Re: BBC **LIES** About HIV TESTS

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, LeftBank wrote:

> I was the guy who asked him the question in the programme broadcast. I doubt
> these biblically sized figures and after 20 odd years it appears that AIDS
> is still more a matter of faith than fact. For the time being I remain
> agnostic, especially as the BBC figures published for the UK show 247
> heterosexual HIV cases for 2002 (figures from jan to sept)
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3233018.stm . The 247 may even be drug
> users or lied about their sexual habits so even that figure is dodgy. Is 247
> new cases really an epidemic?

Probably not, in the UK at least.  They _do_ try to take things into
account when assigning risk exposure (eg lying).  But then in the UK we're
paranoid about HIV and AIDS and have changed society in response.

>
> If they spent the money on sanitation rather than aids drugs in africa,
> Would HIV reduce?

No, drugs aren't the answer in Africa.  Far, far too many infected and far
too late.  A changed society or a vaccine might make more of a difference.
A few years ago I might have said that clean water would save more lives
though, and it still might in some areas, but where there are 10-20% or
more of young adults infected?  Well, I can't see 10-20% of young adults
dying due to unclean water (that's largely responsible for childhood
deaths I think), so now I think even that's not enough.

Bennett