From: larry@bradley.bradley.edu (L. D. Stratton)
Subject: Re: For Those Who Think That Gay Men Have Changed Their Behavior
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:32:14 GMT

In <1992Nov23.134254.22836@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>In article <1992Nov22.213027.11164@netcom.com> ssturgis@netcom.com (Scott Sturgis) writes:
>>>I do.  First, homosexuals are dozens times more likely to be HIV carriers.
>	Not for awhile, anyway.  There was a big story about a year ago
>	that said that the # of teenagers (heterosexual ones) that had
>	been infected with the HIV virus had doubled in 9 months.  The
>	story included the report, but not the actual figures. 
   The Center for Disease Control has all the figures you might want on 
   HIV/AIDS cases within the US and statistical reports on age, sex, risk
   groups, etc.

>	Yes, the fastest growing segment of the AIDS population _will_
>	be heterosexuals [I am, of course, only talking about the US--
>	Africa is wholly irrelavent]--but it is not true _now_.
   The fastest growing segment for infection is women, and particularly
   minority women.  There has been a slow-down in the rate of homosexual
   men but quite an increase in the young adult population.  Remember,
   these are percentages, not numbers but percentages do indicate trends.

>	BTW:  If anyones interested, the number from the teenagers
>	study was somewhere between 400 and 600 <--out of
>	how many tens of millions?
   Check your numbers and look at the larger picture of increase of 
   rates.  Again, CDC publishes the larger report quarterly.

>	Can you say, "Inspire panic because this is really a non-issue?"
   I doubt you could convince any epidemiologist of this being a 'non-issue'.
   WHO estimates 80-110 million infected worldwide by 2000.

>>Again Ted that may be true for the present but the future is a different
>>story. There will be many THOUSANDS more to die before the cure is found. 

>	Show me _one_ virus with a "cure"--any one, I don't care.  Just
>	_one_.. 
   "Cure" was an unfortunate choice of words. However, read on.....

>	Hint:  There is not now, and there will likely _never_ be a cure
>	for AIDS.  [Never here being used in relative terms--we wont see
>	one in our lifetime].  There may eventually be a vaccine that
>	can be used before infection, which is fine.  There may also 
>	eventually be some kind of treatment that extends, further, the
>	life of someone with HIV (by preventing the development of AIDS) 
>	but this is not likely, and these people will simply hang around
>	as carriers.
   Research conducted at Northern Illinois University and now by BioTech
   here in Illinois show some very promising results with RNA replication
   of the virus and the ability to interrupt that replication.  If this
   research proves to be productive, the ramifications indicate that those
   infected by HIV could expect a normal lifespan.  Note that this is not
   a vaccine but a treatment for HIV+ patients.  I do not share your
   pessimism.

   RESOURCE INFORMATION:  Journal of the National Academy of Science
                          Vol. 89 (?)  Nov. 15,1992

>	It is _extremely_ unlikely that there will ever be a 
>	successful therapy for someone who has developed full blown
>	AIDS.
   Think again.  Tremendous advances are being made in DNA/RNA research.
   I will direct your attention to the above resource where several 
   articles have appeared this year on advancements in this area as 
   well as the Saulk Institute publications.  I am not overly optimistic
   about an effective treatment in the next 2 years or so but I am 
   optimistic for the future.

   Oh, if your French is decent, try the Pasteur Institute Journal as
   well.

>	Anyone with AIDS now is walking to the grave.  Anyone with 
>	HIV now has hope that they wont die of it, but the will 
>	_never_ be "cured".  
   Rather broad statements!  You fly in the face of current research 
   with your statement on those with AIDS.  The research that I am 
   involved with negates your first statement and supports your second
   statement to the extent that erradication of the virus through RNA
   replication intervention would do nothing on the antibodies which
   are currently used as the innervator of HIV testing.  Were other tests
   developed for the detection of the disease other than the antibodies,
   the HIV+ or even AIDS patient could test free of the virus if our
   research is fruitful.  Let's pray to God that ours, or some other
   researcher's work is fruitful.

>	A cure or a treatment is _not_ the solution to this problem.
>	The cure is to prevent, by any and all means available to us,
>	the spread of the HIV virus.  
   You are very correct here.  The IMMEDIATE solution is prevention and
   this needs to be preached at all levels of society in every way 
   possible.  However, the long term solution is in research.

   You are probably too young to remeber when we didn't go swimming in 
   August for fear of polio.  That was prevention.  The solution was
   the vaccine.

> Robert Stephen Rodgers  ||  rsrodger@wam.umd.edu  || IRC: Yamanari

   lds
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:60573 ba.politics:7200 ca.politics:9611