Mkuu
mkuyati og , salaamu sana kiongozi.
Shukrani sana mkuu kwa maelezo yako ya kitaalaamu na katika lugha nyepesi kabsa. Nimekuelewa vizuri sana kaka, na mpaka umenipre-empty baadhi ya mambo ambayo nilitaka kuuliza. Hakika nimejifunza mengi ambayo nilikuwa siyajuwi kabsa. Mfano nimeelewa kuwa kumbe HIV akishazibitiwa na ARVs, hatimae hufikia wakati huyo HIV & infected T-Cells vinakufa vyenyewe 'natural death' kama sifa mojawapo ya living things, na ndo hapo Viral Load husoma 'undectetable'!
Sasa mkuu, nina mambo kadhaa ya msingi kabsa ili tumalize huu mjadala ambao ni very educative. My sincere appologies if nakuchosha, lakini lengo langu ni tueleweshane kwa hoja na hatimae tupate common understanding. Kwa heshima zote, nakuomba sana mkuu ujibu hoja zifuatazo kwa understanding yako na kwa mujibu wa taaluma yako, tuwe honest na tusiwe bias. PLEASE naomba ujibu kwa mtililiko wa kila hoja (per question), na sio generally. Karibu:
1. HIV TEST hupima
antibodies dhidi ya aina fulani za protini ambazo husemekana zinatoka kwa HIV.
LAKINI protini hizi huweza pia kutolewa na hali mbalimbali mwilini kama vile magonjwa kama
TB,
Malaria, n.k. Na pia hali ya
mimba (kwa wanawake) huweza sababisha mwili utoe protini hizo. JE hii ni KWELI au UONGO ?
2. Wataalamu wanasema kwamba vipimo cha HIV ni very sensitive & specific to HIV.
LAKINI wataalaamu hao hao pia wanakiri uwepo wa
false HIV+ au
false HIV- !
Na ni kweli kuna watu waliopima HIV+ halafu baadaye wakaja kupima HIV-.
JE ni mambo gani ambayo husababisha false positive ama false negative?? Je kwa mazingira hayo, unakubali kwamba vipimo vya HIV are NOT sensitive/specific to HIV?? Au kama wewe unakana kwamba hakuna false positive wala false negative, tuambie.
3. Viral Load. Wataalaamu wanasema kwamba kipimo cha viral-load hupima idadi ya HIV waliopo mwilini, ndo maana mnaweza kujua kuwa viral load ipo ktk undetectable level. Utata uliopo ni kama aidha Kirusi wa HIV anapimika kwa muonekano kabsa (isolation) ama haonekani kwa muonekano.
JE, wewe kwa experience yako ya kitabibu, tuambie umewahi kumuona kabsa huyu kirusi HIV kwa kutumia kipimo chochote kile?? kuwa tu mkweli. Kama kirusi huyo anaonekana kabisa kwa muonekano ktk vipimo, please tunaomba utuwekee photograph/picha yake hapa (sio mchoro) ili tumuone. Na kama kirusi huyo haonekani kwa muonekano, JE ni vitu gani sasa vina-determine idadi ya HIV katika hicho kipimo cha Viral Load ?? yaani mnapimaje idadi ya wadudu ambao ata vipimo havioni ??
4. RetroViruses. Wataalamu wanasema kwamba HIV ni kirusi aina ya retrovirus.
Je familia hiyo ya retrovirus, ni wote wana sifa ya kupenya na kuji-attach ndani ya mfumo wa kinga (to infect T-Cells)?? ama ni HIV pekee ndo ana sifa hiyo ya kushambulia T-Cells ??
5. Historia ya HIV/AIDS inaeleza kwamba ugunduzi wa HIV/AIDS ulitangazwa rasmi kwenye press conference iliyofanyika tarehe 23 April, 1984. Robert Gallo ndiye aliegundua na kutangaza kwamba HIV inasababisha UKIMWI. LAKINI alikwepa step moja muhimu sana ya
PEER REVIEW SCIENCE , yaan
uthibitisho wa pamoja wa wanasayansi kuthibitisha kwamba HIV ndiyo sababu ya UKIMWI.
JE, hiyo ni KWELI au UONGO? Kama ni KWELI, unadhani ni KWANINI aliruka hiyo step muhimu kabsa katika scientific inventions ??
