Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / April 2004
DISSIDENT WINS IN RECORD LANDSLIDE
|
|
Thread rating:  |
PaulKing - 19 Apr 2004 01:05 GMT South Africa's Mbeki vows to deliver after record poll landslid
Sat Apr 17, 5:37 PM ET
JOHANNESBURG (AFP) - President Thabo Mbeki vowed to carry on "reconstruction and development" in South Africa as final results confirmed his party had won a record 70 percent AFP
The African National Congress (news - web sites) took 69.68 percent of vote and improved its standing in all nine of the country's provinces, the Independent Electoral Commission said Saturday.
The main opposition Democratic Alliance, led by Tony Leon, a tough-talking white, was way behind with 12.37 percent of the ballot and short of the 17 percent he had earlier promised.
The Zulu-based Inkatha Freedom Party was in third place with 6.97 percent.
Mbeki, set to take office for a second and last term following the country's third elections after the demise of apartheid, said Wednesday's peaceful elections were a sign that the nascent democracy had matured.
"I have no hesitation in saying that these elections were truly free and fair," he said at a glitzy ceremony where the results were formally announced.
He thanked South Africans "for their refusal to be provoked or incited to engage in acts of violence and intimidation," saying they had "set a benchmark in terms of what our country must always do to respect the diversity of opinion."
He also urged the new lawmakers "as we begin our second decade of liberation (to) know that what the electorate expects of them is to do everything in their power to secure a better life for all our people."
"I wish them success in their important work that must help our country to register new advances ... as we continue to pursue the goals of reconstruction and development."
Although Mbeki injected some health into the economy in his first term, poverty is still an acute problem and unemployment hovers between 40 and 50 percent
At a victory party a day earlier, Mbeki promised his countrymen that he would deliver on ambitious electoral promises: to create one million new jobs in five years; to spend 100 billion rand (15 billion dollars / 12 billion euros) to improve infrastructure and to halve poverty and unemployment by 2014.
Brigalia Bam, the chairwoman of the Independent Electoral Commission Saturday said the polls were "reflective of the politcal maturity of all South Africans.
"In the runup we saw robust competition," she said, adding that campaigning this this was "issue -driven, no more relying on the roles that the parties had played" during the liberation era.
The electoral commission said turnout for Wednesday's vote at 76.73 percent was much lower than the previous two democratic elections of 1994 and 1999.
Of the advances made in the provinces, the ANC's biggest gain was in the Zulu heartland of KwaZulu-Natal, the key prize in the polls, which it had vowed to wrest this time, but failed to get an outright majority.
The ANC bagged nearly 47 percent of the votes in the eastern province, an eight percent improvement over its 1999 tally.
Its traditional rival, the Zulu nationalist IFP gained 36.8 percent of the ballot. But the IFP's main coalition partner in the province, the Democratic Alliance, notched up 8.3 percent of the vote.
IFP spokesman Musa Zondi on Saturday said his party was open to the idea of co-governing the volatile province with the ANC, where the runup to the 1994 has seen some 12,000 people being killed in violence between ANC and IFP supporters.
The main loser nationwide was the New National Party, a reincarnation of the party which formed the backbone of apartheid South Africa, which got only 1.65 percent of the vote.
South Africa's 400-seat assembly will convene next week to elect the new president, who is almost certain to be Mbeki.
The presidential inauguration is scheduled for April 27 as the country holds festivities marking the 10th anniversary of the end of apartheid with foreign dignitaries invited to attend.
PaulKing - 19 Apr 2004 01:47 GMT Mbeki questions Aids stats 08/02/2004 21:57 - (SA) Jan-Jan Joubert and Willem Jordaan
Cape Town - President Thabo Mbeki on Sunday questioned the extent of HIV/Aids deaths, because of the absence of statistics on the causes of death in South Africa.
After Mbeki did not focus on HIV/Aids and Zimbabwe in his State of the Nation address on Friday, he was bombarded with questions on these issues in an interview with the SABC on Sunday. In his reaction, Mbeki said he would address the two issues in a second State address after the election. Reacting to a question on his personal roll in government's fight against the pandemic, Mbeki indicated that deputy president Jacob Zuma was handling the matter on government's behalf. He said that the allocation to HIV/Aids in the budget showed that "few countries were doing as much as South Africa".
When asked whether it wouldn't help if he personally showed more empathy with sufferers of the disease, Mbeki retorted that he had said a lot about the issue and that government's stance on the matter remained unchanged.
"Tuberculosis is also a big problem. My doctors say there is a diabetes epidemic. Why does nobody talk about it? There are many health issues."
When it was put to him that these diseases were treatable while HIV/Aids was not, he said: "No, that is not the reason". Interviewer Redi Diareko quoted statistics of the World Health Organisation and exclaimed: "This is our country about which these findings were made. You are our leader ..." Mbeki responded that the WHO could speak for itself, but that South Africa did not have reliable statistics on causes of deaths. He said he wanted something more than mathematical calculations - information on death certificates.
More at... news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Politics/0,6119,2-7-12_1480787,00.html
Uiopp - 19 Apr 2004 02:55 GMT In article <50e677768e9de71e7e0ff2d0b5f66ce8@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>,
> South Africa's Mbeki vows to deliver after record poll landslid Yes, but I thought he'd disassociated himself from the AIDS dissidents? Isn't it dishonest to continue calling him a dissident?
PaulKing - 19 Apr 2004 07:04 GMT No. He took a 'soft' approach during the election like any good politician but is firmly dissident.
Dr. Resnick is on his way to SA at this very moment at his invitation. With the election over I think you will see just how committed a dissident he really is.
You are in for a shock!
Uiopp - 19 Apr 2004 07:13 GMT In article <838264ef624eab37471bdee01df91fa1@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>,
> No. He took a 'soft' approach during the election like any good politician > but is firmly dissident. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You are in for a shock! You have independent verification of this? You have a link to a news story stating that Rasnick is going to South Africa at Mbeki's invitation, or something of that order?
PaulKing - 19 Apr 2004 20:15 GMT "You have independent verification of this? You have a link to a news story stating that Rasnick is going to South Africa at Mbeki's invitation, or something of that order"
You will read all about it in the next few weeks. I know what is taking place but cannot disclose more information now.
Before rushing to challenge my assertions I suggest you wait and see (to avoid being proved wrong).
Best wishes,
Paul
Uiopp - 19 Apr 2004 23:08 GMT In article <a39f4628cd999f43495b0c00e887d573@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>,
> "You have independent verification of this? You have a link to a news story > stating that Rasnick is going to South Africa at Mbeki's invitation, or [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Paul If you actually have friends among dissident scientists, had it occured to you that you are not doing them a good turn, or winning any friends on this group, by mindlessly spamming here? Repeating the same assertions about AIDS, over and over, with little qualification or substantiation, just makes you look like an a.shole.
PaulKing - 20 Apr 2004 00:19 GMT "with little qualification or substantiation"
You must be kidding. Almost every post is well referenced.
I am not here to win friends but present the facts consored by the media in the name of 'political correctness'.
My posts are not spam but an attempt at balanced information.
Gary Stein - 20 Apr 2004 00:39 GMT > My posts are spam, not an attempt at balanced information. There isn't that what you really meant to write Paul? Certainly that statement represents what you have posted to MHA so far anyway.
Gary Stein
PaulKing - 20 Apr 2004 01:33 GMT From South Africa (Stop press).
"We met with a number of ANC officials and doctors who represented a wide spectrum of views and beliefs on HIV and AIDS. One well-placed member of the ANC, who is close to the president, assured me that after the election very dramatic actions will be taken that should shakeup AIDS Inc.
I was not given the specifics but there is a good chance that the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel will be reconvened".
Dr. Resnick, Phd
Uiopp - 20 Apr 2004 06:42 GMT In article <60a166424b4bf8c198060e17bf4ba07b@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>,
> From South Africa (Stop press). > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Dr. Resnick, Phd Link? Source?
Jordan - 20 Apr 2004 18:24 GMT > In article > <60a166424b4bf8c198060e17bf4ba07b@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Link? Source? Enough already!
With that idiot Mbeki anything is possible.
PaulKing - 20 Apr 2004 21:03 GMT "With that idiot Mbeki anything is possible."
Seems that 'idiot' has the total support of the largest nation in Africa.
Moira de Swardt - 22 Apr 2004 15:51 GMT "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message
> "With that idiot Mbeki anything is possible."
> Seems that 'idiot' has the total support of the largest nation in Africa. Because the electorate is too stupid - ok, let's be charitable - politically uneducated due to the evil apartheid regime - to think about what it is really voting for.
Moira, the Faerie Godmother
Uiopp - 20 Apr 2004 23:44 GMT > > In article > > <60a166424b4bf8c198060e17bf4ba07b@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > With that idiot Mbeki anything is possible. I don't think Mbeki is an idiot. On the contrary, he's obviously a very smart man. He may be wrong about AIDS, but it's easy to be mislead, given that the issues involved are highly complicated.
PaulKing - 20 Apr 2004 21:01 GMT "Link? Source?"
Private communication (extract). You will have to take my word for it, or not, as you wish.
Gary Stein - 20 Apr 2004 21:25 GMT NOT
> "Link? Source?" > > Private communication (extract). You will have to take my word for it, or > not, as you wish. Uiopp - 20 Apr 2004 23:55 GMT > NOT > > > "Link? Source?" > > > > Private communication (extract). You will have to take my word for it, or > > not, as you wish. This is beside the point. Whether this man's claim about Rasnick is bullshit or not, we will know shortly. What surprises me is whether, if it turns out to be right, someone who is a evidently a serious scientist has some sort of connection with a usenet-abusing a.shole, and one who should know very well that he isn't advancing his cause by behaving like this (it would help if he would tell us what sort of connection he has - is he a personal friend of Rasnick, a friend of a friend, or what? But he dodges the question).
Gary Stein - 21 Apr 2004 00:12 GMT > > NOT > > > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message news:ae5334347ca30b57ee624e04e2e7c0cb@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com...
> > > "Link? Source?" > > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > is he a personal friend of Rasnick, a friend of a friend, or what? But > he dodges the question). Well Rasnick has had several so called 'dissidents' claim to know him in posts to MHA and he has received many invitations to post on MHA over the years.
While he has never in my recollection posted to MHA neither has he acknowledged any connection between himself and the 'dissident' of month when he has received emails questioning the dissidents statements on his behalf.
The same can be said for Duesburg, Faber,or Regush. I have exchanged emails with Faber and Regush over the years and personally invited them to post to MHA but neither of them accepted the invitations, I guess they did not relish the idea of having to support there statements with references rather then being free to spout the disinformation that seems to be their trademark when it comes to HIV and Aids issues.
Gary Stein Gary Stein
Uiopp - 21 Apr 2004 01:20 GMT > > > NOT > > > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > Gary Stein > Gary Stein That is the ungenerous interpretation you could put on events. It's more likely that they don't wish to become involved in something that would swiftly degenerate into an exchange of insults and personal attacks, as discussions about highly charged and controversial issues usually do on usenet.
Moira de Swardt - 22 Apr 2004 15:49 GMT "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message
> From South Africa (Stop press).
> "We met with a number of ANC officials and doctors who represented a wide > spectrum of views and beliefs on HIV and AIDS. One well-placed member of > the ANC, who is close to the president, assured me that after the election > very dramatic actions will be taken that should shakeup AIDS Inc.
> I was not given the specifics but there is a good chance that the > Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel will be reconvened".
> Dr. Resnick, Phd It certainly sounds as if the government is trying to get out of having to provide the ARVs it allowed people to believe they were getting during elections. Why does this not surprise me?
Moira, the Faerie Godmother
conciliator - 22 Apr 2004 21:22 GMT > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Moira, the Faerie Godmother 'cause you're a realist, Moira
Uiopp - 22 Apr 2004 22:39 GMT > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Moira, the Faerie Godmother Why the cynicism? Do you really think the SA government's approach to AIDS has been just an attempt at saving money? Why can't you allow that Mbeki may actually be undecided about the science behind AIDS?
richard b - 25 Apr 2004 19:07 GMT > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message Moira, the Faerie Godmother
> Why the cynicism? Do you really think the SA government's approach to > AIDS has been just an attempt at saving money? Why can't you allow that > Mbeki may actually be undecided about the science behind AIDS? You are awarded the laugh of the day. Any person that hasn't known that HIV leads to AIDS for at least the last 20 years is sadly lacking in grey matter. Ah but then we've been too busy celebrating the new democracy for the last ten years to try and understand why hundreds of thousands of our citizens are dying. Poor old Dr. Sher has been working away for 20 years and it's all been a waste of time because he thought HIV had something to do with the problem. Beetroot and garlic that's all Africa needs. And Mugabe is a liberal ally. Keep up the humour, we always need more to laugh about. Richard
Uiopp - 25 Apr 2004 23:55 GMT > > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Keep up the humour, we always need more to laugh about. > Richard Try and keep a sense of proportion. Remember the circumstances under which AIDS first appeared - you had an absolutely brand new disease which was extremely complex, extremely strange, and attacked homosexuals. Scientists understood absolutely nothing at all about AIDS. But when did people want an explanation of that disease? Did they want to wait the many years it might take to fully investigate the competing theories and develop a theory that properly accounted for all the anomalies of AIDS? No. They want an explanation now - Now! - NOW!!
Of all the circumstances under which a mistake might be made, those have to be the most likely. You could ask how scientists are going to get anything right in an atmosphere of utter hysteria and political pressure.
Gary Stein - 26 Apr 2004 02:36 GMT (snip)
> Try and keep a sense of proportion. Remember the circumstances under > which AIDS first appeared - you had an absolutely brand new disease [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > to be the most likely. You could ask how scientists are going to get > anything right in an atmosphere of utter hysteria and political pressure. In 1982 your statement above would have had some validity, however now 20 years latter the science of Virology has made enormous strides. The body of knowledge is orders of magnitude larger due in large part to the HIV epidemic.
It seems that you believe otherwise, in that most of your comments seem to be based on hypotheses that were interesting and thought provoking in the 1980's but have since been shown to be either incorrect or simply not related to the facts as they have been developed by the scientific community.
Why don't you list the "anomalies" that you think are not accounted for by the HIV=AIDS description of the epidemic. I would be interested in hearing what issues you see as not having been addressed by the literature on HIV/AIDS.
Gary Stein
Uiopp - 26 Apr 2004 11:21 GMT > (snip) > > Try and keep a sense of proportion. Remember the circumstances under [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Gary Stein My statement above, no longer valid? Which parts of it? I think the point about doing good science under conditions of hysteria and political intimidation being all but impossible remains valid, and this has got nothing to do with real or purported advances in virology. If you don't agree, could you please tell me exactly which scientific advances would make good science possible under such circumstances?
The question I'd ask is whether our knowledge of HIV has in fact been advancing all this time or whether it has made a series of peculiar maneuvers to avoid recognizing that a mistake was made at the outset. I am not at all sure that I should trust any of the statistics or studies as regards risk factors, since I don't believe that people are generally all that honest about things like drug use or anal sex.
You probably know better than I do the AIDS anomalies that the 'HIV doesn't cause AIDS' books usually list, so I'm not sure why you would want me to repeat them. Maybe there are convincing explanations for those anomalies, or maybe there aren't. In most cases, in response to the arguments of both the mainstream AIDS scientists and the dissidents, all I can do is say, "That's interesting, but I'm not convinced."
richard b - 26 Apr 2004 16:46 GMT > You probably know better than I do the AIDS anomalies that the 'HIV > doesn't cause AIDS' books usually list, so I'm not sure why you would > want me to repeat them. Maybe there are convincing explanations for > those anomalies, or maybe there aren't. In most cases, in response to > the arguments of both the mainstream AIDS scientists and the dissidents, > all I can do is say, "That's interesting, but I'm not convinced." I know almost nothing about what causes AIDS but my daughter is a medical scientist and she worked for the SA Medical Research Institute in Jo'burg some time ago. At that time approximately 8 years ago she was convinced that there was only one cause of AIDS. When she came "home" for a visit last year we had many long conversations on this very topic and the reluctance of certain politicians to acknowledge the cause of AIDS. Her stance was all mainstream researchers in the rest of the world were united in their opinions, except for a few quacks with no scientific proof what so ever.
I would tend to believe the scientists who have spent years of research into the subject than some woman trotting around Soweto handing out veggies and honey to a couple of hungry AIDS victims. Or the pseudo medical advisers to a couple of African politicians.
Consider the statistics, England's incidence of AIDS is just over 40,000 cases or approximately 0,7% whilst in South Africa, and Africa in general the percentage of the population that have contacted AIDS is considerably higher. Do you think this is a result of the Brits culinary tastes. Maybe thats the answer Roast and Yorkshire pud prevents AIDS look at the figures the evidence is conclusive
I agree that proving categorically what causes AIDS like proving any thing else is extremely difficult, but on the balance of probabilities the evidence is overwhelming.
