[quote="Count Zero"]Eh? You do realize that 20% of the population has AIDS right? That is the equivilant to all of California being infected. It isn't an easy problem to fix when one of the beliefs is that you are cured of AIDS if you have sex with a virgin (12 year girls olds are being sold and raped for that purpose). Women are beaten by thier husbands if they demand a condom and so on. It's pretty fucked up continent right now, and those kinds of cultural views are hard to change. Combined with the leaders of the nations not wanting to believe it is a problem or the Roman Catholic Church saying condoms don't stop AIDS it is a really hard fight to win. It is a world crisis, whether we want to deal with it or not.. if we don't it will come home to roost. [/quote]
Wow, not even sure where to begin with this post. Frankly, when I first read it, it seemed so high handed and certain, that well, I was going to let it die. No one is saying AIDS isn't a *huge* problem. There are a lot of huge problems, and there are right and wrong approaches to solving them. There's also political gain, cronyism, and plain out profiteering which needs to be taken into consideration. In short, I don't think the scope of the problem is much in dispute (thought you might consider looking at my questions a bit and see if its entirely true) but the scope of the solution is *seriously* in doubt in my mind.
However, I thought I'd let you chew on these questions for a moment.
1) How many different tests for AIDS exist at this time?
2) How accurate are these tests?
3) How much do these tests cost?
Why is this important? That's an exercise left up to the reader. If you don't understand why these questions are important, that's cool, I thank you for your opinion, Have a good day.
Other things to ponder:
Which companies and which drugs are being touted as 'cures' for AIDS?
How effective is the treatement?
Now the big ones:
How much money has been allocated by the US for aids vaccines in Africa?
How many Africans have been treaded and saved because of the process?
Part of thinking about this is to also take a look at the budgeting process of the government. Total Information Awareness was a key component to 'The War on Terror'. TIA was gutted, funding-wise *after* it was passed. Heck, even after initial allocation.
See, its like the Jerry Lewis Telethon. I can pledge a thousand dollars to Jerry's Kids. It looks really cool, and if I pledged a thousand dollars to PBS, they'd actually mention my name! Sweet. But if I don't send in my check, I didn't actually give them *anything*, but I bought myself a *ton* of goodwill. Especially since PBS won't go on air saying, "Hey, this guy, he pledged a grand, and then screwed us. Here's his address and phone number!"
Lets go to bait and switch take 2. See my wife and I got a scam going. I pledge a grand to PBS. Then my wife calls, and cancels it. So now she's the heavy, and I'm still the good guy. In the real world, this has no benefit, but if I'm the president, and she's congress, well then I'm the president who stood up to save the world from AIDS, and congress were the ones 'looking out for their constituency' Wow. That one is a win/win.
If you want to know what's important, watch the money. Who does it come from? Who does it go to? Does it *really* get there?
Contrast that data with this and its not hard to see what a mess an 'AIDS Crusade' turns into.
Bonus question: What is the US strategy here? What is the UN strategy? Are we going flat out for a vaccine, or are we going with a combination of education and a vaccine?
In my opinion, a vaccine would be great, but there is a desperate need for education, here and abroad.
This reminds of a t-shirt I had that said "Ebola Zaire." Crazy how many looks and comments I got. When ever anyone asked about it I told them it was an awareness shirt which I guess was partially true since some people that asked did not know about Ebola. The truth was that it was a shirt from my favorite comic "Poison Elves."
Anyway, I'm not sure what were debating. I think we all agree that there is a problem with AIDS in Africa no matter what tests they are using, or how often they a being used.
I think something like an Aids frundraiser makes a difference. If simply by making people aware. Lets face it, were Americans with jobs, classes, and the next adventure to worry about. We do not have the time to think, much less do something about an Aids problem thousands of miles away. However, every now and than we get a chance to make a small difference in the way of voting or donating money. When these opportunities arrise would should take them and not worry about the beuacracy behind it.
It is kind of like recycling. The majority of recycled material just gets thrown away making most efforts worthless. However, when everyone belevies it is worthless than it truly is and will soon not exist at all.
If something like Aids in Africa, recycling or Public Television are that important to you than you should get more involved. Otherwise do what you can when you can. Go see the benefit rock concert, donate the $10/month to a benefit and believe that your efforts make a difference because the second we beleive we can't help, we won't.
[quote="BreakfastOfChampions"] What, someone's going to take the 'FOR AIDS' position? :o[/quote]
I would like to take the position pro AIDS, the moon landing was filmed in Hollywood, and the Holocaust is anti-German propoganda and never really happened. :P
I don't think we need a pro position on AIDS to debate about the impact it has on our sense of the world and the people in it. You never know what may be develop out of efforts to combat AIDS. Like a lot of deadly viruses it only demonstrates how fragile we really are and that there is always something out there ready to kick your ass and forget our name.
I guess the only debatable point about this is whether the current effort by the US is a genuine effort to combat AIDS, or if its just blowing smoke.
Another point to play with is the idea that AIDS, if ignored in Africa, will come home to roost in the US. I'm not sure I buy this, since this isn't exactly Ebola, and I can control whether I'm exposed to this disease or not, for the most part. Hardly the black death, or the flu for example, which is *extremely* contageous.
Unfortunately, it's already roosting here. I think it was one of the critisms of the Reagan era that the US goverment turned a blind eye to the problem when it was just becomming known.
Okay, brace yourselves... highly inflammatory post with many generalizations coming...
Aside from criminal activity (i.e. rape, forcible blood injections), AIDS is a completely preventable disease. And all it takes is the maturity of our nation to face it. Unfortunately, corporations have discovered much more money is to be made in media glorifying decadent lifestyles filled with sex and drugs. The American populace has bought into this philosophy of instant gratification, as evidenced by the booming drug cartels and adult entertainment industries. With abstinence as a near-curse word in sex education, students are often underinformed as to the degree of threat posed by this disease and its implications to our society.
The simple solution is for everyone to stop doing drugs and stop having sex! Now of course, this is completely unrealistic and impossible. But if some safeguards were implemented (for instance, clean needle programs), we would see the reduction and eventual elimination of the vast majority of cases involving AIDS. Of course this is only half of the solution. People would have to start exhibiting a greater sense of responsibility and deference when it came to gratification. Those who weren't able to do this or refused to change would be lost to "natural" selection. And I for one would not miss their contribution to the gene pool.
[quote="CaptMDKirk"]Okay, brace yourselves... highly inflammatory post with many generalizations coming...
Aside from criminal activity (i.e. rape, forcible blood injections), AIDS is a [u]completely[/u] preventable disease. And all it takes is the maturity of our nation to face it. Unfortunately, corporations have discovered much more money is to be made in media glorifying decadent lifestyles filled with sex and drugs. The American populace has bought into this philosophy of instant gratification, as evidenced by the booming drug cartels and adult entertainment industries. With abstinence as a near-curse word in sex education, students are often underinformed as to the degree of threat posed by this disease and its implications to our society.
The simple solution is for everyone to stop doing drugs and stop having sex! Now of course, this is completely unrealistic and impossible. But if some safeguards were implemented (for instance, clean needle programs), we would see the reduction and eventual elimination of the vast majority of cases involving AIDS. Of course this is only half of the solution. People would have to start exhibiting a greater sense of responsibility and deference when it came to gratification. Those who weren't able to do this or refused to change would be lost to "natural" selection. And I for one would not miss their contribution to the gene pool.[/quote]
On many levels I agree. It certainly sings true to the liberatarian in me. However, I also think the same is true of helmet laws and such like that.
At the same time, I think people do make mistakes, and a death sentence for doing drugs (which I can debate the legality of said drugs as well) is pretty harsh.
I totally agree that education is the key. "Look, if you're gonna shoot smack, use a clean needle, or at the very least use YOUR own dirty needle." Safe sex is quite key.
However, aside from clean needles, I don't think condoms are 100% effective against HIV. So that means there are people who are going to get infected, despite their best efforts.
WE'RE ALL BEING PUNISHED FOR OUR SINFUL WAYS! ABSTINENCE IS THE ONLY WAY! IF YOU HAVE SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE YOU'RE GOING STRAIGHT TO HELL AND YOU DESERVE WHATEVER'S COMING TO YOU!!!
No wait... that's not what I meant to say.
What I really meant was, our country has a very puritanical outlook towards the two main causes of AIDS, namely sex and drugs.
There will never be nationwide clean-needle programs, because there's a loud and vocal group out there that doesn't see the lives it would save but only sees the promotion of drug use. There will never be nationwide safe-sex condom distribution, because there's a loud and vocal group out there that doesn't see the lives it would save (not to mention unwanted pregnancies) but only sees that it promotes teenage and premarital sex.
1) How many different tests for AIDS exist at this time?
2) How accurate are these tests?
3) How much do these tests cost?
[qoute]
These tests are accurate. It is such an epidemic in Africa that the health agencies are overwhelmed. If the tests didn't work we wouldn't know how many peope have AIDS in Africa.
I don't consider it isn't a money issue in the long run. It is a public health issue. If 20% of the population of the United States (i.e. 46 million people) was infected with AIDS.... We would be screaming for cheap treatment. We don't really care because it doesn't effect us. I get tired of the Us vs Them idea. It doesn't matter who you are, if you are human then you are treated as such. Just because you aren't like me doesn't me I can treat you anyway I want. The pecentage numbers are really funky. The numbers in the rest of the world are something like 2-8% while in Africa it is 20% and climbing
[quote="""] Other things to ponder:
Which companies and which drugs are being touted as 'cures' for AIDS?
How effective is the treatement? [quote]
If we can't cure it then we just let them suffer and die? Give me a break. Let's make it your wife who is infected... and add your kids to it too... you can't cure it so we will just let them suffer and die... sounds fair. It is a money issue after all... how much is it going to cost to treat.
Drugs that provide treatment allow AIDS patients to live almost normal lives. It is a loosing battle, but it extends life and makes it bearable.
[/quote][/quote][/quote]
That is a good question... the money comes from the citizens of the United States and goes to rich Drug Companies who then sell the drugs at insane prices saying that they have to make back thier profits... Rather than covering costs and making money in the long run. Anytime greed gets in the way of health care, Joe Average gets screwed. When a hospital closes because it isn't making money that is crime. A hospital isn't a business.. it is a public service. It seemed a long time ago doctors forget to really listen to the oath they take. I respect covering costs and making a decent amount of money, but getting rich off other's suffering is evil.
[quote="CaptMDKirk"]Aside from criminal activity (i.e. rape, forcible blood injections), AIDS is a [u]completely[/u] preventable disease. And all it takes is the maturity of our nation to face it. Unfortunately, corporations have discovered much more money is to be made in media glorifying decadent lifestyles filled with sex and drugs. The American populace has bought into this philosophy of instant gratification, as evidenced by the booming drug cartels and adult entertainment industries. With abstinence as a near-curse word in sex education, students are often underinformed as to the degree of threat posed by this disease and its implications to our society.
The simple solution is for everyone to stop doing drugs and stop having sex! Now of course, this is completely unrealistic and impossible. But if some safeguards were implemented (for instance, clean needle programs), we would see the reduction and eventual elimination of the vast majority of cases involving AIDS. Of course this is only half of the solution. People would have to start exhibiting a greater sense of responsibility and deference when it came to gratification. Those who weren't able to do this or refused to change would be lost to "natural" selection. And I for one would not miss their contribution to the gene pool.
[/quote]
Give me a fucking break.... don't be a tool.
It is the corporations that are doing this.... that's it... because before the 60's this country was a nation of virgins. Yeah right.... The things you see on TV now were prevalant in the 50's. They just weren't talked about. Teenagers had sex just as much as they do now they are just more open about it. That golden age conservative always look back to is a lie.
The idea of abstiance for sex ed is a failure. It does not work. Conservatives seem to think that if we take away condoms, then kids won't have sex... gimme a break. I personally remember being told "Wait until you are older to have sex, but if you decide to... make sure to use a condom." Everything I was taught in school was a candid adult telling us to wait, but be safe if you decided too.
Besides... we aren't talking about AIDS in our society... we are talking about AIDS in the Third World nations.
That is a great idea of ending these problems is a slight good idea... hard thing to fix though since sex is natural instinct. You talk sex like there is something wrong with it. It is part of who we are as humans. We can't deny that aspect. Yes we have to control ourselves and take responsibility for our actions, but we can't suppress what we are... human. Sex isn't something dirty. Birth Control and Condoms are being responsible.
You talk about AIDS like it is some punishment on the sinful homosexuals and all those people having evil premarital sex.
[quote="BreakfastOfChampions"] However, aside from clean needles, I don't think condoms are 100% effective against HIV. So that means there are people who are going to get infected, despite their best efforts.[/quote]
Condoms aren't 100% effective against HIV, but they are the most effective thing we have at this point in time. They have never claimed to be. If you are going to have sex then use a condom to be safe. The problem with condom distribution is it isn't effective. Not because they aren't getting them. They are, but men don't want to wear them. Their wives ask them to, but they refuse. If they insist, then the are beaten and the husband has sex with them anyway. So AIDS is passed on to the woman and then the kids during childbirth. Remember this isn't a culture like ours. It is drastically different. This is a place where women are often circumcized (i.e. the clitorus and labia are removed and often the women has her vagina sewn shut). Sex often isn't even pleasurable for these women.
The education works but it takes time. We can't expect a quick fix to this. The situation in Africa is like this... imagine if every 5th person in the United States had AIDS. That is effective almost every family in the United States would have an immediate family member infected.
Additionally the money isn't only going to fight the disease. Hundreds of thousands of children are orphaned every day. The money goes to help them. Additionally, there is such discrimination against AIDS patients that they are often second class citizens at best. Thier children, even if uninfected are treat the same. They are often just left to die with their parents.
[quote="mordraine"][b][i]There will never be nationwide clean-needle programs, because there's a loud and vocal group out there that doesn't see the lives it would save but only sees the promotion of drug use. There will never be nationwide safe-sex condom distribution, because there's a loud and vocal group out there that doesn't see the lives it would save (not to mention unwanted pregnancies) but only sees that it promotes teenage and premarital sex.[/quote]
It all comes down to the belief that if we don't give out needles and condoms no one will do drugs or have sex. Yeah... right...
I've never seen too much merit in the conservative though process when it comes to social issues. It might work with economics, but far right policies screw things up good when applied to medical care and education... anyways, back on topic, people...
I do believe in fiscal conservatism, but tend to be more liberal on social issues. Though I also have liberatarian underpinnings, but don't believe everything is solved with a completely free market.
I personally feel our culture is too hung up on drugs as a solution to problems. I think education would be far more effective than drug treatment, especially since the 20% figure for AIDS in Africa as of my last readings on the subject (dated, mind you) indicated that the true number may be more or less.
The test for HIV is expensive *and* dysentry (pardon the spelling) has a lot of similar symptoms to some symptoms of AIDS. In a lot of *outback* medical facilities, they couldn't afford to test everyone who were exhibiting the symptoms, and a lot of dysentry cases are diagnosed as AIDS.
So, I think we're in vehement agreement that any 'solution' is a multi disciplined approach -- education, vaccines and treatment.
One issue that has arised is that some people believe there is a cure out there or that it is completely manageable. Which has lowered some peoples guard to practicing safe methods.
[quote="mordraine"][b][i]WE'RE ALL BEING PUNISHED FOR OUR SINFUL WAYS! ABSTINENCE IS THE ONLY WAY! IF YOU HAVE SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE YOU'RE GOING STRAIGHT TO HELL AND YOU DESERVE WHATEVER'S COMING TO YOU!!![/b][/i][/quote]
That sounds about right to me. :lol:
Seriously though, the only surefire way to protect yourself from AIDS is never to have sex (or to take the time to get your potential partner tested), and to never share needles when shooting up. Then you only have to worry about HIV infected blood donors, incompetant medical personnel, rapists, and people who like to play bloody knuckles.
[quote="Count Zero"]The idea of abstinence for sex ed is a failure. It does not work. Conservatives seem to think that if we take away condoms, then kids won't have sex... gimme a break. I personally remember being told "Wait until you are older to have sex, but if you decide to... make sure to use a condom." Everything I was taught in school was a candid adult telling us to wait, but be safe if you decided too.[/quote]
I completely support the distribution of condoms to students. But I think it should be supplemented with the strong encouragement of abstinence. Not just as a method of birth control, but also to elevate the sexual act to a status of something most special reserved only for the most intimate settings.
[quote="Count Zero"]That is a great idea of ending these problems is a slight good idea... hard thing to fix though since sex is natural instinct. You talk sex like there is something wrong with it. It is part of who we are as humans. We can't deny that aspect. Yes we have to control ourselves and take responsibility for our actions, but we can't suppress what we are... human. Sex isn't something dirty. Birth Control and Condoms are being responsible.
You talk about AIDS like it is some punishment on the sinful homosexuals and all those people having evil premarital sex. [/quote]
Did I say that? Oh, I did. Funny how that works. I [b]did[/b] say it was going to be inflammatory. :P
[quote="CaptMDKirk"][quote:b41cb38055="Count Zero"]The idea of abstinence for sex ed is a failure. It does not work. Conservatives seem to think that if we take away condoms, then kids won't have sex... gimme a break. I personally remember being told "Wait until you are older to have sex, but if you decide to... make sure to use a condom." Everything I was taught in school was a candid adult telling us to wait, but be safe if you decided too.[/quote]
I completely support the distribution of condoms to students. But I think it should be supplemented with the strong encouragement of abstinence. Not just as a method of birth control, but also to elevate the sexual act to a status of something most special reserved only for the most intimate settings.
[/quote:b41cb38055]
Don't forget to add "And remember, everytime you masturbate, God kills a kitten"
HIV in the United States and HIV in Africa are two just about totally different kettles of fish.
On the preventability of AIDS:
The idea that only criminal activity could lead to the unpreventable contraction of HIV is a little bit laughable here in the United States and a scary kind of joke if said in regards to Africa. It is still possible for a sexual partner in what they think is a stable relationship to contract HIV through their partner if the partner has been unfaithful. Anyone who could seriously criticize people in a seemingly permanent, stable relationship for not using a condom every time they have sex is seriously lacking in perspective. It remains a frightening spectre for people in medical professions, dentists, doctors, nurses, and their assistants, lab personnel, emergency care providers especially in any kind of first responder capacity. Let us not forget, too, that a mother may pass the virus on to her unborn child.
In Africa, a woman does not have the same rights women here have. She may not be able to insist on the use of a condom, even if she knows her husband has been unfaithful, even if she knows she is at risk. Where birth control is not the norm, infected mothers pass HIV onto their children. Where medical technology is not so developed, infectious disease is not so preventable. Where instead of our disposable plastics, equipment is re-used, and sterilisation problems may exist. Transfusion problems exist without thoroughly tested blood supplies (we are not, in our first world country, so immune to this problem as we would like to believe). The populace is not so educated and is far more superstitious; many are illiterate. This, almost more than anything else, makes infectious disease so desperately deadly to Africa.
