Posted on 06/24/2002 1:49:13 AM PDT by David Hunter
One in 20 Russian adults will be infected with the HIV virus within five years, threatening a massive epidemic in Europe, according to an independent survey by British scientists.
Researchers at Imperial College, London, have been studying the likely spread of HIV in Russia and have concluded that 5 per cent of the adult population will be HIV- positive by 2007.
'This means four million adults will develop Aids,' said one doctor, who added that there was no upper limit. 'It could easily be a lot worse - at least double. And these people will die within 10 years.'
The results of the Imperial College study - the first independent report into the virus commissioned and assisted by the United Nations Aids program, UNAids - will be presented at a World Health Organisation conference in Barcelona in July.
Experts say HIV has spread most quickly in the last three years among drug users who share needles. But they fear the virus is spreading to the general population through heterosexual sex, and that it may 'mushroom' in the next decade, leading to infection rates similar to those in Africa.
'Our study was focused on the behaviour of drug users in Russia,' said Nick Grassley, who did the research at the college's department of infectious diseases and epidemiology. 'But drug users have sex with non-drug users and they rarely use condoms. Infection rates of sexually transmitted diseases are a hundred times higher in Russia than in Western countries, and these contribute to the spread of HIV. All the factors are there for a large epidemic.'
Grassley added that a third of drug users funded their habit through prostitution, spreading HIV. Security experts are now analysing the impact of the large numbers of eastern European women who work in the sex industries of Berlin, Amsterdam and London.
The estimate comes weeks after the World Bank delivered a stark warning to President Vladimir Putin's administration that the country's economy would shrink by 4 per cent if HIV continued to spread at the current rate. 'HIV is a time bomb,' said one World Bank official.
Putin has been criticised for inaction over HIV. Analysts say Russia does not want to admit HIV is a problem because it might deter investment and further restrict the movement of Russians within Europe.
Health workers are also fiercely critical of the current HIV strategy. In Moscow, Mayor Yuri Luzhkov is encouraging adults to abstain from sex rather than use condoms - a practice frowned on by Russia's Orthodox Church.
Russia spends the bulk of its meagre $5 million annual HIV budget on treatment, but experts warn that to avert disaster it urgently needs to invest more in safe sex education. 'Russia is doing a lot of tests - nearly 20 million, they say - so they know where the problem is,' said an Aids worker. 'But the programmes now focus largely on treatment and not prevention. Treatment costs $10,000 a patient and is funded by international donors, not by the Russian government.'
In 1999, the CIA considered HIV a major security risk for the West and warned that by the end of this year two million Russian adults could be infected. The number of cases of HIV officially registered in Russia has nearly doubled each year since 1997.
Urban Weber, a technical adviser on HIV for UNAids, said: 'HIV will become a very severe problem for Russian society as a whole in a very short time if nothing happens.
'Ninety per cent of Russian HIV cases caught the disease since 1999. This means that the first wave of people will start arriving in hospital in three years. Now there is no visible problem, and this might be the reason why it is getting little attention.'
Weber added that Russians were not being informed of the risks. 'Russian condom use is considerably lower than in other Western countries. But Russians are as rational as everyone else. They just need to be told how to protect themselves.'
The infection also poses a risk to neighbouring states. 'We know that HIV spreads along routes used by truckers and sex workers,' said Weber. 'We do not have exact figures on this, but Germany should be highly aware of the potential for a problem. The economic decline in eastern Europe sends sex workers to border areas and westwards.' An official at the German embassy in Moscow added HIV in Russia was 'of grave concern' to his administration.
Security experts are giving particular attention to the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic coast. A confidential intelligence report seen by The Observer estimates Kaliningrad is home to 20 per cent of Russia's HIV cases. 'It's too close to Berlin for their comfort,' added a source.
HIV rates are highest in Moscow. HIV workers in the city have seen the virus transfer from drug users to the general population since the summer of last year.
Dima Blagovo works for the community project Return to Life. Eight months ago, a woman called Ela, 22, came to their offices. 'She was worried that she had caught HIV,' he said. 'At first we did not believe her when she said she did not inject drugs, but she insisted. She said she had had casual, unsafe sex with a man in a field once. She wanted a test. He was a user, and now she is HIV-positive.'
Ela was the first person Return to Life met who had caught HIV through heterosexual sex. 'I hear about sexually transmitted cases of HIV more and more,' said Blagovo.
There are now 195,000 registered cases of HIV in Russia, and UNAids estimates that up to 1.2 million people may have the virus.
Grassley added that a third of drug users funded their habit through prostitution, spreading HIV.
'Ninety per cent of Russian HIV cases caught the disease since 1999. This means that the first wave of people will start arriving in hospital in three years. Now there is no visible problem, and this might be the reason why it is getting little attention.'
Wow, it sounds like Russia is sitting on top of a ticking time bomb. I suppose the fact that the Orthodox Church doesn't approve of the use of condoms and that they are surprised that AIDS spreads heterosexually won't help either. Also the lack of any public education campaigns and the propensity to blame homosexuals for the AIDS epidemic is problematic too.
Sexual transmission of AIDS is mainly by heterosexual intercourse in Britain, Africa, and Asia, so it shouldn't be a suprise to the Russians. Oh well, when 5% of the population is infected, then they might actually do something.
President Reagan also ignored the USA's early AIDS epidemic because he thought it was just a problem for gays and drug addicts. Now AIDS is a major problem for heterosexuals in the USA. Russia will go the same way unless you lot wake up to the fact that AIDS is a problem for heterosexuals too.
What I remember being said twenty years ago, and very loudly at that juncture, was that the promiscuous lifestyle of SOME homosexual men must stop so HIV/AIDS can be either reduced and/or eliminated. (Discussions concerning quarantine of infected individuals were prevalent and hotly debated during that period, too.)
This whole situation caught my attention. I was in the Navy when AIDS began to infect sailors, some gay and some straight. I vividly recall the debate as I was stationed in Europe and most the cases occurring there were either sea-going sailors OR land-based Army personnel in Germany.
Certain anti-homosexual US public figures tried to use the AIDS epidemic to smear the US homosexual community. But the reason I said the above to Stavka is because he has told me HIV is mainly a problem for homosexuals and so they are a serious risk to the Russian population. Therefore, he proposes to ban homosexuality in Russia, ignoring the fact that sexual transmission of AIDS in many countries mainly occurs through heterosexual intercourse.
What I remember being said twenty years ago, and very loudly at that juncture, was that the promiscuous lifestyle of SOME homosexual men must stop so HIV/AIDS can be either reduced and/or eliminated.
Yes, you are right, but the fact that AIDS mainly spread by heterosexual intercourse (that was the single biggest risk factor) in Uganda, Tanzania, Zambia etc, at that time, was unfortunately ignored by the US government. In fact, they played down the risks for heterosexuals for the first few years of the epidemic in the USA and Britain. It seems the Russians are doing the same thing.
A quote from here: 'Numbers of heterosexually acquired HIV infections diagnosed in the UK have risen steadily over the last 15 years and since 1999 have been greater than the number acquired through sex between men. The total of new diagnoses of HIV in those infected heterosexually is expected to rise to over 1500 for 1999.'
The same thing has been seen in the Carribean countries. See the following quote from here: 'The Caribbean Epidemiological Center (CAREC) member countries (CAREC/CMC) are reporting a high incidence of female AIDS cases. The average male to female sex ratio in annual AIDS cases reported to CAREC declined from 4:1 in 1985 to 2:1 in 1996, with some variation between countries. The cumulative number of female AIDS cases increased 19 fold during the same period, reaching 540 in 1995.'
To see a report from the United Nations which proves that AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, the Carribean and South East Asia is mainly spread heterosexually click here.
They will for sure if they take AIDS drugs.
No, it is not. More of the lies. It is a problem among drug-injection-using heterosexuals.
Despite the prediction for years that HIV will become rampant among heterosexual Americans, it has not.
A standard anti-retroviral drug course costs about $10,000 a year for each AIDS patient. They also have to take the drugs for the rest of their lives, so that's an average cost of about $120,000. How is an impoverished country like Russia going to pay for the drug treatment of 4 million or so AIDS patients? Its diffcult enough for AIDS patients in the USA and Britain to get drug therapy.
I'd say unless the Russians start some serious publicity campaigns their economy will be crippled by the expense of treating all the new AIDS cases.
I mean that it is in the heterosexual population and people are aware of it. Therefore, the sensible ones practice safe sex with strangers.
No, it is not. More of the lies. It is a problem among drug-injection-using heterosexuals.
So would you be perfectly happy to have unprotected sex with a stranger in the USA?
Despite the prediction for years that HIV will become rampant among heterosexual Americans, it has not.
I never said it was "rampant". I said it was a "major problem". A disease which is practically guaranteed to kill you in a very unpleasant way even with the recommended treatment, seems like more than just a problem to me.
You seem to ignore the fact that these people, who originally caught AIDS from shared hypodermic needles, are sources of AIDS for the heterosexual population at large. You can't assume that their heterosexual partners are also intra-venous drug users you know.
That's part of the problem in Russia. The intra-venous drug users catch AIDS by sharing needles and then pass it on to their multiple heterosexual partners, since many of them are prostitutes.
More of the lies.
Why should anyone want to lie about this?
The natural protection which the vagina provides to the virus is broken; then women with lesions can become infected, as well as men.
STDs are much higher in Third world countries, as well as in Eastern Europe.
That is the reason for the spread of AIDs there, among non-drug-using heterosexuals.
Contrary to projections, although the HIV virus has been infecting people in this country for over 20, the expected breakout into the heterosexual community has not happened for the reasons above.
American heterosexuals are not as promiscuous as adults in many Third world nations, nor do they have the STD infections.
If discussions on HIV infections would include these facts, then I would not refer to "lies" being perpetuated.
There's nothing different about American heterosexuals except their sexual behavior when compared to other cultures.
The natural protection which the vagina provides to the virus is broken; then women with lesions can become infected, as well as men.
Damage to the vaginal mucosa can occur in other ways too. For example, a yeast infection or just aggressive intercourse would increase the risk of contracting HIV from a HIV+ man. Heterosexual intercourse may not spread HIV as efficiently as homosexual intercourse but it still spreads it.
Also a man is still at significant risk if he has unprotected sex with a HIV+ woman who does not have a damaged vaginal mucosa. This is because the vaginal fluid contains a high percentage of CD4 T cells, which are the hosts for the virus. HIV can also sometimes pass through the glans penis mucosal membrane.
STDs are much higher in Third world countries, as well as in Eastern Europe.
That is the reason for the spread of AIDs there, among non-drug-using heterosexuals.
An STD infection would certainly increase the transmission efficacy of HIV. But having unprotected sex with a HIV+ person who doesn't have any other STDs is still very dangerous.
...the expected breakout into the heterosexual community has not happened for the reasons above.
Don't you think people have also changed their behaviour? Condoms are used much more frequently in the USA and Western Europe than they are in Eastern Europe and the third world. The proper use of condoms is the only way to prevent the spread of AIDS, apart from abstaining from sex altogether.
This does not bode well for Russia.
That's bullshit. How about two people in love get married and have a monogamous relationship? The problem is that certain people, particularly the activist homosexuals, can't fathom the thought of not having 20 or more partners every year.
Now, you don what you want, that doesn't bother me. But don't tell me that I am spreading some epidemic if I have sex without a condom. Neither myself nor my wife has AIDS. We love each other and are in a monogamous relationship. We have sex without condoms. We are not contributing to the spread of AIDS. End of story.
They can find out if AIDS is spreading heterosexually by comparing the ratio of infected men to infected women. This is what epidemiologists do as a matter of routine. That's how we know that AIDS spreads almost exclusively by heterosexual intercourse in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, if men are becoming infected because they are using female prostitutes who are HIV+ then that doesn't help the ratios.
No, as long as they are both HIV- then they are fine.
Now, you do what you want,
Don't think that just because I am defending Russian homosexuals that I must be a homosexual, actually I am heterosexual myself.
But don't tell me that I am spreading some epidemic if I have sex without a condom. Neither myself nor my wife has AIDS. We love each other and are in a monogamous relationship. We have sex without condoms. We are not contributing to the spread of AIDS.
Of course you aren't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.