Debate : 5392


Off-Topic / Debate / 5392

Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

Hi all, The feature story at cnn.com right now is that the "AIDS pandemic [has been] declared [a] threat to U.S. national security." I've wondered about the cultural significance of AIDS and the related syndromes for about a decade, but haven't come (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Oh, man, you are bringing up a topic that perhaps is more explosive than just about any other in modern american society. I love it. This is not going to make me any friends, but in my opinion the attention AIDS gets is a testimony to the (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter Callaway

(...) it (...) Wow, for once, Larry, I actually agree with you! On all points! I hope this isn't a continuing trend ;-) Whilst the ill-informed will brand it a "gay disease", the fact that AIDS is indiscriminate across the sexual spectrum makes it a (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter White

(...) AIDS (...) lots of snip,snip,snip... (...) Plus they had the political/lobbying machine already rolling with the Gay Rights Movement. My father died from cardiac disease, my mother from cancer, I'm sure everyone here has their own ideas about (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) What are these threats? (...) Who is Reason? (...) It is a threat, maybe not to national security, but a threat nevertheless. HIV/AIDS could cause the deaths of millions of people in a short time, it already has, it will in the future. HIV, (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I know that I've snipped lots, but I wanted to ask about this in particular. On the spectrum of diseases, does this actually count as _easy_ to pass along? I have handled AIDS patients on a few occasions (that I know of) and I seem to be (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter White

(...) It definitely isn't an easy disease to transmit. You need it to enter the bloodstream directly either via needlestick injury or when bodily fluids enter thru an abrasion/cut/sore site. Maybe he meant that it's easy for others to be actually (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) So could anoxia, or ingesting too much water. It's probably fair to say that auto accidents kill more per year in the U.S. than HIV. (...) And yet, HIV doesn't seem so easy to pass around. It doesn't survive very long outside a living host. It (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Botched cleanups by the Superfund, cigarette smoking, improper arrests leading to injuries in prison, the War on Drugs reducing life expectancy of inner city residents, oh, I dunno, Heart disease, Cancer maybe? (...) quite (...) The Reason (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) Geez Larry, instead of answering the question, your first thought is to relish the debate. (...) it (...) Special Interest groups huh. Need I remind anyone reading this that until "certain special interest groups" fought, protested, and (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Scott Arthur

(...) AIDS (...) research (...) Reagan (...) amount (...) things (...) Well said Ed. AIDS is an entity which has changed they way we all live, that is why it was an issue. Here in the UK it was used as a stick to club gay men too a few years ago. (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Let's review for a sec, here... when my uncle Gary got it back in 1984, there was a good argument that it wasn't his fault. People at that time didn't know how to go about preventing it. Now, they do. Haemopheliacs are at the mercy of a clean (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) You are making the assumption that everyone knows that it is unsafe and that everyone knows how to have safe sex. Two major misconceptions. I'll give you an example: Catholic schools do not teach sex education. Yes you can make the arguement (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) Do you really believe that the only way people (kids) learn about safe sex is through schools? I hardly pay attention during commercials and I see public health messages about safe sex from famous actors ALL the time. (...) I disagree. The (...) (24 years ago, 6-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

(canceled) —Jeff Stembel

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) None of these diseases have infected, and will kill, a quarter of the people in many African countries. Why is almost everyone ignoring this fact? These people are the reason we should try to find a cure. I doubt many of them have access to (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) I'm not ignoring it. I just don't (personally) think they figure into my own "how should the government that is funded by MY tax dollars spend my money" equation, at least not more prominently than those "in need" in the US. Which, of course, (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) I am apalled by this heartless attitude. How can you care so little for people who are suffering, just because they don't live in your country? The countries suffering the hardest can't afford to do medical research, and many of them are (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) True. We'll hear about it on the news. Chris (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) How can you say how much I care or not? I didn't address my personal caring for those people, I made a statement about how they rate in my priority system when I'm thinking about how I'd like for my government to spend the money it takes from (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) You mean something like "honest friendship with all who seek it, entangling alliances with none"? Now, who said that? ++Lar (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) and (...) Thomas Jefferson said it in his innaugural address in 1801. (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) It was a rhetorical question, of course. You know I know who said it and I know you know I know. :-) ++lar (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) And by saying you don't want our government to spend added money on finding a cure for a disease that is infecting millions of people in another country, it shows you don't hold nearly as much compassion for human life as you should. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) Wow, thanks for passing moral judgement on my level of compassion based on my desire for fiscal responsibility. Aside from the fact that I could ask what qualifies you as one to set the level of acceptable compassion for human life (assuming (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Should? (...) Uh? increased funding of anything requires more money...right? So the money either comes from increased revenues (taxes) or by taking it from other government programs. Where do you think it should come from? (...) of (...) (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) So what you are saying is that you don't care that 250,000(1) people around the world get infected by HIV/AIDS every month? What makes you think that what goes on in other less developed parts of the world will not affect the USA? This is a (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Tom Stangl

(...) Whoa, now wait just a minute. The US a CAUSE, simply because "action" (i.e. public money used to help develop drugs that the Private drug companies are profiting from) wasn't taken fast enough? Think that statement through a bit more. Africa (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) Why does my own priorities about how my tax money should be spent have to do with whether or not I "care" about those people? Do I think its too bad that that many people get AIDS and will more than likely die from it? Yeah, I do. I also think (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) How fortunate for you. I can think of 25 off the top of my head, but in actuality, its more like 75 that I personally knew. Of the first friends (20+) we made when we moved to NYC in 1982, there are four - FOUR - of us still alive. (...) I (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) I'm not sure - is that a straw man or a red herring? But I'll comment on it anyway. People don't choose to get old. People choose to have unprotected sex, of whatever kind. People choose to share needles. Is there another major way that people (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) still (...) And that's unfortunate indeed. But I don't think Mike was trying to get into a "more of my friends died" contest, merely trying to show that he has some familiarity with the pain and suffering the disease causes back when you were (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) Not getting into a "more of my friends died" contest. Mike was making the point that AIDS has only touched 1 person in his life and that he felt the diseases that touched the people in his life should receive funding before AIDS is funded. I (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) have (...) Cite please. It's certainly not the number one cause of death, I think that's heart disease. (24 % of all deaths?? I can't recall) Further, it's not the number one disease either. I'd put the common cold at the top of the disease (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: [snip a bunch a debate bait] (...) Except that the incubation period for AIDS is 3-15 years. There are people who are only now discovering that they have AIDS. But I won't bother debating this with (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Who says you've *been* debating? Not me. What you've been doing is ducking. Let's be perfectly clear, you've decided to dodge discussion on what the appropriate funding level for research is in our mixed economy because you're convinced that (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) I'm ducking, yeah right. You have repeatedly made the statements in this thread that those who have AIDS should have known better and deserve their fate . Yet you neither acknowledge or deny my asertation of your stand. (...) Really, I'm (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) fate (...) Cite please. I never said precisely that. What I did say is that those who catch it NOW through their own poor choices should know better. I did not make the sweeping generalization you claim. I've never said that those who get it (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: [snip] (...) that (...) to (...) to (...) You'll get my answers once you have answered my question (which YOU have refused to answer and I am now asking now for the THIRD time) - Most AIDS victims (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) I may be wrong, but I think Larry's answer to this question will be similar to mine. If I were to agree that we should be funding SS & Medicaid/Medicare at all (and for the most part I don't) I might agree that money spent on research to find (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) fund (...) That's a Hobson's choice, and a really unrealistic one to boot. But if it will get you to answer much more important questions, OK. Assuming those are the only two possible alternative answers (which they aren't, there are tons of (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Answered it 4 days ago, let me know when you have a chance to answer in turn... ++Lar (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: [snip] (...) that (...) Ah, Hobson's choice number one. I'll choose the LAR method - coin flip says - NO. However, your question (and your eternal preaching on this subject) makes the asumption (...) (24 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) Ummmm.... which lobbying groups are you talking about that do anything other than stuff money in politicians' and parties' campaign funds? I think its pretty clear that's what Larry was getting at, not talking about people (or groups) giving (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Frank Filz

Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) economy (...) the (...) social (...) earmarking (...) other (...) (getting ready to duck and run) Another point to raise about the issue of lobbyists getting to decide how money gets spent: If one feels that (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Was that really a coin flip? I doubt it. I really truly believe (see your weaseling below) that you don't think people ever need to take responsibility for ANYTHING, even if they do know all the risks. Stating that there are unknown risks (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) - (...) than (...) It was a coin flip. IMO, its not a yes/no, black/white question. (...) someone (...) Why is it weaseling to expect people to assume the responsibility for risks they did not know of? Did you know that Singapore (I think it (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

I'm not sure why you two continue to intermittantly duke it out. Larry thinks you're an evil commie, and you think he's an evil...umm...I can't think of a good word...robber baron? (...) How so? (...) That's not really true. Obviously I agree with (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) engineer of the ME generation. :') (...) Simple, its not a black and white, yes or no, question. (...) It doesn't change a thing. A very simple example - if, according to you and LAR, people should "take (moral/financial) responsibility for (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) ED: My name is Lar, not LAR. By spelling it or capitalizing it in a way that I don't choose, you are trying to use a form of namecalling. You know better. people should "take (moral/financial) responsibility for things that they (...) (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Oh my gosh! Something that returned close to the original point! :-) This is not unreasonable - put the money were it will do the most good. Lots of times my wife and I decide we want a number of things and there isn't enough money to go (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) Sorry if you were offended by the all caps Lar, didn't even realize I typed it that way (6:00a.m. pre-coffee). Give me a break, if I was going to name call, I'd do a whole lot better than that. :') (...) So in essence, you are saying that, (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) When I first read this I just knew (incorrectly) that it would end with something like "infringing on my trade dress." Oh well. Hey Lar, do you prefer Lar or Larry? (...) Wow. I'd heard that about NYC inhabitants, but...wow. European friends (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Frank Filz

(...) the (...) For research of course one can't use pure cost/benefit analysis. There has to be risk and potential analysis also. Also, some amount of basic research must continue, so that you don't purely allocate money by ranking all the possible (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) No, the research dollars will be spent where there is the *perception* of best return. Further, it may be simply be the perception of the best short-term return. And just to add to that, it may involve more resources than a single company can (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) be (...) for (...) rare (...) And that is exactly when the government finally starting funding AIDS research - when Nancy Reagan's friend Rock Hudson got AIDS. (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: [snip] (...) a (...) Then you'll never understand the freedom of not owning a car, not having that responsibility. WHen I need a car, I rent one. But for the cost of car payments, NYC car (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Say on, brother! I'm 29 and have never had a license, nor have I ever really wanted one. Regretably, circumstances will soon force me to sell out to The Man, but I've done just fine--and saved many dollars on insurance--without a car up to (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) cabs (...) really (...) :-) Honestly, there is something romantic about the idea, just like there is about hiking the Appalachian Trail, which is something I'm working toward (but my car will be waiting for me that the end). And maybe for a (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Oh, OK, Thanks. :-) (...) Something that struck me while reading Ed's and Larry's responses to all this is that ultimately it's not a matter of need. We _DO_ take moral and financial responsibility for these things. If you sleep around, you (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Eric Joslin

(...) Does this mean that if you contracted a life-threatening illness, you would refuse any treatment that in large part resulted from animal testing? If not, why not? eric (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Further, he must by definition be either a full vegetarian or a full cannibal, at least in principle. Dave! (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) other (...) I don't think so. By my above statements: I could be a full cannibal - but I'd also have to think that eating other animals was OK, just not as tasty. Or I could eat anything that I wanted to - people, veggies, beef, whatever - (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: [snip] (...) Do you carry Credit Cards? :') (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) No longer, but that's another idealogical debate. :-) Chris (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) But surely you don't have a problem with handling ABS?! Dave! (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Okay, but my point was that if you equate humans (of any group) with animals (also, presumably, of any group), then you would see no difference between eating people and eating "animals." Thus any meat consumption would be equivalent to eating (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) that's (...) Right. And that is, in fact, what I believe. But I assumed by "full cannibal" you meant that I would eat human but no other meat. That idea can't be logically derived from what I wrote. Were I to resort to eating any animals (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Just to pursue this to a morbid conclusion, you would therefore have no compunctions against sexual relations with any animal you found suitably attractive, and you would likewise be as willing to donate an organ to any animal (antigen issues (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

OK, hopefully the kiddies are kept away from l.o-t.d (...) would (...) I would apply the same standards that I do to humans...we must both be willing and interested. There is nothing wrong with inter-species copulation when both (all?) parteners are (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —James Simpson

(...) I think that there is a real inherent difference between eating human flesh and eating other animal flesh, because there is a difference between being Fully Animal, and Merely Animal. To explain: The fact that humans possess all of the basic (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

I'm rearranging here and there, not to mislead, but to address things in the order that I chose... (...) If you expect to be flamed by me, guess again. First, you are expressing eloquently a very normal belief. It's wrong (at least for me), but I'm (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —James Simpson

(...) I certainly didn't mean to suggest that I expected an imminent flame from you...I was merely acknowledging that some people following this thread will no doubt vehemently disagree with me. (...) I'm not sure that I follow your question...do (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) being (...) I mean, why does the difference between being fully animal and being merely animal have anything to do with who should be able to victimize whom? (...) I think that murder "is an unfortuante part of the reality of this world" too. (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —James Simpson

(...) I'm still not sure that I follow you. My answer, if I understand the question correctly, is that I believe that it is a moral evil to kill animals gratuitously. (No doubt we'll find some common ground here, but disagree as to what exactly (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

James, upon reading through your response to my last longish note on this it struck me that I was kind of beating the same topic, and that I sounded antagonistic to you as a religious person. While I disagree with you, and it makes it harder to (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —James Simpson

(...) me (...) of (...) Christopher: I haven't been offended by how you have expressed your views; in fact, I enjoy a friendly clash of arms. (...) I believe that gratuitous killing includes killing for sport, but I'm not prepared to say that (...) (24 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Why not do away witht the old testament then - as part of scripture, only - obviously it would retain historical value. (...) Uh...no. I misread and now feel foolish. :-) (Actually, yeah...yeah...that's the ticket, you can catch him at the (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —James Simpson

(...) It still has enormous theological value; the difference is that it is now read and understood in light of our fuller understanding of God as compiled in the New Testament. (...) Ok...I concede the point that it was inconsistent to include (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) you (...) Nope. I would chose the human option, but not because I believe that it is capable of experiencing a "Better existence." I'm familiar with it, I know it's OK, I'd go with the known over the unknown in this case (unless I had reason (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: The nature of being (was Aids, Vegetarianism etc.) —James Simpson

(...) Even if rights were a fiction, I'd agree with you that to avoid causing suffering is better. But, fundamentally, from a bedrock philosophical basis, we have no ultimate way to condemn evil if creatures do not objectively have a right to (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —James Simpson

(...) Correction to a poorly-worded statement; I meant to say: The afterlife will be a poorer place if it lacks animal life, but I believe that animals will be present. James (24 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) I had a professor in college who has made arragements to be buried six inches deep in a forest in VA. I know it doesn't have the same effect as your wishes but it sounds like its legal. -chris (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Hmm.. What if you lightning subsequently sets fire to the woods where you're hypothetically dropped? Or if a landslide buries you? Burying and burning may be creepy, but cholera (for example) and the stench of rotting corpses trouble me, too. (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Well, I guess I won't care...I'll be dead. I mean, nothing's perfect. (...) I'm pretty sure that the stench of rotting corpses doesn't trouble vultures and heyenas; how about if you just let them have me instead of trying to do the work (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) Chris, I haven't been following this thread for the past week and I'm not caught up yet. I'm a little confused by the above paragraph. Are you vegan or lacto-ovo-vegetarian? It sounds like the latter to me, but I wanted to be sure. FYI, I've (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) for (...) years. (...) milk (...) have (...) yet. (...) The latter. I think the line "I eat eggs and dairy..." really gives it away :-) (...) Good for you! I've toyed with following a vegan diet, but it's not a step that I'm ready to take for (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) That's what I thought, 'cept the sentance "I haven't eaten (except for trace amounts by mistake) the flesh, or derivatives, of an animal in six years." confused me a bit- IMO dairy is an animal derivative. Just checking. I noticed you're (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Oh, I wonder how I should have written that. I meant to be saying flesh-derivatives (like gelatin), not animal-derivatives. I certainly agree that dairy is an animal derivative. (...) Yeah, I've been to DC a few times and there are just a ton (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Scott Arthur

(...) Yes, but some would argue that these are still by-products of the meat industry. Scott A (...) figure (...) I'm (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Not me. If you don't believe me, come to Michigan where we raise both beef cows and dairy cows and you will soon discover that milk from a beef cow tastes marginal at best and meat from a dairy cow is absolutely awful, tough and stringy and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Tom Napolitano

(...) cows (...) I'm a northern Illinois farm boy (okey, flame the hell out of me <g>) and all our beef cattle were steers. I couldn't imagine anyone eating old cow carcasses. likewise, you don't get much dairy product from steers. Tom (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) Hmmm. I just call everything I can't eat 'cow' (j/k). Flesh-derivative works for me. (...) WAMALUG had a dinner meeting at Harmony Cafe in Georgetown. Even the picky eaters were happy with the meal. It's one of my favorite places to eat here. (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Last time I was in DC (Thanksgiving for two weeks in '97) my friend and I were in an area near a college (we went on the metro) where there were little delis, tatoo and piercing places, used music shops, and a big (and interesting) gay and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) Ah... the venerable 'Food for Thought' on 1738 Connecticut Avenue in Dupont Circle. Sadly, gentrification(1) has taken hold in that area, and most of the landlords(2) raised the rents several times what they were. Food for Thought couldn't (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Yes! That's it. That place rocked! Actually that whole neighborhood was cool. Kind of like Clark and Belmont in Chicago...maybe all cities have a place like that. (...) :-( (...) That sounds likely, but I just don't remember. I'm pretty sure (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: vegetarians (was Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) deserts are where it's at for me currently. my latest success was fake chocolate cheesecake that fooled some non-vegetarians. I also have this crazy dream of opening a diner(stainless steel and all) that serves typically diner food but all of (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) No. (...) For two reasons. First, because the harm has already been done. I also assert that we should use the gains of the Nazi doctors. You can (rightly) claim that by being a consumer of that good, I'm reinforcing that behavior as (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Eric Joslin

(...) Fair enough. (...) Very honest. Very nice. :D eric (24 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: [snip] (...) You lost me there - "To claim less is to give up something so valuable that I can't even approach why you might want to." I have no idea what the comment means. (...) some (...) (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Right, sorry about that. I mean that to give up ultimate responsibility for your own situation is essentially the same thing as volunteering for a kind of slavery. It's like saying that you're not capable of taking responsibility for your (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —James Simpson

(...) Ok..into the fray I plunge: You have a point regarding promiscuous (spelling?) behavior, but I know someone who was raped when an intruder broke into her house. I'd hardly blame the victim in that case. I wholeheartedly disagree with your (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Frank Filz

(...) Chris's point, and I agree with it, is that the victim does have some responsibility. Perhaps they should have lived in a safer neighborhood. Perhaps they should have instituted a neighborhood watch. BUT, this minor responsibility doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) think (...) accident. (...) I would never, under any circumstances, blame the victim of a rape - or any violent crime (it's not a violent crime if it was justified) - for the crime's committal. That's just not a viable or productive stance. On (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —James Simpson

(...) I do mostly agree with you - victims are rarely 100%, well...victims. Often some act of indiscretion or carelessness is a contributing factor, but...isn't that just the nature of life? I have a friend who just got 2 fingers ripped off in a (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Well, I do think that people are victims. I just also think that they bear responsibility for their situations. And I largely think that people are victims because they don't see to it that they won't be. (...) Yes. And as such, people need to (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —James Simpson

(...) Agreed. (...) Yes, but life is a terribly complex and complicated thing. People must deal with their mistakes, but often it is not reasonable or right to make them 100% responsible. (...) Regarding Lego, unfortunatly, I have not made yet made (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) It's hard for me to fault them too much, when the government (by your account) seems to have gone out of its way to make this happen. (...) He should have negotiated for a better employment contract. This scenario seems bizzarre in this land (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Frank Filz

James Simpson wrote in message ... (...) deal (...) 100% (...) Chris (and I) have never said that the "victim" is ever 100% responsible. We have just argued that the victim does have SOME responsibility. Thankfully North Carolina doesn't see it (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Agreed. (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Do you mean they're "responsible" because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or "they're asking for it?" So if I start knifing people at random the next time I'm on the subway, it's somehow they're fault, at least (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) accident. (...) To say that one is "asking for it" asserts they desire that outcome. Few people desire to be raped or collided with by another automobile. On the other hand, they didn't desire the opposite enough to secure that outcome. Such (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) So if I stomp on an infant or kill a sleeping person, they're still somehow responsible? Your assertion, after a fashion, amounts to "victims make themselves victims." (...) A tempting offer, but I must decline. However, by your previous (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Frank Filz

(...) In the case of the infant, where were the parents? In the case of the sleeping person, where are they sleeping, why didn't they sleep in a safer place? Why didn't they get a buddy to watch them? Sure, the necessary action to completely protect (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) I agree completely! Unfortunately I didn't read your other post on this subject until after I'd posted my previous message, or I'd've addressed your points! (...) That's not my intent at all, and, since this is for all intents and purposes a (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) OK, you caught me. You found a loophole for which I'm not willing to stick to my guns. Infants, having not attained a reasonable measure of maturity and ability, don't count. Infants do not make themselves victims. OTOH, to some extent, the (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) Heh. Not being *purposely* obtuse, though I was trying to extend your argument to (one of) its extreme conclusions. As I mentioned in a response to one of Frank's posts, I'm not comfortable with the latitude such words as "victim" and (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) No. Of course not. You are equally (that is to say fully?) responsible in each instance. In neither case is your death or survival exactly your fault, but in both cases it was your responsibility to assure your safety. And it was the piano (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) Part of this was my error in blurring the relationship between "fault" and "responsibility." My feeling, though, is still that while we are primarily responsible for ourselves, we are also societally responsible for others. I don't think this (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Frank Filz

(...) This is an interesting point to consider. What one needs to consider is that being involved in an incident is not what creates your responsibility for avoiding the risk. It just actuallizes the risk. The responsibility for avoiding the risk is (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I agree that the speeder was responsible for the accident, but while I can point to ways that your friend's behavior could have avoided it, I can claim that he shares responsibility. (I realize that this is not an argument against what you've (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) True, but surely you realize that this is every bit as absurd as my infant- stomping example from my earlier post. He could have been driving a tank. He could have demolished every car driving over the hill. He could have posted a sentry at (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) ^^^^ (...) ^^^^^^ Oh, and one other thing, I'm more of a tenor than a bass. It's a BASEless accusation to charge me with having singing talent, as I cannot carry a tuna in a bucket, but I did manage to be in the choir for our HS production of (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

Has the off-topic.pun group suddenly closed? This is the fifth note that I've just read with the sole (sorry, I couldn't resist) purpose of presenting puns. Chris (...) in (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) in (...) Leave it to a scaly Libertarian to carp!! And anytime you wanna slug it out, I'm ready for you. I'll snail you with my left hook. Don't be so conchy, you'll get the baiting of your life. Yea, I wrote bass, I meant viol. (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) I'm sorry, Ed, but I graduated from high school in 1988, that's 12 years ago. We knew then, in what you would probably call a backwater southern city (Nashville), that unprotected sex could end up killing you. So, imo and in my experience, (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) I am genuinely curious: How can you be so sure that everyone in the world knows about this? Have you seen a report that stated every school district in the world teaches safe sex? And even if they do, what about private/religious schools, or (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) We're veering around, I think Mike and Ed and I are sparring about the US, where it's pretty hard to ignore the truth about how to catch it at this point, it being common knowledge. There may be remote parts of the world that haven't figured (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter Callaway

(...) I would go one step further. Venereal diseases have been around (and have been known about) for a lot longer than AIDS has been on the scene. Most are curable, some are not, and not all are limited in transmission to sexual contact. My point (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I've said that before, you could look it up. It's not exactly a quote as I believe the quote is more along the lines of: 'Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" "I don't know," he replied. "Am I my brother's keeper?"' (NIV (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter Callaway

(...) Unless you just read it for the "articles". Sarcasm, Larry. I was being sarcastic, hence the winking smiley after the statement. You could be no more religious than I could be an American. Can I surmise that the rest of my post was so (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) While I sort of agree with the general thrust here, there are two problems I can see - Most other STD have short incubation periods and obvious symptoms. SO one could have, in 1984, beleived oneself to be completely disease free and thus told (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter Callaway

(...) True, but there are still inherent risks with unprotected sex (including a dishonest partner "sure, honey, I'm clean"), and unless you're prepared to accept the responsibilities, wrap it up or put it away. (...) My point exactly, it's just (...) (24 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Mike Stanley

(...) I could just say something like "so, I don't care about people in the other parts of the world." But that would make me heartless. Let me revise what I said to be limited to those in the US. I'd wager that even those in the US going to (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

(canceled) —Christopher L. Weeks

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) in (...) First, I agree with Mike's post to a large extent. On the other hand, if we're to guide those nations into being good customer states, this might be a good investment. But my real point is that I've read that international healthcare (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Kevin Wilson

(...) Before I make any points, lemme say where I'm coming from. I'm gay, my partner has AIDS. "Don't bareback" is not enough. My SO and I are _extremely_ careful and follow every safe sex guideline you can think of... and in 8 years we've been (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Selçuk Göre

Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) Breaking only for a few words, but you are now making misteaks (first in the history?)..:-) Just think about the tremendous numbers of people who have the virus right now. I can't think of any kind of education (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

Thanks for the note. (...) I agree that the government's bizarre inaction is a cause for concern, but I don't see the link between that occurance ~15 years ago and the current over-representation in the media. (...) And they did a good job of (...) (24 years ago, 5-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Ed Jones

