Shep's South Africa Babbling (split from Saddam/Key to Detro

[The_Nice_Guy]

There was some controversy over African AIDS in the WHO recently.

From the results of various studies, several scientists have disputed the presently-accepted hypothesis of AIDS(HIV) being transmitted via sex. Instead, they say, HIV is transmitted through the use of dirty needles and tainted blood.
http://washingtontimes.com/world/20030304-86278376.htm

Here's something from the article that shouts out for attention.

Many studies report HIV-infected children who have mothers who are not infected. According to one study, 40 percent of children with HIV had mothers who tested negative for the virus.

All I'm going to say on this is that quite obviously, present HIV testing, at least in Africa, has a lot of problems. It's not very accurate, and any data from that continent is going to be suspect if they cannot make an accurate diagnosis. The idea of an AIDS epidemic in Africa might not be true after all.

IMO, basic healthcare, that's where the emphasis should be. However, unsound medical practices, like the use of dirty needles, would make any effort to improve the level of healthcare counterproductive.

Blame it on ANC again. I've always wondered how they managed to run SA into the ground myself.

The Nice Guy

[The Duchess of Zeon]

There was some controversy over African AIDS in the WHO recently.

From the results of various studies, several scientists have disputed the presently-accepted hypothesis of AIDS(HIV) being transmitted via sex. Instead, they say, HIV is transmitted through the use of dirty needles and tainted blood.
http://washingtontimes.com/world/20030304-86278376.htm

Here's something from the article that shouts out for attention.

Many studies report HIV-infected children who have mothers who are not infected. According to one study, 40 percent of children with HIV had mothers who tested negative for the virus.

All I'm going to say on this is that quite obviously, present HIV testing, at least in Africa, has a lot of problems. It's not very accurate, and any data from that continent is going to be suspect if they cannot make an accurate diagnosis. The idea of an AIDS epidemic in Africa might not be true after all.

IMO, basic healthcare, that's where the emphasis should be. However, unsound medical practices, like the use of dirty needles, would make any effort to improve the level of healthcare counterproductive.

Blame it on ANC again. I've always wondered how they managed to run SA into the ground myself.

The Nice Guy

It's been known for a long time that HIV wasn't necessarily transmitted to the child. It doesn't matter, though - So much of the populations of some countries have been gutted (30% in some cases) - that they are headed for a crash. The demographics of the situation demands it. They're still headed up right now but it's a hollow shell.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

um, I hate to say this duchess, but given the nature of the problem -- that HIV was (and still is) running rampant principally among the previously disposessed ethnicities, it is highly doubtful that the apartheid regime would have done ANYTHING but sweep it under the rug, and treat those few whites that were unlucky enough to get it -- after all in those days 'race mixing' was a very serious offense -- the possibility of proper white women (any white women) having brown babies was too horrifying to permit. The logic behind such a strategy would be to keep the underclasses even more effectively subjugated.

now, at least, everything is more equal. I still have certain reservations however about exactly how much of a health risk the african HIV strain is compared to the indo-asian and euro-american -- from a great many of the statistics Ive been hearing (and I really question the accuracy of all these infection rate statistics), it would seem that people should be dropping like flies over there considering the wholly pitiful health care the average person has, yet populations are growing, and growing older as well.

Well, you might be inclined to think that first, but... (in regard to growing populations, see my "hollow shell" comment and think about that). As for the Apartheid Regime - Consider them as racist bastards, sure, but SMART ones. Think of each member of an ethnicity other than white in SA as a production unit. A machine.

You don't want those to break, do you? Especially in very large numbers? That will ruin the prosperity of Real People, won't it? So health care = Maintainence. When you think about it like that the ability of a prosperous apartheid regime to deal with the AIDS epidemic is combined with will. Hardly a compassionate will, but with a will.

[Shaka[Zulu]]

It's been known for a long time that HIV wasn't necessarily transmitted to the child. It doesn't matter, though - So much of the populations of some countries have been gutted (30% in some cases) - that they are headed for a crash. The demographics of the situation demands it. They're still headed up right now but it's a hollow shell.

what exactly do you mean by gutted? you mean that the total population of certain african countries has actually been cut by as much as a third (or do you mean the rate of reproduction)??? solely by HIV and its' client diseases and not some other cause such as famine or war?

give me a break. Ive been to several countries on the continent including Nigeria, Ghana, Liberia, Kenya, Egypt and Morocco. I grant you that egypt and morocco arent at particular risk at the moment, but all the others are -- let me tell you that HIV is a MINOR health risk in the rest of those countries compared to malaria and other traditional ilnesses (hell, it's only a matter of time until there is a major ebola outbreak), and the overall effects of their crappy health care... in nigeria ALONE you can drive along any of the major highways in Lagos and see deformities (birth) by the hundred... and those are the ones that LIVED!

I have to agree with that washington times article... African HIV wouldnt be even half the problem it currently seems to be (and the extent of that problem is doubtful because of shoddy data and methodology) if decent healthcare was available.

[Shaka[Zulu]]

Well, you might be inclined to think that first, but... (in regard to growing populations, see my "hollow shell" comment and think about that). As for the Apartheid Regime - Consider them as racist bastards, sure, but SMART ones. Think of each member of an ethnicity other than white in SA as a production unit. A machine.

ok... then you really dont want too many old ones (too much of a pain as they remember too much) or very young ones (just a burden) do you? besides, do we know that the AR saw things that way, and actually did place such a value on the 'coloreds'?

You don't want those to break, do you? Especially in very large numbers? That will ruin the prosperity of Real People, won't it? So health care = Maintainence. When you think about it like that the ability of a prosperous apartheid regime to deal with the AIDS epidemic is combined with will. Hardly a compassionate will, but with a will.

some interesting assumptions, but they can always import more 'machines'

[Sea Skimmer]

what exactly do you mean by gutted? you mean that the total population of certain african countries has actually been cut by as much as a third (or do you mean the rate of reproduction)??? solely by HIV and its' client diseases and not some other cause such as famine or war?

Take a look at the population of Botswana since 1980, a nation which has not been suffering from famines or wars.

[Sea Skimmer]

Take a look at the population of Botswana since 1980, a nation which has not been suffering from famines or wars.

Forget the above, Botswana has had a considerable population drop recently from HIV, but it's not the example I'm thinking of.

[The_Nice_Guy]

It's been known for a long time that HIV wasn't necessarily transmitted to the child. It doesn't matter, though - So much of the populations of some countries have been gutted (30% in some cases) - that they are headed for a crash. The demographics of the situation demands it. They're still headed up right now but it's a hollow shell.

HIV not transmitted to the child? Excuse me, that's about HIV positive parent to HIV-negative child. Right now, the problem is from HIV-negative parent to HIV-POSITIVE child, the other way round. So where did the virus come from? The best explanation is simply that the test/s are faulty, either in failing to detect the HIV seropositivity of the parent, or that of the child.

But you're still right in that no matter what the cause, the demographics of the African countries have been badly cored out. I think many of the basic services are headed for crisis levels.

Labor intensive sectors, like agriculture, might be about to collapse.

The Nice Guy

[Axis Kast]

The SADF routinely tested various lethal drugs or viral infections on blacks, homoesexuals, and others. Any suspected gays or lesbian troops in the South African military were subjected to painful shock therapy and "conversion" treatments.

I'd make the argument that life under Apartheid was a far sight less decent than life under Nelson Mandela or Thabo Mbeki. The humanistic side of having your own country is fairly important.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

HIV not transmitted to the child? Excuse me, that's about HIV positive parent to HIV-negative child. Right now, the problem is from HIV-negative parent to HIV-POSITIVE child, the other way round. So where did the virus come from? The best explanation is simply that the test/s are faulty, either in failing to detect the HIV seropositivity of the parent, or that of the child.

Garh - Sorry! There's an easy explanation for that, too - And it's a nasty one, at that. Asymptomatic carriers still capable of infecting fetuses through the womb. (First guess based on available information; I'm no virologist and I'd need to do some research to confirm or disprove that theory. Perhaps Phong could add something there.)

But you're still right in that no matter what the cause, the demographics of the African countries have been badly cored out. I think many of the basic services are headed for crisis levels.

Labor intensive sectors, like agriculture, might be about to collapse.

The Nice Guy

That's exactly the point. But more than just agricultural - It's the vital sectors. The people with money are fleeing. Lots of doctors and nurses in the UK are from - Africa. You know why? They don't want to treat a constant stream of AIDS patients with poor quality equipment and low safety standards - They'll eventually get infected. There goes African healthcare down to even worse levels. The same for other vital sectors, which are being hit hard - Traditionally, wealthier classes have had the luxury of being promiscuous in societies like that of Africa, and for a patchwork system like that of modern Africa, that includes the technical people.

As they either flee or get hit with AIDS, that collapses the modern infrastructure. Well, guess what - Africa is partially industrialized. It can't support as many people as it has now with only primitive agriculture alone. It needs at least the rudiments of modern society, and it's losing those. As the levels of AIDS reach a sufficient population cut to affect agricultural productivity from a manpower standpoint as well, you're going to see serious consequences.

At the very least it will be an imitation of the Black Death; that is to say, a third of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa is going to die. I don't see any other way to cut it. It will be worse than that, however, I think. As HIV takes down the populations, it will be combined with not only these famines, but with a greater spread of traditional diseases from the breakdown in infrastructure - And war over dwindling resources. It could be very bad.

That's what I meant by a "hollow shell" - The population growth is still occuring, but it's totally unsupported by anything to make it keep growing. House built on shifting sands and all that.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The SADF routinely tested various lethal drugs or viral infections on blacks, homoesexuals, and others. Any suspected gays or lesbian troops in the South African military were subjected to painful shock therapy and "conversion" treatments.

I'd make the argument that life under Apartheid was a far sight less decent than life under Nelson Mandela or Thabo Mbeki. The humanistic side of having your own country is fairly important.

Oh, I'm well aware of their experiments - But in your best judgement, would they want a massive viral pandemic running wild in the black populace? You're the South Africa expert.

[Axis Kast]

Some of the die-hards? Absolutely. I seriously doubt whether you'd be hearing much about South Africn AIDS if the whites were still in power. A great many of the strongest proponents of Apartheid were actually in the halls of government prior to de Klerk. Vorster? Please. Botha might have tried to fight the epidemic, but to what end I can't say.

Face it. Life for the average black South African has improved. Some will claim it is worse, but most will insist that it is better. There's more to life than the trains running on time, to quote the cliché. There's a huge necessity to recognize the perception of the situation by much of the population essentially liberated from Apartheid.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Some of the die-hards? Absolutely. I seriously doubt whether you'd be hearing much about South Africn AIDS if the whites were still in power. A great many of the strongest proponents of Apartheid were actually in the halls of government prior to de Klerk. Vorster? Please. Botha might have tried to fight the epidemic, but to what end I can't say.

Face it. Life for the average black South African has improved. Some will claim it is worse, but most will insist that it is better. There's more to life than the trains running on time, to quote the cliché. There's a huge necessity to recognize the perception of the situation by much of the population essentially liberated from Apartheid.

Then they'd better enjoy it while they're still alive.

[phongn]

HIV not transmitted to the child? Excuse me, that's about HIV positive parent to HIV-negative child. Right now, the problem is from HIV-negative parent to HIV-POSITIVE child, the other way round. So where did the virus come from? The best explanation is simply that the test/s are faulty, either in failing to detect the HIV seropositivity of the parent, or that of the child.

Garh - Sorry! There's an easy explanation for that, too - And it's a nasty one, at that. Asymptomatic carriers still capable of infecting fetuses through the womb. (First guess based on available information; I'm no virologist and I'd need to do some research to confirm or disprove that theory. Perhaps Phong could add something there.)

My AIDS/HIV knowledge is not up to par. Admiral Valdemar would know better.

[Axis Kast]

It would have been the same had the whites been in power.

Suddenly, there would have been a convenient - from their point of view - downsizing of the black community.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

It would have been the same had the whites been in power.

Suddenly, there would have been a convenient - from their point of view - downsizing of the black community.

Do you really think they would have been able to contain it?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I mean, in the context of - If they're letting it run rampant in the black populace, can they really stop it from crossing over? There's multiple vectors after all, and miscenegation is illegal but not unoccuring in any such society: it only requires one undetected point-infected spreading through the white populace to create a serious problem.

[Axis Kast]

Contain it? From breaking out into the white population, yes. Racial mixing would have been fairly difficult. The spread of intravenous drugs or “bad” blood would also be somewhat impaired by the rather strict rules or racist dogma of the white government, whatsmore. Not to mention that South Africa for a time hosted hundreds of world-class doctors and some excellent facilities. Under the white regimé, mind you. A very great deal of this has deteriorated as the result of expatriation.

