What's The Point Of Taking Anti-Aids Meds?

[subbytch]

Actually I work so I pay cost price for antibiotics when I get a flu once every second year. I remember the last time I paid $64. So even if your analogy wasn't absurd it would still not be applicable. 

So you you take no steps to prevent getting a cold or flu but seek treatment (if you are taking anti-biotics for the flu, your doctor is an idiot) once you get it. 

And you are complaining about people who take no steps to prevent getting HIV -- or people who do -- who then take anti-HIV meds once they are infected? 

Irony, much?

"I pay cost..."

No you don't. You still pay a rate sold to you as cost, but it's actually a negotiated price that your government organization / health insurer / pharmacy chain has been able to negotiate through its collective buying power. It's not as steep a discount as other people get based on the level of insurance they pay, but it's also not the full value of the drug.

 

You don't understand the system you are a part of.

[milkass]

So you you take no steps to prevent getting a cold or flu but seek treatment (if you are taking anti-biotics for the flu, your doctor is an idiot) once you get it. 

And you are complaining about people who take no steps to prevent getting HIV -- or people who do -- who then take anti-HIV meds once they are infected? 

Irony, much?

"I pay cost..."

No you don't. You still pay a rate sold to you as cost, but it's actually a negotiated price that your government organization / health insurer / pharmacy chain has been able to negotiate through its collective buying power. It's not as steep a discount as other people get based on the level of insurance they pay, but it's also not the full value of the drug.

 

You don't understand the system you are a part of.

I meant for a cold .. not a flu. But anyway your egample is silly. No reasonable person would expect you to stay put on a gasmask or biohazard suit to stop transferring a cold. The usual cold/flu etiquette is you stay home from work if youre too contagious, otherwize don't share people's cups, sneez in their face, avoid hugging them etc. That is a reasonable expectation. It's also a reasonable expectation that you don't ask society to pay $1500 a month so you can  have anonymous sex. It's not even just you, honestly. In the scheme of things I don't care what you do. It doesn't effect me. But this general attitude now that "we don't have to worry about AIDS any more" is problematic. I'm surprised the mainstream media haven't cottoned on yet, but soon they will, and people will be stigmatising gays. 

[PhoenixGeoff]

I mean eating disorders can be complex.

Whereas sexuality is easy to grasp and clearly understood by everyone.

Look, objectively and logically you're right. Having random bareback sex with total strangers in a world with all kinds of potentially deadly STDs is unwise.

And it does impose costs on the larger society.

Why do we choose to do it? I really don't know. Sophocles, the ancient Athenian playwright spoke of the lessening of sexual desire with old age as a kind of liberation, and I think that must be true. It was common for the ancients to speak of being enslaved to our sexual desires.

Our feelings and desires are things we cannot control directly. I have no idea why I am attached to things I am. I can learn to detach myself from those things with effort and time, but that is the work of a lifetime (Christianity and Buddhism both are in large part all about this process).

Nor can I understand the attachments of others. I have no desire for a big house with a BMW in the garage and a gazillion dollars in the bank. But many people do, and the pursuit of wealth or of status symbols can be just as destructive as the pursuit of sex or romance. Their sins are not my sins, but we are all sinners together, to put things in religious terms.

So perhaps, borrowing again from religion, it's best to extend a little grace to those out there whose motivations you don't understand.

Remember too, we're all on a journey here. Just because a man wants HIV today, finds part of his identity in a disease, wants to go out in a blaze of sexual glory today doesn't mean that he will always be that way. Preserving his life now gives him an opportunity to grow. I personally think society is right to offer as many of those opportunities as it can.

[cam1972]

I meant for a cold .. not a flu. But anyway your egample is silly. No reasonable person would expect you to stay put on a gasmask or biohazard suit to stop transferring a cold. The usual cold/flu etiquette is you stay home from work if youre too contagious, otherwize don't share people's cups, sneez in their face, avoid hugging them etc. That is a reasonable expectation. It's also a reasonable expectation that you don't ask society to pay $1500 a month so you can  have anonymous sex. It's not even just you, honestly. In the scheme of things I don't care what you do. It doesn't effect me. But this general attitude now that "we don't have to worry about AIDS any more" is problematic. I'm surprised the mainstream media haven't cottoned on yet, but soon they will, and people will be stigmatising gays.

A couple of things: chemo costs MUCH more than HIV meds. Yet you wouldn't deny cancer patients the right to have treatment. Nor complain about the astronomical cost shared by insurance holders. Some cancers are preventable yet you would not deny those patients the right to treatment. So it's not right that you single out this disease/virus.

Second, not having to worry about AIDS is problematic? I'm very thankful we don't. Would you rather the drug preventing AIDS (and protecting against contracting HIV) had never been discovered? I understand why you say that, but think of the cost of lives had it not been found. That is rather selfish on your part. And very narrow minded. I don't understand your reason for singling out ONE health issue when there are MANY health issues caused by bad habits. And are far more costly.

Third and last: having HIV, the stigma is already there. You should look up HIV stigma on YouTube and learn from it. They are trying to change people just like you. People are already stigmatizing gays. Hell.. You have. Your comments in the very first post did that. You put us all in one generalized basket. The lame stream media doesn't have to pick up the story to accomplish that. It's already there. I have been told that I'm a threat to society, that I'm a waste of space and air, and that I should eat a bullet. And these were gay people who told me that. So I already deal with the stigma. Having YOU come on here and further that onto a message board that has become a community for me to feel free and accepted and not have to worry about being judged for what I have is very frustrating. To say the least. I already look at the price every damn time I get my meds from the pharmacy and realize the cost others have to share. But there's not a damned thing I can do about it.

Instead of spouting off, go find a big bottle of compassion and swallow it all. We all come from different walks of life on here. Some did get it by chasing, but I'm betting the majority did not. We each have our own story. And they don't belong in the fiction section. Fantasy rarely lives up to reality, and what we are living is not fantasy. It is reality. One that stares us in the face every time we open the pill bottle. We can talk all we want about how people should do this and shouldn't do that, but we don't live in perfect bodies in a perfect world. Humans fuck up. And there is always a price to pay. This isn't Utopia. It's planet earth. So stop the stigmatizing yourself. Some of us beat ourselves up enough about having it. We don't need others helping. I look forward to the day this thread is no longer on the front page. May it be very soon.

[RideMyBlkDik]

.....having HIV, the stigma is already there. You should look up HIV stigma on YouTube and learn from it. They are trying to change people just like you. People are already stigmatizing gays. Hell.. You have. Your comments in the very first post did that. You put us all in one generalized basket. The lame stream media doesn't have to pick up the story to accomplish that. It's already there. I have been told that I'm a threat to society, that I'm a waste of space and air, and that I should eat a bullet. And these were gay people who told me that. So I already deal with the stigma. Having YOU come on here and further that onto a message board that has become a community for me to feel free and accepted and not have to worry about being judged for what I have is very frustrating. To say the least. I already look at the price every damn time I get my meds from the pharmacy and realize the cost others have to share. But there's not a damned thing I can do about it.

Instead of spouting off, go find a big bottle of compassion and swallow it all. We all come from different walks of life on here. Some did get it by chasing, but I'm betting the majority did not. We each have our own story. And they don't belong in the fiction section. Fantasy rarely lives up to reality, and what we are living is not fantasy. It is reality. One that stares us in the face every time we open the pill bottle. We can talk all we want about how people should do this and shouldn't do that, but we don't live in perfect bodies in a perfect world. Humans fuck up. And there is always a price to pay. This isn't Utopia. It's planet earth. So stop the stigmatizing yourself. Some of us beat ourselves up enough about having it. We don't need others helping. I look forward to the day this thread is no longer on the front page. May it be very soon.

This is one of the best post I have read on this website. Your contributions on this site has enhanced the quality of my life. Thank you.