(...) Its very simple: AIDS is a communicable disease, a plague that spread exponentially in the late 70s and early 80s, and continues to do so in Africa. If the US Government had funded AIDS research, or even AIDS education, in the early 80s, far (...) (24 years ago, 6-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) countries. (...) Maybe I used the term special interest incorrectly. I think of a special interest as being any sub-group of the population who wants public monies distributed in a certain way such that it will specifically help their sub (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) how do you figure? i think a 25% infection rate with all offspring produced after infection of the parent being affected would set some alarms off for the possibility of a local extinction. Especially if you figure that the infection rate has (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Tom Stangl

This is somewhat rambling, but here goes... (...) But it doesn't HAVE to go on - all you have to do is force the damned idea through their heads that SEX (and sharing needles) CAN KILL, so either stay monogamous, or use condoms, or just use your own (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) Sorry, I should have added to my post(s) that I do not support the giving/using of life-prolonging drugs that would result in the situation Tom just described above. (thought about when i started to write and promptly forgot about it :/ ). (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Are there any population ecologists out there? Could it be that when there gets to be too many of a given organism in a localle, and predation isn't taking care of it, diseases become a likely vector for population control. Maybe (if AIDS (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter White

(...) In Australia, the number of newly infected has actually levelled out. Not sure if it was the education campaign that was aimed at the general population on prime-time TV here in the mid-eighties. (...) vector (...) organism (...) There are (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Agreed. Fortunately, ours isn't (slowly warming). At least that's what the data indicate when not interpreted by "junk science" advocates. (...) THIS one, now this one is something to worry about. Keep messing with the drug company profit (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) data (...) Everything I have read lately has been confirming that the world is indeed slowly warming (currently). Whether this is a natural phenomenon or not seems to be much more under debate. I'll ask my best personal source his opinions (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler

(...) Pretty much everything I’ve read or seen indicates that scientists generally agree we are in a warming trend, but those scientists don’t agree on the ultimate effects of that warming. For that matter, they don’t even agree whether it’s a (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I'm not sure, but I suspect everyone doing research is in one camp or the other. Myself I'm on the "it's part of the cyclical nature of climate" side of the fence, I tend to suspect that we're still in the "emerging from the little Ice Age" (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Shiri Dori

(...) Does it matter why? There is a global warming going in as we speak. There is a very fair chance that in a few years, the icecaps will melt and all the major coast cities (NYC, Boston, LA, SF, need I continue?) will be flooded. Does it really (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ice (...) Oh please. Do the math. To me, "flooding" means a change in sea level of 20 feet or so. That's not going to happen. There isn't enough ice even if both icecaps melted down to nothing. The apocalyptic visions of the gloom and doom (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Jeff Stembel

(...) a (...) Au Contraire: "If larger ice sheets begin to recede, sea level could rise rapidly and dramatically. The most vulnerable ice sheet is the marine-based West Antarctic Ice Sheet which contains enough water locked up as ice to raise global (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) Jeff is correct. See my last post(5623). For general information- scientists measure the amount of ice on the planet at a given time by looking at oxygen isotope ratio in deepsea sediment cores. ^16-O is selectively stored in ice over the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Shiri Dori

(...) Which is enough to cover most of the coastal cities all over the world. (...) Well, I don't know exactly how many years. (...) I don't believe everything I read, no. I do believe researches that are well based on facts, yes. (...) Me too. (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Shiri Dori writes: I give on the icecaps, ok? If they all melt at once, we're all going wading. You still have to show that they're all going to melt, though. Won't take much, a few degrees higher average temp should do (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) Well, it's not just the icecaps--it'll rain a lot more, too! 8^) (...) Not to blast Shiri, but in an effort to be fair to those teachers, perhaps the lesson was that the area was covered by seawater, but it was due to the fact that the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) Many grade school teachers don't know squat about science, I once got an email from a concerned parent because her son's teacher was telling the students that the grand canyon was formed by a meteorite, as opposed to the less obvious river.... (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Shiri Dori

(...) IIRC, the 'trends' have been measured as 1 degree celsius (1.8 F) over the past [hundred I think] years. (Dang, wish I had some sources; but I never kept my notes...) The years might be way off, but it's definitely not more than 100; if (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) That data is suspect. 100 years ago we did not have the technology to determine what the temperature was in a repeatable way over enough sample points to determine what the average temperature is at a given location. We've had that technology (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) The determinations of temperature prior to accurate, systematic measurements by humans are derived from other environmental evidence, rather than simply noting what the thermometer said 150 years ago. I regret that I don’t have the particulars (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) They are plenty of ways to confidently estimate temperture. I'm looking at a graph I'm placing into a report right now that has sea-surface temperature estimates off the coast of California back to 130 kyears ago. As Dave said, they are other (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) No, it isn't. And the mob agrees. There is no way that Joe Average is going to give up his petrol and plastics and lots of electricity even if it does mean that we'll leave the Earth a burnt-out husk. (...) I think that there are specific and (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) feet (...) That entirely depends on the geology of the local area - it could be sea level changes or it could be the land itself varying due to tectonic activity (trust a Californian to think along these lines). Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) There's Bruce again with his faulty logic! 8^) Dave! (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) level (...) (trust (...) Are you thrusting the fault onto me? You dip, I'll strike you. Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) LOL!!! It's like the cafeteria at the US Geological Survey... umm, why can't i remember any good geology jokes... -chris (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) The schist you say! Okay, no more mister gneiss guy if you are going to drag the whole U.S. Geologic Survey. But I'll bet their busy playing with their orogenous zones. Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

ROTL!!! that's too much... stop it!!! you are definately boulder than me when it comes to geology puns. (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Comes from being stoned all the time. But hey, I getta get my rocks off somehow. Bruce (...) drag (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Because there aren't any? <grins, ducks and runs> (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) a (...) Half or so of Australia was under water at one point. Admittedly, Australia is pretty darn flat. I'd also be pretty nervous about the long-term land prices in Florida. The geologic record is pretty clear that major flooding happens. (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) IF changing them will make a difference, and IF it's worth the price. I'd vote for letting Florida flood, if it came to that, before I voted to give up electricity and antibiotics. When thinking about the global climate engine and our impact I (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Panderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Dave Schuler

(...) The panderer's the one with the fundraising problems, while the idiot is the one with the misperceptions regarding social issues. Does that clear it up? 8^) Dave! followups to OT-Fun (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Panderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Wait!?! Wouldn't the panderer be the one WITHOUT fund-raising problems? Or should I revert to cynicism and simply amend that to the *successful* panderer? Politician - panderer, they are not two different words! :-) Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Panderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) And despite our hopes, the Giant Pander is nowhere near endangered, and they rather seem to enjoy breeding in captivity. groan, LFB XFUT->.o-t.pun (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Punderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) the (...) up? (...) panderer? (...) rather (...) You missed your opportunity. Note the new subject. (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Punderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Shiri Dori

(...) Punderers and Idiots? That's like night and day! Right, Lindsay? Tell him... we're--we're, we're <stifiling sob>... we're not idiots <sniff>... Well, the Pander bears have kelp me from seal-ping at nights... Oh deer, I've been hearing the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) That's why I put the "might" up there. We are in agreement. (...) That's why I said we need to search out alternatives before we are faced with such a choice. But then again, I'm sick of the Florida Hurricanes winning the NCAA title all the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) well, i didn't do the math but some other researchers have: (URL) maximum sea-level rise from the complete melting of these bodies of ice would be about 264 feet- that's about flooding times 13 by your definition above. There has be a lot of (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Reason number one being that burning hydrocarbons is a huge waste of precious chemical feedstocks... the stocks used to make ABS, for example. Every mile you drive is a brick not made, or something like that. :-) ...and number two being that (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dan Boger

(...) I won't bite, cause I agree... I also seem to recall (though I have no proof, someone?) that it's LESS radioactive than coal! :P how's that for bait? Dan (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Tom Stangl

Heck yeah fission is cleaner. We always seem to be worried about what to do with the spent rods - why not drop them into the sun? It's not like it's going to pollute the sun or anything, and the canisters wouldn't need much of a boost at all. I was (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Frank Filz

(...) Back in college, I was researching power technologies a bit for SF RPGs. I remember that there was some theoretical maximum efficiency for solar panels which I'm pretty sure was less than 50% (might have even less than 25%). It's pretty clear (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler

(...) Part of the objection to this scheme stems from the (currently) prohibitive expense of such launches, as well as the perceived potential for wide scattering of radioactive waste in the event of a disastrous launch. Granted, both of these (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Booster blows up - you now have radioactive material spread over an extremely wide area. And to make the launch somewhat econonomically feasible, you packed it to the max. Thankfully, it took off from Florida (which if we recall, is going to (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) packed (...) Which is worse, losing 3 dolphins or all of California? Mmmm, gotta get back to you on that one. ++Lar (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Tom Stangl

That's assuming we'd use boosters, of course. I figure railguns would be more foolproof. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Rule Number 1: If you make something foolproof, they'll only go out and invent a better fool. :-) (Actually, until the working railgun exists, missles are the only option, and even getting teeny-tiny reactors for deep-space satellites takes an (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey

(...) Maybe we use too much energy then. We waste so much electricity. Many of the modern TV's use energy to keep the picture tube warm will it is off. I don't know how much this is but, since I began to unplug my television when I am not using it, (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Rich Manzo

(...) Ice (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) I work for the US Geological Survey's Climate History Team. I would say that we our research is respectable and legitimate. I have never seen a case of 'junk science' in my two years of employ here. For a look at our research visit: (URL) do (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) ummm.... try reading this: (URL) especially the first sentance. also (URL) you mean that the world is 'warming quickly' as opposed to 'slowly warming', I will have to disagree with you. The earth is still in rebound from the last ice age. It (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) That's an awfully tall order, considering that we have billions of years of instinctual programming to overcome. (...) I.E. The Ugly and Unpopular will inherit the earth... ;) Jeff (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) Me = B.S. Ecology and Evolution specializing in quantitative genetics and population genetics. I start grad school in the fall working on population ecology and conservation genetics. Is that close enough? (...) Maybe... When a population that (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Uh, sure. I was mostly kidding, but that's cool! Good luck with grad school. (...) vector (...) organism (...) [snip a tentative agreement to the first half of my conjecture] (...) I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that it's (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) Thanks! (...) Umm.. It's possible. There is certainaly variation in how people conduct their sexual lives, but I am not sure if that is genetically or socially induced. Maybe a little of both. So where does the 'weak abstinance gene' arrise (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I'm sure (well, as sure as I can be with no real evidence, so take this to mean that it seems exremely likely) that sexuality is controlled both by genetic and environmental factors. I guess the way I named the "weak abstinence gene" it (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

