I can't challenge you on your argument that there is no qualitative difference between the low-priced drugs anti-viral drugs and the high-priced ones. But there are still the larger question that beg an answer. Are Africans more sexually active and or uncareful? Why is it that clean-living, middle class Africans--to use Patrick's phrase--falling to "AIDS" and not clean-living, middle-class Europeans and "white" Americans? Why haven't "progressives" fought for heavy funding for nutritional strategies to attack the "AIDS" crisis as hard as they have fought for the drugs? Why is it that it is ok to declare Africans as "HIV positive" without testing them when that would not fly for one second in the West? Without testing someone for the HIV virus, how can you distingusigh an AIDS death from that of another disease when the only thing that clearly distinguishes an AIDS death from death by another disease is that a person who dies from AIDS is allegedly HIV positive?
Chris
>Messsage du 24/01/2001 17:06
>De : <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>A : <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>Copie à :
>Objet : RE: AIDS
>
> >[lower-priced] generic versions of HIV/AIDS medications from other
> >> countries."
> >
> >So the question is: What's the qualitative difference between the
> >low-cost drugs and the expensive ones?
>
> No chemical difference. They have a lower price. They have a lower
> price because pharmaceutical companies are good at using national
> borders to segment markets, and good at doing price discrimination.
>
> >Isn't this qualitative difference the least bit suspicious?
>
> No.
>