HIV...give them drugs or let them die?

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by peilthetraveler, Jun 23, 2006.

  1. I saw this news in yahoo today

    It says its given 300,000 americans an extra 10 years of life each. not completely uncompassionate when i say let them die, but how many of these 300k people STOPPED having sex? probably not many. Now..if we never gave any of these people drugs to prolong their lives...isnt it safe to assume that they wouldve died out and stopped infecting others by now? By not letting nature take its course, we are actually killing more people, because you have to assume that there are quite a few people out there who say "someone gave this to me, so i am going to give it others" Plus since they know they have HIV, what is the point for them to wear a condom now? Its not like they have the fear of catching HIV anymore.
  2. Ricter


    It's safe to say that after they die they stop infecting others, that's about it.

    But if they transmit the disease to a person or three before they even know they are infected, and those three people transmit it to a few more before they know... well, you probably understand what I'm saying. One does not know at the moment of infection that they are now infected, there is a delay, and that delay is sufficient to give the spread an exponential growth curve.

    Anyway, your solution to simple let them die would dampen the growth curve somewhat, but it wouldn't be nearly enough to flatten it.

    I'd also like to point out that no matter how safe we make the world, how perfect your diet is, how excellent your exercise regime is, you're going to die anyway. There is nothing you can do about that. Sure, you can make efforts to prolong your life, but if you fail to achieve your target, will you be unhappy about it? The answer is "no"--you will be dead.
  3. Good point. :) You are very wise master yoda. :)