A magazine article about American Indians has some rather disturbing information for folks who hope for a resolution to the AIDS epidemic via a vaccine. Starting with the arrival of the Spanish in the late 15th century the American Indians began a steep decline in numbers due to their lack of resistance to European diseases, notably smallpox. A vaccine for smallpox was developed in 1796 by Edward Jenner in England. Five years later, in 1801, President Jefferson ordered the nationwide immunization of American Indians. Yet as late as 1836-40 there was a terrible smallpox epidemic among Indians along the Missouri River, apparently sparked off by an infected riverboat passenger.
The U.S. in the early 19th century probably had better roads and communication than many African countries do in the 21st century. So even if we had a working vaccine against all the different strains of HIV (and any future strains that might evolve) it seems that the eradication of AIDS could take many decades.
They will not be able to eradicate AIDS with a simple vaccine for multiple reasons- one of which is that people will not take the vaccine. Look at what has happened with the Polio vaccine. There is now a re-emergence of Polio despite an effective vaccine. There are several reasons for this- one of which includes unsubstantiated rumors of contamination of the vaccine itself spread by “village elders”. Now health organizations are predicting a pandemic of polio in certain areas.
Realizing that AIDS is potentially a death sentence will likley not be a deterant to those that are fearful of western medicine.
Phil,
I think you are making an extrapolation based on a faulty premise.
The disease vectors and infection rate for smallpox are incredibly fast. The last known outbreak in Germany in 70 infected 17 people in a matter of days, from a quarantined carrier.
AIDS on the other hand takes a good deal more time both to transmit and to progress. There is a much better prognosis of getting the vaccines distributed than of getting a smallpox vaccinations done in time to overtake an epidemic.
It’s hard to have any reasonable discussion of AIDS, especially in Africa, because there’s so much bullshit going on about it. To quote:
“The WHO’s clinical-case definition for AIDS in Africa (adopted in 1985) is not based on an HIV test or T-cell counts but on the combined symptoms of chronic diarrhea, prolonged fever, 10 percent body weight loss in two months and a persistent cough”
From http://www.sas.upenn.edu/African_Studies/Articles_Gen/aids_afr.html (easy to corroborate elsewhere)
Using this kind of definition is simply fraud, as should be obvious. Many would argue the same kind of fraud is going on in the US, though at least here you have to have HIV before it’s called AIDS. Unless you don’t, in which case it’s called ARC. But it’s only ARC if it looks like an autoimmune disorder. It doesn’t have to look much like an autoimmune disorder to be AIDS, though. More on that at: http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/rrbdef.htm
I feel like all the debate about AIDS vaccines and anti-viral drugs is like a debate about how we can best provide leaches to underpriviledged people to cure their ailments. Improving the dissemination of fraudulent medical technology isn’t doing anyone any good. Except for certain “scientists” who are getting an incredible amount of money to study their false theories.
There *is* a social collapse happening in Africa, causing and compounded by a decline in basic health care. But they need antibiotics, condoms (there’s lots of STDs besides AIDS), and basic medical care, not antiviral drugs or AIDS vaccines.