I was talking to Ams today about how the media here portrays AIDS as the worst disease in the world. I believe the reason why awareness of AIDS and HIV is being promoted so much in America is simply because that’s the most common and potentially fatal disease here. You see so many ad campaigns raising AIDS/HIV awareness. With slogans like, “Let’s talk about it,” and so many celebrities making such a big deal about AIDS, it’s hard to not notice it. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we shouldn’t fund research for a cure for AIDS, but should it really be out number one priority?
You heard celebrities and organizations asking for people’s donations to help third world countries with the problem of AIDS. But when was the last time you heard people talk about Tuberculosis (TB)? TB causes nearly 2 million deaths a year according to WHO, and about 1 billion people are estimated to be infected with TB between 2000 and 2020. We already have a cure for TB, people in the third world just can’t afford them. And yet you don’t hear people talking about raising the awareness of TB do you? If anyone truly wants to help those in the third world, they take a step back and see that people in the third world are dying from many other diseases (not just AIDS) that we already have cures for. If only some of that money going in to AIDS research were used to provide treatments for other diseases, think about how many people that would save.
The only reason people here are making such a big deal about AIDS/HIV is because we want the cure. Let’s face it, even if we find a cure for AIDS, it isn’t going to help the people in the third world. AIDS will still a problem there, just like how TB and leprosy are still problems there.
How many times have you heard the term “safe sex”? If only people were educated about safe sex we wouldn’t have such a big problem with AIDS right? Wrong! There is no such thing as safe sex. It should be more correctly termed as safer sex. Condoms do not protect you 100%. There is always the chance that condoms might break, or maybe they were defects. Or maybe the condom wasn’t taken off properly and the partner ends up being exposed to the semen anyway. The point is that there is always that chance you will contract an STD. Statistically, you can lower the chance of contracting an STD from someone by using a condom. However, if so many people are sleeping around you can also increase the expected number of STD contractions (even though the probability of contraction is low).
Let’s say that in one instance you have a probability of 1 of contracting STD (since no one uses a condom), and you have about 100 cases of people with STD having sex with someone who doesn’t over a course of 1 month. Then there would be 100 STD contractions for that period of 1 month. Now, you introduce condoms, and they lower the probability of contraction to 0.05, but the number of people with STD having sex with someone who doesn’t increases to 2000. Then the expected number of contractions is 100, just as in the first case.
By promoting “safe sex” you are only feeding people lies that can seriously hurt them. The more people think they can have sex and be immune to STDs, the more people will want to have sex. The only true way to AIDS prevention is to not sleep around so much. Of course, that would just be ridiculous right?
December 2nd, 2006 at 12:23 am
Well I do agree with most of what you had to say. I do believe that charity is now commodified and that those who give money aren’t really thinking about what they’re doing. Funding for research is run by non-profit organizations who pay corporations to find cures. Those who are benefitting are these companies. Even if they do “find a a cure,” what is to say that they will even release it? They’re getting paid enough, and that’s all that capitalism cares about anyway. They already have treatments for AIDS, and medication to prevent pregnant mothers from passing it onto their children. But most people don’t receive these treatments because they can’t afford them. It’s not that I think funding AIDS research is not important, but to think that our money is going to a good cause is a fantasy that people need to wake up from. There is nothing to say that who we want our money to go to is actually getting it. Those who are in power are not the givers, but the corporations. They can take our money and do whatever they please with it because we are giving them that power.
As for the sex thing, I don’t agree completely with you. 80% of AIDS in Africa was spread through sex with a spouse or through inheriting from the mother passing it on during pregnancy. Initially it was spread massively through contaminated medical devices. I agree that “safe sex” should be called “safer sex” to be more accurate, but I don’t agree that the availability or promotion of condoms cause people to have more sex. People have sex regardless, especially with their spouses. So I don’t believe that monogomous sex will prevent AIDS, it will only contain it.
December 2nd, 2006 at 3:03 am
Of course if your partner has AIDS then you’ll contract it as well. And yes some people will have sex even if they don’t have condoms, but maybe people will be more responsible if you tell them that condoms do not prevent AIDS, it merely lowers the chance of contracting it. You’re right, monogomous sex contains AIDS and other STDs, and the alternative will spread it. Isn’t containment (and perhaps eventual elimination) the better choice?
December 2nd, 2006 at 1:17 pm
I’m pointing out that you should be careful with the choice of words you use because it can change the meaning completely. =P