 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / June 2005HIV infections pass 1 million...
Today's San Antonio Express-News (Tue, 06-14-2005) newspaper had a local adaptation of the national story that the number of Americans infected with HIV has surpassed 1 million for the first time since the height of the epidemic in the 1980s. I was surprised, as I wasn't aware the number of HIV+ Americans had ever declined since the beginning of the epidemic. Several officials hinted at what I've been saying for the longest time, that the new effective drug treatments substantially increase the total number of people the vector (err, "patient") infects before the virus kills him. Here are some selected passages from the article: ------------ "Medicines that weren't around in 1981 have allowed people infected with the virus to live longer, said Dr. Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention at the National Centers for Disease Control...'While treatment advances have been an obvious godsend to those living with the disease, it presents new challenges for prevention.'" "Dr. Sandra Guerra-Cantu [medical chief of communicable diseases with the San Antonio Metropolitan Health District] agreed better medical care is keeping people with HIV alive longer. If there's a downside, she said, it's that new treatments increase the number of people capable of spreading the infection to others...'Part of what happens with people living longer, more productive lives is they also engage in sexual activities, which is part of normal, human behavior when you feel healthy. That increases the risk of other people being exposed to someone who is HIV-positive,' she said." > Today's San Antonio Express-News (Tue, 06-14-2005) newspaper had a local > adaptation of the national story that the number of Americans infected [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > number of people the vector (err, "patient") infects before the virus > kills him. Here are some selected passages from the article: Here are a few things to think about http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05165/521215.stm The CDC estimates that the overall rate of infection is relatively stable, with about 40,000 new cases reported each year. Men who have sex with men accounted for 45 percent of those living with HIV http://www.foxreno.com/news/4603867/detail.html The latest numbers, from 2003, indicate gay and bisexual men make up 45 percent of those living with HIV ======== Now this is quite a way down from the bad days when I think it was around 80% were males who had sex with men. Also the infection rate being more or less stable according to the CDC, it means the increase of people living with HIV/AIDS is simply because those infected are living longer, not because they are living longer and infecting more people, if that were the case it would be a big increase in the infection rate. ============================== > "Medicines that weren't around in 1981 have allowed people infected with > the virus to live longer, said Dr. Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > healthy. That increases the risk of other people being exposed to > someone who is HIV-positive,' she said." "RamRod Sword of Baal" <RamRod Sword of Baal @truthonly.com> wrote in message... > Now this is quite a way down from the bad days when I think it was around > 80% were males who had sex with men. But the MSM infection rate didn't decline that I'm aware of, simply that the number of non-MSM infections increased. > Also the infection rate being more or less stable according to the CDC, it > means the increase of people living with HIV/AIDS is simply because those > infected are living longer, not because they are living longer and infecting > more people, if that were the case it would be a big increase in the > infection rate. And I've been questioning the CDC numbers, I believe they are manipulated to conceal the fact that the infection rate IS increasing. I've used my stupid crackwhore of a brother as an example, I saw absolutely no difference in his lifestyle before he tested HIV+ as after - he is still out there at the same goddamn gay bar night after night after night, week after week, month after month, year after year, picking up gawd knows how many pieces of disco sex trash for uninformed, unprotected sex. Something is not right about the vague reference to the "stable" new infection rate (I had read 40,000 each year since the early-1990s). Nowhere have I actually found a chart showing the actual number of new infections for each of those years, plus the article mentioned critics who believed many more people were carrying the virus than had actually been tested and diagnosed positive. Oh, and my evidence is the increasing number of NEW infections that are already resistant to one or more anti-HIV drugs, surely proof that those who KNOW they have the virus (because they are taking HIV medications, duh) are engaging in unprotected sex and transmitting it to others. Check it out, but don't expect the CDC to tell you how many such cases there are. "la ignorancia es la fuerza" <bb@minitrue.gov> wrote in message > Here are some selected passages from the article: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > healthy. That increases the risk of other people being exposed to > someone who is HIV-positive,' she said." I would she had said something about the retrovirus changing with each reinfection of the infected. The newly infected are double f.cked with no cure in sight. see my post, re niggers and faggots posted during lunch. "Death" <Death@yourdoor.net> wrote... > I would she had said something about the retrovirus > changing with each reinfection of the infected. Yeah, it is pretty amazing how the virus does it, but bacteria also do it. Viruses are essentially organic machines made of interchangeable parts. You can't really "kill" a virus, first of all it's not really alive and second it can reconstitute itself if damaged. Or rather, you can chop up a virus into nonfunctional components, inject them into the bloodstream, and just by chance (?) the interchangeable components can relink to form a functional virus, or perhaps a completely new virus (the origin of SARS?). In the case of HIV, there are maybe half a dozen (?) strains, each with unique characteristics and resistance to particular drugs. So HIV1 is resistant to only Drug X and HIV2 is resistant to only Drug Y; Patient Z picked up Brian who infected him with HIV1, and a few months later Patient Z picked up Justin who infected him with HIV2. Patient Z then goes on to infect Ben with the new strain resistant to both Drugs X and Y and Ben contracts HIV3/W from Michael and so on... One final thing to consider regarding all this... Not too long ago scientists discovered that viruses can actually transmit segments of its host's DNA between entire species. I think the article said entire genes can be transferred between species this way, and I think it also said they've observed entire chromosomes being transferred. The implications for evolution are enormous, viruses being not a threat to life but actually an essential part of the evolutionary process. Yes, and "most of them don't know they are infected". Alex Funny, that is exactly the same figure the CDC claimed in 1993. Nonsense then, nonsense now. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.