From: QAA@psuvm.psu.edu (Tim Bieling)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: AIDS Research
Date: 30 Sep 92 00:34:26 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

In article <CHRISTIA%92092907595650@ASUACAD.BITNET>, TQX@CORNELLC.BITNET says:
>
>Gareth,
>   I don't think anyone in their right mind would object to money being
>spent on AIDS Research. However, most people realize that there is only
>a finite amount of money that can be spent on any kind of medical
>research. To listen to the gay rights activists, one would think that
>we are doing nothing about AIDS even though we are channeling billions
>into AIDS research. There are other health issues just as compelling
>such as cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, cancer,
>etc. Because they don't have an activist group championing their cause,
>we hear little about them and no one gets on the president for "not
>doing enough" even though the survival rate for some of them is not
>appreciably higher than for AIDS, e.g. cystic fibrosis.

Be careful with your labeling of "activists" - ACT-UP, for instance,
is not a gay activist group.  While I don't have exact figures for AIDS
research spending, it is lower than the 4 billion figure I see tossed
around.  A very large chunk of money is consumed through medicare and
medicaid programs - to pay for highly expensive drug/therapy treatments.

A scary thought is not knowing the exact people who are HIV infected but
don't sero-convert, and don't believe they were at risk to being infected.
I've seen estimates of a million or more people.  Also, a the timeframe
for sero-conversion is unknown and could be years (though HIV anti-bodies
tests can show a positive in 3-6 months).

You "complain" that AIDS receives a disproportionate level of funding
compared to other diseases - on the service I might agree, but could
you imagine the financial desctruction caused by the above mentioned
estimate of a million people sero-converting and requiring healthcare?

Part of what caused the whole problem in the first place was that very
little emphasis was placed on education early on in this plague.  At
first it was just a "gay disease"  (even when in Africa the majority of
cases are heterosexually transmitted), and as such it was easy to sweep
under the rug ("it only kills "those damned fags anyway").  Education
is one way to get people to understand - I see so much mis-information
presented (here and other places) about the transmission of the virus
that it's no wonder people are confused.

Educational goals should include blunt discussions about the methods of
transmission and ways to avoid transmission (abstinance, condoms, etc).
I am in support of condom availability programs, needle trade programs
etc.  With these programs, I don't see any "approval" of the actions, but
a means to provide safe "tools" for those who are going to do these
things anyway.  I also applaud any educational programs which will break
the paranoia about HIV and AIDS - and an end to the finger pointing and
placing blame.

Finally - while many think the money spent on AIDS research is overblown,
just consider the knowledge we will gain (and already have).  I can see
many ways how this research will eventually help cure many other diseases
and viral infections.  I consider the money spent a good investment in
the potential future cures of other diseases.

Consider that perhaps this crisis managed to get researchers off their
butts (money talks).  You can be sure this won't be the last time us
humans have some plague to deal with, maybe from this one we as a people
will learn something.

This was rather long-winded - sorry for that, I hope all of you understand
my points.

-Tim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU