Personal tools

Talk:Debate: Should AIDS drugs be made cheaper for developing countries?

From Debatepedia

Revision as of 14:03, 22 June 2009; Nike (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


1) Is there a approximate estimate as to how much money it would cost to keep HIV infected person alive?

Example: Say after the infection with HIV if the AIDS drugs can keep a person alive for 10 years . Then whats the total sum spent on the AIDS drugs for keeping the person alive?

2) Is there any info on the cost of manufacture of these AIDS drugs?

3) Which are the major companies which are manufacturing/selling these AIDS drugs?

Nike 09:03, 22 June 2009 (CDT)


It won't work at all. I live in South Africa. In my province, Gauteng, 1 in 4 people have AIDS. In another province, 1 in 2 people have AIDS. SA is supplied cheaply with AR's and the government still subsidises a chunk off of the result price, so it costs about R600 for a good supply of AR's. Well, we have cheap drugs, affordable to even the most poverty-stricken areas. WE STILL HAVE A HUGE AIDS PROBLEM. So obviously it won't work. AR's just push the problem of AIDS forward. If something isn't done to stop AIDS in its tracks, then it will become the daily routine of your average Southern African to in an AIDS pill with breakfast every morning. All our government is doing, is keeping people with AIDS alive. How about stopping them from getting it in the first place? The biggest effort the government of SA has done to actually prevent AIDS was hand out low-quality free condoms... stapled to the packets. 5 million of them. Instead of wasting money subsidising or talking about getting more AR's, we should be educating poor communities about AIDS and telling them not to screw around like wild animals. My sympathies to the people who got AIDS from other reasons. --User:Savi comment on June 20th, 2009.

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits