<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space?</title>
	<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:44:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2</generator>

	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Dr. PS Duke</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-39469</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:12:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-39469</guid>
					<description>Tine,  Who is (or was) Numphizo?  Is that an alternative spelling of Nozipho Benghu, who was the &quot;scientific proof&quot; that your treatment was the cure for AIDS?

It's been 4 or 5 years now since the burglars peed on your records right?  Do you have new records of the latest 20,000 or so you have cured?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Tine,  Who is (or was) Numphizo?  Is that an alternative spelling of Nozipho Benghu, who was the &#8220;scientific proof&#8221; that your treatment was the cure for AIDS?</p>
	<p>It&#8217;s been 4 or 5 years now since the burglars peed on your records right?  Do you have new records of the latest 20,000 or so you have cured?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Tine van der Maas</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-36992</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 23:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-36992</guid>
					<description>Sorry, somehow I was disconnected above.  I contacted Zachie Achmet long before there was any ARV treatment in SA. He never returned my calls after one phone call speaking directly to him explaining the concept of our program or answered his calls when we phoned him around 1998/1999. It was a dead end!!! I also contacted Patricia de Lille of then PAC - no response! Same for the DA. I want to make it clear it was not just one calll or 2, but many phone callls - records wil bear this out. Dr Manto was the only one that did respond.

Again I contacted Mark Heywood just before Easter 2003 (veriviable records) to put patients on our program under doctors  supervision with me supervising - (please remember that at this stage there were no ARVs roll out) -as we kew our program worked,  guess what . Again no reply when he should have told me a yes or a no (again telephone records to prove it) I did contact him. At that time I had just been attacked somewhere in KZN, so I did not push it as with a broken shoulder and ligaments I had to find the confidence to drive a car again.  (It was a favour to them as I was quite traumatised, but still wanted to spread the good message of health).

Next contact with TAC: After our documentary came out, Nathan Geffen got hold of a copy and obviously watched it as he asked me questions on this. He did not want to speak to me but did correspond with me by sms and email which I saved all the emails. 

If you really think I am a killer as many on the nternet 
zzzzzdo you not charge me with these homicides of Khabzela and Numphizo. The TAC has plenty of money to take me to court  . 

Ethical journalism should be very careful. Where are your ethics if you never have interviewed me and as I always have I been very clear about the issues.You wiill regret it if you ignore me. Please remember I do have the records I send you. Kid regards

Tine van der Maas</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Sorry, somehow I was disconnected above.  I contacted Zachie Achmet long before there was any ARV treatment in SA. He never returned my calls after one phone call speaking directly to him explaining the concept of our program or answered his calls when we phoned him around 1998/1999. It was a dead end!!! I also contacted Patricia de Lille of then PAC - no response! Same for the DA. I want to make it clear it was not just one calll or 2, but many phone callls - records wil bear this out. Dr Manto was the only one that did respond.</p>
	<p>Again I contacted Mark Heywood just before Easter 2003 (veriviable records) to put patients on our program under doctors  supervision with me supervising - (please remember that at this stage there were no ARVs roll out) -as we kew our program worked,  guess what . Again no reply when he should have told me a yes or a no (again telephone records to prove it) I did contact him. At that time I had just been attacked somewhere in KZN, so I did not push it as with a broken shoulder and ligaments I had to find the confidence to drive a car again.  (It was a favour to them as I was quite traumatised, but still wanted to spread the good message of health).</p>
	<p>Next contact with TAC: After our documentary came out, Nathan Geffen got hold of a copy and obviously watched it as he asked me questions on this. He did not want to speak to me but did correspond with me by sms and email which I saved all the emails. </p>
	<p>If you really think I am a killer as many on the nternet<br />
zzzzzdo you not charge me with these homicides of Khabzela and Numphizo. The TAC has plenty of money to take me to court  . </p>
	<p>Ethical journalism should be very careful. Where are your ethics if you never have interviewed me and as I always have I been very clear about the issues.You wiill regret it if you ignore me. Please remember I do have the records I send you. Kid regards</p>
	<p>Tine van der Maas
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Tine van der Maas</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-36967</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 21:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-36967</guid>
					<description>I can not let this go so I will state the following under oath so anybody can use this against me in a court of law if they want to:

1.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I can not let this go so I will state the following under oath so anybody can use this against me in a court of law if they want to:</p>
	<p>1.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Ethical Editor</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-35544</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 00:26:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-35544</guid>
					<description>Dr. Foley, 

As your quotes demonstrate, either none of the supposed evidence for pharma funding of TAC was brought forward, or if it was the judge dismisses it without telling us what it is.

In either case, it is difficult to make up one's mind independently on this basis.

Incidentally, in the other court case mentioned by Mr. Geffen, the judge's approach was exactly the same. When the defence (The Perth Group) would say that Nancy Padian's or Gallo's research papers supported the defence arguments, the judge would 'investigate' by asking Gallo his opinion. Now guess if you can what Gallo's or anybody else on the prosecution side's opinions were.

Likewise, in South Africa, the judge begins and ends his 'investigation' by simply repeating TAC's words:

&quot;I refer briefly to some of the responses to the allegations made by the respondents.

Achmat states that since its inception the TAC has insisted on political and financial independence from the pharmaceutical industry.  This policy was formally declared and adopted at its national congress in March 2001 and forms part of TAC’s constitution etc. etc. etc.&quot;

Allow me to bring two points to attention that should be obvious (without saying that Lincoln has any foundation for his allegations) 

1. It is a rare event indeed that any wrongdoing is found when an organization or institution investigates itself.

2. It is extremely difficult to prove that someone knowingly (a condition of proof further introduced by the judge) has accepted indirect funds from third party.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Dr. Foley, </p>
	<p>As your quotes demonstrate, either none of the supposed evidence for pharma funding of TAC was brought forward, or if it was the judge dismisses it without telling us what it is.</p>
	<p>In either case, it is difficult to make up one&#8217;s mind independently on this basis.</p>
	<p>Incidentally, in the other court case mentioned by Mr. Geffen, the judge&#8217;s approach was exactly the same. When the defence (The Perth Group) would say that Nancy Padian&#8217;s or Gallo&#8217;s research papers supported the defence arguments, the judge would &#8216;investigate&#8217; by asking Gallo his opinion. Now guess if you can what Gallo&#8217;s or anybody else on the prosecution side&#8217;s opinions were.</p>
	<p>Likewise, in South Africa, the judge begins and ends his &#8216;investigation&#8217; by simply repeating TAC&#8217;s words:</p>
	<p>&#8220;I refer briefly to some of the responses to the allegations made by the respondents.</p>
	<p>Achmat states that since its inception the TAC has insisted on political and financial independence from the pharmaceutical industry.  This policy was formally declared and adopted at its national congress in March 2001 and forms part of TAC’s constitution etc. etc. etc.&#8221;</p>
	<p>Allow me to bring two points to attention that should be obvious (without saying that Lincoln has any foundation for his allegations) </p>
	<p>1. It is a rare event indeed that any wrongdoing is found when an organization or institution investigates itself.</p>
	<p>2. It is extremely difficult to prove that someone knowingly (a condition of proof further introduced by the judge) has accepted indirect funds from third party.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Brian Foley</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34898</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 13:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34898</guid>
					<description>Lincoln is lying again when he states that TAC is &quot;pharma sponsored&quot;. 
A full bench of the Cape High Court has found that there is no evidence
that the TAC receives pharmaceutical funding. Indeed, it found the claim
Read the full judgment at:
http://www.tac.org.za/documents/JudgmentTACvRath-200603.doc

In particular, the court stated &quot;The respondents’ [Matthias Rath et al.]
allegations with regard to the pharmaceutical industry and the TAC are
premised upon conjecture and inferences and, it seems, are underpinned
by a conspiracy involving several players. It is an unlikely scenario
and no evidence has been disclosed which supports the respondents’
position on the TAC’s funding. The TAC, on the other hand, has made full
disclosure of its income and their source. Moreover, several local and
international deponents have confirmed the TAC’s policy and practices in
respect of its finances. The respondents’ allegations are not supported
on the available evidence and the contrary appears to be more likely.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Lincoln is lying again when he states that TAC is &#8220;pharma sponsored&#8221;.<br />
A full bench of the Cape High Court has found that there is no evidence<br />
that the TAC receives pharmaceutical funding. Indeed, it found the claim<br />
Read the full judgment at:<br />
<a href='http://www.tac.org.za/documents/JudgmentTACvRath-200603.doc' rel='nofollow'>http://www.tac.org.za/documents/JudgmentTACvRath-200603.doc</a></p>
	<p>In particular, the court stated &#8220;The respondents’ [Matthias Rath et al.]<br />
allegations with regard to the pharmaceutical industry and the TAC are<br />
premised upon conjecture and inferences and, it seems, are underpinned<br />
by a conspiracy involving several players. It is an unlikely scenario<br />
and no evidence has been disclosed which supports the respondents’<br />
position on the TAC’s funding. The TAC, on the other hand, has made full<br />
disclosure of its income and their source. Moreover, several local and<br />
international deponents have confirmed the TAC’s policy and practices in<br />
respect of its finances. The respondents’ allegations are not supported<br />
on the available evidence and the contrary appears to be more likely.&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: ERV</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34857</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 03:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34857</guid>
					<description>Well youre a little liar, arent you then, Michael aka lincoln.

So how are you reasoning going back on your vow?

Anita, if youre so concerned about qualifications, Im not even a grad student yet, and I regularly trounce Denier claims on my blog for my friends.  Deniers with credentials, Creationists with credentials, same thing.

Regarding the post, if someone is addressed in an article by name, then they should be given space to defend their name.  However, general Denier claims require no 'equal space'.  Let them do their own research and publish if they want space and a medium to spread their views.  Thats how everyone else has to do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Well youre a little liar, arent you then, Michael aka lincoln.</p>
	<p>So how are you reasoning going back on your vow?</p>
	<p>Anita, if youre so concerned about qualifications, Im not even a grad student yet, and I regularly trounce Denier claims on my blog for my friends.  Deniers with credentials, Creationists with credentials, same thing.</p>
	<p>Regarding the post, if someone is addressed in an article by name, then they should be given space to defend their name.  However, general Denier claims require no &#8216;equal space&#8217;.  Let them do their own research and publish if they want space and a medium to spread their views.  Thats how everyone else has to do it.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Anita Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34675</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 14:58:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34675</guid>
					<description>SPEAKING FOR THE DEAD.

Nathan Geffen's post contains factual errors which have passed editorial checks at the blog. Among these are slurs on the honour and good name of the late Professor SWP Mhlongo MBBS LRCP MRCS MSc MED (London). Since the dead cannot speak I dare to speak for him.

Far from being a &quot;descredited scientist with no experience working with HIV&quot; at his death, he held the position of Chief Practitioner, Family Medicine and Primary Health Care. In performance of his duties he examined Family Med post-grads throughout the country. At his own university, MEDUNSA, now part of University of Limpopo, he lectured and was voted best lecturer on several occasions between 1998-2006. His role as head of department of both family medicine and primary health care, took him to wards and clinics under his own hospital, other universities and facilities throughout this country and in neighbouring countries where South Africa has set up partnerships at a diplomatic level.

In addition, he regarded it an honour to serve on South Africa's Presidential Advisory Committee and his comments regarding it's Interim Report (March 2001) are a matter of record. To say as Geffen does that this man would lie in order to promote his ideas, is the antithesis of the man and his ideas were most certainly not seen as falsehoods by the authors of the Interim Report.

