ken@images1.Waterloo.NCR.COM (Ken Braithwaite) (11/01/90)
I have recently heard the following assertions:
1) AIDS proper -- as opposed to HIV infection -- is spreading very
slowly amongst the general population, and that its spread is confined
mostly to the traditional risk groups (homsexual men, drug users, and
transfusion recipients).
2) That this diffusion pattern (of the syndrome as opposed to viral
infection) is incompatible with any known viral contagion pattern or
mechanism.
Are these assertions correct?
Do they undermine the viral AIDS theory? If not why not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Braithwaite | They couldn't hit an elephant at
| this dist
These opinions are solely | last words, General Sedgwick
my own. I don't share. |
----------------------------------------------------------------------judy@thalatta.com (Judy Johnson) (11/04/90)
In article <1990Nov1.162630.19811@cs.ucla.edu>, ken@images1.Waterloo.NCR.COM (Ken Braithwaite) writes: > I have recently heard the following assertions: > 1) AIDS proper -- as opposed to HIV infection -- is spreading very > slowly amongst the general population, and that its spread is confined > mostly to the traditional risk groups (homsexual men, drug users, and > transfusion recipients). Is this true in Central Africa as well? Not from what I hear. Could this be explained in terms of the long "gestation" period possible between infection and onset of the syndrome? Ie, those in the earlier infection groups are still the majority of those reaching the point of AIDS onset. Just a thought... Judy Johnson mcgp1!judy