HIV & AIDS-A Deep Human Concern

a rea of genetics. A couple of years ago at
a conference there was a very prestigious
professor who had done some of the major
discoveries in HIV, and I asked him what
about genetic implications of this disease,
do genetics play a role? But he says of course
and everybody knows that. I said, Professor
I’m sorry, nobody knows that. That is not
spoken about. That is a taboo issue.
I asked a senior official why do we not look
into the genetic determinants or issues
that can be related here, and I was told:
“Absolutely not. It is bad enough that it is
in Africa and with such intensity. We do not
want the slur to be cast on Africa that the
people are genetically predisposed to HIV
transmission or infection”. Yet the genetic
evidence that we seem to have at the
moment is that the Northern Europeans, the
Swedes, the Norse and so forth, about 15-
18% of them are genetically incapable of
contracting HIV. People in Southern Africa,
it is said that 90% of them are carrying
a gene which predisposes them to HIV
infection. Now the trouble with ignoring that
kind of thing in my very limited parochial
book is, first of all, there are avenues there
surely for further investigation for the
development of vaccines that would protect.
There is also room there to protect people
or to prevent resources all going along the
one track, that if we can solve the sexual
transmission of the disease we will have
solved everything. Also, there is the almost
inevitable stereotyping of Africa. Africa,
the Horn of Africa, Southern Africa, South
Africa, Lesotho, Botswana, Mozambique,
Zambia, Zimbabwe, Namibia. They are
the countries where AIDS is concentrated
most in the world. Emphasising strongly
the sexual transmission of the disease
almost inevitably casts an image of Africa
as a highly sexualised continent with an
unspeakable amount of sex, and sex of a
strange nature.
Yet the fact is that one of the pillars of a
modern approach to sexual activity, what’s
called multiple concurrent partnerships –
stop these, and you will stop the disease –
that approach is built on a model that does
not work. Apart from the model not working,
it ignores the fact that international evaluations
and assessments show us that in
Southern and Central Africa, multiple concurrent
partnerships will occur on the average
for six men out of one hundred.
In Europe, it would be 10 or 12. In the
United States and France, it might be 14
or 15. We are loading ourselves with something,
and we might not have the answers
at all. The idea is that we should not speak
about it because this would be saying, well
the African people are predisposed to this
disease and they are at a genetic disadvantage
in relation to HIV transmission. We
have no inhibitions about speaking about
sickle cell anaemia, a condition that only
people of African descent can manifest in
the numbers that are being shown, and that
80% in Sub-Saharan Africa are carrying the
gene that could lead to sickle cell anaemia
in their offspring.
We are inhibited and almost forbidden to
speak about this in relation to HIV. I feel
that that is wrong and that is something
that needs to be changed. I am concerned
at present about some of the reports that
are coming out, the tone of the reports more
than the actual content. The tone is very
upbeat, as if we have conquered HIV, as
if we have conquered this disease. We are
hearing enthusiastically about a new treatment
platform that will be a platform also
for prevention. We are hearing that the goal
of an AIDS-free generation is within reach.
That statement, the goal of an AIDS-free
generation being within reach, is what the
media published of what Hillary Clinton
said last year on World AIDS Day. What Hillary
Clinton actually said was: the goal of
an AIDS-free generation is possible. I think
there is quite a difference between something
being possible and something being
within reach, but the spin-doctors got at it,
and one is given the impression of “Mission
Accomplished, we have reached the goal”.
36