It is true that many might have been confused by anyone who has addressed these issues publicly, Geffen included. But to state that the professor &quot;promoted falsehoods that have confused people&quot; implies consciously sinister intent. Such an allegation should never have been allowed in print about the late Professor Sam Mhlongo, because it is so patently incorrect, according to all available facts.

Whatever Geffen said about Prof Mhlongo's scientific understanding and how this applied to pseudo-standards of practice, just do not tie up to the facts of his status in academia at the time of his death.

I have no idea how the Policy Co-Ordinator at Treatment Action Campaign, gets what appears to be unedited access to this website to say what? Tell editors how to do their job the TAC way? Meandering inconsequential, spiteful and factually inaccurate argument leading to the leap of faith that Geffen is the arbiter separating science from pseudo and therefore Setter of Rules. His &quot;rule of thumb&quot; is an epitaph: be extremely cautious, because today's consensus can be tomorrow's lie. -  Anita Allen anita@theallens.co.za</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>SPEAKING FOR THE DEAD.</p>
	<p>Nathan Geffen&#8217;s post contains factual errors which have passed editorial checks at the blog. Among these are slurs on the honour and good name of the late Professor SWP Mhlongo MBBS LRCP MRCS MSc MED (London). Since the dead cannot speak I dare to speak for him.</p>
	<p>Far from being a &#8220;descredited scientist with no experience working with HIV&#8221; at his death, he held the position of Chief Practitioner, Family Medicine and Primary Health Care. In performance of his duties he examined Family Med post-grads throughout the country. At his own university, MEDUNSA, now part of University of Limpopo, he lectured and was voted best lecturer on several occasions between 1998-2006. His role as head of department of both family medicine and primary health care, took him to wards and clinics under his own hospital, other universities and facilities throughout this country and in neighbouring countries where South Africa has set up partnerships at a diplomatic level.</p>
	<p>In addition, he regarded it an honour to serve on South Africa&#8217;s Presidential Advisory Committee and his comments regarding it&#8217;s Interim Report (March 2001) are a matter of record. To say as Geffen does that this man would lie in order to promote his ideas, is the antithesis of the man and his ideas were most certainly not seen as falsehoods by the authors of the Interim Report.</p>
	<p>It is true that many might have been confused by anyone who has addressed these issues publicly, Geffen included. But to state that the professor &#8220;promoted falsehoods that have confused people&#8221; implies consciously sinister intent. Such an allegation should never have been allowed in print about the late Professor Sam Mhlongo, because it is so patently incorrect, according to all available facts.</p>
	<p>Whatever Geffen said about Prof Mhlongo&#8217;s scientific understanding and how this applied to pseudo-standards of practice, just do not tie up to the facts of his status in academia at the time of his death.</p>
	<p>I have no idea how the Policy Co-Ordinator at Treatment Action Campaign, gets what appears to be unedited access to this website to say what? Tell editors how to do their job the TAC way? Meandering inconsequential, spiteful and factually inaccurate argument leading to the leap of faith that Geffen is the arbiter separating science from pseudo and therefore Setter of Rules. His &#8220;rule of thumb&#8221; is an epitaph: be extremely cautious, because today&#8217;s consensus can be tomorrow&#8217;s lie. -  Anita Allen <a href="mailto:anita@theallens.co.za">anita@theallens.co.za</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Tine van der Maas</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34605</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 00:17:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34605</guid>
					<description>Nathan, as always, you are blind to the truth. You will drown in your own arrogance. Tine</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Nathan, as always, you are blind to the truth. You will drown in your own arrogance. Tine
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Criselda Kananda</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34535</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 08:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34535</guid>
					<description>Nathan,

