www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall World AIDs Day - Festive?

Nor was I attributing any such thing to them. :p

As you will notice, I did say that when they are in my corner, then I am right.... Never said that I am not right when they disagree with me....


David, the Byzantine Catholic

Just as a sidebar, for those contemplating getting a tattoo, or having an ear or other parts of the anatomy pierced, please be sure (in the US) that your practitioner is a member of the Association of Professional Piercers. Not a kiosk at the mall. The APP folks have been advocating for YEARS for laws requiring that piercing and tattooing equipment be autoclavable. Their members use this type of equipment, and autoclave.

The folks at the mall use plastic guns that cannot be autoclaved between uses. Similar bloodborne pathogen transmission dangers exist when tattooing equipment is not autoclaved.

Decorate your bodies as you wish - but please do it safely.

Doffing the ol' Public Health hat.

We now return to Reality Programming....


Sharon

Well, I certainly don't claim any charism of infallibility! Contrary to a rumor which amused me a couple of weeks ago, I am not even a Bishop, let alone the Pope!
David courteously thanked me for my posting, even though I expressed some strong disagreement - I hope David in turn will accept my thanks. "The Grace of God is in courtesy" (Belloc, I believe).
Surely one important reason for this forum is to enable an exchange of views. Anybody who seriously claims infallibility (and the only such person I've ever met is John Paul II) is unlikely to participate in such an exercise, so there's little point in worrying about it!
That David's point that most cases of AIDS can be traced back to somebody else's immoral behaviour seems to have some merit, if not to be entirely convincing. Rape is an immoral act. Blaming the victim of the rape is outrageous. Blaming the result child is unspeakable! Whether by accident or by design, David's posting did give the impression of blaming AIDS patience for AIDS. Since David assures us that this was never his intention, we should all accept his assurance. I would apologize for having misunderstood him in the first place, and I would ask him - given that I am not the only person who misunderstood his intention - to be careful of this possibility in the future. The whole discussion is volatile enough to justify what might in other circumstances be unusual caution in expressing ourselves. If we do not exercise such caution, it is a near-certainly that we will hurt people even without intending to.
I could provide examples of people known to me personally who died of AIDS, and whose living situations made it wildly unlikely that they had been engaged in the sort of misconduct popularly associated with that dreadful disease. I don't watch my friends 24 hours a day (nor would I care to encourage anyone to watch me 24 hours a day - and besides, the electric light in the bathroom is out of order) but there were sufficient "witnesses to the person's chastity", to employ a late medieval phrase. I shall not provide the names of those examples - let alone the names of the witnesses who are still alive - because there is also a right to privacy and I have no permission from anyone involved to turn them into a public spectactle.
Meanwhile, it might be sensible to remember that charity begins at home. If there is a statistically significant difference between Greek-Catholics and the rest of the population regarding HIV and/or AIDS, then we would all do well to know it, and to analyze the causes of such a difference. If there is not, since the discussion of this particular matter is not pleasant and is certainly available elsewhere, can we not turn our collective attention to something more edifying and more directly our concern? Incognitus

As usual Brian is the most judgmental poster on the forum.

To celebrate World's Aids Day is like celebrating first confession. We celebrate sin? Odd, odd, odd.

Dan Lauffer

Dan,

Just because we disagree (and we would disagree over 90% of the time I'm sure) there is no need to go ad hominem.

I have worked with AIDS Patients before and have seen the discrimination. When you have done the same, you can tell me something, OK?

David,

If I misconstrued your post, as I apparently did based on what you've posted since, I apologize. I would, however, second Incognitus' recommendation that, especially on such a volatile issue, one is well-advised to carefully read what one has written before committing it to post, to assure that the remarks cannot or will not be misunderstood or misconstrued.

Many years,

Neil

Come to think of it, I've never attended nor seen any events in connection with World AIDS Day, so I don't know how festive or un-festive these events might be (and I don't doubt that they vary in different places). However, it is often typical of human behaviour to "celebrate" as an act of Faith (or faith) the future vanquishing of some present evil (the sublime liturgical example of this is the midnight Paschal service of our tradition, when we celebrate not only Christ's victory over death but the application of that victory to ourselves). As a Christian, I believe that God wills to forgive us our sins and to heal us from our diseases and infirmities - and if that sounds cheap, I shall allow myself to note that that I'm having any unpleasant muscular virus at the moment. I urgently want the forgiveness of my sins and the healing of my diseases and infirmities and since I believe that God is doing both in His own kairos, it seems well to celebrate the wonderful works of God. Without claiming to be able to read the minds and hearts of all those everywhere who might take part in a World AIDS Day event, that is how I would like to understand any festive aspects of such an observance. Incognitus

I never said blame the victim.

And while I will take Incognitus advice to heart I would like to add, to Incognitus and Neil, in a topic that is so volatile as this that they should seek clarification before they fly off the handle and attempt to burn someone at the stake when they disagree.

As for Incongnitus comment about rape, yes rape is an immoral act. I would never blame the rape victim, but this does not change the fact that the victim of rape is an innocent that must bare a heavy cost due to someone elses immoral act as is the case in most, if not all, HIV/AIDs transmissions today.

Now you might ask how I draw a link between this thought and the celebrations the media covered on World AIDs Day?

Well here is the answer, as posted elsewhere in this thread, most HIV/AIDs activitist groups also support the homosexual agenda. These celebrations, that the media covered, looked like the many parades that these groups put on for ocasions other than AIDs Day. So it looked like a celebration of one of the many immoral/sinful behaviors that causes HIV/AIDs to be spread.

That we can now treat HIV/AIDs as a more chronic thing may be a bad thing, as it still leads to death. There are reports that people are starting to return to their immoral behaviors because of this.

As for Brian and Dan. As I have treated, as a paramedic, many AIDs patients, can I comment on how judgmental you appear at times?


David, the Byzantine Catholic

David,

Indeed you may. I have ministered to people with AIDS in my capacity as a Protestant minister for 27 years. It is a horrible thing when an innocent contracts the disease through no fault of their own. It is a horrible thing when a person who has been enticed into the Homosexual life style has become infected. It is morally reprehensible for someone to promote the homosexual lifestyle especially so when it often leads to HIV/AIDS.

I think this position if fairly clear and quite defensible.

Dan Lauffer

I did not realize either that I had flown off the handle or that I was seeking to burn David at the stake. Having re-read my posting which seems to have given rise to this criticism, I still don't realize either of those things. Rather, I apologized to David for having misunderstood him, and I thanked him for his courtesy. But accusing me of seeking to burn him at the stake cannot be considered courteous, I fear. In this connection, he might consider looking up the history and meaning of the word "faggot".
If, by the way, my addressing David in the third person is annoying him (somebody objected to this practice on another thread several weeks ago), I repeat my apology with the explanation that I am not addressing him exclusively, but rather seeking to contribute to a wider discussion.
In defense of Neill, whom I do not know personally, though I would like to, I have not read anything in his postings on this topic that struck as lacking that peace which should accompany such a discussion.
The grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God the Father, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with us all, this Sunday and eternally. Incognitus

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DavidB, the Byzantine Catholic:
[QB]
He also seems to blow off my experience, as a paramedic, in the healthcare field. I have dealt with his type before. As he goes in length to show his "credentials" as a way to show how "intelligent and educated" he is, where as I am just an ignorate grunt working in the field. I am sure your studies and work behind a desk makes you better than I am.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DavidB, the Byzantine Catholic:
[QB]
He also seems to blow off my experience, as a paramedic, in the healthcare field. I have dealt with his type before. As he goes in length to show his "credentials" as a way to show how "intelligent and educated" he is, where as I am just an ignorate grunt working in the field. I am sure your studies and work behind a desk makes you better than I am.

Dear David,

I'm sorry if you were offended by my posting. In no way was I attempting to "blow you off' or show you "how intelligent and educated" I am. These are not words I used. In fact, relative to most people with whom I work, I'm poorly educated. I would hate it if my co-workers were looking down on me so believe me this was not my intention towards you.

Also, our company has in the past developed rapid diagnostic systems for the emergency care market. We have had the opportunity of working with paramedics such as yourself on these technologies and believe me, we were highly dependant on their technical expertise to develop marketable products.

I think that in reality what happened was that you posted a message in which you stated what your AIDS experience was and how 'this gave you some authority' on the subject. I did the same. The fact that I have a global corporate and governmental experience on the pandemic does not diminish your contribution, feelings, or thoughts on the matter.

Further, I do not look down on you or anyone else. I'm not sure to what you attribute the rest of your statement to but suffice it to say that if I'm participating in this forum it's because I think we are all equals. Individuals participate in forums to learn and grow as human beings.

My final words on the subject are: improved morality is an ideal we should all work towards. Unfortunately there is a lot of immorality which we can't control so in the interim, let us show compassion and help the many who need it.

PRI Weekly Briefing
24 April 2003
Vol. 5/ No. 12


Are Africans Promiscuous Unto Death?
By Steve Mosher

A newly published meta-analysis of African AIDS studies should be read by
all concerned about the future of the African peoples. In the first part,
Brewer and his colleagues propose that “existing data can no longer be
reconciled with the received wisdom about the exceptional role of sex in
the African AIDS epidemic.”(2) In the second, Gisselquist et al discuss
“how health care transmission of AIDS in Africa was ignored” in previous
studies.(3) In the third, and final, article, Gisselquist and Potterat
estimate the actual percentage of HIV/AIDS cases in Africa that was
transmitted heterosexually, as opposed to medically.(4) These studies
empirically demonstrate that unsafe injections and other medical exposures
to contaminated blood may account for two-thirds or more of the new cases
of HIV/AIDS. In this new view, sexual activity is responsible for
one-third or less, perhaps much less, of the spread of HIV in Africa.

In the late eighties, influential AIDS experts reached the conclusion that
heterosexual sex was playing an exceptional role in the African AIDS
epidemic. In a prominent 1988 article in Science, Piot et al wrote that
‘Studies in Africa have demonstrated that HIV-1 is primarily a
heterosexually transmitted disease and that the main risk factor for
acquisition is the degree of sexual activity with multiple partners, not
sexual orientation.’(5) Once this paradigm was firmly in place, it tended
to be self-perpetuating. Epidemiological evidence of medical transmission
of AIDS by unsafe injections and other medical exposures to contaminated
blood was ignored or misrepresented. The World Health Organization (WHO)
now claims that ”current estimates suggest that more than 99% of HIV
infections prevalent in Africa in 2001 are attributable to unsafe sex.”(6)
99%!

But on what evidence were these sweeping conclusions based? Very little,
as it turns out. As Gisselquist et al note, “We have been unable to locate
any document—from the 1980s or later—that describes a process to estimate
a 90% sexual contribution to Africa’s HIV epidemic from empirical studies
of risk factors for HIV.”(7)

So where did the “consensus” come from?

In the very early stages of the African epidemic, AIDS was demographically
associated with sexually active populations, principally prostitutes and
their clients.(8) This association seems to have caught the attention of
various interest groups which, for diverse ideological, political, and
financial reasons, promoted the notion of heterosexual transmission in
their publications, proposals, and press releases.

First, many in the foreign aid community shared the conviction that Africa
was “overpopulated,” and that both the world and Africa would be a better
place if fewer African babies were born.(9) In order to drive down the
birth rate, ongoing population control programs relied upon the promotion
and distribution of condoms and contraceptives. Those who supported or
participated in these anti-natal programs were inclined to emphasize the
role of sexual transmission in African HIV/AIDS as an additional argument
for condom promotion and distribution.

Second, in 1984 USAID began piggybacking its HIV/AIDS programs onto
preexisting family planning programs. Organizations which applied for and
received funding for such “integrated” programs--so-called because they
brought together HIV prevention and pregnancy prevention under the same
roof—may have been inclined to emphasize sexual transmission of HIV in
their grant proposals and reports. If “unprotected” sex was driving up
both the birth rate and the HIV/AIDS rate, then their integrated HIV/SRH
clinics were the answer to both crises.

