| Revision as of 15:33, 11 May 2010 editBruceSwanson (talk | contribs)974 edits link change.← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:15, 20 May 2010 edit undoBruceSwanson (talk | contribs)974 edits Further statement.Next edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| Since many of my edits deal with ] I should probably point out that as a ] ] whose only drugs are ], ], and an occasional ten-dollar ], my viewpoint is merely that of an interested ], observing from: | Since many of my current edits deal with ] I should probably point out that as a ] ] in excellent health whose only drugs are ], ], and an occasional ten-dollar ], my viewpoint is merely that of an interested ], observing from: | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| ]: {{cquote| ''Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Misplaced Pages, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source can be used only to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge.''}} | ]: {{cquote| ''Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Misplaced Pages, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source can be used only to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge.''}} | ||
| ] has been pronounced by public guardians with their hands in the collective till -- an arrangement formerly banned but now embraced -- engraved as orthodoxy, given teeth, and made rich with grants dangerous for scientists, clinicians, and doctors to question. That leaves laymen. | |||
| Having read ]'s ], it's plain to this layman that AIDS is non-infectious. In the West it's primarily a lifestyle disease, after all these years restricted mostly to gay males or intravenous drug-users, dying of their own excesses and the financial interests of their doctors, then falsely canonized by fake-holy relics like the ]. An ] ] would be more honest in clinically appropriate cases. | |||
| Other than being fleeced by it as a taxpayer, my only interest in The Greatest Theory in the World is that it is so obviously a textbook example of what ], in her book ], described as a ''monstrous moral hybrid'', itself the product of what she termed a process of ''syndrome mixing''. Viewing the show through that filter gives one a ringside seat to what ''must'' eventually become known, if only as a footnote when all the principals are long dead leaving estates beyond the reach of civil law, as the worst disaster in medical history -- up to that time, of course. ] (]) 00:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:15, 20 May 2010
I am a copy editor and proofreader living in the Los Angeles area. I've begun a blog on proofreading and its management; and have posted a speculative essay on our probable lottery-based, crowd-sourced future, here.
Since many of my current edits deal with HIV/AIDS I should probably point out that as a heterosexual male in excellent health whose only drugs are wine, beer, and an occasional ten-dollar cigar, my viewpoint is merely that of an interested layman, observing from:
| “ | All Misplaced Pages articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors. | ” |
and
| “ | Primary sources should not be cited in support of a conclusion that is not clearly made by the authors or by reliable secondary sources | ” |
and
| “ | Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Misplaced Pages, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source can be used only to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge. | ” |
The Greatest Theory in the World has been pronounced by public guardians with their hands in the collective till -- an arrangement formerly banned but now embraced -- engraved as orthodoxy, given teeth, and made rich with grants dangerous for scientists, clinicians, and doctors to question. That leaves laymen.
Having read Peter Duesberg's Inventing the AIDS Virus, it's plain to this layman that AIDS is non-infectious. In the West it's primarily a lifestyle disease, after all these years restricted mostly to gay males or intravenous drug-users, dying of their own excesses and the financial interests of their doctors, then falsely canonized by fake-holy relics like the AIDS Quilt. An AZT Shroud would be more honest in clinically appropriate cases.
Other than being fleeced by it as a taxpayer, my only interest in The Greatest Theory in the World is that it is so obviously a textbook example of what Jane Jacobs, in her book Systems of Survival, described as a monstrous moral hybrid, itself the product of what she termed a process of syndrome mixing. Viewing the show through that filter gives one a ringside seat to what must eventually become known, if only as a footnote when all the principals are long dead leaving estates beyond the reach of civil law, as the worst disaster in medical history -- up to that time, of course. BruceSwanson (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)