Abstinence won't stop HIV progress
Let me begin by saying that there is no right answer in the effort to control the spread of HIV-1 infection across the globe. However, in yesterday's Wildcat Seth Frantzman's attempt to justify abstinence as an adequate control for the spread of HIV miserably failed. First off, there are no Indians in Botswana (being an Indian myself). Second, Mr. Frantzman's last statement only sheds light on the ignorance of the public regarding antiretroviral medication. The World Health Organization has completed multiple studies on the subject of HIV-1, and it has proven that treatment with antiretroviral medication has reduced the transmission of HIV-1 among adults (and mother to their children) by about 50%. Treatment with antiretroviral medication has given the chance of children born to HIV infected mothers to live a HIV free life. The treatment with antiretroviral medication has prolonged the life of many infected with HIV, and has blocked the virus' development into AIDS. Yes, the "Global Fund wastes its time giving drugs to the sick." It is these sick people who are giving birth to children who are HIV-1 positive, not having a chance toward a proper life. However, abstinence is not the only key to limiting the spread of HIV-1. Mr. Frantzman and the general public needs to read about this growing epidemic. There is no cover-up, no lies, no secrecy. The problem is funding and resources, something the World Fund and the World Health Organization stride to improve daily. Thus, only an adequate mix of medication, abstinence, and proper medical interventions will fully reduce the rate of HIV-1 transmission across the globe.
Preet Ghuman
biochemistry and political science senior
Freedom attacked by protesters
Mr. Caravelli's excellent photograph in yesterday's Wildcat accurately captures the essence of the march against the Andean Free Trade Agreement.
Dressed in primitive garb unlikely to protect them from the winter chill, two Indians march together. In deliberate defiance of the wheel, which Native Americans didn't invent and have never fully appreciated, one Indian carries a large drum over his back. Manual labor, it seems, will keep him warm. In a country based on the power of the pen, an Aztec representative beats his drum for attention. What are they protesting? Surprisingly, they admit this openly - freedom. What they fail to mention is their destination - statism and slavery.
Their crucial error lies in their ignorance of the concept "production." Believing the world contains a static quantity of goods, they see any change in "distribution" as a threat and denounce the wealthy as expropriators. When a man makes money, though, he trades some value he created (by rearranging the elements of nature to serve man's needs) to a consumer who values the creation over the money. The fortune a successful businessman amasses did not exist before - it has been produced (created). Nobody suffers. When protesters denounce the wealthy, they denounce production. Only production makes consumption possible - they attack their own livelihood.
By forcing their tribesmen to deal with expensive locals over the cheaper price of free trade, they shackle their own future. The inefficient farmers gain unearned consumers - local residents paying more, stagnating. Without free choices (where to buy food), the locals are enslaved to the state's decrees. It is only a matter of time and degree before, rather than visiting doctors, they will be forced to see the local witch doctor. It is slavery and savagery these protestors are marching towards.
Chad Mills
electrical engineering senior
Pearl Harbor article contained errors
Yes, we should honor Pearl Harbor vets. We should honor all veterans who serve. We should also try to get the facts right when reporting their service. The headline over your article in yesterday's Wildcat implied the attack on Pearl Harbor happened 51 years ago, which it did not. This was cleared up within the article but the headline remains incorrect. Also another clear error involves the statement that there were 94 battleships in the harbor at the time of the attack. A quick Web search reveals that there were actually eight battleships present, all of which were damaged or sunk. Journalists should try to get their facts straight before reporting them.
Sam Marion
research specialist physiology
Constitution doesn't say 'free and public'
Regarding yesterday's letter by Melissa Evers: "Free and public" education is found nowhere in the Constitution of the United States. Ms. Evers may be thinking about Article 11, Section 6 of the Arizona Constitution, which states that university instruction should be "as nearly free as possible."
Harassing professor Reid is uncalled for. If that's the way my fellow Christians and myself always tried to spread His word in purely religious matters, I don't think we'd get anywhere fast. At least from what I read about the lecture, professor Reid was simply doing his job by starting a class discussion.
However, let's not use a portion of the United States Constitution that does not exist to justify professor Reid's supposed misbehavior. Moreover, let's not use such a misquote to deny that the university is the property of the people of the state and is thus under their jurisdiction should a majority request change.
Garrett O'Hara
political science sophomore