Even the left-wing Independent reports that 25 years after after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic does not exist. In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations was profoundly flawed Kevin de Cock (His real name, honest!), the head of the WHO’s department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.
Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including gay men, drug users, and prostitutes and their clients. The contrast with the propaganda pumped out by the likes of the BBC over the years could not be greater. Remember this? Oddly enough, the BBC does not seem to have picked up on this sensational news. I wonder why? No more red ribbons?
Nothing we didn’t already know. Interesting thing is when will the UN admit that made made global warming is not the main cause of climate change?
To tie AIDS to ‘left-wing’ this or that is plain silly. It was and still is a very difficult disease to understand and deal with. The need to protect the population against a very new and on all counts a potentially extremely serious epidemic was there, and the right message went out.
There is still a large number of heterosexual AIDS patients in many western countries.
But as usual, people with little or no scientific education find it amusing to rave and rant against scientists. Sad, really.
nearly oxfordian.
As close to 100% as its possible to be of all new heterosexually transmitted cases of hiv in this country come about as a result of sexual contact with an infected sub saharan african.
Wasn’t AIDS created by the American government to wipe out the ‘sub saharan african’ continent called… Africa? Whether you agree or not, it’s hard to prove either way and only a fool would argue against it.
After all, this wouldn’t be the first time the American government has created a killer disease to wipe out vast numbers of people. I refer to the ‘BZ’ drug which made LSD look like a mild headache. The film Jacob’s Ladder being a fine example.
The real bias in the BBC reporting is that they very rarely make the link to immigration. We are one of very few countries who do not require health checks for immigrants, a policy that presents risks not just from Aids, but TB increasingly very easily caught hepatitis.
I refer you to my piece from November 2007…
“According to the Washington Post, “The United Nations grossly overestimated both the scope and direction of AIDS infections, its scientists will admit later this week. The actual numbers in almost every theater have proven to be much less than UN reports indication, in some places less than half of that asserted. Outside researchers say that their demands for government funding motivated them to essentially lie about the gravity of the situation: The United Nations’ top AIDS scientists plan to acknowledge this week that they have long overestimated both the size and the course of the epidemic, which they now believe has been slowing for nearly a decade, according to U.N. documents prepared for the announcement. “There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda,” said Helen Epstein, author of “The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS.” “I hope these new numbers will help refocus the response in a more pragmatic way.””
Anon.
Because of course, thirty years ago we possessed the biotechnology capability that we dont currently have, to create something that for some reason would only target people in a specific geographical area.
right……….
notasheep: A lesson to learn from AGW advocates…
Scientists, like everybody else, follow the money/funding.
The smugness of these comments is alarming, almost as alarming as the prevalent attitude of the under 30’s to HIV/AIDs. I am certain that there will be a very significant increase in the number of cases, and yes, heterosexual as well, in the very near future, just as with syphilis in recent years.Certainly there has been a criminal laxness in not screening immigrants, particularly those from Africa, but we have plenty of the home grown variety and the conviction of the generation that have grown up without knowing anyone who has AIDs, that they are somehow invincible will, literally, be the death of many sons and daughters. To align this with any political persuasion is just facile.
To tie AIDS to left wing ideology is anything but silly. Leftists were protecting HOMOSEXUALS feelings, much as the BBC does with MUSLIMS.
The truth is a casualty to lib ideology.
Next up, global warming, cooling or staying the same. A CRISIS brought to you by the same suspects. White westerners.
Well, I half-agree with you Keith, but the reason for the preponderance of AIDS among heterosexuals in Africa is the frequency of ‘alternative’ lifestyles eg multiple partners, widespread prostitution and ‘unusual’ sexual practices/preferences.
Keith, let me guess, you’re liberal??
Of course you are. You are emotional and not interested in facts.
The idea that AIDS was going to be a heterosexual pandemic was reported pushed and assumed gleefully by the media. It didn’t happen. I’m glad you are so much more “caring” than the rest of us. Liberals claim a moral high ground that they do not occupy.
The heterosexual AIDS pandemic always was a myth, promoted deliberately to avoid the stigmatising of homosexuals and to a lesser extent drug users. Had the powers that be been less politically correct targeted programmes at high risk people outsie Africa would have nipped the problem in the bud long ago. As it was vast amounts of money were wasted on ‘safe sex’ campaigns.
The situation in Africa is very different and the causality is not completely understood as yet
“To align this with any political persuasion is just facile.”
It was indeed, political correctness was the guiding hand behind the whole approach to AIDS.A non judgmental non discriminatory stance was taken which resulted in the pandemic prognosis becoming dominant,instead of targeting groups most at risk.
Arthur Dent and Peter, you are both spot on. The leftist media has the UNIQUE POWER to sanitize the news or to decide what IS and what IS NOT news.
First it was the new ICE AGE, then it was GLOBAL WARMING, now it is GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE. It is called a “CRISIS”.
CRISIS MY PINK ARSE.
Follow the bouncing POUND or DOLLAR.
Al Gore is now mega-wealthy, FAT and still stupid.
BBC also lying about the climate
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/06/losing-plot.html
“As close to 100% as its possible to be of all new heterosexually transmitted cases of hiv in this country come about as a result of sexual contact with an infected sub saharan african”
So? It had to originate somewhere. And your point is?
“To tie AIDS to left wing ideology is anything but silly. Leftists were protecting HOMOSEXUALS feelings”
Rarely have I seen such ignorant drivel on any message board. AIDS is a DISEASE, you prat.
Nearly Orwellian. You are entitled to you opinion. But you are incorrect madame. Liberals use DISEASE for political purposes all the time.
Either you are stupid or you are part of the liberal problem. Which one do you choose N.O.??
N.O. you don’t win an argument that way. Yes yes, I understand lightweight liberal cons like you are USED to getting a PASS, but ALAS or A LASS, in your case. I’m not intimidated by ladies such as you.
The LEFT has USED AIDS for political purposes.
There is only one instance in which you were LOGICAL N.O.. You said AIDS was a DISEASE!! TRUE.
LIBERALISM IS A DISEASE AS WELL.
N.O., you cannot bully me. You are a limp wristed speck.
So? It had to originate somewhere. And your point is? gaz can answer for himslef, but my point would be that the disease profile and its spread is so dissimilar in Africa and elsewhere that we might be dealing with two distinct variants of the virus.
We know, and probably always did know, that outside Africa AIDS was not generally transmissable via heterosexual intercourse, if at all. It was predominantly found in the homosexual male community, especially when those men had multiple partners and abused drugs. Despite this preventative activity was not focussed on the at risk community, but was diluted by spreading it thinly across the dominant heterosexual population.
Inside Africa, the disease was cleraly spreading in a very different manner and now we have many hiv positive africans coming to Europe that appears to be happening here as well.
Political Correctness has been damaging to research and control of hiv/AIDS
Sorry nox but I too believe aids was used as a weapon by the left to further steer society in the direction they wished.
Thank you Thud. It’s beyond obvious.
When AIDS became clearly transmitted in Western nations by homosexual activity. When it was obvious that gay men like Freddie Mercury were dying from AIDS, it became POLITICAL.
The LEFT, America’s media/BBC decided to sanitize the issue.
NOT ALL MUSLIMS BLOW UP SUBWAYS!!!
Get my point?
They have injured the cause that they previously claimed to care about.
I am vilified for making the point, that is OBVIOUS and TRUE.
Liberals believe CARING is better than CURING.
Think about it.
AIDs was created by America to kill its mane enemies – gays and blacks.
White people are genetically regressive and they jealously gaurd their grenetic regression with the AIDs and GLobal Warming.
Anon,
Time for your nap.
anon… a point well made..if you are a lunatic that is.
Arthur Dent and Peter are correct in their view of what lay behind the great Aids scare of the 80s and 90s. Suggesting everyone was at risk was a deliberate policy to prevent the stigmatising of male homosexuals and IV drug users, who were at most risk because anal sex and injecting oneself can easily lead to blood infection (in the former case, through rectal injury). It was PC-driven, just like the body searching of 80 year grandmothers (or me, for that matter – not the same thing!) in US airports after 9/11.
Still, it provided some humour. Do you remember those dramatic phallic advertisements on TVb of men with pneumatic drills smashing an iceberg while a voice portentously declared: ‘There is a threat today facing EVERYONE. AIDS. Don’t die of ignorance.’ That ad provided a great Smith & Jones joke: ‘That ad really terrified me – I had failed all my O levels.’
I can remember shouting furiously at the telly when being told that I was at risk from AIDS. As a straight monogomous man, I was never at risk.
What was the best line? ADIS – don’t die of dyslexia!
There’s an analogy with the Beeb’s veggies bushing the BSE affair.
The report does end with this clunker from Dr de Kock:
“The impact of HIV is so heterogeneous. In the US , the rate of infection among men in Washington DC is well over 100 times higher than in North Dakota, the region with the lowest rate. That is in one country. How do you explain such differences?”
Well, duh, I’m not an epidemiologist but I could venture a guess. You might as well wonder why the BBC has so many cocaine users on its payroll.
Anyone remember when the beeb decided to “address the AIDS issue” on eastenders and who they gave it to?
Their chosen victim was Mark Fowler, a straight non intravenous drug using white man in a monogomous relationship.
At the time his demographic was about the least likely to fall victim but as usual for the beeb it just wouldn’t have done to show a black or gay with such a negative disease.
“As a straight monogomous man, I was never at risk”
Not entirely true. Blood transfusions were still iffy for a while.
And do you know for sure that your partner had been monogamous all his/her life?
Nobody said that you were at risk from monogamous sex per se.
The hysteria and ignorance on this thread are amazing.
“We know, and probably always did know, that outside Africa AIDS was not generally transmissable via heterosexual intercourse, if at all.”
Note the reservations, the backtracking. We don’t know for sure.
Say what you like NO,but the “Great Pandemic” like the “Great Warming” has not come.
Billions have been spent on targeting the wrong problem.
While I agree that there will be no global heterosexual pandemic, I don’t agree that the any epidemic will be confined to Africa. A heterosexual epidemic exists in PNG. Interestingly PNG shares three sgnificant characteristics with Black Africa; polygamy, promiscuity and low status of women.
I remember somebody in the AIDS industry’s early days saying that the Queen Mother was just as much at risk as a drug-taking promiscuous gay man.
Surely we can all see that the risk of acquiring HIV/AIDS is directly related to certain lifestyle characteristics such as sex and drugs (rock ‘n’ roll not yet proven). In sub-Saharan Africa, it is a fact that the manner of sex and the number of partners gives rise to much greater risk. Anal intercourse as practiced by gay males in the west makes gays a high-risk group.
So NOx is simply wrong on this one. The risk IS related to lifestyle, and much of lifestyle is a choice. That is why the BBC, with its pro-gay, pro mass immigration from Africa opinions distorts the reality of HIV/AIDS.
“So NOx is simply wrong on this one. The risk IS related to lifestyle”
Purely demagogery. I never said it isn’t.
And AIDS industry, forsooth … what hysterical nonsense. Not surprising, then, that you can’t even read what I wrote … or else are misquoting me deliberately …
Peter and his ilk have never heard of risk analysis and precautions. Oh, dear …
Back in April the Beeb bigged up a petition in the Scottish Parliament by gay men demending to be allowed to give blood. The issue was no longer one of patient safety, it seemed, but one of discrimination against one of the Beeb’s favoured “communities”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7347108.stm
“A spokesman for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) Network said: “The blanket ban on gay and bisexual men giving blood is an outdated policy that was put in place decades ago when people believed Aids was an exclusively gay disease.
“We now know that this is far from the case. There is no clinical reason for the blanket ban on gay and bisexual men giving blood.
“It is a policy from a bygone era, which unfairly discriminates.”
