Posted on 06/03/2005 11:18:37 AM PDT by FormerLib
Glazov: Dr. Brody, lets begin with you. Could you kindly comment on this phenomenon and give your perspective on some of the themes I have raised?
Brody: In the early 1980s, in my hometown of New York, it was apparent that AIDS deaths were occurring in transfusees, injecting drug users, and male homosexuals. It was also apparent to the homosexual community that given that affected population, generous federal funding would not be forthcoming. People skilled at public relations developed the "Big Lie": that HIV was a major risk to all, and was readily spread via penile-vaginal intercourse (rather than only by injection or anal intercourse) to otherwise reasonably healthy adults. This lie was understandable given the circumstances at that time. With time, generous funding became available, and the lie was no longer needed for the original purpose.
However, by that time, several political interests became very invested in the Big Lie. Those interests included those who sought to confuse political equality of homosexuals with egalitarian disease susceptibility (I suspect that only a small minority of those promoting that agenda were themselves nominally homosexual). So-called "gender feminists", inspired by the late Andrea Dworkin and her ilk, were keen to vilify intercourse, and hoped to reduce intercourse frequency (in favor of sexual behaviors that were less exclusively heterosexual), as well as to dampen its quality and intimacy (via condom promotion).
In addition to the major role played by the political left, segments of the political right might have been pleased to see a means of enforcing relative sexual continence. People of any political persuasion who, for their own psychological reasons, feared intercourse, also joined the chorus.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
That is our point with the article..."The Big Lie" implies that it is safer to have unprotected heterosexual sex.
Actually, that does not appear to be precisely true according to this article and, until the agenda-driven science is removed from the equation, it is unlikely that the truth will be known.
Then your point is based upon your own faulty supposion as the article never even makes that allegation. It only correctly identifies the behaviors that are more dangerous.
You made the cliam Jackass, why should he prove your negative?
There have been articles posted. Nice profanity.
They are all dangerous, my friend.
The article you posted seems to be agenda driven.
Are the risks equal, medically speaking?
No, they are not.
To say so is to engage in a lie.
It is called "stating the truth."
"Another Left-bred bias was present a lack of realistic appreciation that African data can be tainted by widespread official corruption, as well as endemic poverty, ignorance, and superstition."
African data is not complete because most do not have health care and adequate testing. Imagine the numbers if poverty-stricken and the very rural were tested. Often in Africa, people die without knowing what caused the death. The numbers are not inflated, AIDS deaths are undercounted.
Every day, people (including many babies) waste away and die. Who counts the AIDS deaths in these bush communities with witch doctors counted as the medical professionals? You are right about superstitions. Sometimes when an African gets those purple legions, they are said to be "possessed" when they in fact have AIDS.
Imagine how many people died of cancer in this country when we were dirt poor and at the technological equalivalent that many Africans are today. What was listed as their cause of death? Does it mean we didn't have cancer in this country until the advent of modern day pollution?
But that's like saying ok, car crashes are not nearly as dangerous as plane crashes. So go ahead, have a car crash.
I think you are preaching to the choir here.
Most often, "consumption" or "natural causes."
Does it mean we didn't have cancer in this country until the advent of modern day pollution?
HUH? Is there some sort of contest for saying silly things in this thread?
Not all of us are in his choir.
You already won that contest, my friend.
There's heathens in them thar hills, I tell ya!
No, I'll concede to you in that category after you demanded I tell some people that I've never met about their medical conditions (or lack thereof).
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.