United States Discriminates Against HIV+ People

I appreciate people's sentiments and compassion for those who are HIV+, but I think you need to consider the well-being and health of those who are not affected with HIV.

With regards to my comments, United States Discriminates Against HIV+ People; I received the following information from the Migration Health Services International Organization for Migration (IOM), Geneva Switzerland.

UNAIDS/IOM Statement on HIV/AIDS-related Travel Restrictions, June 2004
http://www.iom.int/en/PDF_Files/HIVAIDS/UNAIDS_IOM_statement_travel_restrictions.pdf

Under scientific scrutiny some like Peter Duesberg are still questioning "acquired immunity."

It is bad enough that people like this poster are forbidden to cross borders - but after twenty years under the onus of your diagnoses it is even worse to think that the syndrome is an invitation to kill people with treatments that are worse than the complaint.

Look at those CIA statistics. I can do the math in my head. Canada has fewer deaths in proportion to the diagnoses.

Is it that the air is better? Maybe fewer common colds.


http://www.duesberg.com/

I don't want to seem an insensitve pr**k here, but we are talking about allowing carriers of a COMMUNICABLE and FATAL disease into the country?

I know HIV and AIDS carriers have become the 'cause celeb' of the moment and it seem that anyone not voluntarily wearing 'The Ribbon' or anyone who says anything even mildly critical of the whole HIV/AIDS bandwagon is villified as a 'heartless monster'.

I'm sorry, but I don't see a problem with the whole restriction thing.

You cant come into this country if you have tuberculosis, and that is a disease with a much lower death rate than from AIDS.

The health restrictions at the borders are the U.S. governments DUTY. This is to ensure the protection of the citizens of the United States against contact with avoidable diseases.


I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but I believe that this is what the government is paid to do...

Protect it's citizens.

I have the advantage that my fahther was the leading surgeon of a great tuberculosis hospital and I myslef worked a couple of years in the field of HIV/AIDS prevention.

Thus I might know a bit more about these diseases than an average person.

I can assure that the kind of how you can get infected by someone with tuberculosis is totally different to getting infected by someone with HIV - the latter actually should (and could ) never happen, nowadays.

to Fedral;

It is the responsibility of each and every person to use protection ( condoms) against contact with HIV which is an avoidable disease; not the responsibility of the government!

Education is necessary,! Prevention is necessary! Not a discriminating ban preventing entry into the United States.

If, as you say, the health restrictions at the borders are the U.S. governments DUTY, then why is the United States allowing Americans infected the freedom to leave the United States and visit other countries?

I'm not trying to seem like the Devils Advocate here, but there are other ways of passing the virus to others around you.

Are you saying that if you are hurt or cut during your stay in the U.S. that there is NO chance of you infecting others via blood contact?

Are you saying that if you collapse on the street and some 'good samaritan' like myself, who is trained in CPR, gives you mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, there is NO chance of infection?

What if you are sick in a restaurant or hotel and vomit, are you saying that there is NO danger for the housekeeping staff while coming into contact with you 'bodily fluids'?

There seems to be a prevalent myth here that sex is the only method of transmission, when it is clearly not.

I used to work for Walt Disney World many years ago and I was well aware of the dangers of coming into contact with hepatitis carriers.

Please excuse some of us if we do not want to increase the risk of our daily lives by allowing free entry into the U.S. of people carrying a FATAL and COMMUNICABLE disease.

believe me, I feel great compassion for you, but compassion does NOT mean I have to constantly expose myself to you in the name of 'political correctness'.

To all of the above: rarely.

I mean, of course there is a change that I'm hit be a meteroid ...

I believe the law was instated to keep boat loads of African refugees from being able to claim refugee status by touching American soil. I doubt it was created to keep a specific Canadian out of the country.

And, Fedral, if you really have such fears: why could this only happen with non-US-citizens???

It could, but we do not have to INCREASE the likelyhood of it happening by opening our borders to anyone.

There is always the CHANCE of a fire starting in my house, I don't have to increase that risk by allowing my neighbors to dump their old oil soaked rags in my living room or dropping gasoline over my kitchen floor.

