CompuServe Thread

Victor, I definitely didn't suggest there was a moral reason for reconsidering how much money is spent on AIDS research. What I did suggest is that as AIDS is a completely avoidable disease, we might consider the money better spent on unavoidable maladies or directed toward prenatal care, for example. I'm not even sure I'd be in favor of such a course. It was just a suggestion. And I certainly didn't imply that AIDS activists are a "self-serving gathering of derelict members of society." Wherever did you get that idea? In fact I rather applaud ActUp's attacks on the FDA's inexplicable reluctance to approve new AIDS drugs and wish there was a similar group working for Alzheimer's sufferers. I will have to disagree with you as to whether AIDS is being transmitted "quite easily from male to female." I think the statistical estimate is 100 contacts with an infected partner for a woman to be infected. For the average American sexually active woman, that would require well over a year of effort in a monogamous relationship and much longer (to the point of being virtually impossible) if she were promiscuous. Women who are getting AIDS are being infected by their drug abusing partners and they are included in the high risk groups. …Warren