Apple Honors World AIDS Day for the Fifth Year With Red Store Logos

[AppleFan360]

Yes, gay men have a higher risk of contracting HIV. Why? Because they're more promiscuous.

That's not really totally true. It's more about the fact that unprotected anal sex carries the highest risk of contracting the disease.

People preach how HIV affects everyone. That's not really true either. Unless done through a blood transfusion or needle, any couple who has been tested and are monogamous will NEVER get HIV. Period.

 

[bandrews]

That's not really totally true. It's more about the fact that unprotected anal sex carries the highest risk of contracting the disease.

Yes, you are right, that is a major factor. And straight couples do that too.

 

[Mums]

So you're taking the word of the man who claims to have isolated this alleged unisolated virus, meaning that he's a liar by your own admission, as fact because he now claims it's harmless?

Their confusion, not mine.

 

[Renzatic]

Their confusion, not mine.

No, it's your confusion because you're using him as a source to prove your point. By the merits of his achievements do you consider his opinions on the matter worthwhile. If he didn't isolate HIV, then his opinion that it's harmless wouldn't carry so much weight. But you're also saying that his achievements are a basically lie, because per your statement, no one has actually isolated HIV yet.

You're contradicting yourself by being so selective about what to believe from the same source.

 

[.Andy]

Her daughter was poisoned by a criminal doctor.

She died from pneumonia caused by an AIDS-defining illness because her little immune system was not working. Directly caused by the HIV she contracted from her mother who was breast-feeding despite warnings against it. It is the sad result of HIV denialism. The only people to blame are Maggiore and those who perpetuated her delusion.

 

[.Andy]

No, it's your confusion because you're using him as a source to prove your point. By the merits of his achievements do you consider his opinions on the matter worthwhile. If he didn't isolate HIV, then his opinion that it's harmless wouldn't carry so much weight. But you're also saying that his achievements are a basically lie, because per your statement, no one has actually isolated HIV yet.

You're contradicting yourself by being so selective about what to believe from the same source.

The virus has been isolated. Mums is confusing not satisfying Koch's Postulates with the virus not being identified.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17326-five-myths-about-hiv-and-aids/

Sad that deniers still exist. The medications have made wonderful progress.

 

[mentaluproar]

The virus has been isolated. Mums is confusing not satisfying Koch's Postulates with the virus not being identified.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17326-five-myths-about-hiv-and-aids/

Sad that deniers still exist. The medications have made wonderful progress.

I am amazed she actually believes this. This is anti-vaxxer level crazy.

 

[Renzatic]

The virus has been isolated. Mums is confusing not satisfying Koch's Postulates with the virus not being identified.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17326-five-myths-about-hiv-and-aids/

Sad that deniers still exist. The medications have made wonderful progress.

If I were to give him the benefit of the doubt, I'd say that he's correct that HIV is "harmless", at least in the sense that it has no symptoms. As far as I know, you feel fine while it slowly disables your immune system. And AIDs isn't a virus itself, but the stage of the disease where you start catching other diseases that no one would get without having compromised immunity.

No one actually dies from AIDS, nor do they die from HIV. They die from complication brought about from contracting HIV, of which we call the final stage of the illness AIDS.

If it were anyone else but Mums, I'd say they're just grossly mistaken, and are reading too much into the aside facts. But it's Mums, and everything's a conspiracy.

 

[0098386]

I used to joke when people posted "all lives matter!" as a reaction to "black lives matter"; "all diseases matter!" and to urge people not to donate to cancer charities or that Ice Bucket Challenge type awareness campaign. I never thought it would actually come true, never thought I'd see the day where a serious problem facing innocent people becomes a game of Disease Top Trumps.

Very sad.

 

[Mums]

She died from pneumonia caused by an AIDS-defining illness because her little immune system was not working. Directly caused by the HIV she contracted from her mother who was breast-feeding despite warnings against it. It is the sad result of HIV denialism. The only people to blame are Maggiore and those who perpetuated her delusion.

That is the official story. You are touting untruths. Perhaps you work for Big Pharma?

 

[Mums]

No, it's your confusion because you're using him as a source to prove your point. By the merits of his achievements do you consider his opinions on the matter worthwhile. If he didn't isolate HIV, then his opinion that it's harmless wouldn't carry so much weight. But you're also saying that his achievements are a basically lie, because per your statement, no one has actually isolated HIV yet.

You're contradicting yourself by being so selective about what to believe from the same source.

