Log in

View Full Version : S. African AIDS expert urges Circumcision



coda
26th September 2005, 03:49
S. African AIDS Expert Urges Circumcision


By CLARE NULLIS

CAPE TOWN, South Africa (AP) - A South African AIDS expert Saturday advocated male circumcision as the best available ``vaccine'' against the virus in his country, where an estimated 6 million people are infected and more than 600 people die every day.

Francois Venter told a congress of health activists in the Treatment Action Campaign that a recent survey in the Soweto township indicated that circumcised men were 65 percent less likely to contract AIDS than those who had not been circumcised.

``We dream of a vaccine which has this efficacy,'' said Venter, clinical director of the Reproductive Health and HIV Research at the University of Witwatersrand. ``The results are phenomenal.''

The association between circumcision and a reduced risk of HIV was noted as early as 1987, when Dr. William Cameron of the University of Manitoba in Canada reported findings from a study in Kenya. Some researchers in early studies have said they believe cells in the foreskin may be particularly susceptible to infection.

Venter urged the Treatment Action Campaign, an influential movement of 13,000 activists, to consider promoting circumcision as a vital prevention tool, given that existing methods were failing to slow the spread of the epidemic.


South Africa has the highest number of people living with HIV/AIDS in the world. Nearly 30 percent of pregnant women are infected, according to a health department survey published in July, and in the hardest hit province of KwaZuluNatal this rises to 41 percent. The disease is now one of the main causes of death among young adults and infants.


Some traditional communities in South Africa practice circumcision, but there are calls for tighter medical controls to limit health risks from blunt and contaminated instruments.


``We don't want our men to go to the chop shop but have medical circumcision,'' said Zackie Achmat, an AIDS activist who said the congress - which meets every two years - would debate whether to encourage mass circumcision.


Achmat, who is HIV positive, said much more needed to be done on prevention. He said that even though government distribution of condoms increased from one million in 1994 to 40 million in 2004, this still only amounted to 35 condoms per sexually active male per year.


He said that 73 percent of young people without the virus believed that they were not at risk of catching, and 62 percent of young people with the virus also believed there was no risk.


Achmat criticized the government's record on treatment. Of the 500,000 people who need AIDS therapy, only 76,000 are currently receiving it through the public health sector. The World Health Organization has singled out slow progress in South Africa as one of the main reasons it will likely miss its target of putting 3 million people worldwide on therapy by the end of this year.


``We are dying. We are still dying,'' he said.


Achmat has for years attacked the government for doing too little too late against the AIDS epidemic. In a sign of the mutual antagonism, health ministry officials refused invitations to attend the congress.


``President Thabo Mbeki tragically still shows symptoms of AIDS denialism,'' said Achmat. Mbeki reputedly doubts the link between HIV and AIDS. Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang has repeatedly voiced doubts about the safety and efficacy of antiretrovirals, instead stressing the benefits of a diet heavy in garlic, lemon and olive oil.


The Soweto study, was conducted by French researchers between 2002 and 2005 with more than 3,000 healthy, sexually active males between 18 and 24. About half the volunteers were circumcised by medical professionals, and the rest remained uncircumcised.


All the men received counseling on AIDS prevention. But after 21 months, 51 members of the uncircumcised group had contracted HIV, the AIDS virus, while only 18 members of the circumcised group had gotten the disease.


The World Health Organization and UNAIDS welcomed the results of the study, released at a conference in Brazil in July, but says that more trials should be conducted before circumcision can be recommended as a preventive method.


A study conducted by the U.S. National Health Institute involving 5,000 individuals is now under way in Uganda.



09/25/05 07:27

ÑóẊîöʼn
26th September 2005, 06:46
Personally I'm skeptical, it seems more likely that circumcised men simply have less sex and so are less likely to become infected.

But hey, it doesn't help that the Catholic church is doing it's damn best to prevent the dissemination of proper sex education.

h&s
26th September 2005, 15:49
Yeah. I'd say that this research is most likely to act to hide the cronic lack of funding decent sex-ed programmes have.


Francois Venter told a congress of health activists in the Treatment Action Campaign that a recent survey in the Soweto township indicated that circumcised men were 65 percent less likely to contract AIDS than those who had not been circumcised.
Come on! What the fuck is this? The people who are putting this out know full well that circumcision will not stop a man from contracting HIV.
HIV is a disease subject to many many 'old-wive's tales,' and this will only add to them, which can only be a bad thing.
Anyway, could circumcised men are more likely to be religously devout, and therefore less promiscuous? bet they didn&#39;t want to think of that.... <_<

coda
26th September 2005, 22:26
a nice tight, high cut has just as much sex, functions just as well orgasmically and erectionally, and is no more devoutely religious than any other cock.

:)

Mujer Libre
27th September 2005, 01:47
The reason that circumcision makes contraction of AIDS less likely is that the inner part of the foreskin is mucous-lined, whereas the glans itself is keratinised. Since keratin is harder, the virus has a tougher time entering the skin. With a mucoid surface it just pops straight in.

So circumcision probably DOES reduce the likelihood of transmission. Note that nobody said it would STOP transmission. (They have done studies of Muslim and non-Muslim men in India and it turns out that the rates of AIDS are much lower n Muslim men, despite a similar number of sexual partners and other behaviours)

That said. it is no alternative to education and safe sex. But then again sub-Saharan Africa needs ANYTHING that can help stop the rising infection rates.

JamesMac
27th September 2005, 19:47
It would probably help stop the spread of AIDS if all those infected stopped having sex after finding out.

But then no one would know what the real infection rate was because no one would ask.

HIV/AIDS is not cureable for the individual, but, as a species we could eradicate it.

Just keep your dick in your pants.

Don&#39;t flame, just answer one question - how many and which viral infections can be cured?

Vanguard1917
1st October 2005, 15:52
The reason that circumcision makes contraction of AIDS less likely is that the inner part of the foreskin is mucous-lined, whereas the glans itself is keratinised. Since keratin is harder, the virus has a tougher time entering the skin. With a mucoid surface it just pops straight in.

It has been scientifically proven that circumcision lowers the risk of transmission of HIV.

But that&#39;s not the point. The point is that the AIDS epidemic is wrongly being associated with sexual behaviour. This approach to the problem puts the blame on Africans, particularly African men, who are portrayed as though they are ignorant, irresponsible savages who simply fuck too much. This is a west-orientated - racist - approach.

The truth is that HIV is incredibly difficult to transmit between hetrosexuals who do not practice anal sex. It&#39;s estimated that, for a woman to "catch" HIV from an infected male, the risk is about 0.3% per episode of vaginal intercourse. For a man to "catch" HIV from an infected woman, the risk of tramissions from vaginal sex is about 0.04% per episode. So, the risk of transmission of HIV between hetrosexuals that do not have anal sex (or use intravenous drugs) is actually (contrary to popular belief) very low.

And this is very closely reflected in the demographics of HIV prevalence in the West: HIV is highly "contained" within certain high-risk groups - namely, gay men and intravenous drug users.

This then begs the question: if HIV is not such a problem within the hetrosexual population in the west, why is it so in Africa (and in other impoverished parts of the world)?

The common approach is to say things like: oh, because there aren&#39;t enough condoms; or, even if there were enough condoms, African men don&#39;t like using them; or, African men like to visit brothels, have anal sex with numerous prostitutes, and then bring the disease home to their wives, who then pass it on to their babies during breast-feeding... and so on and so forth.

Some of these arguments are typically postmodernist in the way that they look to "African culture" in order to explain the AIDS epidemic. This is also closely linked to the old imperialist viewpoint that saw Africans as "savages from the dark continent".

What we need to do is to look at HIV just as how we would look at any of the other diseases that kill millions in Africa. We need to argue that the AIDS problem is rooted in poverty. It has its roots in poor hospital sanitation, poor hygiene during birth (there have been cases in Africa where a HIV positive baby is born to parents who are both HIV negative), dirty needles, lack of proper sterilisation, etc.

Unprotected sex is not the cause of AIDS that every westerner thinks it is.