More importantly whilst the politicians and their cronies are trying to justify their position on the epidemic, millions of their people are dying. The irony is that the vast majority of those at risk, voted for the same politicians that are letting them die. Is there a moral there. Africa wins again. Richard
Gary Stein - 26 Apr 2004 21:27 GMT > > (snip) > > > Try and keep a sense of proportion. Remember the circumstances under [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > the arguments of both the mainstream AIDS scientists and the dissidents, > all I can do is say, "That's interesting, but I'm not convinced." What I am trying to get you to commit to is just what it is that your "not convinced" about. Your continued avoidance of taking any kind of position leads me to conclude that you are simply another denialist troll hoping to stir the pot and confuse as many newbees as you can. If I am mistaken then prove it by at least telling us what you find so unconvincing in the mainstreams arguments, if you can't do that your not worth the trouble of replying to.
Gary Stein
Uiopp - 27 Apr 2004 08:58 GMT > What I am trying to get you to commit to is just what it is that your "not > convinced" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Gary Stein I did tell you something I thought was unconvincing in the mainstream arguments - the whole notion of doing good science under conditions of hysteria, with political pressure from gay activists to get an instant answer, by epidemiologists who are consciously or unconsciously biased toward finding an infectious cause. You didn't want to respond. I can understand why, the whole issue is too big, too scary, too complicated.
I am still reading up on the subject and may say more about the other points later. But as it stands, as I understand it, there is no actual proof that HIV kills cells or does much of anything else. There is the correlation between HIV and AIDS, and that's about it. How good the correlation actually is, is a good question, and so is how good is the correlation with risk factors - hard to work out, for obvious reasons.
conciliator - 26 Apr 2004 19:16 GMT > > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Keep up the humour, we always need more to laugh about. > Richard Please, Mr. B - if you want to give medical advise, mention all the products required, such as genuine olive oil. It may be expensive, as our healthy minister said, but a bottle lasts at least a month!! :>))
richard b - 28 Apr 2004 14:30 GMT > > > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > > > > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > products required, such as genuine olive oil. It may be expensive, as > our healthy minister said, but a bottle lasts at least a month!! :>)) That would be verrry funny if it wasn't so sad, lets hope now the hype about the elections are over, the government genuinly tries to set up a planned program for combating this desease.
conciliator - 29 Apr 2004 19:05 GMT > > > > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > > > > > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > about the elections are over, the government genuinly tries to set up > a planned program for combating this desease. I doubt if there will be a new initiative, as Msimang has been appointed again as health minister. The beetroot growers must be smiling!
Uiopp - 29 Apr 2004 12:26 GMT > > > "PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message > > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Keep up the humour, we always need more to laugh about. > Richard If you really think that it is so unlikely that dissident scientists are right, bare in mind that mainstream scientists are just starting to make some of the same points - such as that the connection between sex and AIDS in Africa is at the very least exaggerated - that the dissidents have been making for years.
Ferdi Greyling - 29 Apr 2004 13:14 GMT <<bare in mind >>
Now here is an interesting idea!!
Uiopp - 30 Apr 2004 00:43 GMT > <<bare in mind >> > > Now here is an interesting idea!! Go ahead and look it up for yourself. The Perth Group were arguing that AIDS in Africa had much less than supposed to do with heterosexual sex long before Gisselquist et al brought this to mainstream attention. And they did it in the same way as Gisselquist, going through and reinterpreting the existing scientific literature. Once you know that you immediately suspect that there are other problems with the conventional view of AIDS in Africa that have not surfaced yet.
Steve Hayes - 30 Apr 2004 03:40 GMT ><<bare in mind >> > >Now here is an interesting idea!! Connected, naturally, with Aids and Sex.
Comes in a plane wrapper, no doubt.
 Signature Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Uiopp - 20 Apr 2004 06:24 GMT In article <cbb1f952bfdbbe6fb8a99da39c061c05@localhost.talkabouthealthnetwork.com>,
> "with little qualification or substantiation" > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > My posts are not spam but an attempt at balanced information. Yes, well, in that case all I can say is that they are not a very well considered attempt. The regulars of this group are well aware of the controversies around AIDS. Those who aren't don't need a flood of posts, a few would do.
PaulKing - 20 Apr 2004 21:05 GMT "The regulars of this group are well aware of the controversies around AIDS. "
It seems to me this forum has as many dissident regulars as establishment supporters.
I have had a great number of compliments on my posts.
You cannot please everyone.
|
|
|