HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yazz@locus.com (Bob Yazz)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Re: dyer on aids
Date: 4 Sep 92 20:59:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Sep4.211325.645
Organization: unspecified
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6068

kwald@tinored.cu (Karen Wald ) writes:

| Steve Dyer responded to a Radio Habana Cuba news story about AIDS in 
| Cuba, and a forthcoming conference here, rejecting each and every 
| statement as a lie or fabrication or cover-up. 
| 
| It would be interesting to know how many people out there think like 
| Steve Dyer

Perhaps you have no idea what a standing joke the government of Cuba
is in the world.  No one trusts a thing that government says at all.

People all over the globe know the entire Island is a prison -- they
don't let you leave, the very definition of a prison.  Entire families
die trying to escape.  There is no testimony more objective.

Even Castro's own sister has publicly written that her brother is
more interested in maintaining his status as Military Dictator than
he is in the welfare of his own people.  Did you catch that story
on your daily paper or nitely newscast?

Expect your conference to be greeted with about as much respect
as one the Soviets might have sponsored on Psychiatry.  (They're
the good folks who, to name merely one example, would commit a
dissident Ballet Dancer to a "psychiatric hospital", and lock her
in a ward populated with amputees.  Apparently, this proved very
"theraputic".)

If respect from the world community is what you seek, you have a
a very long road ahead of you.

Best Wishes to the people, not the government, of Cuba

== Bob Yazz ==
-- 

"You can put lipstick on a hog, and call it 'Monique', but it's still a pig."

-- Ann Richards, the wildly popular, Harley Riding Governor of Texas
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Re: Illegal Drug Use at the White House
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5969
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 01:11:26 GMT

In article <1992Aug23.231348.17223@cs.ucla.edu> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>Millie, the White House springer spaniel, regularly takes prednisone for
>treatment of lupus.
>Prednisone can be legally prescribed to a human for any purpose, but has
>not been approved for the treatment of lupus in dogs.  According to a
>1968 law, it is illegal to give a drug to an animal if the drug has not
>been approved for the animal's particular condition.  Prednisone is not
>an approved treatment for lupus in dogs.

I'd reserve judgement until I saw this so-called law.  I find it hard to
believe that the federal government would attempt to regulate veterinarians'
professional behavior in general.  I would bet that the law was designed to
apply to livestock, dairy animals, and poultry which provide or would be used
for food, and not pets.  In such cases, it makes eminent sense to control the
drugs which are administered, because they might have effects on humans
ingesting food products which comes from treated animals.

>[sci.med.aids readers may compare this with how the FDA treats humans
> who wish to try experimental treatments for HIV.]

It's not clear to me what you're trying to say.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Re: Letter to SF Sentinel
Date: 24 Aug 92 01:35:16 GMT
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5971

Sorry, Billi, you don't get to silently repost reports on studies on AZT
without addressing in detail my rebuttal to your dogged misunderstanding
about the usefulness of the drug.  You've got an axe to grind, and grind
you will, over and over again until you think people will believe you, if
only through exhaustion.  The studies that you've been citing and reposting
simply do not say what you think they are saying, and the authors of the
studies would undoubtedly disavow any conclusions similar to yours, because
they're not even _trying_ to address what you insist they're saying.

Of course the drug is toxic.  Yes, it does appear to "wimp out".
It's not a cure.  At present, it only prolongs survival, compared
to patients who receive no nucleosides, but it doesn't seem to
permanently forstall death from complications of the disease.
However, to state the fact that a drug is imperfect (most are) is
not a recommendation to remove it from the armamentarium of therapies.
It is still a cornerstone of therapy in those who can tolerate it,
and it's still one of the best therapies we have.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: Amos.Omondi@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Amos Omondi)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Re: Questions on worldwide heterosexual AIDS demography
Date: 25 Aug 92 21:33:22 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6003

In article <1992Aug25.123152.18224@cs.ucla.edu> jmt@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Jon M. Taylor) writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.020421.22134@cs.ucla.edu> Amos.Omondi@comp.vuw.ac.nz
>(Amos Omondi) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug23.182920.10308@cs.ucla.edu> jmt@sactoh0.sac.ca.us
>(Jon M. Taylor) writes:
>>> ...
>>>the US were.  My friend replied that he though that there were several
>>>reasons:
>>>
>>...
>>>
>>>     3.  Anal sex is much more common in the 3rd world.  This might
>>>dovetail with #2 above.
>>>
>>
>>Nonsense.
>
>     1.  I strictly meant HETEROSEXUAL anal sex.
>
>     2.  Saying "nonsense" and then leaving doesn't help me out a whole
>lot.  Care to tell me WHY you think it is nonsense?
>--

My remark applies to ANY anal sex.  An attempt to do even the slightest
"research"  would have revealed it to be nonsensical.  I hope that posters
will try to do their homework before they transmit dubious statements.
Try and find someone more knowledgeable about the 3rd world to quote.
From: budd@ccrs.emr.ca (Mark Budd)
Subject: Re: Per-partner infectivity of oral receptive intercourse
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6017
Organization: Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, Ottawa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:43:59 GMT

>We do have the basic fact - avoid sharing "bodily fluids" and you're safe,
>barring accidents.
>
>In a number of postings you've made it clear that you want oral sex to be
>safe.  I'd it to be safe also - it would restore a certain amount of
>enjoyment to my life -  but there's reason to think that it's not safe in
>all cases.  The level is risk is up for debate, but I don't think there's
>any question that there is some risk to some people under some
>circumstances.  
>
>The question is, of course, "What risks?  What people?  What circumstances?"
>We don't know.  I'm not sure that we'll ever know.  Do we know that for any
>disease?  Do we know why some people get colds all the time and others
>don't?
>
>You're free to take all the risks you want, of course.  Personally, I
>prefer to go the virtually-no-risk route and have some peace of mind.  I
>think your choice is clear -  no risk, no worry or some risk, some worry.
>
>I think you'd be better off learning to eroticize safe sex than to anguish
>over what's OK and what's not.  It can be done.  There are even workshops
>on it. 
>
>-- 
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Jack Hamilton   jfh@netcom.com   P. O. Box 281107   SF, CA   94128-1107

Something I've always wondered and have had a hard time getting an answer
to:
     Is it safe for an HIV+ guy to perform oral sex on a woman (safe from
her point of view of course)? 

Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: bhjelle%carina.unm.edu@lynx.unm.edu ()
Subject: Re: Questions on worldwide heterosexual AIDS demography
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6001
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 21:16:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.142604.21070@cs.ucla.edu> rpetsche@mrg.PHYS.CWRU.Edu (Rolfe G. Petschek) writes:
>
>I believe there are diseases which are longer known than HIV (notably Hepatitis 
>B and C) which are typically transmitted by first-world type transmission
>routes for HIV (anal sex and sharing of blood products).  I believe that
>these diseases have are not a significant health risk in the heterosexual 
>(non-needle stuck) population.  I think that they have been around long 
>enough that we "know" this is not a simple result of not having become
>prevalent in the heterosexual population.
>
>Question:  Is this perception correct?

Hepatitis B is very prevalent in some heterosexual populations,
such as those in China, India, and Africa. As with HIV, once it gains
a solid hold in a population, it can spread to very high prevalence
levels. Whereever it occurs, sexual transmission is easily
demonstrated.

Hepatitis C occurs as a low-level endemia (ca 1%) almost everywhere.
Its transmission is poorly understood but heterosexual transmission
is almost certainly a major factor in maintaining that level.

>Question:  Are there also "Pattern II" countries for these diseases?

Yes, everywhere they occur, they are spread through heterosexual
activity. (Contrary to popular belief, community-acquired HCV
infection dwarfs transfusion-acquired HCV infection).

>Question:  If this perception is correct are there "Pattern I country"
>epidemiological or pathogen presence or tissue infection or other
>reasons to believe that HIV is different from these other longer known
>pathogens and more likely to infect large numbers of heterosexuals?

There is little reason to believe that HBV and HCV infection in
the first world is primarily "pattern I" as opposed to
"pattern II". This is especially true for HCV, for which there
is nearly no enrichment among homosexuals.

>As has been pointed out there are important resource allocation
>questions related to this question.
>--
If you accept that we can let our guard down with respect to
heterosexual transmission of HIV, you run, IMHO, a grave risk of
falling into the same trap as Burma and Thailand.

Brian

Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: Matthias Urlichs <urlichs@smurf.sub.org>
Subject: Re: The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5966
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, FRG
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 16:10:52 +0200

In sci.med.aids, article <1992Aug22.173726.21105@cs.ucla.edu>,
  kwmc@cbnewsj.att.com writes:
>
> Now lets talk abouth the myth of so called safe sex ... if condoms are
> so unreliable in preventing pregnancy why do we put our lives in their
> hands to prevent viral transmission.  Handing out condoms is like handing
> out handkerchiefs as parachutes and telling people its now safe to jump
> out a plane !
> 
It's not necessary for condoms to totally prevent infection. They merely have
to get the rate of infection low enough to prevent an exponential increase in
infections.

Condoms are not 100% effective against pregnancy, but they're so good that,
if everybody used them, mankind would die out. It follows that not advocating
the use of condoms, or worse, advocating not using condoms, is irresponsible
at best.

If you have the choice of not having a parachute at all, and one that fails
to open once every 500 jumps or so, what would you do? Not jump at all, and
stay on the ground in the first place? For many people, this is not a viable
option.

Besides, it's called safe_r_ sex these days.