There is always the CHANCE of getting hit by a car , but I do not have to increase that risk by putting on dark sunglasses and running onto the Autobahn at night.

The United States government has a responsibility to protect it's citizens. As far as I am concerned, this is just part of their obligation to me.

In 1981-82 the fear of an unknown illness set the tone; fear- from ignorance!

When I first was tested, there were concerns of individuals being quarantined, or individuals infected put on a government list. My family was concerned for me that I even had the test! Fearing what might happen to me if the test came out positive for HIV.

Since the mid 80's, we have had a much broader understanding of HIV and AIDS: in that understanding recognizing the virus and how it is spread.

It is ignorance about HIV that has fueled stigma and discrimination. The United States ban does just that and this ban means; that people infected have to continually fight against stigma and discrimination. It is more than time to put a stop to this ridiculous and incorrect thinking around HIV and AIDS.

Bradford, your post was very well written and thought out. It also fails to address ANY of the concerns that some people have and I wrote in my earlier post.

Page back and tell me whether my concerns are unfounded, and if they are, show me medical proof as to how those concerns are without merit.

I do not presume to speak for anyone but myself, but I know from discussions I have had with friends and coworkers, the concerns that I posted are on peoples minds.

I have seen what this disease can do to you. Three of my fellow cast members in my department at Disney got it. I watched two of them slowly deteriorate until they were but shells of their former selves. The third killed himself once he became symptomatic.

So forgive me if I want to protect myself and my loved ones from additional risk of infection from you and your fellow victims.

Funny, but the US government doesn't discriminate against people coming over the border from Mexico who carry a wide variety of illnesses, including cholera, measles, and typhoid.

If your HIV virus is treated and undetectable, then you pose no risk to anyone.

Maybe you should lie about your sero-status? Heck, Bush has been lying about everything for 57 years and no one seems the least bit concerned.

Fedral, you're doing a bang-up job of speaking for me. I agree with what you've said here.

To Federal;

There are instances (mentioned in my original post) where on rare occasions an accident occurs and a doctor, nurse, health care, worker may be infected. It may even be, although rare, in any of the circumstances you mentioned.

But to blatantly discriminate against all HIV+ people is not a humane way to deal with the situation.

On another note; you may see me as a victim, I do not! I have lived long ( 20 years HIV+) and I have worked hard to break down the barriers of fear and discrimination in my own life and for the sake of others.

I am healthy and on HIV medications. I do not have any detectable virus. I'm married and not having sex with other people. However, years ago when I was single and HIV+, not one person in a ten year period, ever brought up using protection! It was always me who would bring it up. Even though we have known since 1982 how HIV is spread, people still do not understand or prevent the spread of HIV.

I am tired of hearing the own ness being placed on HIV+ people to insure safe sex is practiced. The risks generally come from having unprotected sex, and otherwise there is no real threat to you or your family.

The U.S. government has not educated people to fully understand HIV. Instead of questioning a ridiculous ban, you should be educating yourself and those you know; to have a better understanding of HIV and AIDS.

Equally important, you should be contacting your government and demanding that HIV education be forefront and denounce your presidents stand using Abstinence as a way of preventing the spread of HIV.

Do you know that your President denies the necessary funds to organizations that promote the use of condoms as a method of prevention?

People need to be informed with proper information.

Bradford
you're doing a bang-up job of speaking for me. I agree with what you've said here. :wink:

(No, I'm not HIV+, and I'm totally heterosexual. But I've worked for nearly 10 years as a professional in AIDS prevention, academically and "in the fields".)

I think the point being missed here is that the law is not aimed at people like Bradford, he is merely collateral damage.

Imagine what would happen if the hundreds of thousands of HIV+ Haitians or africans decided to emigrate to the US. The law stops that because not everyone is as careful and open with their disease. The greater good has to be looked after regardless of the effects on the individual.

In speaking with my friends, we all agree that if the American government was to screen all American residents for HIV and ban those found to be HIV+ from leaving the country for any reason............there would be a public outcry and said ban would never be imposed!