7 ms·

Say the unsayable: countries get the HIV epidemics they deserve

41 points by musiciangames 17y ago

angilly 17y ago
I just want to point out this has (virtually? completely?) nothing to do with "hackers" -- and that's a good thing. It's nice to have a little variety on Hacker News from time to time. Thanks for posting this.
puredemo 17y ago
I don't think "deserve" is the word to use here. They get the epidemics that their cultures perpetuate, sure, but that happens everywhere. I hear Mormonism is rampant in Salt Lake City..
- jongraehl 17y ago
  It's funny that you compared Mormonism to an AIDS epidemic. But why wouldn't you say SLC deserves its Mormonism?
  - puredemo 17y ago
    Well, it's a (slightly) tongue in cheek comparison. I wouldn't say SLC 'deserves' its Mormonism. I was lucky enough to be raised agnostic / atheist. However, my parents also taught me that I should never take entrepreneurial risks in life. Because of that, I wasted over ten years working in dead end corporate jobs. But did I really deserve that? By default, children inherit the beliefs of their parents. It's very difficult to break out of beliefs that you have followed for your entire life. If it took me ten years to figure out that corporate jobs were a dead end, imagine how long it would take someone to learn to think critically about religion when it claims their soul and essence are in jeopardy, or to break free of a culture that teaches women are inferior to men.
JoachimSchipper 17y ago
Note that this is _not_ necessarily true on a personal level (the adulterous-partner argument).
hackermom 17y ago
I'd like to put it a bit differently: you never get what you deserve; you get what you take - and in the south of Africa, they've really been grabbing hands full of AIDS the past two decades. There's an old saying that fits this metaphorically: "you reap what you sow". Please enjoy your harvest. Let forth finally a smaller generation, of better health.
- kral 17y ago
  The last period makes me think about a generation immune to HIV. And about a short story by David Brin, The Giving Plague (www.davidbrin.com/givingplague.htm). Nice reading.
- jongraehl 17y ago
  What an odd sentiment - you seem triumphal ("please enjoy") that the population of (part of) Africa may decline.
_delirium 17y ago
Hmm, the general direction of this argument is uncomfortably close to, "gays get the HIV epidemic they deserve" (even for some of the same reasons this article cites). In both cases we could probably have more rational discussions without that "deserve" word, which involves moral connotations. How about discussing: what kinds of sexual-relationship graphs are more or less conducive to the spreads of which kinds of disease? I would guess there are actually a lot of factors, and more than unprotected promiscuity. Clearly unprotected promiscuity seems involved: the article's discussion of some recent African experience points that out, and so does the 80s gay bathhouse culture. But there are plenty of promiscuous cultures that appear not to have high HIV prevalence, e.g. college-student bar-pickup and frat culture has very low HIV infection rates, even for people with 30+ partners and regular unprotected sex.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- praptak 17y ago
  "college-student bar-pickup and frat culture has very low HIV infection rates, even for people with 30+ partners and regular unprotected sex" Citation needed. I seriously doubt a major group of people can keep low infection rates with 30+ partners and regular unprotected sex. The only rational explanation would be regular HIV tests plus stopping on positive result - seems implausible.
  - Retric 17y ago
    For disease transmission it's less important how much people connect inside small groups but how much those groups connect to other groups. The issue is when someone get's infected with something vary quickly the whole group becomes infected.
    - araneae 17y ago
      Right. For instance, models have shown that IV drug users are an extremely important group because they connect the heterosexual and gay pools of susceptible.
dalore 17y ago
To be fair in the past the west took advantage of Africa, often saying it was for their own good. So look at the current plight with a bit of history and it makes sense why they don't trust the west. No one certainly deserves to have an epidemic.
barrkel 17y ago
I seem to recall research indicating that strict monogamy is associated with higher incidence of HIV than more sexually liberated societies. The reason seems to be that in strict societies, in the absence of casual sexual encounters, many males frequent prostitutes, who become hyper-connected vectors of disease. With more casual sexual encounters, the graph is less connected. And in polygamous cultures, there's a lack of women to go around, so there should be a similar dynamic re prostitution. Of course, it's not all this simple - there are lots of factors at work.
- shawndumas 17y ago
  'frequent prostitutes' != 'strict monogamy'
  - khafra 17y ago
    I think it's safe to say that without extensive and widespread genetic engineering or effective mind control, a strictly monogamous culture will have many members who frequently patronize prostitutes.
sakri 17y ago
The Vatican and their anti birth control stance should also receive a fair share of the blame. Matter of fact, I think the pope should be charged with crimes against humanity for this stance.
- gaius 17y ago
  Ermm, what the Church actually says is "no sex outside marriage". Blame the Church for many things, but the spread of STDs says more about your own prejudices than anything else.
  - maurycy 17y ago
    Not quite. After 30s of googling: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7967173.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7967173.stm It said the Pope's recent comments that condoms exacerbated the problem of HIV/Aids were wildly inaccurate and could have devastating consequences. The Pope had said the "cruel epidemic" should be tackled through abstinence and fidelity rather than condom use.
    - Tichy 17y ago
      "abstinence and fidelity rather than condom use" Isn't that basically the same as "no sex outside marriage"?
      - maurycy 17y ago
        Not quite. It doesn't matter, though. Please focus on the first part: "condoms exacerbated the problem of HIV/AIDS". The statement is wildly untrue, and makes the Church guilty of STD's spread.
        gaius 17y ago
        So people are ignoring the Church on abstinence, but obeying it on contraception? Doesn't really seem plausible, does it?
Tichy 17y ago
"over half a billion dollars of PEPFAR money a year, in part to promote abstinence, monogamy and condom use" I am a bit surprised to hear that Americans pay other countries to promote abstinence and monogamy. Also, men in power everywhere have lots of sex, it is natures way. I don't think the president single-handedly infected the nation with HIV. Not that I have any sympathies for him, just saying. I always felt it was hypocritical to demand a pure christian marriage life from presidents.
maxklein 17y ago
I think this is nonsense. I doubt that the Southern Part of Africa is more promiscuous than West Africa or Brazil or Sweden. Yet the difference in infection rates are massive. And why does a warzone like Liberia have 1.7% infection rates? See my post on this: http://blog.cubeofm.com/suprising-facts-about-aids-in-2010 http://blog.cubeofm.com/suprising-facts-about-aids-in-2010 To quote from the UN report: "There has been a pervasive stereotype that in countries where men have multiple concurrent partners, there is a higher rate of AIDS. Well, according to the UN paper, "there is no significant correlation between prevalence of sexual concurrency and HIV prevalence at the country or community level." That article is just wrong.
- musiciangames 17y ago
  From her book: "All of Africa is poor. But not all of Africa has very high rates of HIV. HIV reaches very high levels only in areas where there are lots of simultaneous sexual partnerships, lots of untreated STIs and lots of uncircumcised men". Here is the geographic distribution of male circumcision http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Global_Map_of_Male_Circumcision_Prevalence_at_Country_Level.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Global_Ma... 80-100% in most of West Africa. Western countries such as Sweden have had education on the real causes of HIV transmission for many years, and encourage use of condoms, discourage sharing needles. Brazil has had a fine response to HIV, including refusing to sign the US's 'loyalty oath' to receive PEPFAR money. This requires the recipient country to sign a statement saying they oppose prostitution. Brazil chose instead to regulate it, and lost $US50million in funding. The author is an epidemiologist, who has lived in Kenya and Indonesia, working with gays, prostitutes and drug users (as well as 'waria' for whom we don't even have a word). She has been an author of many of the reports of UNAIDS itself. To dismiss the article as 'just wrong' appears misguided. I'd really recommend you read her book- it's very readable.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
- hackermom 17y ago
  Out of shear curiosity... would you mind elaborating on the choice of West Africa, Brazil, and Sweden? I know South Africa has a rumor. I know Brazil has a rumor. But West Africa and Sweden makes no sense to me.
compay 17y ago
What an idiotic premise. Nobody deserves to die from having sex.
- CWuestefeld 17y ago
  Nobody deserves to die from having sex. The way the world works rarely follows our notions of what's fair or unfair. The laws of nature do as they will, and they are capricious. Statements like yours really don't make any sense at all.
  - frankus 17y ago
    From the point of view of nature, nobody deserves anything. Shit just happens. It doesn't make sense to layer morality on top it, which is what the title of the article can be read as doing. There are lots of ways to be stupid an irresponsible, but there is a very human tendency to treat ways of being stupid and irresponsible that involve sex as wicked rather than foolish. It's a blind spot in our rationality that we have to compensate for, and the tone -- if not the substance -- of the article seems to fail to do that.
- steveplace 17y ago
  Good thing that premise wasn't in the article.
- mcantor 17y ago
  I feel like it's worth noting that the title was, "countries get the HIV epidemics they deserve," not "people get the HIV infections they deserve." I think the author's point was that the country's culture results in HIV problems, not that any individual person has done something that means they "had it coming." Though I agree that using the word "deserve" makes the argument very emotionally, politically and morally loaded, and not necessarily for the better.

