Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / October 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

A new side-effect?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Death - 24 Oct 2006 14:39 GMT
October 24, 2006
Worrisome New Link: AIDS Drugs and Leprosy
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.

With affordable AIDS drugs arriving in many poor countries, experts say a startling and
worrisome side effect has emerged: in some patients, the treatment uncovers a hidden leprosy
infection.

No one knows how widespread the problem is. Only about a dozen cases have been described in
medical literature since the first one was found, in London in 2003. But AIDS specialists in
Brazil, India, Africa, the Caribbean and elsewhere are reporting that some patients on
life-saving antiretroviral drugs are developing painful facial ulcers or losing feeling in
their fingers and toes.

And in the third world, where 300,000 new cases of leprosy were discovered last year and where
38 million are infected with the AIDS virus, the problem will inevitably get worse, experts
say.

"This is just the peak of the iceberg," said Dr. William Levis, who treats leprosy patients at
Bellevue Hospital in New York City. "It's early in the game. Most physicians don't even think
about leprosy, so there's probably much more around than we know."

Dr. Gilla Kaplan, a professor at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and one
of the first to study connections between AIDS and leprosy, agreed.

Antiretroviral treatment, she said, "is going to flush out the silent leprosy by making it
symptomatic."

Because leprosy, a bacterial disease, can be treated with specialized antibiotics that are
supplied free by the Novartis pharmaceutical company, there is little prospect of a worldwide
epidemic or large numbers of deaths. "It's a matter of concern for the individual patients,"
said Dr. Denis Daumerie, who leads the efforts by the World Health Organization to eliminate
leprosy. "It's not a matter of concern for public health."

Still, the disease requires taking multiple pills for six months to two years - an added burden
for people who typically already take three AIDS drugs. And because the problem is little
known, it often takes doctors weeks to figure out what new ill is besetting their AIDS
patients.

Experts say the problem arises when the AIDS drugs cause the immune system to recover. It then
generates new white blood cells that carry the bacteria from old, silent leprosy infections to
the skin of the face, hands and feet.

That is a new twist on a medical paradox that has confounded tropical-disease specialists for
20 years.

In the mid-1980's, as it became clear that AIDS was not primarily a disease of gay American men
but was killing millions of people - men, women and children - in poor countries, many public
health doctors prophesied that it would be a double disaster for those with leprosy.

It seemed a logical assumption since leprosy is caused by a germ from the same family of
waxy-walled bacteria as those that cause tuberculosis and mycobacter avium, two major killers
of AIDS patients. But it proved a false alarm.

"People expected a big surge in leprosy, but it didn't happen," said Dr. Diana N. Lockwood, a
leprosy expert at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

When the predictions did not come true, she said, "we assumed that co-infected people just died
before their leprosy became manifest." The incubation period for the most easily diagnosed form
of leprosy is 8 to 13 years, while the incubation period for AIDS is 8 to 10.

But leprosy in people known to have been already infected did not seem to worsen when those
patients developed AIDS, too, showing that the two diseases can apparently coexist without
reinforcing each other.

So it came as a shock to doctors when AIDS treatment caused hidden cases of leprosy to appear.

The first such patient described in a medical journal was Dr. Lockwood's, a Ugandan exile in
London who was being treated for both tuberculosis and AIDS, and suddenly developed a swollen
lesion on his face.

"It took us a while to realize it was leprosy," Dr. Lockwood said. "Since then, we've seen more
cases in people from Brazil and India."

Depending on symptoms, leprosy is often initially misdiagnosed as arthritis or lupus. Painful
facial lesions, which are less common, can have many causes; in the Uganda man's case, doctors
said, his immune system probably formed nodules around bacteria next to a facial nerve.

Dr. Michael S. Glickman, a bacteriologist at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center who treated
the only co-infected case known in New York, said he too had some difficulty diagnosing his
patient's leprosy.

Dr. Glickman's patient, a man from Burkina Faso, was suffering from advanced AIDS when he first
saw Dr. Glickman six years ago, with a CD4 cell count below 10 (normal is 500 or more). As the
patient recovered on antiretroviral therapy to a CD4 count of 600, he developed a
lighter-colored patch of skin. Dr. Glickman noticed that it was slightly numb to the touch.
Fortunately, he had once visited Dr. Levis's clinic at Bellevue, and made the connection.

"It was so unremarkable that, if I hadn't seen leprosy patients, I wouldn't have known what it
was," he said.

His patient's leprosy was eventually cured, but he had to have an unusual drug regimen because
one typical leprosy drug reacts badly with the protease inhibitors taken by AIDS patients.

Treatment in cities like New York and London is relatively easy, but the real crisis, experts
said, will evolve in poor countries with dual epidemics.

In French Guiana, for example, Dr. Pierre Couppié, chief of dermatology at the Central Hospital
in Cayenne, said he believed that about 1 in every 500 AIDS patients would develop leprosy
lesions soon after starting treatment.

Brazil has the world's highest per-capita leprosy rate and also one of the most effective AIDS
treatment programs in the developing world, and seven Brazilian cases have been mentioned in
medical literature. No countrywide study has been done, but Dr. Patricia D. Deps, a leprosy
expert at the Federal University of Espirito Santo in Brazil, said it was "becoming more and
more common."

"We don't have good numbers, but we think about 2 percent of the leprosy cases in Brazil are
co-infected with H.I.V.," Dr. Deps said. The country that most worries experts is India. Not
long ago, it had 70 percent of the world's leprosy cases. Its official caseload is a bit of a
mystery now. After an aggressive 20-year campaign to find and treat new cases, India officially
declared leprosy "eliminated as a public health issue" last year. However, that statement was
carefully crafted: it means there is a national average of lower than 1 case per 10,000
citizens, which could be as many as 100,000 new cases a year.

At the same time, with about 5.2 million people infected with the AIDS virus, India is poised
to outstrip South Africa as the country with the most AIDS victims. But its epidemic began much
later than South Africa's or Brazil's, and it has been slow to roll out AIDS treatment. As
treatment grows, leprosy may surge along with it.

Other countries with high numbers of leprosy victims are Myanmar, Madagascar, Nepal and
Mozambique.

But there are also great unknowns. "It depends on how good the medical system is," Dr. Lockwood
said. "For example, last year, Congo discovered 11,000 new cases."

Novartis provides the W.H.O. with clofamizine, rifampicin and dapsone, the standard leprosy
regimen, in blister packs and boxes so patients can be handed six months of treatment at a
time, already divided into daily doses.

But treating leprosy in AIDS patients may turn out to be more difficult, doctors say, because
rifampicin cannot be used. And treatment in wealthy countries includes more expensive
anti-inflammatories, as well as thalidomide, which blocks a common inflammatory complication.

Because thalidomide causes severe birth defects, the World Health Organization opposes its use
in the third world.

Doctors have long known that dormant diseases can surge as a weak immune system recovers. The
threat is sometimes called "Haart attacks" - a grim pun on the medical acronym for "highly
active antiretroviral therapy."

The recovering immune system regains its ability to create fevers, flood infected tissue with
white blood cells, break bacteria down into toxic waste products and build nodules around
bacteria it cannot kill.

But in a weakened patient, that inflammatory response itself can be dangerous. For example,
when doctors know that an AIDS patient has tuberculosis, they often try to give TB drugs for
two months to suppress the bacteria before starting antiretrovirals, because the patient's own
immune attack on the tuberculosis bacteria in the lungs can be fatal.

2006 The New York Times Company
brainfart - 24 Oct 2006 20:13 GMT
Death wrote...
> Because leprosy, a bacterial disease, can be treated with specialized antibiotics that are
> supplied free by the Novartis pharmaceutical company...

That's not quite true.  While Novartis provides the drugs, they are not really
donated but rather billed to patients in Western countries.  When Abbot Labs
"donated" billions of dollars worth of Norvir to various African countries, it
compensated for the cost by raising the price 4x in Western countries.  Since
in every Western country HIV treatment is paid for by the state, that means that
American taxpayers are paying for Abbot's generosity.  And to top it off, Abbot
got billions in tax deductions for its charitable contribution, so the U.S.
government winds up paying double what it would have had it simply purchased the
Norvir and gave it to Africa directly.

