From: lazarus@wixer.cactus.org (Michael Lax)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Anti-religious fanatics (Was Re: School Choice )
Date: 12 Sep 92 13:56:19 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications

In article <1992Sep10.170008.19886@gtephx.UUCP> forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:
>In article <3#4y6dc@rpi.edu>, blythes@cs.rpi.edu (Stephen Blythe) writes:
>> In article <1992Sep4.164731.8994@mcs.anl.gov>, shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer) writes:
>> |> [lots of good stuff deleted]
>> |> 
>> |> >	So what should we do in the meantime? Discriminate against
>> |> >people with AIDS?
>> |> >
>> |> >				J. Wagner
>> |> 
>> |> How 'bout treating them like anyone else who has a deadly infectious
>> |> disease. Naw can't do that.
>> |> 
>> |> 				mike
>> 
>> BZZT.
>> 
>> Infectious implies that by standing next to someone with a disease, I can
>> contract it from them. In the case of AIDS this is FALSE. Too bad, really. I mean
>> that you couldn't have read this the hundred or so times it's already been posted.
>> 
>
>So you're telling me that I can't get AIDS from my dentist and that any
>infected dentist has a right to continue his practice without notifying
>any patient?  Same goes for surgeons -- do you think that they have 
>a right to operate on you without letting you know that they have AIDS?
>
>That attituded is why AIDS is going to be the plague of the 21st century.


The odds of you getting AIDS from your dentist are beyond astronomical.
Of the millions of dentists in this country - and in may other countries -
only FIVE people have gotten AIDS from _one_ dentist - and in this case,
though the dentist was infected, strong evidence suggests the patients
were infected by other patients.  Although we have a right to 
safe health care, you equate "knowing" a person's HIV status with 
knowing your treatment will be safe.  NOT!  Testing every health care
professional and every patient would not only be an outrageous
expense, it would do nothing to protect either party.  It takes
up to a year after infection before HIV can be detected.  The only way
to insure safety is to practise universal sterlization procedures.  Does
your dentist sterilize his handpieces between each patient?  Probably
not.  It's time consuming and it destroys the instrument.  But
would knowing your health care professional's HIV status make you "feel"
better?  The attitude over those that have HIV as compared with other
diseases is clear:  with no other disease are we as concenred with
_how_ a person became infected.  In terms of how being known as
HIV positive can destroy a person's life, and how absolutely
unbeneficial this knowledge can be to anyone - even a patient
of an HIV+ surgeon - I cannot support mandatory testing.  It
is only a step away from sewing identification on to peoples' clothing.


======================================================================
"For I can see that in the midst of death, Life persists; in the
midst of untruth, Truth persists; in the midst of darkness, Light
persists."

"An eye for an eye will blind the world."
                                      Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

"I'm here, I'm queer, get used to it."
                                                             ME!

lazarus@wixer.cactus.org
Michael Lax, 12514 Esplanade St., #B, Austin, TX  78727-4409
512.837.1596 (h), 512.836.9715 (fax)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.misc