Since diseases that are successful kill their hosts, eventually a disease either eleminates the species or dies out itself. That could be happening in some of these places. How do you respect the people but stimulate change that creates self reliance? America has had the same problem on the reservations where it has been clear for a long time that the answer was to do away with many of the structures that do not fit with our culture. We did a perfectly good job in the late 1800s and when we have sovereignty, as in the same sovereignty as one state against another we do well also. Then along comes Time Magazine or one of the others and complains about the private people we hire to help us and how much they are being paid. Of course no one says that the states or federal government shouldn't hire private companies to do things. Only those who run casinos. It is clear that the only way that Americans will let others succeed is if they do in the same structure as Americans themselves. Now why not apply that principle to the children of the wealthy? AIDS is terrible but it is exacerbated by those who would profit from it in one way or another. How do you create a medical structure that encourages health rather than puts out the fire once it has started and divides the water between the haves and have nots unequally?
REH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: RE: [Futurework] The epidemic of Aids > Keith, > > Absolutely. As I said, it's a behavioral disease in the US. > > Incidentally, while looking up my archives and others to make my points in > the long screed on AIDS, I found the contact number for catching AIDS is > not 500, but 1,000. This compares with two contacts for syphilis and > gonorrhea. Don't know about herpes and suchlike. > > I originally thought that the amyl nitrites that young homosexuals take to > maintain their abilities through the night were enough to make them unwell > and less able to fight off invasive disease. > > Duesberg suggests all "recreational" drugs press hard on the immune system. > > I am beginning to feel he is on the right track. > > I've also mentioned that some diseases attack the immune system, though I > haven't a listing for them. > > You also believe in the connection between HIV and AIDS. In the US, there > are thousands of patients with AIDS but not HIV, and a million with HIV who > don't have AIDS. > > Yet, the definition has become circular. If you have HIV and one of the now > 30 diseases - you have AIDS. > > I suppose we must wait for the findings of researchers who are beginning to > have second doubts about this too easily accepted relationship. > Unfortunately, people like Duesberg are kept out of the circle - simply > because he doesn't follow the party line. > > As honest (and acceptable) researchers begin to publish findings separating > HIV from AIDS things may change. If Montagnier - who first discovered > HIV/AIDS - is changing his mind on this, perhaps we will find common sense > returning to the subject. > > Maybe Duesberg will even get a grant again! > > In Africa, the problem doesn't need to be drugs. It's just plain lack of > nutrition. This is what UNAIDS Program Development Advisor Elesani Njobvu > said: > > "Families lacking sufficient nutritious food are more vulnerable, as poor > nutrition is closely linked with poor health. This in turn makes a person > more vulnerable to HIV infection and can shorten the incubation period of > HIV, meaning that symptoms appear sooner. The situation is [the] worst for > the poor who have the least access to medical care." Njobvu added that > people struggling with daily survival are less likely to take preventative > measures and are "inclined to resort to any means to get food". > > Which remark, I suppose is directed to prostitution. > > Those poor bloody people. > > I pointed out that South Africans don't test for HIV. It's a privacy issue. > But in the rest of Africa, testing is diminishing even in the best areas. > What testing there may be is apparently not very good and cannot be trusted. > > In the poorest - and hardest hit areas - apparently there is no HIV > testing. HIV is assumed. People who once died from TB now die from AIDS. I > fear that the disease is the same - only the acronym has changed. It would > be interesting to find out if anyone now dies from the common diseases they > used to die from. (I have a feeling that this is something I will have to > look into.) > > Another figure I would find interesting is the number of white South > Africans (less homosexuals and hemophiliacs) who die from AIDS. AIDS > problems in South Africa are in the rural areas and the townships. How many > well-fed South Africans are dying? That would be an interesting statistic. > But a quick look around hasn't come up with much. > > Meantime, rather than AIDS drugs, it might be more helpful to send > broccoli to Africa.Incidentally, Most African countries are coping. Four > are basket cases - including Joe's Kenya. Kenya has some of the best > agricultural land in Africa in the Central Highlands. Plenty of water is > available for irrigation of the arid areas. > > Yet there is widespread starvation - even to able bodied men being unable > to bring in the food - though there is apparently plenty of corn. It just > doesn't get to those who need it. > > It may be that governmental corruption and incompetence is a greater > problem in parts of Africa than AIDS. Kenya once had a > magnificent future that has been sunk by the malfeasance and misfeasance > of those office. > > Pete complained because I was critical of Clinton's: "a quarter of southern > Africa's population is likely to die of AIDS ..." > > Pete thought this was a useful attempt to engage our compassion. Maybe, but > it was an outright lie. The sub-Saharan population of Africa rose: > > 1950 - 227 million > > 1970 - 361 million > > 1990 - 626 million > > 2000 - 803 million > > Is compassion the fruit of lying? Maybe - politicians love to have > something to take them off the hook. What better than a terrifying disease > to blame for their ineptness and venality? "It isn't our fault that things > are such a mess. It's this horrible disease." > > All I suggest is some rethinking if we are to save the next generation - or > the one after that.. > > Harry > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > Keith wrote: > > >Harry, > > > >Aids can only spread by direct entry into the blood stream -- hence via > >injuries or through severely abraded skin. A nurse would normally have no > >risk of becoming a victim but if, say, you were a bricklayer then you'd be > >very unwise to look after an Aids sufferer unless you wore surgical gloves > >while at home. > > > >Aids is not very catchable. It needs a considerable local concentration of > >sufferers before it gets a start. But given this *and* a great frequency of > >practices that causes skin abrasion then it can then spread -- after it did > >after Haight-Ashbury -- and keep on spreading because its symptoms are not > >obvious for years in some cases. > > > >Keith > > > >At 23:11 12/01/03 -0800, you wrote: > > >Arthur, > > > > > >AIDS is not contagious, and doesn't appear to be infectious. Shown by the > > >apparent absence of harm to any of the care-givers of the hundreds of > > >thousands of aids victims. > > > > > >Now, ain't that a funny virus? Think of a flu virus and compare. > > > > > >There was a period I remember when someone started a rumor that you can get > > >AIDS from mosquitos. > > > > > >Harry > > > ****************************** > Harry Pollard > Henry George School of LA > Box 655 > Tujunga CA 91042 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Tel: (818) 352-4141 > Fax: (818) 353-2242 > ******************************* > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002 > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
