# Straight Aids Myth Shattered? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 19, 2004, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235 "2004-03-19T17:13:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/41 "2004-03-21T02:37:35Z")
> [@](#): > > the Bangui Definition could be used to prove the existence of this mysterious HIV “pandemic” in any region on the planet where malnutrition, starvation, and unsanitary conditions and disease prevail. Which, of course, _eliminates_ most of Africa. Starvation and malnutrition appear at distressingly high _intervals_ along the sahel region just south of the Sahara, exacerbated by warfare in the same regions. Neither is prevalent as a general condition throughout Africa, particularly not in locations such as Kenya and South Africa where AIDS still has an extremely high rate of reporting. Similarly, unsanitary conditions and disease are _not_ prevalent across the entire sweep of sub-Sahara Africa. They are often reported for the medical facilities (which are overwhelmed by AIDS patients) but they are not a condition of life for the typical farmer or factory worker throughout the continent once one gets away from the war-torn regions. If AIDS was being reported according to the Bangui definition only in Congo, the Sudan, and the other hot spots, this criticism might be legitimate. However, with the prevalence of AIDS throughout the entire sweep of the region south of the Sahara, including countries that are relatively prosperous and stable, the Bangui definition cannot be so easily dismissed. ---
**Author:** ![Iscariot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ac91a4/32.png) [@Iscariot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iscariot)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/42 "2004-03-21T03:17:36Z")
> [@Biggirl](#): > > Fascinating. Where are you seeing these statistics? Are you saying there is something biological causing this susceptablility or is it some aspect of minority culture and behavior? Because if it is behavior then I would say that the US supposed paranoia about heterosexual AIDs is what is keeping the heterosexual, non-IV users relatively AIDS free. Anywhere you care to check them–it’s across the board, even in America. The CDC site has a number of good essays on the heterosexual transmission of HIV among minorities in the US. There has been some suggestion that minorities have a higher incidence of bisexuality and homosexuality, and there’s really no question that per capita they use more IV drugs, but that doesn’t account for the higher numbers of heterosexual transmission. > [@](#): > > Is the number of minorities, especially those of African descent, who use these services in the Third World such an order of magnitude higher than in the New World that it accounts for the spread of AIDS there and not here? Why isn’t the rate of heterosexual AIDS not exploding at Hunt’s Point in The Bronx? There are plenty of prostitutes _and_ minorities there, but it is still mostly an IV drug user disease there. Because people get AIDS from other sources, such as third rate health care, and IV drug use, at a much higher rate in Africa. They get it from needles, and then pass it to prostitutes. And yes, the incidence of prostitution is markedly higher in Africa. > [@](#): > > [Herpes is down in the US, but syphilis is going gangbusters-- especially among males.](http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0F14FF3C5A0C7A8CDDAA0894DC404482) Yet here in the US we have managed to keep infection rates low for non-needle using heterosexuals. Comparing incidence of STDs in America with those in Africa is like comparing the penguin population in Antarctica with that in Egypt. > [@](#): > > Their own health care system is giving it to them. More than a little disconcerting, if you ask me. Isn’t this something that can be fixed? It’s my own personal belief that it is education and awareness that’s keeping AIDS down in the hetro community in the US. Surely this is one area where education _can_ work in Africa. One can only hope. Not only can it, UNAIDS reports that it does. Dramatic decreases in HIV population are seen when education regarding the use of needles is passed on. Haiti is an excellent example–it still has a disturbingly high rate, but it’s no longer the AIDS capital of the world. It’s kind of ironic how shocked we are to see their own health care infecting them, considering that two short decades ago, our own health care system was infecting us. We had the resources to fix that. They don’t. > [@](#): > > While lack of health care would certainly make _having_ AIDS more difficult, I don’t see how it effects the infection rate. In fact, I would think it could help reduce it. Africans with AIDS die much more quickly than those in the US. Black market medication. Something we don’t have a problem with in developed nations–people who can’t get to see doctors get their medication from somewhere else. Then they inject themselves. > [@](#): > > Not sure what this has to do with the transmission of AIDS and why it’s spreading among heteros in Africa and not the US. Just for the record [UNICEF is worried about AIDS in Eastern and Central Europe where the water is generally clean.](http://www.unicef.org.uk/press/news_detail.asp?news_id=104) I think the problem in Africa is that many believed you couldn’t get AIDS if you were straight/had sex with a virgin/boiled your water when this is emphatically untrue. Those are both concerns. But the Eastern Europe analogy isn’t going to hold up very well. The numbers in Africa are _staggering._ We’re well beyond “concerned,” and looking more at localized epidemics. > [@](#): > > Of course they are. They are getting it through unclean needles and through sex. TThose are the two major transmission routes. > From the UNICEF article above You ignored the puzzling statistics that indicate that instance of sexually transmission may be being exaggerated: Why are children, who have not had sex, and do not have HIV positive parents, contracting AIDS at an alarming rate? A rate much higher than the statistics provided by third world governments indicate should be possible. And why is instance of every STD dropping, except HIV? Education is clearly working, in that it is encouraging safer sex in Africa. Why is safer sex not stopping HIV? Both of these point ineluctably to the suggestion that the numbers regaring heterosexual transmission are not being accurately reported. Regards. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/43 "2004-03-21T08:16:39Z")
As far as why AIDS is attacking Africa more vigorously, you might take a look at the linked article. It seems that some people of European descent are actually immune and a lot more are resistant to HIV. [http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/30/1070127266087.html?from=storyrhs](http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/30/1070127266087.html?from=storyrhs) I can’t link to it but there is an article in a recent Scientific American on this. The gist of it is that this is a lucky accident caused by genetic response to smallpox. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![edwino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@edwino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/edwino)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/44 "2004-03-21T17:09:38Z")
**Testy** The CCR5 mutation was also linked to plague (_Y. pestis_) resistance, but a recent _Nature_ article disputes that. > **[Evolutionary genetics: CCR5 mutation and plague protection - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14961112/?dopt=Abstract)** > > A recent and prevalent mutation in the chemokine receptor CCR5 in humans of northern European ancestry has been proposed to provide protection against bubonic plague. Here we infect both normal and CCR5-deficient mice with the bacterium Yersinia... ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/45 "2004-03-21T18:09:26Z")
I have a question: What was supposed to be the “myth of heterosexual AIDS”? 1. Is it that there was a pandemic just around the corner? 2. Is it that AIDS would transmit _swiftly_ among heterosexuals as it had among gay men? 3. Is it that AIDS would transmit _at all_ among heterosexuals? The information that **Dogface** and **Iscariot** posted have pretty clearly demonstrated that the third belief (if it were denied) would be validated by the evidence. Was _that_ the “myth of heterosexual AIDS”? Or was it number 1, number 2, or some other assertion? ---
**Author:** ![labmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f19dbf/32.png) [@labmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/labmonkey)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/46 "2004-03-21T19:00:39Z")
The “heterosexual AIDS myth” was that by the end of the millenium, there would be an epidemic among heterosexuals with transmission and infection rates on par with gays in the 80’s, not that there would never be any cases of HIV transmission heterosexually. That new infections among heterosexuals would skyrocket out of control. It has never happened. And bear in mind it was not only pundits and “instant experts” but public health officials who were playing at chicken little. So, I suppose it would be no.s 1 and 2 of your question, **tomndebb**. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2004, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/47 "2004-03-21T19:35:03Z")
OK. > [@](#): > > public health officials who were playing at chicken little. Were they playing at chicken little? Or, like the Y2K issue, did some more alarming reports (including some admittedly hysterical cries) lead to sufficient steps being taken in different ways that prevented the projected outbreak from occurring? Granted that there are conflicting views of the actual events in Africa, Southeast Asia, and the former Soviet Republics, it still sounds as though it is hardly a “homosexual” disease. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/48 "2004-03-22T07:21:07Z")
