UNAids: Asia Becoming AIDS Powder Keg

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-07-06 05:37pm

BBC News

Seems we're simply not learning yet. Maybe we need twice that figure before it's something of a problem.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-07-07 01:30am

India and China better get their act togather before it is too late.

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2004-07-07 04:31am

This could potentially be the way the human population will decrease to more managable levels if it hits China and India to the same degree as Africa is currently being effected.

Within the next twenty or so years will we probably see massive increases in deaths due to AIDs

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2004-07-07 05:26am

ggs wrote:This could potentially be the way the human population will decrease to more managable levels if it hits China and India to the same degree as Africa is currently being effected.

That was what I was thinking... of course it's rather morbid...

The_Nice_Guy · Post by **The_Nice_Guy** » 2004-07-08 08:50am

Again, the level of testing accuracy seems to be a blank spot. There is every reason to continue arguing against the veracity of HIV testing, as well as the theory behind HIV/AIDS.

Come on, any EMs of HIV yet?

Sure, there is every chance numbers of people with the disease AIDS itself is increasing due to inadequate healthcare, nutrition, exposure to viruses in urban areas, but there's still very little to back the claim that it's all due to HIV.

The most telling part of the BBC article was the final few paragraphs, where they were backtracking from prior estimates. Is it too much if I say they'll be backtracking again in a few years down the line, and that their vaccines will NOT work?

TWG

The_Nice_Guy · Post by **The_Nice_Guy** » 2004-07-08 09:00am

Oh yeah, and Duesberg is STILL tilting at the windmill...

http://www.ias.ac.in/jbiosci/jun2003/383.pdf

Download the pdf, and examine the claims.

TWG

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-07-08 02:51pm

The_Nice_Guy wrote:Again, the level of testing accuracy seems to be a blank spot. There is every reason to continue arguing against the veracity of HIV testing, as well as the theory behind HIV/AIDS.

Come on, any EMs of HIV yet?

Oh not this again...

Look, there are plenty of images.

A false colour image from a TEM of a load of budding HIV particles erupting from a T4-Lymphocyte. Plenty more where that came from.

Sure, there is every chance numbers of people with the disease AIDS itself is increasing due to inadequate healthcare, nutrition, exposure to viruses in urban areas, but there's still very little to back the claim that it's all due to HIV.

Given samples of the virus are found in those within the UNAids studies since it's looking for HIV positive individuals and not AIDS sufferers only, I fail to see the relevance; the incidence figures I believe are from ELISA or similar tests for HIV antibodies in the whole blood. Yes, AIDS can occur via other pathological instances, but this is an active threat creating the condition. I think any agent that can propagate such a condition needs some serious attention, no?

The most telling part of the BBC article was the final few paragraphs, where they were backtracking from prior estimates. Is it too much if I say they'll be backtracking again in a few years down the line, and that their vaccines will NOT work?

TWG

Why are you worried about vaccines when you insist everytime that the actual virus doesn't exist?

And no, vaccines don't work for the very fact that HIV is at least 200 times more unstable than Influenza. That, my friend, is one adaptive virus and although drugs can slow the progression, instances of drug resistance are documented too.

Rest assured, if there ever can be a proper vaccine or even cure for the condition through other means, then it'll be found. There's a lot of money at stake in this problem that the pharms don't want to miss out on.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » 2004-07-08 07:44pm

If AIDS hits China really hard like it did Africa, I wonder if it will get more attention. After all, western countries are just aching to get access to China's markets. An AIDS epidemic would really suck.

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2004-07-08 07:50pm

Defiant wrote:If AIDS hits China really hard like it did Africa, I wonder if it will get more attention. After all, western countries are just aching to get access to China's markets. An AIDS epidemic would really suck.

Western countries have always been trying to get at China's markets. An AIDS epidemic on the scale of Africa would likely topple the communist government and leave China fractured and fighting itself for the next 20 years or so.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2004-07-08 08:11pm

I've wondered for some time if the way the Chinese government is dragging its feet over dealing with HIV/AIDS is delibrate - after all, this is the same government than banned having more than one child*, and is willing to back up the law through a variety of means.

