HIV vaccine... do we really want one?

Here's a dilemma: The brave new nano-tech world will make it possible to create an immunity against the HIV virus

At first glance that sounds like a great thing. But considering the broader aspects of those who typically contract the disease tending to fall into categories usually expressing irresponbsible personal behavior, will this be an enabler for these?

And wont that result in an increase in STD's overall? For those who now contract HIV through incidental exposure, I'd think it wont help at all. They dont display 'bad acts' thus wont likely be inoculated when the treatment is available.

For those who now share needles, and engage in risky sex, I'd think there will be increased Hepatitis and various STD infection.
Never mind nano-delivery systems could be used for populace manipulation. A whole new meaning for 'bio-warfare'.

Have to say I'm 50-50 on it.

 

Don't want people sharing needles? Create needle exchanges in every city at a total cost of like $200,000 per city.


Don't want people engaging in sex without condoms and such? Create places that give out free condoms AND make sure these places are properly advertised.


Geez, it's this easy. Unfortunately this has problems because the idiot right-wing finds pre-marital sex immoral and the idiot libertarians want "personal responsibility" towards using needles. Screw both and create needle exchanges and free condoms for all.

 

I hear you, and I'm disappointed no one else has commented on your comment. You know, like if those have actually been TRIED and how it turned out.

 

I agree that a drug providing HIV immunity would most likely result in an increase in STDs for people who have risky sexual behavior. You would still have to consider condom distribution and I believe the success of those programs vary.

However, I think it would be good for IV drug users. Needle exchange programs definitely work (without encouraging drug use) but they are not 100%. This drug could almost provide 100% protection for that population and protect any unknowing sexual partners from getting infected.

I also think we would be almost morally obligated to provide such a drug to male prisoners.

 

Fog - You could make that claim about any number of medical cures. Do advancements in caridologic medicine encourage obesity? Does chemo encourage smoking? And what of pharmaceutical advancements that better enable people to live beyond their ability to provide the most basic of needs for themselves?

You can link irresponsible behavior to many conditions. The problem is, you can also find plenty of people who contract them through no fault of their own.

Personally, I'd rather leave moral authority out of the hands of my govt, given their less than stellar moral history.

 

The needle exchanges have been tried and have been known to work rather well. What also needs to take place is the abolishment of laws that charges people for having needles and they should also be sold in stores. Also if you quit the supply, there is no longer demand. Therefore quit turning a blind eye to the drugs coming into this country and the demand for hardcore narcotics would end. I don't mean continue the drug war, I mean quit supplying contras and such and turn a blind eye to their other operations(IE:Cocaine and Heroin distribution). With all of these measures applied, HIV would go down and drug use would go down and we would have better communities.


As for the condom distribution and sex ed etc, it works, but it isn't advertised. I can bet you that less than 20% of the city anybody lives in here knows if there is a free health clinic. That needs to change.