Thank you. The SA article mentioned that the mutation was originally thought to have been a response to plague but that theory had been dropped in favor of smallpox. My understanding is that the spread of the mutation was insufficient for the length of time since the last plague epidemic. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/49 "2004-03-22T08:00:01Z")
OK, I looked it up. The SA article is Feb 2004 and the souce is the December 2003 Proceedings of the NAS. Plague was thought to be a poor fit due to it being bacterial in origin and having become less of a problem about 250 years ago. Smallpox was also considered a better fit on a geographic basis. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/50 "2004-03-22T13:38:42Z")
_“Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn’t want the disease to be known as “the gay plague,” and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.”_ Wow! I didn’t know you could get these people in the same room without a brawl ensuing, much less have them all “conspiring” together. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/51 "2004-03-22T14:02:53Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > _“Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn’t want the disease to be known as “the gay plague,” and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.”_ > > Wow! I didn’t know you could get these people in the same room without a brawl ensuing, much less have them all “conspiring” together. The anti-sex feminists on the feminist left and the moral conservatives on the religious right joined forces back in the 80s to attempt to censor the media. Didn’t work, but they were definitely “conspiring” together. Granted, I think “conspiracy” is the wrong word here, as it implies secrecy. Working together to achieve a common goal is probably closer to the truth. Then again, there was a Big Lie goin’ round, so I guess there WAS an element of conspriracy. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2004, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/52 "2004-03-22T14:46:55Z")
> [@Iscariot](#): > > First and foremost, minorities–particularly those of African descent–are more susceptible to AIDS. It’s one of those statistics that’s something of a faux pas to mention in polite company, lest we seem racist. Bad form or not, it’s still true. AIDS discriminates. > [@Iscariot](#): > > > [@Biggirl](#): > > > > Fascinating. Where are you seeing these statistics? Are you saying there is something biological causing this susceptablility or is it some aspect of minority culture and behavior? Because if it is behavior then I would say that the US supposed paranoia about heterosexual AIDs is what is keeping the heterosexual, non-IV users relatively AIDS free. > > Anywhere you care to check them–it’s across the board, even in America. The CDC site has a number of good essays on the heterosexual transmission of HIV among minorities in the US. I see nowhere that you’ve actually shown a statistic or study arguing that minorities inherently have some greater susceptibility, which may be why “It’s one of those statistics that’s something of a faux pas to mention in polite company, lest we seem racist.” > [@Biggirl](#): > > There has been some suggestion that minorities have a higher incidence of bisexuality and homosexuality, and there’s really no question that per capita they use more IV drugs, but that doesn’t account for the higher numbers of heterosexual transmission. There is no question that minorities use more IV drugs per capita? First, who is included in this definition of minorities, and second, why is there no question? You seem to make generalizations and expect us to buy into them without actually presenting any cites or data. ---
**Author:** ![edwino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@edwino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/edwino)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2004, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235/53 "2004-03-23T17:36:45Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > OK, I looked it up. The SA article is Feb 2004 and the souce is the December 2003 Proceedings of the NAS. Plague was thought to be a poor fit due to it being bacterial in origin and having become less of a problem about 250 years ago. Smallpox was also considered a better fit on a geographic basis. I’ll look up that article sometime today and give it a read through. The CCR5 mutation is quite highly prevalent in European populations, which doesn’t necessarily mean evolutionary selection. It is quite difficult to actually differentiate selection from things like genetic drift. I believe the Tay Sachs mutation for a long time was thought to be protective for tuberculosis (in carriers). This was found not to be the case after around 20 years of research. The smallpox hypothesis is intriguing though. I’ll let you know what I think… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/straight-aids-myth-shattered/235235.md?page=2)