41 points by musiciangames 17y ago

I just want to point out this has (virtually? completely?) nothing to do with "hackers" -- and that's a good thing. It's nice to have a little variety on Hacker News from time to time. Thanks for posting this.

puredemo 17y ago

I don't think "deserve" is the word to use here. They get the epidemics that their cultures perpetuate, sure, but that happens everywhere. I hear Mormonism is rampant in Salt Lake City..

jongraehl 17y ago
It's funny that you compared Mormonism to an AIDS epidemic. But why wouldn't you say SLC deserves its Mormonism?
- puredemo 17y ago
  Well, it's a (slightly) tongue in cheek comparison. I wouldn't say SLC 'deserves' its Mormonism. I was lucky enough to be raised agnostic / atheist. However, my parents also taught me that I should never take entrepreneurial risks in life. Because of that, I wasted over ten years working in dead end corporate jobs. But did I really deserve that? By default, children inherit the beliefs of their parents. It's very difficult to break out of beliefs that you have followed for your entire life. If it took me ten years to figure out that corporate jobs were a dead end, imagine how long it would take someone to learn to think critically about religion when it claims their soul and essence are in jeopardy, or to break free of a culture that teaches women are inferior to men.

JoachimSchipper 17y ago

Note that this is _not_ necessarily true on a personal level (the adulterous-partner argument).

hackermom 17y ago

I'd like to put it a bit differently: you never get what you deserve; you get what you take - and in the south of Africa, they've really been grabbing hands full of AIDS the past two decades. There's an old saying that fits this metaphorically: "you reap what you sow". Please enjoy your harvest. Let forth finally a smaller generation, of better health.

kral 17y ago
The last period makes me think about a generation immune to HIV. And about a short story by David Brin, The Giving Plague (www.davidbrin.com/givingplague.htm). Nice reading.
jongraehl 17y ago
What an odd sentiment - you seem triumphal ("please enjoy") that the population of (part of) Africa may decline.

_delirium 17y ago

Hmm, the general direction of this argument is uncomfortably close to, "gays get the HIV epidemic they deserve" (even for some of the same reasons this article cites). In both cases we could probably have more rational discussions without that "deserve" word, which involves moral connotations. How about discussing: what kinds of sexual-relationship graphs are more or less conducive to the spreads of which kinds of disease? I would guess there are actually a lot of factors, and more than unprotected promiscuity. Clearly unprotected promiscuity seems involved: the article's discussion of some recent African experience points that out, and so does the 80s gay bathhouse culture. But there are plenty of promiscuous cultures that appear not to have high HIV prevalence, e.g. college-student bar-pickup and frat culture has very low HIV infection rates, even for people with 30+ partners and regular unprotected sex.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
praptak 17y ago
"college-student bar-pickup and frat culture has very low HIV infection rates, even for people with 30+ partners and regular unprotected sex" Citation needed. I seriously doubt a major group of people can keep low infection rates with 30+ partners and regular unprotected sex. The only rational explanation would be regular HIV tests plus stopping on positive result - seems implausible.
- Retric 17y ago
  For disease transmission it's less important how much people connect inside small groups but how much those groups connect to other groups. The issue is when someone get's infected with something vary quickly the whole group becomes infected.
  - araneae 17y ago
    Right. For instance, models have shown that IV drug users are an extremely important group because they connect the heterosexual and gay pools of susceptible.

dalore 17y ago

To be fair in the past the west took advantage of Africa, often saying it was for their own good. So look at the current plight with a bit of history and it makes sense why they don't trust the west. No one certainly deserves to have an epidemic.

barrkel 17y ago

I seem to recall research indicating that strict monogamy is associated with higher incidence of HIV than more sexually liberated societies. The reason seems to be that in strict societies, in the absence of casual sexual encounters, many males frequent prostitutes, who become hyper-connected vectors of disease. With more casual sexual encounters, the graph is less connected. And in polygamous cultures, there's a lack of women to go around, so there should be a similar dynamic re prostitution. Of course, it's not all this simple - there are lots of factors at work.

shawndumas 17y ago
'frequent prostitutes' != 'strict monogamy'
- khafra 17y ago
  I think it's safe to say that without extensive and widespread genetic engineering or effective mind control, a strictly monogamous culture will have many members who frequently patronize prostitutes.

sakri 17y ago

The Vatican and their anti birth control stance should also receive a fair share of the blame. Matter of fact, I think the pope should be charged with crimes against humanity for this stance.

