[Smiles]

A person learns many lessons over a long life . . . one of the most important is to always view askance (if not immediately distrust) anyone who starts of a discourse, argument, or opinion, with the phrase, " ... You need to know a few things ... "

Cheer ...

[marc11864]

that the ora-quick test, which has been commonly used to confirm HIV antibodies especially in places like SF City Clinic has thrown a number of false-negatives and they're now scrambling to retest a number of previously negative result testees (please don't laugh, i only made it to 2nd grade :P )

[Silom]

Objective, have you been reading virusmyth.net? It is... ahem... not very objective.

[objective]

Silom, yes and no, but I do not speak for the multitude of PHD academics on that site, I speak for myself. I maintain that the only way to be objective on this matter, and on any matter, is to rely on science and on proof. If that makes me unobjective to you, so be it.

[SF farang]

Marc11864, I remember reading about the problem with Ora-quick tests, but - not to be picky - the news reported here was that false positives, not false negatives, were the problem. People went in for an Ora-quick test, got the result in 20 minutes that they were HIV positive, then a normal (old-fashioned) blood draw was performed and sent off for confirmatory testing, which took 1 or 2 weeks. Several of these confirmatory tests came back negative, so that's how they found out about the false positive problem. I guess it's no fun walking around for 2 weeks thinking you are positive, when you aren't. From the news:

"In late 2005, counselors at several HIV testing programs (mainly in New York City and San Francisco) reported apparent clusters of positive OraQuick HIV test results on oral fluid that were ultimately found to be negative on confirmatory testing. At some locations, the reported rate of false-positive test results was as high as 9 per 1000...."

[SF farang]

The URL you have provided is courtesy of the US government. Documents published by the US government are about as trustworthy as the Iraqi mobile germ warfare labs.

Well I guess I shouldn't be too surprised to see Iraq finally introduced into this discourse. Your scientific method - discrediting all medical research that disagrees with your position just because it's posted on a US government website - is certainly enlightened. But it is consistent with a Grand Government Conspiracy theory. Can't wait for your next chapter - perhaps "How AIDS was developed by the CIA"?

[objective]

Can't wait for your next chapter - perhaps "How AIDS was developed by the CIA"?

Actually HIV was “discovered” by a US government department, after credit was effectively stolen from a European research institute. Feel free to verify that for yourself, and try to avoid sourcing your scientific data from politicians. To my knowledge, the CIA has nothing to do with any diseases, so I am uncertain why you raise it.