[travelingbutthole]

I have no issue with the stigma, as mentioned before homosexuality has been stigmatised by idiots, but thats other peoples problem.

 

My issue is that since my diagnosis I've been feeling a sense of isolation.

Living just outside of normal society with a limited pool of potential partners makes me feel like my life has stalled.

When I do find somebody to play with then its full speed ahead towards destination fuck frenzy but at the moment I'm lonely.

I'm sure I'll work it out in the end.

[subbytch]

I meant for a cold .. not a flu. But anyway your egample is silly. No reasonable person would expect you to stay put on a gasmask or biohazard suit to stop transferring a cold. The usual cold/flu etiquette is you stay home from work if youre too contagious, otherwize don't share people's cups, sneez in their face, avoid hugging them etc. That is a reasonable expectation. It's also a reasonable expectation that you don't ask society to pay $1500 a month so you can  have anonymous sex. It's not even just you, honestly. In the scheme of things I don't care what you do. It doesn't effect me. But this general attitude now that "we don't have to worry about AIDS any more" is problematic. I'm surprised the mainstream media haven't cottoned on yet, but soon they will, and people will be stigmatising gays. 

You might want to do some research. 

 

Colds and flu are a larger drain on Western society -- economically, socially, mortally-- than HIV is. Most people are contagious for a week before showing the first symptoms, which is how flus spread so damn fast. That, plus the ongoing failure of people to do two simple things: wash their hands regularly and get a flu shot every year.

 

In the abstract, for colds and flu? They're a social disease, fairly easily preventable by limiting the number of social contacts, doing some simple precautions, and getting a regular injection. But people continue to have a high number of social contacts, refuse to regularly and frequently wash their hands, and most people don't get flu shots, especially those most at risk. 

 

And society doesn't care. If you get a cold? Dumb luck. If you get a flu? Dumb luck. But there's no moral censure.

 

Not so with HIV or other STIs. They're spread more or less the same way, have some pretty easy tools to limit the likelihood of exposure, and there are now prophylactic treatments to all but eliminate their spread. Society though morally censures the contracting of an STI, the prevention methods for STIs, and, in some quarters, the education of how to prevent STIs. (STIs include HIV.)

You have yet to articulate a rational reason for this. Indeed, you have expressed an opinion that finds no fault with this dichotomy. I'd go so far as to say you've articulated that people deserve to get HIV / STIs, as if they've committed some offense against society or the universe at large.

Sex is one of the most interactions a person can have. We have the tools now to allow that sexual interaction to occur quite safely. We even have the tools to mitigate when an adverse situation occurs. What we don't seem to have a lot of? Compassion. People think they're justified in moral-mongering against folks whose choices they disagree with. 

 

For what it's worth? No, you aren't. Your stated opinion is idiotic. It's unreasonable. And it's inhumane. 

[milkass]

A couple of things: chemo costs MUCH more than HIV meds. Yet you wouldn't deny cancer patients the right to have treatment. Nor complain about the astronomical cost shared by insurance holders. Some cancers are preventable yet you would not deny those patients the right to treatment. So it's not right that you single out this disease/virus.

Second, not having to worry about AIDS is problematic? I'm very thankful we don't. Would you rather the drug preventing AIDS (and protecting against contracting HIV) had never been discovered? I understand why you say that, but think of the cost of lives had it not been found. That is rather selfish on your part. And very narrow minded. I don't understand your reason for singling out ONE health issue when there are MANY health issues caused by bad habits. And are far more costly.

Third and last: having HIV, the stigma is already there. You should look up HIV stigma on YouTube and learn from it. They are trying to change people just like you. People are already stigmatizing gays. Hell.. You have. Your comments in the very first post did that. You put us all in one generalized basket. The lame stream media doesn't have to pick up the story to accomplish that. It's already there. I have been told that I'm a threat to society, that I'm a waste of space and air, and that I should eat a bullet. And these were gay people who told me that. So I already deal with the stigma. Having YOU come on here and further that onto a message board that has become a community for me to feel free and accepted and not have to worry about being judged for what I have is very frustrating. To say the least. I already look at the price every damn time I get my meds from the pharmacy and realize the cost others have to share. But there's not a damned thing I can do about it.

