Is the Roman Catholic Church to blame for African AIDS?

[tharkûn]

Of course the labs can not even allow the sell the products by a lower price (or produce them) because would be possible to an USA buy here and even paying importantion taxes to have it more cheap than he would buying in USA. That is the reason of the lack of interest of the companies to produce to serve the third world demand. Nothing to do with importations.
This is what is known as "reimportation". Drug produced in the US, sent to Brazil, marketed there at a reduced rate, bought there by a US individual/firm/whatever, imported from Brazil back to the US, and consumed in the US.

"Secondary importation" of drugs is when the drug is manufactured in the US, shipped to Brazil, marketed in Brazil at its market value there, bought there by a foreign individual/firm/whatever, imported from Brazil to a country with a higher market value, and consumed there.

THIS is why drug companies don't cut prices by huge factors for nations with low incomes. They would LOVE to sell it cheap in say Brazil, but only if they can sell it at its full cost in the US, EU, and the like. People who take advantage of the price disparity ultimately destroy the price disparity.

That is the whole stealing problem. The researches found natives using some substance and they just get the plant (or what is necessary to produce it) , reproduce that in the laboratory and claim the register. That is something happening.
not entirely. Companies get the plant (or whatever) and isolate the specific chemical which produces the effect. Often they also derivatize the hell out of the chemical to find a better drug. They then find a way to mass produce the chemical (NOT trivial), run clinicals, and walk the drug through the FDA.

In short to make a drug viable for mass consumption in 1st world countries ... you are looking at large amounts of investment even if you were given the structure for free. Take the frog example first you need to find the actual poison ... the frog has literally millions of small organic molecules in his system ... you want *1* of them. So you need to isolate the molecule responsible for the effect, determine its structure, figure how to mass produce it (they don't harvest the commericial drug directly from the frogs, right?) ... and then go on with clinicals and the rest. VERY rarely is a drug just waiting to be sent to clinicals and sent to market.

Now some companies are better about sharing the profit from these ventures than others. As with all exploratory drugs, most attempts will fail (because there are no clear dosing guidelines, too much of the greater population experiences significant side effects/paradoxical response/whatever, no efficient delivery system exists, a competitor comes out with a drug that MUCH better fills the niche, etc.) so your successes have to cover the cost of your failures.

Drug companies certainly are not saints, and they have their share of outright asses, but the industry as a whole is not unreasonable.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Aye. Tharkun gasps the problem correctly. I think transparent borders and largely unregulated international trade and business are really fucking up the world (and by regulated international trade, I mean honest regulations like one would do within a nation between states, not the profit wankfests writting by megacorps and kill reimportation/secondary importation, this needs to end, and so does internation drugs and weapons trade nixing weed which isn't worth the trouble).

[lgot]

THIS is why drug companies don't cut prices by huge factors for nations with low incomes. They would LOVE to sell it cheap in say Brazil, but only if they can sell it at its full cost in the US, EU, and the like. People who take advantage of the price disparity ultimately destroy the price disparity.

That would be true if 4,5 years ago, when there was no disparity between Dollar and Real, they sold it here. But they did not. Because the power of bargain of brazlians was too low to use drugs that would cost 25%, 50 % of the salary.
The big true , as its true for many other products - eletronics products, CD - The consumers of brazil have little power, little money and are not atractive. Everything starts there. The importation problem is only secundary to that.

not entirely. Companies get the plant (or whatever) and isolate the specific chemical which produces the effect. Often they also derivatize the hell out of the chemical to find a better drug. They then find a way to mass produce the chemical (NOT trivial), run clinicals, and walk the drug through the FDA.

Urucum, a popular red product that indians used is owned by a american company. They did not "created" the product, neither found it. (Would be the same thing as I saying I can build a ferrari, know the every piece of it, would give me right). There is no merit to pledge a patent for a product that already exist.
Plus, even your scenary is illegal. You can not take from brazil any of those plants (or whatever) and they do it. Its done by blackmarket without the permission of brazilian governament.

In short to make a drug viable for mass consumption in 1st world countries ... you are looking at large amounts of investment even if you were given the structure for free.

This is untrue you know. They only needed to ask the indians, who used the poisoin in their arrows. People assumed they used the frogs but they used the plant instead. The scientist who found it just had to observe the frog lost color after one week without eating the plant to make the relation.
But I adimit that is a scenerary, a luck one.

But that does not change, and there is a argument about the patent laws about such subjects, if its correct to claim patent for something you found how is made, but not created the actual process.

It is of course wrong, because those stuff belong to the original country's natural resources and if there is anyone with rights over the research, use or not of it, is the country that had to preserve such natural resources.

[Guest]

YES I BLAME THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR EVERYTHING THAT EVER WENT WRONG

[Stormbringer]

YES I BLAME THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR EVERYTHING THAT EVER WENT WRONG

Wow, did your preist touch you in naughty places when you were a kid?

[Skelron]

I've posted this before on a similar topic, and I'll do it again, several mistakes have been made by people here. The following is from The Cafod Website, Cafod is the Official overseas aid agency of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, and so is directly linked to the Catholic Church, it's activities are the activites of the Catholic Church from England and wales, this is what they do about HIV/AIDS in Africa
http://www.cafod.org.uk/hivaids/aidsethics.shtml

HIV Prevention, Condoms and Catholic Ethics

CAFOD has fostered the development of comprehensive analysis of the HIV pandemic covering the medical, social, cultural, economic and theological issues involved. This analysis has gradually been built up over 15 years drawing upon the experience of partners overseas whose lives are affected by HIV and AIDS. It also reflects our stance as a Catholic development agency, working within the social and ethical teaching of the Catholic Church.

One of the questions most frequently asked of CAFOD relates to how we deal with the matter of condoms as a prevention strategy for HIV in the context of the sexual transmission of the virus. CAFOD sees HIV prevention as encompassing a broad range of personal and societal strategies for reducing risk and decreasing vulnerability. CAFOD also recognises that any prevention strategy must take a position on the use of condoms. Since this question is particularly sensitive in the light of Catholic teaching, CAFOD has drawn up a straightforward and summary account of where we stand as a Catholic agency.

CAFOD sees the HIV pandemic as one of the greatest development crises facing humankind and fully recognises the multiple social, cultural, economic and other factors that influence behaviour.

CAFOD believes that in the long term behaviour change is the most important and fundamental way to reduce the spread of HIV. Fully consistent with that standpoint and working towards that end, CAFOD aims to help people to modify their sexual behaviour, to reduce the number of their sexual partners and to strive towards living out the ideal expressed in the teaching of the Church of abstinence before marriage and fidelity within it.

CAFOD's experience shows that consistent and sustained behaviour change is part of a complex and long-term process and is rarely achieved quickly.

At the same time CAFOD is fully aware of the scale and prevalence of HIV infection in much of Africa, Asia and elsewhere where it constitutes a public health emergency which requires immediate responses and urgent measures.

CAFOD therefore recognises that the promotion of harm minimisation is often a necessary and crucial shorter-term strategy.(my emphasis)

Consequently CAFOD asks all partners working in the area of HIV prevention to give individuals full information about all means of HIV prevention and that this advice is scientifically correct. A person must be able to make decisions about preventing HIV transmission that are consistent with their religious convictions and based on their knowledge and understanding of the risks of their individual situation.

CAFOD does not support programmes that give false or misleading information about prevention (e.g. that HIV will inevitably pass through holes in latex; or that condoms contain HIV; or on the other hand, that the use of condoms guarantees 100 percent "safe" sex). This distorts truth, damages credibility, and can alienate rather than engage individuals and others involved in mitigating the spread of HIV away from developing effective partnerships.

As the official agency of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and respectful of Catholic teaching and beliefs, CAFOD does not fund the supply, distribution or promotion of condoms.

These are facts, Fact 1.) They inform people of the scientific options open to them, they do not say, use a Condomn and you will burn in hell, nor do they say, A Condomn will not work, as the virus will get through the gaps in the Latex, which someone here says they experianced in their Collage.
Fact 2.) They do not distrapute Condomns. This is true, and why should they, the Church believes Condomns are wrong, they offer the people the information they need to make an informed decision, they do not provide the condomns, this can just as easily be distrupted from another secular source. The Key fact is that they do not oppose, delay, or misinform people about the benefits of condomns, they simply don't provide people with them.

But this is just one agency you say, yes it is true, but it is also only a part of a wider world wide Catholic Charity known as Caritas Internationalis which is the worldwide organisation for the other similar organisation's from other countrys. One of it's roles in Carita's internationalis is

The HIV Support Section acts as the Secretariat for the Caritas Internationalis AIDS Task Force, with the Head of Section acting as the Secretary to the group. CAFOD's Director is the co-Chair of the Task Force.

Does anyone think with that much influance over the various Overseas Aid Agencies of the Catholic Church that their policy on Aids is not the one used by the majourity if not all, the Overseas Aid Charitys of the Catholic Church and if not could you please explain why you think that.[/b][/quote]

[Darth Wong]

I've posted this before on a similar topic, and I'll do it again, several mistakes have been made by people here. The following is from The Cafod Website...

That's nice. Now what makes you think that this inoffensive policy is actually being implemented rather than simply being published to deflect criticism, particularly when the Pope continues to assail contraception as contrary to the will of God, and front-line people such as Mother Theresa publicly lauded AIDS as a just punishment for sexual immorality?

[Justforfun000]

That's nice. Now what makes you think that this inoffensive policy is actually being implemented rather than simply being published to deflect criticism

Yes...Phrases like "Put your money where your mouth is", or "Practice what you Preach" come to mind. Hmm, that second one is particularly appropriate.

I also want to see if I can stir the pot up a bit here. How do people here feel about the AIDS naysayers? You know, the HIV has nothing to do with AIDS people.

