A Cure for all STD's

[goofyjim]

Note the tactic employed here – the misrepresentation of a post, followed by an attack on the poster’s Catholic faith.

Yet I was attacked on the thread on gun control as not being in good standing with the Church by a poster who I will not mention. So the mistakes can be made by anyone.

 

[marybee]

How would condoms prevent physicians from getting the disease from their patients? I’m also wondering how a child would get it from a parent, and how a condom could possibly prevent that.

Sorry, was this about condoms or diseases? I was merely stating that some innocent people get the disease that is all.

 

[Ferdinand_Mary]

**NOTICE:

**The topic of this thread is not AIDS in Africa.

The topic of this thread is not “the other thread” I recently closed.

The topic of this thread is not any sort of personal animosity posters may be feeling toward each other, or any expressions thereof.

The topic of this thread is a rather lighthearted post about abstinence and monogamy being the most effective forms of disease prevention/control. Please stick to the topic or this thread will be closed.

If folks cannot control themselves, I will direct them to employ their ignore lists. Otherwise, please self-edit for tone/content before hitting the submit button.

Mane Nobiscum Domine,
Ferdinand Mary

 

[Mary3]

Lets remember especially when it comes to AIDS, many healthcare professionals get it by treating people with the disease.

I just watched a TV show about a guy who was a Paramedic who acquired AIDS through treating other people. Luckily his wife was somehow not affected. Very sad

First, I don’t believe that **many **healthcare workers acquire AIDS.

And it’s somewhat misleading to say that those who contract AIDS are just ‘treating’ patients. There are a few, preventable breaks in technique that can lead one to be infected with HIV. Those are: sticking oneself with a dirty needle (or other sharp device) used on an HIV-infected person, splashing oneself in the eyes, nose, mouth or open skin with infected body fluids of an HIV-infected person. It is not a disease that is easy to ‘catch’, yet the whole healthcare system has safety practices designed to prevent exposure incidents. A healthcare worker who scrupulously follows the safety rules can reliably avoid HIV infection.

 

[goofyjim]

Obviously monogamy and abstinence may not be the cure all for every case of AIDS. Anyone remember the woman who got from her dentist? No sex involved there. This has grown beyond just an STI.

 

[Dale_M]

**
The topic of this thread is not “the other thread” I recently closed.
**
Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you

I just stumbled across this thread and I feared it was like a deranged killer from some horror movie… the thread that just wouldn’t die!

That said, if everyone would just keep their legs crossed we wouldn’t have any STDs - no kids either, but, after all, what is important here?

 

[marybee]

First, I don’t believe that **many **healthcare workers acquire AIDS.

And it’s somewhat misleading to say that those who contract AIDS are just ‘treating’ patients. There are a few, preventable breaks in technique that can lead one to be infected with HIV. Those are: sticking oneself with a dirty needle (or other sharp device) used on an HIV-infected person, splashing oneself in the eyes, nose, mouth or open skin with infected body fluids of an HIV-infected person. It is not a disease that is easy to ‘catch’, yet the whole healthcare system has safety practices designed to prevent exposure incidents. A healthcare worker who scrupulously follows the safety rules can reliably avoid HIV infection.

Actually many do. Go check the stats. If I said that MANY people contract AIDS using latex condoms I am sure you would agree. But since I am directing it towards innocent people who are not being struck down by God for their debauchery you don’t agree. So either latex is good to prevent healthcare workers and condom users, or its bad for both. Yes, it is true that latex gloves are a bit stronger, BUT- they both EASILY tear. So would you be perfectly fine working at an AIDS clinic as long as you had some trusty gloves? If it doesn’t fit your agenda you won’t agree.

 

[Cari]

Can someone explain to me why the term STI is now being used by some instead of STD? What’s the difference between disease and infection in this particular case? Is it some social nuance, like referring to leprosy as “Hansen’s disease” now, or is there another reason?

Thanks!
C

 

[vern_humphrey]

Quote:
Originally Posted by vern humphrey forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cab/viewpost.gif
Let me understand this – is sex not the primary means of transmission of AIDS?

Yes, sex is the principal but not the only way in which the virus is transmitted.

So we can stop quibbling about it – AIDS is spread by sex, and only secondarily by other means.

What I said here however is that the sexual component of HIV transmission, which we usually focus on, is made more complex by other factors - such as whether the person having sex is poor or rich, homeless or sheltered, educated or not educated, has access to ARV drugs or not. All these things complicate our approach to what is essentially a sexually transmitted disease. It should be said that if this were something like mononucleosis - kissing disease, transmitted by personal contact of the close kind - we would not be having all this bother, no? But here we have penises and vaginas and sex, and Victorian hangups, so we get confused and hungup on how to respond.

And we compound that confusion by telling at-risk people they can have “safe sex.”

The response by national and international communities to the HIV pandemic has been inefficient, corrupt, ignorant, financially under-resourced, run by people in denial, politically fraught. Compare the response to 9/11 and the response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic.

And fraught with Political Correctness – from resistance to HIV testing to promoting comdoms as “safe sex.”

‘We’ have not wasted three decades; governments and agencies and corrupt individuals have wasted time and money and energy and lives.

So what behavioral change have you achieved?

What are your strategies for changing behavior?

Yes, it took a long time to identify the nature of the virus; yes it took too long to understand the nature of its transmission and spread, infection and prevalence. But once ‘we’ understood, we did little. And if you read my papers (Google Carol Coombe) you will see how hard many people fought for action from corrupt, uncaring, incapacitated governments - who knew they needed to provide leadership, diversify resources, create combined plans with nongovernment agencies, develop awareness and provide information to people and agencies, to contain the spread. The Treatment Action Campaign in South Africa actually sued the Minister of Education for not distributing drugs - and won its case.

And yet the epidemic continues apace.

At the same time, many churches including the Catholic church, were providing support and relief, homebased care to orphans, to adults in distress because of infection and unemployment, taking on some of the burden of care not provided by government.

Read my lips, condoms are only one tool, one facet, one element of what needs to be done to overcome, prevent, reduce, challenge, kill off HIV and AIDS.

Read my lips – telling at-risk people there is such a thing as “safe sex” is leading them down the garden path.

And blaming the Catholic Church for not going along with that deception is simply disengenuous.

 

[goofyjim]

So we can stop quibbling about it – AIDS is spread by sex, and only secondarily by other means.

And we compound that confusion by telling at-risk people they can have “safe sex.”

And fraught with Political Correctness – from resistance to HIV testing to promoting comdoms as “safe sex.”

So what behavioral change have you achieved?

What are your strategies for changing behavior?

And yet the epidemic continues apace.

Read my lips – telling at-risk people there is such a thing as “safe sex” is leading them down the garden path.

And blaming the Catholic Church for not going along with that deception is simply disengenuous.

vern,

I for one am not blaming the Church for this epidemic but someone in this thread brought up the wrong conclusion on how HIV got started and I tried to address by even reading his link and stating that it did not fit his theory. While it may be primarily an STD, and it does not get prevented by condoms, culturally, worldwide there are several other ways it is spreading. So let’s not continue to blame any particular group of people. We need to work on finding a cure and preventing something else similar to it form coming in the future.

 

[vern_humphrey]

vern,

I for one am not blaming the Church for this epidemic but someone in this thread brought up the wrong conclusion on how HIV got started and I tried to address by even reading his link and stating that it did not fit his theory. While it may be primarily an STD, and it does not get prevented by condoms, culturally, worldwide there are several other ways it is spreading. So let’s not continue to blame any particular group of people. We need to work on finding a cure and preventing something else similar to it form coming in the future.

Well, first of all let’s consider that AIDS is spread by behavior. Yes, some people get it by needle sticks when caring for AIDS patients and so on, but sex is the primary behavior, and intravenous drug use is second.

That said, we cannot blame the Catholic Church for not endorsing condoms. Indeed, I think I have made a strong case for showing that endorsing condoms as “safe sex” promotes the spread of AIDS by encuraging the at-risk groups to think they can have “safe sex.”

Finally, since AIDS is is spread by behavior, I would like to see someone who can explain what is being done to change that dangerous behavior.

 

[goofyjim]

Well, first of all let’s consider that AIDS is spread by behavior. Yes, some people get it by needle sticks when caring for AIDS patients and so on, but sex is the primary behavior, and intravenous drug use is second.

That said, we cannot blame the Catholic Church for not endorsing condoms. Indeed, I think I have made a strong case for showing that endorsing condoms as “safe sex” promotes the spread of AIDS by encuraging the at-risk groups to think they can have “safe sex.”

Finally, since AIDS is is spread by behavior, I would like to see someone who can explain what is being done to change that dangerous behavior.

And I totally agree. But it is not always sexual behavior that is spreading it. I said nothing about endorsing condoms but a little compassion needs to happen. If we start testing are we going to quarantine those who have it or will we allow them to continue living in society. What Carol is trying to demonstrate is that it is not only sexual behavior that needs to be changed.

 

[vern_humphrey]

And I totally agree. But it is not always sexual behavior that is spreading it.

Not always. But if you eliminated the sexual and drug behavior, AIDS would die on the vine.
QUOTE=goofyjim;2243890]
I said nothing about endorsing condoms but a little compassion needs to happen. If we start testing are we going to quarantine those who have it or will we allow them to continue living in society. What Carol is trying to demonstrate is that it is not only sexual behavior that needs to be changed.

We are not going to quarentine them – only one country that I know of has made a serious effort to quarentine AIDS patients, and that’s Cuba. If you can belive what Castro says, it’s has had a significant impact on AIDS in that country.

But testing – vigorously opposed by AIDS activists for years – is now a fact of life. I know dentists and physicians who have posters on their walls telling patients that if they object to being tested for AIDS they will not be treated.

I know nursing homes that require AIDS testing – which is only fair, since the nurses and aides are at risk there.

 

[goofyjim]

Not always. But if you eliminated the sexual and drug behavior, AIDS would die on the vine.
QUOTE=goofyjim;2243890]
I said nothing about endorsing condoms but a little compassion needs to happen. If we start testing are we going to quarantine those who have it or will we allow them to continue living in society. What Carol is trying to demonstrate is that it is not only sexual behavior that needs to be changed.

We are not going to quarentine them – only one country that I know of has made a serious effort to quarentine AIDS patients, and that’s Cuba. If you can belive what Castro says, it’s has had a significant impact on AIDS in that country.

But testing – vigorously opposed by AIDS activists for years – is now a fact of life. I know dentists and physicians who have posters on their walls telling patients that if they object to being tested for AIDS they will not be treated.

I know nursing homes that require AIDS testing – which is only fair, since the nurses and aides are at risk there.

Well if they test positive will they be denied treatment? And if testing is required it has to be for everyone. That will include you and I. I know I don’t have it because I have lived celibately all my life.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Well if they test positive will they be denied treatment?

Why would you even ask that question? Do we kick people out of emergency rooms if we find they are really sick or injured?

And if testing is required it has to be for everyone. That will include you and I. I know I don’t have it because I have lived celibately all my life.

Well, common sense dictates that people in at-risk groups are more lucerative targets, but yes – most nursing homes, doctors and dentists who demand tests demand them from everyone.

 

[Dale_M]

Abstinence. Its tough to do!

Here is a link to HIV, The Wretched of the Earth, and CC’s Teaching the 29 page message thread which was finally locked yesterday, but which seems to have hijacked this current thread. I guess its a hot topic, but when a moderator says “cool it”, we probably should abstain.

 

[Delphinus85]

Monogamy!

That’s right boys and girls, the panacea for STDs has finally been found. Using this new found medical technique, all STDs can easily be whipped off the face of the planet in under 100 years. Never again will we need to face the scourge of Syphilis, or the devastating effects of AIDS (though it is still possible that this one may be around in an extremely attenuated form), or the embarrassment of herpes.

Per the latest studies on this new medical treatment, being completely committed to only one partner, and waiting till marriage acts as 100% promise against contracting STD’s. If approved by the FDA, the ACLU and the MPAA, it will become the standard recommendation by all doctors in the hopes of beating this tragedy

Test studies have shown that when comparing 1000 couples adhering to this medical regiment, The astonishing results indicated no one contracted any STD of Any kind; something no other medical technique can claim about any ailment

A new day has dawned… Talk to your Health provider today to see if monogamy is right for you.

Some possible side effects may include an increase in ridicule from popular culture, A yearning sensation devoted only to your spouse, Increased affection for your spouse, and in some cases, children. Please report any of these conditions to your local parish as they may be signs of a truly blossoming relationship. Monogamy is not subject to lawsuits related to unexpected Children…

(Just an in jest statement. but a powerful statement all the same. Something we all know…)

In Christ

point of interest…depsite their names, sex isn’t the ONLY way these diseases are transmitted. Herpes (oral) is most commonly transmitted mother to child by kissing. That’s how my friend got it. She is a virgin by the way. When people accuse her of sleeping around, it destoys her.

 

[Delphinus85]

oh sorry one more thing, I’d just like to say that I used to think the catholic church was freaking crazy for not handing out condoms in africa to prevent AIDS, especially when they say ABC is acceptable for PURELY MEDICAL means, but someone on the first page laid out the arguement of the church rather plainly and I finally got it! Thank you!

I see it like this: if the church was to say it’s okay to use condoms, but then try to teach abstinance (the only thing that makes sure you won’t get AIDS from sex) it will then be seen as hypocritical, and the only thing that makes “sex safe” is no longer credible (abstinance). See, condoms only work if you use them, and I’d be willing to bet the most of the transmission is being done by people who probably wouldn’t use a condom if they had it. (rape, prostitution/rape of children etc…) The only thing we can do is cahnge people’s attitude about sex. It’s about about rules or whether birth control is right or wrong, it’s about what works. Throwing condoms (which only work if you use them, and when you use them only work 80-90 percent of the time) at the problem is like using asprin to fix a broken leg. You might lessen the pain a little, but you won’t fix the problem at all. And handing out condoms until the problem with the attidute towards sex is fixed, just ensures it will never be fixed.

What do we do abou tthe innocents in the way? Everything we can. We work to help poverty in the area. Put an end to the NEED for prostitution. Find those raping women and arrest them. Teach the women self defense they don’t have to be raped. Teach kids at young ages th horrifying truth of what is out there and teach them RESPONSIBLE, not SAFE, sex. If we hand out condoms in the meantime, they won’t listen.

Yes, it’s a little too utopian to work, right? Well that is what Jesus asks of us.

For the record though, not everone who has AIDS or an STD is sleeping around. More than we need to make sure we don’t hand out condoms, we need to make ABSOLUTE sure that we are loving those afflicted. I think that if Christ were here now, he would say “when I was afflicted with AIDS, you comforted me, not called me promiscious” to his list of “that which you do to the least of these, you do to me”

 

[jmcrae]

oh sorry one more thing, I’d just like to say that I used to think the catholic church was freaking crazy for not handing out condoms in africa to prevent AIDS, especially when they say ABC is acceptable for PURELY MEDICAL means, but someone on the first page laid out the arguement of the church rather plainly and I finally got it! Thank you!

I see it like this: if the church was to say it’s okay to use condoms, but then try to teach abstinance (the only thing that makes sure you won’t get AIDS from sex) it will then be seen as hypocritical, and the only thing that makes “sex safe” is no longer credible (abstinance). See, condoms only work if you use them, and I’d be willing to bet the most of the transmission is being done by people who probably wouldn’t use a condom if they had it. (rape, prostitution/rape of children etc…) The only thing we can do is cahnge people’s attitude about sex. It’s about about rules or whether birth control is right or wrong, it’s about what works. Throwing condoms (which only work if you use them, and when you use them only work 80-90 percent of the time) at the problem is like using asprin to fix a broken leg. You might lessen the pain a little, but you won’t fix the problem at all. And handing out condoms until the problem with the attidute towards sex is fixed, just ensures it will never be fixed.

What do we do abou tthe innocents in the way? Everything we can. We work to help poverty in the area. Put an end to the NEED for prostitution. Find those raping women and arrest them. Teach the women self defense they don’t have to be raped. Teach kids at young ages th horrifying truth of what is out there and teach them RESPONSIBLE, not SAFE, sex. If we hand out condoms in the meantime, they won’t listen.

Yes, it’s a little too utopian to work, right? Well that is what Jesus asks of us.

For the record though, not everone who has AIDS or an STD is sleeping around. More than we need to make sure we don’t hand out condoms, we need to make ABSOLUTE sure that we are loving those afflicted. I think that if Christ were here now, he would say “when I was afflicted with AIDS, you comforted me, not called me promiscious” to his list of “that which you do to the least of these, you do to me”

WOO HOO!!!

AMEN, brother - AYYYY MENNN!!! :extrahappy:

Thank you - this just made my day!!

 

[heisenburg]

point of interest…depsite their names, sex isn’t the ONLY way these diseases are transmitted. Herpes (oral) is most commonly transmitted mother to child by kissing. That’s how my friend got it. She is a virgin by the way. When people accuse her of sleeping around, it destoys her

Agree completely. While I understand that there are some STD’s that can be transmitted in other forms, it is by far much more rare. Yes Health professions can get it from patients, Yes Children can get it from their parents.

The purpose of what was suppose to be a humorous thread was simply that if people stuck to one partner, abstained before then, Many STD’s would be nearly eradicated within maybe 100 years.

Health Professionals won’t get the illness as frequently because their patients are far less likely to get it. Then after the first illness generation, the only people that health professionals would come in contact with, would be other health professionals, and/or those given the illness via their parents. At that point the STD should fall below the criticle point that allows it to keep going, and in time, maybe 100 years, the STD is almost completely gone.

Same thing goes for parent to children. Within 1 generation, that same scenario will no longer be very common, maybe even not possible…

If in this ideal world, people could stay devoted to their spouse, and keep it locked away till marriage, Yes… STDs would be a thing of the past.

To those that derailed the thread and turned into a 'condoms in Africa thread…"


May your zeal be blessed, but please keep in mind the purpose of this thread…

IN Christ