People with HIV are banned from the US

[Liberal Populism]

if one one were really concerned about health issues it would be much smarter, cost effective, etc to screen for TB than HIV.

of course the first step ahead of all this would be to close the dang border.

i say again:


SEAL THE BOARDER NOW!!11!

That picture is beyond genius.

[BIGTEX]

BIGTEX can understand why you refuse to reveal the nation (or continent) from which your forebears came to this nation.

Embarassing, isn't it?

[pittypat65]

My daughter is a RN and says there is an epidemic of TB in this country due to the illegals. She says everyday in the ER she sees many and they are mostly illegal immigrants.

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

We allow the President of Iran to speak at a university here in the U.S., but those with HIV are not welcome?

Something isn’t right here. 

from the world of one plus one makes anything but two

[conley]

We allow the President of Iran to speak at a university here in the U.S., but those with HIV are not welcome?

Something isn’t right here. 

from the world of one plus one makes anything but two

ahmedinijad has the hivvies? 

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

hiv, tb, hepatitis....does it really matter?  why would you knowingly allow someone into the country who is the carrier of a potentially deadly communicable disease?  vermouth, is our educational system so bad that you have to troll the world for the potentially hiv positive genius?  comm lee why do you expend so much energy to demonstrate your ignorance??  better that you should change your moniker to dumb ass and leave it at that! 

[conley]

hiv, tb, hepatitis....does it really matter?  why would you knowingly allow someone into the country who is the carrier of a potentially deadly communicable disease?  vermouth, is our educational system so bad that you have to troll the world for the potentially hiv positive genius?  comm lee why do you expend so much energy to demonstrate your ignorance??  better that you should change your moniker to dumb ass and leave it at that! 

yeah actually it does matter you ignoramus...TB is airborne whereas HIV and Hepatitis are not. 

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

DUMB ASS all are communicable and potentially deadly.....what about this do you fail to comprehend???  what is your argument for inviting this into the country???  the sexual nature of hiv transmission seems to have done little to mitigate the spread. 

[Peter1469]

I have to agree with Grump and Mr. D.  To all those who would admit HIV positive people into the US, would you answer change if the US had universal health care? 

[Vermouth]

Grumpy, HIV isn't transmitted by casual contact. If you're in a high-risk situation, you need to take precautions regardless of who you're dealing with - there is no absolute way to know if it is safe. Otherwise, it's not an issue.

I have to agree with Grump and Mr. D.  To all those who would admit HIV positive people into the US, would you answer change if the US had universal health care? 

No, why? This ban is on visitors, not just immigrants. We don't ban people with cancer and other conditions who may come here for treatment. Why would we ban someone coming for AIDS treatment? And why would we ban a nonsymptomatic HIV+ tourist? Wouldn't we want them to spend their vacation dollars here? The US is the "leading center of public and private HIV research" and yet International conferences on HIV and AIDS are not held in the US because of the ban.

From the article:

...The ban itself is also largely unenforceable -- it's impossible to take blood from all those coming to America, hold them until the results come through and then deport those who test positive ... The result is not any actual prevention of HIV coming into the United States but discrimination against otherwise legal immigrants who are HIV-positive...

...Would treating HIV like any other medical condition cost the United States if such visitors or immigrants at some point became public dependents? It's possible -- but all legal immigrants and their sponsors are required to prove that they can provide their own health insurance for at least 10 years after being admitted...

[SDML]

I'm with Vermouth on this one.

Bans on tourists for one disease and not another is groundless given the inconsistency. Ban every communicable disease across the board and then you have a semblance of policy, but without that it's just hysterics.

[Peter1469]

Yes, I am not sure that I would ban temporary visitors.  I would be worried about visitors who decide to stay and use our resources to treat their illness- especially in a rationed healthcare (i.e., universal health care or government provided health care) system. 

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

if we have prior knowledge that an individual entering this country has a potentially deadly communicable disease we would be nuts not to deny entry.  vermouth, what does non-symptomatic have to do with this??  again this is not an argument regarding transmission and again the nature of transmission has not mitigated the spread of hiv.  as for sdml's support of your argument....it appears that waving a dollar in front of sdml is comparable to waving a red cape in the face of a bull.  in short this is more politically correct, dem/lib silliness.

[Vermouth]

if we have prior knowledge that an individual entering this country has a potentially deadly communicable disease we would be nuts not to deny entry.  vermouth, what does non-symptomatic have to do with this??  again this is not an argument regarding transmission and again the nature of transmission has not mitigated the spread of hiv.  as for sdml's support of your argument....it appears that waving a dollar in front of sdml is comparable to waving a red cape in the face of a bull.  in short this is more politically correct, dem/lib silliness.

It's communicable only if you actively engage in risky behavior. It's not contagious by public contact.

My point about the tourist being nonsymptomatic is that he would have no need for medical care while vacationing in the US.

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

if we have prior knowledge that an individual entering this country has a potentially deadly communicable disease we would be nuts not to deny entry.  vermouth, what does non-symptomatic have to do with this??  again this is not an argument regarding transmission and again the nature of transmission has not mitigated the spread of hiv.  as for sdml's support of your argument....it appears that waving a dollar in front of sdml is comparable to waving a red cape in the face of a bull.  in short this is more politically correct, dem/lib silliness.

It's communicable only if you actively engage in risky behavior. It's not contagious by public contact.

My point about the tourist being nonsymptomatic is that he would have no need for medical care while vacationing in the US.

my point is that the "risky behavior" you refer to is naturally engaged in (gunnit, comm lee, libpop have your parents explain this to you) and being non-symptomatic has nothing to do with transmission.