Instead of spouting off, go find a big bottle of compassion and swallow it all. We all come from different walks of life on here. Some did get it by chasing, but I'm betting the majority did not. We each have our own story. And they don't belong in the fiction section. Fantasy rarely lives up to reality, and what we are living is not fantasy. It is reality. One that stares us in the face every time we open the pill bottle. We can talk all we want about how people should do this and shouldn't do that, but we don't live in perfect bodies in a perfect world. Humans fuck up. And there is always a price to pay. This isn't Utopia. It's planet earth. So stop the stigmatizing yourself. Some of us beat ourselves up enough about having it. We don't need others helping. I look forward to the day this thread is no longer on the front page. May it be very soon.

 

Cancer is not only a lifestyle problem. People get cancer for genetic reasons The causal link between environment, genetics and cancer is impossible to disentangle. When a lifelong smoker gets lung cancer a lot of people might say "Oh well, he brought it on himself". That's not fair ether but you can't pretend it doesn't not happens. 

 

Not having to worry about AIDS is problematic if society is paying for it. If there was a drug that immunized me from lung cancer but it cost $1500 a month and I shifted that cost onto insurance companies and tax payers so I could smoke carefree I believe people would be justifiably upset, if they new. 

 

Whatever HIV stigma is there is is being made worse by bugchasing.Really people who contracted the disease accidentally are affected as much as anyone. 

Whereas sexuality is easy to grasp and clearly understood by everyone.

Look, objectively and logically you're right. Having random bareback sex with total strangers in a world with all kinds of potentially deadly STDs is unwise.

And it does impose costs on the larger society.

Why do we choose to do it? I really don't know. Sophocles, the ancient Athenian playwright spoke of the lessening of sexual desire with old age as a kind of liberation, and I think that must be true. It was common for the ancients to speak of being enslaved to our sexual desires.

Our feelings and desires are things we cannot control directly. I have no idea why I am attached to things I am. I can learn to detach myself from those things with effort and time, but that is the work of a lifetime (Christianity and Buddhism both are in large part all about this process).

Nor can I understand the attachments of others. I have no desire for a big house with a BMW in the garage and a gazillion dollars in the bank. But many people do, and the pursuit of wealth or of status symbols can be just as destructive as the pursuit of sex or romance. Their sins are not my sins, but we are all sinners together, to put things in religious terms.

So perhaps, borrowing again from religion, it's best to extend a little grace to those out there whose motivations you don't understand.

Remember too, we're all on a journey here. Just because a man wants HIV today, finds part of his identity in a disease, wants to go out in a blaze of sexual glory today doesn't mean that he will always be that way. Preserving his life now gives him an opportunity to grow. I personally think society is right to offer as many of those opportunities as it can.

 

I show grace by being happy to pay taxes to support people who are unlucky or underprivileged. I'm not going to be gracious about paying taxes so some entitled person can be a whore. 

[milkass]

You might want to do some research. 

 

Colds and flu are a larger drain on Western society -- economically, socially, mortally-- than HIV is. Most people are contagious for a week before showing the first symptoms, which is how flus spread so damn fast. That, plus the ongoing failure of people to do two simple things: wash their hands regularly and get a flu shot every year.

 

In the abstract, for colds and flu? They're a social disease, fairly easily preventable by limiting the number of social contacts, doing some simple precautions, and getting a regular injection. But people continue to have a high number of social contacts, refuse to regularly and frequently wash their hands, and most people don't get flu shots, especially those most at risk. 

 

And society doesn't care. If you get a cold? Dumb luck. If you get a flu? Dumb luck. But there's no moral censure.

 

Not so with HIV or other STIs. They're spread more or less the same way, have some pretty easy tools to limit the likelihood of exposure, and there are now prophylactic treatments to all but eliminate their spread. Society though morally censures the contracting of an STI, the prevention methods for STIs, and, in some quarters, the education of how to prevent STIs. (STIs include HIV.)

You have yet to articulate a rational reason for this. Indeed, you have expressed an opinion that finds no fault with this dichotomy. I'd go so far as to say you've articulated that people deserve to get HIV / STIs, as if they've committed some offense against society or the universe at large.

Sex is one of the most interactions a person can have. We have the tools now to allow that sexual interaction to occur quite safely. We even have the tools to mitigate when an adverse situation occurs. What we don't seem to have a lot of? Compassion. People think they're justified in moral-mongering against folks whose choices they disagree with. 

 

For what it's worth? No, you aren't. Your stated opinion is idiotic. It's unreasonable. And it's inhumane. 

 

I can't believe you would actually say that cold's are asymptomatic and then go on to suggest that it can they can easily be contained all in the same paragraph. How are you going to contain an asymptotic, airborne virus? Are we all supposed to stay in a state of permanent quarantine to prevent the spread of the common cold? Colds and flus are just a fact of live. What does not have to be a fact of life in 2016 is the hiv virus, which is spread 99% of the time by infected semen entering an anus. There are simple ways to contain it: 1 is condoms. 2 is only having sex with people who are tested and disease free. 3 is taking medication that effectively immunizes you from AIDS. Now any of these are valid options. But I can't see how 3 is ethical if you are cannot pay for it. I'm a taxpayer and I'm allowed to express an opinion about what my taxes are paying for. I don't want to pay taxes to subsidize peoples promiscuous sex lives. I'd rather pay taxes to help HOMELESS PEOPLE or SICK PEOPLE. 

 

People do moralize about kids whose parents refuse to have them vaccinated. The are excluded from schools. 

 

Honestly they only valid argument that has been put forth against mine in the one about medicines being socialized. In a better world, all medicines would be available for everybody and excluded from profiteering. But the fact is, with the world the way it is, capitalist investment in research is the only way a lot of medicines are produced. In the future I expect that anti-hv meds will me cheap. Amoxicillin is cheap now because it has been around forever. 

[milkass]

For those demanding I show more compassion, who am I supposed to have compassion for? What is it about a subsidized cumdump that I am supposed to feel sorry for? I'd be more inclined to feel envy for him. Who wouldn't want  such a libertine sex life? 

[cam1972]

Cancer is not only a lifestyle problem. People get cancer for genetic reasons The causal link between environment, genetics and cancer is impossible to disentangle. When a lifelong smoker gets lung cancer a lot of people might say "Oh well, he brought it on himself". That's not fair ether but you can't pretend it doesn't not happens. 

 

Not having to worry about AIDS is problematic if society is paying for it. If there was a drug that immunized me from lung cancer but it cost $1500 a month and I shifted that cost onto insurance companies and tax payers so I could smoke carefree I believe people would be justifiably upset, if they new. 

 

Whatever HIV stigma is there is is being made worse by bugchasing.Really people who contracted the disease accidentally are affected as much as anyone.

I never said every cancer was caused by lifestyle choices. Mine wasn't. You don't need to feel the need to educate me on that. I've been there as well. Quit misquoting and making things fit your argument.

PrEP is used to keep people from getting the virus HIV, not AIDS. You show your ignorance by not knowing the difference. The fact that I'm HIV positive but don't have to worry about dying of AIDS is anything but problematic for me. Or any other person that contracted the disease. Nor should it be for the taxpayers since we won't have the costly hospital bills that AIDS brings with it. In that same vein, if PrEP can keep the number of infections lower, then it is a cheaper alternative in the long run. Your numbers don't add up.