As for leprosy, well I've long compared AIDS to leprosy in that they're both
gross and make you a pariah.  But instead of trying to combat the drug-induced
leprosy with more drugs, perhaps we should be working to lessen the stigma of
leprosy, so that sufferers won't feel bad about having it.  If the public were
educated about how leprosy wasn't particularly harmful or contagious, and saw
the rich diversity of talent that exists within the worldwide leper community
- combined with strict anti-discrimination statutes - then leprosy could move
into the social mainstream and we wouldn't have to spend billions of dollars
"treating" a manageable condition with toxic drugs.
Death - 24 Oct 2006 21:49 GMT
"brainfart" <fart@brain.org> wrote in message

>  But instead of trying to combat the drug-induced
> leprosy with more drugs, perhaps we should be working to lessen the stigma of
> leprosy, so that sufferers won't feel bad about having it.

LOL, that is what Carter is trying to do with HIV/AIDS but hasn't
the balls to come right out and say it.
GMCarter - 24 Oct 2006 22:32 GMT
>"brainfart" <fart@brain.org> wrote in message
>>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>LOL, that is what Carter is trying to do with HIV/AIDS but hasn't
>the balls to come right out and say it.

What in the world are you dithering about now?

Lessening stigma is fine. Providing treatment is important. It's not
an either/or situation.

LOL...the addlepated monkey puppet: drooling and inchoate. Twitch
away, sweetie!

        George M. Carter
Death - 24 Oct 2006 23:13 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net>

>  " Death" <Death@yourdoor.net>
> >
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Lessening stigma is fine. ...

LOL, see you only played the ignorant fool, you knew
what I was saying, you just don't have the balls to admit it.

That is why you go on and on about lessening the stigma
so faggots won't have to feel guilty about having hiv/aids.

You push meds like that is the answer for past and present behavior
rather than give up the behavior that infected you in the first place.

The reason people don't get/have hiv/aids is they do not engage in a specific behavior
that causes one to acquire the dis-ease.
GMCarter - 25 Oct 2006 12:30 GMT
>"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net>
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>That is why you go on and on about lessening the stigma
>so faggots won't have to feel guilty about having hiv/aids.

Oh! I see. You feel people SHOULD feel guilty about being sick?

Well, that's consistent with trying to share the agony that afflicts
you.

>You push meds like that is the answer for past and present behavior
>rather than give up the behavior that infected you in the first place.

No, I think treating an illness is a good idea.

Even treating heart disease, despite the fact that behavior (e.g.,
diet issues) may have lead to it.

People eat. People f.ck. It's life. I'm not hung up about living and
enjoying life--nor about the mortality that is all of our lot.

Stigma does not help. It adds to fear and discomfort. I'd bet that it
worsens outcomes in terms of both individual progression as well as
potential for further spread of HIV.

>The reason people don't get/have hiv/aids is they do not engage in a specific behavior
>that causes one to acquire the dis-ease.

Not in the slightest. People can inject drugs or have anal or vaginal
sex (the highest risk activities for transmission) without becoming
infected. Clean needles, condom use, for example are the harm
reduction techniques that reduce risk dramatically.

Abstinence from these activities can indeed prevent infection. No
question.

But unless you subscribe to the Bushit of "abstinence only" idiocy,
which has never been shown to work, and act like human behavior is
controllable by simple-minded approaches, you're merely trying to make
a case to justify your own efforts at oppression, maintaining stigma
and being a tired, agonized bigot.

        George M. Carter
Death - 25 Oct 2006 15:27 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

> Not in the slightest. People can inject drugs or have anal or vaginal
> sex (the highest risk activities for transmission) without becoming
> infected. Clean needles, condom use, for example are the harm
> reduction techniques that reduce risk dramatically.

Now you claim that clean needles and con-dumbs are meds?

> Abstinence from these activities can indeed prevent infection. No
> question.

and that is what I said.