Christopher Weeks wrote: <snip> (...) Ok- I'll assume. This may spawn a separate discussion, but did anyone read that 'natural history of rape' book that made a lot of headlines a few months ago. i haven't read it yet, but i have read some other (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I think I was mixing the way that I was using the phrase "in the interest of." Obviously organisms don't know what's in their species' "best interest" in terms of adaptability. I'd revise my statement above to be something like: It is probably (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) I understood that, I have probably been influenced/corrupted by Richard Dawkins... (...) perhaps. I guess that would fall under artificial selection. I think we may be bordering on eugenics here, which has its own set of problems. (...) true, (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) for further worries... (URL) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Fish :-( (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) feeding (...) caught, has advocates, and will be slow to ruin the whole of the lake. I guess we'll wait and see. Chris (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I don't know. That explanation seems plausible especially given how SEAsian river fish behave given the option of a current. You have to be a pretty hard-core cichlidiot to keep track of all the different P.zebra strains. But I raised (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) heard (...) As I understand it, infection by the father isn't transmitted via conception at all. And, for reasons somewhat unknown, HIV infected mothers frequently produce babies without infection. So, your premis isn't correct. (...) But even (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Shiri Dori

(...) What leads you to think that? The infected people are not all dying very soon. Some (many) of them do not know they are infected, and many of them do not know how to prevent transmitting HIV. They will continue to pass it on, and probably for (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Several things are concurrently happening. Some of them are dying. Such an alarming number of them are sick, that their broken social system that has thus far not provided a socially acceptable method of teaching basic health and safty topic (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) The ones who listen to the education and change their habits will live and those who don't won't. Heartlessly simple, but then, that's evolution in action for you... It will only take a few generations. In geological time, that's "shortly". (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Unless, of course, widespread plague causes civilization to break down. Then, the ones who listen to the education *and* successfully dodge the bullets will survive. Witness what happened to the Jews during the Black Plague. Cheers, - jsproat (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Are you suggesting this as a real possibility, or as a logical argument to Larry's point? Chris (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Then, (...) will (...) A logical argument to Larry's point. Plagues have a habit of overthrowing society. It's also a real possibility, of course, though not necessarily a probable one. Certainly not probable on a large enough scale to pose a (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) The destablization of countries not a threat to US National Security? The loss of a quarter of a country's workforce would destroy its economy. This could damage the economy of neighboring countries or those that back them financially. With (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) No. Not in the general case it isn't. Sorry about that. ++Lar (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) Explain please. Jeff (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) We're not the worlds policeman. While the destabilization of, for example, Liberia, may be quite saddening to watch, it's not going to have a long term large impact on us. There is nothing that Liberia has that is a vital interest to us. The (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) Actually, it does: Our Fellow Man. (...) Actually, it would probably heavily damage our economy. (...) While true, it is rather hard to say just what would happen when a country destabilized. Therefore, it is better to be safe than sorry. (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I don't think that counts. If the government believed that 'our fellow man' was a vital interest, things would be very different. Since they aren't, then it must not be so. (...) Nah. I'm no economist, but I bet we'd go on fine after hitting (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Hypothetically speaking, of course. And hypothetically, I agree. In the specific case, I disagree. the virus is too hard to transmit for it to become a plague. I wouldn't even call it an epidemic, much less a pandemic. Now, if the virus (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey

(...) Ok, the virus does mutate. the mutation rate for the genes that code for the protein coat is about 15%/8 years. Compare this to the divergence rate in almost any gene between a person and a chimpanzee which is about 2%/several million years. (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) This is a good point that hasn't been discussed much here. The likelihood of progress should go into the cost-benefit analysis. OTOH, if the techniques developped for Polio worked for HIV, it'd be under control by now, right? Since that's not (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Rob Doucette

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: --SNIP-- (...) One report I read (can't remember where) explained the NS threat with respect to AIDS trends on a global level: Africa, Asia specifically. With the massive rates of infection in (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —James Brown

(...) AIDS is a communicable disease, and is on a fairly steep climb as far as death toll goes. Some statistics(1): South Africa estimates 1 in 10 adult males have HIV. There are 7 African countries where AIDS is responsible for 20% or better of the (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel

(...) I think the reason it gets more attention is because it affects more people (just my impression) all over the world than cancer, especially in Africa. (...) These are just the US stats. I seriously doubt these stats hold true for other (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Quote from Reuters news story: "In seven countries in sub-Saharan African, 20 percent or more of adults were infected with the virus that causes AIDS, and would die within the next few years, leaving some 40 million children orphaned, Thurman (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter Callaway

(...) and (...) triple." (...) With all of the stats just presented above, on must ask the obvious question "How is it spreading so darn quickly?" How did 20% of tha male population in that African nation become infected? Are they so sexually (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) that (...) your (...) 20% of the *adult* population, not just *male*. As to the breakdown between male and female, I don't know. In India, I know it is spread through prostitutes. I'm not familiar with the primary vector in Africa. (...) 20% (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter Callaway

(...) OK, my bad, but it's still a horrifying statistic. (...) No it's not, sadly, but that's why the medical funding needs to continue. What I'm saying is that we need the education to prevent further infections, otherwise people will continue to (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)