Guys..this is going to be a very heated debate. I want to discuss a very sensitive and volatile issue, but I want to do so in a civil manner. If you disagree with me, fine. Tell me why you think I am wrong, and more importantly, why you think you are right! Don't say "kayz you are a piece of shit....I hope you die". That adds nothing to the debate.
Again, this is a touchy subject and I will probably offend many of you with my ideas and opinions. But please understand that these are just MY opinions.
Okay, here goes.
I think we need to get rid of funding for AIDS in the United States (or drastically reduce it). If other countries want to tackle this "epidemic", so be it. But I don't think the US should contribute.
Why???
Becuase AIDS is a disease of choice. Yes, a disease of choice. There are ZERO genetic predispositions to HIV/AIDS (unless of course your mother had it and passed it along to you at birth....we'll discuss this in a moment). An individual contracts AIDS/HIV thru his own actions..period. HIV/AIDS can only be contracted when an infected individual's bodily fluids (not all fluids) come into direct contact with a non-infected person. This occurs via sexual intercourse, oral sex, needle sharing (blood), and other less known/publicized ways.
The reason it bothers me so much is that I look at the amount of money we spend on AIDS research in the states and I compare it to the amount of money set aside to combat diseases such as Prostate Cancer in males and breast cancer in women.
Each year, the CDC sets aside approximatley $14 million dollars to help combat prostate cancer. EAch year, approximately 220,000 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer, which ranks second to only lung cancer in cancer related deaths in males. This year alone, about 29,000 men will die from prostate cancer, which is typically regarded as a fairly cancer to treat if caught in time.
Unlike HIV/AIDS, prostate cancer is based largely on genetic predisposition. Obviously there are environmental factors that will exacerbate the condition, but there is a great deal of genetics involved. However, AIDS contraction is based solely on ones lifestyle/actions.
Each year, the CDC sets aside approximatley $100 million (varies depending on the source of info.) to help combat and screen for breast cancer, which kills more women than any other cancer except lung cancer. This year alone, approximately 250,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and about 43,000 women will die from it.
Like Prostate cancer, breast cancer is largely genetic. Women whom have a family history of breast cancer (either on the dads or moms side) is at a much greater risk of getting breast cancer.
The same cannot be said for AIDS because there is no genetic predisposition.
Each year in the United States alone, about 43,000 individuals will contract HIV. And this year, about 18,000 will die from AIDS. Here are some interesting stats on HIV/AIDS:
1) The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that 850,000 to 950,000 U.S. residents are living with HIV infection, one-quarter of whom are unaware of their infection.......the fact that 1 in 4 people who have it are unaware they are infected is disturbing and that is the main problem.
2) Of new infections among men in the United States, CDC estimates that approximately 60 percent of men were infected through homosexual sex, 25 percent through injection drug use, and 15 percent through heterosexual sex. This does not leave room for error.
3) Of new infections among women in the United States, CDC estimates that approximately 75 percent of women were infected through heterosexual sex and 25 percent through injection drug use
Each year, we spend almost a half of a billion dollars to combat AIDS worldwide. That is 5 times more than we spend on breast cancer and about 33 more times than we spend on prostate cancer. This to me is disturbing. Here we have 2 diseases that in most cases, cannot be prevented..but can be treated when caught early. On the other hand, AIDS is COMPLETELY preventable, and virtually untreatable. The virus mutates faster than we can creat new cocktails to fight it. It is always one step ahead of us.
Now, lets look at the cases where AIDS is contracted when sex, needle use, or any "acts" are not involved:
1) Transmission at birth. In 1992, the number of AIDS cases in adolescents (from birth -12 years of age) was less than 100 nationwide!!! This is a relatively low number IMO. Babies born with AIDS rarely live past the age of 5.
2) Blood transfusions. The odds of this happenign are about 1 in 450,000. Thus, it accounts for a negligible amount of new cases each year...if any at all. This is contributed to the new blood screening processes put into place.
3) Hospital workers sticking themselves with needles accidentally.This is highly rare.
So, my question to you guys is this:
Since it is the actions of primarily irresponsible individuals, does AIDS justify the amount of dollars it receives for funding when compared to other diseases??? There are a few cases each year that results from freak accidents.Do those justify hundreds of millions of dollars??
If you agree with me, what would you do to stop the spread of AIDS??
If you disagree with me, why?? and don't say "you are so ignorant and clueless". Give me a real answer.
And before anyone asks: "No, I do not know anyone with AIDS. At least I don't think so, but then again, 25% of those infected dont' even know...so how would I"?
I'm interested in your opinions.
