It seems there is a new generation of HIV tests that are instant, or at least
give results within a minute or so, and use saliva instead of blood. I'm not
sure if the accuracy is as good as the standard blood-based antibody or PCR
tests, or whether it gives false negatives which is unacceptable.
My point is that if reasonably accurate (some false positives okay, no false
negatives are acceptable), then it should be being distributed free or at
nominal cost to people at high risk, e.g. patrons of gay bars, so they and
their partner of the hour can both test themselves and within a minute know
whether they should engage in sex.
Naturally, the AIDS advocates are hysterical over this, such a readily-
available, cheap, and OTC do-it-yourself test cuts them out of the loop.
So many of them are employed in "counseling" (lacking any useful skills)
and currently all HIV tests are accompanied by "counseling" - if you are
HIV- they chant communist propaganda slogans to wear condoms, and if you
are HIV+ they chant communist propaganda slogans to wear condoms, all
while charging social services $500/hour for their expertise.
Also, a readily-available OTC instant test would probably be very
effective in reducing the rate of new HIV infections, and that would
be very bad for their business as well. A multibillion dollar
industry is at stake, every new HIV infectee means another million
dollars a year the gov't dumps on the doctors and counselors and
pharmaceutical companies. If AIDS was cured tomorrow, they would
all be out of jobs, but as long as the epidemic continues to spread
they are literally rolling in dough.
Jordi - 27 Jul 2005 18:07 GMT
will you bite the hand that feeds you...will you stay down on your knees
wrote:
> It seems there is a new generation of HIV tests that are instant, or at
> least
> give results within a minute or so, and use saliva instead of blood.
> I'm not
> sure if the accuracy is as good as the standard blood-based antibody or PCR
> tests, or whether it gives false negatives which is unacceptable.
Ora-sure claims 99% accuracy in 20-60 minutes.
http://oral-aids-test.com/
> My point is that if reasonably accurate (some false positives okay, no
> false
> negatives are acceptable),
I agree if the test is to err it should be that way.
will you bite the hand that feeds you...will you stay down on your knees - 27 Jul 2005 19:19 GMT
"Jordi" <Jordace@happy.org> wrote...
> Ora-sure claims 99% accuracy in 20-60 minutes.
>
> http://oral-aids-test.com/
And did you notice it's intended only for professional medical use, not
home use? Also rather expensive, I was envisioning a test that can be
profitably sold for a dollar or two, and one a little bit quicker (gay
men couldn't possibly wait 20 minutes before having sex). In fact,
just about every argument I've heard against OTC tests is that they
cut the fuckin' counselors out of the loop, not that the tests are any
less accurate than traditional lab tests.
To any leftists who think counseling is so fuckin' important, well
imagine the government sez you're only gonna get one billion dollars
for HIV testing and counseling. You can either choose to spend 50%
to 75% of that finite amount of money on "counseling" those who
were tested using the remaining 25% of the money, or you could spend
the entire billion on testing. Since leftist HIV advocates typically
majored in fluff like Lesbian Eskimo Studies rather than Economics,
they often don't realize that money doesn't grow on trees and tend
to believe the government has an infinite amount of cash to dump on
whatever cause they demand more funding for. With no increase in
funding, they will be forced to analyze the situation and decide
whether the counselors (who don't seem to be effective anyway) are
worth spending most of their fixed budget on (parents often use
allowances to teach their children how to budget, apparently the
left missed that lesson).