posted on June 27, 2001 02:59:56 PM new
You arent going to stop a disease like Aids with just innoculation. Education doesnt seem to be working, and innoculation, even if there were such a thing, would cost and who has the money to pay for it? At 1 dollar per shot, that is millions. Do you have a few millions to spare? And what about those who refuse to take the shots even if it was a given that said shots would help (religious beliefs, etc)? So what other way can one stop aids? What? Eh? Whats that? I think you know where Im going next, dont you.
posted on June 27, 2001 03:13:21 PM new
To say that Aids could not be innoculated for worldwide because of cost is silly. As I've already pointed out, and this isn't conjecture, it is possible to stamp out a disease worldwide by innoculating everyone. It has been done. Everybody of my generation has a scar from their smallpox innoculation. My children do not. Smallpox has been eradicated.
Of course, there isn't currently an innoculation which would prevent the contraction of HIV, or AIDS. Before a smallpox innoculation was developed, there wasn't an innoculation for smallpox either.
posted on June 27, 2001 03:14:44 PM new
If there were an innoculation available at $1 per person, the money would appear instantly to make it available to all comers. I'd personally donate, but I suspect that the government wouldn't delay.
However, there's a problem.
There is no vaccine.
Not even close.
Not for $1 million per person.
Not next year, or next decade.
It's a false hope which keeps us from doing what needs to be done.
New victims appear every day, the price we pay for our current attitude.
posted on June 27, 2001 03:16:08 PM new
I agree, the smallpox case shows that we can destroy a disease. From what I understand, smallpox only exists in labratories today. However I'm not sure you can innoculate against a disease that will kill you if you get a cold. Innoculating would mean creating a 'mini-AIDS'. Is that possible? AIDS is different than other diseases.
posted on June 27, 2001 03:54:43 PM new
Of course, there is an answer, the simplest one.
Everyone in the world would have to be tested, and everyone who is HIV positive would have to be killed, immediately, taking care that during killing and subsequent disposition of remains that the infection wasn't spread. This includes men, women and children.
After that first round, everyone would be tested again, since HIV can be contracted yet antibodies not show up for some days (30? 60?) Second round actions, same as the first.
If that was done, for a certain number of cycles, Aids would be, if not completely, nearly completely elimated.
Effective, but who would think that this was a good solution? I wouldn't.
posted on June 27, 2001 03:55:11 PM new
No, Hepburn, I don't know where you are going with the following post.
You state,
"You arent going to stop a disease like Aids with just innoculation. Education doesnt seem to be working, and innoculation, even if there were such a thing, would cost and who has the money to pay for it? At 1 dollar per shot, that is millions. Do you have a few millions to spare? And what about those who refuse to take the shots even if it was a given that said shots would help (religious beliefs, etc)? So what other way can one stop aids? What? Eh? Whats that? I think you know where Im going next, dont you. "
Your attitude seems to be all or nothing.
I think that we should focus on what can be done right now.
Research for a vaccine and a cure can continue.
Drugs can be made available to reduce suffering.
The infection rate can be reduced by making drugs availabel to reduce transmission from parent to child.
Birth control can be provided. Reducing the population vulnerable to this disease is crucial.
Just because there is not a vaccine right now, we can't just throw up our hands and say to hell with it. Or, just because birth control will not be used by every person, we cannot withhold this option from some people who will use it. Neither can we give up on education.
posted on June 27, 2001 04:26:28 PM new"Everyone in the world would have to be tested, and everyone who is HIV positive would have to be killed, immediately, taking care that during killing and subsequent disposition of remains that the infection wasn't spread. This includes men, women and children"
Yes. To the ovens for their sins. I think that your idea could garner a level of support, Donny, at least here.
Lawmakers Battle Over AIDS Funding
By John Whitesides
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With a fight brewing over U.S. funding to fight AIDS (news - web sites) in Africa, Democratic lawmakers on Thursday said the Bush administration needed to boost its commitment to battling the disease around the globe.
ASHINGTON - The Bush administration's top foreign aid official said yesterday he wanted the new Global AIDS and Health Fund to focus almost completely on prevention and include little if any money for anti-retroviral drugs for those living with AIDS.
http://www.globe.com/dailyglobe2/158/nation/Prevention_urged_in_AIDS_fight+.shtml
IN THE FIRST 100 days, the evidence is in that lip service and budget gimmicks will characterize the Bush administration's response to the AIDS epidemic, at home and around the globe. While the words may be draped in compassion, the budget numbers and their consequences are frighteningly conservative.