6. Inasemekana kwamba ugunduzi huo wa Robert Gallo ulitokana na research iliyotumia
wagonjwa 93 wa AIDS! Kati ya hao
wagonjwa 93 tu,
only 44 AIDS patients tested HIV+''. Yaani research hiyo ilitoa matokeo kwamba wagonjwa 44 wamepima HIV positive, na wagonjwa 49 wamepima HIV negative!
JE, hiyo ni KWELI au UONGO?? Kama ni KWELI, hao wagonjwa 49waliopima HIV negative, ni kitu gani ambacho kilisababisha AIDS kwao? Na kwa kuzingatia standards za Research, wewe hupati shaka yoyote kabisa kwenye hizo findings za research ya R. Gallo ku-approve HIV = AIDS ??
7. Historia ktk medical science inaeleza kwamba miaka ya 70, Robert Gallo huyo huyo aliwahi kuibua hoja za kisayansi kwamba virusi hao hao aina ya retroviruses wanasababisha Cancer kwa binadamu. Lakini Peter Duesberg na wanasayansi wengine walikuja na scientific critics zilizochallenge madai ya Gallo. Gallo alishindwa kuprove madai yake scientifically. Hatimae ndiyo ikaja kuwa proved (hadi leo hii) kwamba Cancer si ugonjwa wa kuambukizwa (non infectious disease).
JE, hiyo ni KWELI au UONGO ? Kama ni KWELI, kwanini sasa unapinga scientific critics za wanasayansi wenzie juu ya hiyo research ya Gallo iliyo-approve HIV=AIDS ??
8. Denialist wa kwanza kuhusu HIV/AIDS hypothesis ni Dr. Peter Duesberg. Profesa huyu amedeal na retrovirus kwa miaka zaidi ya 30. Ni mtu wa kwanza ku map genetic structure ya retroviruses. Pia ni yeye ndiye aliyegundua genes ambazo zinasababisha Cancer, na hatimae ndipo ikawa proved kwamba kumbe Cancer sio ugonjwa wa kuambukizwa (non infectious diseases).
Link: Prof. Peter Duesberg:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJXIbZxNLho
JE, hiyo ni KWELI au UONGO ? Kama ni KWELI, ni kwanini sasa mwanasayansi huyu (mwenye credibility kubwa ktk medical science) anapingwa sana na hasikilizwi kabsa kuhusu denialism yake kwenye HIV=AIDS ? Ama labda mtaalamu huyu amechanganyikiwa akili ndo maana hawamsikilizi kabsa wala ku-consider scientific-critics zake ?
9. Dr. Luc Montaigner (co-founder wa HIV) yeye mwenyewe anaeleza kwamba hakuna uthibitisho kuwa HIV anaua T-Cells. Prof huyu pia anasema kwamba if someone has 'good immunity', the body can get rid of the Virus in few weeks after infection! (NOTE: Luc Montaigner ndio mgunduzi halisi ambaye data zake ziliibwa na Robert Gallo na kumfanya R.Gallo awe wa kwanza kutangazwa ndiye mgunduzi wa HIV) .
Link: Prof. Luc Montaigner:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyPq-waF-h4
JE, mtaalaamu huyo hapo anasema UKWELI au ANADANGANYA ??
10. Prof. Kary Bank Mullis (profesa wa biochemistry na Nobel prize winner) yeye mwenyewe hakubaliani kwamba HIV anasababisha AIDS. Pia anasema hivi: "The only way to stop HIV/AIDS is to stop funding it". Profesa huyu ndiye mgunduzi wa kipimo cha HIV kinachotegemewa zaidi kiitwacho PCR.
Link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IifgAvXU3ts
JE, profesa huyo anasema UKWELI au ANADANGANYA ?
11. DISCORDANT COUPLES.Wanandoa wanaoishi pamoja muda mrefu lakini mmoja ni HIV+ lakini mwingine ni HIV- !
JE, hili wewe unalisemeaje, ni kwanini hutokea hivyo ?
12. UKIMWI unaweza sababishwa na mambo yafuatayo:
Ulaji mbovu wa chakula (malnutriton); Ukosefu wa maji safi na salama; Utumiaji wa mara kwa mara wa madawa ya hospitali kama vile antibiotics, chemotherapy and/or radiations kwa wagonjwa wa cancer; Recreational drugs/madawa ya kulevya; Unywaji wa pombe kupindukia; Magonjwa ya kujirudia mara kwa mara; Ukosefu wa antioxidants; Msongo wa mawazo wa muda mrefu (severe Stress).
