To be fare, the South Africans may have a point, i.e., it’s possible that many of the cases diagnosed as “AIDS” in Africa aren’t actually caused by HIV. At least that explanation for why we have an AIDS epidemic in Africa but not on any other continent makes about as much sense as any other I’ve heard.
At least that explanation for why we have an AIDS epidemic in Africa but not on any other continent makes about as much sense as any other I’ve heard.
I don’t think that phenomenon needs a special explanation. Wikipedia tells us that about 70% of people with HIV live in sub-Saharan Africa, and about 70% of the world’s AIDS deaths occur in sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS is concentrated in Africa because HIV is concentrated in Africa.
it’s possible that many of the cases diagnosed as “AIDS” in Africa aren’t actually caused by HIV
Statistically, given the millions of Africans who’ve had AIDS diagnoses, we would expect thousands of erroneous diagnoses even if the diagnostic process were 99.9% correct.
I don’t think that phenomenon needs a special explanation. (..) AIDS is concentrated in Africa because HIV is concentrated in Africa.
That’s not an explanation. Why is HIV concentrated in Africa? Back during the 90′s the standard explanation was that there was strain of HIV in Africa that spread well by heterosexual sex and that this strain was likely to break into the US real soon now. Since that failed to happen, we are now left with no unfalsified explanation.
Statistically, given the millions of Africans who’ve had AIDS diagnoses, we would expect thousands of erroneous diagnoses even if the diagnostic process were 99.9% correct.
One difference between Africa and other continents is that on other continents they test for the HIV virus before diagnosing someone with AIDS. In Africa since doing blood tests is expensive, and without disposable needles (also expensive) not particularly safe, they will frequently diagnose AIDS based only on symptoms.
Back during the 90′s the standard explanation was that there was strain of HIV in Africa that spread well by heterosexual sex and that this strain was likely to break into the US real soon now.
A lot of the spread of AIDS likely wasn’t due to sex but due to uncleaned syringes.
One difference between Africa and other continents is that on other continents they test for the HIV virus before diagnosing someone with AIDS. In Africa since doing blood tests is expensive, and without disposable needles (also expensive) not particularly safe, they will frequently diagnose AIDS based only on symptoms.
Algeria is an African country that has less AIDS than the US. It’s not so much about seeking a difference between Africa and the rest but about subsaharan Africa and in particular South Africa and Botswana which happen to have the most AIDS. South Africa and Botswana aren’t a particular poor countries, in 1990 they were comparable with Cuba and Brazil.
There are a bunch of ceremonies where humans get cut with nonsterilized knifes. There’s polyamory.
A lot of the spread of AIDS likely wasn’t due to sex but due to uncleaned syringes.
So all the western “anti-AIDS” condom distribution programs were mostly a waste of time and resources? That doesn’t bode well for the success of a western humanitarian takeover.
South Africa and Botswana aren’t a particular poor countries, in 1990 they were comparable with Cuba and Brazil.
So all the western “anti-AIDS” condom distribution programs were mostly a waste of time and resources?
Condoms do reduce some ways in which AIDS get’s spread but they are not enough.
And yet they can’t afford disposable syringes.
It’s not only a matter of having the money to afford disposable syringes. It’s about having the knowledge that if you don’t use a disposable syringe you have the risk of getting infected with AIDS. That’s why AIDS denialism is so dangerous.
Yeah, because South Africa totally didn’t go through a major societal upheaval about two decades ago.
During the Vietnam war the average lifespan of Vietnamese people fell by three years. What happened South Africa reduced the life span of South African more than three time as much. That’s how much they messed up.
Countries normally don’t lose ten years of average lifespan through major societal upheaval or wars.
From 1991 to 2001 Rwanda who had their genocide in 1994 gained a year in lifespan while South Africa lost seven.
It was changed in a way that brought people like Thabo Mbeki to power and because he did things like what we discussed above, South Africa got very messed up.
To be fare, the South Africans may have a point, i.e., it’s possible that many of the cases diagnosed as “AIDS” in Africa aren’t actually caused by HIV. At least that explanation for why we have an AIDS epidemic in Africa but not on any other continent makes about as much sense as any other I’ve heard.
I don’t think that phenomenon needs a special explanation. Wikipedia tells us that about 70% of people with HIV live in sub-Saharan Africa, and about 70% of the world’s AIDS deaths occur in sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS is concentrated in Africa because HIV is concentrated in Africa.
Statistically, given the millions of Africans who’ve had AIDS diagnoses, we would expect thousands of erroneous diagnoses even if the diagnostic process were 99.9% correct.
That’s not an explanation. Why is HIV concentrated in Africa? Back during the 90′s the standard explanation was that there was strain of HIV in Africa that spread well by heterosexual sex and that this strain was likely to break into the US real soon now. Since that failed to happen, we are now left with no unfalsified explanation.
One difference between Africa and other continents is that on other continents they test for the HIV virus before diagnosing someone with AIDS. In Africa since doing blood tests is expensive, and without disposable needles (also expensive) not particularly safe, they will frequently diagnose AIDS based only on symptoms.
A lot of the spread of AIDS likely wasn’t due to sex but due to uncleaned syringes.
Algeria is an African country that has less AIDS than the US. It’s not so much about seeking a difference between Africa and the rest but about subsaharan Africa and in particular South Africa and Botswana which happen to have the most AIDS. South Africa and Botswana aren’t a particular poor countries, in 1990 they were comparable with Cuba and Brazil.
There are a bunch of ceremonies where humans get cut with nonsterilized knifes. There’s polyamory.
So all the western “anti-AIDS” condom distribution programs were mostly a waste of time and resources? That doesn’t bode well for the success of a western humanitarian takeover.
And yet they can’t afford disposable syringes.
Condoms do reduce some ways in which AIDS get’s spread but they are not enough.
It’s not only a matter of having the money to afford disposable syringes. It’s about having the knowledge that if you don’t use a disposable syringe you have the risk of getting infected with AIDS. That’s why AIDS denialism is so dangerous.
South Africa managed to loss around 10 years of average lifespan in the debacle. The same thing didn’t happen on other continents.
The South African really did suffer a lot because there government didn’t do enough to fight AIDS.
Yeah, because South Africa totally didn’t go through a major societal upheaval about two decades ago.
During the Vietnam war the average lifespan of Vietnamese people fell by three years. What happened South Africa reduced the life span of South African more than three time as much. That’s how much they messed up.
Countries normally don’t lose ten years of average lifespan through major societal upheaval or wars.
From 1991 to 2001 Rwanda who had their genocide in 1994 gained a year in lifespan while South Africa lost seven.
The genocide ended. On the other hand South Africa’s political system was permanently changed.
It was changed in a way that brought people like Thabo Mbeki to power and because he did things like what we discussed above, South Africa got very messed up.