posted August 14, 2006 03:48 PM              

After donating half a billion dollars...
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/002537.html

He has every right to speak out!!

Sarah Boseley in Toronto
Monday August 14, 2006

Guardian

Bill and Melinda Gates have come off the political fence and publicly backed key causes of Aids campaigners, criticising the abstinence policies beloved of the US government and calling for more rights for women and help for sex workers.
Making the keynote speech of the opening session of the 16th International Aids Conference in Toronto, on Sunday, the Microsoft billionaire and his wife, who have previously largely confined themselves to discussing and funding non-political scientific research, spoke with passion and commitment about the social changes necessary to stop the spread of HIV/Aids.

The "ABC" programme - abstinence, be faithful and use a condom - had saved many lives, Mr Gates told the conference of more than 20,000 delegates. But, departing from his government's line, he added that for many at the highest risk for infection, ABC had its limits.

"Abstinence is often not an option for poor women and girls, who have no choice but to marry at an early age. Being faithful will not protect a woman whose partner is not faithful. And using condoms is not a decision that a woman can make by herself; it depends on a man.

"We need to put the power to prevent HIV in the hands of women. This is true whether the woman is a faithful married mother of small children or a sex worker trying to scrape out a living in a slum. No matter where she lives or what she does, a woman should never need her partner's permission to save her own life."

The Gates Foundation is funding research into microbicides - gels or barrier creams a woman can use before sex that will kill HIV. An update on the research will take place during the week-long conference.

Mrs Gates called for an end to the stigma affecting those with HIV. "Stigma makes it easier for political leaders to stand in the way of saving lives," she said, in a direct attack on some African leaders whose reservations over condoms are encouraged by the US Christian fundamentalist right's belief that abstinence from sex is the answer.

"In some countries with widespread Aids epidemics, leaders have declared the distribution of condoms immoral, ineffective or both. Some have argued that condoms do not protect against HIV, but in fact help spread it. This is a serious obstacle to ending Aids. In the fight against Aids, condoms save lives. If you oppose the distribution of condoms, something is more important to you than saving lives."

She also criticised African governments whose officials accompanied the couple on their fact-finding trips, such as the recent one in July, up until the point that they went to see sex workers. "At that point, it can become too politically difficult to stay with us and our official hosts often leave," she said.

posted August 16, 2006 05:26 PM              

In this world, abstinence is NOT the answer. It's a lovely thought, but not realistic.

posted August 16, 2006 05:50 PM            

But there will always be something. I personally believe that humans and/or the scientific community are delusional if they think they can ever eliminate all microbial life that is threatening humans. IMO, the key is in lifestyles/culture encouraging behavoir that limits one's exposure/likeliness of getting disease, such as eating right, cleanliness, and even yes, abstinence and fidelity.

To me, the abstinence/AIDS argument can be analgous to smoking. Most people would argue that because smoking leads to Lung Cancer, the best way to avoid lung cancer is not to smoke. I don't understand why, when one is talking about the cause and effect of promiscuity/prostitutes and AIDS, that abstinence by some is thrown out the window. Abstinence from smoking is one of the obvious remedies to getting not lung cancer, so we advocate not smoking...to the same degree, one is considerably less likely to get AIDS if they don't have sex at all or have sex only with one partner who is also not having sex with a million other people - yet absintence is always thrown out as being unrealistic. However, expecting abstinence when it comes to smoking is not. Nor is abstinence from eating yourself into heart disease, or one of a number of other illnesses that have an obvious causal relationship to not exercising self control.

posted August 16, 2006 07:27 PM            

A - Abstinence: If someone can hold out, they should unless they know the person is negative. This does NOT apply to married people. Being abstinent while married is ludicrious. If someone cannot hold out.. then look at option C

B - Be Faithful: If you are in a relationshp DO NOT CHEAT on your spouse.. if you must cheat choose Option C

C- Use a Condom.

It doesn't say one must be asexual to prevent contracting HIV. I don't believe that programs the preach 100% abstinence are appropriate, but this one seems to encompass all possibilities.

I have no yeah or nay vote as this is the first time I heard about it nor do I push any belief system regarding it.

In parts of this Country we have a hard time getting various populations to use condoms. Many infected people and people in at risk populations feel that since there are drugs available that extend the life of a person with HIV, then they are at risk of nothing more life threatening that diabetes.

Both lead to death- just at a slower rate.

I understand it is vastly different for people in disadvantaged areas and people from impoverished countries. Add to that the cases of rape from older men that think raping a virgin will cure aids and sex workers not using condoms and the rate of infection and death keeps climbing.