JE, hapo unakubali au unakataa ?
13. Wataalaamu wanasema kwamba Huwezi kupata TB mpaka kinga yako iwe chini/ishuke/ipungue (yaani uwe na ukimwi). Na Si watu wote wenye TB wapo HIV+, kuna wengine wanakutwa HIV- !
JE, hiyo ni KWELI au UONGO ? Kama ni KWELI, je hao wenye TB & HIV-negative, ni nini kimeshusha kinga zao za mwili ?
14. ARVs dosage. JE, mgonjwa hupewa ARVs tu pekeake? ama ni ARVs + medications zingine za kawaida??
15. ARVs. Dawa hizi hufanya kazi ya ku-fight huyo kirusi wa HIV. LAKINI huwa zina madhara yafuatayo kwa mtumiaji, yaani watumiaji wengi wa wa ARVs wa muda mrefu wanakuwa hatarini kupata baadhi ya madhara yafuatayo:
Matatizo ya Moyo; Matatizo ya Ini; Matatizo ya Figo; Cancer/Saratani; Anaemia/Upungufu wa damu; Kupooza/Stroke; na Kisukari.
Link: ARVs side effects:
https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/drugs/290/t...rate/0/patient
Link: Soma
warnings za ARVs hapa:
Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (Viread) | Patient Version | AIDSinfo
Link: ARVs side effects:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GokUme9x07E
Kwa ukweli wako na uzoefu wako kazini/hospitalini, JE hiyo ni KWELI au UONGO? Kama ni KWELI, unakubali kwamba ARVs zinasababisha UKIMWI ?
16. Tunaambiwa kuwa Duniani kote wanayasansi wanaendelea tirelessly kufikiria na kukuna vichwa ili kupata TIBA na suluhisho kamili kuhusu HIV/AIDS.
JE, kama kweli wana nia ya dhati kabisa kuutokomeza ugonjwa huu, ni KWANINI hawataki kabisa kuwasikiliza denialists wenye critics za kisayansi ? Why wasikae meza moja na kuwasikiliza labda pengine wanaweza kuibuka na suluhisho la ugonjwa huu?
17. There might be some other factors UNKNOWN TO SCIENCE ndo zinasababisha Ukimwi.
JE, what can you comment on this observation ??
Yangu ni hayo mkuu. Tupe majibu yako yenye mashiko kwenye hoja zote hapo juu, ili wasomaji wapate uelewa mpana kuhusu kitendawili hiki cha HIV/AIDS !
Natanguliza shukrani zangu za dhati, and I really appreciate your kind passion of sharing knowledge.
DARASA HURU. Karibuni pia wakuu:
@pakamwam , multikasuku , Eiyer , Deception , H1N1 , everlenk , mzee wa kigonzile , Econometrician , Kaunga , mshikachuma
goodmorning!! now lets get down to bussiness.. hoja zitajibiwa kwa mtiririko uleule kama zilivyoulizwa.
1. ni kweli kuna some situation kama mimba na TB na zingine nyingi ambazo zinaweza kutoa a false "positive" test. with regards to HIV, a false positive rapid antibody test ni pale ambapo test incorrectly identifies antibodies as antibodies against HIV. sababu ya kuwa na false positive test include antibody cross reactivity and "HLA antigens that mimic HIV antigens (samahani sifahamu kiswahili cha hili), ambazo sometimes occur katika kondo la nyuma la uzazi wakati wa ujauzito, sanasana ujauzito wa mapacha. hii husababisha mwili kutengeneza antibodies against these antigens ambazo huwa incorrectly identified as antibodies against HIV bt primary HIV tests.
