In aids virus how is it that we can determine the nature of the disease?

research has shown us that this particular disease has a specific nature, i'm wondering what that nature would be to any one's specific defence system or how it may effect it in the fututre of progression. I f any comments please give.

Actually, this "disease" is rather non-specific. "AIDS" Patients may have any one of 30 AIDS-defining diseases according to "AIDS", however, even immunodeficiency - considered the hallmark of "AIDS" is not necessarily required. For example, Kaposi's sarcoma, dementia, and weight loss may occur without immunodeficiency. Thus, there is no AIDS-specific disease.

AIDS patients have antibody against HIV in common only by definition-not by natural coincidence. AIDS-defining diseases of HIV-free patients are called by their old names.

nlike the West, AIDS in Africa is diagnosed without any laboratory tests. Patients are classified as AIDS cases without laboratory proof that they have either immunodeficiency or HIV infection. All that is required is to have various clinical conditions. But the conditions accepted as forming the "S"(syndrome) of "AIDS" in Africa bear no relationship to AIDS in the West. In the West, AIDS is diagnosed if a person has one or more of approximately 27 relatively rare diseases.

However in Africa, AIDS is diagnosed according to the World Health Organization's 1986/87 Bangui" definitions that can best be described as a collage of common non-specific symptoms, such as cough, fever, diarrhea, tuberculosis (TB) and a cancer called Kaposi's sarcoma. Every one of these diseases, including Kaposi's sarcoma, have been endemic in Africa for generations.

Kaposi's sarcoma, for example, was described in the Ebers papyrus dating from 1600 BC. (In the West, Kaposi's sarcoma is restricted to gay men.) Of the 661 million people in sub-Saharan Africa, 2-3 million have active TB with an annual mortality of 790,000. Despite this and the fact that in adults, "HIV infection" usually follows TB infection, TB has now become an AIDS defining illness. In fact, 30-50% of African "AIDS" deaths are from TB. In spite of all this, AIDS experts expect that we should accept that something "new" is afoot in Africa and that it is caused by a new agent, HIV. Suddenly, a new disease, caused by a new agent has appeared. The old diseases and their deleterious effects on the immune system are no longer operative.

Many AIDS experts also expect us to believe that unlike the story in the West, in Africa AIDS is spread predominantly by heterosexual contact. Indeed, since the number of heterosexual cases in the West is too small to be statistically meaningful, the African "evidence" is used to forecast the same predicament in the West. The claim of heterosexual spread in Africa is based on absence of "evidence of homosexual transmission or intravenous drugs" and the approximately equal numbers of males and females who have AIDS as well as positive antibody tests. The latter certainly does not prove that AIDS is heterosexually spread-influenza and appendicitis also have an equal sex distribution.