In article <5114b42a7503f464aed2c7b8e3feb527@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>, PaulKing <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: Hundreds of times 1,000 micrograms is 2 or more tenths of a gram. Condoms would be *wet* with toluene. People would be shaking the excess toluene off their condoms before using them. If you actually knew what you claim to know, you would be able to tell us how you know, ie. provide the sources for your information. You have been asked for this repeatedly, and you...

The 3 SEX RULES SEX RULE number 1 Sex is more important than dying. SEX RULE number 2 Sex is more important than murdering somebody. SEX RULE number 3 If people could change their sexual behavior, we wouldn't be here.

Is this GM Carter using a new name? Seems like something he would believe....as mad as 'AIDS' itself.

By Berton Roueche The Medical Detectives http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=berton+roueche

A great deal. Toluene is only sold in 56 gal drumbs (by most distributors) and condom manufacturers buy them by the thousand.

In article <c0a1f2ba7d21d85681520f86fa1b98ec@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>, PaulKing <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: You're trying to save face. I quoted dishonestly to see if you would notice, and you didn't. Your failure to notice is remarkable. In political or politicized arguments, people typically check for dishonesty in what their opponents say, but not what their allies say. Though I am your opponent, you didn't check what I said.

In article <ae2d58b93918c03a7324092490a89909@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>, PaulKing <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: PKB -- David Canzi

Are you going to believe your next sex partner telling you they only did one sexual practice and then just stopped there? Very often people do not just do one sexual practice and stop. One of the myths of ranking risks for sexual practices is a notion that sexual practices can be isolated for risk. It is a myth because very often people do not just do one sexual practice and stop there.

Fallacy of Exclusion http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/exclus.htm Definition: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the "principle of total evidence".

* * http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/dissent/documents/health/pharmgen.html Front Organisations Drug companies are among those health care groups which have created front "community" organisations to press and market their point of view. These groups acquire a large nominal membership, often by subterfuge. Many

On Wed, 18 May 2005 18:23:17 -0400, "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: Note from the article: "Local government officials said condom users should not stop using rubber contraceptives based on results of the study because N-Nitrosamine does not present an immediate health danger." Yet another study I have REPEATEDLY posted here, not a news report

The Bangui Definition In 1985, the World Health Organization called a meeting in Bangui, the capital of the Central African Republic, to define African AIDS. The meeting was presided over by CDC official Joseph McCormick. He wrote about it in his book "Level 4 Virus Hunters of the CDC," saying, "If I could get everyone at the WHO meeting in Bangui to agree on a single, simple definition of what an AIDS case was in Africa, then, imperfect as the definition might be, we could actually start...

Behind every 'AIDS' story lies a money making scam. FLEMINGTON, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 16, 2005-- Results of a new national survey of 864 physicians and 1,339 members of the general public revealed that a significant majority of both groups believe that mandatory, federally funded HIV testing would improve the overall

Alternate URLs http://tinyurl.com/d5rz9 http://tinyurl.com/e2xea

Organic solvents Mercury Toluene (Condoms proven to cause birth defects) NO DOUBT ABOUT IT http://www.arhp.org/healthcareproviders/onlinepublications/healthandsexuality/teratogens/prevpreg-a-1.cfm?ID=242

On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:20:18 -0400, "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: No you haven't. Nothing of the sort. You're completely, utterly and contemptibly full of shit.

Thanks for the update.

In article <4bc1827a1610597afdc1bbad248e27be@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>, PaulKing <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: You followed up an article about denying the antecedent with "another example" which is, in fact, not an example of denying the antecedent. Thank you for this excellent demonstration of your inability to understand basic logic. -- David Canzi

On Mon, 16 May 2005 00:48:45 -0400, "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote: Indeed. You have provided absolutely NOTHING to support your view--nor any explanation for what AIDS is.

Another fine example of the flawed logic behind the 'AIDS' myth. With 'AIDS', however, even when the evidence shows the opposite result (for example the massive UK funded East Africa study that found 'no hint of the slightest effect' in regard to sex ual activity causing AIDS) the AIDS establishment simply ignores it and keeps on insisting that it tis so, tis so, tis so. 'AIDS' is both a logical fallacy AND even worse an illogical fallacy.