A cure for AIDS?

[TINNY]

This is actually quite an old discovery. A few decades in fact (1984 by Dr. John Kabara). I'm just wondering why it has not been used widely. It seems quite an astounding discovery, and quite useful too.

Monolaurin is a monoglyceride formed from lauric acid and glycerol. It has anti-viral properties against lipid coated viruses, such as HSV and HIV.

Just search for monolaurin, and you'll find a number of articles.

[Freethinker]

While a medical cure for AIDs is extremely important, the bigger question is what is stopping the effort to reduce it's rapid spread? Boy am I gonna catch it for once more bring the discussion around to....

The number one method that would dramtically reduce the spread of aids is use of condoms. Instead BILLIONS are being spent on efforts that continue to fail.

"the United States, under the Bush administration, has promised the largest amount of any country: $15 billion over five years to African and Caribbean countries. President George W. Bush has attached strings to that money, in effect neutering AIDS education programs."
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12781246&BRD=2318&PAG=461&dept_id= 484045&rfi=6


Religious ideology continues to kill millions. Pretending that Abstenence only promotion is going to solve this problem has been proven to increase the speard of AIDs. But religious leaders have actually stated that AIDs is their god's way of justifyably killing those that don't toe the line. So they don't care how many PEOPLE they kill, just how many SOULS they save along the way.

CURING AIDs after it is caught is not the larger issue. STOPPING the spread IS. RELIGION is the biggest blockaid.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY
"Science without religion is lame."
-Einstein-

Nice tag. Often used by beleivers to pretend someone of unquestionable intellect actually suckered for the same thing they do. But they never want to let you know what the context of the quote is. I t comes from A Symposium, the Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., New York, 1941. Here is more of it for contextual reasons.

"a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation... Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts... a conflict arises when a religious community insists on the absolute truthfulness of all statements recorded in the Bible... science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding.... To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict between religion and science cannot exist, I must nevertheless qualify this assertion once again on an essential point, with reference to the actual content of historical religions. This qualification has to do with the concept of God. During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man's own image, who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence, the phenomenal world. Man sought to alter the disposition of these gods in his own favor by means of magic and prayer. The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. Its anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes. Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history...To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with natural events could never be refuted, in the real sense, by science, for this doctrine can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot. But I am persuaded that such behavior on the part of the representatives of religion would not only be unworthy but also fatal. For a doctrine which is able to maintain itself not in clear light but only in the dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind, with incalculable harm to human progress... And so it seems to me that science not only purifies the religious impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism but also contributes to a religious spiritualization of our understanding of life. <u>The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge</u>."

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://condor.stcloudstate.edu/~lesikar/einstein/Einstein2b.html
">http://condor.stcloudstate.edu/~lesikar/einstein/Einst

[TINNY]

you really cannot resist the temptation to hit people when there's an opportunity, FT.
anyway, what about this from the same website:

However, it must be admitted that our actual knowledge of these laws is only imperfect and fragmentary, so that, actually, the belief in the existence of basic all-embracing laws in Nature also rests on a sort of faith. All the same this faith has been largely justified so far by the success of scientific research. But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: TINNY
you really cannot resist the temptation to hit people when there's an opportunity, FT.

anyway, what about this from the same website:

However, it must be admitted that our actual knowledge of these laws is only imperfect and fragmentary, so that, actually, the belief in the existence of basic all-embracing laws in Nature also rests on a sort of faith. All the same this faith has been largely justified so far by the success of scientific research. But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.

Oh there is lots of interesting things at that site. That yes he did consider natural to be greater than man. But he abhored a personal god concept and spoke out against it regularly.

And we have discussed this alsewhere before and it can be continued there. But I think it would be good to have a discussion about things like AIDs, it's impact and it's spread. Both medically and socio-politically.

For instance, if we could allocate ONE ONEHUNDRETH of the funds diverted to Bush's Iraq war, we could proabaly wipe out the whole problem in a year.

And that does NOT mean more Abstenence only programs.

[pgrmdave]

But the number of people contracting AIDS is falling in the US, it reached a peak in 1993 and has been on a decline since then.
http://www.avert.org/usastaty.htm

The real problems are in places where there is little or no education on the subject, the most notable being africa.

[TINNY]

it's funny how this thread ended up in the computers and technology category. Maybe we should move it to medical science. It's awfully quite there.

[Freethinker]

Originally Posted by pgrmdave

The real problems are in places where there is little or no education on the subject, the most notable being africa.

And interestingly the geography most under attack by Christian Missionaries. Where there is specific effort to stop the very things that could most benefit these people, EDUCATION. Where the religious authorities are doing everythng they can to stop the people most in need from getting an accurate education of and acccess to birth control and safe sex.

One more example of the extreme immorality of religion.

[pgrmdave]

Originally Posted by Freethinker

One more example of the extreme immorality of religion.

Do you mean to imply that religion is only immoral, or simply that there are instances of immorallity within religion? Do you really need me to provide examples of "extreme immorality" of science?

[TINNY]

And interestingly the geography most under attack by Christian Missionaries. Where there is specific effort to stop the very things that could most benefit these people, EDUCATION. Where the religious authorities are doing everythng they can to stop the people most in need from getting an accurate education of and acccess to birth control and safe sex.

One more example of the extreme immorality of religion.

you are so quick to accuse those christians whereas on other subjects, you apply such intellect to analyze and think of the myriad possibilities.

One more example of the extreme biasedness of atheism