Baada ya kukubali ukweli huo, naomba nielezee principles za test za magonjwa, na kwa nini hoja yako haiwezi kubadili ukweli. Kwanza, katika ku diagnose ugonjwa as sensitive as HIV hatutumii kipimo kimoja. unapopima rapid antibody test ya HIV, majibu ya kwanza tunayasoma kwa kusema THE TEST IS "
REACTIVE", and NOT the test is "POSITIVE". hii ni kwasababu ya kuweka into context uwezekano wa kuwa na false "positive" test. Baada ya kupata majibu haya ya awali, "reactive", huwa tunaomba kipimo cha pili, ambacho kiko much more superior katika ku-pick antibodies that are very very specific to HIV, so excluding the effect of antibody cross reacivity and HLA antigens (maana hata HLA antigens nazoongelea only mimic HIV antigens, they dont completely resemble HIV antigens). Hii test ya pili ndiyo tunaita confirmatory test, ambapo nayo ikija "positive", then definately the diagnosis is
POSITIVE. baada ya test ya pili, kuna test ya tatu,, na ya nne ,, na ya tano.. zote zinazidiana uwezo unavyozidi kupanda mbele.
kabla sijaongelea statistics, naomba niongelee
Sensitivity and specificity of a clinical test (any test).
A.sensitivity -
The sensitivity of a clinical test refers to the ability of the test to correctly identify those patients with the disease
B.
Specificity-
The specificity of a clinical test refers to the ability of the test to correctly identify those patients without the disease
Hivyo basi, sensitivity of HIV test ya kwanza ni 99%, hiyo inamaanisha around 99% of all who may be positive will be found REACTIVE. Specificity of the second, third, fourth test after the initial "reactive" test is arround 99.9 % (hapa naongelea modern HIV tests, maana these support current data). hii inamaanisha kwamba watu 999/1000 ambao test ya kwanza iliwakuta REACTIVE kimakosa, watakutwa NEGATIVE , therefore screening out the FALSE "POSITIVES" (hivyo unaweza kukutwa "positive kwa kipimo kimoja, ukawa negative kwa kingine ambacho kiko more superior). kwa hiyo kazi ya test ya kwanza ni kupata wale wote wenye viashiria vya HIV, test zinazofata ni ku- identify those who really have the virus. mfano, modern western blot test (advanced test) imeonekana kuwa specificity close to 100%
In laboratory practice nobody should receive an HIV-positive diagnosis without the following steps all being taken:
- A test giving a positive result. (reactive)
- The test being repeated ( with a more sensitive test) and still giving a positive result.
- A new blood sample being taken and this also giving a positive result.
- Any discrepancy between the test results, or any indeterminate results, being investigated, and further tests carried out if necessary
Naomba ifahamike kwamba HIV tests are among the most sensitive and specific clinical tests. In paractise kuna magonjwa mengi ambayo huwa diagnosed by clinical tests that are less than 90% sensitive and specific, mfano Typhoid fever, lakini no one ever questions humu!! pia, tutakataa kutumia test kwa sababu only 0.1% of people who are found positive but dont actually have the disease? tukienda kwa mtindo huo, tutakataa uhalisia na ufanisi wa kila clinical test unayoijua, na kuanzia hapo tutakataa hata magonjwa mengine
kuelewa zaidi hizi concepts kwa lugha nyepesi, tafadhali bonyeza
HAPA
Pia statistical evidence inapatika katika ile article ambayo niliweka link mwanzoni na kuwaomba msome (EVIDENCE THAT HIV CAUSES AIDS)
2. Hoja ya pili naamini nimeielezea kikamilifu katika
#1.
(ntarudi, Muda wa chai huu..)
3. Kuhusu viral load, hii narudia tena. term sahihi ni HIV VIRAL LOAD. nadhani unapata idea nayoitetea. HIV viral load hupima kiwango cha virusi katika mwili katika wakati fulani. principle ya kipimo hiki ni ku-identify specific bands of HIV viral proteins na kukadiria ni kiasi gani cha virusi wanaweza kuwepo kutokana na wingi fulani wa protein hizo ambazo kipimo hutambua. chemistry ya kirusi cha HIV na kiwango/namba ya protein zinazotengeneza kirusi kimoja zinajulikana, hivyo kupata absolute namba ya virusi inahitaji kugawanya tu. Mfano, ni kama ukipewa miguu 16 ya mbuzi, inamaana miguu hii imetokana na mbuzi wangapi?
kuelewa zaidi kwa lugha nyepesi, bonyeza
HAPA
kuhusu isolation, as with all viral diseases isolation of HIV is a complex and difficult process, BUT IT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED.
KUpata proof ya isolation ya HIV please refer to my origional link ya EVIDENCE... , lakini pia soma link hii
HAPA
kuhusu kuona picha in real time, honestly sijawahi. lakini, in medical science and research, diagnosis and drawing conclusion between the link kati ya mdudu na ugonjwa ambao tunafikiria anasababisha, inategemea vitu vingi zaidi ya merely pure visual proof. na teknolojia ya kuona wadudu hawa ni kubwa sana, maabara zetu naweza sema hazina (i stand to be corrected)
kupata baadhi ya more recent pictures taken by high resonance electromagnetic microscopes, bonyeza
HAPA
4. katika familia ya retroviruses, ni kweli kwamba sio HIV tu ndiyo yenye uwezo wa kuathiri T-cells. kabla ya kwenda mbali zaidi, naomba tuwekane sawa kwamba T-cells zipo aina tofauti tofauti. kwa mfano, T-cells zinazofahamika zaidi ni T4 na T8, pamoja na nyinginezo. T4 cells ni zile T-lympocytes zinazobeba CD4 receptor katika surface zao. pia ifahamike kwamba, kuna aina nyingine za celli za mwili ambazo pia zina-posses CD4 receptors kwenye surface zao, sio T4-lymphocytes pekee. seli hizo ni kama CD4 positive dendrites na CD4 positive macrophages. kwa maana hiyo basi, uwezo wa HIV ni ku-infect only those cells zenye CD4 receptors (cd4 positive cells), na sio celli zingine. one of the retroviruses known to cause disease through infecting T-lymphocytes is Human T-lymphocytes leukemia Virus (HTLV), anayesababisha leukemia.
Now, conclusive evidence has shown that in most patients with AIDS with low CD4 lymphocyte levels and a positive HIV test, HIV has been identified in more than 98% of patients as compared to other retroviruses. Pia, other T-cell lines infected by retroviruses did not show a decline in absolute specific cell numbers compared to those cells infected by HIV. sijui umeweza ku-draw the link hapo?
Please reffer to my Origional document ya EVIDENCE..., lakini pia tembelea hii link
HAPA
5. kuhusu the subject of
PEER REVIEW SCIENCE in the context of HIV, hapo kuna walakini kimetholojia. lakini, remember that was the primitive primitive HIV era. Lakini 30 years after the very first publication of HIV aids, with exponential improvement in levels and capabilities of science (in the context of medical science), wanasayansi na madaktari wengi(hata wale wasiofanya kazi katika ku-deal na HIV AIDS directly,, kama MIMI,, ambao hatu-"benefit" chochote) bado wanaamini katika findings hizi, though knowledge juu ya HIV imekuwa na kuongezeka sana. The Core basic principles have more or less remained the same.
kuhusu hii ishu ya peer review science, kuna paper nisoma mda kidogo. katika michango mbalimbali iliyomo kulikuwa na maneno haya "
One person, no matter how broadly trained, cannot make the call on every paper
If your decisions were guided by expert opinions you would be less inclined to make such horrific errors in judgment. To be sure, peer review is not perfect, but it is far better than the beliefs of any one of us. I recently conducted a simulated blind review of the Duesberg article. There views I received are posted at my blog and would certainly inform any reasonable editor that the paper was a sham. My hope is that you either change your policy, or that Elsevierre place you as editor, or perhaps do away with the journal altogether"
tafadhali bonyeza
HAPA kusoma paper nzima
6. kuna kipindi niliomba hapa more recent studies kuhusu HIV and testing lakini sikupewa. Nasema tena, science is not stagnant. pamoja na kukua kwa sayansi na teknolojia ya ku test HIV, and the exponential increase in the level of knowledge (in HIV AIDS context), bado core basic principles kuhusu mdudu huyu have remained the same, pamoja ya kuwa researched mara nyingi na watu tofauti. Katika article niliyoweka, inaonyesha dhahiri utofauti wa vipimo vya zamani na sasa, 30 years after the primitive HIV era. Naomba uniwekee recent data juu ya sensitivity and specificity of current tests, kutoka "independent research sources"
Pia, maswali yako mengi umeyaformulate kwa mtindo wa YES or NO answers. Mimi kujibu YES or NO does not necessarily define my stand, unless unaelewa mawazo yangu katika maelekezo yangu. this is not purely mathematics, its science and logic.