Last week (3rd June) a written answer on the subject was published on the Scottish Parliament’s website:
Ross Finnie (West of Scotland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that adopting a nucleic acid testing system as its standard test regime would constitute reasonable grounds for the relevant bodies to reassess the current blanket ban on gay men donating blood.
(S3W-13175)
Shona Robison: Men who have had sex with men, and who fail to acknowledge this at a blood donation session, have consistently the highest incidence of being HIV positive. This is the case with or without the implementation of nucleic acid testing. Securing the safety of the national blood supply in Scotland is a major priority. The Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service follows strict United Kingdom and European rules and regulations when collecting and processing blood to make sure it supplies the NHS in Scotland with the safest possible blood. The regulations are monitored and reviewed on a regular basis by medical and scientific experts. We believe it is important to accept this medical and scientific advice.
Somehow the Beeb hasn’t picked up on this answer yet. Can’t think why.
“Not entirely true. Blood transfusions were still iffy for a while.
And do you know for sure that your partner had been monogamous all his/her life?” Nearly Ox.
Curiously enough, you pompous ass, yes I do!
chuffer…to know such a thing with certainty is for some like nox apparently clearly impossible…for some of us easy.Nox you usually fight a good fight..on this one you are way off target.
Thud and Chuffer, you are ignorant pompous assholes.
You see, thud, he knows EVERYTHING.
nox…you clearly think you know me..perhaps youi mistake me for somebody you met at one of your leather queen coffee mornings?….being polite to you obviously is a waste of time so I will not bother again.if you have a problem with monogamy thats your problem…some of us lead normal lives you and your gay friendly leftist friends plainly don’t.
I must know thousands of people, amongst them a few openly gay men.
Guess the sexuality of the three people that have AIDS?
The BBC can spread the myth that hetro’s are just as statisticaly likely as homo’s to develop Aids until the world freezes over.
It doesn’t make it true.
Nearly Oxfordian:
Thud and Chuffer, you are ignorant pompous assholes.
Nearly Oxfordian | 09.06.08 – 11:44 am | #
And I can’t help thinking that this particular comment tells us all we need to know about N. Ox.!!
N.Ox is trying to spread the blame and risk. He is a dissimulating wwhitey trying to cover up that AIDs was made by US government WASP puritans to kill gays and blacks.
‘Anon’,
Persistently repeating that AIDS was invented by the WASP USA to kill blacks and gays will not make it any less of a fabrication than if you say it just once.
It is an absurd theory and discredits this blog by its constant repeated use.
Baggie…anon and his nonsense is just crap that blows in and out of here occasionaly….a nasty minor irritation.
I’m not convinced the AIDS campaigns were driven by a PC desire not to stigmatize homosexuals and drug takers.
The strategy was originally drawn up by Margaret Thatcher and her team. Can’t see them being particularly PC.
The actual effects of ‘safe sex’ campaigns seem mixed. There was a drop in teenage pregnancies for a while, but then there’s been a huge increase in sexually transmitted diseases apart from AIDS.
It may be true that the real risk for heteros is pretty much confined to those who have sexual partners from Africa, but there again there are a heck of a lot of Africans here now, many of whom may well be infected. Apart from that, the number of heroin addicts has rocketed…. so there are plenty of good reasons for the government to keep its guard up.
I think Nearly Oxfordian has a point…. diseases are complex things and political posturing of any sort rarely helps.
I think Nearly Oxfordian has a point…. .
PaulS | 09.06.08 – 12:41 pm | #
What, you mean he does know my wife’s sexual history better than I do?
“N.Ox is trying to spread the blame and risk. He is a dissimulating wwhitey trying to cover up that AIDs was made by US government WASP puritans to kill gays and blacks”
What a dumb little wanker you are. Piss off back to planet X54Zog.
Chuffer, if you can’t understand that I was talking in general terms, you need to try harder. Ever heard of promiscuity? Ever looked up the average number of partners in various populations? You may be surprised when you check the figures for Pinner and Walton-on-Thames.