I think I have reached a stage where I am tired of you rubbishing my name when you don't even know me. Who gave you the right nor permission to speak on behalf of all infected with HIV. When I was diagnosed and told I would live for only two years and God willingly I am still alive almost 10yrs later symptom free and without your highly recomended toxic drugs. I HAVE NEVER SAID HIV DOES NOT CAUSE AIDS, you must get your facts right. I keep saying this and will continue saying it that HIV infection alone cannot cause AIDS. Like many others, I am disappointed that our current approach excludes a number of co-factors known to increase biological susceptibility to infection by all disease agents, including HIV, among which are nutritional security, poverty, powerlessness, and the basic necessities for a healthy and a dignified life.
This is what I keep saying, now you and your followers tell me, which part do you not understand. You seem like and inteligent person, if only you could read and listen and ask questions and then only make silly comments. 
  
CRISELDA’S TIPS ON HOW TO LIVE POSITIVELY WITH HIV 

You must first want to live and be grateful that you are alive

Body

Prevent illnesses by practicing advanced hygiene, e.g washing hands, using clean utensils when cooking, bathing, and minimising germs into your body. 
Stay warm-viruses don’t like a warm environment
Eat Good food and avoid over boiled vegetables, and fried and processed foods
Eat foods with some of the nutrients needed to strengthen your immune system like: Selenium, Aloe juice, Zinc, Vitamin A, Beta Carotene, Vitamin B12, Vitamin C, Iron.
Clean your Stomach with natural Anti-worming medicines and food
Clean your food, Drink clean water 8 to 10 glasses a day
Prevent and treat diarrhoea immediately
Maintain a healthy weight, Plough your own vegetables and fruit
Treat each minor illness seriously, go the your local clinic or hospital seek help. Get tested for diabetes because this complicates managing HIV
Work with your doctor to investigate the extent of the infection, just in case you have reached a stage of taking ARV’S.

Mind

Deal with your fears
Get your feelings out
Get support if possible, find someone to talk to.
Love heals, love yourself as God loves you
Remember that laughter is the best medicine
Forgive yourself for whatever wrong you thing you have done and those you think wronged you.

Spirit

Most importantly as you pray, start believing that God is listening and it is done. And start thanking God for the Grace.
Now this is just to mention a few, the more reason we must stop the sexualizing of HIV. And there is no one size fits all, I could have never been this healthy if I was not financially independent.
    
This tiny minute virus blamed for all AIDS related deaths is also blamed for our attitudes.
This is what AIDS cannot do: AIDS is so limited that
It cannot cripple love, shatter hope, corrode faith, take away peace, kill friendship,  shut out memories, silence courage,  invade the soul, reduce eternal life, not even quench the spirit, Our greatest enemy is not the disease but the fear of speaking up and seeking help.  

As we strive for an AIDS free World, let us restore the stolen dignity of African people and stop hiding behind their sexual preference. There can only be one winner in the AIDS PANDEMIC and that is all of mankind. By working together, we will solve the this challenge together, and together we will find health, peace and most importantly meaning to life. You must always remember that Science is not always accurate therefore allow yourself to be open minded and learn from other disciplines. 

I think I must now find myself a good lawyer and stop you from dragging my name into your cheap political point scoring.

STOP THIS NONSENSE. You need to start listening to what I say and not make silly assumptions.

