The Anti-Science Party marches on ...

[quaddriver]

yes, and I posted the data.

DGS clearly indicated he was referring to this country. When I looked up the data, so did I, so did Lord Jim.

I will smooth my math a little bit and state again: chose any 7 days of this year 2011 so far. more women died of heart disease than will die all year from aids.

Since we are talking about the USA, and expenditure of USA funds, which disease carries with it the greater urgency?

Ask again when you realize that the CDC places the blame soley on ricky (and oft illegal) behaviours for one of the 'diseases'. How does one find a cure for that?

And it helps not that scooter has moved the goal posts at least thrice.

First it was aids is the killer of all women something to 44, then all women something to 34, then black women something to something.

As as least 2 separate posters have shown, there is no data to support that assertion, in fact, quite the opposite.

Is the USA outside the 3rd world?

Snide remarks from non-citizens aside, yes.

Is the number of aids deaths very small in the US compared to other stuff. yes.

does it occur on the margins? you answered that yourself with the link above from which I quoted, the answer being yes.

I believe all the posts, claims, links and supporting evidence are available on this page and perhaps the last. Re-read it if unclear. My job description does not include spoon feeding.

[Grim Reaper]

Ask again when you realize that the CDC places the blame soley on ricky (and oft illegal) behaviours for one of the 'diseases'. How does one find a cure for that?

Improved sexual education and increased resources to provide protection. Preventative measures implemented back then would have been relatively cheap compared to the amount of money that has been spent on people infected with AIDS since then.

[dgs49]

My point of interest in this thread is the false threat of the HETEROSEXUAL transmission AIDS by sexual congress in the general U.S. population.

In short, there is no such threat.

The incidence of the spread of AIDS by heterosexual contact is heavily concentrated in a tiny, marginal, sliver of the population: black females in their early 20's. Outside that group, it is a non-event. About as much of a threat as being struck and killed by lightning.

And lest we forget, the incidence of AIDS among monogamous (or celibate) non-intravenous-drug-using persons is approximately zero.

And if education could stop the spread of the disease, it would have been eradicated 20 years ago. I would guess that at least 80% of new cases in the U.S. are the result of unprotected sexual activity.

[loCAtek]

Quite true dgs49, as with unwanted pregnancy, it's young people who think they are immune, who take risks and don't use projection.

[Gob]

So I'll ask Quaddy again....

So, my point was, dgs claimed that AIDS "outside the third world, it is insignificant and only occurs on the margins", do you believe that to be true? Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

[loCAtek]

Um, you're asking him repeat himself? Why not re-read the data posted?

[Grim Reaper]

And if education could stop the spread of the disease, it would have been eradicated 20 years ago. I would guess that at least 80% of new cases in the U.S. are the result of unprotected sexual activity.

That's if we bothered much with sex education. Too many schools are still teaching abstinence-only, we're woefully behind on educating teenagers when it comes to sex. We even provide benefits to schools that do so.

[Scooter]

My point of interest in this thread is the false threat of the HETEROSEXUAL transmission AIDS by sexual congress in the general U.S. population.

You may consider it false, but to those whose business it is to deal with such things, a disease that will affect 1 in 139 women is serious business. It is skirting the level of becoming a generalized epidemic (which it already is among black women and the poor).

The incidence of the spread of AIDS by heterosexual contact is heavily concentrated in a tiny, marginal, sliver of the population: black females in their early 20's.

And because they are black, they don't count? A disease doesn't deserve attention because it disproportionately affects black Americans? Wow.

And what do you imagine happens to those women when they leave their 20s? Does their HIV infection magically disappear? A 20 year old HIV-infected woman becomes a 30 year old HIV-infected woman, becomes a 40 year old HIV-infected woman, and with the state of treatment today becomes a 50 year old HIV-infected woman, becomes a 60 year old HIV-infected woman, becomes a 70 year old HIV-infected woman. Now that people are not dying anywhere near as prematurely, the population affected is not a "sliver" of anything.

Outside that group, it is a non-event. About as much of a threat as being struck and killed by lightning.

Let's test that, shall we?

