HIV Vaccine Ready for Human Testing

[XemnasXD]

It's still a change. It doesn't matter if 15% are affected or just 5%. It's still a change from the norm. Statistically, it may seem like a good idea but there is no telling what effect it will have on the world's population because you can not factor in human behavior. If anything, the biggest change will be with those who don't have AIDs, changing how they currently perceive people with the disease and regions of the world where the disease is the most prominent. It could be a change for the better or worst but I see no reason to take that chance.

Of course it's not going to lead to immediate overpopulation but I don't see how you could refute one of my points that its going to lead the world towards overpopulation faster than the world would have if we hadn't found a vaccine.

The countries where the virus has hit the hardest suffer from a high mortality rate, high rate of child birth deaths, and a lower life span than average. Curing those people would merely help those countries bring their population back up to a standard level. Saying that the virus shouldn't be cured because it would do this is basically like saying we shouldn't have hospitals because they keep people from dying and thus contribute to over population.

If you are so concerned about over population then maybe we should make laws in the US to limit the number of children we have. We should also lower the amount of food available. Get rid of homeless shelters. There are a number of things we can do in this country to lower or help curb the threat of over population. But i never see you suggesting these ideas before. Instead you are suggesting that we refuse to cure about 33 Million people of which only about 1% live in the US anyway and most of which reside in third world countries. 33 mil is about .0055% of the worlds population. You would be curing .0055% most of which reside in third world countries whose people suffer from high death rate, lower lifespan, high child birth rate, stagnant economies, and poverty. And you are going to tell me that curing .0055% of the worlds population who live under those circumstances will contribute to over population? There are a ton of more effective ways to curb over population, i don't see how curing .0055 of the population who will still be living under these circumstances is detrimental to the cause. Those people will still be living in conditions that breed death, it would be more effect to kill 33 million americans who have healthcare and like to pop out babies living in conditions with support the growth of life.

You are not "taking a chance" If you consider curing these people "taking a chance" then you should support the other things i suggested because those are guaranteed to put a damper on population growth. Your argument sounds like it makes sense but only to people who don't know what they're talking about. A virus came along and added insult to injury devastating these peoples populations. Now a cure comes along to undue the damage that was done and you're saying its bad because people might live? Your argument holds no real world standings. It sounds like the argument of someone who lives thousands of miles from the problem and will never experience anything like it in their life. It is hypocrisy at its finest. While you live and breath you contribute to your own problem and yet you say its ok to let those people die. Do us all a favor and kill yourself, help lower the population and the level of stupid in the world.

[iGod]

Aren't there different kinds of aids though? The reason people with aids avoid having sex with other people with aids.. since every other kind needs a different medicine etc etc and some medicine are counteractive

Will one vaccine neutralize all the different kinds of aids?

(uninformed)

[Priam]

Aids is aids, people just react different.

[Mirosuke]

I hope this HIV Vaccine works. I can't argue anymore. qft...

[Reise]

"**** you" in a lot of words.

Jerk status = Told.

[Da_Realest]

The countries where the virus has hit the hardest suffer from a high mortality rate, high rate of child birth deaths, and a lower life span than average. Curing those people would merely help those countries bring their population back up to a standard level.

Standards continue to change.

Saying that the virus shouldn't be cured because it would do this is basically like saying we shouldn't have hospitals because they keep people from dying and thus contribute to over population.

I disagree.

If you are so concerned about over population then maybe we should make laws in the US to limit the number of children we have.

I'm not really concerned with overpopulation.

We should also lower the amount of food available. Get rid of homeless shelters.

I believe diseases are part of natural selection so those 2 statments are irrelevant to me.

There are a number of things we can do in this country to lower or help curb the threat of over population. But i never see you suggesting these ideas before.

Of course you don't. You don't know me nor do I think such a topic has arised similar in nature to this one on the forums.

Instead you are suggesting that we refuse to cure about 33 Million people of which only about 1% live in the US anyway and most of which reside in third world countries. 33 mil is about .0055% of the worlds population. You would be curing .0055% most of which reside in third world countries whose people suffer from high death rate, lower lifespan, high child birth rate, stagnant economies, and poverty. And you are going to tell me that curing .0055% of the worlds population who live under those circumstances will contribute to over population?

And you're telling me it won't? So those people are meaningless to the argument I was making just because they're a low statistic? An increase is an increase. However, how about I say they might as well be dead if I were to agree with you saying that they are going to go back to the same living conditions? I assume you would say something similiar to each one of them should have a choice in whether they should live or not. If so, I would say that is one of the reasons why they are invdividuals.

Not just to focus on those in third world countries with AIDS, anyone with AIDS is capable of making a positive or negative change to the world or their local community effecting others. That's another reason why they deserve to live. That's also another reason why I believe the world doesn't need the vaccine.

There are a ton of more effective ways to curb over population, i don't see how curing .0055 of the population who will still be living under these circumstances is detrimental to the cause. Those people will still be living in conditions that breed death, it would be more effect to kill 33 million americans who have healthcare and like to pop out babies living in conditions with support the growth of life.

Like I said before, you aren't considering human behavior. You're generalizing that all of these people will be just average people when all it doess is take 1 person to make a difference. That is one of the reasons why I believe the change could be for the better or worse. Yes, you could say the same about many other situations in attempt to ridicule this portion of my argument but that isn't what is being discussed right now. It may be a miniscule detail to you or many others not worth considering, but it is one of the things that I do consider to be a factor.

You are not "taking a chance" If you consider curing these people "taking a chance" then you should support the other things i suggested because those are guaranteed to put a damper on population growth.

Well, I don't.

Your argument sounds like it makes sense but only to people who don't know what they're talking about.

So not only do you insult me but you insult anyone who might agree with me or have similar thoughts. Nice.

A virus came along and added insult to injury devastating these peoples populations. Now a cure comes along to undue the damage that was done and you're saying its bad because people might live?

You make it seem as though it has only been a few months or so since the virus has devastated them. The cure most likely would restore the population back to the previous "standard" but people are more than just numbers so much of the damage would not be undone.

Your argument holds no real world standings.

Neither does an arguement that doesn't consider the human factor.

It sounds like the argument of someone who lives thousands of miles from the problem and will never experience anything like it in their life. It is hypocrisy at its finest.

Not at all. Would you still say my argument sounds like "someone who lives thousands of miles from the problem" if you knew that that I lived there or if I told you beforehand that I had AIDs? Most likely, no. You look less at what I type and look more at what I'm not typing or any sign of personal information about me to deduce what type of person I am to further your argument/insults.

While you live and breath you contribute to your own problem and yet you say its ok to let those people die.

I handle my own problems.

Do us all a favor and kill yourself, help lower the population and the level of stupid in the world.

I would love to trade insults with you, but not when engaging in a discussion that I want others to take serious. Just keep your weak insults to yourself though I assume thats nearly impossible based on your previous posts on SRF.

"Statistically, it may seem like a good idea but there is no telling what effect it will have on the world's population because you can not factor in human behavior."

From the bold part of my quote, I thought it was obvious that one could conclude that I understood your view and the views of others that agreed with you in some form or fashion yet you insist on trying to shove statistics down upon me as if I'm ignornant as to why you you and many others made that decision. I don't need numbers to understand that there are other ways to prevent overpopulation. I don't know if the numbers you provided are true without sources, but I respect you enough on this topic to assume that the numbers you provided aren't just numbers you pulled out of your ass.

You ignored the human behavior portion of my post and the main point I was trying to make that the people that will be affected the most by the vaccine are those that do not have the virus and assumed my post was base only on overpopulation. Maybe I didn't make my post clear enough, but I'm sure it was. Curing aids will change millions of people. How they view people with AIDS, how they view those third world countries where AIDS is prominent, etc. I really don't see it as being so simple that if you cure these people = good thing. I believe the situation is much more complex.

You believe there is nothing wrong with curing them while I'm indifferent towards the vaccine leaning a bit towards a pessimistic view. Because of my view, all of my words that weren't aimed at you could be used against me. I came here to just give my opinion not engage in a argument about right and wrong and what is the more effective way to control the world's population.

Anyway, I don't like to speak long on a topic I don't care much about so I'm done here.

[Reise]

the main point I was trying to make that the people that will be affected the most by the vaccine are those that do not have the virus

Anyway, I don't like to speak long on a topic I don't care much about so I'm done here.

That's too bad, because I'd like to see more about why you believe people WITHOUT the virus are going to be more affected by the vaccine.

[Squirt]

Thats nice. I doubt it will work on the first try though.

[InviSniper]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Don't read if you can't take a joke:

Spoiler!

HIV is Gods' way of telling you to use a rubber. (Yes, I know not every HIV transference is from sex. Yes, I know God may or may not exist. But seriously, wrap it before you tap it.)

[Barotix]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Don't read if you can't take a joke:

Spoiler!

HIV is Gods' way of telling you to use a rubber. (Yes, I know not every HIV transference is from sex. Yes, I know God may or may not exist. But seriously, wrap it before you tap it.)

God's a noob.

the main point I was trying to make that the people that will be affected the most by the vaccine are those that do not have the virus

Anyway, I don't like to speak long on a topic I don't care much about so I'm done here.

That's too bad, because I'd like to see more about why you believe people WITHOUT the virus are going to be more affected by the vaccine.

Who are the primary recipients of vaccines?

[.Banshee]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Don't read if you can't take a joke:

Spoiler!

HIV is Gods' way of telling you to use a rubber. (Yes, I know not every HIV transference is from sex. Yes, I know God may or may not exist. But seriously, wrap it before you tap it.)

God's a noob.

the main point I was trying to make that the people that will be affected the most by the vaccine are those that do not have the virus

Anyway, I don't like to speak long on a topic I don't care much about so I'm done here.

That's too bad, because I'd like to see more about why you believe people WITHOUT the virus are going to be more affected by the vaccine.

Who are the primary recipients of vaccines?

I think Realest is referring to overpopulation.

Now let me put this in simple terms for all you overpopulation freaks:

1) 3.3 million people a year will barely make a dent in our 6 billion people population. Especially given the fact that as sexually active humans we are constantly reproducing.

2)The worst cases of HIV infection are in RURAL regions. Such as the Sahel regions of Africa, and the forest of sub Sahara Africa. take your overpopulation shit to Southeast Asia, The Indian Subcontinent, Western Europe, and Northeast USA.

3)Where is your compassion? Millions of people should suffer so YOU can live a good life, and note the earth can still support us, it hasn't gotten to point where it's cataclysmic hell on earth billions of people starving yet.

[inky]

Don't read if you can't take a joke:

Spoiler!

HIV is Gods' way of telling you to use a rubber. (Yes, I know not every HIV transference is from sex. Yes, I know God may or may not exist. But seriously, wrap it before you tap it.)

NEVER!

Cut the crap about overpopulation. You're a consumer living in a consumer market, who the hell are you to say that it's okay for others to die for your own selfish reason? Unless the overpopulation in your area is so bad that your neighbor has to sleep on the same bed as you, I really don't see the point in bringing up the "issue of overpopulation." It's a part of natural selection but so are other causes of death such as accidents and heart attacks - which we are all trying to avoid as much as possible.

[StealMySoda]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Cancer is an entirely different 'kind' of disease. There is no virus, no bacteria and no fungii involved with getting it. Just plain old mutation of body tissue. Cancer will never be wiped out as it is 'natural'. We can only find better ways to combat it once people have it (increase rate of survival) and better ways to detect it earlier.

[Trace]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Cancer is an entirely different 'kind' of disease. There is no virus, no bacteria and no fungii involved with getting it. Just plain old mutation of body tissue. Cancer will never be wiped out as it is 'natural'. We can only find better ways to combat it once people have it (increase rate of survival) and better ways to detect it earlier.

Can you get cancer from a Virus? Yes you can (see Human Papilloma Virus).

[SneakyBanana]

If it actually worked think of the ammount of people who would get aids just to loose a quick 90 pounds...

[XemnasXD]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

You can do both you know....

[Priam]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Don't read if you can't take a joke:

Spoiler!

HIV is Gods' way of telling you to use a rubber. (Yes, I know not every HIV transference is from sex. Yes, I know God may or may not exist. But seriously, wrap it before you tap it.)

So basically whe should just let 3.3 million people die. Whilst we have plenty of scientists working on both.

Ok.

[InviSniper]

I love how we are taking the steps to a cure for HIV, but the real fight is cancer IMO. Approximately 3.3 Million die each year from HIV, but 7.6 Million die of cancer. Which is the greater evil?

Don't read if you can't take a joke:

Spoiler!

HIV is Gods' way of telling you to use a rubber. (Yes, I know not every HIV transference is from sex. Yes, I know God may or may not exist. But seriously, wrap it before you tap it.)

So basically whe should just let 3.3 million people die. Whilst we have plenty of scientists working on both.

Ok.

You didn't understand what I was trying to say and I'm not even going to bother explaining myself.

[Priam]

I took your reply literally, if you mean something else, then be sure to write that down next time.

There is no greater evil, regardless of number of deaths. There are just two evils.