The truth about AIDS

#1

Rasputin_Vol

"Slava Ukraina"
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
72,056
Likes
39,840
#1
So I gave blood on Thursday and had to do all of the paperwork and questionaire jazz. Anyways, the majority of the questions asked were "have you had sex with a man since 1977", "have you ever had sex with a partner that had sex with a man since 1977"... blah blah blah. Inside the bus, there was a sign hanging up saying essentially the samething and that you can't give blood if any of these conditions are true. Very politically incorrect, and very (very) much directed towards an anti-gay male bias. Now how can something like be so openly allowed to carry on in 2008/2009 with all of the hypersensitivity there is about alternative lifestyles?

The truth is, that the ACLU/California hippie types that run our country know the truth about how AIDS is commonly spread... Sure, you have your occasional blood transfusion that went wrong or the IV drug user. But the truth is that these guys can't come out and say that gay male sex is an activity that is highly likely to transmit the HIV/AIDS virus. And these guys can't risk a public outbreak of tainted blood fom some of these donors. Even ACLU types have car accidents or operations that will need blood from donors, and even they don't want to be infected. But if it came down to covering up this truth for say some other knd of personal or political gain, these same people would not tolerate the type of language or innuendo that was exibited on the bloodmobile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#2
#2
Would you not say that medical professionals would openly tell you that male homosexual intercourse is a significant risk factor for HIV/AIDS?
 
#3
#3
Would you not say that medical professionals would openly tell you that male homosexual intercourse is a significant risk factor for HIV/AIDS?

Yeah, I'm not really sure what the point is here... They definitely will tell you that and it's not like that's been concealed. I think the thread title should have "AIDS" replaced with "ACLU".
 
#5
#5
Perhaps it is related to the whole, HIV-AIDS link is a myth, thing?
2 things:
1. It firmly shows that there is a link between male homo-intercourse and HIV/AIDS. Medical professionals may openly discuss this among themselves, but the mainstream media wouldn't dare admit there is a link. They will do shows/stories about the high number of gay men having to deal with AIDS/HIV, but they won't focus on the cause for their illness (their risky behavior). Instead, the focus would be on the treatment and how we can get more gov't money involved in treating these people after the fact. Maybe, if the media would be as aggressive to point out the gay males' recklessness and accountability in this, it may remove the apparent double standard.

2. The language and bias of the questions left no doubt where the medical field stands on this. If this sort of anti-gay bias would have presented itself in any other situation (e.g. gay adoption, gay school teachers, military etc), there would be blood in the streets. There is no way you could discriminate against gays in this fashion if you had objections about your kids having a gay teacher or a high school even having a gay issues class. The ACLU and every liberal nutjob in the country would try to make an example out of you. But these same groups have no problem letting the medical field prohibit gays from donating blood??? Why single out just gay men? Why aren't these groups fighting to allow gay men to have an opportuntity to save a life here at home in the same manner they fight for gay men to save lives overseas with our armed forces???
 
Last edited:
#6
#6
I guess I just fail to see the absence of an admitted link between male homosexual intercourse and the risk for HIV/AIDS. I've never thought that this was some sort of piece of back-room discussion material. I do not think that schools prevent a person with Hepatitis from being a teacher, but you had better believe that doctors would not allow someone with Hepatitis give blood (or someone with risk factors for Hepatitis, such as needle sharing).
 
#7
#7
The odds of your kid contracting HIV from a gay teacher are pretty freaking low. The odds of you contracting HIV from HIV+ blood are 100%.
 
#8
#8
I guess I just fail to see the absence of an admitted link between male homosexual intercourse and the risk for HIV/AIDS. I've never thought that this was some sort of piece of back-room discussion material. I do not think that schools prevent a person with Hepatitis from being a teacher, but you had better believe that doctors would not allow someone with Hepatitis give blood (or someone with risk factors for Hepatitis, such as needle sharing).

And Hep B is about 100x more easily contracted than HIV.
 
#9
#9
The odds of your kid contracting HIV from a gay teacher are pretty freaking low. The odds of you contracting HIV from HIV+ blood are 100%.

Not suggesting casual contact will give you AIDS. :unsure:

But just wondering why the usual defenders of "gay rights" haven't come in to at the very least tone down the language used and make it more PC, and that why would these guys allow the medical field to openly single out gay males. You could make a strong case that straight gay men could pose an equal threat... but I didn't see that.