Absolutely incorrect. It is the story that is oxymoronic: "Discoverer" of "HIV", which has never been isolated, states "HIV" is "harmless". The whole "AIDS" narrative is like Swiss cheese.

 

[.Andy]

That is the official story. You are touting untruths. Perhaps you work for Big Pharma?

I work for big tin foil. It is far more profitable. My customers believe anything.

 

[tevion5]

Nice theory there, Social Darwin, but the one thing you're not accounting for is that some can go months on end without realizing they're infected. HIV has no outward symptoms in its initial stages.

Ehm, thats not my instant concern for his tactic. If we wanted to get rid of huge amount of all diseases we could certainly just let all infected humans die. If everyone stayed in a separate quarantine chamber for a month people would almost never get sick ever again.

However, this would result in the deaths of millions of people that would fail to get medical care! This is basically eugenics and institutional darwinism. It is literally the opposite of modern medicine.

Should we shoot all forms of criminals right away? There would be very little crime. But what sort of world would that be? Health and safety would mean nothing in a planet with nothing to live for.

 

[Renzatic]

However, this would result in the deaths of millions of people that would fail to get medical care! This is basically eugenics and institutional darwinism. It is literally the opposite of modern medicine.

Should we shoot all forms of criminals right away? There would be very little crime. But what sort of world would that be? Health and safety would mean nothing in a planet with nothing to live for.

Gaw, this forum sometimes.

Neverminding the fact his idea is inhumane, it's also unworkable. To round up the amount of people necessary to contain any disease as widespread as HIV would require a massive amount of money and manpower to achieve. Not only that, but you're more directly exposing people to said diseases, which means it'll end being more likely spread. Attempting to solve the problem through brute force quarantine would do nothing but make things worse.

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

That's pretty cold.

Limited dollars for research. Cancer hits kids and young people through no fault of their own.

Whereas, according to the CDC:

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) of all races and ethnicities remain the population most profoundly affected by HIV.
​

Incidents of HIV could be greatly reduced simply by practicing safe sex.

Apple should be giving their support to help kids afflicted with leukemia.

 

[Mums]

I work for big tin foil. It is far more profitable. My customers believe anything.

The truth at last! Thank you for admitting that "HIV" / "AIDS" is a hoax.

 

[bandrews]

Limited dollars for research. Cancer hits kids and young people through no fault of their own.

Whereas, according to the CDC:

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) of all races and ethnicities remain the population most profoundly affected by HIV.
​

In the US.

However in the rest of the world:


https://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids-101/global-statistics/

 

[sim667]

Limited dollars for research. Cancer hits kids and young people through no fault of their own.

Whereas, according to the CDC:

Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) of all races and ethnicities remain the population most profoundly affected by HIV.
​

Incidents of HIV could be greatly reduced simply by practicing safe sex.

Apple should be giving their support to help kids afflicted with leukemia.

Around 37 million worldwide liv with AIDS, around 70% of that is sub saharan African, and about half the total number don't know they have it. 22 million do not have any access to treatment. 1.8 million of that 22 are kids.

So 1.2 million in America, most of whom have access to treatment (whether they can afford it or not is a different matter) is probably a. Not who this campaign is aimed at, b. A drop in the ocean when looking at HIV stats worldwide.

There are more kids with HIV and no access to treatment, then there are the entire number of people in the US who you're trying to use to justify why apple shouldn't be supporting. Frankly I am disgusted with your post.

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

Around 37 million worldwide liv with AIDS, around 70% of that is sub saharan African, and about half the total number don't know they have it. 22 million do not have any access to treatment. 1.8 million of that 22 are kids.

So 1.2 million in America, most of whom have access to treatment (whether they can afford it or not is a different matter) is probably a. Not who this campaign is aimed at, b. A drop in the ocean when looking at HIV stats worldwide.

There are more kids with HIV and no access to treatment, then there are the entire number of people in the US who you're trying to use to justify why apple shouldn't be supporting. Frankly I am disgusted with your post.

I said:

Apple should be giving their support to help kids afflicted with leukemia.
​

You said:

Frankly I am disgusted with your post.
​

I'm in favor of curing kids who got cancer through just being alive. AIDs can be prevented by safe sex and not sharing needles.

If we're comparing numbers, let's expand curing leukemia to curing cancer in general. Such a cure would save tens of millions of lives:

Each year globally, about 14 million people learn they have cancer, and 8 million people die from the disease. Research suggests that one-third of cancer deaths can be prevented, but sometimes services and technologies are not widely available, especially in low- and middle-income countries.
​

Many of the same problems with preventing HIV also apply to preventing deaths from cancer. Why are those people less deserving of Apple's support?

 

[bandrews]

I said:

Apple should be giving their support to help kids afflicted with leukemia.
​

You said:

Frankly I am disgusted with your post.
​

I'm in favor of curing kids who got cancer through just being alive. AIDs can be prevented by safe sex and not sharing needles.

If we're comparing numbers, let's expand curing leukemia to curing cancer in general. Such a cure would save tens of millions of lives:

Each year globally, about 14 million people learn they have cancer, and 8 million people die from the disease. Research suggests that one-third of cancer deaths can be prevented, but sometimes services and technologies are not widely available, especially in low- and middle-income countries.
​

Many of the same problems with preventing HIV also apply to preventing cancer. Why are those people less deserving of Apple's support?

Your selective comprehension knows no bounds does it?

I'll requote the post from @sim667 for you

Around 37 million worldwide liv with AIDS, around 70% of that is sub saharan African, and about half the total number don't know they have it. 22 million do not have any access to treatment. 1.8 million of that 22 are kids.

So 1.2 million in America, most of whom have access to treatment (whether they can afford it or not is a different matter) is probably a. Not who this campaign is aimed at, b. A drop in the ocean when looking at HIV stats worldwide.

There are more kids with HIV and no access to treatment, then there are the entire number of people in the US who you're trying to use to justify why apple shouldn't be supporting. Frankly I am disgusted with your post.

This is from the (RED) website:

OUR MANIFESTO
Every Generation is known for something.
Let’s be the one to deliver an AIDS FREE GENERATION.

We all have tremendous power. What we choose to do or even buy, can affect someone’s life on the other side of the world. In 2002, more than 1,500 babies were born every day with HIV. Today that number is just over 600. We must act now to get that close to zero.

We’re at a tipping point in the fight against AIDS – with urgency and action, it’s possible for the world to end the transmission of HIV from moms to their babies. We can deliver the first AIDS FREE GENERATION in over thirty years.

(RED) can’t accomplish this alone. It will take all of us to get there –governments, health organizations, companies, and you. When you DO THE (RED) THING, a (RED) partner will give up some of its profits to fight AIDS.

It’s as simple as that.

BE (RED). Start the end of AIDS now.

Not one mention of gays.

He said nothing about helping kids with leukaemia being disgusting.

 

[AppleFan360]

Not one mention of gays.

They aren't stupid. You really think they want an element of controversy into the equation?

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

Your selective comprehension knows no bounds does it?

Actually, you're the one with selective comprehension, as what follows will amply illustrate:

I'll requote the post from @sim667 for you

What I said is that AIDs can be prevented by safe sex and not sharing needles. The children born with HIV are like crack babies: saddled with the consequences of their parents' bad behavior.

Kids with leukemia, and people with cancer in general, get cancer just by living, so their behavior is generally not what caused their disease.

@sim667 made the issue one of numbers, so I pointed out that cancer is far more prevalent and that many more die of it each year compared with HIV.

This is from the (RED) website:

Not one mention of gays.

And here we come to that selective comprehension problem of yours: I mentioned gays not once. Why did you bring them up? Is it that you associate unsafe sex and needle sharing with gays? That's pretty prejudiced.

He said nothing about helping kids with leukaemia being disgusting.

He called my post disgusting when all I'd said was that AIDs can be prevented by not indulging in risky behavior, whereas kids with leukemia can't do anything to prevent their disease, and so Apple should support curing leukemia at least.

 

[Renzatic]

Many of the same problems with preventing HIV also apply to preventing deaths from cancer. Why are those people less deserving of Apple's support?

No one's less deserving of Apple's support. They just need to start up a good charity, and court them if they want their money.

This goes back to what I said earlier. Just because they support one charity doesn't mean they have to exclude the rest by necessity.

 

[DUCKofD3ATH]

No one's less deserving of Apple's support. They just need to start up a good charity, and court them if they want their money.

This goes back to what I said earlier. Just because they support one charity doesn't mean they have to exclude the rest by necessity.

But why focus on AIDs to the exclusion of other charities? Apple's famous for not having had a charitable foundation while Steve was running things, so what made Tim select AIDs instead of, say, childhood leukemia?

 

[Renzatic]

But why focus on AIDs to the exclusion of other charities? Apple's famous for not having had a charitable foundation while Steve was running things, so what made Tim select AIDs instead of, say, childhood leukemia?

My first guess? Bono.