3 a.m. magazine poetry
- news
- ['news feed' has closed]
- / older news
- books
- richard yates (2010)
-
- shoplifting from american apparel (2009)
- cognitive-behavioral therapy (2008)
- eeeee eee eeee (2007)
- bed (2007)
- you are a little bit happier than i am (2006)
- 'e-books'
- hikikomori with ellen kennedy (2007)
- today the sky is blue and white with bright blue spots and a small pale moon and i will destroy our relationship today (2006)
- this emotion was a little e-book (2006)
- selected 'pieces'
- 'relationship story'
- essay re 'future of the novel'
- essay re mushrooms
- essay re koko
- essay re 'almost transparent blue'
- top 10 worst fruits re blowjobs
- top 10 animals w/o asses
- profile re 'tao lin'
- essay re 'sfaa'
- essay re [various things]
- essay re trespassing
- essay re 'blogging platforms'
- essay re 'three movies i liked
- essay re 'marina abramovic'
- essay re 'honored guest'
- essay re 'sfaa'/music
- essay re seattle
- essay re 'reading in seattle'
- essay re 'levels of greatness'
- essay re 'good and bad in art'
- essay re poems/relationships
- essay re [the word 'nice']
- essay re germany
- essay re 'k-mart realism'
- essay re 'thomas bernhard'
- essay re 'short stories'
- 'we will drink our coffee...'
- the 'can't concentrate' manatee
- the nearly-severely depressed bird
- the existentially-fucked megamouth shark
- the professional sasquatch
- the gay stepdad
- the disappointed ant
- the vegan muffin
- sex story
- exactly what i want
- love is a thing on sale
- leftover crack in red hook
- sasquatch
- we will drink our coffee
- should
- bear poem
- february
- october
- friday
- whale poem
- opposite of song of myself
- interviews
- jeff rosenstock
- stza crack
- ben lerner
- malcolm gladwell
- tony o'neill
- chelsey minnis
- michael earl craig
- richard grayson
- deb olin unferth (2)
- matthew rohrer
- rebecca curtis
- clancy martin
- joy williams
- stephen elliott
- stephen dixon
Loading
18 Comments:
thank you
world domination
Yes it does.
Gene looks wise and sexy.
thank you
wise and sexy
no matthew
thank you.
Oh, Tao. Yes. Yes it does.
But I don't think we'll be able to get very far in this conversation. I just wanted to make sure some sort of counter was made to that new headline.
For Farber's sake, you might mention that she has never explicitly said she endorses Peter Duesberg's hypothesis, only that she thought it was appropriate to cover his work.
Which, of course, it is.
But Duesberg is wrong. I've read his work and the responses, and I'm convinced of that to the limits of my understanding of health and science.
(Keep in mind I'm a product of the American public school system.)
i don't think i've read duesberg, but the entire book wasn't just about duesberg, farber reported beginning with the first time HIV was said to cause AIDS, and it was convincing, so i think HIV or HIV alone probably doesn't cause AIDS, if only because the people who think that HIV probably doesn't cause AIDS aren't making any money off that claim, while 'HIV causes AIDS' people are making a lot of money
the same with tobacco, oil, electric cars, and probably everything else that involves corporations and a lot of money
even the scientists who believe that HIV can cause AIDS recognize that there are people who are living with AIDS but do not have and never once had HIV.
matthew you should offer a counter to the new headline
matthew i changed it back, but had changed it to 'bff's can begin later in life' with a link to old friends
http://mhpbooks.com/oldFriends.html
I would say first that you probably shouldn't use the monetary element as the deciding factor in that there may be people who claim that whatever gives you chicken pox isn't what gives you chicken pox, and they may not be making any money on it, while the people who tell what that that thing that the others said doesn't really give you chicken pox does give you chicken pox and they may make some money on it but in the end the second people might be right.
(I don't know if what I just said makes sense. I was feeling a little Oulipo.)
But you can link to Celia Farber and I'll dispute the conclusion but not that the work exists. I'm in favor of as much information as possible.
You could maybe link to both. I like Stephen Dixon, too. I wrote something about his story "She Said" for school. I like that story a lot. I have a large book of his short stories, and I think that "She Said" is the shortest one, and I read it first. And then didn't read any more of them. Not yet. The cover has a picture of Dixon. his left eye is much smaller than his right eye in the illustration. But in his jacket photo, he's normal.
I've read a little about cases that seem to be AIDS where HIV is not found, but I think many of those are chalked up to imprecise HIV tests. And beyond that, immunosuppression can happen to people for other reasons. But there isn't real concensus that these are cases of AIDS.
you are right, that is a bad way to decide whether or not something is true; the thing that is 'true' may sometimes be the thing that makes money, maybe
i don't think the celia farber book had conclusions
i don't remember that well
usually i read things that expose giant accepted facts as false and it seems like the person is just doing it because they want to believe they are in a 'video game' where they get to expose false truths and go on some journey to fight evil, or something, but i did not feel that at all with this book
i looked at the sentences, the motivation, read about the author, thought about oil, tobacco, the food industry, movies like the electric car one, stared at the sentences and thought about everything and i feel that it is probably true that HIV doesn't cause AIDS
or rather whatever the trusted experts and drug companies think right now will be very hard to change, since so much money is currently involved, which is something the book shows
even if HIV did cause AIDS the book shows that if it was more profitable that HIV not cause AIDS then that would become the 'truth'
the book applied to everything for me, not just HIV and AIDS, it showed me even more how difficult it is to change things where a lot of money is involved or where 'experts' are involved
i have the same giant stephen dixon book
so 3 am is doing things again finally? okay.
i don't think the cecelia farber book had conclusions. i think its just obvious that HIV doesn't SOLELY cause AIDS by the fact that there are people who are living with AIDS and don't have HIV and people who have injected themselves with HIV and have not developed AIDS. i think the amount of money that has been invested in the AZT drugs and the HIV causing AIDS theory is a very big factor in deciding what is 'true'. if it is 'true' that HIV doesn't solely cause AIDS all of the scientists who are invested in that theory and in the AZT drugs would most likely lose all of their money and jobs and have their 'reputations' destroyed and i think it is obvious that they are trying to avoid that because those who believe that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS and the AZT drugs are the only cure have been trying very hard to keep peter duesberg from gaining funding and support.
daniel's poem had 'indents' where a line didn't fit on the page, but 3 a.m. doesn't do indents, so his poem looks very bad now, people should just focus on the words
Post a Comment
<< Home