World Aids Day - Friday 1.Dec.2006

Worlds Aids Day is December 1, 2006

Any activity going on in Munich or has everyone become complacent?

There are plenty of things to protest about. Maybe no one cares that 40 million people worldwide have the disease. The media has done a good job convincing everyone that people who have the disease are degenerates, but in reality, the many just ordinary people and didn't have the knowledge to prevent it.

With a drug cost of $ 600,000 per person for lifetime treatment, does anyone really believe that for profit-drug companies are looking for a cure?

Anyone wonder why a person by the name of Rabbi Marvin S. Antelman, a leading scientist, holds a United States Patent # 5676977 since 1996 for the aids cure and it never has been reported in the media. His company is located in Israel. Usually you are not issued a patent in the USA unless it works. Link below

Method of curing AIDS with tetrasilver tetroxide molecular crystal devices - U.S. patent

Anyone wonder why not a single governement in the west has invested any significant resoures using non-commercial state Bio-research facilities to find a cure? Instead they pass out money to there durg company buddies who really don't care about finding a cure just a new drug to keep one going until they suck out all your money.

Any comments anyone? Munich seems quiet on this issue.

A quick Google search comes up with a candle-light walk starting at 19:00 from Odeonsplatz.

More info under: Münchner Aidshilfe and Candle-Light-Walk ...as well as various different fundracing concerts and benefit parties. All in German I am afraid.

how else are drugs to treat HIV and AIDS going to be developed? There is no such thing as a not-for-profit drug company and, with the exception of the Cuban government, state funded drug discovery and development just does not really exist.

The reason for this is the process of drug development is very long, has a high failure rate and is extremely expensive.

There is unlikely ever to be a 'cure'. There will be therapies though, some of which might come close to a cure. These need to be patented and the company spending millions or even billions on developing the drug, needs to recoup those costs in sales of the drug. That is why new drugs are always expensive _ NOT because some avaricious big cat wants to make a lipsmacking profit (No matter what arseholes like Monbiot might tell you)


No, you are issued a patent when the product or process is sufficiently novel that it needs its intellectual property protected for the duration of the time to develop it and beyond. It takes upwards of 10-15 years to develop a drug from patent to the market and more than 90% fail on the way there and never reach the market.


again, the reason why governments do not back this research is that they are not willing to take on the risk. Most drugs fail in development. The engoines of drug discovery are also not 'drug company buddies' of anyone - they are small academic research teams that patent a product and then try to commercialise it by seeking seed and VC funding - often from VC funds that ARE backed by governments.

It is only once the products are far on in development that they are then licensed to the big drug companies.

Please, if you are going to mount a criticism of the present set up, try at least to be informed about what you are talking about.

[adminabuse]Otherwise you come over like a brainless twat to the number of us who work in or around medical research who post to this site.[/adminabuse]

My difference with the big medical companies is that they fostered for a long time with their advertising in the gay press that therapies meant just the odd pill a day.

Oooooh look there's a poof jogging in the park, these's a poof with a puppy, there's two poofs together in their fab designer kitchen in a Gärtnerplatz style loft.

So having HIV and AIDS can't be too bad and a LOT of people went barebacking, particuarly the younger ones.

That's been changed somewhat and the latest campaigns are saying that yes, HIV is still around and yes it is dangerous and yes it has disadvantages.

I have my differences with some of the campaign material that I've argued about too as boring, old, tasteless (even for moi!) and culturally exclusive.

Bell the cat, it is obvious you prefer corporatism (Fascism as Mussolini called it) and big profits for the few to the state actually doing good for its citizens.

Why doesn’t America or Germany sub out all there bio-terrorism projects? If governements can invest in developing weapons of mass destruction, they can invest in developing cures for diseases. Salk was the last scientist who really contributed anything to mankind and he refused to patient it because he thought everyone should benefit.

And not to mention the fact that pharmaceutical medicine does not generally work. The number one cause of death in america is from medicine. It is bad science.

Tesla therory’s and others have been silenced by the media to protect the pharmaceutical industrial complex. Not to mention, of course the 52 dead micro-biologist who have met with there demise over the past 5 years. The odds the of that happeneing is about 10 million to one.

[adminabuse]Tell me, does someone pay you to attack everyone who writes something on this site that does not agree with the government?[/adminabuse]

Hmm this thread has: conspiracy, misinformation, speculation all presented as fact.

but erdingtown, governments *do* invest in medical research - both primary research in the academic sector and through tech transfer, seed and VC funds once a patentable druggable compound is identified.

I am *so* not a corporatist as you put it. But I do work within the biotech industry and have it up to here with jumped up ignorant numpties rubbishing things they quite obviously know nothing about.

Thank you all for sticking to the facts and remaining civil. Your friendly moderation team.