People Who Pass On AIDS Virus May be Sued

[uls]

dami na din HIV+ dito sa Pinas. Di lang mashado publicized. Kaya ingat...

http://www.journal.com.ph/index.php?...ate=2006-06-11

http://www.journal.com.ph/index.php?...ate=2006-06-29

[OTO]

Destroying diseased organisms has been done by man with little or no qualm for centuries. kaso na lang tao ang pinaguusapan dito sa the ethics of it does come into play.

Disease does have a part to play in our world. If the world was free of disease how can we manage the population growth? People would need to die of old age or crime to have enough resources for everyone.

I'm sure my opinion will not sit well with a lot of people but pause for a moment and think. If no one dies as fast as we reproduce where will we put the extra people? How will we feed em?

I think HIV/AIDS wouldnt have happened if people didnt do it with monkeys or ate moneky meat. that's the current theory people have on where HIV/AIDS came from.

[uls]

People are not dying as fast as people reproduce. People are reproducing faster than people are dying. http://www.worldometers.info/

I dont buy that "diseases have a part to play in our world" thing. Diseases should be wiped out. Many diseases have already been been wiped out. Vaccines against smallpox, polio etc have virtually eradicated diseases that could have killed billions.

Many people who would have died are alive today coz of vaccines. That includes me and everyone reading this.

Darwinian natural selection allows weak organisms to die out, leaving strong organisms to thrive.

But it is not our nature to give in to natural selection. Man has been defying natural selection and will continue to defy natural selection.

When we feel sick, we dont just give up and wait for death. We go see a doctor and take medicine. Its our nature to avoid death. we dont say "hey, im sick, its my time to go... i accept it... its the circle of life."

Scientists have sequenced the human genetic code. There's gene therapy and stem cell technology...

Im sure there's a scientist in a lab somewhere who will find the cure for AIDS or cancer, or even aging.

[OTO]

If no one dies what happens then? We multiply like tribbles then what?

[uls]

If no one dies what happens then? We multiply like tribbles then what?

And then Man has to figure out ways to deal with that. Build megacities. Colonies in space. Terraform Mars.

I believe there is no limit to what Man can achieve.

From Ape-man to the Human Genome Project. We have come a long way. And we are still evolving.

[OTO]

We cant even house the poor now what more if no diseases or death happens? Megacities dont work. Colonies in space & mars are more fiction than fact. We may end eating recycled food & drink derived from your last meal. Tht's no way a human being should live.

This is not to offend anyone but what if Jesus Christ didnt die for us we'd all be damned.

It's a natural biological function to do everything to live but everything must die.

And then Man has to figure out ways to deal with that. Build megacities. Colonies in space. Terraform Mars.

I believe there is no limit to what Man can achieve.

From Ape-man to the Human Genome Project. We have come a long way. And we are still evolving.

[GasJunkie]

I'd gladly kill you to ensure my space in this world.

[Horsepower]

If ever you've taken Philo1, there's this thing called "Argumentum Ad Hominem" and some of you are guilty of it.

See, this is a discussion, we present ideas, why the hell do you attack the person? Tsikot, from my initial impression is composed of mature people. Getting angry at a person with an unpopular idea is simply so childish and immature.

Don't take things personally, I don't even know you. If you have AIDS then I apologize for the seemingly harsh idea I presented. It's just a Machiavellian derived solution, if the elimination of the few sick will benefit the majority, i think it's well worth it. I am a practical person who thinks usually between costs and benefits, that's it. It is unpopular and criticisms are sort of expected but not emotional over-reactions. My statements here doesn't necessarily reflect my own belief nor actions. Some, are just for the sake of discussion. Remember, we're talking about an uncurable disease here and the problem of its further spread that's facing this human race.

Rebutt the ideas, not the messenger. Geez! How typical of most Filipinos.

I hope we can have an intelligent, healthy discussion here.

[Bogeyman]

More than just research into eradicating present diseases, maybe it's time that we all took a long hard look at how we've been living our lives. I tend to think that man ultimately brought down upon himself what he has been enduring for the last thousand years or so. Massive industrialization, wanton disregard for nature, misused resources, misplaced priorities overall -- they've all given rise to ills, physical and otherwise, that scientists are now racing to cure before it's too late. Where there's preventive maintenance on cars, surely there must be one for how humanity will chart its course for generations to come.

I hope we can have an intelligent, healthy discussion here.

That will depend on how 'healthy' and 'intelligent' your ideas will be in the future.

[empy]

If ever you've taken Philo1, there's this thing called "Argumentum Ad Hominem" and some of you are guilty of it.

See, this is a discussion, we present ideas, why the hell do you attack the person? Tsikot, from my initial impression is composed of mature people. Getting angry at a person with an unpopular idea is simply so childish and immature.

aba, at naghalukay pa ng Philo 1 :bwahaha: too bad you don't even know how to use the term properly. an ad hominem argument is attempting to discredit an argument because there is something objectionable about the person who said it (like trying to say the autobahns were a bad idea because Hitler built them). what is being attacked here is the stupidity of your ideas, not you personally.

and don't worry about people being angry - speaking for myself, i might be angry if you were a public official who could actually do something like what you're proposing. i'm really more amused with what i'm reading.

you want logic? let me give it a try:

If you have AIDS then I apologize for the seemingly harsh idea I presented.

fallacy: assuming only people who have AIDS would object to your idea. have you considered anyone who has relatives or friends with AIDS, or just simply value human life, would object also? oh, that's right - you are a cost/benefit type of person *rolls eyes*

if the elimination of the few sick will benefit the majority, i think it's well worth it.

My statements here doesn't necessarily reflect my own belief nor actions.

two statements, three sentences apart, that contradict each other. are you in favor of it or aren't you?

Some, are just for the sake of discussion. Remember, we're talking about an uncurable disease here and the problem of its further spread that's facing this human race.

fallacy: the only way to stop the spread of AIDS is to kill everyone who has it.

there's a very simple way to make sure you don't get AIDS. don't have unprotected ***, take blood transfusions or share needles with anyone who has it. we are not talking about some Ebola pandemic where you can't go out in public without fear of a killer infection.

so tell me...you think taking the lives of 40MM people across the world somehow is a bigger benefit to the world and the other 6 billion people who have minimal risk of infection if they take the proper precautions? let's see your analysis, Mr. Cost-Benefit.

how many people with AIDS are productive members of society that give more than they take? Magic Johnson is one well-known example.

saying stupid things without thinking! Geez! how typical of most (insert adjective here) (btw, another fallacy - generalization)

now, where's my 'owned' smiley, hehe

That will depend on how 'healthy' and 'intelligent' your ideas will be in the future.

i'm not holding my breath

[GasJunkie]

Survival instinct FTW

[boydapa]

i think this disease was designed/created by U.S. or U.N. to ensure a manageable world population. and if ever there is a cure im sure they wont allow it to be released commercially. sinadya nila yan---biruin mo billions of dollars and years were spent on this thing pero hangang ngayon wala pa rin nararating...tapos yun mga gamot na naimbento nila is more of a body poison than a medicine. i wont look at it at any other way...it is more of a geo political gimmick than anything else. ito ay akin lng naman

[BlueBimmer]

disease caused by viruses are very difficult to combat, not like bacteria based diseases that can be attacked with the many kinds of antibiotics. thats the reason why a HIV cure is very hard to attain. there is a vaccine though but not that effective.

[GasJunkie]

i think this disease was designed/created by U.S. or U.N. to ensure a manageable world population. and if ever there is a cure im sure they wont allow it to be released commercially. sinadya nila yan---biruin mo billions of dollars and years were spent on this thing pero hangang ngayon wala pa rin nararating...tapos yun mga gamot na naimbento nila is more of a body poison than a medicine. i wont look at it at any other way...it is more of a geo political gimmick than anything else. ito ay akin lng naman

I take offense in this I have always believed cancer was the "it" disease.

[boydapa]

add ko lng, i think kung totoo yan disease na yan dapat mathematically(multiplier effect ksi) ang death toll natin ay thousands if not millions die from time to time---....as in bodybags all piled up day by day na parang WWII kaso wala naman ah.

nagloko ako mga more than 10yrs ago as in dami ko ginawa kalokohan eh lang hiya mas mauuna yata ako mamatay dahil sa worry kesa dyan sa mga publicity nilang yan eh. feeling ko nagkakaroon ako ng sakit dahil ka wowory eh. tagal naman mag take effect nyan nakakainip! torture kakaisip.

[uls]

So what do we do? Stop all the cancer and AIDS research? Stop developing new treatments for heart disease, diabetes? we have to leave stuff that will kill people right? we cant find cures for everything out there coz if we did, nature wont have anything left to kill us with.

So where do we stop? We stop at cancer and AIDS? find cures for everything else but leave cancer and AIDS alone?

Im on the side of people who will not accept disease as a part of life.

Im on the side of scientists. They will constantly challenge and defy nature.

People who will not resign to the fact that man is powerless against nature are responsible for the forward and upward surge of mankind thru the ages.

Thank God for them.

[OTO]

Dude you're taking things to the extreme. No we dont stop trying to curb the spread of diseases but to say diseases & death has no purpose is wrong. Things must die so others can live. Can you imagine not being able to kill a chicken to eat a nice lunch at KFC?

Our resources are finite but our appetites arent. We need death & diseases to offset the population growth. Once everyone stops reproducing I guess that is when we dont need diseases and death anymore.

This isnt Star Trek, it's real life.

So what do we do? Stop all the cancer and AIDS research? Stop developing new treatments for heart disease, diabetes? we have to leave stuff that will kill people right? we cant find cures for everything out there coz if we did, nature wont have anything left to kill us with.

So where do we stop? We stop at cancer and AIDS? find cures for everything else but leave cancer and AIDS alone?

Im on the side of people who will not accept disease as a part of life.

Im on the side of scientists. They will constantly challenge and defy nature.

People who will not resign to the fact that man is powerless against nature are responsible for the forward and upward surge of mankind thru the ages.

Thank God for them.

[uls]

There is a scientist. His name is Aubrey de Grey. He believes the cure for aging is within reach. He believes technology already exists that can push life expectancy of people living today to 120 years.

And as science advances, those who do live that long will be able to take advantage of even newer advances that will further extend their lives.

And as they live even longer, they will benefit from even more advancements. 120-160-250-500-1000... that's basically the idea.

The scientific community won't take him seriously but they can't dismiss him. There is too much sound science behind his theories that they can't ignore him.

Noone has dared to debate him yet.

http://www.sens.org/

[BlueBimmer]

tsk tsk

[GlennSter]

oist tama na.

lets go back to sharing ideas...