Jim Quinn Rejects Germ Theory

Is it just me, or are homophobic bigots really reaching lately?

I mean, I get it. They are against science as a rule. Earth is 6000 years old, and dinosaur bones were planted by scientists with the help of Satan as a test of faith and for personal profit, and all other scientists are just one huge secret cabal (with all this "Global Warming" and "melting ice caps" stuff) out to take away their God-Given American Right to drive the biggest, ugliest gas-guzzler imaginable, thereby confirming their status as gigantic assholes.

But sex producing a virus?

Haven't heard that one before.

So funny that all I can do is stare:

"[G]ay marriage doesn't produce anything that the state has an interest in. Gay sex produces AIDS, which the state doesn't have -- or should have an interest in. They should charge homosexuals more for their -- for their health insurance than they charge the rest of us."

I shall name him...Quinny.


The meme of "the Gay Plague?" It's dead, Jim.

HIV causes AIDS. It is a virus that can effect anyone that comes into contact with it in a communicable fashion, generally through body fluids. Examples: blood transfusions, infected needles, sex of ANY kind between ANY partners.

I would need to find some stats to back me up on this, but I'm pretty sure that the largest infected group of people in the US is young, straight African American women. But wait, thats science again...

Psssh, who needs proof?

World Health Organization decides the gold standard of scientific evidence is superfluous

WHAT!?

Scientific evidence can now include “causal relationships” suggested in observational or epidemiological studies, animal and laboratory experiments, generally accepted authoritative information validated over time, and traditional knowledge and experiences of use. The acceptance of these alternative ways of knowing came after years of lobbying by the health foods and dietary supplement industry.(emphasis added)

Basically, because pesky science was getting in the way of profit margins, now there doesn't need to be scientific proof that certain foods or supplements help prevent disease, there just has to be a "credible" claim. Sandy at Junkfood Science breaks it down, and sums up:

In other words, this gives an NGO, such as a health food or supplement industry organization, the ability to can make any claim it chooses and say it’s substantiated.

Few consumers will realize when they see a health claim on the label of a food or supplement, purportedly supported by scientific evidence from the WHO, that the definition for scientific evidence has changed.

Why has this story not been widely reported in mainstream media or in professional publications reaching the scientific and medical communities? It would appear the input of scientists and doctors in health policies is not wanted, as the WHO and UN-FAO become influenced by things other than the best science.

We have enough issues with food science and knowing what is actually good, and what foods have an actual effect on health issues or are preventative, without having to worry about what scientific evidence actually consists of.