QUOTE: "...HIV-1 protease is not an active enzyme when it is first expressed in cells. It has to be activated to do its job," Tang said. "What we were able to see is how it self-activates from an immature form when the virus is not infective into a mature form when the virus gains infectivity..." UNQUOTE.
Again, the problem is that they are assuming these enzymes are from "HIV," but they don't look for "HIV," to be sure there are particles present that meet the textbook descriptions of it. When this has been done, an excess of microvesicles (cellular "junk") has been found, rather than an abundance of "HIV," which would be necessary for "HIV" to be dangerous. In any case, claims about proteases need to be made with caution, because as wikipedia.org points out:
QUOTE: ...Proteases occur naturally in all organisms... The activity [of proteases] can be a destructive change, abolishing a protein's function or digesting it to its principal components; it can be an activation of a function, or it can be a signal in a signaling pathway... Proteases are also a type of exotoxin, which is a virulence factor in bacteria pathogenesis... UNQUOTE.
Thus, one must be very careful when making claims about proteases. It is most likely the case that in "HIV/AIDS" the "patient" has stressed his/her body to such a degree that dangerous protease activity is present, and no "virus" is required for this. Simple, inexpensive experiments could demonstrate this point, refuting "HIV/AIDS," but of course those who control the research money are too "conflicted" or ideological to fund such experiments.
Source of fist quoted passage: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081001145028.htm |
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Prev Message