As far as the hepotitis argument, there is no political agenda related to that disease. But there is no one here that can deny that AIDS/HIV is an issue that divides along political lines. Conservatives would argue that we need to work on the cause (drug use, gay male sex, risky behavior). Liberals believe in more funding for drugs and more programs to help gay men, rarely pointing out the things that particularly put gay men at higher risk. That would be too taboo and politically incorrect...
 
#10
#10
I guess I just fail to see the absence of an admitted link between male homosexual intercourse and the risk for HIV/AIDS. I've never thought that this was some sort of piece of back-room discussion material. I do not think that schools prevent a person with Hepatitis from being a teacher, but you had better believe that doctors would not allow someone with Hepatitis give blood (or someone with risk factors for Hepatitis, such as needle sharing).

It is not so much that it is back-rom discussion as it is not politically correct to point out the link between the two. Do this, walk into a room of liberals and see the reaction you would get if you stated that gay men put themselves at a higher risk of catching AIDS than heterosexuals because of the nature of their acts and see what kind of response you get. If you make it out a live, you will be labled anti-gay and you will be called a bogot/homophobe.
 
#12
#12
So I gave blood on Thursday and had to do all of the paperwork and questionaire jazz. Anyways, the majority of the questions asked were "have you had sex with a man since 1977", "have you ever had sex with a partner that had sex with a man since 1977"... blah blah blah. Inside the bus, there was a sign hanging up saying essentially the samething and that you can't give blood if any of these conditions are true. Very politically incorrect, and very (very) much directed towards an anti-gay male bias. Now how can something like be so openly allowed to carry on in 2008/2009 with all of the hypersensitivity there is about alternative lifestyles?

The truth is, that the ACLU/California hippie types that run our country know the truth about how AIDS is commonly spread... Sure, you have your occasional blood transfusion that went wrong or the IV drug user. But the truth is that these guys can't come out and say that gay male sex is an activity that is highly likely to transmit the HIV/AIDS virus. And these guys can't risk a public outbreak of tainted blood fom some of these donors. Even ACLU types have car accidents or operations that will need blood from donors, and even they don't want to be infected. But if it came down to covering up this truth for say some other knd of personal or political gain, these same people would not tolerate the type of language or innuendo that was exibited on the bloodmobile.

So the reason for Sub Sahara Africa to be overrun with AIDS in male homosexual activity?
 
#13
#13
So the reason for Sub Sahara Africa to be overrun with AIDS in male homosexual activity?

Do you have any other explanation for the heavy concentration in that area?

You just unknowingly stepped on yet another politically incorrect issue concerning AIDS in Africa.
 
#14
#14
When you mention aids, the movie "Factor 8" and Bill Clinton ought to mentioned also.

(pardon the length of this cut and paste)

FROM THE FACTOR8 WEBSITE:

For more than two decades, the Arkansas prison system profited from selling blood plasma from inmates infected with viral hepatitis and AIDS. Thousands of unwitting victims who received transfusions of a product called Factor 8 made from this blood died as a result.

Follow along as filmmaker Kelly Duda uncovers the tragedy that many consider a crime.

Why did the state of Arkansas and its prison system risk selling inmatesÂ’ blood for so long and how was it able to continue?

Factor 8: The Arkansas Prison Blood Scandal is an unsettling look at the complex issues surrounding prison corruption, blood safety and government oversight.

At the heart of the documentary is one reporterÂ’s dogged search for the truth. He discovers that his home state knew it was dealing a dangerous product, yet put profits over public safety while federal regulators looked the other way. Charges of cronyism and cover-up reach all the way to the administration of then-Gov. Bill Clinton.

Add death threats, burglary, and a murder to the story and a suspected campaign of fear and intimidation surfaces lending explanation to how this story was kept quiet for so long.

Even now, families are still grieving. People are still dying. Around the world major class action lawsuits have been filed and criminal investigations are underway. While the rest of the globe looks to America for answers, the story remains largely untold and no one has ever been held accountable.

Factor 8 is one citizenÂ’s attempt to set that right.

“In the early days of AIDS, we at the CDC were surprised that the hemophiliac community was infected so rapidly. This shocking documentary tells why.”

Dr. Donald Francis/ former head of AIDS Laboratory
at the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention


Profile

In late 1998, when Mark Kennedy of the Ottawa Citizen used Kelly DudaÂ’s investigative work to break the Canada-Arkansas angle of the tainted blood story internationally, Duda had no idea how much hard work still lay ahead. It would take more than seven years for the whole story to be told. During this time, Kelly was followed, sued, burglarized, his tires slashed and his rear window smashed.

Early coverage in the Canadian press, The Economist, Salon, InvestorÂ’s Business Daily and other media outlets all can be traced back to the muckraking efforts of this one man.

Kelly has worked with CNN, the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corp.) and APTV (Associated Press Television) in their coverage of the use of tainted prison plasma in blood products. He was also part of the team for Fuji-TV that produced The Hepatitis C Epidemic: A 15-Year Government Cover-up. This program won a George Foster Peabody Award in 2003 and was watched by more than 12 million viewers in Japan.

Recently, Kelly was a consultant in two major class-action lawsuits in Europe and Japan where plasma from ArkansasÂ’ prison system appeared. He is actively assisting efforts in Canada to compensate all hepatitis C victims of tainted blood, and assisting the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) in its investigation of the Arkansas prison plasma sales. He has also been in talks with the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI about a possible investigation in the United States.

Kelly was involved in selecting questions put forth in a Senate inquiry on tainted blood in Australia. Evidence he uncovered linking Arkansas prison plasma to its use in the U.K. was presented to the QueenÂ’s Council in BritainÂ’s High Court and to the Ministry of Health. This information is also in the hands of the European Parliament in Brussels.

Director's Statement

Prior to the making of Factor 8, I never considered myself an investigative journalist. In fact, I had never written a newspaper article before in my life. I was an aspiring filmmaker who had a story thrown into his lap.

Actually, it wasnÂ’t even a story at the time but a series of events that allegedly took place in my home state in the 1980s. It was a tale I didnÂ’t want to tell, but the more I looked into it, the more I found.

It didnÂ’t take long before I realized that regardless of the cost and sacrifice, the story youÂ’re about to see, which is a complicated one, had to be told. There where quite literally lives at stake. I felt a moral responsibility, a civic duty to do something.

Factor 8 is one personÂ’s search for answers. I warn you, much of what youÂ’ll see will shock you. Factor 8 upsets the apple-cart, and may challenge your world view, and your views about leadership, government, and human nature. I know it did for me.

Lastly, if you are at all impressed by this documentary, know that there are tens of thousands of stories out there right now waiting to be told which the major media have elected not to cover.

When all “500 channels” are own by six business conglomerates, when newspapers don’t own themselves, when cinema verite, and style-over-substance “reality” programming rule the day, when sound bites are the extent of our news coverage, and when “spin” has become an accepted way for disseminating the truth, I ask you, where can the true spirit and expression of the independent voice be heard?

Factor 8 is a story told in the “free press” tradition. And it is a testament to the fact that with a digital video camera, a cell phone, and a laptop, real stories by real people can still be told.

Production Notes

It may sound sensational, but I assure you itÂ’s true. In the process of making Factor 8, I received strange phone calls, I was followed, my house was broken into, my tires slashed, and sensitive information -- including my personal notes -- mysteriously appeared on the Internet. I also had a gun pointed at the back of my head, there was a murder, and a key inmate informant was whisked out of state and put into isolation.

When I went looking for the governorÂ’s papers of Bill Clinton, to find state documents relevant to my investigation, I was told that 4,000 boxes had been hidden away in private storage and could not be found.

When I went to the Arkansas State Health Department to request records regarding disease rates at the prison and anything about the plasma program, I was stonewalled. I actually had to sue the state agency just to get access to its files that by law are suppose to be a matter of public record.

When I went to the Arkansas State Police Headquarters key documents had disappeared.

When complete strangers showed up out of the blue asking me what I was doing and with whom did I work for, I had to ask myself, “what’s going on here?”

One thing is for certain, if I had a dollar for every time someone (in the past 7 years I’ve been investigating this story) told me to “be careful!” I could have paid my rent several times over.

Then in January 2004, I was sued, and shortly before Factor 8 was to screen in Park City, Utah, a federal Judge blocked my premiere. The case was eventually dismissed, but not without costing me two more years of my life and a lot of heartache. ... Not exactly what I expected to happen to me in my home state.

Now victims around the world are asking me for information. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) have talked to me about its investigation into the Arkansas shipments, and so has the U.S. Department of Justice about the possibility of its own investigation. I am working with activists in the U.K. pushing for a criminal investigation there, and with Congressmen in Japan and with the major media in Australia regarding their questions about shipments of tainted Arkansas prison plasma. Yet, despite global interest, few Americans know of this travesty.

