One question, justinh: Why work out the entire “HIV mutation” scenario ? Euthanizing HIV-positive patients is already well within our capabilities. You may want to ask yourself why we refrain from that.
If euthanasia falls within your definition of workable, we’re not operating under the same assumptions, I guess.
What about: Study the disease. Find a cure. Use it. Curb the disease until then. It’s just another disease, mankind has battled enough of those.
S. Norman
Yes, reality would be another option. Where’s your cite about people with the HIV virus running around infecting others once they are aware that it’s possible?
Fortunately for you, we don’t have a government and medically sponsored program to wipe out people with insanely stupid ideas so that they don’t pass them on to other people.
L
And, actually, the scenario you set up is the plot of Tracy Hickman’s “The Immortals” In the book, the gov’t rounds up people with AIDS and puts them in camps in the Utah desert.
Again, let’s not tar and feather the guy just yet. He may have stumbled across a genuine ethical dillema. Keep the emotions in check and think logically.
FEMA has the power to qurantine in a national emergency, this quarantine will most likely be enforced by the military, possibly through the use of lethal force. It is a possibility often considered in discussions on worse case scenario bio-terrorism and emerging infectious diseases. As I said in my earlier post, the extreme measures considered in the OP wouldn’t work for HIV, but what about fatal outbreaks on a smaller scale? Would lethal force ever be warranted?
The delimma reminds me of the “Clear and Present Danger” by Clancy. A govt official is given the opportunity to cut the amount of cocaine enterring the US by half. the cost is he has to help one group wipe out the competition and he has to sell out a force of special ops troops.
He goes for the bait and its up to Harrison to save the day. The troops are saved , the bad govt official is gone and he kisses his wife. But the amount of Cocaine remains the same.
Well in AIDS there is no saving the day. Daily, the infection is spreading , from those with it to those without it.
The quarantine method wouldnt work because of the above mentioned threats of new outbreaks and relaxed precautions. I agree. It would have to be a “drinking water solution” like Flouride treatment for cavities. But the technical aspects is beyound this thread. I am talking about the ethnical issues.
My argument is that the nice, PC, compassionate methods have not been effective. What are some solutions from “out of the box thinking”?
What is the best solution to a sensitive person like SEXY WRITER?
Not according to CDC reports I’ve read over the past few years - new HIV infections are, overall, down (although there have been some rises in certain specific communities, notably minorities). No, the disease still exists, but it is being curbed. (Does anyone have any current stats? I’ll try to find some later if I have the time.)
Of all the diseases this planet has faced, HIV/AIDS is by far the least of its worries. IIRC, this is historically actually one of the hardest diseases to transmit - it’s not airborne, it’s not spread by touch, and so forth. Sadly, ignorance isn’t quantifiable, which could very well make it one of the easiest to get. 
Esprix
Esprix is right about infection and death rates being down in the US. From the NIH (http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/aidsstat.htm):
However, he is guilty of Western bias and very, very wrong about the state of the world if he thinks “HIV/AIDS is by far the least of its worries [as far as communicable diseases]”. AIDS has recently passed Malaria as the leading infectious killer in the world. Though I could not nail down the entire picture I suspect that worldwide, the picture is getting worse - not better, especially in developing nations. A story vastly unreported in the North American and European press is the devastation that AIDS has wrought in sub-saharan Africa.
(http://www.hivchannel.com/aids/history.shtml) Methods that work in the west do not work here because of a distrust of western science and a political desire for an “African Solution”. Poverty effectively prevents the distribution of the antiviral drugs that have helped control the spread of the virus in the developed world. Illiteracy slows education efforts.
I am not advocating the lethal quarantine described in the OP, but we must face the fact that standard methods have not worked in the developing world. Half a continent is being destroyed. I’d call that far from the “least of the planet’s worries”.
AIDS is really more of a symptom of deeper problems than a primary problem by itself. As has been pointed out it’s a slow spreading and difficult-to-catch virus that can be contained without much difficulty. The deeper problem which allows it to spread is the deeply rooted ignorance, stupidity, and superstition rampant in much of the world.
Sure, you could kill off everyone with AIDS, and eliminate the virus that way. But the fundamental problems which allowed it to spread will still be there - ignorance and stupidity causing societal problems all ove the world. Better to fight the root causes, then AIDS will be easy to clean up.
Thank you for the clarifications, Beeblebrox. Your information underscores everyone’s points, aptly summarized by AndrewL - ignorance is the real killer at work. Killing off a few million people isn’t going to rid the world of the ignorance that caused the disease to be spread in the first place.
Esprix
Beeblebrox
I think Esprix’s point is that unlike, say, ebola or malaria, AIDS is easily controllable. It is extremely difficult to catch. (With the exception of mother to newborn for which there are now very cheap and effective therapies.) What is more, the behaviors that put you at risk are easily identifiable. That makes it very easy, from a public health perspective, to control.
I’m well aware of the AIDS epidemic in Africa. This isn’t a health problem though as much as it is a political problem. A few countries, notably Uganda, have tackled the problem head-on with public education and some modest spending on public health with excellent results.
The problem with the idiocy proposed by the OP is that it demonstrates a complete failure to understand the most basic issues surrounding the problem it attempts to address. Statements like,
**
are just embarassingly stupid. Contrary to what the OP is trying to suggest, science has an excellent handle on treating AIDS. What’s more, from the earliest days of its discovery, science had a perfectly good understanding of how to prevent AIDS from spreading. There is, therefore, no desperate public health crisis that can only be addressed by some dramatic “out of the box” solution. There is, in some countries, a failure of political will which prevents these solutions from being implemented, but that’s a separate issue.
AIDS is the big boy on the list of STDs. It’s what people think of when they think of trasmitable diseases. It’s what they most fear catching. It’s a very good reason to put on that condom.
No one wants AIDS, but as long as the threat of AIDS is out there, safer sex will be practiced by people more often than not. As wrong as it is, if AIDS were to disappear tomorrow, the number of STD cases out there would increase rapidly.
Why? Because stupid people suddenly think there’s nothing left to fear.
So having AIDS does serve a purpose. I might actually go so far as to say that the AIDS virus prevents the spread of diseases more often than it causes it.
Long ago, I pondered the chance that AIDS was an evolutionary tool to rid the population of those too iqnorant to avoid it. I was chastised as being too insensitive. I was told it was everybody’s right to go out and engage in sex with other men, women, animals, whatever. If they caught something then the govt should find a cure. You shouldnt fault them cause they were just doing what was their right. I relented.
Now I am told that you have to be a complete moron to get AIDS cause its almost impossible to get.
Which is it?
I hate to be embarrassing stupid. It seems to be a trivial complaint now when a couple years ago it was a global dilemma. Now it is even praised by some as a method of preventing pregnacy and STDs. I guess the answer is we shouldn’t worry about it and let it run its course. Then may I suggest that we stop diverting funds away from cancer research to fight it?
Sorry I forgot one. Its not even a fatal disease anymore. It must just be a nuisance one like fever blisters. They sure are unsightly and hurt if you are eating crackers!
I smell a Pit thread coming on…
Esprix
“They’re animals anyway, so let them lose their souls.”
-Coppola, The Godfather
“I was told it was everybody’s right to go out and engage in sex with other men, women, animals, whatever.”
—Ah. Here we come to the crux of the issue. The OP seems to equate bestiality, homosexuality and straight “adultery.” And equally disapprove of all of them.
I disagree, I don’t think it is a separate issue at all. When evaluating public health poilicies, science and politics must both be examined. Yes, we know a good deal of science behind AIDS. But that science hasn’t done a lick of good in Southern Africa where politics has hindered the treatment and prevention effort. Non standard solutions will be necessary in order to wed the politics and science of AIDS in developing nations. “Thinking outside the box” is essential in order to find South African President Thabo Mbeki’s “African Solution”. If all we do is tell them what worked for us, we may as well be saying “let them eat cake”, and patting ourselves on the back in congratulations of our enlightenment and political will.
justinh, whoa, easy there. AIDS is not much of a threat to North America any longer, and safety frequently breeds indifference. Since Americans aren’t dying as much any more, you don’t see as much about AIDS on American news. AIDS has not gone from a “global dillema” to a “trivial complaint” in the US, it is more an out of sight - out of mind thing . It’s still bad, we’ve just grown use to it and don’t think about it as much.
Though some posters have betrayed a certain North American insulation and incorrect belief that AIDS has largely been conquered, I can not fault them for their reaction to your OP. On the surface it can seem to be rather inflamatory, because the hypothetical solution is far worse than the problem. Baiting them further isn’t going to help any discussion you might want to foster and will instead bring about aspersions on your character, such as Eve’s post, based on things may not have intended. I would suggest you make it clear that you are completely abandoning the death quarantine for HIV infection idea and narrow the discussion down a bit. Two possible ideas: Is there any hypothetical situation (such as a domestic outbreak of ebola Zaire) that would warrant a lethal response? or How should we curb the spread of HIV in Africa when education doesn’t work and anti-virals can’t be properly distributed due to poverty?
Choose your next response carefully, kid, I have a lot to do tonight and may not be around to bail you out.
Eve, I do equate them with mountain climbing, skydiving, bungy jumping, and russian roulette. They are activities with benefits as well as risks. If you are aware of both then who is responsible to bale you out when the risks catch up to you. All the activities can only benefit/damage you (ok except for wilbur the donkey). The exception is if you catch a disease that is transmittable to the general society who didn’t wish to task the risk of the activities.
Everyone else,
This should not be a discussion of the virtues of AIDS or its carriers. You can talk about lung cancer and smoking all day long but as soon as you get into buggering then the name calling starts.
This should be : If you have a way of saving a certain percentage of lives by sacrificing a smaller percentage, do you take it? Don’t we do that is Africa with the hunger thing already. Aren’t we letting the weak starve and concentrating on feeding the stronger.
BeetbeBrox,
How is that? Thats as tame as I get.
The weak aren’t starving the poor are.