From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Re: Clinton's position on AIDS
Note: Copyright 1992, Dan R. Greening. Non-commercial reproduction allowed.
Archive-Number: 6006
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:11:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.185552.574@cs.ucla.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>In article <1992Aug23.231549.17418@cs.ucla.edu> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>
>However much one dislikes the policies of the Bush Administration, support
>for AIDS has been and is now incredible.  The facts are that AIDS gets about
>2 Billion a year for research.  The budget for education on AIDS is some 350
>Million (and which, unfortunately, targets the low ris groups).
>
>Compared to Breast cancer, AIDS funding is astounding, especially since
>Breast cancer kills many more people than AIDS. 

Maybe funding for breast cancer is to low, but that doesn't imply that
AIDS funding is to high. 2billion per year comes to only $2000 per
infected person per year in the US. If these people come down with
full blown AIDS it will cost $100,000 to treat each one. This isn't
even scratching the surface of even the purely economic costs. 

>Funding for research of
>diseases should be proportioned fairly in view of the number of people
>affected and at risk.  
              ^^^^^^^
Think about that....

>WHO's 1985 figure of 400 million was a gross
>overstatement.  And besides, no one gives press releases about the world
>figure for diseases such as Breast cancer.  When charted by careful analysis
>of the statistics, AIDS does not come close to touching the Breast Cancer
>problem, especiallly here in America.

How many years of life are lost to AIDS and how many to breast cancer?
Is the incidence of breast cancer increasing? Can breast cancer
mutate into new more contagious strains?

>>Promote a national AIDS education and prevention initiative that
>>disseminates frank and accurate information to reduce the spread of
>>the disease, and educates our children about the nature and threat of
>>AIDS.
>
>This would be  a refreshing touch.  But... the problem is not totally the
>Bush administration.  A big part of the problem is the pressure from certain
>homosexual groups who  are vehemently against any federal advertising that
>links AIDS with homosexual behavior.  

AIDS is linked to risky behaviours none of which are exclusively homosexual,
I'm homosexual and have never had anal sex.

>This is a real problem, becuase being
>homosexual does not give one AIDS, but participating in homosexual behavior
>rasises one's likelihood of getting AIDS.

Since when did making out with someone of the same sex spread HIV?

>I still don't know why there are not direct commercial on TV warning of the
>link between drug use by needles to AIDS.  What's going on?  Let's here the
>truth.

I've never seen a direct commercial about HIV period. 

>The U.S. discriminates on matters of immigration all the time.  We have to. 
>For example, we discriminate on those with contagious diseases such as
>Teberculosis.  However, AIDS is not contagious, and hence I would favor not
>restricting immigration for AIDS.  But, if there is a strain of AIDS that is
>more likely to spread as some have hinted at lately, then restriction should
>be in effect.  So, some seem to want their to be a new virus that is
>spreading rapidly for various political and research reasons, but this hope
>inevitably justifies immigration restrictions.  The problem is more complex
>than a group of shouters in Amsterdam imply.

Unless you test all people entering the country you have no hope of
even making a dent. Most people with HIV won't know they have it.
And even then people would slip by who where recently infected.

>>Reevaluate the AIDS prevention budget at the U.S. Centers for
>>Disease Control to ensure that education is a top priority.
>
>Like I said before, more funding is not going to solve the problem.  The
>answer is the type of message we are sending.  Taargeting  white, middle class,
>non drug using heterosexuals ignores the main problem.

1) The Helms admendment goes along way towards preventing federally funded
   AIDS education for homosexuals.

2) It needs to be directed at everyone, the greatest risk factor for
   AIDS is ignorance. If the white middle class remains ignorant long
   enough they will be the leading risk group.

>>Support local efforts to make condoms available in schools.
>
>If Clinton is  really for this, he's a goner. And for AIDS activists, I am
>convinced this is the wrong way to go. 

And we should remove safety belts from cars because having belts encourages
driving?

>>Reorganize the NIH infrastructure to streamline AIDS research
>>efforts and improve planning efficiency and communication.
>
>Alot of funding, what about the national debt?  How will pay for all of
>these New programs?

Who will pay for not having these programs?

-- 
>>Unix/C Contract worker available 5 years C/unix work experience<<  ______
Available for Telecommuting/Travel and contracts on the T Line       \    /
in the Boston MA area. Send me e-mail for a copy of my Resume.        \  /
       -- VWIS 508-793-9568 (2400 baud), Linux support BBS.--          \/
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids