why is AIDs so widespread?

[fatgirl_lover]

So as my friend very convincingly explained to me getting AIDs is hard (without needles and without anal sex). First the girl has to have aids, then even if she does and you have sex without a condom a number tossed around a lot is that you have only 1/500 chance of getting it. However if you also use a condom the condom has to break or you have to exchange blood somehow. So it's a huge parlay. How is AIDs so widespread in places like Afrca, I remember reading that in some places it is as high as 1/8 people have it.

[Phil153]

Spread of AIDS:

#1: Butt sex. Homosexuals and straight people who like to put their penis in rotting animal and vegetable remains are the reason that AIDS even exists today.
#2: Prostitutes. Many clients; things like sores and venereal disease increase chance of contraction.
#3 AIDS babies. Women with HIV in Africa still have plenty of children.
#4: Needles

Read this. It will open your eyes. It is NOT SAFE FOR WORK text.

Watch it, you can't link that Phil. -Rduke55

[vhawk01]

Having sex with virgins involves lots of blood.

[Phil153]

Would that really be a large effect? I know it's a common belief in those countries that sex with virgins can cure AIDS, but it can't be that common.

Another point for OP is that female risks are quite a bit greater than male risks.

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
Would that really be a large effect? I know it's a common belief in those countries that sex with virgins can cure AIDS, but it can't be that common.

Another point for OP is that female risks are quite a bit greater than male risks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Saliva inhibits the virus in some ways I have heard.... another good reason to use some spit as lube! chalk another one up for "things I learned from porn"

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Would that really be a large effect? I know it's a common belief in those countries that sex with virgins can cure AIDS, but it can't be that common.

Another point for OP is that female risks are quite a bit greater than male risks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what the prevalence of "virgin sex" is, but you are probably right. I was just trying to add that sex with a bleeding little girl has got to be WAY up there on the riskiness scale, for the very same reasons anal sex is.

[slik]

I have no idea how they would do scientific studies, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aids says that even with unprotected anal sex without withdrawal the % of transmission is only like 1%. So with regards to your question, the only way AIDS would spread is through repeated negligence, which still exists in the countries where it predominates.

[Siegmund]

People who have unprotected sex *once* with an infected person tend not to get it.

People who have unprotected sex nightly, or even weekly, with an infected person or persons tend to have their number come up in the lottery within a few years.

1 in 500, or 1 in 100, isn't much. But if you do it once a week, that's 10% and 40% chance of infection within one year, for vaginal and anal respectively. (OK, it's not QUITE an independent trials thing - most likely not everyone is equally susceptible to catching it... but the numbers are imprecise to begin with so that's the least of our worries.)

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
So as my friend very convincingly explained to me getting AIDs is hard (without needles and without anal sex). First the girl has to have aids, then even if she does and you have sex without a condom a number tossed around a lot is that you have only 1/500 chance of getting it. However if you also use a condom the condom has to break or you have to exchange blood somehow. So it's a huge parlay. How is AIDs so widespread in places like Afrca, I remember reading that in some places it is as high as 1/8 people have it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if 1/8 have it... and 1/500 will get it if they have sex with someone with it... then the odds of contracting it from unprotected sex is 1/4000. So 1 every 4000 encounters will get it by your math....and there are obviously tens of thousands perhaps millions of encounters over any given amount of time and area........ hmmmmmmmm.........

[m_the0ry]

There's a lot of misinformation here...

The reason why AIDS is so widespread is because the virus has developed complicated dormancy mechanisms. It can be present in a host for 4+ years without any symptoms. This keeps the host mobile yet infectious.

[slik]

It is also advantageous to the virus for the host to live longer (and perhaps be non-lethal). So with evolution, the AIDS virus will attenuate even further.

[ QUOTE ]
There's a lot of misinformation here...

The reason why AIDS is so widespread is because the virus has developed complicated dormancy mechanisms. It can be present in a host for 4+ years without any symptoms. This keeps the host mobile yet infectious.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Beavis68]

there are a list of symptoms, of those symptoms are met, AIDS is diagnoses. Most of the africans diagnosed with AIDS have not been tested for HIV.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
It is also advantageous to the virus for the host to live longer (and perhaps be non-lethal). So with evolution, the AIDS virus will attenuate even further.

[ QUOTE ]
There's a lot of misinformation here...

The reason why AIDS is so widespread is because the virus has developed complicated dormancy mechanisms. It can be present in a host for 4+ years without any symptoms. This keeps the host mobile yet infectious.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

AIDS isn't a virus.

[JuntMonkey]

AIDS numbers in Africa are hugely exaggerated.

For starters, AIDS is sometimes diagnosed in Africa with no tests at all - just a description of symptoms to a doctor in a clinic, symptoms which are often identical to those of things like malaria and malnutrition.

Different organizations will have wildly different estimates of the number of infected people, since they often extrapolate based on very small sample sizes.

And finally, even if a patient in Africa is actually tested, AIDS tests often give false positives. In the United States, there are several different blood tests (something like 5) that need to come out a certain way to diagnose a patient as having AIDS. In Africa it's often just 1 test, with false positives possible for numerous reasons, including plain old pregnancy.

Even in the developed world, you could test negative in New York City, then send the EXACT SAME blood work to Australia and test positive.

There was a fantastic article in Rolling Stone magazine in 2001 about AIDS in Africa, written by Rian Malan, a South African journalist. He set out to write an article to expose and bring attention to how bad the AIDS problem was in Africa ("1 in 5 infected"). He started off by making a call or two to confirm some statistics, and found that he could confirm nothing...and then he fell down the rabbit hole.

http://www.whatisaids.com/rollingstone.htm

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
AIDS numbers in Africa are hugely exaggerated.

For starters, AIDS is sometimes diagnosed in Africa with no tests at all - just a description of symptoms to a doctor in a clinic, symptoms which are often identical to those of things like malaria and malnutrition.

Different organizations will have wildly different estimates of the number of infected people, since they often extrapolate based on very small sample sizes.

And finally, even if a patient in Africa is actually tested, AIDS tests often give false positives. In the United States, there are several different blood tests (something like 5) that need to come out a certain way to diagnose a patient as having AIDS. In Africa it's often just 1 test, with false positives possible for numerous reasons, including plain old pregnancy.

Even in the developed world, you could test negative in New York City, then send the EXACT SAME blood work to Australia and test positive.

There was a fantastic article in Rolling Stone magazine in 2001 about AIDS in Africa, written by Rian Malan, a South African journalist. He set out to write an article to expose and bring attention to how bad the AIDS problem was in Africa ("1 in 5 infected"). He started off by making a call or two to confirm some statistics, and found that he could confirm nothing...and then he fell down the rabbit hole.

http://www.whatisaids.com/rollingstone.htm

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I know, there are no blood tests to determine whether someone has AIDS.

[PLOlover]

dr. dean edell said that in africa there's some sort of "dry sex" (vaginal sex) that helps spread HIV.

the other reasons i've heard others have posted, also I've heard from the AIDS is manmade virus crowd that it was designed to better infect the black race.

[slik]

The blood test is a simple enzyme test and a drop is sufficient to test activity. (For this you get the results in 15 minutes).

Recent tests allow a toothpick to scrape a few cells from the cheek to be tested. (I'm not sure about the mechanism of this test). (But you get the results in a few minutes in this test, too).

[slik]

This is an old theory, and biotechnology has only recently reached necessary advancement to be able to create such things.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
The blood test is a simple enzyme test and a drop is sufficient to test activity. (For this you get the results in 15 minutes).

Recent tests allow a toothpick to scrape a few cells from the cheek to be tested. (I'm not sure about the mechanism of this test). (But you get the results in a few minutes in this test, too).

[/ QUOTE ]


OHHH, you mean an HIV test.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
This is an old theory, and biotechnology has only recently reached necessary advancement to be able to create such things.

[/ QUOTE ]

just rounding out the theories.

[fatgirl_lover]

thanks for the info everyone. though some of the responses are not entirely convincing. i know if you keep playing the loterry then eventually your number will come up but still, this is a prety hard lottery to "win". people need to be having constant unprotected sex, and then the people they are having unprotected sex with a lot of them need to have AIDs.

seems like the solution is very straightforward, no anal sex with someone who has AIDs, use a condom, don't use dirty needles to inject drugs. curious, how do you guys have knowledge on this subject? definitly wasn't expecting 19 responses on this topic.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Watch it, you can't link that Phil. -Rduke55

[/ QUOTE ]
To everyone PMing me about the deleted link, no it's not a hate site or anti-gay site and there are no pornographic images. It's interesting but not that exciting. And no, I won't be sending it to you.

Cheers.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
Would that really be a large effect? I know it's a common belief in those countries that sex with virgins can cure AIDS, but it can't be that common.

Another point for OP is that female risks are quite a bit greater than straight male risks.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

Taking it in the ass > taking it in the vagina > putting your fireman in something

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
thanks for the info everyone. though some of the responses are not entirely convincing. i know if you keep playing the loterry then eventually your number will come up but still, this is a prety hard lottery to "win". people need to be having constant unprotected sex, and then the people they are having unprotected sex with a lot of them need to have AIDs.

seems like the solution is very straightforward, no anal sex with someone who has AIDs, use a condom, don't use dirty needles to inject drugs. curious, how do you guys have knowledge on this subject? definitly wasn't expecting 19 responses on this topic.


[/ QUOTE ]

starsky from the tv show , his wife had aids when it first came out from a transfusion or something and they had sex for years and starsky never got aids.

[Deorum]

Odds of a male contracting HIV from someone in a non-high-risk group without a condom through PVI: 1 in 5,000,000

Odds of a male contracting HIV from someone in a non-high-risk group with a condom through PVI: 1 in 50,000,000

Link to page on infection percentages (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=73514)

As far as the HIV epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa, environmental institutes such as the Worldwatch Institute would like to have you believe that it is largely a result of a collapsing ecosystem:

"The first region where decline is replacing progress is sub-Saharan Africa. In this region of 800 million people, life expectancy - a sentinel indicator of progress - is falling precipitously as governments overwhelmed by rapid population growth have failed to curb the spread of the virus that leads to AIDS."

2000a Worldwatch Institute, Lester Brown et al.
(eds.): State of the World 2000. New York: W. W. Norton.


However, environmental institutions often exaggerate numbers and make false claims based on incorrect statistical analysis in order to overstate their cause, hoping it will garner more attention. In actuality, the primary reasons for the widespread AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa are political and social factors:

"The high levels of AIDS arise from the failure of African political and religious leader to recognize social and sexual reality. The means for maintaining and conquering the epidemic are already known, and could prove effective if the leadership could be induced to adopt them. The lack of individual behavioral change and of the implementation of effective government policy has roots in attitudes to death and a silence about the epidemic arising from beliefs about its nature and the timing of death."


Caldwell, John C. 2000 "Rethinking the African AIDS epidemic."
Population and Development Review. 26(1):117-35.

Also:

"... two principal factors are to blame [for the AIDS epidemic in the developing countries]: first, the reluctance of national governments to take responsibility for preventing HIV infection; and second, a failure by both national governments and international agencies to set realistic priorities that can have an effect on the overall epidemic in countries with scarce resources and weak implementation capacity."

Ainsworth, Martha and Waranya Teokul 2000 "Breaking the silence: setting realistic priorities for AIDS control in less-developed countries."
The Lancet 356(9223):55-60.

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is also advantageous to the virus for the host to live longer (and perhaps be non-lethal). So with evolution, the AIDS virus will attenuate even further.

[ QUOTE ]
There's a lot of misinformation here...

The reason why AIDS is so widespread is because the virus has developed complicated dormancy mechanisms. It can be present in a host for 4+ years without any symptoms. This keeps the host mobile yet infectious.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

AIDS isn't a virus.

[/ QUOTE ]

=HIV

[fatgirl_lover]

"But the odds are much worse if you have sexual intercourse with
someone who's "high risk" (i.e. a gay or bisexual male, or a
hemophiliac). The odds of contracting AIDS if you have sex with
someone in this high risk group are 1 in 10,000 if you use a condom
and 1 in 1,000 if you don't use a condom.
"

in the high risk group it doesn't include sex workers, any thoughts on whether a 21-27 year old prostitute who uses condoms always (my impression is some prostitues always use condoms with people) is a high risk category?

[fatgirl_lover]

i'm trying to search aids rates in sex workers now with little luck.

[FortunaMaximus]

Link to Avert.org (Int'l HIV/AIDS Stats) (http://www.avert.org/statindx.htm)

Fairly comprehensive, and might do for a good starting point.

[JuntMonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
Link to Avert.org (Int'l HIV/AIDS Stats) (http://www.avert.org/statindx.htm)

Fairly comprehensive, and might do for a good starting point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love how the stat is that 5.9% of the population in Sub-Saharan Africa have it, but the MOTHEREFFING [censored] ON A MAJOR CABLE NEWS NETWORK YESTERDAY SAID "30%". Same [censored] where Oprah Winfrey said in 1986 that 1 in 5 HETEROsexuals would be dead from AIDS. Gotta scare everybody into thinking they can get it.

Also it's an atrocity that we're raising billions of dollars to throw expensive AIDS drugs at Africa. Let's start with clean water, nutritious food, hygiene, and basic medical care please.

[govman6767]

Seeing how the Pope travel's to numerous populated countries in the world and ADVOCATES not using condoms. I would say the pope and the church have been contributing to the spread of AIDS ( NOT THE #1 REASON FLAMERS ) but it is a reason. Countries adverse to using condoms is a problem.

I'm just assuming that poorer countries in Africa the people cannot afford condoms. Or would rather have lots of kids because childern are a big resource in poor countries.

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The blood test is a simple enzyme test and a drop is sufficient to test activity. (For this you get the results in 15 minutes).

Recent tests allow a toothpick to scrape a few cells from the cheek to be tested. (I'm not sure about the mechanism of this test). (But you get the results in a few minutes in this test, too).

[/ QUOTE ]


OHHH, you mean an HIV test.

[/ QUOTE ]
Given that HIV appears to lead with 100% certainty to AIDS, which in turn is 100% incurable, why are you concerned about the distinction? Contracting HIV = contracting AIDS.