On American Sex, Drugs, and Rock 'N Roll:
It is not our custom here to live in fear. That there is a risk of death in anything we do is no excuse to abstain utterly from it. That I may die in a car accident does not pre-empt the expectation that I will turn up at work in the morning. That AIDS kills people is not an excuse for people to stop having sex. The predictable argument against this concept is that you have to go to work, but you don't have to have sex. I suggest that if your idea of living entails sitting in your mom's basement playing with miniatures all day, you're set on abstinence. The rest of us should feel free to get laid. I don't mean fuck any whore or frat boy you can find, but within the limits of normal adult relationships, sex is healthy. Use condoms if you are not utterly monogamous. Use your common sense, but understand that even the best-laid plans go awry - and understand that this isn't license to hide under your bed for the rest of your life.
Drug use is another matter entirely. The idea that they're 'doing this to themselves' or 'they're killing themselves anyway' is reprehensibly cruel. It is sentencing individuals to a long, painful death for needle drug use. If sentencing a convicted murderer to death is a point of ethical contention between great minds, how can we be so high-handed about the death of needle drug users? Are our consciences so clean? Are we so certain of their circumstances? I suspect not. I suspect that we consider them the trash of our society, and are more comfortable with the idea that 'they deserve it' rather than with the concept that no matter where they are in life, we may at the very least show compassion. Compassion, however, is a hard road, because it spurs us to action. Finding the right action for this particular population is hard. You have people on the one hand saying 'give them clean needles' and on the other hand saying 'drugs are bad, mmmkay? it's wrong to give people needles'. There is a good ethical argument for either side. The ultimate answer would be to fix the root cause of the destructive behaviour.
On Drug Companies and Black Helicopters
Count Zero wrote: It is the corporations that are doing this.... that's it... because before the 60's this country was a nation of virgins.
That’s right. Pfizer sent a man to Africa to fuck a monkey just so we’d have AIDS. They’re doing it all.
Drug companies aren't touting unsafe lifestyles as a cool thing to make money. Really the people signing on with this bandwagon are no different from the people who tell you about those black helicopters or whatever the government conspiracy du jour may be. I worked on a leading antiretroviral treatment trial and can absolutely tell you that the people who developed that drug are committed to the health of our patients. Companies who don't watch their bottom lines are going to go out of business. Those businesses are the source of innovation in drug design. Without them, we might be waiting a long time for cures for anything.
If there are subcultures that encourage high risk behaviours, they are not part of our mainstream culture. Our mainstream culture is too puritanical. So, too, are our corporate cultures. The culture espoused by most pharmas in the US reflects the mainstream values of the United States. If this weren't already the status quo, you can bet your bippy the public wouldn't like it a bit, and companies are media-conscious, these days.
If pharmas stopped being able to sell AIDS drugs, there are plenty of markets out there. Human illness isn’t going away anytime soon. We haven’t figured out cancer or the common cold, so trust me when I tell you I’m not looking to jump industries the day we cure AIDS.
On accuracy and expense of HIV tests
From the World Health Organization:
In one study of the cost and cost-effectiveness of voluntary counselling and testing in Kenya and Tanzania, the per client cost ranged from US$ 27 to US$ 28, and it was estimated that the cost per HIV infection averted was US$ 249 for Kenya and US$ 346 for Tanzania, while the cost per DALY (disability-adjusted life-year) saved was US$ 13 and US$ 18 respectively (Sweat et al, 2000). The cost-effectiveness of counselling and testing therefore compares well with that of other public health interventions, such as measles immunisation (Sweat et al., 1999, 2000).
The standard of care is an ELISA test followed by a Western Blot to confirm positives or indeterminate results. ELISA tests are inexpensive and very sensitive. The accuracy of a test may be defined by two elements: specificity and accuracy. The ELISA test, being so sensitive, may give occasional false positives after events that have aroused immune system activity. Lab errors are also possible because of the high sensitivity. This is why positives are followed with a Western Blot test.
In general:
Here or there, HIV is worth treating. There is no simple solution for Africa. Education alone is insufficient and testing and treatment do no good without solid, long term commitment to patient care and community prevention. When Sesame Street introduced an HIV positive character in South Africa, I could have cheered. So many children are so desperately affected by this disease. No amount of money or labour will fix this problem in Africa in any short amount of time. It takes time to change attitudes and educate people. It takes even longer to change systems which may hinder the effectiveness of western style treatment and preventative care.
"I need no mask to speak with you. Unlike my brother. I create my own personality. Personality is my medium."
[quote="Neuro"]Count Zero wrote: It is the corporations that are doing this.... that's it... because before the 60's this country was a nation of virgins.
That’s right. Pfizer sent a man to Africa to fuck a monkey just so we’d have AIDS. They’re doing it all. [/quote]
Ummm... I hoped that you picked up that was sarcasm.... right?
Man if Pfizer sent someone to fuck a monkey that must have been tough.... I have trouble walking across the room to get a condom with a hard-on... I can't imagine trying to chase down a monkey... :shock:
[quote="Neuro"][b]On American Sex, Drugs, and Rock 'N Roll:[/b]
It is not our custom here to live in fear. That there is a risk of death in anything we do is no excuse to abstain utterly from it. That I may die in a car accident does not pre-empt the expectation that I will turn up at work in the morning. That AIDS kills people is not an excuse for people to stop having sex. The predictable argument against this concept is that you have to go to work, but you don't have to have sex. I suggest that if your idea of living entails sitting in your mom's basement playing with miniatures all day, you're set on abstinence. The rest of us should feel free to get laid. I don't mean fuck any whore or frat boy you can find, but within the limits of normal adult relationships, sex is healthy. Use condoms if you are not utterly monogamous. Use your common sense, but understand that even the best-laid plans go awry - and understand that this isn't license to hide under your bed for the rest of your life. [/quote]
The only relationship that I personally believe sex should be involved with is marriage. Call me a prude or a old-fashioned or a fundamentalist, I've heard it all before. Sex is too sacred in my mind to be as free as the majority of our culture would seem to believe (at least in California). And you can't deny the fact that if sex was limited only to marriage, there would be a reduction in the number of new HIV infections each year. But as I said before, this is completely unrealistic as our society stands now.
[quote="Neuro"]Drug use is another matter entirely. The idea that they're 'doing this to themselves' or 'they're killing themselves anyway' is reprehensibly cruel. It is sentencing individuals to a long, painful death for needle drug use. If sentencing a convicted murderer to death is a point of ethical contention between great minds, how can we be so high-handed about the death of needle drug users? Are our consciences so clean? Are we so certain of their circumstances? I suspect not. I suspect that we consider them the trash of our society, and are more comfortable with the idea that 'they deserve it' rather than with the concept that no matter where they are in life, we may at the very least show compassion. Compassion, however, is a hard road, because it spurs us to action. Finding the right action for this particular population is hard. You have people on the one hand saying 'give them clean needles' and on the other hand saying 'drugs are bad, mmmkay? it's wrong to give people needles'. There is a good ethical argument for either side. The ultimate answer would be to fix the root cause of the destructive behaviour. [/quote]
You've made my point for me in regards to sex. [u] The ultimate answer would be to fix the root cause of the destructive behaviour.[/u] Of course, with drugs this is a bit easier to accomplish, since drug use is not responsible for the propagation of our species (and it's completely unnecessary). And I completely support your opinion on compassion. When I said before I would not miss their contribution to the gene pool, I may have made a bit strong of a hyperbole. Apologies.
For a long time, I was pro-life, against clean needle programs, and definitely opposed to the distribution of condoms in junior/high schools. But I finally came to appreciate the fact that people are going to do whatever the hell they feel like doing, because of the general lack of self-control and self-love in our society. People want to experience pleasure, and will often take drugs or sex as an quick solution to this thirst for love. By becoming pro-choice, for clean needles and condoms in schools, I condoned these selfish activities because in my mind it would serve the greater good (whatever the hell that means). I think all in all I changed my mind because I felt like I wanted to support the positions that would reduce my risk of exposure (along with everyone I've cared about in my life). But mostly me. So yes, I suppose it was a selfish decision on my part, but c'est la vie.
[quote="Neuro"][b]On Drug Companies and Black Helicopters[/b]
If there are subcultures that encourage high risk behaviours, they are not part of our mainstream culture. Our mainstream culture is too puritanical. So, too, are our corporate cultures. The culture espoused by most pharmas in the US reflects the mainstream values of the United States. If this weren't already the status quo, you can bet your bippy the public wouldn't like it a bit, and companies are media-conscious, these days.[/quote]
Mainstream is puritanical?? Have you watched primetime NBC, CBS, or ABC lately? Granted, these factors alone should not and do not comprise the breadth of our mainstream culture, but they are unmistakable indicators of its state. More and more liberties are being taken towards full-blown nudity, violence, and general tolerance of "less offensive" acts. Everyone is so concerned with stepping on someone else's feelings or beliefs because they don't want bad press, or in some cases, they're trying to avoid getting hit with a lawsuit.
[quote="Neuro"][b]In general:[/b]
Here or there, HIV is worth treating. There is no simple solution for Africa. Education alone is insufficient and testing and treatment do no good without solid, long term commitment to patient care and community prevention. When Sesame Street introduced an HIV positive character in South Africa, I could have cheered. So many children are so desperately affected by this disease. No amount of money or labour will fix this problem in Africa in any short amount of time. It takes time to change attitudes and educate people. It takes even longer to change systems which may hinder the effectiveness of western style treatment and preventative care.[/quote]
I agree that this problem will take the full measure of the world's medical resources to treat, and perhaps someday, to cure. I appreciated the time you took to make this a fully fleshed-out, in-depth post, and it's one of the best I've seen on these boards. Kudos.
[quote="CaptMDKirk"] The only relationship that I personally believe sex should be involved with is marriage. Call me a prude or a old-fashioned or a fundamentalist, I've heard it all before. Sex is too sacred in my mind to be as free as the majority of our culture would seem to believe (at least in California). And you can't deny the fact that if sex was limited only to marriage, there would be a reduction in the number of new HIV infections each year. But as I said before, this is completely unrealistic as our society stands now.
[/quote]
I have never really understood the wait till marriage idea. I am a Christian and I still don't get it. It made sense a few thousand years ago, but now it is unnecessary. If you aren't a moron about sex and are a mature adult then you are very unlikely to get an STD, AIDS/HIV, or get someone pregnant. I think this comes down more to the immaturity of our culture. We behave like children even as adults. I child can be all about themselves, they are kids and don't have perspective... when you become an adult you have a duty to be more responsible and unselfish. It is what makes you an adult.
I would rather have the "free-love" aspect of our culture, then it behind closed doors and not being discussed like it was 50+ years ago. I think that is more damaging in the long run. People can't be ashamed of being sexual beings and having urges, that sexual repression then comes back in negative ways, it creates pornography, sexual abuse, etc. We have to be mature about who we are as sexual beings. Why do you think I have such a problem with sex in Sci-Fi and Fantasy (see Battlestar Galactica discussion)... it is because it is immature. I like to think I am at least slightly an adult.
[quote="CaptMDKirk"] For a long time, I was pro-life, against clean needle programs, and definitely opposed to the distribution of condoms in junior/high schools. But I finally came to appreciate the fact that people are going to do whatever the hell they feel like doing, because of the general lack of self-control and self-love in our society. People want to experience pleasure, and will often take drugs or sex as an quick solution to this thirst for love. By becoming pro-choice, for clean needles and condoms in schools, I condoned these selfish activities because in my mind it would serve the greater good (whatever the hell that means). I think all in all I changed my mind because I felt like I wanted to support the positions that would reduce my risk of exposure (along with everyone I've cared about in my life). But mostly me. So yes, I suppose it was a selfish decision on my part, but c'est la vie. [/quote]
It is disappointing that you gave up what you believe is right because you feel that people will do it anyway. That really makes no sense to me... show some conviction. I could give up on what I believe even though I know I will have very little impact, I still stand my my convictions because I feel they are right.
If you have come to realized the benefits/reasons of supporting the above issues then I salute you, but if you have come to support them becasue you could give a shit... then that is really sad.
I look at abortion and support free choice because it needs to be the woman who controls when she reproduces. Far to often pregency can be a way for someone to trap a woman. I support clean needle exchanges because it allows you to curb the spread of HIV and also get those people who are addicts some possible help and get them off drugs... when you know how is an addict it is easier to help them. I support condoms in schools because like my parents and grandparents always said, they were doing it anyway, I figure we might as well be sure they are safe. It stops STD's and ruduces teen pregnacy (therefore dropping the abortion rate). Does that mean that I think teenagers should be having sex? No, not really, but they should be as safe as they can be if they are. Actually, I am suprised we don't encourage kids to fool around more and not have sex. I remember making out with a girl being a lot of fun. :)
Things like sex are supposed to be fun... it isn't selfish to have a good time when you are being sexual. It isn't selfish for two adults to be sexually intimate (straight or otherwise). It is selfish for people to go after sex for the sake of sex. It seems that you look at sex very strangely. Maybe it is just me having grown up with my parents being priests (father and step-mother are Episcopal priests), and having parents that asked me about my sexual activity which gives me a strange point of view. Hell, when I turned 16 my parents got me a box of condoms because they weren't trying to kid themselves. They didn't want me to have sex, but they wanted to be sure they didn't get any unexpected grandkids or medical bills.
[quote="""] Mainstream is puritanical?? Have you watched primetime NBC, CBS, or ABC lately? Granted, these factors alone should not and do not comprise the breadth of our mainstream culture, but they are unmistakable indicators of its state. More and more liberties are being taken towards full-blown nudity, violence, and general tolerance of "less offensive" acts. Everyone is so concerned with stepping on someone else's feelings or beliefs because they don't want bad press, or in some cases, they're trying to avoid getting hit with a lawsuit. [quote]
You make some good points here, but I really have never seen a problem with appropriate nudity. It is just a human body after all. We shouldn't be ashamed to show a naked body. Now there is a point to where it is inappropriate. Kids shouldn't be watching porno saturday morning and there is a certain level of decency that must be maintained, but we can't freak out because there are tits on TV. As to the worries of hurting someones feelings... as long as it isn't abusive or oppressive (i.e. racist, sexist, unusually cruel, etc. ), then I simply say tough it up and take it. I have noticed that some people out there are just big wussies.
[quote="""] I agree that this problem will take the full measure of the world's medical resources to treat, and perhaps someday, to cure. I appreciated the time you took to make this a fully fleshed-out, in-depth post, and it's one of the best I've seen on these boards. Kudos.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
I agree here, and I have to agree with Kirk here in saying that your response was very well executed and impressive. Excuted much better than I could have... I haven't written anything like that since college.
[quote="Count Zero"] I have never really understood the wait till marriage idea. I am a Christian and I still don't get it. It made sense a few thousand years ago, but now it is unnecessary. [/quote]
My girlfriend and I thought about getting married, but her dowry just ain't worth it. :)
[quote="cczernia"] My girlfriend and I thought about getting married, but her dowry just ain't worth it. :)[/quote]
Same here... unfortunately I am the one with the dowry that is worth anything... I sometimes feel like my parents are just trying to get rid of me.... :P
You won't cure HIV with morality, and in fact we have no right to.
There are some generalisations we can make about sex from a social responsibility standpoint and be on firm ethical ground:
Do not conceive children you can't support
Do not get others sick
Engage in activity only with other consenting adults
Even this last point has some fuzziness as we struggle with the definition of 'adult', but as generalities, these are statements we can largely support from a social standnpoint on the 'your rights end where my nose begins' platform.
Beyond that, it's nice that people have convictions about premarital sex or what have you, but they're not concepts anyone has a right to impose on others. For individuals who do not adhere to the same precepts, it's pointless and unethical to apply scare tactics that only serve to reinforce a specific morality. Where it is a natural and normal part of an individual's life and acceptable to their creed to engage in sexual behaviour that does not defy what society has a right to ask of them as defined above, we must respect their civil rights.
Any ethically sound treatment of HIV must preserve civil rights.
"I need no mask to speak with you. Unlike my brother. I create my own personality. Personality is my medium."
[quote="Neuro"]For individuals who do not adhere to the same precepts, it's pointless and unethical to apply scare tactics that only serve to reinforce a specific morality. Where it is a natural and normal part of an individual's life and acceptable to their creed to engage in sexual behaviour that does not defy what society has a right to ask of them as defined above, we must respect their civil rights. [/quote]
This is especially true when it comes to fighting AIDS in Africa. They have a completely different set of morality and ethics with regards to sexuality. For the US to even [i]attempt[/i] to push it's quasi-religious abstinence agenda before agreeing to send financial aid is absurd.
Letting go of my logical and ethical considerations of HIV in Africa, let me share something I heard on NPR the other day.
NPR followed a nurse in a hospital somewhere in Africa - I don't know where off the top of my head. The staff gathered for announcements of who had died the day before of AIDS, prayed together, and sang a hymn. She said they start all their days like that, and that there are always deaths.
She met with a man to counsel him. He had been diagnosed with AIDS. She explained treatment options, and there was an awkward pause as he asked how much it would cost, because unless it was free, he could not afford it. Talking to the reporter later, she described him saying, (paraphrased) "Of course he can't afford treatment. We tell him that what he needs to do to stay healthy is to eat healthy and rest well, and it is clear that there is no food. There is nothing to eat, and no treatment. It is terrible to have to tell people that unless they have money, they must just go home and try to be peaceful until they die."
She had been doing this for over ten years, and I was so impressed by her strength and her compassion. I was impressed that she could go in every day to face death first thing in the morning and deal with death and hunger all day long and still have faith and kindness. Individuals like this make it clear to me that it's far more than a matter of pocketbook and good sense to help our fellow man, but that it's the very stuff of a worthwhile life.
"I need no mask to speak with you. Unlike my brother. I create my own personality. Personality is my medium."
All of our ethical and moral considerations aside, if you're looking to beat a disease, trying to enforce morality probably won't make much of a dent, here and especially in Africa.
~twisting reality so you do not have to~
"It's like rock, paper, scissors, crippling blow to the groin. Crippling blow to the groin always seems to win."- Wintermute
While this is good news Kenya is one of the more advanced nation. Also they started doing massive safe sex campaigns. It seems to have worked.
Consider this though... it doesn't make the problem any better... 6.7% is really nothing when we consider the fact that around only 900,000 people have HIV/AIDS in the US. That is less than 1%.
I realize that this is not a new thread and has been going on for a while, but I know a family that works in Africa, in fact two families, and one works in a hospital in Zambia, which has been hit harder than any with aids. I also had a professor that lived in Africa for 12 years and talked a lot with him.
I have different views on Aids in Africa. And it may be the greatest tragedy of our time.
[quote]I realize that this is not a new thread and has been going on for a while, but I know a family that works in Africa, in fact two families, and one works in a hospital in Zambia, which has been hit harder than any with aids. I also had a professor that lived in Africa for 12 years and talked a lot with him.
I have different views on Aids in Africa. And it may be the greatest tragedy of our time.[/quote]
Well, alright, what do you think about that? It's not much use to tell us just the background information without telling us what you actually think about it.
"I need no mask to speak with you. Unlike my brother. I create my own personality. Personality is my medium."
