the end of HIV?

[dragonstar57]

is it right to get rid of everyone with HIV/AIDS in order to protect those that don't?

[insane_alien]

nope. not when prevention of the spread of HIV can be achieved by much more agreeable means.

 

condoms over elimination.

[dragonstar57]

nope. not when prevention of the spread of HIV can be achieved by much more agreeable means.

 

condoms over elimination.

but those are not fool proof.

[insane_alien]

neither is extermination as some will slip through the net.

 

its also infinitely more palatable than extermination.

[Mr Skeptic]

If you make HIV a condition that will make you hunted down like a criminal and killed, guess how many are going to volunteer to be a part of this process vs how many would hide their condition as best they could? In addition, some people would probably purposely infect others, just to rub in how nasty killing people is. A bloody dart thrown at one of the politicians responsible for such a policy, for example.

 

The policy of exterminating infected people might be OK for some fast-acting fatal plague with visible symptoms, but even then quarantine would be better if possible. Burning dead bodies, on the other hand, is definitely a good idea in certain circumstances.

[Dak]

it can be treated relatively well. A cure should be available at some point before it eradicates us completely.

 

Maybe discreetly marking the infected, but Mr. Skeptic's point about not coming forward still applies to that...

 

A better approach might just be to try and make the treatments available cheaper in places like Africa.

[dragonstar57]

it can be treated relatively well. A cure should be available at some point before it eradicates us completely.

 

Maybe discreetly marking the infected, but Mr. Skeptic's point about not coming forward still applies to that...

 

A better approach might just be to try and make the treatments available cheaper in places like Africa.

perhaps some kind of stamp that would only show up under u.v light?

or a public list?