Since the early seventies, millions of dollars have been spent on the effort to rid the world of AIDS. I find this very odd. They did nothing to isolate people who infected with AIDS. I have heard arguments, infinitum against said isolation. Yet, had the original people with aids had been isolated, it would have drastically reduced the spread of the virus. The cost would have been minimal compared to the billions spent.
It would have also been advantageous to those infected. It is the nature of disease to reduce immunity. Is it not part of the name. Hence the person with AIDS is more likely to die from secondary infections when exposed to them. An isolated person might have lived years longer than someone exposed to such things as TB, flu, hepatitis and such.
As an aside, ignoring (CDC, the same folks that gave us the China virus.) the spread of the disease has caused some spreading of those secondary infections. TB was virtually eradicated until AIDS. There just might be a reason to the spread of hepatitis among homosexuals.
The so-called experts said that the disease could not be transmitted through the blood. Then they found out that they were wrong only after thousands of victims were infected. This was totally the fault of the experts.
Even though it was general knowledge that the disease was primarily transmitted from homosexual to homosexual, no attempt was made to keep homosexuals from contributing to blood national blood supply, especially in San Francisco. Actually, just the opposite. Blood banks purposely sought out homosexuals. As a result, the disease spread from heterosexuals, overnight, into the general population.
It would seem the homosexuals wanted the disease to spread so that more money would be put into the research. Researchers frantically looked for something, anything. Even so, the disease spread, especially in Africa. It lended credence to the conspiracy theory that the CIA was trying to kill all black people.
A few logical steps would have drastically reduced the death from dreaded disease. It was as those in power wanted the disease to spread. To be sure, there have been billions of dollars that have gone into the drug research in hopes of finding a cure a cure or vaccine. Bottom line, they have slowed the spread, elongated how long people with the disease and they have managed to make a protected class out of homosexuals…all at the cost of billions of dollars and millions of lives.
With all this, the disease could be virtually eradicated in one decade with two simple changes in society. First and foremost, stop sharing needles. Better, stop abusing drugs. Second, stop sex out of marriage.
I know. it sounds like a crazy idea. It is radical. However, it cannot be denied. It will work. After two decades, most of those who are infected will decrease to a very small number. After three decades, the numbers would be reduced to a handful.
The problem is, of course, that would mean enforcing some archaic laws, some that most don’t like.
At the least, three things should have been done. First, identify those who have the disease. That way, we would know who to avoid. Second, crack down on illegal drug distribution, hard. Stop treating it as a victimless crime. The victims are dying every day. It would seem they are just being ignored.
Finally, anyone who knows they are HIV positive and intentionally infects others should be tossed in prison. In some cases, some remained free to roam after committing mass murder, though it was legal. Among the worst, rock hudson. (Note I don’t capitalize his name on purpose) He killed dozens of young boys knowing he was transmitting the disease. Turning my stomach, the news media treated him as a hero. Personally, I believe all his work should be destroyed. He is a worshiped mass killer, and he knew it. Some may not like the way I throw around my terms, but I won’t apologize. It just is I hate those who purposely cause mass death, politically correct or not. Murderers out not be idolized.
bfrhodes99 