The lifetime risk of being struck (not even just those killed) by lightening is about 1 in 250,000, or about 0.0004%. Of course, the HIV prevalence among those "good", white, heterosexual Americans Dave is concerned about (as opposed to blacks, etc., who don't count) is several orders of magnitude greater than that.

And lest we forget, the incidence of AIDS among monogamous (or celibate) non-intravenous-drug-using persons is approximately zero.

Well, no, it's not, actually. Many, if not most, women who get infected through sexual contact do so in the context of a relationship they believe to be monogamous.

I would guess that at least 80% of new cases in the U.S. are the result of unprotected sexual activity.

Probably more. As opposed to what? Of course it's being transmitted by unprotected sexual activity. But if you believe that to always suggest some sort of fault or moral failing, ask yourself what your reaction would be if your wife insisted on using condoms whenever the two of you had sex. You would tell her to go fuck herself, which is precisely the reaction that millions of women get everyday. Not everything is a question of choice.

[Scooter]

Quite true dgs49, as with unwanted pregnancy, it's young people who think they are immune, who take risks and don't use projection.

Speaking of Freudian slips...

[quaddriver]

You may consider it false, but to those whose business it is to deal with such things, a disease that will affect 1 in 139 women is serious business.

I love logical fallacies. Is what he said true?

yes, ONLY if you leave off the rest of the quote:

(1 in 32 black women and 1 in 106 Hispanic/Latina women will be diagnosed with HIV, compared with 1 in 182 Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander women; 1 in 217 American Indian/Alaska Native women; and 1 in 526 for both white and Asian women).

where is the fallacy?

Does a black woman getting infected with aids affect in any way a white women? Asian? Latina?

No.

Just the same as safely flying on an aircraft today has no influence as to your chances of being in a plane crash tomorrow.

IS the incidence among black women high? yep. Is it aids related? nope. 1 in 5 will get cancer in their lifetime. That number holds across ALL women, without smoothing. So hen, bsg, sue, whomever else are white chicks, contrary to scooters scare tactics, statistically you only have a 1 in 526 chance of getting aids. (and you still have to make a conscious choice to do so)

Now that we have shitcanned the argument, perhaps time is better spent fixing the actual problem: black women have a way disproportionate share of aids cases. and it has nothing to do with the medical research dollars spent.

[The Hen]

Does a black woman getting infected with aids affect in any way a white women? Asian? Latina?

No.

Yes.

We do not live in a monogamous segregated society.

Women can infect men with HIV and men can pass that on to other partners.

[quaddriver]

so if the sistah girl down the street gets aids your chances just went up?

what are you telling us here?

Interesting that you should use a derivitive of the word monogamy.

you mean to tell me a 'disease' of pandemic proportions (per scooter) can be prevented/cured thru monogamy?

Imagine the glee the AMA would feel if they find that liking the color blue prevents cancer...

[dgs49]

Middle class white people have a much greater risk of being struck by lightning, as it tends to happen on the golf course, or when cutting the grass.

God is definitely racist.

Have you ever noticed that Scooter likes to disagree with people even when he cannot disagree with what they say? It's a neat trick. I'll bet he's a regular barrel of monkeys at a house party.

[Scooter]

The notion that middle class white people have a "much greater chance" of being struck by lightening than contracting HIV is something I can clearly disagree with, even though you were stupid enough to repeat it after having been proven false.

And if being able to contradict everything you say isn't "disagreeing", then it's an interesting universe you must be living in. But coming from someone who openly admits he doesn't care who dies so long as they are black, why would I be surprised?

[Liberty1]

Have you ever noticed that Scooter likes to disagree with people even when he cannot disagree with what they say? It's a neat trick. I'll bet he's a regular barrel of monkeys at a house party

Yes. Or he just says stupid outrageous shit.

[Scooter]

Cool, I have a fan club.

[The Hen]

so if the sistah girl down the street gets aids your chances just went up?

what are you telling us here?

..

I am trying to tell you that the absolute statement you made was wrong.

[Scooter]

The history of the AIDS epidemic is that of individuals believing that they were not a member of a "group" that was at risk...



...and having a blood test prove them wrong.