A while ago I looked through a lot of their material, and the people behind it, and I have to admit I was quite surprised at the general respectability of many of the scientific researchers and medical field individuals who have subscribed to this camp of thought. Even the inventor of the test they use to detect viral load denounces this use and says it is like counting bumpers in a car junkyard as a statistic to detect the number of working cars.

To further heighten the mystery, even the mainstream medical thought that ignores the inventor's objections tell us that it is not used as a diagnostic tool for HIV infection because, lo and behold. People who are NOT infected can show viral load. Does this make sense?

There were a great deal of contradictions and unexplained points that were all postulated by these AIDS dissidents as never being challenged or refuted, just ignored and swept under the carpet. I know a lot of this to be definitively true because many organizations, newspapers, telivision stations and magazine have admittedly refused coverage or in depth analysis of the dissenters because it might "confuse" people and lead to unsafe sex. Sounds a bit like the Catholic Church to me.....

Anyhow, I forget a lot of what I read when I was comparing the two points of view, but I left the argument unconvinced one way or the other. Although I have to admit, I was starting to lean towards the dissenters as they were asking some very hard questions I saw no true refutations to. (refutations? Is that a word? )

So, any opinions? enlightenments?

[Skelron]

I've posted this before on a similar topic, and I'll do it again, several mistakes have been made by people here. The following is from The Cafod Website...

That's nice. Now what makes you think that this inoffensive policy is actually being implemented rather than simply being published to deflect criticism, particularly when the Pope continues to assail contraception as contrary to the will of God, and front-line people such as Mother Theresa publicly lauded AIDS as a just punishment for sexual immorality?

1.) Prove that the policy of Cafod is being ignored. The Problem with the Church is that different groups can interpret matters differently. Mother Theresa was weird, on the one hand a real good and kind person the other, well my Aunts Sister left her order of Nuns because of Theresa's erm weirdness I think. (and I in no way want her beutification rushed, but the Pope wants to make his friend a Saint before his death)

2.) Theresa's approach is one alone. Her Policy's are followed only by her specfic order of Nun's a vast minority of the people operating from and for the Church in Africa, Carita's Internationalis and Cafod are FAR more important, AS Theresa only dealt with the Dieing and incurable, not with education or anything else. (That is the remit of her order (The sisters of mercy or something), the order she founded, to grant comfort the to the dying and sick, no where does she speak of education in any form. that is not the role her order was founded to do, therefore they have no part in the frontline War Against HIV/AIDs prevention, when people get to them they are dying a little late for education...)

3.) The Pope's words are not law binding on the church unless he speaks from the throne, they are open to interpretaion by the Cardinals and Bishop's of eachg country. although a certain amount of toeing the line is expected, they are not considered infalliable. A Bishop and Cardinal is allowed to follow their own conscience, as is a Lay member. (The Pope has made about three pronoucments from the Throne, none on Condomns, else the French Cardinal could not be Pro-Condomns officially, he could not speak out in their favour since he would be going against the word of God... etc)

Therefore Prove that the Cafod Site Lies. A Blanket the site lies and then using evidence of Mother Theresa's Personal view on the matter, when she had nothing to do with cafod or the issue. And the Note that the site says it takes into account the view of the Pope by not distrubuting.

Also Qualify Frontline, Cafod is in the Frontline, it raises money here yes, but it also works out there... it dosn't just transmit the money.

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

The problem with prostitution is not that they can't get condoms, it's that they can't use them. The guys simply won't patronize a prostitute that requires them. Most of the hookers know the risks but run them because they have no choice. That's usually the case in survival prostitution. And it's lead to skyrocketing infections rates in Africa, India, and Southeast Asia.

This stems in large part from poor education, which in turn stems from the same taboos I'm talking about. There is life-saving information that nobody wants to teach because they're squeamish or hung-up or blocked by religious beliefs. Did you know that some people in Africa believe that if a person with AIDS fucks a virgin, it will cure him? But even in communities with some kind of school, the subject of sex education is verboten for all the reasons I've mentioned before, so they might as well NOT have schools.

Yes, I have heard that one about Bang a Virgin will cure AIDS. Oh and Another thing I've heard is that Foreskin is the most permiable type of skin to the AIDS virus, and that some tribes Advocate circumsisions(sp) while others dont'. But I think the Main reason why AIDS is b/c there is a lack of the proper medication being proliferated. You can have all the Education, condoms, etc. but without certain drug that can prevent AIDS from spreading from the mother to the child that Leads to more cases of AIDS B/c pracitcally all cultures in Africa Families have lots of children. My mom is one of 12 children in her family (4th Born in 1948).

[Guest]

YES I BLAME THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR EVERYTHING THAT EVER WENT WRONG

Wow, did your preist touch you in naughty places when you were a kid?

My grandmother was a Catholic and she told me some things about their depraved acts that still give me nightmares.

[Stormbringer]

YES I BLAME THE CATHOLIC CHURCH FOR EVERYTHING THAT EVER WENT WRONG

Wow, did your preist touch you in naughty places when you were a kid?

My grandmother was a Catholic and she told me some things about their depraved acts that still give me nightmares.

Sorry, I didn't know.