Why do so many Africans have AIDS?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by cavebear


No, it appears to be a relatively new transferred virus to the human population, sometime around the middle of the past century. The virulence of the disease and the absence of any population showing inhereted resistence suggests a recent development.

Researchers traced the first case to a man living in the Belgian Congo in the 1940s.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


Researchers traced the first case to a man living in the Belgian Congo in the 1940s.

hi ,

working for the belgian institute of tropical research in antwerp , .....

a guy who did experiment's on animals and humans , ....



have a nice day

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Willem


In many parts of Africa they can't even afford to buy condoms. If there's even any available.

True. Epidemiologists consider truck drivers and the prostitutes who serve them to have been a major factor in spreading the disease. In the past 30 years Africa has rapidly been undergoing urbanization. The general trend is for rural men to leave their families behind to care for the traditional family plot of land while they go to the city in the hopes of landing a paying job. The men often then acquire secondary families in the city, reducing the money they send back to their families to a trickle. The abandoned rural wife is then left behind to fend for herself and the children by takig up the only source of income available to her: prostitution. The highways of Africa are literally lined by prostitutes.

Frankly condoms aren't very popular in the US either. Epidemiologists have been tracking a trend in the gay community over the past five or six years away from condom use. In the heterosxual community use of condoms is even less frequent. Let's face it, condoms reduce the sensation and spoil the fun. Mind you, I'm not advocating unsafe sex, just stating a fact.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
So we're to blame people who're too ignorant/stupid/culturally programmed to catch the disease, and thus spread it onwards?

erm...I assume you meant they do catch the disease, and if that is what you meant, then yes. If they catch the disease for these reasons, it's still their own fault isn't it? Or would you prefer to blame westerners?

The vast majority of people who catch the disease have acted irresponsibly, should we just pack up, go home, let nature take care of them? Honestly.

Not necessarily, but I certainly think the victims of AIDS are less deserving of treatment than victims of cancer.

And I can't help but detect your usual "AIDS is a punishment from GOD for our WANTON SIN" undertone, Cali.

My usual? When have I ever said anything of the sort?!

Loadsa sex is a good, socially beneficial thing, and your moral system is insane and outdated.

Loadsa sex within a committed, loving relationship is a socially beneficial thing, loadsa sex with multiple partners is not. If that's what you consider an "insane and outdated moral system", then I guess you think monogamy and being free of STDs is the result of the same.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Carried out with alien technology.

Hmm, never considered that.

[Caligastia]

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Carver


You obviously don't even care about the spread of the disease, just blaming "Africans". Some Africans deserve blame, but not most of them.

So if an african transmits aids through risky sex they are not to blame? I suppose you would prefer to blame westerners for the shortcomings of african society.

In South Africa, it is now known through the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that the apartheid regime (at least) stockpiled HIV for possible weaponization. Additionally, clandestine delivery methods were developed including vaginal swabs distributed to blacks that left women more vulnerable to the disease.

No doubt these factors played a part, but most of the problem is the sexual habits of africans themselves.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Dissident
I don't think we should question why it happened, but what is being done about it.

If you don't look at the reasons why it's spreading, how are you going to combat it?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


You say that as if it's a personal moral failing to have promiscuouss, unprotected sex. Today we know that it is reckless and dangerous behavior, but during the period in which the virus spread across Africa and across the world the biggest disease we had to fear was herpes. It only becomes a moral failing after you've been informed how the disease spreads, and it was already widespread across Africa and the world by that point.

You don't have a problem with promiscuous, unprotected sex unless there are diseases involved? You don't see this behaviour as being immoral?! There are many other reasons other than disease why this kind of sexual activity is a problem. There is a lot of emotional hurt involved, not just among the sexually active, but also among the children who are born as a result of this kind of activity. It's a very selfish practice, don't you consider selfishness to be immoral?

[Willem]

Originally posted by David Floyd

Are you trying to make the claim that "promiscuous, unprotected sex with multiple partners" is just as common in the West as it is in Africa? Please.....

And are you trying to make the claim that Africans are sexual brutes that can't control their urges? They're just humans, with the same drives as the rest of us. If you or I were born into their situation, we'd be just as promiscuous.

And it could very well be that people in the west would be just as promiscuous as they are. I take it you're too young to remember the "Sexual Revolution" just before AIDS came on the scene. Everyone was ****ing everyone then, sometimes all at once. That's why the disease spread so rapidly.

They should certainly know it now, and ever since we've been telling them to, which has been for years. I can accept the argument that they didn't know at first, but I can't accept the argument that they've been ignorant for the past 20 years.

So where are they supposed to get the condoms exactly? It's not as if they can just head down to the local drug store. Many communities don't even have a clinic or a doctor, never mind access to products that we take for granted. And there'd be a good possibilty that they couldn't even afford to buy condoms, even if they were available.

[Richard Bruns]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by obiwan18
Che,

Why then is there such a big difference between North Africa and sub-saharan africa in transmission rate? Why does North Africa have such a low rate of AIDS transmission?

Islam, Christianity doesn't murder you for being promiscuous.

Are you suggesting that they should start doing so?

But seriously, I think that blaming religious people for the spread of any STD is horribly unjust. If people did what the religions told them to do, STD´s could not spread.

It is an interesting historical note that strict moral codes are often the result of a big STD epidemic. In the 16th and 17th centuries, during the "Age of Reason," promiscuity was widespread and tolerated in European society. Then syphilis came and decimated that society. It was about that time that religious movements such as the original Puritanism became popular.

In short, abstinence followed by monogamy is an evolutionary advantage, especially for females. Not only is a stable family better for a child´s development, but people who abstain before marriage are more likely to live long enough pass on their genes. Of course, the STD´s have evolved around this by developing long incubation periods, so that the infected people can have kids before they die.

The amount of things in human history that are the result of viral and bacterial evolution is quite impressive. I would not be surprised at all if this epidemic has effects similar to the syphilis epidemic.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Caligastia
If they catch the disease for these reasons, it's still their own fault isn't it? Or would you prefer to blame westerners?

Why blame anyone? It's a disease, no different from smallpox or polio, or malaria. A tiny organism has found a way to use our bodies to sustain itself, with the end result being our deaths. Pointing fingers at anyone serves no purpose at all, except to waste time.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Richard Bruns
I would not be surprised at all if this epidemic has effects similar to the syphilis epidemic.

It already has! I was around when AIDS first came on the scene, and there's been a distinct change in attitude regarding sex and relationships since then, compared to what it was like before.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Willem


Why blame anyone? It's a disease, no different from smallpox or polio, or malaria. A tiny organism has found a way to use our bodies to sustain itself, with the end result being our deaths. Pointing fingers at anyone serves no purpose at all, except to waste time.

AIDS is different because a certain kind of behaviour helps it to spread. Those who engage in this kind of behaviour are therefore helping to spread the disease. Without recognising this, how can we possibly stop the spread of AIDS short of a cure?

[Solly]

Britain is being put at risk of an AIDS epidemic because of the useless Labour government not wanting to appear racist by booting out unwanted cheats.