Speaking from experience yet again, the ones who have thrown hate my way didn't even know there was such a thing as chasing the bug. While I don't pretend to understand the thinking behind chasing, I don't believe for a second that the chasers are helping create the stigma. The three letters do that on their own. And lack of education. You are a good example. The stigma remains because people are too lazy to educate themselves. Using you as an example: you say having sex only with men who were tested and are disease free is a good way to keep from getting infected. That is ignorant. You don't know who they have had sex with since being tested. They could be poz and not have the symptoms. They could have a high viral load and neither of you be the wiser. A medicated undetectable person has been proven to be less of a threat. How do you think so many have been infected? Because of ignorant thinking such as yours.

For those demanding I show more compassion, who am I supposed to have compassion for? What is it about a subsidized cumdump that I am supposed to feel sorry for? I'd be more inclined to feel envy for him. Who wouldn't want  such a libertine sex life?

When I spoke about compassion, I was referring to your all inclusive statements about people with HIV. Your comments have been harsh and hateful. That said, you are all over the map. You bitch about these people in one sentence yet in the very next sentence you say you would be more inclined to envy them. I'm having a hard time taking you seriously.

I'll say this and I'm done: the more of your posts I read, the more I see how uneducated about the VIRUS and DISEASE (two separate things) you really are. Quit wasting people's time and go educate yourself.

[subbytch]

I can't believe you would actually say that cold's are asymptomatic and then go on to suggest that it can they can easily be contained all in the same paragraph. How are you going to contain an asymptotic, airborne virus? Are we all supposed to stay in a state of permanent quarantine to prevent the spread of the common cold? Colds and flus are just a fact of live. What does not have to be a fact of life in 2016 is the hiv virus, which is spread 99% of the time by infected semen entering an anus. There are simple ways to contain it: 1 is condoms. 2 is only having sex with people who are tested and disease free. 3 is taking medication that effectively immunizes you from AIDS. Now any of these are valid options. But I can't see how 3 is ethical if you are cannot pay for it. I'm a taxpayer and I'm allowed to express an opinion about what my taxes are paying for. I don't want to pay taxes to subsidize peoples promiscuous sex lives. I'd rather pay taxes to help HOMELESS PEOPLE or SICK PEOPLE. 

 

People do moralize about kids whose parents refuse to have them vaccinated. The are excluded from schools. 

 

Honestly they only valid argument that has been put forth against mine in the one about medicines being socialized. In a better world, all medicines would be available for everybody and excluded from profiteering. But the fact is, with the world the way it is, capitalist investment in research is the only way a lot of medicines are produced. In the future I expect that anti-hv meds will me cheap. Amoxicillin is cheap now because it has been around forever. 

 

 

It's really not hard to grasp, Milkass. Flu viruses are asymptomatic in their initial period. It's why it's so easy to spread them. The only way to reduce or eliminate the chance of infection is to 1) Stop the insertion of viral particles into mucous membranes by washing hands frequently, wearing gloves, and facemasks. 2) Only interacting with people who wash / wear gloves / facemasks. 3) Regular inoculations against flu (the flu shot.) 

If you aren't willing to take those precautions, especially if you are interacting with a high number of people in your daily life, I don't understand why I'm responsible then for subsidizing the aftercare required when you test positive for the flu virus. Especially if you wind up hospitalized, why should my tax dollars go to pay for that? You are educated. You know the risks. And if you don't protect yourself, if you get infected with the flu,  it sucks to be you. I want my dollars to go to pay for homeless people or people with cancer -- the deserving types, not the folks who carelessly got infected, despite all the available methods we have of preventing this.

I'm supposed to have sympathy for you, someone who lives a carefree life of interacting with whomever they want, touching surfaces without barriers, and not caring about how they might transmit a deadly pathogen to a child or the elderly? Your moral compass is screwy. Must be nice to be so carefree with your life.

[milkass]

I never said every cancer was caused by lifestyle choices. Mine wasn't. You don't need to feel the need to educate me on that. I've been there as well. Quit misquoting and making things fit your argument.