> But unless you subscribe to the Bushit of "abstinence only" idiocy,

I said people who do not engage in risky behavior do not aquire
the hiv/aids.
brainfart - 25 Oct 2006 16:21 GMT
Death wrote...
> "GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Now you claim that clean needles and con-dumbs are meds?

What GMCarter says is technically true, but completely unrealistic
because you cannot expect a bunch of cracked-out sex twinkies to
have the presence of mind to follow those precautions.  The do-good
left has some illusion that if enough trillions of dollars are spent
chanting propaganda slogans at mentally-deficient transexual crack
whores that they will suddenly become responsible and take elaborate
precautions to avoid infecting themselves or others.

>>But unless you subscribe to the Bushit of "abstinence only" idiocy,
>
> I said people who do not engage in risky behavior do not aquire
> the hiv/aids.

And you are correct.  Under various aliases I mentioned my abstinence
because of the HIV epidemic.  I correctly assumed that almost every
gay male in America already was infected with the virus and decided
the stress of worrying about every sexual encounter wasn't worth it.
My gay brother (evidence for the gay gene) decided that the epidemic
was exaggerated because they wanted to spoil gays' fun, and proceeded
to buttfuck half the western hemisphere until he caught AIDS, and now
he's working on buttfucking the other half to give it to them.

To whoever praises the glories of condoms, are you willing to have
anal sex with my HIV+ brother if he wears a condom?  I am pretty sure
that your faith in condoms will falter as his herpes- and wart-covered
penis begins to penetrate your sphincter.  Then I will proceed to
chant a whole bunch of statistics at you to prove that there is no
risk, and poo-pooh your concerns as unfounded as possibly symptomatic
of an obsessive paranoia disorder needing treatment with Prozac and
Ritalin.
Death - 25 Oct 2006 17:39 GMT
"brainfart" <fart@brain.org> wrote in message

> > "GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
> >
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> What GMCarter says is technically true, but completely unrealistic...

In the U.S. faggots account for 50-70% of new hiv/aids cases, whereas only 5-15% are caused by
heterosexual contact, one-third of which are from heterosexuals having contact with an I.V.
drug abuser.

This is out of a population where faggots doesn't represent more than 5% of the population.

There isn't a biological reason to cause hiv/aids in faggots.

This is the (behavior) of the people involved. When one takes this position, faggots come out
of the closet to shout homophobe or bigot but the fact is no matter how much a faggot whines,
these numbers still represent faggots that are infected.

As I've shown on earlier threads, education has NOT resulted in a decrease in risky behaviors
in the faggot, rather over the past several years  faggots having unprotected sex increased
from 1/3 to 1/2!

My question to you is: If the personal behavior of faggots and IV drug abusers is not to blame
for their over-representation in the hiv/aids statistics, what is?

No answer? Then I'll ask this:

If education/clean needles is the answer to the problem, why isn't it decreasing the people
committing risky  behaviors in high risk areas like San Francisco and New York?
GMCarter - 26 Oct 2006 10:31 GMT
snip
>My question to you is: If the personal behavior of faggots and IV drug abusers is not to blame
>for their over-representation in the hiv/aids statistics, what is?
>
>No answer? Then I'll ask this:

I have an answer--your question has stigma and oppression embedded in
it.  You want to "blame" behaviors.

That's the kind of cultural nonsense that creates the environment
where people want to hide their activities because they feel they're
wrong, rather than try to engage in activities that are honest, open
and reduce risk.

HIV doesn't give a sh.t about your twisted hatred. It infects people
of any sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious background or lack
thereof, etc.

Indeed, lesbians have had a traditionally low level of HIV prevalence.

>If education/clean needles is the answer to the problem, why isn't it decreasing the people
>committing risky  behaviors in high risk areas like San Francisco and New York?

What makes you think such programs aren't having an effect?

        George M. Carter

****
These data are a bit old but were at a time when, despite a lot of
struggle against the authorities, needle exchange and harm reduction
programs were flourishing:

D C Des Jarlais, M Marmor, P Friedmann, S Titus, E Aviles, S Deren, L
Torian, D Glebatis, C Murrill, E Monterroso, and S R Friedman. HIV
incidence among injection drug users in New York City, 1992-1997:
evidence for a declining epidemic. Am J Public Health. 2000 March;
90(3): 352-359.

Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, NY 10003, USA.

Small right arrow pointing to: This article has been cited by other
articles in PMC.
Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We assessed recent (1992-1997) HIV incidence in the large
HIV epidemic among injection drug users in New York City. METHODS:
Data were compiled from 10 separate studies (N = 4979), including 6
cohort studies, 2 "repeat service user" studies, and 2 analyses of
voluntary HIV testing and counseling services within drug treatment
programs. RESULTS: In the 10 studies, 52 seroconversions were found in
6344 person-years at risk. The observed incidence rates among the 10
studies were all within a narrow range, from 0 per 100 person-years at
risk to 2.96 per 100 person-years at risk. In 9 of the 10 studies, the
observed incidence rate was less than 2 per 100 person-years at risk.
The weighted average incidence rate was 0.7 per 100 person-years at
risk. CONCLUSIONS: The recent incidence rate in New York City is quite
low for a high-seroprevalence population of injection drug users. The
very large HIV epidemic among injection drug users in New York City
appears to have entered a "declining phase," characterized by low
incidence and declining prevalence. The data suggest that very large
high-seroprevalence HIV epidemics may be "reversed."
Death - 26 Oct 2006 16:22 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

>  " Death" <Death@yourdoor.net>

> >My question to you is: If the personal behavior of faggots and IV drug abusers is not to blame
> >for their over-representation in the hiv/aids statistics, what is?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> I have an answer--your question has stigma and oppression embedded in
> it.  You want to "blame" behaviors.>

That's it? That's your answer, stigma. Wrong- any so called stigma attached
to personal behavior, happened after the fact.

Once again you run away from the idea of personal responsibility.
The question asked was, if not PB then what accounts for the percentages,
you passed.

> That's the kind of cultural nonsense that creates the environment
> where people want to hide their activities because they feel they're
> wrong, rather than try to engage in activities that are honest, open
> and reduce risk.

Damn, my question did all that huh?

> HIV doesn't give a sh.t about your twisted hatred. It infects people
> of any sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious background or lack
> thereof, etc.

And the caveat you always omit, ...that indulge in specific behavior.

> Indeed, lesbians have had a traditionally low level of HIV prevalence.

Why is that Carter?

> >If education/clean needles is the answer to the problem, why isn't it decreasing the people
> >committing risky  behaviors in high risk areas like San Francisco and New York?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> struggle against the authorities, needle exchange and harm reduction
> programs were flourishing:

Abstract:  Studies of HIV seroprevalence among IV drug users show wide variation among cities
in the United States and Europe. The time that the virus was introduced into the IV drug using
group within the city is one factor in explaining these differences; other cross-city factors
have yet to be identified. Once HIV has been introduced into the IV drug use group within a
particular geographic area, there is the possibility of rapid spread up to seroprevalence
levels of 50% or greater. Thus, a currently low seroprevalence rate should not be seen as a
stable situation.
GMCarter - 26 Oct 2006 23:57 GMT
>"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>That's it? That's your answer, stigma. Wrong- any so called stigma attached
>to personal behavior, happened after the fact.

You were the person that wants to "blame" people. Yep. That's stigma.
Before or after the fact.

>Once again you run away from the idea of personal responsibility.

Not in the slightest.

But then I don't think "personal responsibility" means operating out
of a sense of guilt or fear but rather positive attributes such as
honor and dignity and decency.

>The question asked was, if not PB then what accounts for the percentages,
>you passed.

PB?

>> That's the kind of cultural nonsense that creates the environment
>> where people want to hide their activities because they feel they're
>> wrong, rather than try to engage in activities that are honest, open
>> and reduce risk.
>
>Damn, my question did all that huh?

Exactly.

Death, you're the one with the most horrible disease I can imagine. It
must be really grindingly horrible to be you.

        George M. Carter
Death - 27 Oct 2006 01:35 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

> >>  " Death" <Death@yourdoor.net>
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> You were the person that wants to "blame" people. Yep. That's stigma.
> Before or after the fact.

Not so, and the question stands. If the (PB) personal behavior of faggots and drug abusers
isn't the blame for their over-representation in the hiv/aids statistics, what is?

OK so it isn't the water, it isn't the air, it isn't the trees and it sure isn't any stigma.
Stigma is not infected with any dis-ease to be spread amoung the population.

You blameing stigma is likened to the thief that blames the cop that busted him.

> >Once again you run away from the idea of personal responsibility.
>
> Not in the slightest.

Then you'll have no problem answering the question.

> But then I don't think "personal responsibility" means operating out
> of a sense of guilt or fear but rather positive attributes such as
> honor and dignity and decency.

Honor, dignity nor decency has anything to do with responsibility
for the dis-ease you carry.

> >The question asked was, if not PB then what accounts for the percentages,
> >you passed.
>
> PB?

personal behavior

> >> That's the kind of cultural nonsense that creates the environment
> >> where people want to hide their activities because they feel they're
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Exactly.

People hide activities they are ashamed of, true.
They fear what they know about themselves.

> Death, you're the one with the most horrible disease I can imagine.

Yes I imagine you would think so. My dis-ease is honesty, dignity
and decency.

>It must be really grindingly horrible to be you.

When you wear rose-colored glasses
and live in denial, I'm sure you would think that.
brainfart - 26 Oct 2006 19:05 GMT
Death wrote...
> If education/clean needles is the answer to the problem, why isn't it decreasing the people
> committing risky  behaviors in high risk areas like San Francisco and New York?

I support the needle exchanges, if only because they encourage IV
drug users to return the needle instead of leaving it laying on
the ground like they usually do.  Every time I use on of those
green automatic public toilets in San Francisco there is a used
needle laying on the floor, though I suppose it still is better
than tossing it in the trash slot to await the poor janitor and
prick him when he cleans it out.

What GMCarter and others is that most of the people at risk for
HIV don't give a f.ck.  They don't give a f.ck about themselves
and they don't give a f.ck about others, and they are set on a
path of self-destruction and if they didn't care about catching
the disease they don't care about giving it to others.  There
are a few truly decent people who do get infected (usually by
trusting someone who turned out to be trash), but the vast
majority of HIV patients are garbage.
Death - 26 Oct 2006 19:39 GMT
"brainfart" <fart@brain.org> wrote in message

>   Death wrote...
> > If education/clean needles is the answer to the problem, why isn't it decreasing the people
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> drug users to return the needle instead of leaving it laying on
> the ground like they usually do.

my reply would have been:

>  They don't give a f.ck about themselves
> and they don't give a f.ck about others, and they are set on a
> path of self-destruction and if they didn't care about catching
> the disease they don't care about giving it to others.
GMCarter - 26 Oct 2006 23:59 GMT
snip
>What GMCarter and others is that most of the people at risk for
>HIV don't give a f.ck.  

Wrong yet again!

I'm perfectly well aware that there are people that don't give a f.ck
about life, especially at some periods of life.

I'd rather live in a society that collectively gave enough of a f.ck
to provide adequate resources to help these people and show them some
folks do care.

It's not just ethically responsible....it's an investment and modest
use of resources that is MUCH less costly than some of the possible
alternatives (illness, burdens on the healthcare system, prison, etc.)

        George M. Carter
Death - 27 Oct 2006 02:02 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

> Wrong yet again!
>
> I'm perfectly well aware that there are people that don't give a f.ck
> about life, especially at some periods of life.

Like knowing you are hiv/aids positive ?
Perhaps waking up every day knowing you are hiv/aids positive.
Maybe going to bed at night knowing you are hiv/aids positive.

Oh yeah, I can see them caring about picking up their used con-dumbs
or needles so others would not become infected.

> I'd rather live in a society that collectively gave enough of a f.ck
> to provide adequate resources to help these people and show them some
> folks do care.

That is just about a socialist idea, liberal to be sure.
The place you envision sounds strikenly like Oz
somewhere over the rainbow, where blue-birds fly, LOL

> It's not just ethically responsible....it's an investment and modest
> use of resources that is MUCH less costly than some of the possible
> alternatives (illness, burdens on the healthcare system, prison, etc.)

