Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

forget sexy, Obama is bringing science back

58 posts in this topic

Posted

why do you keep posting this and not mentioning that it was all tied to those countries teaching abstinence only education, which almost certainly increased the rate of HIV infection?

not yet and that's probably not where their primary application will lie. (it doesn't make sense, for example, to treat rapidly reproducing cells with...more cells?) however, they're already using them to grow peoples' jaws back and human cells were used in rats to repair spinal chord damage in rats so it's difficult to say this is anything but the most promising and exciting breakthrough in medicine since, oh, I don't know, daily baths.

I only posted it once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I only posted it once.

oh sorry last time you used different articles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yes ... the Web site I linked is the National Institutes of Health, and if you will do your research, you will know that none of these diseases have been cured by stem cells -- adult or embryonic.

you're wrong.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08021209.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Not sure where you got your information from, but its seems to be incorrect for the most part. There is nothing wrong with teaching abstinence as long as it is not the only thing taught. It is the best and easiest way to avoid std's. Of course, that is not the only prevention method they teach, and only a small part of the budget is spent on teaching abstinence.

If you want to criticise GWB, be my guest. He certainly deserves a lot of criticism for a lot of things, but funding for medical research is not one of them.

US funding for Aids research and other disease went to virtually every country in the African continent and many other nations throughout the world. The primary recipients were 15 core nations, that included South Africa, Vietnam, Mozambique Tanzania among others.

PEPFAR has fielded domestic criticism from some Democrats and international activists for spending a portion of funding on abstinence-until-marriage programs and for placing conditions on other funds. Some political conservatives have criticized the program for what they consider the general inefficacy of foreign aid

Prefar (President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief)

To slow the spread of the epidemic, PEPFAR supports a variety of prevention programs: the ABC approach (Abstain, Be faithful, and correct and consistent use of Condoms); prevention of mother to child transmission (PMTCT) interventions; and programs focusing on blood safety, injection safety, secondary prevention ("prevention with positives"), counseling and education.

Initially, a recommended 20% of the PEPFAR budget was to be spent on prevention, with the remaining 80% going to care and treatment, laboratory support, antiretroviral drugs, TB/HIV services, support for orphans and vulnerable children (OVC), infrastructure, training, and other related services. Of the 20% spent on prevention, one third was to be spent on abstinence-until-marriage programs in fiscal years 2006 through 2008, a controversial requirement. The other two thirds was allotted for the widespread array of prevention interventions described above, including counseling, education, injection safety, blood safety and condoms.

The 2008 reathorisation of PEPFAR eliminated both the 20% recommendation for prevention efforts and the 33% requirement for abstinence programs.

International Aids Malaria and TB research

Pepfar

PEPFAR "has literally saved millions of lives," said Peter Piot, who stepped down at the end of last year after 13 years as head of the UN agency UNAIDS.

"In my mind, there's no doubt that Bush's legacy on AIDS is very positive."

Tachi Yamada, president of the Global Health Programme at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, said PEPFAR and Bush's malaria initiative "are real success stories."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

do you really not understand why, until 2008, requiring that one-third of all money be spent on absintence only education which as a prereq does things like blatantly lie and restrict access to contraceptives and lies about their effectiveness in a continent ravaged by fuging aids?

this happened in the united states

In 2004, California Representative Henry A. Waxman led an investigation of abstinence-only education programs funded by the federal government. The investigation, titled “The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs,” found that 80% of curricula used by two-thirds of SPRANS grantees contained false, misleading, or distorted information about reproductive health.

The report looked at 13 abstinence-only sexual education curricula, and found errors in scientific information presented by 11 of them. Many contained errors regarding HIV prevention and the effectiveness of condoms.

According to the CDC, “Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing the transmission of HIV.” According to the Waxman report, multiple abstinence-only curricula use a 1993 study by Dr. Susan Weller which found that condoms reduce risk by 69%, using an analysis which both the FDA and the CDC found erroneous. One abstinence-only curriculum, “I’m in charge of the FACTS” claims that “The actual ability of condoms to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS, even if the product is intact, is not definitively known.”

yes, not having sex is the only certain way to stop the spread of STDs......in theory. In reality, it doesn't fuging work.

WASHINGTON - Programs that focus exclusively on abstinence have not been shown to affect teenager sexual behavior, although they are eligible for tens of millions of dollars in federal grants, according to a study released by a nonpartisan group that seeks to reduce teen pregnancies.

"At present there does not exist any strong evidence that any abstinence program delays the initiation of sex, hastens the return to abstinence or reduces the number of sexual partners" among teenagers, the study concluded.

http://www.thebody.com/content/art32960.html#7

# The most rigorous published review to date of 28 sex education programs in the United States and Canada aimed at reducing teen pregnancy and STDs, including HIV, found that none of the three abstinence-only programs that met inclusion criteria for review demonstrated evidence of efficacy for delaying sexual debut.6

# Furthermore, these three programs did not reduce the frequency of sex or the number of partners among those students who had ever had sex.6

lol even abstinence pledges just make kids stupid

e study also found that those young people who took a pledge were one third less likely to use contraception when they did become sexually active than their peers who had not pledged. These teens are, therefore, more vulnerable to HIV, other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and unintended pregnancy. Further research has confirmed that young people who have taken a pledge are equally as likely to contract an STD as their non-pledging peers. The data also shows that in communities where “too many” adolescents (20%) take a virginity pledge, overall STD rates were significantly higher than in other settings.

you know what has been proven to work? CONDOMS!

ut according to Guttmacher, condom use did significantly increase from an almost negligible rate in 1988 to almost 40% in 1995 among unmarried women 15-19 years old and there were massive increases in condom use across the board for all age groups, for both sexes, and even for married couples in the same time period. Such an impact of essentially introducing condoms into a population where their use was almost nonexistent in 1988 and the subsequent fall in HIV rates is hard to downplay

but by all means ignore overwhelming observable evidence and conjecture and continue to keep yourself uninformed so you can keep on cheerleading programs that were only successful assuming the observer keeps himself in the dark as much as possible.

to appeal to your supposed conservative side, you're basically praising a guy for pumping federal money into something everyone knew DIDN'T WORK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think that Dubya did not do all that bad in that department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's one case, which doesn't mean a lot. Where are your "thousands" who have been cured of all the diseases you listed. I'm particularly, personally, interested in the cure of diabetes.

You're trusting that one case over the NIH, the experts in the field. OK ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

that was just the first google search result, i'll leave the next 10 pages of them up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

that was just the first google search result, i'll leave the next 10 pages of them up to you.

Translation: Rodeo can't back up his own statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's it; I'm drinking a glass of fresh squeezed fetus juice every morning!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's it; I'm drinking a glass of fresh squeezed fetus juice every morning!

Raw eggs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites