If viral load isn't a predictor of t-cell decline and "AIDS," then what is the holy grail?

Up until now, the viral load was said to indicate virus activity, t-cell death, and sometimes, should be used to guide the subject into treatment, namely ARVs, or HAART. I believe that count has been variable based upon CD4 cell counts of under 350 I believe. Now the WHO says that up to 15% of a cohort studied in Africa, HIV negatives had CD4 t-cell counts below 350. Does that throw the entire prescribing mechanism into disarray? Some say it does.

Others in more established situations may fear the consequences of having to admit that the past 25 years of pushing pills was done in the dark. No matter, people have made a lot of money, and a certain industry has used NGOs, governmental agencies, and earnest researchers around the globe as pawns in their quarter-century chess match.

The paradigm goes something like this: HIV stalks t-cells, hijacks them kills them, but not before converting the new digs into a factory for replicating itself. This hell-mouth called HIV then causes any combo of 32 AIDS infections, including tuberculosis, dementia, cervical cancer, and no doubt, special reserved seating for the bugs that have us on their shit list, like Cryptospordium.

If viral load isn't a measure of infectiousness vis-a-vis CD4 t-cell death, then what of relevance does it measure?

Individual levels is a term used in these posts. I don't see any other level to bring this discussion, for HIV, a stigma, not an illness, always affects an individual.

It is telling that to AIDS lovers and researchers worldwide, HIV's object of desire is a faceless nonindividual. What is HIV but a dirty stain leeched from money weighing down a sea of subjects who have become fodder for future drug studies.

Sadly, the professionals in pharmacoepia cleverly co-opted the moral high-ground falsely in the most egregious manner, ending trials early, saying "it would be unethical to hold back the drug; giving the placebo is unethical because the new drug worked so well, we'll ram this through FDA" (or however it works over there) "and make a billion next year."

I digress.

Tuberculosis disease dates to the Pharaohs, cervical cancer is caused by HPV, not AIDS, crypto affects a large percentage of the at large population and HIV has nothing at all do with it.

There is good reason to say the paradigm is falling apart. We are all catching on to the mystery usually shrouded in fancy terms and the research within the industry itself is dissolving the 25 year cover. Despite how HIV & AIDS devotees wrap research results around a core predetermined belief, in support of drugs usually, the facts will speak for themselves.

WHO report | paradigm

Technorati Tags: