I read the post below with amazement. I couldn't believe my eyes. I thought the author was trying to put a retro logic point across. I thought it was a pathetic attempt at levity. But there was no punchline.
I concluded, as one English gentleman said, that "being a gentleman, I would not say what I think of you, and my secretary, being a lady, would not type it, but you, being neither, will know exactly what I mean!" Mr Pollard is actually technically incorrect when he attempts to be technical. It is possible (and there are documented cases) of people catching infections from vaccines. AIDS without HIV isn't AIDS. Immune deficiency does occur congenitally and it is called (naturally) CIDS. There is no proof as yet to suggest that one can survive indefinitely with the HIV virus. But the phenomenally obscene assertion or implication that the AIDS problem is a scam designed to rob well meaning American and European taxpayers of their hard earned sympathy dollars is so disgusting I wonder if it merits the dignity of a reply. Get this Mr Pollard, we die of malaria in Kenya because we can't afford the full course of (one dose) treatment that costs less than one US dollar. More people die of malaria than of AIDS even now. And yet sixty (that's right sixty) percent of the patients taking up our hospital beds are AIDS patients. Not "people with antibodies," I'm afraid, but people who are skeletal, wasted and unlikely to make next month. We no longer "know someone who heard of someone" around here. We all have both friends and relatives who have died and are dying. It is a raging epidemic and Mr Lewis' fury and frustration are, to say the least, warranted. I am sure rural Africans would be surprised to learn that they need to be taught how to feed themselves. It just so happens that "market forces", as Mr Pollard describes them, have led to the phenomenon of farmers in our grain basket district of Uasin Gishu refusing to grow more maize, and thousands of tons of their maize rotting because they can't get a price that covers their costs, while two hundred miles to the south, other farmers sit in the dust waiting for relief food imported by WFP and distributed by the government which can't afford to pay for the Uasin Gishu maize. (Well actually they could but corrupt government officials have made that a whole new problem.) All we need is a revisionist armchair intellectual. Pretty soon he will prove that statistically, since Africans comprise less than one tenth of the world's population, AIDS isn't even a human problem. Car crashes in the west kill far more people. We need help here. This is not a scam. The solutions that people come up with from the comfort of a study in California may even be well meaning - (though quite frankly I don't see that in this case - I see a donor fatigued Westerner who probably never actually made a donation) - but they do not begin to deal with the fullness of a tragedy such as AIDS. I know this kind of heat is not generally recommended for a list like this one and I shall probably regret my rashness by the end of the day - in which case I seek your forgiveness and forbearance in advance. But right now, I'm really mad!! Joe Gichuki -----Original Message----- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 January, 2003 1:40 AM To: Brian McAndrews; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Stephen Lewis has one word for us: Help Brian, One's heart goes out to Stephen Lewis, but he is probably the worst person to be in charge of an AIDS project in Africa. Some time ago, I said to Karen (I think) that anger and other emotions can get you started on attacking a social wrong. These emotions are also useful when you are actually doing things that will have an effect. However, in between, you have to think what to do. Then emotion is the enemy. You really must think clearly if your activism is later to have any point. If Stephen thought more about the problem (though I concede, his reported actions may be intended for propaganda than the actual problem) he might remember some things about AIDS. AIDS is a behavioral disease. It isn't easy to catch, but heavy frequency of sexual intercourse will raise your chance of catching it. (The number used to be 500 contacts as opposed to gonorrhea and syphilis with numbers of 1 and 2 contacts.) This is why it was noticed first with homosexuals who not only frequently connected, but they used drugs to enhance their natural abilities (before viagra). For a year or two, AIDS patients in LA were reported in the LA Times every month. Invariably, more than 90% were homosexuals, some more were bi-sexual, a few were hemophiliacs and others. The Times no longer prints the figures. Probably because a new statistic is added. HIV is included in a the HIV/AIDS figures. You are tested for HIV by checking the antibodies in the blood. If you have them, you have HIV. If you had a polio shot, your body would be full of antibodies. Does this mean you have polio? Of course not. I should mention that the real test for AIDS is expensive and not straightforward, so it tends rarely to be done. If you test positive for HIV, it is assumed you have AIDS, are about to get AIDS, or will eventually get AIDS. Actually, there is AIDS without HIV and a veritable landslide of HIV patients without AIDS. Nevertheless, we combine the HIV/AIDS numbers to get disaster figures. Further, if someone has pneumonia, he has pneumonia. If he has pneumonia and he has HIV - he has AIDS. (I have forgotten the listing of "AIDS" diseases. They keep increasing. I seem to remember they lately included cervical cancer!) In this way everyone who is seriously ill in Africa can expect to be marked down as an AIDS casualty. The mere fact that money is available will raise this figure. If I was an overworked African doctor and knew money was available for AIDS patients, all my patients would quickly have AIDS. (The two basic assumptions - remember?) This is why after a $92 billion expenditure, there appears to be not one person cured of AIDS. No simple vaccine, or something, has been found for a quick fix. As this is the way things go, it is likely that all this money has prevented alternative and possibly more hopeful research from occurring. I should add that although getting HIV isn't going to kill you - continuing the behavior that got you the HIV may well do so. Hey! That proves HIV is responsible for AIDS! In today's LA Times, Stephen cried for the little kids "weakened by hunger, ravaged by AIDS". Could hunger be responsible for the poor health of the little kids? Even if they were fed, could they change their adult behavior away from numerous sexual contacts? Stephen, the socialist, wants food supplied for the hungry. Perhaps the free market attitude would be to provide them with seed so they can feed themselves. We should load the UN groups up with people who can teach them to feed themselves. A study in England - I think by Birmingham University, but I'm unsure, found that at 12 houses to the acre, British back yard gardens produced as much food in retail value as if the land was free of houses and in the hands of a farmer or smallholder. Or let's continue to use toxic AZT to treat the dying AIDS patient. It does make you feel you're making a difference. Harry ****************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of LA Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (818) 352-4141 Fax: (818) 353-2242 ******************************* _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
