GERRI@IBM.COM (Gerri Oppedisano) (01/25/91)
I would consider myself in support of the effort to fight AIDS, get more public awareness, gain governmental support for AIDS research and for the decent and fair treatment of AIDS or HIV+ patients. But I must say that last night's protests dissappointed me. AIDS is not the only killer in this world and NOT the only important issue for our country to focus on. I think AIDS lobbyists or any lobbyist begin to lose credibility when they demonstrate such a completely narrow, self centered view based on their cause. Where is ACT UP's concern for the importance of innocent people dying in this war with Iraq??? .. I realize cancer is an old desease, but there are still MANY dying from it today. Where is the day to day concern and focus on cancer research in the news? When I see a protest like the one organized last night I want to tell these people to just get a grip on reality. Their cause is one of many, and it's hypocritical to behave as if their's is the one of most importance.. I suspect if the war going on now continues on for years there will be less of a complete focus on it as time passes; just like any other important crisis. What exactly was the AIDS supporters' protest about? What in particular was the gripe? Perhaps I missed something. gerri@ibm.com
flar@Eng.Sun.COM (Jim Graham) (01/25/91)
In article <1991Jan24.225506.18241@cs.ucla.edu>, GERRI@IBM.COM (Gerri Oppedisano) writes: |> I would consider myself in support of the effort to fight AIDS, get more |> public awareness, gain governmental support for AIDS research and for the |> decent and fair treatment of AIDS or HIV+ patients. But I must say that |> last night's protests dissappointed me. AIDS is not the only killer in this |> world and NOT the only important issue for our country to focus on. I think |> AIDS lobbyists or any lobbyist begin to lose credibility when they |> demonstrate |> such a completely narrow, self centered view based on their cause. |> Where is While there are many other concerns in our world these days, there are also many aspects of AIDS which make it "special" and therefore an urgent crisis. It is an infectious disease(?) with an incredible long asymptomatic incubancy period and no known cure, vaccine, or reliable long-term treatment that is currently very widespread (more among certain groups than others). While many other diseases share one or more of these aspects, how many share all of them? There is a very serious potential for this disease to wipe out a major portion of our population in the not so distant future on a scale wider than any currently known disease or war. That is why ACT-UP does what they do. |> Where is |> ACT UP's concern for the importance of innocent people dying in this |> war with |> Iraq??? Where is everyone elses concern for the *innocent* people dying of AIDS? Also, I believe that they were calling for an end to the war, so they did show some concern for those dying. And, while broadcasting news of the war to the standard citizen serves little purpose beyond giving us a front seat in the war so that we can gawk, broadcasting news of AIDS gives the standard citizen useful information that he needs to fight a war that is going on in his own backyard in which he may be one of the soldiers. AIDS awareness is directly important to the population. War gawking is only indirectly important (it raises his awareness of foreign policy and world events and maybe provides information that is important if he has family overseas or is planning to travel to certain areas in the near future). |> .. I realize cancer is an old desease, but there are still MANY dying |> from it today. Where is the day to day concern and focus on cancer research |> in the news? But as far as I'm aware, cancer is not infectious and many forms of cancer are treatable with varying degrees of success. Also, I've always seen cancer as an undesireable natural enemy. There are certain aspects of our environment which can accelerate the formation of cancerous cells, but the older you get, the more likely that the cumulative chance of a cell in your body going cancerous will eventually catch up to you. It is like a "design flaw" in our biology that we are still trying to correct rather than an external enemy which we need to protect against. Does anybody care to comment on that viewpoint? |> When I see a protest like the one organized last night I want to |> tell these people to just get a grip on reality. Their cause is one of many, |> and it's hypocritical to behave as if their's is the one of most |> importance.. But, it could very well mean a complete and utter change in the human race in very short order if we don't fight it now. It should not be taken lightly. People keep getting complacent about the state of the AIDS threat (something that our own "Wounded Bird" was recently lamenting). Also, it is everyone's cause, not just the group that demonstrated. |> I suspect if the war going on now continues on for years there will be less |> of a complete focus on it as time passes; just like any other important |> crisis. But, as the threat from AIDS continues to grow (people are still being infected in very large numbers even now that we are aware of it), the threat of war will peak, die down and eventually fade (when it ends which is hopefully very soon). AIDS is just growing and has the potential to grow exponentially which means that right now is the time to focus on it, not later. Here is a question: How have the infection rates changed since AIDS was first discovered? Is there an exponential curve? I realize that failure to report infections skews the statistics drastically, but is there any recognizeable trend? |> What exactly was the AIDS supporters' protest about? What in particular was |> the gripe? Perhaps I missed something. Basically, something close to what I've said above (although someone from ACT-UP may know more). It was actually a simultaneous peace protest and AIDS awareness demonstration (I believe they chanted "Fight AIDS, not Arabs"). Whether or not the media is dwelling on the war at this time is probably personal opinion, but actually I agree that it did seem a bit premature to be complaining about the recent war monopoly in the media which was already dying down within a few days after it started. ...jim
th1h+@andrew.cmu.edu (Timothy J. Haggerty) (01/26/91)
Protest and anger are not measured, rational responses; nor does one movement of the body politic take precedence over another.I guess what bothers me the most about this kind of reaction to protest is that they always seem to start with some sort of disclaimer e.g.: "that while I'm in favor of increased AIDS funding, I would prefer that people on the way to early deaths would just be a little more quiet and polite about it . . .is that too much to ask?" YOU BET IT IS. ACT UP has always pissed people off--that's their job, for Christ's sake! Why is it hypocritical to behave as if AIDS issues, to those intimately involved, are the issue of most importance? Are HIV infected people supposed to patiently queue up until their issue reaches the top of some (imagined) national agenda? Does the war in the Gulf effect my life as immediately? Can I change that world? Unfortunately, AIDS protesters have a grip on a reality that is all too real. To claim that issues, as they pass through time, will inevitably lose importance is a banal justification for someone who needs to be amused by current events rather then compelled into action by them. What really seems to annoy people ACT UP is its insistance upon confrontation rather then entertainment. Street theatre was fun; political demands are boring.
dgreen@uunet.UU.NET (01/30/91)
lever!max@uunet.UU.NET (Max J. Rochlin) writes: |> > What exactly was the AIDS supporters' protest about? What in particular was |> > the gripe? Perhaps I missed something. |> |> The gripe is that the US has spent more in the past _week_ for Desert Storm |> than its spend in the past _decade_ for AIDS research. |> |> It's pretty appalling to think that the United States has all this money for |> war and we have to squeeze Congress for every red cent for AIDS research. Indeed. About twice as many Americans have died from AIDS as died in the Vietnam War. The contagion aspect makes AIDS more insidious than cancer: estimates of 235,000 more dead by 1993 illustrates the exponential expansion of the AIDS epidemic. Over 1 million Americans are presently infected. Half are likely to be dead by 1995. We could easily compare these numbers with those of a nuclear attack on a major city. Unfortunately, the slowness of the disease has numbed us to its overall consequences; war makes for much more interesting TV news. I happen to support US involvement in the Iraqi war, precisely because I worry about Hussien's genocidal potential. I also strongly support ACT-UP. One can equate the magnitude of the problems; clearly they are inequitably funded. Thanks for making a stink! Keep it up. Play safe, ____ \ /Dan Greening IBM T.J.Watson Research Center NY (914) 784-7861 \/ dgreen@ibm.com Yorktown Heights, NY 10598-0704 CA (213) 825-2266