----------------------------------

A doctor named Michael Galster also wrote a book on this called "Blood Trail," he presented the facts as he knew them in the form of a novel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf
#15
#15
my mom was talking to a doctor in chattanooga and she asked him about aids in chattanooga. he said there are about 3-4 time more people infected with hiv and aids than the official statistic say. he said if the actual percentage was brought out, people in chattanooga would freak out. he also said the percentage increase is really astounding.
 
#16
#16
The truth about AIDS is that it receives a ridiculous amount of federal funding.
 
Last edited:
#17
#17
my mom was talking to a doctor in chattanooga and she asked him about aids in chattanooga. he said there are about 3-4 time more people infected with hiv and aids than the official statistic say. he said if the actual percentage was brought out, people in chattanooga would freak out. he also said the percentage increase is really astounding.

The gays and the straights
And the white and the spades.

Everyone has AIDS!
AIDS AIDS AIDS!
My grandma and my dog 'ol blue (AIDS AIDS AIDS).
The pope has got it and so do you (AIDS AIDS AIDS AIDS AIDS).
C'mon everybody we got quilting to do (AIDS AIDS AIDS AIDS AIDS).
We gotta break down these baricades
Everyone has AIDS!
 
#18
#18
The truth about AIDS is that receives it receives a ridiculous amount of federal funding.

yeah, it's because of the media's sympathetic coverage of aids. cancer kill way more people yearly and doesn't near the coverage aids get. what's so bad is that aids could be wiped if out if guys didn't take in the ass with multiple dudes. cancer isn't a disease by choice.
 
#19
#19
yeah, it's because of the media's sympathetic coverage of aids. cancer kill way more people yearly and doesn't near the coverage aids get. what's so bad is that aids could be wiped if out if guys didn't take in the ass with multiple dudes. cancer isn't a disease by choice.

In some cases, cancer is a disease of choice. And no, AIDS wouldn't be eliminated by homosexual abstinence.
 
#20
#20
Poor, uneducated African Americans brought up in a culture disregarding safe sex practices are the largest population of US citizens with AIDs. Sorry to bust all your bubbles in the "I hate **** because I've very insecure" crowd, but they aren't leading.
 
#21
#21
Do you have any other explanation for the heavy concentration in that area?

You just unknowingly stepped on yet another politically incorrect issue concerning AIDS in Africa.

what would that be...

back to sub sahara africa, I think it's due to amount of unproteted sex and number of partners
 
#22
#22
The truth about AIDS is that it receives a ridiculous amount of federal funding.

More money is spent on Aids then on cancer, I forget the exact number, but 4 or 5 times I think. On a disease, for the majority of people who have it was preventable.
 
#23
#23
first of all aids is not an epidemic. it is a disease of choice. meaning you choose to participate in behavior that raises your risks of contracting the disease. malaria or the plague those are epidemics. in 2005 male to male sexual contact resulted in 58% of all aids diagnosis. male to male sex and drug use made up 3 percent of diagnosis. injection drug use made up 13%. high risk hetero sex resulted in 33% of new cases. while the percentages of male to male sex and hetero sex is somewhat close you need to look at the total numbers. the latest figures that i have seen have the homosexual population anywhere from 4 to 8 percent of the total population. so a homosexual person is very much more at risk than a straight person. we know how to eradicate hiv/aids and it has nothing to do with how much of our money the gov't spends on the disease. we have not even figure out how to cure the most simple viruses like the common cold for god's sake. 559,650 died of cancer in 2007(including both of my grandparents). compare that to 2005 when a total of 17,011 people died of aids. now which is the epidemic? so no it's not bigotry or homophobia to say the gay community is the prime target of hiv/aids it is just the truth.
 
#24
#24
More money is spent on Aids then on cancer, I forget the exact number, but 4 or 5 times I think. On a disease, for the majority of people who have it was preventable.

I'd prefer the government get out of the business of disease research business altogether. But it won't. I know the NIH usually spends about 2-3 billion on AIDS. That is ridiculous.
 
#25
#25
yeah, it's because of the media's sympathetic coverage of aids. cancer kill way more people yearly and doesn't near the coverage aids get. what's so bad is that aids could be wiped if out if guys didn't take in the ass with multiple dudes. cancer isn't a disease by choice.

:lolabove::lolabove::post-4-1090547912:
 

VN Store



Back
Top