Man Cures Himself of HIV

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
For the Last Time, the original test [b]was NOT a MIX UP

-If you actually read it, the original blood test was done twice.

-The Hospital rechecked the original blood sample, and confirmed that the original test was in fact, correct, making Andrew Stimpson's lawsuit null and void.

-Andrew Stimpson had the original blood samples sent to various clinics, all of which confirmed the original test was in fact, his own blood, and HIV positive.

He was then later tested 3 times, and all 3 tests came back negative.

Look, I know this is hard to swallow (no pun intended), but this guy was once HIV positive, and then turns out HIV negative .I don't know how its possible, but it happened. Unless you want to beleive that this is some sort of media/government conspiracy for the effort of somehow distracting us, it seems most likely that this is one rare case where someone actually beat the virus on his own.

In regards to Devil King's prior post, yes, you guys should also check out the story of the Prostitutes from Kenya.

It seemed that repeated exposure to the HIV virus, somehow made them immune, but a few of them became infected once they STOPPED having anonymous sex (ironically).

Also, according to Andrew Stimpson, himself, his boyfreind of Hispanic decent, is HIV positive. He had unprotected sex with him after his first diagnosis, seeing no point is using protection.

This means that Andrew Stimpson had repeatedly exposed himself to the HIV virus, through unprotected anal sex with his infected boyfreind, yet he himself had no infection. He himself somehow stayed HIV Negative, despite:

1) Having been found positive at first two blood tests

2) Having repeated UNPROTECTED anal sex with his HIV positive boyfreind for months after the first diagnosis.

Just consider the possibility...how can he be HIV negative despite having repeated unprotected sex with his HIV positive boyfreind ?

The entire situation, at all angles, tells us that this guy actually beat HIV.

The most probably reason, many scientists in the reports have said, was that perhaps the strand of HIV he acquired was severely weak, and not strong enough to replicate and mutate at a rate which would require its survival.

Who knows....but please...before you make your decisions, please read the entirety of all reports. Then make up your mind. [/B]

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
For the Last Time, the original test [b]was NOT a MIX UP

-If you actually read it, the original blood test was done twice.

-The Hospital rechecked the original blood sample, and confirmed that the original test was in fact, correct, making Andrew Stimpson's lawsuit null and void.

-Andrew Stimpson had the original blood samples sent to various clinics, all of which confirmed the original test was in fact, his own blood, and HIV positive.

He was then later tested 3 times, and all 3 tests came back negative.

Look, I know this is hard to swallow (no pun intended), but this guy was once HIV positive, and then turns out HIV negative. [/B]

That's false logic. Considering what we know about HIV, it is in fact at least as likely that the original tests were errors. That he spontaneously cured himself of HIV is not the most likely option left.

A series of original mistakes might be unlikely but it's still very possible and to jump to positive conclusions is unwise- especially as nothing ever came of this.

All it would have taken for all the original results to be false would have been an abormal production of antibodies by Stimpson. Very rare indeed for it to match the HIV diagnosis, but certainly possible, and apparently rather more likely than a cure.

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
If he is alive, and well, and healthy, then chances are the tests about his negative status are true 🙄

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
For the Last Time, the original test [b]was NOT a MIX UP

-If you actually read it, the original blood test was done twice.

-The Hospital rechecked the original blood sample, and confirmed that the original test was in fact, correct, making Andrew Stimpson's lawsuit null and void.

-Andrew Stimpson had the original blood samples sent to various clinics, all of which confirmed the original test was in fact, his own blood, and HIV positive.

He was then later tested 3 times, and all 3 tests came back negative.

Look, I know this is hard to swallow (no pun intended), but this guy was once HIV positive, and then turns out HIV negative .I don't know how its possible, but it happened. Unless you want to beleive that this is some sort of media/government conspiracy for the effort of somehow distracting us, it seems most likely that this is one rare case where someone actually beat the virus on his own.

In regards to Devil King's prior post, yes, you guys should also check out the story of the Prostitutes from Kenya.

It seemed that repeated exposure to the HIV virus, somehow made them immune, but a few of them became infected once they STOPPED having anonymous sex (ironically).

Also, according to Andrew Stimpson, himself, his boyfreind of Hispanic decent, is HIV positive. He had unprotected sex with him after his first diagnosis, seeing no point is using protection.

This means that Andrew Stimpson had repeatedly exposed himself to the HIV virus, through unprotected anal sex with his infected boyfreind, yet he himself had no infection. He himself somehow stayed HIV Negative, despite:

1) Having been found positive at first two blood tests

2) Having repeated UNPROTECTED anal sex with his HIV positive boyfreind for months after the first diagnosis.

Just consider the possibility...how can he be HIV negative despite having repeated unprotected sex with his HIV positive boyfreind ?

The entire situation, at all angles, tells us that this guy actually beat HIV.

The most probably reason, many scientists in the reports have said, was that perhaps the strand of HIV he acquired was severely weak, and not strong enough to replicate and mutate at a rate which would require its survival.

Who knows....but please...before you make your decisions, please read the entirety of all reports. Then make up your mind. [/B]

Andrew Stimpson: The Man "Cured" of HIV

False positive test result and diagnosis

This seems the most probable 'alternative' scenario, and one that the CWT has suggested as an explanation . . . A false positive result can either occur because the test detects a non-HIV antibody (i.e. an similar antibody produced against a different virus) or, theoretically, because there are somehow HIV antibodies present, although there is no actual HIV infection.

. . . The CWT's assertion that the virus was 'transient' suggests he may have somehow had antibodies in his blood following exposure without actually having a current HIV infection . . .

It stands to reason within any population some people will have a resistance to any disease. It's a kind of natural selection. Conversely this is probably a lab error. Passable thread 6.5-7/10

1) Adam Poe, you didn't read the entire article.

The original bloodtests were redone, in various clinics, since he was suing the hospital for the "false results", and they were all declared correct the first two times they were taken. Read the article again.

2) Like Devil King said earlier, the reason not much became of this is because there's not a whole lot of profit that can be gained from curing HIV/AIDS. Pharmacy companies aren't going to exactly jump all over this, because it would mean an end to the billions of dollars in profit they gain from their mixes of HIV medications.

3) Not much came from the Kenyan Prostitutes either, but they were proven to have been immune to the HIV virus. The theory is that they were immune because of repeated exposure.

However, some of them became infected once they stopped having sex. Scientists believe this is because they were no longer exposing themselves, and therefore thier immune system remained static, allowing the virus to mutate further.

***You guys are forgetting. HE had UNPROTECTED ANAL SEX with his HIV POSITIVE BOYFREIND. And he STILL REMAINED NEGATIVE.

The original tests being false or correct are almost IRRELEVANT, when you consider the fact that despite his boyfreind having HIV, and he having UNPROTECTED SEX with him, he STILL REMAINED CLEAN AND HEALTHY...

Are you guys asking why ? Open your eyes.

Don't forget that centuries ago, some people survived the Bubonic Plague (Black Death). This plague was far more contagous than HIV, and it killed people much faster. Yet some people became immune.

If that is the case, then how do you imagine this is impossible for HIV ?

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Stimpson's none-too-bright, is he? Or he's a bug-chaser. Which also makes him pretty dumb.

Just because he is Gay does not mean he's dumb.

He figured he might as well have unprotected sex since he was "already HIV positive". So he had unprotected sex with his HIV positive boyfreind, and somehow STILL remained Negative.

I think that is the question we should consider....

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
1) Adam Poe, you didn't read the entire article.

The original bloodtests were redone, in various clinics, since he was suing the hospital for the "false results", and they were all declared correct the first two times they were taken. Read the article again.[b]

You read the article again:

Andrew Stimpson: The Man "Cured" of HIV

[b]False positive test result and diagnosis

This seems the most probable 'alternative' scenario, and one that the CWT has suggested as an explanation . . . A false positive result can either occur because the test detects a non-HIV antibody (i.e. an similar antibody produced against a different virus) or, theoretically, because there are somehow HIV antibodies present, although there is no actual HIV infection.

. . . The CWT's assertion that the virus was 'transient' suggests he may have somehow had antibodies in his blood following exposure without actually having a current HIV infection . . .

HIV tests detect an immune response, i.e. the production of antibodies to HIV, not the presence of the virus in the bloodstream. It was his previous exposure to HIV, not the presence of the virus in his bloodstream, that caused the immune response detected by the HIV test, thereby yielding a false-positive result.

That he has been exposed to HIV, and remains negative is rare, but not miraculous.

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
***You guys are forgetting. [b]HE had UNPROTECTED ANAL SEX with his HIV POSITIVE BOYFREIND. And he STILL REMAINED NEGATIVE.[/B]

Originally posted by lord xyz
Having unprotected anal sex with someone who is HIV positive does not mean you'll get AIDS 100%.

Almost a 100% chance, though.

Originally posted by Secretus
Almost a 100% chance, though.

SpearofDestiny, you are not changing anything. Yes, it is unlikely you can have regular anal sex with an infected person and stay infection free. But ONLY unlikely. That's certainly happened, several times, and it is again FAR more likely than a spontaeous curing of HIV.

Your bubonic plague example is a bad one because that didn;t have anything like a 100% death rate. Rabies would be better- only one documented case of survival. And so, yes, miracles like that do happen. But you only call it a miracle if you are completly and utterly certain that all the other more likely possibilities are gone.

That has not happened. It is still far more likely that a. he was lucky enough not to catch it and b. the diagnosis was faulty.

That;'s just true- my eyes are open. Yours are looking into a dreamland.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Yours are looking into a dreamland.

nearly every disease is beatable due to our immune system, and you do have a chance of overcoming it however small it may be

Originally posted by rader
nearly every disease is beatable due to our immune system, and you do have a chance of overcoming it however small it may be

As yet, the only way he could have done that would be to commit suicide.

With the latest advances in treatment, doctors have discovered that they can successfully neutralise the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The so-called ‘combination therapy’ prevents HIV from mutating and spreading, allowing patients to rebuild their immune system to the same levels as the rest of the population.

Science Daily

vincent

Why was this merged? It was two different topics ermm

Urizen needs to feel popular or else he'll get AIDS.

Originally posted by Devil King
For years at a time?

I could have been that he developed an AIDS-like antibody from some other virus.

Technically it is possible to beat the disease, but I pretty much garuntee it didn't happen form herbal supplements.

Those just made his kidneys work harder.

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I think that is the question we should consider....

HIV can actually be tricky to transfer, however, it will, and when it does, it'll kill ya.

And trust me, in unprotected sex, you'll be the one who gets it the first time. If not, I'll have you soon.