Main Forums > Living With HIV

GALT 25 years on?

(1/6) > >>

alisenjafi:
In the interest of not further hijacking the tread   HIV Hides In gut to escape treatment 
http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=2332.0

The gist of the  post above has turned  from a question on why it took 25 years to equate the gut with the immune system and the technology that HIV Worker says just came about to look into GALT:


--- Quote from: HIVworker on August 06, 2006, 09:39:42 AM ---and you are saying they didn't look because either the scientists were too stupid or that the political climate that existed and still exists excludes adequate funding for HIV - so people can't afford to ask these questions?

R

--- End quote ---
Gee  can you point out anywhere that anyone BUT you brought up stupid?



--- Quote ---that the political climate that existed and still exists excludes adequate funding for HIV -
--- End quote ---

Not only is funding being slashed but the money that are left are going into policies such as buying abstinence rings for kids. Do you feel this is money well spent?
Here are some views of this administrations contridictions on it's AIDS policy



http://www.thenation.com/doc/20041220/kaplan

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040712/ireland

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/09/1044725671018.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR2006040401628.html

http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/taking-the-hypocrites-oath/2581/

http://www.thebody.com/atn/402/bush_aids.html

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/oct2003/aids-o09.shtml

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C05E1DD123EF930A35751C0A9679C8B63

Cheers
Johnny

HIVworker:
Well, here is what I meant by stupid...

On the topic of finding out HIV replicates in the gut...J220 said...


--- Quote from: J220 on August 04, 2006, 12:17:50 PM ---It took scientists 25 years to discover this....

--- End quote ---

When asked what it meant he said...


--- Quote ---Regardless, it's a fact. And the statement can be read in a variety of ways, for example, it can be meant as a comment on how insidious the virus is, while it can also be meant in the content that yes, researchers have been incompetently behind the curve for all these years. It's all in the eye of the beholder. But for the record, I did mean it in the latter sense.
--- End quote ---

If that doesn't indicate stupid, I don't know what does. Stupid means incompetently behind the curve. So that takes care of that.

DO NOT ask me to defend the current government funding of HIV nor the Bush administrations policy on HIV spending.

I guess it boils down to who you consider as 'them'. If them is the politicians that try and inject their political spin on HIV issues, then that is not what I am arguing. If you want to consider 'them' to = government spending then you can argue on your own. Government policy has never come into my work nor has it stopped me from getting government grants until the recent NIH spending cuts that hit every aspect of scientific research from physics to biology.

The reason it has taken 25 years to get to conclusion that the gut (lungs and brain) are important for HIV is due to the sensitivity of assays designed to look for replicating virus. It wasn't until 1996 that we had a decent viral load test, let alone to find a single cell with replicating virus in a body of others. My comment was in reply to J220's one about scientific incompetence and I am not going to be drawn on the rest of these issues as it was not the direction of either J220 or my posts. So take your own agenda elsewhere and take my name off this post.

R

aztecan:
Well, to add my particular spin on things:

The fact it took 25 years to uncover this information is not surprising. Until a decade or so ago, gluten intolerance was virtually unknown. But today, it is now believed a fair percentage of people suffer from this condition.

Researchers have worked for years isolating, studying and finding many of the quirks of HIV. This doesn't imply stupidity. Just as not uncovering the differences between HIV in the blood and HIV in the brain was not stupidity. This is a learning process that will continue.

I think the salient point of this thread is the cuts in funding for research and the redirecting of moneys to other, futile, feel-good programs that makes Middle America comfortable.

ASOs and other organizations are increasingly having to prove their expenditures are valid - even though in some cases the degree of proof required approaches ludicrousy - or face funding cuts.

This all comes at a time when "abstinence only" programs and "faith based" organizations are raking in the dough for the previously described abstinence rings and other "just say no" ideas that are not only useless, but forego essential education regarding HIV prevention.

In solidarity,

Mark

(Edited because I should know better than to write in the heat of the moment.)

HIVworker:
Before this goes too far...

I totally agree with everything that has been said about funding. More is needed, not less.

But this discussion I was having in the other thread was not to do with Bush and telling people not to have sex. It was to do with the suggestion that it took 25 years of HIV research to find out the gut was important. I know many researchers who have held NIH grants that have been working on this very problem and it took the advent of some nifty tools to unlock this secret. It's not a black and white problem and not one that you can blame the government for. It's a tricky thing to find a few cells in several trillion that harbor active replication and the fact it took so long wasn't due to the incompetence of scientific researchers. THAT was the only thing I was taking issue with.

I am not stopping you going down the government bashing path or complaining about lack of funds, but PLEASE, PLEASE don't associate my name with someone who is agreeing with anything that is said in those links. Don't take my words out of context and suggest I somehow agree with everything that has gone on for 25 years - of Regan only saying once that HIV was a problem etc. My discussion had NOTHING to do with that.

I was saying that the men and women who do the work - and have been doing so since the start of this disease - are not incompetent or behind any curves. Our lives are made difficult by the funding problems - that I will agree. But I was trying to answer J220s comments that I stuck up in this quote. The notion that researchers are behind the curve in HIV. I don't believe it is so, so I was arguing that point.

So please take my name off this thread as it is a misrepresentation of what I was saying.

R

aztecan:
R,
Sorry if my post sounds like government bashing. It was, to be sure. But, in the initial post of this thread, several links are provided and describe the dichotomy between Bush-speak and Bush reality.

I already know of your dedication to research in this field. I also do not in any way intend my post as a denigration of the efforts of researchers.

On the contrary, as I pointed out, HIV research is a progression. I could not expect all of the answers and fully expect more information to come to light as time passes.

But I take, for a variety of reasons, a very street-level view of HIV/AIDS. While research is important, crucial in fact, its clinical nature often makes it difficult to easily equate new discoveries to the life-and-death issues facing those living with HIV.

In other words, knowing that HIV hides in the gut is interesting, but more research is needed to find out the implications of this knowledge.

The final paragraph of the post opened the door for my comments.


--- Quote ---Not only is funding being slashed but the money that are left are going into policies such as buying abstinence rings for kids. Do you feel this is money well spent?
--- End quote ---

Speaking solely for myself, the answer is no!

HUGS,

Mark

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version