A lot of your arguments assume lifestyle changes that I find unlikely. While a sound general plan, it won't work in the area this money is aimed at.
It is a nice way to funnel funds into the "ailing" pharmaceutical companies. "Sorry we couldn't get those pesky border laws changed to help you continue raping the American elderly. Here's a couple billion to help ease the sting."
Bush announces acceleration of $15billion AIDS Drug program
I do agree that the drug companies are being given an unnecessary boost and that generics are the way to go; I am not debating the politics of the decision. However, I am attempting to present another side to the issue for those who will decry the use of treatment as an option.
As for "a lot" of my arguments hinging on certain lifestyle changes, I only presented two possible cases, one of which presents lifestyle changes which would increase the effectiveness of the treatment in preventing the spread of the disease and one which does not. Neither of my arguments rely on these changes, however.
As for "a lot" of my arguments hinging on certain lifestyle changes, I only presented two possible cases, one of which presents lifestyle changes which would increase the effectiveness of the treatment in preventing the spread of the disease and one which does not. Neither of my arguments rely on these changes, however.
Traz Blackwolfe (Retired)
--------------------
I could turn you inside out
What I choose not to do
--------------------
I could turn you inside out
What I choose not to do
Why would you assume that? Because anyone who would fuck a man in the ass could never have any regard for human life?masteen wrote:Assuming both these guys continue to fornicate until the day they drop, can you conclusively say that the man receiving treatment will spread the disease less than the guy who dies 10 years sooner?
Assuming two handgun owners will shoot children at the playground until the day they drop, can you conclusively state that one of them shouldn't shoot you?
The Boney King of Nowhere.
I don't believe he referenced a specific sexuality, though I do find it interesting that two men were used as the example, rather than two women.Mplor wrote:Why would you assume that? Because anyone who would fuck a man in the ass could never have any regard for human life?masteen wrote:Assuming both these guys continue to fornicate until the day they drop, can you conclusively say that the man receiving treatment will spread the disease less than the guy who dies 10 years sooner?
Assuming two handgun owners will shoot children at the playground until the day they drop, can you conclusively state that one of them shouldn't shoot you?
Traz Blackwolfe (Retired)
--------------------
I could turn you inside out
What I choose not to do
--------------------
I could turn you inside out
What I choose not to do
a good chunk of africans don't believe that it's transferred via sexual contact. it's also a common superstition in many sub saharan cultures that having sex with a virgin will cure you of AIDS.Mplor wrote:Why would you assume that? Because anyone who would fuck a man in the ass could never have any regard for human life?