7. Hoja yako
#7 inazidi ku-confirm kwamba sayansi always inakua. watu wanagundua vitu vipya every other day. Niliwahi kumuuliza mtu humu kwamba anajua kwamba now kuna cancer nyingi tu ambazo cause ni virus ambao wanaweza kuwa transmitted from person to person? sikujibiwa!!
Lakini pia, in science we discuss facts na si vinginevyo. Ndio maana hata siku moja huwezi kuta mimi nam-criticize P.Duesberg juu ya ugunduzi wake wa oncogenes,, maana facts zipo na nazijua. Ndio maana kuna usemi husema "SMALL MINDS DISCUSS PEOPLE, BIG MINDS DISCUSS FACTS". Hata kama uwe na Uprofesa mkubwa namna gani, hata kama uwe mkuu namna gani, hata kama uwe na experience namna gani,, kama the facts dont tally then you have no point to prove. kwa hiyo tuache kuongelea watu na ukuu wao, tuongelee substance ya tafiti zao. mbona ile article niliyotoa imejitosheleza tosha,, kuna haja wewe kurudia haya maswali??
8. kuhusu Duesberg, nasema tena I discuss Facts and not people. kwa hapa tulipofikia naamini facts zangu unazielewa ama kuzijua. evidence nimekupa.
pia, sio entirely true kwamba Dusberg hataki kusikilizwa kabisa, anapata airtime kubwa tu, na amehojiwa mara nyingi. ana hoja nyingi, lakini facts chache hivyo wanasayansi wengi hawa-side upande wake. mfano, je ni ukweli kwamba ukimwi ni ugonjwa unaosababishwa na life style kama kunywa pombe, kuvuta madawa, malnutrition, kutumia ARV na vitu vingine vingi lakini sio kirusi? kama ni hivyo, unaelezeaje watu ambao wana dalili za ukimwi na a positve test,, ambao hawanywi pombe wala kutumia madawa na hawana malnutrition? vipi pia kuhusu mtoto anayezaliwa na mama mwenye virusi, na yeye baadaye ankuja kupata dalili zilezile za ugonjwa,, bila kuvuta madawa, wala kunywa pombe wala kuwa na malnutrition? pia, kama ARV zinasababisha ukimwi unaelezeaje wale ambao hawana hizo risk nilizotaja hapo juu lakini wametest +ve ila hawanywi ARV, hawa huwa hawaendelei kuumwa na hata kufa?? umejiuliza ni denialists wangapi waliacha dawa na kuzuia watoto wao wasipewe dawa kwa kuamini HIV haipo,, wangapi bado wapo hai? una hizi data?
Rejea article yangu ya mwanzo
9.how sure are you kwamba Gallo aliiba data za Dr. Luc Montaigner?? una proof? Remember i dont discuss people, I discuss facts.
kuhusu kuua Tcells, huo ni utafiti wa wapi? je kuna Peer review science hapo ama ni mawazo yake binafsi (hahaha!!!)? pathology inasema HIV incapacitates the cell by overriding its genome, making the cell make more viral copies and and prevents it from doing its normal activities. at the end the cell is either burst ama is marked by antigens na kuwa destroyes by phagocytic cells etc. je unadhani immunity kushuka lazima celli zife? hata wewe kama baba wa familia ukifungiwa ndani usichakarike lazima uchumi uyumbe, sio mpaka uwe umekufa. tusijitoe ufahamu kirahisi hivyo!!
10. Again, facts and Not people
11. Unatakiwa kuelewa kuwa transmission ya HIV kama vile transmission ya magonjwa mengineilivyo inategemea vitu vingi kwa pamoja. just to mention afew
a. infective dose
b, virulence
c. immunity
d. infective dose ie. depends on state and stage of disease ya anayeku-infect
e. route of infection
f. Biological- kuna watu wana mutant receptors for HIV. zinaitwa mutant CCR5 receptors. HIv hawezi ku-infect celli za watu hawa, hivyo hawapati maambukizi!! but these peolpe are very few, extremely rare.
Je, wajua avarage ya uwezekano kwa mtu (mwanaume) kupata maambukizo kwa njia ya sex ni asilimia 0.3% tu?? ukiyajua haya yote tunaweza ku argue kwa logic.
hivyo, kupata exposure ya virusi vya HIV does not necessarily mean you will catch the infection, the same way ukipata exposure (reember nimesema exposure, and not infection) ya vidudu vya kipindupindu haimaanishi ni lazima uumwe kipindupindu.