Third, HIV/AIDS was identified in the Western mind with homosexuals (also
called MSMs, or men who have sex with men) and injection drug users
(IDUs). As Gisselquist et al write, “[I]t was in the interests of AIDS
researchers in developed countries—where HIV seem stubbornly confined to
MSMs, IDUs, and their partners—to present AIDS in Africa as a heterosexual
epidemic.”(10) Homosexual activist Randy Shilts writes in his account of
AIDS in America that “Nothing captured the attention of editors and news
directors like the talk of widespread heterosexual transmission of
AIDS.”(11)

Fourth, as Packard and Epstein have documented, “the role of sexual
promiscuity in the spread of AIDS in Africa appears to have evolved out of
prior assumptions about the sexuality of Africans.”(12) That is to say,
Africans were imagined to have too much sex with too many partners in
circumstances that were too risky. These assumptions have little basis in
reality. As Brewer et al report, “Levels of sexual activity reported in a
dozen general population surveys in Africa are comparable to those
reported elsewhere, especially in North America and Europe. Perhaps more
importantly, there appears to be little correlation with the level of
risky sexual behavior shown in these surveys and the epidemic trajectories
observed in these countries.”(13)

Fifth, as Gisselquist et al notes, “health professionals in WHO and
elsewhere worried that public discussion of HIV risks during health care
might lead people to avoid immunizations. A 1990 letter to the Lancet, for
example, speculated that “a health message—e.g., to avoid contaminated
injection materials—will be misunderstood and that immunization programmes
will be adversely affected.”(14)

In short, individuals and organizations read into the African situation
their own biases (against people in general and Africans in particular),
their own agenda (a heterosexual epidemic and immunizations at any cost).
The result was what Gisselquist et al call the “ignoring and
misinterpreting of epidemiologic evidence.” This is very, very strong
language for a scientific journal to publish.

In their second study, Gisselquist, Potterat and their colleagues examined
all the evidence on African AIDS transmission available through 1988,
before what they call the “premature closure of the debate” led
“researchers in Africa . . . [to] often assume sexual transmission without
testing partners, without asking about health care exposures, and when
conflicting evidence nevertheless emerges—such as infected adults who deny
sexual exposures to HIV—routinely rejecting it.”(15) In all, they reviewed
22 separate studies. What they found is startling:

Injections were more highly associated with HIV than was sex. “Published
epidemiological evidence from 1984-88 in Africa shows higher average crude
PAFs [population attributable fractions, a measure of risk] associated
with injections than with measures of sexual exposure.”(16)

Most of those infected with HIV were in a long-term monogamous
relationship. “Although some adults may have under-reported numbers of
sexual partners, the consistency of the evidence suggests a large majority
of HIV infections in non-promiscuous adults, and little concentration in
the general population according to sexual activity.”(17)

Those of higher socioeconomic status have higher rates of HIV than those
of lower status. “Since [Sexually transmitted diseases] STD have long been
associated with lower socioeconomic and educational attainment, it was at
least equally plausible that associations between high status and HIV
pointed to differences in health care rather than sexual behavior.”(18)
That is to say, the more “health care” one was exposed to, the greater
one’s risk of developing HIV.

Clinic attendance was associated with HIV. “Comparison of HIV prevalence
and incidence in STD clinics with prevalence in general population studies
suggests that risk for HIV infection was associated with clinic
attendance.”(19)

Infants were medically infected with HIV. “High rates of HIV infections in
children that could not reasonably be attributed to vertical [that is,
mother-to-child] transmission.”(20)

They close this extraordinary indictment of health care in Africa by
pleading with “public health managers [to] . . . be more willing to seek
and respect evidence about the proportion of HIV in Africa from medical
procedures.”(21)

In their third, and final, article, Gisselquist et al estimate the actual
percentage of HIV/AIDS cases in Africa that were transmitted sexually. The
figure they come up with—25 to 35%--is far below the 90% hypothesis
customarily assumed by researchers.(22) This rate of sexual transmission
is only a third of what would be necessary to sustain the rapidly
expanding HIV/AIDS epidemic.

Gisselquist et al urge a new effort to assess the role of medical
transmission: “A growing body of evidence points to unsafe injections and
other medical exposures to contaminated blood as pathways that have not
yet been adequately addressed.”(23) The risk of infection with HIV from a
contaminated medical injection is one in 30.(24) This risk is 33 times
higher than the generally accepted probability of transmission for
penile-vaginal sex (about one in 1000).(25)

Where do Africans experience such exposures, which have taken such a toll
on African life? Often in family planning programs, where injectable
contraceptives such as Depo-Provera, Norplant implantation, and abortion
(called “post-abortion care”) by Manual Vacuum Aspirator (MVA) are the
order of the day.

Next week we will estimate how many of the 22 million deaths from
AIDS,(26) and the 30 million HIV infections, are a direct and indirect
consequence of U.S. and foreign-funded family planning programs in Africa.


Endnotes

1. David D. Brewer, Stuart Brody, Ernest Drucker, David Gisselquist,
Stephen F. Minkin, John J. Potterat, Richard B. Rothernberg, and Francois
Vachon, “Mounting Anomalies in the Epidemiology of HIV in Africa: Cry the
Beloved Paradigm,” Int. J. of STD & AIDS 2003; 14:144-147.
David Gisselquist, John J. Potterat, Stuart Brody, and Francois Vachon,
“Let it be Sexual: how Health Care Transmission of AIDS in Africa was
Ignored,” Int. J. of STD & AIDS 2003; 14:148-161.
David Gisselquist and John J. Potterat, “Heterosexual Transmission of HIV
in Africa: An Empiric Estimate,” Int. J. of STD & AIDS 2003; 14:162-173.
2. Brewer et al, p. 144.
3. Gisselquist, Potterat, Brody and Vachon, p. 148.
4. Gisselquist and Potterat.
5. Piot P. Plummer F.A, Mhalu F.S., Lamboray J-L, Chin J., Mann J.M.,
“AIDS: An International Perspective,” Science 1988; 239:573-9.
6. World Health Organization (WHO). “The World Health Report 2002:
Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life.” Geneva: WHO, 2002.
7. Gisselquist, “Heterosexual Transmission of HIV in Africa: An Empiric
Estimate,” Int. J. of STD & AIDS 2003; 14:162-173, p. 162.
8. Quinn, T.C., Mann J. M., Curran, J.W., Piot, P., “AIDS in Africa: an
Epidemiologic Paradigm.” Science 1986; 234:955-63.
Van de Perre, P, Rouvroy, D., Lapage, P., et al. Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndromw in Rwanda. Lancet 1984; ii: 62-65.
9. Gisselquist, David, et al, International Journal of STD & AIDS 2003;
14:148-161, page 158.
10. Ibid., p. 158.
11. Randy Shilts, And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS
Epidemic (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000), p. 513.
12. Packard, R.M., Epstein, P., Epidemiologists, Social Scientists, and
the Structure of Medical Researh on AIDS in Africa,” Soc Sci Med 1991;
33:771-83.
13. Brewer et al, “Mounting Anomalies in the Epidemiology of HIV in
Africa: Cry the Beloved Paradigm.” International Journal of STD & AIDS
2003; 14:144-147. p. 145.
14. Gisselquist et al, “Let it be Sexual,” p. 158.
15. Ibid., “Let it be Sexual,” p. 148.
16. Ibid., p. 154.
17. Ibid., p. 152.
18. Ibid., p. 153.
19. Ibid., p. 154.
20. Ibid., p. 153.
21. Gisselquist et al, “Discounting health Care in HIV Transmission,” p.
159.
22. Gisselquist et al, “Estimating sexual transmission of HIV,” p. 171.
23. Gisselquist, “Estimating . . .”, p. 171.
24. Drucker, E.M., Alcabes, P.G., Marx, P.A., “The Injection Century:
Consequqnces of Massive Unsterilie Injecting for the Emergence of Human
pathogens.” Lancet 2001; 358:1989092.
25. Royce, R.A., Sena, A., Cates. W. Jr., Cohen, M.S. “Sexual Transmission
of HIV.” New England Journal of Medicine 1997: 336:1072-8.
26. UNAIDS, “AIDS Epidemic Update,” 2000-2002; World Health Organization,
Fact Sheet 2, “The Global HIV/AIDS epidemic.”


© 2003 Population Research Institute. Permission to reprint granted.
Redistribute widely. Credit required.


If this is true, then it would appear that I was quite misinformed with regards to previous statistics I had seen. I apologize to all for my mistatements.

Justin, a sinner