gaius 17y ago
Ermm, what the Church actually says is "no sex outside marriage". Blame the Church for many things, but the spread of STDs says more about your own prejudices than anything else.
- maurycy 17y ago
  Not quite. After 30s of googling: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7967173.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7967173.stm It said the Pope's recent comments that condoms exacerbated the problem of HIV/Aids were wildly inaccurate and could have devastating consequences. The Pope had said the "cruel epidemic" should be tackled through abstinence and fidelity rather than condom use.
  - Tichy 17y ago
    "abstinence and fidelity rather than condom use" Isn't that basically the same as "no sex outside marriage"?
    - maurycy 17y ago
      Not quite. It doesn't matter, though. Please focus on the first part: "condoms exacerbated the problem of HIV/AIDS". The statement is wildly untrue, and makes the Church guilty of STD's spread.
      - gaius 17y ago
        So people are ignoring the Church on abstinence, but obeying it on contraception? Doesn't really seem plausible, does it?

Tichy 17y ago

"over half a billion dollars of PEPFAR money a year, in part to promote abstinence, monogamy and condom use" I am a bit surprised to hear that Americans pay other countries to promote abstinence and monogamy. Also, men in power everywhere have lots of sex, it is natures way. I don't think the president single-handedly infected the nation with HIV. Not that I have any sympathies for him, just saying. I always felt it was hypocritical to demand a pure christian marriage life from presidents.

maxklein 17y ago

I think this is nonsense. I doubt that the Southern Part of Africa is more promiscuous than West Africa or Brazil or Sweden. Yet the difference in infection rates are massive. And why does a warzone like Liberia have 1.7% infection rates? See my post on this: http://blog.cubeofm.com/suprising-facts-about-aids-in-2010 http://blog.cubeofm.com/suprising-facts-about-aids-in-2010 To quote from the UN report: "There has been a pervasive stereotype that in countries where men have multiple concurrent partners, there is a higher rate of AIDS. Well, according to the UN paper, "there is no significant correlation between prevalence of sexual concurrency and HIV prevalence at the country or community level." That article is just wrong.

musiciangames 17y ago
From her book: "All of Africa is poor. But not all of Africa has very high rates of HIV. HIV reaches very high levels only in areas where there are lots of simultaneous sexual partnerships, lots of untreated STIs and lots of uncircumcised men". Here is the geographic distribution of male circumcision http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Global_Map_of_Male_Circumcision_Prevalence_at_Country_Level.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Global_Ma... 80-100% in most of West Africa. Western countries such as Sweden have had education on the real causes of HIV transmission for many years, and encourage use of condoms, discourage sharing needles. Brazil has had a fine response to HIV, including refusing to sign the US's 'loyalty oath' to receive PEPFAR money. This requires the recipient country to sign a statement saying they oppose prostitution. Brazil chose instead to regulate it, and lost $US50million in funding. The author is an epidemiologist, who has lived in Kenya and Indonesia, working with gays, prostitutes and drug users (as well as 'waria' for whom we don't even have a word). She has been an author of many of the reports of UNAIDS itself. To dismiss the article as 'just wrong' appears misguided. I'd really recommend you read her book- it's very readable.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
hackermom 17y ago
Out of shear curiosity... would you mind elaborating on the choice of West Africa, Brazil, and Sweden? I know South Africa has a rumor. I know Brazil has a rumor. But West Africa and Sweden makes no sense to me.

compay 17y ago

What an idiotic premise. Nobody deserves to die from having sex.

CWuestefeld 17y ago
Nobody deserves to die from having sex. The way the world works rarely follows our notions of what's fair or unfair. The laws of nature do as they will, and they are capricious. Statements like yours really don't make any sense at all.
- frankus 17y ago
  From the point of view of nature, nobody deserves anything. Shit just happens. It doesn't make sense to layer morality on top it, which is what the title of the article can be read as doing. There are lots of ways to be stupid an irresponsible, but there is a very human tendency to treat ways of being stupid and irresponsible that involve sex as wicked rather than foolish. It's a blind spot in our rationality that we have to compensate for, and the tone -- if not the substance -- of the article seems to fail to do that.
steveplace 17y ago
Good thing that premise wasn't in the article.
mcantor 17y ago
I feel like it's worth noting that the title was, "countries get the HIV epidemics they deserve," not "people get the HIV infections they deserve." I think the author's point was that the country's culture results in HIV problems, not that any individual person has done something that means they "had it coming." Though I agree that using the word "deserve" makes the argument very emotionally, politically and morally loaded, and not necessarily for the better.