Subject:
|
Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 9 May 2000 23:05:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
651 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ed Jones writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Stanley writes:
> >
> > > But back to the issue I was addressing - tax money and how the government
> > > should be spending it. I know one person who has died from AIDS.
> >
> > 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.
>
> 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
> saying "no one knows what it's like" or implicating it, anyway.
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 simply stated my experience with AIDS and other diseases.
>
> The fact that in your local sample set there's a high incidence is not in and
> of itself an argument for AIDS being number one on the funding priority list.
> I'd argue it's currently getting proportionally more funding than it deserves
> to get given relative harm to the nation as a whole.
Hmm, on what do you base your opinion? Are you considering only those who have
died of AIDS, only those who have full blown AIDS, all who are HIV positive?
Check your numbers. HIV+ is the number disease in America.
>
> However it IS an argument that perhaps there *is* something in your local
> sample set that makes your sample set more vulnerable. And there is, and now • we
> know *what* it is. Pity we didn't better understand it back in 1982 so your
> friends and my uncle didn't die, but it's also a pity we don't have automated
> guideways on all our roads so no one dies in car accidents, or any of 1000
> other possible ways to reduce death from anything other than old age.
Huh? what is the relevance to the current discussion?
> Resources get allocated one way or another. There are only a finite number of
> them to go around. I'd prefer that the market do the allocating, because when
> it does, it works very well. You'd prefer that the big gun of government do • the
> allocating, which is misguided but since there are enough of you making the
> argument, I have to argue the point of which diseases "deserve" funding • instead
> of just sitting back letting the market decide and allocate efficiently.
I'm not arguing who funds the research. Remember that the initial funds for
AIDS research were rasied by chartiy benefits. I'm saying that if the
govenment is funding research, than AIDS research has to be a priority. It is
far more financially responsible to find a cure/life prolonging drugs, than to
treat full blown AIDS. And before you ask why - I'll tell you. Most people
with AIDS become disabled, their health coverage plan runs out and they rely on
Social Security and Medicare. Guess who pays for that.
>
> Sorry if explicitly making that argument hurts your feelings, really, I am. • But
> you forced me to make it, so don't complain about the consequences.
You haven't hurt my feelings at all.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) 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 (...) (25 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) 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 (...) (25 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
228 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
