Both are very awful yet I guess I have problems knowing or think I know that when aids first came to light it was because a certain group of people that to me it appears medicines have overcome, stopped, halted, frozen in place AIDs. It appears since groups of people are more prone to getting infected with AIDs that research is more dominate for groups of people. Sure many won't like that I write I feel is true, but the bottom line is this; anyone can get cancer, but HIV and AIDs are due to either being Gay, a drug addict, and then sadly through tainted blood transfusions or birth from a mom who has or had it.
Why is more money geared for one over the other and if I'm wrong then someone please explain why Cancer research hasn't found a cure for cancer and I'm not talking about destructive Chemo and radiation, but about meds as easy as it is to take for AIDS. WHY? I knew a guy about twenty years ago who had full blown Aids and he told me his red blood cell count was below 200, but suddenly science came up with a cocktail. I saw him about five years ago at a local community center, working out, healthy looking and happy. He filled out, was smiling and later told me there isn't any trace of AIDs in his body any more.
He lived nineteen more years(still alive) than a friend recently who was told he would have, possibly five years and a year and a half later is gone. What's wrong here? Does it pay to be a promiscuous person who never gave a thought to transmitting to others, and not pay to be a solid upstanding young father? What's wrong?
Why is more money geared for one over the other and if I'm wrong then someone please explain why Cancer research hasn't found a cure for cancer and I'm not talking about destructive Chemo and radiation, but about meds as easy as it is to take for AIDS. WHY? I knew a guy about twenty years ago who had full blown Aids and he told me his red blood cell count was below 200, but suddenly science came up with a cocktail. I saw him about five years ago at a local community center, working out, healthy looking and happy. He filled out, was smiling and later told me there isn't any trace of AIDs in his body any more.
He lived nineteen more years(still alive) than a friend recently who was told he would have, possibly five years and a year and a half later is gone. What's wrong here? Does it pay to be a promiscuous person who never gave a thought to transmitting to others, and not pay to be a solid upstanding young father? What's wrong?
No comments:
Post a Comment