Concentration camps are being built as I type.
GMCarter - 27 Oct 2006 10:44 GMT
>"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>>
>Like knowing you are hiv/aids positive ?

Not in the slightest. Most people I know who become aware of becoming
HIV+ are usually in shock. They are NOT necessarily at a point of not
giving a damn about life.

>Perhaps waking up every day knowing you are hiv/aids positive.
>Maybe going to bed at night knowing you are hiv/aids positive.

Most people with HIV I know have learned to live with the disease.
Most honorably as anyone can be in the face of the increased risk of
illness or death.

Certainly more than a cowardly wannabe cocksucker.

        George M. Carter
Death - 27 Oct 2006 17:45 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

> Most people with HIV I know have learned to live with the disease.

>I'm perfectly well aware that there are people that don't give a f.ck
>about life, ...

>George M. Carter

>Certainly more than a cowardly wannabe cocksucker.

>George M. Carter

Come now, you do yourself an injustice.
I'd bet you are a practiced cocksucker with no fear of aids
what-so-ever. You can always run to the meds you push
for your salvation.
Patrick Ashley Meuser"-Bianca" - 27 Oct 2006 01:48 GMT
Case in point.  The disease follows the cause.  It should exist under the
light of a more clinical light true, but also as the aggregate can be safely
interpreted for the point of incursion by which the initial events of its
progeny has evolved indeed.

Partick Ashley Meuser"-Bianca"
Cyberneticist

> "brainfart" <fart@brain.org> wrote in message
>>
[quoted text clipped - 40 lines]
> committing risky  behaviors in high risk areas like San Francisco and New
> York?
GMCarter - 26 Oct 2006 10:24 GMT
>  Death wrote...
>> "GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>because you cannot expect a bunch of cracked-out sex twinkies to
>have the presence of mind to follow those precautions.

You're wrong. People can and do make better choices.

Indeed, the bigger risk of all the "recreational" things out there for
forgetting about condoms is alcohol.

The problem is that we do not have NEARLY enough programs to help
people get off and stay off drugs. Those programs are FAR more cost
effective (and humane) than shoving people into the multi-billion
dollar prison system.

The problem with you knee-jerk right wing idiots is that you think
with your brain stem and don't apply the kind of sensible fiscally
conservative logic to social issues and problems like this that save
taxpayers more money. Like treatment on demand and a single payer
healthcare system. These are demonstrably and dramatically more
economically sensible than the status quo.

        George M. Carter
Death - 26 Oct 2006 16:33 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

> You're wrong. People can and do make better choices.

Than the choices they made and now regret?
Lets call that personal responsibility for personal behavior.

>Indeed, the bigger risk of all the "recreational" things
> out there for forgetting about condoms is alcohol.

Lets call that personal responsibility for personal behavior.

>The problem is that we do not have NEARLY enough programs to help
>people get off and stay off drugs.

There we go, someone elses fault, LOL.
GMCarter - 27 Oct 2006 00:02 GMT
>"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>
>> You're wrong. People can and do make better choices.
>
>Than the choices they made and now regret?

You think people can go through life living some fantasy angelic life
at the end of which there will be no regrets? Death is the biggest
regret. Death will happen to you and I can imagine what kind of
regrets you may have.

snip
>>The problem is that we do not have NEARLY enough programs to help
>>people get off and stay off drugs.
>
>There we go, someone elses fault, LOL.

Not in the slightest. It's talking about how we live as a community.
And where we apply resources. And where that can help to reduce other
overall burdens and costs to the community, as well as being
beneficial to the individual.

        George M. Carter
GMCarter - 26 Oct 2006 10:20 GMT
>"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>Now you claim that clean needles and con-dumbs are meds?

LOL. They are harm reduction tools.

>> Abstinence from these activities can indeed prevent infection. No
>> question.
>
>and that is what I said.

Really? You rather burble along in a stew of hate and spew inchoate
nonsense.

>> But unless you subscribe to the Bushit of "abstinence only" idiocy,
>
>I said people who do not engage in risky behavior do not aquire
>the hiv/aids.

And I noted that humans that have sex can reduce the risk of high-risk
activities through use of condoms and clean needles.

        George M. Carter
Death - 26 Oct 2006 16:50 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message

> And I noted that humans that have sex can reduce the risk of high-risk
> activities through use of condoms and clean needles.

There are plenty of humans that do not require the need for con-dumbs
or clean needles.

HIV Complicates Africa's
New 'Super TB' (XDR TB)
By Sarah McGregor
10-17-6

PRETORIA (Reuters) - Highly drug-resistant tuberculosis could become a major killer in AIDS-hit
parts of Africa where governments have been slow to roll out TB control programmes, the World
Health Organization said on Tuesday.

Urgent efforts are underway to redirect donor funds to fight virulent strains of TB, known as
extremely drug resistant or XDR-TB, after an outbreak in South Africa that has killed at least
74 people since January 2005.

Most of those cases were among HIV-positive people whose immune systems were already weakened
by the AIDS virus.

"The XDR-TB crisis will not in most parts of the world be solved unless HIV is properly
considered. We have for now been paying lip service," Teguest Guerma, of the HIV department of
WHO, told health officials at a TB workshop in Johannesburg.

"Underlying HIV will add significant challenges to the clinical response." Tuberculosis is the
leading killer of AIDS patients and both diseases are on the rise in southern Africa.

Tuberculosis could have a disastrous impact in sub-Saharan Africa -- the hardest hit region in
the global AIDS epidemic -- which has a poor health infrastructure.

The best way to fight the dual problems of HIV/AIDS and TB is to overlap strategies to combat
them, said experts.

A big hurdle is that no new medical antibiotics for TB have been developed in four decades and
it will be at least 2020 before new treatments are widely available.

It could also be difficult to attract new funds as the $4.7 billion required by the Global Plan
to Stop TB each year consistently comes up short, said officials.

However, representatives from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria have
agreed to shift existing funds to combat XDR-TB and the U.S.-backed PEPFAR is considering a
similar request, said Paul Nunn of the WHO.

Government representatives from Swaziland, Lesotho, Namibia, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Mauritius, and
Mozambique, and WHO officials and scientists were invited to attend the two-day workshop by
South African Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang.

The minister was unable to attend because she is in hospital being treated for what is being
described as a lung disease.

Patricia A. Doyle DVM, PhD
Bus Admin, Tropical Agricultural Economics
Univ of West Indies

Please visit my "Emerging Diseases" message board at:
http://www.emergingdisease.org/phpbb/index.php
Also my new website:
http://drpdoyle.tripod.com/
GMCarter - 27 Oct 2006 00:03 GMT
>"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>There are plenty of humans that do not require the need for con-dumbs
>or clean needles.

Quite true and quite irrelevant.

Are you like a Nancy Reagan puppet?
Death - 27 Oct 2006 02:10 GMT
"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net>

>  Death" <Death@yourdoor.net>
> >
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Quite true

> and quite irrelevant.

Not to the un-infected
Dildeaux - 26 Oct 2006 17:52 GMT
>>"brainfart" <fart@brain.org> wrote in message
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> What in the world are you dithering about now?

He might be dithering about those whose meal ticket depends
on sickness, misery and, excuse the pun, death.
Patrick Ashley Meuser"-Bianca" - 27 Oct 2006 01:43 GMT
Why.  There should've been more focued on the reversion of the virus into
more prototypical forms far before this, since 1998AD, its been imagined
that nano-magnetic transfusion was possible, but what were the materials.

Patrick Ashley Meuser"-Bianca"
Cyberneticist

>  Death wrote...
>> Because leprosy, a bacterial disease, can be treated with specialized
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
> dollars
> "treating" a manageable condition with toxic drugs.
Dildeaux - 26 Oct 2006 17:50 GMT
> October 24, 2006
> Worrisome New Link: AIDS Drugs and Leprosy
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> uncovers a hidden leprosy
> infection.

What, heterosexuals with AIDS? Leprotic Heterosexuals!

Rate this thread:






 
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.