-- 
"People don't form relationships, they take hostages."
		-- anon
-- 
Matthias Urlichs  --  urlichs@smurf.sub.org -- urlichs@smurf.ira.uka.de   /(o\
Humboldtstrasse 7 -- 7500 Karlsruhe 1 -- Germany  --  +49-721-9612521     \o)/
From: tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda)
Subject: Re: The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5953
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 17:35:38 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.085845.16506@cs.ucla.edu> pyramid.pyramid.com.pyramid.com!portal!cup.portal.com!Neon@pyramid.pyramid.com.pyramid.com writes:
>In an article, 8/18/92 16:26 34/1608 sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer
>writes:
>>
>>However, because of the extremely low incidence of female-to-male
>>transmission, HIV infection will NOT escape into the general
>>heterosexual population in great numbers because of this. Most of the (male)
>>IV drug users will eventually die of AIDS, many of their (female)
>>partners will, but few if any other non-drug-users will catch it from
>>them, even if the HIV+ girlfriend of the drug user has sex with
>>other men. So the mechanism for an epidemic in the heterosexual
>>population is not in place.
>
>As someone who now is living with HIV disease, it saddens me to see
>people making assumptions that certain groups are safe from infection.
>AIDS as we now know is a sexually transmitted disease.  It can also
>be spread by blood to blood contact as when IV drug users share needles.

The point was not that heterosexuals were "safe" from infection but that the
infection will not escape into the general population "in great numbers." 
Most people are safe from lightning strikes, but no one is going to suggest
that the general pop. is absolutely safe from lightning.

>
>The sooner people of all groups take their heads out of the sand and
>face the seriousness of the risks, the better the chances of preventing
>this plague from spreading to them.
>
>Tony Bruder - neon@cup.portal.com

Do you know the seriousness of the risks?  What is the statistical
likelihood of heterosexual infection?  Broken down into different types of
behavior?  

======================================================
 Teddy Kalivoda  ------------> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu 
   University of GA Computing & Network Services       
     Inst.of Higher Education               
=====================================================                                                                          
	"The sleep of reason gives rise to monsters"
				        (Goya, Caprichos)

Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Re: % HIV+ test in x Weeks of contact with virus??
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5964
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 01:38:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug22.173736.21159@cs.ucla.edu> 
bhjelle%carina.unm.edu@lynx.unm.edu () writes:
>In article <1992Aug20.205344.11719@cs.ucla.edu> molly@krang.vis.citri.edu.au 
>(Mark Ollila) writes:
>>
>>What percentage of people are tested positive after x weeks of
>>the sexual encounter with a HIV+ person.
>
>It is hard to get enough patients to generate the kind of statistical
>precision required to answer your question. 

As Brian said, it's difficult to answer the question.  You have to know
when someone became infected, and you have to test them frequently enough
to find out when they seroconvert.  

I haven't read the Lancet article, but I would think that the only
infections which would be open to that kind of study would be cases like
needle-sticks in hospitals.  It's harder to test in the general population,
because people don't know for sure when they became infected, and it's not
really common for people to be tested every month (or whatever other small
time scale you want to look at). 

We probably won't know for sure for a long time.  I don't know what kinds
of studies are being done outside the United States, but the National 
Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases is now saying that the basic
epidemiology of HIV is well known, and is starting to defund large
population studies like the United Men's Health Studies in San Francisco. 

-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton   jfh@netcom.com   P. O. Box 281107   SF, CA   94128-1107
From: Amos.Omondi@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Amos Omondi)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Re: Questions on worldwide heterosexual AIDS demography
Keywords: 42
Date: 24 Aug 92 01:37:50 GMT
Organization: Spaceship Enterprise
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5972

In article <1992Aug23.182920.10308@cs.ucla.edu> jmt@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Jon M. Taylor) writes:
> ...
>the US were.  My friend replied that he though that there were several
>reasons:
> 
...
> 
>     3.  Anal sex is much more common in the 3rd world.  This might
>dovetail with #2 above.
> 

Nonsense.
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: mgflax@phoenix.princeton.edu (Marshall G. Flax)
Subject: Re: Saran Wrap
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Keywords: safe sex, saran wrap, oral sex, HIV
Archive-Number: 5955
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:31:53 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.011832.3122@cs.ucla.edu> heath@athena.cs.uga.edu (Terrance Heath) writes:
>I've been telling people that saran wrap is an option, so long as
>they do not use 'microwavable' saran wrap, which is definitely porous.

I've *never* heard that microwavable saran wrap is porous!  Sounds like
that information should be far more widely disseminated!  Perhaps they
should label the Saran Wrap as well ("warning: product is safe for
microwaves, but not for your own toaster") :-).

marshall
-- 
---
------- (c) 1992, Marshall Gene Flax <mgflax@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> -------
----------- 5 Joyce Lane, Woodbury, NY 11797, 516-364-9331,9379  ----------
- c/o Jack Gelfand,Psychology Dept,Princeton U.,NJ 08544,609-258-6739 (w) -
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: dchapman@well.sf.ca.us (Dave Chapman)
Subject: Re: The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6054
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 05:57:25 GMT

In the first-world countries, less than 10% of the cases are
caused by heterosexual acts.  In the third world, the total
seems to be more like 80%.

We do not know why.

Explanations which have been suggested include co-infections
which break the skin, generally poor health and nutrition,
and more virulent strains of the organism.  Other, more
exotic possibilities have been suggested.

The fact is that we do not know, and there is still a very
real prospect of a heterosexual _break-out_ in North America.

-dave
From: jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Government behavior in vaccine trials
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 5958
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 05:21:00 GMT

[Extracted from the San Francisco Examiner, July 28, 1992]

Two advocacy groups and four families from the Pine Ridge and Standing Rock
Indian reservations filed suit against the Indian Health Service and the
Centers for Disease Control, claiming that the government is injecting
babies on the reservations with an unapproved hepatitis vaccine.

Lakota Sioux Indians born in Rapid City, South Dakota are being injected
with either an experimental hepatitis A vaccine or, as a control, an
approved hepatitis B vaccine.   The plaintiffs claim that the government
did not propoerly inform parents that the program was testing for safety
as well as the effectiveness of the vaccine.

The Health Service says that Indians were selected for the experiment
because many reservations, being poor and crowded, experience HA
epidemics every five to seven years, and so would benefit most from the
vaccine.

The lawyer who filed the suit said that HA is associated with bad water,
poor sanitation, and crowded housing, "all of which the federal
government, under the treaties, is specifically responsible for dealing
with on the reservations.  But instead of meeting its obligations, it
foists the vaccinations on Indians."

Parents on the reservation said that they knew little about the
vaccinations.  One parent said "the workers told me it was safe.  They
didn't tell me it was experimental."

SmithKline Beecham, manufacturer of the vaccine, says that the vaccine
is approved and widely used in England and several Eureopean countries.
In addition, over 30,000 people in Thailand and Europe are said to have
been injected, with few deaths and no side effects.

In contrast, the Hepatitis A Vaccine Prevention Program, in a letter to
doctors, warned of anaphylactic shock - a life-threatening condition -
and such possible side effects as cancer and jaundice.

-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton   jfh@netcom.com   P. O. Box 281107   SF, CA   94128-1107
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Appology for post
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6025
Organization: unspecified
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 7:13:18 CDT

I wish to appologize for a slip of the finger and allowing a mail error
message to be posted to sci.med.aids and associated lists this morning.

-phil

[co-moderator]

-- 
     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
	 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
     phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet  (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)]
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
From: Amos.Omondi@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Amos Omondi)
Subject: Re: The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6004
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:32:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.132802.19666@cs.ucla.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>In article <1992Aug23.182851.10200@cs.ucla.edu> KARYPM%SJUVM.BITNET@VM.USC.EDU (Paul M. Karagianis) writes:
>
>>Africa/Asia where it obviously is, boil down to a difference in social
>>values.  "Those people" have more sex with more partners under less
>>hygenic conditions; they are more likely to have secondary STD's, anal
>>sex, bi-sexual experiences and use prostitutes.  That's a reasonable

Do you people actually know anything about the Third World or do you simply 
get at this "anal sex"/"bi-sexual sex" stuff by extrapolating from the spread 
of AIDS in the west? 

>It's probably correct because we haven't seen evidence of quick transmission

Can we "omit" the probablies and try to have some facts for a change?
From: css1rs@gondor.mcs.surrey.ac.uk (Russell Smithers)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Blood Broups a few questions
Date: 4 Sep 92 09:23:03 GMT
Organization: University of Surrey, Guildford, England
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

This is the first time I have posted this group, so I hope im
not asking silly questions.

Basicly what determine's you'r blood group, (is it random) or is
it dependant on you mum/dad? Also is blood group A R.H. Positive
rare?

Thanks.

PS. E-Mail would be better but I will check this news group.
PPS. My carreer is in computers, so I have nothing to do with 
medicle matters.
From: lynn@elan.Elan.COM (Lynn Gazis)
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: metal bars; ankles, knees and hips
Date: 25 Aug 92 19:44:07 GMT
Reply-To: lynn@elan (Lynn Gazis)
Organization: Elan Computer Group, Inc., Mountain View, CA

My feet also point out (one doctor I saw asked to take
pictures, because I was a "textbook case," and the most
extreme he had seen).  I didn't get the braces, and I
have had chronic pain in knees, hips, and ankles for
the past ten years (since the age of 21).  I don't know
whether the braces you mention make for more of less 
pain later in life, but malalignment can cause problems
all by itself without any help from metal bars.

Lynn Gazis-Sax