God Bless You
Criselda Kananda
Metrofm Talk Show Host</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Nathan,</p>
	<p>I think I have reached a stage where I am tired of you rubbishing my name when you don&#8217;t even know me. Who gave you the right nor permission to speak on behalf of all infected with HIV. When I was diagnosed and told I would live for only two years and God willingly I am still alive almost 10yrs later symptom free and without your highly recomended toxic drugs. I HAVE NEVER SAID HIV DOES NOT CAUSE AIDS, you must get your facts right. I keep saying this and will continue saying it that HIV infection alone cannot cause AIDS. Like many others, I am disappointed that our current approach excludes a number of co-factors known to increase biological susceptibility to infection by all disease agents, including HIV, among which are nutritional security, poverty, powerlessness, and the basic necessities for a healthy and a dignified life.<br />
This is what I keep saying, now you and your followers tell me, which part do you not understand. You seem like and inteligent person, if only you could read and listen and ask questions and then only make silly comments. </p>
	<p>CRISELDA’S TIPS ON HOW TO LIVE POSITIVELY WITH HIV </p>
	<p>You must first want to live and be grateful that you are alive</p>
	<p>Body</p>
	<p>Prevent illnesses by practicing advanced hygiene, e.g washing hands, using clean utensils when cooking, bathing, and minimising germs into your body.<br />
Stay warm-viruses don’t like a warm environment<br />
Eat Good food and avoid over boiled vegetables, and fried and processed foods<br />
Eat foods with some of the nutrients needed to strengthen your immune system like: Selenium, Aloe juice, Zinc, Vitamin A, Beta Carotene, Vitamin B12, Vitamin C, Iron.<br />
Clean your Stomach with natural Anti-worming medicines and food<br />
Clean your food, Drink clean water 8 to 10 glasses a day<br />
Prevent and treat diarrhoea immediately<br />
Maintain a healthy weight, Plough your own vegetables and fruit<br />
Treat each minor illness seriously, go the your local clinic or hospital seek help. Get tested for diabetes because this complicates managing HIV<br />
Work with your doctor to investigate the extent of the infection, just in case you have reached a stage of taking ARV’S.</p>
	<p>Mind</p>
	<p>Deal with your fears<br />
Get your feelings out<br />
Get support if possible, find someone to talk to.<br />
Love heals, love yourself as God loves you<br />
Remember that laughter is the best medicine<br />
Forgive yourself for whatever wrong you thing you have done and those you think wronged you.</p>
	<p>Spirit</p>
	<p>Most importantly as you pray, start believing that God is listening and it is done. And start thanking God for the Grace.<br />
Now this is just to mention a few, the more reason we must stop the sexualizing of HIV. And there is no one size fits all, I could have never been this healthy if I was not financially independent.</p>
	<p>This tiny minute virus blamed for all AIDS related deaths is also blamed for our attitudes.<br />
This is what AIDS cannot do: AIDS is so limited that<br />
It cannot cripple love, shatter hope, corrode faith, take away peace, kill friendship,  shut out memories, silence courage,  invade the soul, reduce eternal life, not even quench the spirit, Our greatest enemy is not the disease but the fear of speaking up and seeking help.  </p>
	<p>As we strive for an AIDS free World, let us restore the stolen dignity of African people and stop hiding behind their sexual preference. There can only be one winner in the AIDS PANDEMIC and that is all of mankind. By working together, we will solve the this challenge together, and together we will find health, peace and most importantly meaning to life. You must always remember that Science is not always accurate therefore allow yourself to be open minded and learn from other disciplines. </p>
	<p>I think I must now find myself a good lawyer and stop you from dragging my name into your cheap political point scoring.</p>
	<p>STOP THIS NONSENSE. You need to start listening to what I say and not make silly assumptions.</p>
	<p>God Bless You<br />
Criselda Kananda<br />
Metrofm Talk Show Host
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Should ethical editors give pseudoscience space? by: Phillip S. Duke</title>
		<link>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34425</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2007 08:57:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.journaids.org/blog/2007/05/16/should-ethical-editors-give-pseudoscience-space/#comment-34425</guid>
					<description>Lincoln, good grief!  You do have a short memory, don't you.  On February 20th you promised us you would quit your denialist rantings:
http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2007/02/hivs_dover.php#comment-349590
if the Parenzee case went south on the Perthies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Lincoln, good grief!  You do have a short memory, don&#8217;t you.  On February 20th you promised us you would quit your denialist rantings:<br />
<a href='http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2007/02/hivs_dover.php#comment-349590' rel='nofollow'>http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2007/02/hivs_dover.php#comment-349590</a><br />
if the Parenzee case went south on the Perthies.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
