As a doctor, I’d rather have HIV than diabetes
 

An interesting read.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/...than-diabetes/

cool read. The USA is rampant with diabetics, and new ones arise every day. It is equally deadly and actually can be far more debilitating.

i was waiting to see...and it is in his last paragraph - the social aspect and psychological impact on the HIV positive person.
so yes, a complete and great article. thank you.

i read this earlier, thanks for the link, and a great read except for the usual first-world myopia-- HIV in africa is still a megamegamegabitch. but still, with new medications, maybe there's hope, just like we have enough food to feed the planet and nobody should starve, right?

anyway, impressive how much times have changed though. i grew up resentful of baby boomers-- they got to fuck all they wanted and left the next generations to pick up the shit and wrap themselves in plastic. but now, suddenly it's like nothing! (in rich countries anyway). i know a guy who got himself infected on purpose, actually (long story).

still, one potential unintended consequence of this epidemiological plateau could be that spread rates spike again and/or more virulent strains could mutate from that. being alive definitely fucking kills you.

id rather have kfc than any of these diseases.

Cheers Genteel - a really interesting and thought-provoking article. Agree w/Nefeli on the last paragraph as well.

This is something I thought when I was reading the article. I still can't explain why I know people who have had full blown aids for years now and they are not only still alive but seem to have made major improvements to their health.

well, sure, the meds are working great right now, which is great for the people right now. that alone is GREAT.

problem is-- we might be breeding med-resistant viruses at the same time, just like we have been breeding antibiotic-resistant bacteria one can find on kitchen counters these days. the world is a very big lab, and as long as transmission continues, the virus will be with us. so the sense of danger must not disappear (as auden said).

this is just a truce in what's going to be a very long arms race.

And this guy is a doctor? Probably one of those same kinds of "doctors" that are responsible for the 100,000 American deaths annually do to medical negligence or malpractice ;)

the future is going to be crazy. 3d printed organs, why not 3d printed wangs? they'll probably become as disposable as anything else. you could just inject flesh to numb it and remove and reattach them at will. you could turn your entire body into a walking hanging wang garden.

you could put a wang on your wang so you have a double wang.

there will be lots of wang art. probably fluorescent designs you can get on your skin. wang technology will accelerate us all into the post human future.

this post was brought to you by the 3d printed brain of the clone that google made of me which has killed me and is using my life to maximise financial opportunities and pay its operating costs back to google.

It’s important to address the social stigma attached to it and encourage people to get tested and seek treatment.
With proper care, HIV carriers are not only surviving but also no longer infectious and most people are not aware of that.

It's amazing and really telling about the lack of investment on prevention and research on other chronic diseases like diabetes.
Governments will, unfortunately and as per usual, learn this the hard way as NHSs drive their economies bankrupt.

This isn't the "post a picture of yourself" thread, buddy.

There are billions of dollars invested in developments of medicines and treatments, as well as education and public health campaigns across the country, from the street level to the school to the White House.. The bigger problem is that people are simply not caring. The "foods" that people eat that contribute to or cause diabetes are as addictive if not possibly more so than several "street" drugs. People are eating themselves into oblivion. The government then would be better suited to outright BAN most of the terrible imitation foods that we eat that cause this problem. Aids=condoms and cheap meds. Diabetes= sugar and bleached flour restrictions can solve these problems at the governmental level..

these processed "foods" are the reason the USA is the one country in the world where the poor are fat and the rich are thin. It really freaks out people that visit the USA from other countries.

Poor people can't afford to buy ''the good food''. I thought this was obvious to you as it's obvious to me?

it is obvious, especially when you go to the grocery store and see that one lime costs $1, and one avocado costs $2. Insane shit.

well so why is this even a point of discussion then? on this thread, of all threads?

That is all market price manipulations, produce and "good foods" aren't actually that much more expensive than the crap imitation foods, and indeed, when you factor in the health costs the price is MUCH steeper for the cheap shit in the long arc..

The realer problem for poverty at least in the US is not just the price of foods, but what are called "food deserts" where people simply do not have logistical access to better food choices.

But even THIS is not the issue with the diabetes mentioned in the article. As !@#$%! already mentioned, this is a first world problem, in the developing world, and not just the stereotype of Africa but increasingly in East and South Asia, HIV/AIDS is NOT a fringe disease, it doesn't afflict gay and needle drug using communities, it affects EVERYONE. It has become as much a "familial" disease as cancer or heart disease. With diabetes, a sizable portion of folks who suffer from these preventable diseases got them from having too much money and making too many poor food choices, almost willfully diving off the cliff. Food is a powerful drug, because unlike drugs which have a minority population of active users, EVERYONE EATS.

because eating unhealthily creates a fat, diabetic underclass that cannot afford proper healthcare and which rely on emergency rooms in the USA for critical care.

wait what? really?

Nope. they are all healthy as fuck

Those billions are a fraction of what these diseases cost the economy. Each dollar invested has a significant return, so what you’re saying doesn’t make any sense.

Your logic is appalling as usual:
If your daft assumption that “The bigger problem is that people are simply not caring” is right then there’s a problem with prevention, no?

Sigh.

My point was that the info and drug campaigns aren't strong enough, and the disease is a consequence largely of bad food choices, so since the government is already able to regulate food, why not regulate bad food out of the market and reduce the disease from where it starts, and further if folks who have diabetes don't have or have limited access to the bad foods that caused their illness, would that not help treat their own disease as well as prevent others?

What is that you suggest exactly since apparently my logic is appalling as usual, because as usual you've been brave enough to shout out vociferous criticisms but lack any proactive suggestions?

Brilliant. I’m starting to question more than your logic at this point.

As you’ve said, food and ingredients are already heavily regulated in most developed countries. How do you suggest governments should go about establishing relationships between substances and disease? Counting rhymes?

It takes SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH which is what we’re celebrating ITT.

Again, where is the lack of scientific research? I'm not buying it. I could care less what you think of my logic, facts are facts. Can you demonstrate that there is a lacking of investment in research and drug development? We already know the link between substances and disease in this regard, what more is there to need to study or prove?

You mentioned the government needed to do something about it. Stop appealing to emotion or even worse, relying on ad hominem fallacies. Talk about the substance of the issue here. Are you saying the government needs to invest in more research? You have to prove that the current research is inadequate which thus far you haven't. Are you saying the government needs to increase social and awareness campaigns, perhaps get more involved with doctors and hospitals, get out in the communities especially impoverished areas or places identified by the CDC as being epidemic regions for diabetes? Oh, right, ALL of that is in play, and of course all of it could and ESPECIALLY SHOULD be done more. HOWEVER, and its going full circle again, I suggested before and I will say it again, would not the government be better suited to through regulations BAN the worst offenders of "foods" that largely if not 100% contribute to this disease??

At the least, research, awareness, subsidized medical treatment should all be done in tandem with increasing regulation of the very dangerous foods which cause or contribute to this disease. Shit, we banned "street" drugs and put hundreds of thousands of people in jail for selling them, but we let "grocery" stores continue to "feed" us into oblivion :(

Fantastic. Facts are facts and you didn’t even bother to look them up. You want proof, but didn’t source your own claims.

In the specific case of the US I suggest you go lookup the current status of the NIH budget and study how the FDA works, I have no interest in try to reason with you.

I did look at the NIH budget, it said that 4.5BILLION dollars was spent since 2010 and of course the NIH budget doesn't include private or international research plus that doesn't include the CDC/HSS and local investments in public health and awareness campaigns ;)

Look, I've already agreed with you and said that we should be doing even more of what is already being done, but I still believe that it is in part a matter of public lethargy and that banning the worst offending "foods" would be a significant step in the right direction. People knew through research and awareness campaigns that smoking was bad for health, but it took those efforts matched with significant increases in regulations that finally brought smoking down. In California we're down to just 12% of population as smokers, I think the national average floats in the 20s..

And somehow you’ve decided that means they’re overspending. BILLION is a word for a big number after all.

Fucking hell, you really are hopeless. If that figure is correct that’s less than what the Federal Government spends on printer toner over a period of three years.

i had the clap once. it was a piss poor version of an STD. i just held my piss really hard and tight before i 'came' piss and everything was OK. a puerto rican taught me that.

you did get it cured by a doctor right?

yea, of course. good ol antibiotics. they were puerto rican flavored.

as a male, i had a low chance of getting it. ran out of luck that day.

When did I even remotely suggest over it was over spending? You're reading too much into this or adding things that are not for the discussion. What I said was that the government would from its be position be more effective to outright ban the the "foods" to prevent the disease in the first place to add to the current efforts.


No I'm not, but thanks for being a prick about what could have been an otherwise meaningful conversation.

meaninglol

i guess you need somewhere to start. kissing ass is one or lips wrapped around a big ol fat one.

If it’s more effective to do something else you’re implying exactly that you idiot. You seem to lack basic reading comprehension, logical reasoning and analytical thinking skills, I’m forced to bring it into the discussion.

If you’d cared to put two seconds of thought into it or to take an informed opinion, you would’ve realised that to ban foods you need scientific support and that it takes scientific research to find healthier alternatives. You also would’ve learned that scientific agreement is not immutable e.g., trans fats were once considered healthier than saturated fats.

So no, I’m afraid this discussion would’ve never gotten more meaningful than the fact that you’re a fucking fool wasting my time.

inb4 hurr durr, I-I was just trolling you

No you just seem to lack basic interpersonal and social interaction skills ;)

Why didn't you just ask me to clarrify instead of of assuming while also insulting? I never said or implied that investment in research and awareness campaigns should somehow stop just because I said that people don't seem to care about them after all we need to find ways to make people care MORE now don't we? I just suggested the government would be in a better position to ADD banning the foods in tandem. Sorry, if it ruins your whole, "Insult and degrade another human being to make an otherwise mistaken and therefore irrelevant point."



Sighs. The research is there to support the bans, foods already come with AMA warnings about how diets low in sugars can help prevent diabetes. The government just has to step up its game, which is what you previously suggested. I agreed, and offered a new suggestion of what the government can also do to add to what its currently doing.


Glad you feel that way, its always great to feel valued by other humans, carry on being such a great person, we love your positive and supportive approach :cool:

say whatever you want about his interpersonal skills, he's still dead on about your stoner logic though.

you may try to deny or distract from this fact by acting outraged, but it won't make it any less true, just more hilarious.