Just an aside, but I believe you mean H3O (1 hydrogen atom, 3 oxygen
    atoms), not H2O2 (1 hydrogen atom, 2 oxygen atoms and 2 somethings). 
    Can somebody please verify?
    
    Thanks,
    Mary

    H3O (the "3" actually being subscripted on the H) would consist of
    three hydrogens and one oxygen.  In reactions, and in describing
    loosly bound systems, a molecule or radical is frequently prefixed
    with a non-subscripted number to say that the molecule appears that
    number of times.  That is not what is being discussed.  What you
    are talking about would be HO3, while water is H2O.  I have never
    heard of either H3O or HO3, but I'm not enough of a chemist to claim
    that it doesn't exist.

    In any case, hydrogen peroxide is H2O2 (2 hydrogen and 2 oxygen atoms
    per molecule).  If you disolve ozone (O3 instead of the common form of
    oxygen O2) in water you will get hydrogen peroxide, as well as
    oxidizing any easily oxidized molecules (including viruses and
    hemogloben but also, for example, cell wall lipids I would expect) that
    happen to be floating around.

    A good way to thouroughly remove organics from water, but I would be
    hesitant to assume that its effect on blood would be benign.

				    Topher

    Mary,
    
    You have your notation wrong.
    
    H O  (H2O2) is hydrogen peroxide.
     2 2
    
    Of course, I can't think why Marcos finds hydrogen peroxide
    interesting.
    
    						Ann B.

    I sit corrected :-)
    
    I think what was confusing me was the prefix on oxide.  (in case anyone
    cares ;')

    An update on related topics ...
    
    	A teaser on a news program last night mentioned the possibility
    	of an experimental AIDS vaccine being tested on Rhesus monkeys.
    
    	Not enough information given to determine what they were really
    	talking about, or its signficance.   All they said was that
    	it was a 'weakened form of HIV,' which is of course the
    	standard principle of immunization.   I thought there was supposed
    	to be horrendous technical problems with getting an orthodox 
    	immunity reaction with HIV, so I don;t know what to make of this.
    
    	Anyone know what this might refer to ?
    
    	-------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    	In related news, the Hyperoxygenation string in ::HOLISTIC has been
    	set hidden due to a reader complaint.
    
    	Who wants to start the conspiracy theory rolling ?  ;-)
    
    						kind regards,
    						todd

    Ok, sorry for the delay but it was a fairly long piece of research and
    as they say, "A lie is half way round the world before the truth has
    got its boots on." Anyway I took time out for Christmas and New year.

    To forestall the cries of pain from window watchers I have placed my
    rather long note in the next reply.

    Jamie.

    Jamie,
    
    It's not clear from your comments that you are aware that there is
    a vaccine against FeLV.  It was developed at Tufts University's
    School of Veterinary Medicine.  (One of the trial patients was
    Steve Kallis' eldest cat.)
    
    						Ann B.

    Great news I wonder when it will be released over here.

    Jamie.

Well, although I don't really like Jamie's
style and I don't understand his motives - my
hat is off to him for doing a thorough job
of research.

John D.

    >I don't understand his motives

    Oh permit me to explain. A gay friend of mine who is suffering from
    AIDS fell for the con and was gently relieved of all his savings, I
    also found out over the holiday period that they then went on to con
    his lover out of his savings too. The entire thing was a waste of
    money and I doubt if my friend will live long enough to see the summer.

    Put the effort on my part down to a sense of duty to make sure that
    these people do not prey on the lack of medical knowledge of those who
    are suffering. In reality it was a labour of love.

    Jamie.  

    
    >In reality, it was a labour of love.
    
    And it shows, Jamie.  Thank you.
    
    Cindy

    Jamie,
    
     I'm usually only a read only person, but I had to reply to thank you
    for that great note! I enjoyed every word of it.
    
     There has been advertising over here lately for something called an
    "Oxygen Cocktail", which is supposed to super oxyginate the blood or
    something to make you have more energy, and make you a better runner,
    jumper, sports person in general I guess. All your research verified
    the fact that I thought it was bunk to start with.
    
    Thanks so much for the time and effort you put in. I'm sure your
    friends thank you too.
    
    Love,
    
    Y