The Coin Return Foundational Fundraiser is here! Please donate!
Helping to prevent the spread of aids?
CephalicCarnage
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So ive been reading alot about sex, and i came across this article.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15501173/
It talks about std's not being directly related to promiscuousness. It says that std's being spread so quickly in africa is not so much because they are promiscuous, but because of poverty and lack of education. The article says that helping to prevent things like aids requires a different variety of methods depending on social values, economics and such.
So what method do you guys think would work best to help slow the spread of aids in africa? Or anywhere in that matter, maybe people in whatever country you are from think differently than how americans think, and how do you think would be a better way to get across to those people?
I would state my own opinion, but i realy cant think of anything other than, better education and maybe, donating tons of condoms and such to aftrica. im not very creative i guess
i cant think of anything. how about you guys? Any creativity in you? maybe one of you will cure the world of aids with your revolutionary ideas!! i dont know..... lol, either that or for some insane reason the mods will lock my thread and i will cry cuz i wont know why lol.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15501173/
It talks about std's not being directly related to promiscuousness. It says that std's being spread so quickly in africa is not so much because they are promiscuous, but because of poverty and lack of education. The article says that helping to prevent things like aids requires a different variety of methods depending on social values, economics and such.
So what method do you guys think would work best to help slow the spread of aids in africa? Or anywhere in that matter, maybe people in whatever country you are from think differently than how americans think, and how do you think would be a better way to get across to those people?
I would state my own opinion, but i realy cant think of anything other than, better education and maybe, donating tons of condoms and such to aftrica. im not very creative i guess
i cant think of anything. how about you guys? Any creativity in you? maybe one of you will cure the world of aids with your revolutionary ideas!! i dont know..... lol, either that or for some insane reason the mods will lock my thread and i will cry cuz i wont know why lol. We are not evil because of the evil things we do, we do evil because we ARE evil.
CephalicCarnage on
0
Posts
So I'm of the mind that if they started to use condoms there would be a decline in aids. Education would be required as well.
It consistently surprises me that more people do not see this as self-evident.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
why should donations only be given to places preaching abstinance? i think the goal is to prevent as much spreading as possible, but i dont think people are so ready to just give up sex altogether. i dont know i just dont think preaching abstinance would work, in america is certainly would not, we are so complete for sex it wouldnt work. maybe in aftrica it would work, because they dont seem to have as much sex as us. maybe you are right ^^
edit- I completely misread captains post, oops ^^
Not only do they not realize that they have it, but they may not even understand what it is or how it's spread. They may believe that HIV does not cause AIDS, or that condom use doesn't stop AIDS. And really who cares about a disease that'll kill you 10 years from now if the average life expectancy in your country is 50 and you're already 35?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I think you misunderstood him. He was saying let's stop giving money to the abstinence-only fuckers, because that shit doesn't work. Not here, not in Africa, not anywhere.
It's called sarcasm, my ducks.
I like the Kenya, condoms, and catholicism discussion.
There is not an easy way to solve the African Aids problem. Either they need to stop having sex (they won't), start using condoms (catholics can't), or we need to somehow get rid of all those who are infected.
The education issue is far more difficult than some make it sound. Because one cannot educated africans to only aids. They need to be educated in a far greater context so that what we tell them about aids makes sense.
Though to be fair, a practicing Catholic also isn't supposed to have mistresses, so it's not like they take the Bible as word of God as is. If the case is made along the lines of "Use a condom unless you want a kid or you'll die", one hopes any non-insane human being can get with the program.
It's not that stupid. I wouldn't put it past them.
Africa has passed a point of no return with it's AIDs problem. Anything we do there will only delay the inevitable for millions of Africans.
Ultimately, I wonder if all this AIDs money going toward preventing people from getting AIDs, is better off going toward research for curing AIDS.
Considering what a clusterfuck getting the limited HIV treatment we have to the people in Africa, I think every case we can prevent through education will cost us a hell of a lot less in theoretical treatment however many years down the line.
You know this how?
Did we ever expect to treat every case in the first place? That sounds too unrealistic.
I mean, I was under the impression some people we just doomed no matter what we do.
I don't know it, that is merely my hypothesis, which is quite rational.
Completely irrational.
It's folksy, but it's the rule of thumb in the medical community. Teaching someone not to do something is infinitely easier than repairing the damage after they've done it.
The "problem" with that is that they want kids and they have aids. So the message probably ought to be, "Stop having sex or you'll die."
Some of the more isolated areas have completely bat-shit crazy understandings of what Aids is anyway that one is combating not only ignorance but completely engrained misunderstanding of how the world works.
So what about all the damn kids born with AIDS?
"Sorry kid, you shouldn't have existed."
Do you know even the rough percentage of Africans with HIV/AIDS?
Don't you see how less people getting infected leads to even less people getting infected? A cycle of healing won't work if it never starts because "it's too late"
Yes, it's a widespread problem, but that doesn't mean there's no hope.
Yes, in a perfect world.
My lord, you're stupid.
If less people get the disease, less people spread it.
Also. . . also in the real world.
Sheri Baldwin Photography | Facebook | Twitter | Etsy Shop | BUY ME STUFF (updated for 2014!)
Why? If you prevent one guy from getting AIDS, all the people he has sex with also won't get AIDS (from him, anyways). I fail to see how this is irrational.
The rate at which the disease spreads is faster than the rate at which you can spread education of prevention against it.
You will never win.
Never, if you use the methods we use now.
Hence, it's only in a perfect world that such a scenario is plausible.
You're talking about stopping it entirely. Everyone else is talking about helping, about decreasing the number from 1,000,000 to 500,000.
Sheri Baldwin Photography | Facebook | Twitter | Etsy Shop | BUY ME STUFF (updated for 2014!)
That's a pretty shallow interpretation. At any given point in a disease's course, there will be people who already have the disease. Saying that stopping the spread is easier than treating the disease after it has spread doesn't mean you just ignore anyone who has the disease.
All it means to say that an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure is that it's more effective to fight the spread than cure the symptoms.
In this specific case, you advocated stopping all prevention measure and focusing on finding a cure, and all everyone else is saying is that your idea is a worse use of resources than the alternative.
What? From what well of non-existent expertise are you pulling this authorative analysis?
We've been doing a shitty job when we didn't do enough education, so fuck education?
I'm just going to throw my hands up and say people can go ahead and prevent whatever the fuck they want, as long as moral obligation does not get in the way of finding an actual cure.
Because the cure, should be the real goal.
You may disagree, and that's fine.
Wait....
6 people with aids.
One situation:
6 infected people sleep with six non-infected people.
We now have 12 infected people.
These 12 people each have sex with another person.
We now have 24 infected people.
Another situation:
6 infected people. 3 have sex and 3 do not.
We now have 9 infected people.
These 9 people each have sex with another person.
We now have 18 infected people.
Do you deny 24 > 18 ?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/outlook/story/0,,1976125,00.html
On what basis?
I can't tell if you think the statement is absurd or obvious.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
The problem being that there may be no cure, or it may be decades away. In a scenario like that, the only hope is to stop or slow the infection rate to the point where the disease dwindles to a level where we can't reduce it any more, or burns itself out.
On the basis of numbers.
Sheri Baldwin Photography | Facebook | Twitter | Etsy Shop | BUY ME STUFF (updated for 2014!)