I learned a great deal of information in this course. I have never taken a health class besides the general sex ed class in high school. I found this course very interesting. I learned a lot about the STI's globally and a little bit about how they affect Americans. It would have been nice to cover more of the social affects of STI's within the United States, but I know that this is a globally focused course. I also was very interested in learning about the origins of HIV/AIDS. Until this class I had always known the disease came from chimpanzees but I was unaware of how they were linked to it. After having taken this class I understand the history of the disease much better.
One thing I do think needs to be covered more is how people are currently dealing with HIV/AIDS and how people cope with it on a daily basis. Also, more information on what type of research is being conducted today to find a cure would be interesting.
This class is definitely beneficial at a university level. College students are among the most risky group for transmitting STI's and that's mostly because of lack of education. If everyone were to take this course I'm sure the spread of STI's would decrease. However, I also think it would be even better to teach this course in high school. High school students participate in many risky behaviors as well and teaching people protection methods and causes of their actions at a young age would result in even less people infected with an STI.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Living with HIV
I found Bob Skinner's presentation about living with HIV very interesting. I would have liked to hear more about his daily life and less about his political views on the issue, but I suppose his political views are currently playing a major role in how he is able to live his life.
One thing I learned from Bob is that it is quite possible to live a long life being HIV positive. He was diagnosed nine years ago and seems to still be going strong. Also, I found it interesting that he is still sexually active. I would think a person with HIV would not want to be sexually active at all because there is always the risk of spreading it to others even if a condom is used. But that is Bob's personal choice and the public doesn't really have any right to say whether or not he's right. I think Bob represents the stereotypical HIV positive person. He was a promiscuous gay man diagnosed with HIV. In the beginning, it was thought that gay men were the only carriers of this disease, but we have learned this to be false. I also think that Bob represents a population that is very lucky to be able to afford the medication. I know he does not pay for the pills himself, but his government is able to do so. Many other people are not able to rely on their governments for the medication when they do not have the money. Therefore Bob is able to live a longer life because he lives in the United States.
In rural regions it seems that HIV is mostly transmitted through heterosexual intercourse. The cause for this is because often times women in these rural areas are afraid to ask their partners to wear condoms because that could mean that either they are being unfaithful or they are accusing their partners of being unfaithful. In either case, women in these rural areas are less likely to ask for protection.
Also, there are other factors that play into the HIV epidemic in rural areas. A lot of places do not provide adequate nutrition and sanitary needs to HIV positive people. With a lack of proper diet and exercise, HIV is more likely to take over ones body and become AIDS. Another problem is that there are not many medical facilities in rural areas for people to get the attention they need. All of these factors affect how common HIV is in rural areas.
One thing I learned from Bob is that it is quite possible to live a long life being HIV positive. He was diagnosed nine years ago and seems to still be going strong. Also, I found it interesting that he is still sexually active. I would think a person with HIV would not want to be sexually active at all because there is always the risk of spreading it to others even if a condom is used. But that is Bob's personal choice and the public doesn't really have any right to say whether or not he's right. I think Bob represents the stereotypical HIV positive person. He was a promiscuous gay man diagnosed with HIV. In the beginning, it was thought that gay men were the only carriers of this disease, but we have learned this to be false. I also think that Bob represents a population that is very lucky to be able to afford the medication. I know he does not pay for the pills himself, but his government is able to do so. Many other people are not able to rely on their governments for the medication when they do not have the money. Therefore Bob is able to live a longer life because he lives in the United States.
In rural regions it seems that HIV is mostly transmitted through heterosexual intercourse. The cause for this is because often times women in these rural areas are afraid to ask their partners to wear condoms because that could mean that either they are being unfaithful or they are accusing their partners of being unfaithful. In either case, women in these rural areas are less likely to ask for protection.
Also, there are other factors that play into the HIV epidemic in rural areas. A lot of places do not provide adequate nutrition and sanitary needs to HIV positive people. With a lack of proper diet and exercise, HIV is more likely to take over ones body and become AIDS. Another problem is that there are not many medical facilities in rural areas for people to get the attention they need. All of these factors affect how common HIV is in rural areas.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
HIV Theories
The "Hunter" Theory, The OPV Theory, and The Conspiracy Theory all give various accounts as to how HIV originated and the cause of HIV. Both the "Hunter" theory and the OPV theory include the idea that HIV is a mutated form of SIV which is found in chimpanzees in Cameroon. However, the "Hunter" theory dates back further which explains earlier cases than the OPV theory does. Also, the "Hunter" theory accounts for there being various strands of HIV while OPV doesn't. The Conspiracy theory seems completely bogus to me and from reading that brief paragraph on it, it does not appear to have any factual information backing it so I'm kind of confused as to why it is even considered a legitimate theory. If the conspiracy theory were true then why are there different strands of HIV in the world today, and how is it linked to the chimpanzee disease SIV?
Clearly I do not think that the conspiracy theory is very plausible at all. However, both the OPV and the "Hunter" theory seem quite plausible. I understand that the OPV theory does not account for earlier cases of HIV, but I'm curious as to how certain researchers are that there were earlier cases of HIV. It seems that with our limited knowledge of HIV that both explanations are plausible.
I do think it is important for people to continue researching the beginnings of HIV. In order for us to fully understand its mutations and developments within the human species, we have to know where it started. Also, discovering more information on the origins of this disease could help lead to better treatment, preventions methods, or maybe even a cure.
Clearly I do not think that the conspiracy theory is very plausible at all. However, both the OPV and the "Hunter" theory seem quite plausible. I understand that the OPV theory does not account for earlier cases of HIV, but I'm curious as to how certain researchers are that there were earlier cases of HIV. It seems that with our limited knowledge of HIV that both explanations are plausible.
I do think it is important for people to continue researching the beginnings of HIV. In order for us to fully understand its mutations and developments within the human species, we have to know where it started. Also, discovering more information on the origins of this disease could help lead to better treatment, preventions methods, or maybe even a cure.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
What about white priviledge?
The article in white privilege was very thought provoking. It discussed the concept that racism is not merely the act of certain people being held back, but also the act of white people have certain advantages that aren't ever noticed. Many of the advantages that McIntosh speaks of are things that happen in everyday life that people do not notice. She goes on to lay out many instances where white people have privileges over colored people. Some of these examples include; shopping without being followed or harassed, living in a neighborhood where white race is dominant and not being judged by your neighbors, and being able to find food at the grocery store which fit ones cultural traditions. All of these things are privileges whether white people like to acknowledge them or not. McIntosh goes on the discuss that white people will have to end up giving up some of there privileges in order for different races to not be oppressed any more.
I for one I have never paid much attention to the fact that I am around white people most of the day, most of my neighbors are white, and the people I work worth are all white. These types of things make everyday life for me more comfortable. I do agree with McIntosh in the fact that these things are privileges that the "typical" white person can take for granted. However, when you factor in all of the various "isms" its easy to see that there really isn't a typical white person that enjoys every single one of her privileges. For example, since I am young I still get watched when I go into stores and often I cannot return things without a receipt even though older people could have. Another example is that even though I am white I am a female and therefore cannot always go places by myself and still feel secure. I guess to sum up my feeling on her report, I agree that there are white privileges, but that along with those privileges other things come into play that knock a person down again. I don't believe that there is ever going to be a way for each and every single person in the world to be completely equal.
I also have a problem with her saying that white people need to give up some of their privileges in order for others to gain equality. I guess this falls along the lines of affirmative action which I'm not a big fan of either. I feel like there has got to be another way for people to be more equal without taking away the rights of the privileged.
Although I do not completely agree with her article I can see how white privilege plays into the treatment and spread of HIV/AIDS. In the United States, white people in general have more access to health care and education and therefore are more able to seek the treatment and prevention necessary for preventing the spread of this disease. I think that ensuring access and education to all people in the United States would definitely help control the HIV/AIDS epidemic here. This issues of white privilege could also be brought to attention world wide so that more people can become educated and have access to the proper protection tools.
I for one I have never paid much attention to the fact that I am around white people most of the day, most of my neighbors are white, and the people I work worth are all white. These types of things make everyday life for me more comfortable. I do agree with McIntosh in the fact that these things are privileges that the "typical" white person can take for granted. However, when you factor in all of the various "isms" its easy to see that there really isn't a typical white person that enjoys every single one of her privileges. For example, since I am young I still get watched when I go into stores and often I cannot return things without a receipt even though older people could have. Another example is that even though I am white I am a female and therefore cannot always go places by myself and still feel secure. I guess to sum up my feeling on her report, I agree that there are white privileges, but that along with those privileges other things come into play that knock a person down again. I don't believe that there is ever going to be a way for each and every single person in the world to be completely equal.
I also have a problem with her saying that white people need to give up some of their privileges in order for others to gain equality. I guess this falls along the lines of affirmative action which I'm not a big fan of either. I feel like there has got to be another way for people to be more equal without taking away the rights of the privileged.
Although I do not completely agree with her article I can see how white privilege plays into the treatment and spread of HIV/AIDS. In the United States, white people in general have more access to health care and education and therefore are more able to seek the treatment and prevention necessary for preventing the spread of this disease. I think that ensuring access and education to all people in the United States would definitely help control the HIV/AIDS epidemic here. This issues of white privilege could also be brought to attention world wide so that more people can become educated and have access to the proper protection tools.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
AIDS As I Know It
I must be completely honest, I do not know very much about AIDS other than it is a devastating epidemic that needs to be stopped. I also know that the prevention of AIDS can be prevented with current safer sex practices and by not sharing needles. These seem to be the main issues in how AIDS is transferred between people. Which in turn has lead to the stigma that only homosexual people and drug users can contract AIDS when in fact any sexual orientation is at ask of contacting AIDS.
The video on Wednesday discussed that in the 1980's a large problem with the transferal of AIDS was because of the blood banks. I had never conceived of this before. I currently donate blood on a regular basis and am aware of the questions they ask prior to donating. I was not aware that there was such a huge debate over those questions in the 80's. I also was unaware that in the beginning AIDS was closely associated with Haiti. I have never heard any stigma surrounding AIDS and Haiti.
For the most part I have gotten my information from health classes. Of course I have watched movies such as RENT which don't display much factual information but rather a look into an AIDS patients life.
As a global topic, I am hoping to learn more about how AIDS is affecting people around the world. I know that Sub-Saharan Africa has a huge problem with it, but I more interested in learning how big of a problem it is in other democracies and also how other government are handling the issue. I know that for a while several government leaders refused to acknowledge that AIDS even existed and I am curious to see how that has changed if at all.
The video on Wednesday discussed that in the 1980's a large problem with the transferal of AIDS was because of the blood banks. I had never conceived of this before. I currently donate blood on a regular basis and am aware of the questions they ask prior to donating. I was not aware that there was such a huge debate over those questions in the 80's. I also was unaware that in the beginning AIDS was closely associated with Haiti. I have never heard any stigma surrounding AIDS and Haiti.
For the most part I have gotten my information from health classes. Of course I have watched movies such as RENT which don't display much factual information but rather a look into an AIDS patients life.
As a global topic, I am hoping to learn more about how AIDS is affecting people around the world. I know that Sub-Saharan Africa has a huge problem with it, but I more interested in learning how big of a problem it is in other democracies and also how other government are handling the issue. I know that for a while several government leaders refused to acknowledge that AIDS even existed and I am curious to see how that has changed if at all.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
North/South Divide
As we learned in class there is great disparities in health care around the world. Many people do not have access to affordable health care and some do not have access to health care treatments at all. This causes people with lack of access to be more likely to contract a disease since they do not have the chance to prevent it.
A major contributor to this problem is classism. Classism in the case of STI prevention basically means that those people residing in higher classes (i.e. the United States) have more access and can afford to seak out prevention methods whereas those people in less wealthy nations (i.e. Sub-Saharan African nations) are more prone to spreading STI's simply because they do not have the access to simple prevention methods such as condoms or dental dams.
As a citizen of the United States it is hard to wrap my mind around the fact that some people do not know that condom use can help prevent STI's from spreading. For as long as I can remember, that has been what I was taught. However, different cultures were not taught the same thing and therefore it is harder for them to grasp that concept. Also, condoms have always been quite accessible for me throughout my life. I can name at least four different places right now that I could go and get some if I needed to. In rural places such as Sub-Saharan Africa, condoms are not all over the place like they are here. In the United States it is easy to get wrapped up in the idea that people in poorer countries have access to STI prevention methods and just choose not the use them, but in reality their culture and accessibility is extremely different than ours.
Even though the same diseases infect people in the United States, it is at a much lower frequency due to our education and accessibility. A goal in alleviating the burden of STI's should be to make prevention methods more known and acceptable, while also making them highly accessible to all people around the globe.
A major contributor to this problem is classism. Classism in the case of STI prevention basically means that those people residing in higher classes (i.e. the United States) have more access and can afford to seak out prevention methods whereas those people in less wealthy nations (i.e. Sub-Saharan African nations) are more prone to spreading STI's simply because they do not have the access to simple prevention methods such as condoms or dental dams.
As a citizen of the United States it is hard to wrap my mind around the fact that some people do not know that condom use can help prevent STI's from spreading. For as long as I can remember, that has been what I was taught. However, different cultures were not taught the same thing and therefore it is harder for them to grasp that concept. Also, condoms have always been quite accessible for me throughout my life. I can name at least four different places right now that I could go and get some if I needed to. In rural places such as Sub-Saharan Africa, condoms are not all over the place like they are here. In the United States it is easy to get wrapped up in the idea that people in poorer countries have access to STI prevention methods and just choose not the use them, but in reality their culture and accessibility is extremely different than ours.
Even though the same diseases infect people in the United States, it is at a much lower frequency due to our education and accessibility. A goal in alleviating the burden of STI's should be to make prevention methods more known and acceptable, while also making them highly accessible to all people around the globe.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
HPV Advertisement, Now there's a way to stop it!
This is an advertisement for the HPV vaccination. The ad shows various moments that occur throughout peoples lives that they will want to be around for, indicating that if you don't get the vaccination you could end up not surviving long enough to live a full life which is an example of a fear message. By showing that cervical cancer, which is caused by HPV, could cause you to miss out on the important things in life, it makes a person believe that they need the HPV vaccine to survive.
This ad also gives off false information. There are many different strands of HPV that cause cervical cancer and the HPV vaccine only protects against a few strands. Therefore the vaccine does not stop cervical cancer from happening all together as the ad suggests.
It is successful at aiming towards it advertising market. Young women in there late teens and early twenties are the only people subject to the vaccine. The pictures used in the ad show women growing up and special moments that will happen in their life, especially the wedding picture. All women have a dream or goal of what their life will turn out like and the pictures used in this ad demonstrate some of those goals.
In general I think advertisement has a huge affect on the public opinion of STI's. I for one had never heard about HPV until the "ONE LESS" commercials came out. I think that advertisement also can change peoples view about how STI's can affect everyone not just so called "promiscuous" people. Advertisements can be very educational if they are actually providing factual information.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)