4 ms·

I'm all for this; more power to them. However, HIV/AIDS is already very preventable and had been on the decline for a decade or more. I'd rather see something l

I'm all for this; more power to them. However, HIV/AIDS is already very preventable and had been on the decline for a decade or more. I'd rather see something like this effort, but for cancer. A disease that affects many more people. Actually, what I really want to see it a focus on stopping poaching, whaling, habitat destruction and ocean acidification. Even with all the disease, humans don't seem to have issues reproducing. Extending the human population, especially those of developing countries, only leads to more of the above. One day our children are going to say - "Cool, no more HIV, but what's a rainforest? what's a Rhinoceros? why can't we eat fish." Just saying.

kyro 13y ago
So make it happen (seriously).
- cpursley 13y ago
  I donate to campaigns that I think believe have a real impact. One of my favorites is http://thetashingainitiative.org/ http://thetashingainitiative.org/
  - kyro 13y ago
    Wonderful! Good on you for taking action.
naveenspark 13y ago
HIV/AIDS is a giant problem. North of 35MM people are living with HIV worldwide and more are infected every day. Yes we have made strides in reducing infection rates, but we are far from solving this problem with existing approaches. To put this in context, nearly 5,000 people a day die from AIDS. That is like 10 747s falling out of the sky every single day. The only solution is a vaccine which is why we are doing what we are doing. There are many big problems for us to solve on our planet. HIV/AIDS is one of the biggest and hardest to solve.
- cpursley 13y ago
  Awesome. I'm certainly glad people care enough to work on these types of real issues.
judah 13y ago
Bill Gates just addressed this [1], showing the faulty thinking behind this idea that saving lives is ultimately bad for the earth. "It may be counterintuitive, but the countries with the most deaths have among the fastest-growing populations in the world. This is because the women in these countries tend to have the most births, too. This pattern of falling death rates followed by falling birth rates applies for the vast majority of the world. Demographers have written a lot about this phenomenon. The French were the first to start this transition, toward the end of the 18th century. In France, average family size went down every decade for 150 years in a row. In Germany, women started having fewer children in the 1880s, and in just 50 years family size had mostly stabilized again. In Southeast Asia and Latin America, average fertility dropped from six or seven children per woman to two or three in a single generation, thanks in large measure to the modern contraceptives available by the 1960s. Because most countries—with exceptions in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia—have now gone through this transition, the global population is growing more slowly every year. As Hans Rosling, a professor at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and one of my favorite data geeks, said, “The amount of children in the world today is probably the most there will be! We are entering into the age of the Peak Child!”" Saving lives will improve humanity and -- as humanity has discovered -- actually contributes to fewer births. This is one of the reasons we see shrinking populations in 25 nations including Japan, Ukraine, Italy, Greece. [2] The reality is that saving lives counterintuitively decreases population through lower birth rates, which may ultimately help the earth. Also, observe that the world is at its highest population today, and yet, billions of humans are totally resource-secure. Why this counter-intuitive phenomenon? It's largely thanks to technological advancements in farming and genetics. There is no reason to believe this trend will not continue. [1]: http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_gn_ll0_012023#section=myth-three http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_gn_ll0_01202... [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline
- humannature 13y ago
  highest population today.. yes but what about pollution levels? highest ever too? natural resources also more depleted than ever? your post doesn't address the issue of overpopulation...
jlcx 13y ago
Something like this, but for cancer? Here you go: http://www.indysci.org/project-marilyn.html http://www.indysci.org/project-marilyn.html

kyro 13y ago

So make it happen (seriously).

cpursley 13y ago
I donate to campaigns that I think believe have a real impact. One of my favorites is http://thetashingainitiative.org/ http://thetashingainitiative.org/
- kyro 13y ago
  Wonderful! Good on you for taking action.

naveenspark 13y ago

HIV/AIDS is a giant problem. North of 35MM people are living with HIV worldwide and more are infected every day. Yes we have made strides in reducing infection rates, but we are far from solving this problem with existing approaches. To put this in context, nearly 5,000 people a day die from AIDS. That is like 10 747s falling out of the sky every single day. The only solution is a vaccine which is why we are doing what we are doing. There are many big problems for us to solve on our planet. HIV/AIDS is one of the biggest and hardest to solve.

cpursley 13y ago
Awesome. I'm certainly glad people care enough to work on these types of real issues.

judah 13y ago

Bill Gates just addressed this [1], showing the faulty thinking behind this idea that saving lives is ultimately bad for the earth. "It may be counterintuitive, but the countries with the most deaths have among the fastest-growing populations in the world. This is because the women in these countries tend to have the most births, too. This pattern of falling death rates followed by falling birth rates applies for the vast majority of the world. Demographers have written a lot about this phenomenon. The French were the first to start this transition, toward the end of the 18th century. In France, average family size went down every decade for 150 years in a row. In Germany, women started having fewer children in the 1880s, and in just 50 years family size had mostly stabilized again. In Southeast Asia and Latin America, average fertility dropped from six or seven children per woman to two or three in a single generation, thanks in large measure to the modern contraceptives available by the 1960s. Because most countries—with exceptions in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia—have now gone through this transition, the global population is growing more slowly every year. As Hans Rosling, a professor at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and one of my favorite data geeks, said, “The amount of children in the world today is probably the most there will be! We are entering into the age of the Peak Child!”" Saving lives will improve humanity and -- as humanity has discovered -- actually contributes to fewer births. This is one of the reasons we see shrinking populations in 25 nations including Japan, Ukraine, Italy, Greece. [2] The reality is that saving lives counterintuitively decreases population through lower birth rates, which may ultimately help the earth. Also, observe that the world is at its highest population today, and yet, billions of humans are totally resource-secure. Why this counter-intuitive phenomenon? It's largely thanks to technological advancements in farming and genetics. There is no reason to believe this trend will not continue. [1]: http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_gn_ll0_012023#section=myth-three http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org/?cid=bg_gn_ll0_01202... [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline

humannature 13y ago
highest population today.. yes but what about pollution levels? highest ever too? natural resources also more depleted than ever? your post doesn't address the issue of overpopulation...

jlcx 13y ago

Something like this, but for cancer? Here you go: http://www.indysci.org/project-marilyn.html http://www.indysci.org/project-marilyn.html