AIDS is today not a “serious” problem in the United States per se – at least, it’s not reached a pandemic level despite having crossed all color, wealth, and lifestyle barriers. After the same fashion, the South Africans would have contained those proven HIV positive. Now that’s not to say AIDS wouldn’t have become a problem, but it does mean that it would have been (A) less-prevalent among the white population, (B) less well-covered in journalistic terms, and (C) contained aggressively from the outset among the white (and potentially coloured) population. South Africa of 1994 had a great deal more money and medical capability than the South Africa of today.

[The_Nice_Guy]

Garh - Sorry! There's an easy explanation for that, too - And it's a nasty one, at that. Asymptomatic carriers still capable of infecting fetuses through the womb. (First guess based on available information; I'm no virologist and I'd need to do some research to confirm or disprove that theory. Perhaps Phong could add something there.)

Asymptomatic carriers? Again, this contradicts a great deal of what has been said about HIV/AIDS. And if there really was such a thing as 'asymptomatic carriers', well then, the use of HIV testing kits would be a joke, since it's very probable that a lot more people actually carry the virus than is actually detected, including people who don't test HIV positive, and don't get AIDS!

And if that's true, what changes the HIV status of a 'asymptomatic carrier' from negative to positive, and perhaps further on to AIDS? Spontaneous expression? If somebody says 'HIV', I'll like to thwap him on the head.

The Nice Guy

[Stuart Mackey]

Stuart Mackey
Obviously you did not get the point, or you did not know that the industrial spin-up of Germany is the result of Hitler's reign? The Third Reich was brought down not due to the inhumane policies of nazism, but due to agressive policies of Hitler and the resulting war breakout.

Stas, perhaps you did not know that inhumane nations are the agressive one's? and perhaps you did not know that Hitlers economic policies were on the verge of collapsein 1939? .

Specifically on the Soviet regime: it's problem was the economical system of socialism, which brought it to an utter failure, not the inhumane policies of the state, which people endured for about 70 years.
So it's not a matter of cruel policies, and obviouslt death of the dictator doesn't mean the breakup of the state.

Do I need to point out to you who won WW2 to show why Stalin was not deposed? hmm and who deposed Beria? and what the fuck happned in 1989-90? the moment the USSR got the chance the regime was changed.
One thing leed's to another, as you seem to have missed it.

Oh, and let not forget Franco's Spain. and as to succefull dictatorships the world has yet to see a long term economic success story from any of them, bar, possibly, China.

Free and decent societies are succesfull, dictatorships, buy their very nature result in stagnation and decay, as freedom breeds success, and that must be supressed to support the regime.

[The_Nice_Guy]

China also realizes that if they want to be successful economically, state controls have to be loosened, so that further validates the freedom=prosperity theory.

The only thing is, do you go for liberalization politically, or economically first? Russian chose the former, while China chose the latter. The latter option may yet prove to be the better bet.

The Nice Guy

[Stuart Mackey]

China also realizes that if they want to be successful economically, state controls have to be loosened, so that further validates the freedom=prosperity theory.

The only thing is, do you go for liberalization politically, or economically first? Russian chose the former, while China chose the latter. The latter option may yet prove to be the better bet.

The Nice Guy

Indeed. It may be a better bet, but there is one issue that was raised at the Tiannimen square massacre, at what point will economic freedom and freedom of information overcome culture to encourage political freedom?

[The_Nice_Guy]

Indeed. It may be a better bet, but there is one issue that was raised at the Tiannimen square massacre, at what point will economic freedom and freedom of information overcome culture to encourage political freedom?

It'll take some time, but they'll get there, sooner or later. The problem lies in trying to get the populace educated and knowledgable enough that elections won't be a joke.

Besides, the great fear of political liberalization in China has always been justified by its history. Either rightly or wrongly, they feel democratization too soon would see something like the Balkans, or a replay of China in the 1920s, as various generals and governors make grabs for power.

I don't envy the CCP. Let go too soon, and China dissolves into a myraid of small provinces. Hold on for too long, and the disaffected populace may rise up in revolt.

Step by step, is what I can see. They're already talking of holding elections for town chiefs to help combat corruption. It'll be interesting, to say the least.

The Nice Guy

[Axis Kast]

The Chinese will likely elect to keep their ideology. It's too useful.

As for economic progress and dictatorship? South Africa is a shining example, though you have to factor in total isolation and a huge degree of pre-existing wealth.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The Chinese will likely elect to keep their ideology. It's too useful.

As for economic progress and dictatorship? South Africa is a shining example, though you have to factor in total isolation and a huge degree of pre-existing wealth.

China certainly has the mineral wealth for economic progress.