China WANTS to drop its population... do they really care that much about how it happens? Especially since HIV is still so strongly associated with prostitutes, drug users, and other undesirables? Oh yes, and poor villages who sold their blood, which was drawn in a manner so at odds with what we in the West would consider proper procedure that when I first heard about it I was shocked, just shocked.

Problem is, of course, that this disease will not stay down among the "undesirables" forever - it will eventually creep into the mainstream, as it has in some parts of Africa, with devastating results. By then, though, most of the old farts running the show over there will be dead, so what do they really care?

* Yes, yes, I'm aware it's not so clear-cut as all that - rural and low-population areas are allowed more, when the first child is handicapped a second may be permitted, etc... Didn't want to dredge up details and look, I did anyway.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-07-08 08:31pm

Broomstick wrote:I've wondered for some time if the way the Chinese government is dragging its feet over dealing with HIV/AIDS is delibrate - after all, this is the same government than banned having more than one child*, and is willing to back up the law through a variety of means.

China WANTS to drop its population... do they really care that much about how it happens? Especially since HIV is still so strongly associated with prostitutes, drug users, and other undesirables? Oh yes, and poor villages who sold their blood, which was drawn in a manner so at odds with what we in the West would consider proper procedure that when I first heard about it I was shocked, just shocked.

Problem is, of course, that this disease will not stay down among the "undesirables" forever - it will eventually creep into the mainstream, as it has in some parts of Africa, with devastating results. By then, though, most of the old farts running the show over there will be dead, so what do they really care?

* Yes, yes, I'm aware it's not so clear-cut as all that - rural and low-population areas are allowed more, when the first child is handicapped a second may be permitted, etc... Didn't want to dredge up details and look, I did anyway.

While I wouldn't put such a scheme past the Chinese government (the same folks who let SARS turn from an outbreak into an epidemic), an uncontrolled plague rapidly spreading through their urban population would be an unmitigated economic catastrophe. Totalitarians, as a whole, don't like sloppiness and they don't like horrible disasters that can rile up the proles. If they were that desperate to get their numbers down (and they can't be that badly pressed, considering they're paving over thousands of acres of prime farmland), they could start practicing forced sterilizations.

Now, do I think the cabal in Beijing could delude itself into thinking AIDS isn't really a threat to China until it's too late? Again, look at how they handled SARS. And do I think that if China had a major outbreak, they'd control it by throwing HIV+ people into quarrantine camps and letting them die of malign neglect? It's working for Castro, so why not?

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-07-08 08:39pm

What about India? The damage that AIDS could do in crowded cities is rather high isn't it?

I'm not an expert on Indain culture however, how much drug use is going on, casual sex, do they have Westren standard for blood transfusions, etc?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-07-08 08:47pm

frigidmagi wrote:What about India? The damage that AIDS could do in crowded cities is rather high isn't it?

I'm not an expert on Indain culture however, how much drug use is going on, casual sex, do they have Westren standard for blood transfusions, etc?

A general AIDS breakout into India would be as bad or worse then the African pandemic, unless there's something about Indian society I don't know about.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-07-08 09:15pm

A general AIDS breakout into India would be as bad or worse then the African pandemic, unless there's something about Indian society I don't know about.

Good God! That would turn those cities in morges. Is anyone paying attention this report or is it forgotten has soon as read like most UN reports?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-07-08 09:23pm

From what I recall of a WHO report, some 5 million Indians are destined for AIDS due to HIV.

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2004-07-08 11:57pm

frigidmagi wrote:What about India? The damage that AIDS could do in crowded cities is rather high isn't it?

I'm not an expert on Indain culture however, how much drug use is going on, casual sex, do they have Westren standard for blood transfusions, etc?

An AIDS breakout in India would be much worse due to its massively larger population (over 1 billion officially counted people) and its much greater population density.

So any bets on when the population in India starts to crash due to everyone dying from AIDs? 40-80 years? I dont have any real hope for AIDs spread to be limited in a 3rd world nation with jack-all infrastructure with a retro-virus we can barely touch.

PainRack · Post by **PainRack** » 2004-07-09 02:23am

Broomstick wrote:I've wondered for some time if the way the Chinese government is dragging its feet over dealing with HIV/AIDS is delibrate - after all, this is the same government than banned having more than one child*, and is willing to back up the law through a variety of means.

The social and economic costs of AIDS argue against this theory. To put it simply, its easier to believe in government incompetence, especially in China, where it ONLY took 2 weeks for the SARs epidemic to be noticed.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-07-10 01:39pm

Check it out, China is issuing an HIV warning:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3882283.stm

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2004-07-10 01:49pm

ggs wrote:So any bets on when the population in India starts to crash due to everyone dying from AIDs? 40-80 years? I dont have any real hope for AIDs spread to be limited in a 3rd world nation with jack-all infrastructure with a retro-virus we can barely touch.

Eventually, it may be limited by one of the measures any country with that many people can take: evolution. If it kills off enough people, you can bet that the people with genetic AIDS resistance will be a greater percentage of the population than before. It's still morbid as hell, though.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2004-07-10 03:42pm

On the bright side, this will hopefully serve as a partial solution to overpopulation.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-07-10 04:36pm

Peregrin Toker wrote:On the bright side, this will hopefully serve as a partial solution to overpopulation.

The world is self-sufficient in food and the birthrate worldwide is falling towards replacement. There is no overpopulation problem. There is no bright side to millions of people dying a painful, lingering death.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2004-07-10 04:45pm

(Takes mental note: "Never, ever, post something on the N&P forum when sleepy and hungry".)

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2004-07-11 02:17am

RedImperator wrote:
Peregrin Toker wrote:On the bright side, this will hopefully serve as a partial solution to overpopulation.
The world is self-sufficient in food and the birthrate worldwide is falling towards replacement. There is no overpopulation problem. There is no bright side to millions of people dying a painful, lingering death.

Why the fuck is food the first thing anyone points to? It's not food that'll be the limiting factor, it'll be water.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2004-07-11 11:35am

Uraniun235 wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
Peregrin Toker wrote:On the bright side, this will hopefully serve as a partial solution to overpopulation.
The world is self-sufficient in food and the birthrate worldwide is falling towards replacement. There is no overpopulation problem. There is no bright side to millions of people dying a painful, lingering death.
Why the fuck is food the first thing anyone points to? It's not food that'll be the limiting factor, it'll be water.

And water affects food production. In much of Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, and Texas, farming is supported almost entirely with water pumped from an underground aquifer, which is being depleted quite a bit faster than anyone wants. If we run out, that's a lot of farmland that'll suddenly be dropping in food production (one of the reasons I'm getting the hell out of this shithole in one year). I wouldn't be surprised to see this sort of thing happen in other places.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-07-11 12:00pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
Peregrin Toker wrote:On the bright side, this will hopefully serve as a partial solution to overpopulation.
The world is self-sufficient in food and the birthrate worldwide is falling towards replacement. There is no overpopulation problem. There is no bright side to millions of people dying a painful, lingering death.
Why the fuck is food the first thing anyone points to? It's not food that'll be the limiting factor, it'll be water.

And that justifies his idiotic claim that a worldwide AIDS pandemic has a bright side because it will cull all those excess humans how? We can get water to people--it might cost a fortune and it might force us to rethink a lot of our agricultural methods, but we can keep people alive through water shortages. The point is that these are people we're talking about, not inconvenient statistics whose elimination is a good thing.

Besides that, if AIDS ever got to the point that it would put a serious dent in Chinese or Indian populations (the way it seems to be going in Africa), the social disruption would make whatever might come of water shortages seem tame, and India and China are nuclear armed.