Talk:HIV/AIDS/Archive 4

message: I've added two images from the National Institute of Health. The first--"HIV Viron.png"--replaces the old "Aids virus.jpg" image. The new image is clearer and provides a better description of the anatomy of the HIV viron. The second image--"HIV Daughter Particles.jpg"--illustrates the text about replication of HIV after and initial infection (under the "Current medical understanding of AIDS" section).
Please be nice to the new images while waging revert wars...
Carl Henderson 04:26, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Images 

message: I have removed. "During situations where treatments are available many people are able to delay death between ten to twenty years after the development of AIDS." becuase there is no factual basis for this claim. Show me the reference to a ten year survival for antiretrovirals . if you want to make this claim.
Also I have added. "In a process still imperfectly understood, HIV infects the CD4 cells (also called T4 or T-helper cells) of the immune system" This is the current 2005 "scientific consesus". Fauci of NIH from memory.
I have a problem with "AIDS typically develops about ten years following HIV infection." I think ten years is probably the 50% survival - so half develop AIDS within 10 tears and after 10 years half have not developed AIDS. Calling a mid point of a range "typical" seems misleading as in fact very few people wil actually develop AIDS in years 10
Also "proper administration" of antiretroviral medicatiom, seems unnecesarily contentious. Is there evidence of improper adminstration - is it itended to suggest that all or some doctors are imcompetent?
Fred2005 14:49, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  fred's edit 

message: I have a problem with this:
:HIV is transmitted by bodily fluids, such as blood, semen, breast milk, and vaginal secretions. It causes disease by infecting CD4+ T cells, a type of leukocyte (white blood cell) that normally coordinates the immune response to infection and cancer. When a person's CD4+ T cell count decreases sufficiently he or she is prone to a range of diseases that a healthy person's body is normally able to fight. These diseases include cancers and opportunistic infections, which are usually the cause of death in persons with AIDS. HIV may also infect brain cells, causing some neurological disorders.
How is this relevant to Symptoms of AIDS?
The whole issue is that the first symptom of AIDS is usually an AIDS defining illness. Two thirds of reported AIDS in the United States is on the basis of low CD4 cell count - these cases are all asymptomatic
Also opportunistic infections was replaced by AIDS defining illness back in 1993. Can we move with the times and keep up to date with the scientific consenus please?
If you read the Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia article you will see that we have all moved on from the earlier suggestions about opportunistic infections. Fred2005 16:00, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symptoms 

message: The purpose of this section appears to be to ridicule some Nobel laureates and the Murdoch press, without actually stating their views. Words like, mainstream, activists, dissidents, and AIDS denialism are all emotive words, which judge positions that are not presented. I am deleting it Joe Merkel 02:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative theories 

message: This is the AIDS article, so the first point is that "AIDS spread initially in West Africa." As this is the habitat of the common chimpanzee genetic comparisons of HIV and SIV were done by the team at University of Alabama. 1999 is the date of publication not when the research was done. The researchers have wisely avoid speculation about how the transfer from chimpanzee to human occured. Weiss, a leading expert in AIDS, suggests the butchering of chimpazees for meat is a possiblity. Beliefs about prostitutes are unsupported by evidence. The polio vaccine theory has also been investigated and discarded. An encyclopedia is not a repository of every discredited belief, blind alley or red herring. Stick to the facts than can be referenced.
The is no reason to repeat the artists impression of HIV. It is already on the HIV article. Joe Merkel 16:56, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins edit 

message: I have divided this into two sections, because treatments are for people with AIDS and vaccines are intended to prevent HIV - actually vacines probably belong in the HIV article.
I have edited to the 2002 treatment guidelines and linked to the  Antiretroviral drug article. Statements like "The majority of the world's infected individuals, unfortunately, do not have access to medications and treatments for HIV and AIDS." are demeaning, racist, and inaccurate. The fact is the majority of the HIV infected people in the world do not meet the current treatment guidelines! Joe Merkel 17:05, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatments and vaccines edit 

message: This article is getting torn up by Fred's edits. He is replacing well-written paragraphs with dire warnings about the dangers of HIV treatment and claims of controversy about early treatment. Of course we should mention the most current guidelines for starting treatment, but in a neutral manner (and without removing information on the benefits of HAART). Rhobite 16:33, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
:I believe Fred2005 has broken the 3RR rule with his last edit. Axon 16:39, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fred2005's nonsense 

message: Uh, where did my remarks on this talk page go? It seems they have been completely deleted by SciGuy. They are not in the talk archives or the NPOV dispute branch SciGuy created. Axon 16:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of talk page comments 

message: I have heard that Africans are more likely to contract AIDS due to genetic factors and that a minority of those with Scandinavian genes are immune to it. Perhaps we should include something about this? 207.224.198.170 16:50, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You're thinking of the CCR5-Delta32 mutation, which provides some protection against HIV infection and is more common in those of European descent. see the CCR5 page in OMIM or do a Medline search on "CCR5-Delta32". - Nunh-huh 05:14, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Africans & genetics 

message: I'm assuming that Sci guy's new tactic is simply to drown readers in overwhelming statistics and impenetrable language, such as the new CDC graphic and the large lists of people infected per region and deaths per region. I'm not saying this data shouldn't be in there, but there seems to be an intentional campaign to (a) make it take up as much space as possible and (b) copy complex language directly from medical studies.
For example, we just rewrote the lead section by hand over the past few days. I think the new lead is pretty good. Sci guy replaced the lead section with this text, copied directly from the CDC's MMWR, a publication which is intended for medical professionals: 
:"The etiologic agent of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome AIDS is a retrovirus designated human immunodeficiency virus HIV. The CD4+ T-lymphocyte is the primary target for HIV infection because of the affinity of the virus for the CD4 surface marker. The CD4+ T-lymphocyte coordinates a number of important immunologic functions, and a loss of these functions results in progressive impairment of the immune response."
This text is basically unreadable to a layperson. I'm concerned that now that the legitimate contributors are making an effort to cite sources, Sci guy has shifted tactics towards trying to make the article as unreadable as possible. Sci guy please use your own words. Other people have taken the time to do research and write in language that is comfortable to read. If you are not willing or capable of doing the same, I'd ask that you please stop editing this article. All of your recent edits have been simple cut and paste jobs. Rhobite 16:57, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
:If you check the archive, you will find that Sci guy was previously criticized for NOT including the statement "The etiologic agent of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome AIDS is a retrovirus designated human immunodeficiency virus HIV." Now he is being criticized for including it! Is this article intended to contain, current referenced facts - or readable misinformation? For example the lead section now contains the popular misconception that "AIDS is a disease characterized by the destruction of the human immune system." In fact it is only part of the immune system the CD4 T cells that are affected, and this is thought to result in a loss of cell mediated immunity, and therefore vulnerablity to certain specifc diseases and some cancers. The current focus of AIDS is the heterosexaul epidemic in sub Saharan Africa. Fred2005 11:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fred, you are quoting out of context.  At the time, Rhobite was making the point that Sci Guy was selectively quoting the CDC (and back then, we were making the point that the article was unreadable through his and your efforts).  Now, as Rhobite said, Sci Guy has switched gear to swamping the article in medical jargon.  As to "destruction of the immune system", that's a good enough approximation for an article introduction.  Now, stop wasting our time, please.  --Robert Merkel 12:34, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Drowning in statistics and terminology