About me
Archive
About me

New Aids nightmare shocks US

close

Hold up! Before you read on, please read this...

This post was published more than 14 years ago

I keep old posts on the site because I often enjoy reading old content on other people's sites. It can be interesting to see how views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have, to put it mildly, mellowed.

I'm not a believer in brushing the past under the carpet. I've written some offensive rubbish on here in the past: deleting it and pretending it never happened doesn't change that. I hope that stumbling across something that's 14 years old won't offend anyone anew, because I hope that people can understand that what I thought and felt and wrote about then is probably very different to what I think and feel and wrote about now. It's a relic of an (albeit recent) bygone era.

So, given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views may well have changed in the last 14 years. I have written some very silly things over the years, many of which I find utterly cringeworthy today.
  • This post might use words or language in ways which I would now consider highly inappropriate, offensive, embarrassing, or all three.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken, and embedded material might not appear properly.

Okay. Consider yourself duly warned. Read on...

A strain of HIV that is highly resistant to almost all anti-retroviral drugs and which leads to the rapid onset of Aids has been detected in New York.

This, from a front-page Observer article, is more than a little worrying. New York was the place where HIV was first discovered, too.

If this is a genuine new strain of the HIV, then this could be absolutely devastating – just as we’re beginning to get used to an HIV that people can live with for many years before developing AIDS, we could be taken back decades to HIV being an immediately destructive virus.

It is incredibly disappointing to see the Observer, of all papers, pandering to the notion of HIV as a ‘gay disease’, despite it being more prevalent in heterosexual populations:

Health officials have warned that gay men are becoming increasing lax in their attitude to sexual health.

This isn’t the kind of thing the Observer would normally do, so I’m intrigued as to why they have done. This is much more like Times territory, and – guess what – this is what their (buried) article has to say:

It’s a wake-up call to men who have sex with men

To really tackle the problem of HIV, this is exactly the kind of stigma that needs to be avoided.

This 333rd post was filed under: News and Comment.

Some recently published posts

Reflecting on my first ten years as a doctor / June 2019, 8 minutes long

What I’ve been reading this month / June 2019, 6 minutes long

Californian taxis, gun ownership and democracy / May 2019, 9 minutes long

The assassination of JFK / May 2019, 6 minutes long

Crossing the US-Mexico border / May 2019, 10 minutes long

Some random old posts

Review: Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell / December 2012, 3 minutes long

Harry Potter and the Dealthy Hallows / December 2006, Less than a minute long

Adios, Anthony – It wasn’t all bad / May 2007, 2 minutes long

From the ‘Minerva’ Column of the BMJ… / June 2004, Less than a minute long

The A-Level Debate / August 2005, 6 minutes long

The door to God’s fridge is usually closed / August 2007, Less than a minute long


Comments and responses

No comments or responses to this post have been published yet.

Compose a new comment



Comment

You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.



The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.