12. Hii nilishakueleza personally, ukimwi kwangu ni HIV-AIDS. au ushasahau? ukimwi mwingine wowote ambao sio HIV-AIDS nilisema term ukimwi hapo ni misnomer!! kumbuka historia.
13. Sio wote wenye TB wana HIV, lakini wengi wenye HIV AIDS wanapata TB. Rate ya TB katika wagonjwa wenye upungufu wa kinga sababu ya sababu nyingine (apart from HIV) ni ndogo sana, as compared to rate ya TB ktk HIV positive patients!! ulisoma article ile kweli? do you know the facts? hata mtaani tu umeona? pia 98% ya wote wenye upungufu wa kinga wana virusi HIV, unabisha? soma article tena, Unajua kuhusu PCP na rate zake? nayo ni opportunistic infection ambayo unapata kinga ikishuka. patients wenye upungufu wa kinga bila HIV almost never get PCP, ila wengi wenye HIV-ukimwi wanapata PCP. unahisi ni bahati mbaya hapo?
kuhusu nini kimesababisha kushuka kinga kama hawako HIV positive na wana TB, hebu jijibu sababu mwenyewe maana ni rahisi sana. mojawapo ni malnutrition,, endelea..
14. wengi wanapewa ARV peke yake, ila kama una malaria at some point utapewa dawa za malaria pia kama mtu mwingine yeyote. kwani, wanaokunywa dawa za sukari kila siku wakiumwa kikohozi hawatapewa dawa za kikohozi?
mda mwingine you can choo to also give vitamins, kama wanavyopewa wengine.
15. facts mkuu, facts!! kuna dawa ambayo haina side effects? hebu tafuta side effects za dawa za kisukari ama schizophrenia uone kama zina tofauti na hizi za ARV. nazo zinasababisha ukimwi? au, lete tu side effect ya dawa za malaria and their toxicity, ama dawa za kansa, its all the same, acha kukomaa na ARV tu,, diagnose na hizo zingine kama zinaleta ukimwi.
principle ya utoaji wa dawa inategemea the benefits of the medicine when given,, and the risks associated with not giving it. so, weigh the benefits and the risk, lasivyo hamna dawa ambayo ingetolewa.
pia, side effects hutegemeana na mtu, wengi hupata very mild side effects, maana hata side effects nazo zina grade zake. wale wenye severe side effects hubadilishiwa dawa. soma article uelewe
16. kwa mtazamo wangu, people always want to move foward. facts, facts, facts. sasa denialists wanataka kumaliza ukimwi kivipi wakati hata cause hawajui?? mbona wameandika article nyingi ila response bado ndogo? again, facts, facts, facts!!
17. science is an open book, possibilities are endless. kama people will find those factors and come up with hard evidence FACTS, nitakubali. but till then, my stand and position is firmly poled on the scientific context of HIV facts.
Asante sana, nimejibu yote kulingana na uwezo wangu. najua kuna watu humu walikuwa wanasubiri nikimbie,, sorry for dissapointing you!!
Naomba mpitie tena ile link niliyotoa, na kama wewe kweli uko neutral basi iweke ile link juu kwenye origional post yako. unaweza pia weka na link ya denialists, ili watu wapitie zote na kuchambua.
RTAKE IT FROM ME, HIV IS REAL. if you were standing where I stand ungeelewa,, maana hata maswali yako hayako specific,, umeniuliza siasa zaidi kuliko sayansi. Ila nimejibu kisayansi, so atleast aknowledge that.
najua wengi humu tunatamani HIV isingekuwa real, hata mimi pia, because it would have been much better. lakini hatuwezi kuongea kwa lugha nyepesi tu kila mda tuanapopata shida inayotusumbua,, because this is the bitter truth, take it or leave it. sitaongelea tena swala hili, belive what you want.
"None are more enslaved that they who hopelessly belive they are free "
KWAHERINI!!
NB; nitakuwa nafatilia kama mkuu deception atakubali lile pendekezo la yeye kujidunga damu yenye virusi (tena from a patient mwenye stsge 4 disease, not on ARV) in public. I will admire the enthusiasm.
mkuyati og, a husband and a father.