PrEP is used to keep people from getting the virus HIV, not AIDS. You show your ignorance by not knowing the difference. The fact that I'm HIV positive but don't have to worry about dying of AIDS is anything but problematic for me. Or any other person that contracted the disease. Nor should it be for the taxpayers since we won't have the costly hospital bills that AIDS brings with it. In that same vein, if PrEP can keep the number of infections lower, then it is a cheaper alternative in the long run. Your numbers don't add up.

Speaking from experience yet again, the ones who have thrown hate my way didn't even know there was such a thing as chasing the bug. While I don't pretend to understand the thinking behind chasing, I don't believe for a second that the chasers are helping create the stigma. The three letters do that on their own. And lack of education. You are a good example. The stigma remains because people are too lazy to educate themselves. Using you as an example: you say having sex only with men who were tested and are disease free is a good way to keep from getting infected. That is ignorant. You don't know who they have had sex with since being tested. They could be poz and not have the symptoms. They could have a high viral load and neither of you be the wiser. A medicated undetectable person has been proven to be less of a threat. How do you think so many have been infected? Because of ignorant thinking such as yours.

When I spoke about compassion, I was referring to your all inclusive statements about people with HIV. Your comments have been harsh and hateful. That said, you are all over the map. You bitch about these people in one sentence yet in the very next sentence you say you would be more inclined to envy them. I'm having a hard time taking you seriously.

I'll say this and I'm done: the more of your posts I read, the more I see how uneducated about the VIRUS and DISEASE (two separate things) you really are. Quit wasting people's time and go educate yourself.

 

 

 

 

People who did not who are not trying to catch hiv on purpose have nothing to do with anything I have said .. absolutely nothing. I think you're projecting here with your victim-mongering; You're obviously so used hiding behind victimisation arguments that you deploy when when they have no relevance. A person person who intentionally catches HIV is not a victim of anything but his or her own choices. It is indeed insulting to them for you to say legitimate hiv victims should be afforded the same 'compassion' as people who intentionally got it - either by pointed choice or negligent sexual practices. 

 

I know the difference between hiv and aids. I use the  the term 'anti-aids meds' because it covers two relevant medications - prep and antiretroviral drugs. 

[milkass]

It's really not hard to grasp, Milkass. Flu viruses are asymptomatic in their initial period. It's why it's so easy to spread them. The only way to reduce or eliminate the chance of infection is to 1) Stop the insertion of viral particles into mucous membranes by washing hands frequently, wearing gloves, and facemasks. 2) Only interacting with people who wash / wear gloves / facemasks. 3) Regular inoculations against flu (the flu shot.) 

If you aren't willing to take those precautions, especially if you are interacting with a high number of people in your daily life, I don't understand why I'm responsible then for subsidizing the aftercare required when you test positive for the flu virus. Especially if you wind up hospitalized, why should my tax dollars go to pay for that? You are educated. You know the risks. And if you don't protect yourself, if you get infected with the flu,  it sucks to be you. I want my dollars to go to pay for homeless people or people with cancer -- the deserving types, not the folks who carelessly got infected, despite all the available methods we have of preventing this.

I'm supposed to have sympathy for you, someone who lives a carefree life of interacting with whomever they want, touching surfaces without barriers, and not caring about how they might transmit a deadly pathogen to a child or the elderly? Your moral compass is screwy. Must be nice to be so carefree with your life.

OK well that's absurd. It's not possible to contain the flu, given its asymptomatic, airbourne  nature. The only way would be to quarantine everybody 100% of the time. Since this is absurd, the only practical option is for people to do the best they can not to spread it -immunisation, limiting contact etc. Also flu's don't require a lifetime of expensive drugs to treat. But hey whatever makes you feel better about your publicly funded sex life. 

[milkass]

 You bitch about these people in one sentence yet in the very next sentence you say you would be more inclined to envy them. 

 

 

Ha. Yeah I bitch about these people the way I bitch about Bernie Maddoff. I envy the richness, not the choices he made to become rich.