AIDS victims in Africa plead with Powell for more aid
By Warren P. Strobel
INQUIRER WASHINGTON BUREAU
KAMPALA, Uganda - One by one, the AIDS victims, mostly women, rose to tell their stories - how they were shocked to learn of their infection, how they grieved at losing a husband or a child to the disease, how they worried about their shortened futures.
Then they pleaded with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, envoy from the richest and most powerful nation on earth, for more help from the United States to fight the AIDS epidemic that is killing Africans by the millions. Give us the drugs available in the West, but which are too expensive here, to prolong our lives, they said
http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/05/28/national/POWELL28.htm
RETORIA, South Africa, May 24 — Secretary of State Colin L. Powell discussed Africa's regional conflicts with President Thabo Mbeki tonight but the two officials danced around the even more deadly problem of AIDS, which has struck more people in South Africa than any other country.
posted on June 27, 2001 05:35:38 PM new
I'm not a heartless person, but this might sound heartless. Isolation is necessary to prevent the spread. When there wasn't a vaccination for small pox quarantines were necessary. I believe that if decisions had been swift and objective in the early 80s the quarantine of a few thousand would have saved the lives of several million.
You'd find the fire department of little value if they weren't allowed to operate for fear of water damage when fighting a house fire. That may be a fuzzy analogy but it is the best I can offer.
posted on June 27, 2001 06:36:55 PM new
Helen, once you get the priviledge to know who I am as a person and not as someone who posts in AW and you only see some of who I am and not ALL of who I am, THEN you can pass judgement on my attitude. Until then, back off.
posted on June 27, 2001 06:45:02 PM new
I can see it now...quarantine all the people who have aids. All in one country, perhaps? Or, maybe stuff them all on one island? What happens when they get bored? Make more babies? Then what? Who is supposed to take care of these people? And the children born of them? Us? The world? Yes, if there were a cure, I would donate funds...as much as I could. But am I supposed to do this for the rest of my life, because people REFUSE to take precautions, learn from education, etc? When does it stop being my responsibility to take care of those who dont try to take care of themselves? No, it isnt someones fault that they contracted aids through blood transfusions. But it dam sure isnt my fault that someone chose to have unsafe sex and contracted it. If there were a cure, fine...great. Wonderful. Lets make sure everyone gets innoculated. But there isnt. So now what? Kill them before they pollute the rest of the world? I think not. Education? Nope, that doesnt work either. Ban them to some country like they are walking germs? That seems more cruel. So what is the solution? I see none.
What if a US citizen contracts aids. Do they get to fly to this quarantine and join "the rest"? Leave their families because they "have it"?. How do they get there? What about the ones that dont tell they have it and die quietly? Sure...what a great idea. And MY attitude is bad? Gimme a break.
[ edited by hepburn on Jun 27, 2001 06:47 PM ]
posted on June 27, 2001 06:57:21 PM new
Pat, everyone gets in bad frames of mind and tonight is mine, I guess. I have not attacked or made fun of anyones posts here, agree or disagree because it is their opinion. I am stating what I think, not what SHOULD be thought since we are all different. Im TIRED of the same courtesy not shown to mine. If I get booted for saying so, so be it.
posted on June 27, 2001 09:57:14 PM new
James - I don't know the answer to your question, is it possible to innoculate against a disease like Aids, but as a stupid layperson, my thought would be, why not? We vaccinate against paralytic polio and though it is possible to contract polio through vaccination, the incidence of that is a miniscule 8 - 10 cases per year in America.
posted on June 27, 2001 10:02:01 PM new
Hi Donny. I don't claim to know much about the topic, but the thing about AIDS is that it destroys your immune system. A cold becomes fatal. I don't see how we can inject something into our system that will destroy our mechanism for defense against it and at the same time defeat it.
posted on June 27, 2001 10:13:38 PM new
I don't know either, so these are just ignorant guesses, but it might be possible to vaccinate against HIV not with HIV itself, but something lesser but related, like cowpox was used to vaccinate against smallpox.
posted on June 28, 2001 08:08:58 AM new
"Striking an assertive tone for the Bush
administration on AIDS policy, Secretary of
State Colin L. Powell told the ..."
Sometimes I think Powell speaks for himself and not the Bush administration.
posted on June 28, 2001 08:31:49 AM new
Too bad I cant address Powell as President Powell. He would have been an excellent leader for our country. JMHO.
posted on June 28, 2001 09:50:04 AM new
A link to International Aids Vaccine site. Click on Vaccine Science then check out State of Current Aids Vaccine page.
