X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.history
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 01:48:10 -0400
From:         Allan Adler <adler@RISC1.ACC.URI.EDU>
Subject:      AIDS and CAWKI
Comments: To: history%ubvm.bitnet@uriacc.ACC.URI.EDU

I am just wondering whether the AIDS epidemic is the beginning of the
extinction of homo sapiens sapiens in our own time.

We are accustomed to the fact that civilizations rise and fall and that species
become extinct (in fact we help many of them along). But at the same time,
many of these events are unthinkable until they occur. So why not our own
extinction? Even that has been made thinkable by nuclear proliferation and
by our tampering with the environment, so why reject out of hand that what
finally does us in is the AIDS epidemic?

I have read Plagues and Peoples, by William MacNeill, which was recommended to
me by my friend Dan Foss. And it shows how history is full of occasions when
diseases struck but the human immune system eventually adapted and resisted.
But AIDS may be different since it strikes at precisely the adaptability of
the human immune system. Therefore, we can't assume that AIDS will eventually
degenerate into just another childhood disease just because everything else
did.

Presently, it is not the human immune system that is our hope against the
disease. It is the edifice of medical research and it is the organization
and resources of governments that are the apparent hope. But the edifice of
medical research depends on the economic status quo, as do the organization
and resources of governments. One of the effects of the AIDS epidemic will
be to diminish the economic status quo, and along with it the organization
and resources of government and the edifice of medical research. Even if
one discounts the cost of treating a growing population of AIDS victims,
the mere fact that huge populations of workers will disappear will have
a tremendous economic impact.

I'm confident that medical researchers will succeed in guaranteeing the
safety of the blood supply. And as a further precaution, many people can use
their own blood for transfusions when they go in for operations.
But the task of modifying human sexual behavior seems extraordinarily
difficult, particularly when there is little funding for education in
this area and when many people do not believe what they are taught.
In addition, when the density of infected individuals rises to a certain
point, many people will feel that they and their partners are probably
already infected, hence don't need to bother practicing safe sex.

The concept of safe sex itself is somewhat misleading. It is not the case that
it is safe to have safe sex with an infected individual. It is merely safer
than having unsafe sex with an infected individual. There appear to be
two prongs to the attack on the AIDS epidemic:
(1) treat the individual
(2) treat the population

Advocacy of safe sex seems to fall under (2). The idea is that even if one
can't treat AIDS, one can still try to to minimize the probability that one
will get infected. This in turn slows the growth of the population of infected
individuals, which in turn makes safe sex safer and safer. But if the
population of infected individuals rises, safe sex gets more and more
unsafe and ceases to be an effective procedure for controlling the size
of the infected population.


But ok, suppose that the population drops by 1 or 2 or a few orders of
magnitude. Perhaps that will make applicable what MacNeill writes about
the population density required in order for a disease to become endemic
in a populaiton, and AIDS will die out for lack of enough victims.
But what will be the condition of the human population at the point
that that happens? What will we have in the way of CAWKI (civilization
as we know it)? What is the minimal population necessary to maintain
CAWKI?

And while the population is dwindling in this way, what will be the
immediately apparent effects on the distribution of world power,
on military conflict, on world economy and on the anthropology and
sociology of humanity?

If you happen to reply to this topic, please send a copy to me at the
email address below, since I don't subscribe to this mailing list.

Allan Adler
adler@risc1.acc.uri.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU