Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

China Censors HIV/AIDS Awareness Documentary

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the learn-it-the-hard-way dept.

Censorship 120

eldavojohn writes "Amnesty International is reporting an unusual case of censorship in which Chinese police questioned HIV/AIDS workers in China and instructed them to cancel an airing of a documentary made by Aizhixing Institute of Health Education on the disease. The director of that NGO recently left China after constant police harassment. The canceled documentary was about Tian Xi, a patient who contracted HIV by blood transfusion at age 9."

cancel ×

120 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

us censors glowbull atrocities documentation (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860094)

it's probably not 'stuff that matters' or completely contagious/100% fatal (yet).

the corepirate nazi illuminati is always hunting that patch of red on almost everyones' neck. if they cannot find yours (greed, fear ego etc...) then you can go starve. that's their (slippery/slimy) 'platform' now. see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

never a better time to consult with/trust in our creators. the lights are coming up rapidly all over now. see you there?

greed, fear & ego (in any order) are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of our dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children. not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one, & the terminal damage to our atmosphere (see also: manufactured 'weather', hot etc...). see you on the other side of it? the lights are coming up all over now. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be your guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. we now have some choices. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on your brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

"The current rate of extinction is around 10 to 100 times the usual background level, and has been elevated above the background level since the Pleistocene. The current extinction rate is more rapid than in any other extinction event in earth history, and 50% of species could be extinct by the end of this century. While the role of humans is unclear in the longer-term extinction pattern, it is clear that factors such as deforestation, habitat destruction, hunting, the introduction of non-native species, pollution and climate change have reduced biodiversity profoundly.' (wiki)

"I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview. "How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report. "Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."--

"The wealth of the universe is for me. Every thing is explicable and practical for me .... I am defeated all the time; yet to victory I am born." --emerson

no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being. our soul purpose here is to care for one another. failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'. & recently (about 10,000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding & excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.

consult with/trust in your creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." )one does not need to agree whois in charge to grasp the notion that there may be some assistance available to us(

boeing, boeing, gone.

Re:us censors glowbull atrocities documentation (0)

Luke has no name (1423139) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860126)

Are you ALWAYS awake?

ROFL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860180)

It's not just one person posting that, dumbass. It's copypasta.

Are you ALWAYS so stupid?

Re:ROFL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860554)

Are you ALWAYS a douche?

Re:ROFL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860698)

Yes.

seeing as unprecedented evile NEVER sleeps (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860646)

it requires/demands frequent/constant attention/feeding, like any disease(d)/ego. its' needs can never be even partially met however, so it must be disempowered from time to time by the raised awareness of its' intendead motives towards life (us) itself. the 'sins' of the father.... blah blah blah. you know. stuff like that. it's so serious now, that disbelief has been temporarily suspended. see you there?

Fuck China (3, Insightful)

XPeter (1429763) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860106)

Mod me flamebait or troll, but to hell with any country in the world that deems it proper to censor their people.

Re:Fuck China (3, Insightful)

Jerrei (1515395) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860160)

I'm sure what you meant to say was "to hell with any country that is open about censorship, and doesn't hide behind the media and state secrets".

Re:Fuck China (2, Insightful)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860388)

I'm sure what you meant to say was "to hell with any country that is open about censorship, and doesn't hide behind the media and state secrets".

The degree of open censorship within a country is proportional to the number of bullets that country is willing to use to enforce its censorship. So its not really a positive that they don't bother to hide it.

Re:Fuck China (0, Offtopic)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861510)

US citizens bought enough guns in three months to supply every soldier in China and India with a rifle and enough ammunition in one month to have them shoot that rifle around 450 times.

Re:Fuck China (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861920)

And the US government bought enough big guns and heavy artillery to make sure they could quell any insurrection by US citizens wielding said guns 100x over.

What could in theory cause such an insurrection? Dissatisfaction with US government policies, and lack of adequate representation of workers and small business, while adopting adverse pro-government, pro-corporation, pro-union socialist-fascist policies, and intentionally taking no action against crisis situations such as BP oil spell, in attempt to exacerbate them allowing further promotion of anti-USian agendas.

Re:Fuck China (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864348)

Slow inexorable change in how government treats it citizens with not a lot of pain or suffering on the part of the citizens just discomfort. It's been happening for a long time. It really does not matter who is in charge as it is a natural function of government to acquire power. We may be past the point where citizens can make any sort of effective reduction in that power. I do not know how long it will take but I will most likely be to old or already dead when it happens.

Re:Fuck China (5, Insightful)

Aboroth (1841308) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860398)

Oh please. Your implication is surely that there is some country such as, I don't know, the USA that is just as China bad but hides it, somehow making China more admirable. That is such a ridiculous assertion that my head just exploded. I'm sure the people living in China know all about this recent activity and are testament to the fact that... oh wait, no they don't, they have no idea what is going on, and there is no legal avenue to find out.

mod parent up (1, Insightful)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860770)

Oh please. Your implication is surely that there is some country such as, I don't know, the USA that is just as China bad but hides it, somehow making China more admirable.

Indeed, the fact that what censorship there is in the US might be disguised or hidden is itself a sign of freedom. Otherwise the boot would come down just as it does in China. "At least they are honest about it" only means that they are more willing to use force to suppress dissent, and don't fear dissent since they can imprison or kill dissenters. Don't like it? They'll imprison or kill you too.

Re:mod parent up (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32861212)

Using force to support censorship *IS* more admirable than using due process of law.

Let me make this clear. Censorship is always, unconditionally, evil. No exceptions. Now--this is a philosophical axiom I hold. You can try to find exceptions--but for me, it is a core premise. You cannot censor evil without doing greater harm. Given censorship is unconditionally evil, then I would *rather* have the evil done by violence and force than through some orderly systematic process. People at least recognize and react to immediate violence. At least then men of courage and honor are likely to destroy their government. It's honest, it's candid--it's available for inspection by the global community.

Due process of law is just a proxy for the ultimate and final threat of violence by the legal system under the guise of democratic process. And when censorship enters the question, you can't even challenge the law. That's right--you can't challenge censorship in the US. Witness the cases being thrown out left and right. Oh, ONE case made it--and that judge was LEGALLY IN THE WRONG.

"Due process of law" is an illusion used to maintain the status quo. I can challenge any law I want--as long as I have standing. Oh wait--I can't show standing because the existence of evidence is classified. Because my own evidence would be confiscated from me. Because the judge himself is not allowed to see it. Or the jurors. Because I have no chance of success, no recourse, no evidence--by definition of legal fiction!

Fuck. that. I'd rather see nations burn out fast than witness a slow agonizing death by disingenuous ambivalence and sophistry.

Re:mod parent up (1)

equex (747231) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861934)

And then mod _this_ parent up. Sir, you just poked a hole in the Matrix using about 1650 letters. I saw them as green semi-japanese nuggets of wisdom raining vertically down my monitor.

Re:mod parent up (1)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 4 years ago | (#32862052)

Your matrix must be different from mine so. Among the flapping holes in his argument, a) some censorship is probably acceptable when the communication itself becomes an act of violence (cf child pornography, snuff movies), b) inability to understand that "orderly systematic process" and violence are the same thing in places like China, and there is a substantial difference between that and law and order, and c) tha gaping self contradictions in the post, for example, "That's right--you can't challenge censorship in the US" versus "Witness the cases being thrown out left and right."; if you can't challenge it how are cases even reaching the courts?

It does hit the right buzzwords to give one a vague feeling of self righteous indignation and victimisation while making almost zero sense though, I will give it that.

Re:Fuck China (1, Offtopic)

noidentity (188756) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860920)

You're right; here in the USA, we know about all censorship that occurs. Of course, we have lots of crazy conspiracy-types who make lots of silly claims, but we know not to listen to them since they're crazy, duh.

Re:Fuck China (0)

Jerrei (1515395) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861950)

"no they don't, they have no idea what is going on, and there is no legal avenue to find out."

What happened to Kennedy? and what "legal avenue" would you use to find out? The western world might be the lesser of two evils, but it's still that. You are implying it isn't as much as I was implying that China was somehow more admirable.

Re:Fuck China (1)

the way (22503) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864980)

I'm sure the people living in China know all about this recent activity and are testament to the fact that... oh wait, no they don't, they have no idea what is going on, and there is no legal avenue to find out.

Why would they have no idea what's going on? They can read Slashdot just like you can, and therefore can find out about this from the same source as you have. There are also an enormous number of Chinese-language blogs with similar content.

China's firewall is, in practice (in my experience) fairly limited, and fairly random. None of the sites I read day to day were blocked anywhere I went in China, except for blogger.com blogs (although other blogging sites I read, such as Wordpress, were not blocked). I found people in China to be very well informed (at least, the folks in the cities - the 800m peasants in China of course don't in general have access to the internet, because they can't afford it).

Re:Fuck China (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861894)

China is not the least bit open about their censorship.

There are just some things they censor that they don't mind the public finding out that they censor.

Obviously they don't mind the public knowing they have some censorship programs.

They also have little control of foreign nationals such as the director of that NGO reporting the fact they censored it, without creating a diplomatic incident.

Buth there ARE things China censors and doesn't want the public to know that they've censored anything, they hide behind the media and state secrets all the time.

Re:Fuck China (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860278)

So...to hell with probably all of them? (at the least pretty much all "notable" ones)

Re:Fuck China (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861262)

Whatever it takes!

Re:Fuck China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860380)

Mod me flamebait or troll

I really didn't want to, but I couldn't figure out how to mod you "pointless, uninsightful drivel".

Re:Fuck China (1, Insightful)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860598)

What about -1 , "Censorship" ?

He basically said what i was thinking ( i can't speak for anyone else ) , but i don't say it , because i don't want to modded down.
So in a sense , that's a form a self-imposed censorship.

Re:Fuck China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32861130)

...and their not even Christians!!! Who'd have thought it possible?

Re:Fuck China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32861282)

Mod me flamebait or troll, but to hell with any country in the world that deems it proper to censor their people.

I concur. To hell with the entire world!

Re:Fuck China (1)

stimpleton (732392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864562)

"Mod me flamebait or troll, but to hell with any country in the world that deems it proper to censor their people."

I am currently in correspondence with a person who posted a documentary on You Tube about Bergen-Belsen concentration camp [wikipedia.org] , and that video has been removed for TOS violation.

While Google, of course, is not the US government, they will be staying within bounds influenced by the Administration.

While it is easy to stand of a soap box and say "Fuck China" for its censorship, it is not so easy when a target is so close to home, aye?

Could someone censor this man? (2, Funny)

linforcer (923749) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860120)

Such foul language.

China Censorship Is Not News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860124)

Its not anything new, its a way of life for them. The fact of the matter is that censorship of any kind is a well established and legal procedure used to protect the interests of the Chinese government. You may not like it but that is how it is over there.

I have no idea why this case deserves to be on slashdot. It's not really nerd news worthy.

Re:China Censorship Is Not News (5, Insightful)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860152)

The day we start accepting it is the way we lose.

Re:China Censorship Is Not News (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861186)

True of both sides.

China Censorship Is News (5, Insightful)

Robotron23 (832528) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860216)

I think you're totally wrong.

With the regression of freedoms in the western world (Anglosphere especially) , we can draw parallels with situations that've arose in our own countries. Truth be told, when authority is sufficiently potent it will attempt to sweep anything that suggests shortcomings on its part firmly under the carpet. In the end people are less informed, and in this case when we've a health matter it's obviously counter to the well-being of the population at large to suppress stories like this one. AIDS is a big problem in China; not nearly the same level as it is in sub-saharan Africa, but nevertheless it is a large public health concern on around the same level as the US or parts of Europe.

It's news because of how much we ourselves have shifted in that direction, under guise of 'stopping the terrorists' or 'protecting the children' or any other stock reason that gets trotted out every time something oppressive gets on the statute. Unlike the past where authoritarian soceity spawned from power-hungry people after a revolution, our journey in that direction is an evolutionary process; a softly, softly approach.

I've spoken with individuals from China over the years; they know perfectly well how corrupt and rotten the whole Communist party is from the honchos in Beijing to the district governors, to petty civil servants. The whole system is infested with crooks and sanctimonious hypocrites; it actually makes the British or US government seem rather decent in comparison. But even though many Chinese are aware of this, it doesn't alleviate the fact they're denied knowledge which could well help in the battle with HIV. That some person under an assumption of their own moral superiority would deny people knowledge about something like this and send some thugs over to pester the creator of the work is pretty appalling.

Re:China Censorship Is News (1, Insightful)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860252)

I wish I had mod points, because the parent is deeply Insightful.

Re:China Censorship Is News (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860332)

I am completely right, and you are dead wrong.

This is not news for nerds. It is not a science issue, censorship of AIDS issues is not even something out of the ordinary in China. Slashdot like to drum out the usual "China censors XXX" stories to bait the self-righteous freedom fighters into replying and demonizing China. Its just easy clickbait for them. If there was any tech or science relevance, it might be ok, but this one is ridiculous.

Checkmate, I win. Game, Set, Match.

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860914)

Still better than another fucking iGadget story!

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860622)

I agree but I think it depends on where in the U.S. you live. In some places in the U.S. it is very difficult to see the corruption, in other places, corruption is all one sees. For the most part, many in the U.S. are very compliant and neither question nor challenge the government and therefore they don't really see how repressive the government can be. That has started to change some as things like financial and economic security have begun to threaten people's livelihood. It is always easier to see it when it happens to someone else then when it is happening to oneself.

HIV/AIDS instruction has also been challenged here in the U.S. I'm sure you and others recall the debate about condoms versus abstinence, correct? There was many cases where organizations and schools had to have certain HIV/AIDS programs cut because of the threat of funding cuts, lawsuits, etc. as condom use was seen as promoting sex. I think a difference between here and China is that in China the police are used, in the U.S. there is no need to use the police as the population happily censors itself when the threat to capital is presented.

Just some thoughts.

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32864392)

Not providing public funding for something (or debating whether or not to provide public funding) is not the same thing as censorship. We don't provide public education funding for furries, but you can find them on the web, no problem.

You are mistaking "i want those people over there to say what I want them to say, but they won't say it" for "they are being censored". You want to have a school that teaches bondage fetishes in sex ed? Go start a private school and you can do it to your heart's content. Well, you'll have a few things to watch out for when dealing with young kids that you wouldn't with adults, but if the parents of your "we teach femdom and horse-girl" school kids want their kids educated that way, the government won't really have all that much to say about it.

Re:China Censorship Is News (3, Insightful)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860708)

And to add to this line of reasoning, in the US, the abstinence neo-cons have censored, by removing funds from adequate sex education in the US. SO we have as a result, far more STDs, unwanted pregnancies, children in poverty, and the emotional and financial toll for these.

The Bush Administration did it by withholding funds, condom education, free needles, and many other action that would appear on the surface to condone their visage of immoral behavior, but instead, just abetted stupidity.

Try as you will, you won't stop people form having sex. A rational expectation is to make people educated about choices, and push them as much as is rational towards making choices that don't cause pregnancy or spread disease. The Chinese, in this case, are in denial, just as George Bush was.

Re:China Censorship Is News (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861460)

At least in the USA you can fight back.

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32861818)

No you can't you stupid fuckwit, or you'll be thrown in a cell without a trial as a terrist.

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32862150)

Try as you will, you won't stop people form having sex. A rational expectation is to make people educated about choices, and push them as much as is rational towards making choices that don't cause pregnancy or spread disease. The Chinese, in this case, are in denial, just as George Bush was.

I suspect you fail to understand the rationale. Just because you disagree with the other side does not mean they are stupid. I am sure George Bush is well aware of STDs and how helpful sex ed can be. But the people he was trying to appease (it's politics; it's hard to tell what he himself actually wanted) believe that the creation of new life is sacred, and should be protected at all costs --- even if the quality of that life is diminished by a higher prevalence of STDs.

Re:China Censorship Is News (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 4 years ago | (#32862258)

More STDs== more health costs.

More preventable pregnancies== more health and real costs.

Censoring the information did little good. Do you think people were abstinent? Can I sell you property in the Gulf?

It's censorship. The info needs to be out there. There are lots of people that would make different decisions based on 1) real information about STD and pregnancy mitigation rationales (said more plainly than I am) and giving people condoms and needles.

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32862490)

(I am the same AC.)

I did not say it was a good decision for keeping health costs low. I am very much so in favor of good sex ed, etc. I was just pointing out that the other side might not be stupid, they might have different priorities (ex. more life is more important than the monetary cost of that life). Understanding point of the view of the anti-sex ed people and reasoning from there may be a better way to get support than pointing out that not teaching sex ed is stupid. I am not really sure exactly what that constitutes.

Re:China Censorship Is News (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 4 years ago | (#32862662)

God is on their side. I've found that negotiating with the pseudo-Christian mafia always boils down to insipid scriptural citations.

You can wave the evidence right under their noses, and they'll deny its existence, or cite trickery.

What results is that a minority of mostly WASconvervativePs make rules for what's become a heavily diverse constituency. As Dorothy might say, we're not in Kansas anymore.

Coalition building is a nice concept. There are constituencies that aren't going to be able to be considered 'mainstream' any more, and their participation appears to them as being marginalized. That is a reality: they cannot impose their religious views on those that won't accept them.

Yes, moral components are still a strong piece how the mainstream lives. Dominating them, evangelizing them, imposing luridly awful religious restrictions, isn't the crux of liberty. Commonality is.... composed of democracy within this republic. Marginalizing thought isn't a good place to start.

Re:China Censorship Is News (1)

Cytotoxic (245301) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864452)

That is a reality: they cannot impose their religious views on those that won't accept them.

Yes, moral components are still a strong piece how the mainstream lives. Dominating them, evangelizing them, imposing luridly awful religious restrictions, isn't the crux of liberty. Commonality is.... composed of democracy within this republic. Marginalizing thought isn't a good place to start.

And yet your posts on this thread indicate that you would very much love to impose your morality on others, particularly families with children and the children of those families. And that you would very much love to marginalize the thoughts of those you disagree with.

Another strange idea you present: Commonality is the crux of liberty. That is almost an oxymoron. Liberty means the freedom to do as you will. Commonality means the same as everyone else. Those two don't really go together very well. Unless, of course, you meant to suggest that a commonality of a communally held belief in the fundamental import of liberty is the crux of liberty.

Re:China Censorship Is News (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 4 years ago | (#32865926)

No. I'd like to educate them, using scientific evidence rather than the insanity of Leviticus. Liberty is commonality that's experienced both personally, and also as a societal more.

Some of us need orthodoxy to lead us. Others see the human animal and know that it's not intelligent, and needs education to make choices that aren't hormonal... that won't lead to devastating consequences. We help educate; the choices are theirs. Withholding education, withholding funding for condoms and needles is what causes the crises we have: untold abortion/unwanted pregnancy, poverty, HIV and STDs at peak levels, and some smug dumbass believing that they did right by their Maker.

Re:China Censorship Is News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32864424)

Refusal to fund speech is not the same thing as censoring speech. There is no ban on talking about condoms in the US. If someone else decides that they don't want to speak words that you would like for them to speak, that is not the same as censorship. Your entire post is a canard. Besides, attaching Bush's name to said policies is addle-brained.

The only thing the substance of your post argues for is the elimination of a federal role in education. That way, if Wasilla Alaska wants to keep their kids in the dark about sex they are free to do so, while Springfield, Mass. can teach their kids about the advantages of finger-banging and handies as a hedge against VD.

Health or Politics? (3, Interesting)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860136)

I would think the government would agree to distributing information purely about health issues. I wonder about the tone of the film. Is it wrapped up in criticism of the government? AI's site, of course, portrays it as totally innocent. I clicked on "Watch Documentary" but it stalled out.

Re:Health or Politics? (5, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860182)

Probably the fact that it makes the Chinese government look like inept morons. A lot of the disease transmission was due to incompetence by their health authorities in terms of blood transfusion techniques.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

naz404 (1282810) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860214)

Kevin Peter Hall [imdb.com] , the original actor in the Predator suit in Predator 1 and Predator 2 died that way, AIDS via incompetent blood transfusion after a car crash. He was in Misfits of Science [imdb.com] too. Such a loss :(

Re:Health or Politics? (2, Interesting)

Marcika (1003625) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860870)

Kevin Peter Hall [imdb.com] , the original actor in the Predator suit in Predator 1 and Predator 2 died that way, AIDS via incompetent blood transfusion after a car crash. He was in Misfits of Science [imdb.com] too. Such a loss :(

More importantly, Isaac Asimov [wikipedia.org] died that way as well -- and the doctors cajoled his family into hushing it up for decade (until the doctors were dead as well).

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860796)

Also China's government still has a real problem, that many totalitarian type governments do, of thinking that their wishes make reality. They are used to in normal life saying "This will happen!" and it does. Their word is law and all that jazz.

So what you get because of that is an attitude of "If we don't pay attention to it, it isn't real." This happened with SARS. China didn't want it to be a problem, so the government basically ignored it and suppressed information on it. However, it eventually grew to the point of biting them in the ass more or less and they couldn't just ignore it anymore.

Same kind of deal here as well. Not only do they not want state hospitals to look inept, but they don't want to admit there's a problem they can't solve. AIDS is something they cannot deal with, just like all the rest of us. We can contain it, we can treat the afflicted, but we can't actually deal with it, stop it. They don't want ot admit that, they don't want AIDS to be a problem in China, so they are just denying it.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861504)

Not only do they not want state hospitals to look inept, but they don't want to admit there's a problem they can't solve... they don't want AIDS to be a problem in China, so they are just denying it.

Quoting Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] : Early efforts to control the HIV/AIDS epidemic emphasized enforcement of laws against high-risk behavior, but later lessons from effective interventions in pilot programs and in other countries (e.g. needle exchange programs in Australia and condom campaigns for sex workers in Thailand) have led to a more evidence-based approach... Three major initiatives are being scaled up concurrently. First, the government has prioritized interventions to control the epidemic in injection drug users, sex workers, men who have sex with men, and plasma donors. Second, routine HIV testing is being implemented in populations at high risk of infection. Third, the government is providing treatment for infected individuals."

Wikipedia cites this paper [thelancet.com] from the Lancet (as authoritative as you can get), and the abstract seems consistent with what Wikipedia says.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860860)

Probably the fact that it makes the Chinese government look like inept morons. A lot of the disease transmission was due to incompetence by their health authorities in terms of blood transfusion techniques.

As it was in every other country. Including the USA. I remember Isaac Asimov, for one, was infected via a transfusion and died of AIDS. Of course, China should have learnt from the USA, but they were sure that it was just a disease of foreigners (as Americans used to think it was only gays and Haitians).

Re:Health or Politics? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32863186)

Of course, China should have learnt from the USA, but they were sure that it was just a disease of foreigners (as Americans used to think it was only gays and Haitians).

That's silly! Everyone knows that it only exists in San Francisco and Africa.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

Jedi Alec (258881) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860694)

I would think the government would agree to distributing information purely about health issues.

Indeed. Only a total idiot would think it's a good idea to deliberately withhold information about health issues for political reasons. Speaking of which, how's that whole "abstinence only" thing working out?

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

Entropius (188861) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861226)

The abstinence-only people deserve to rot in a hell of their own creation just like the Chinese censors.

Just because one thing is bad doesn't make another bad thing less bad.

Re:Health or Politics? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32862506)

Why do you condamn people who practice abstinence and did not do or say anything that affect you? If it is their choice to abstinance, who are you to tell them not to do otherwise?

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

Entropius (188861) | more than 4 years ago | (#32863174)

You're missing political context here.

"Abstinence-only" refers to radical Christians in the USA who believe that, rather than offering comprehensive sex education to children, we should instead teach them that any sexual activity before marriage is sinful and exceptionally dangerous, and that teaching them about contraception will only encourage them to have sex, so we shouldn't do that.

They're not just practicing abstinence, they're insisting the rest of us do so too, and depriving children of access to education -- often, to crucial information that will keep them safe. And THAT is the problem.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

Cytotoxic (245301) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864474)

You're missing political context here.

...

They're not just practicing abstinence, they're insisting the rest of us do so too, and depriving children of access to education -- often, to crucial information that will keep them safe. And THAT is the problem.

Which of course argues against government control of the educational system. But I don't think too many people on either side of that debate would be interested in that obvious conclusion.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861026)

In France, like 20 years ago, a big scandal erupted because of this kind of issue : contaminated blood was being used in transfusion with the knowledge of a lot of people. They tried to shut down leaks but in the end, many people had to resign on some had to go to jail.

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

unixan (800014) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861032)

And sometimes, it's about Politics in Health.

China isn't the first nation to grapple with HIV in blood transfusions. The United States' blood transfusion industry lobbied in the 1980s to suppress the issue over concerns about their reputation and revenue, and succeeded to some degree.

In this case, China's communist government is probably being lobbied, too -- and as an easily corrupted system with great powers, we see instances like this.

Fortunately, there are also top-level politicians trying to turn it it around. [chinacsr.com]

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861346)

Since the glorious healthcare they provide is incapable of making mistakes (by virtue of it's incredible superiority), claiming someone got AIDS from a transfusion borders on blasphemy

Re:Health or Politics? (1)

mjwalshe (1680392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32865122)

There was a scandal with tainted blood donors that spread AIDS to people who had blood transfusions that the local government knew about and tried to cover up.

http://www.asiahealthcareblog.com/2010/04/27/blood-money-why-blood-transfusions-are-so-dirty-in-china/ [asiahealthcareblog.com]

Great news (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860186)

They can kill themselves off with aids and save my kids from having to do it the old fashioned way when it all kicks off in 20 years or so.

Re:Great news (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860852)

Self-damage by competitors (the one-child policy, etc) IS good, though it's not PC to say that or imply we aren't all Gaia's children.

The low birth rate in what's left of the Soviet Union, and the demographic backfire awaiting the ChiComs are the sort of chickens I like to see come home to roost.

Re:Great news (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864726)

Ex-Soviet Union generally doesn't have very exceptionally low birth rate; the rates are what they are for Russia largely due to whole generation of male alcoholics and drinking-related illnesses that are killing them.

And ultimately we're all on this boat; breeding while probably already beyond the sustainable levels for the planet, in some of those places even outright using 3-4 times more resources per capita than there is available long term (without taking them from the past or borrowing from the future), won't bring anything good...most likely especially for places doing it.

good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporting (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860196)

China bans hysteria reporting. The use of a few isolated cases to make the public panic and demand very expensive 100% fixes is not good for society. It reminds me of terrorism and the Toyota break problem coverage. You would be more likely hit by lightning than a victim of these problems. Nothing can be 100% perfect so it is false reporting when media does not reveal the statistics and pretends like the isolated cases are epidemic problems.

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (5, Insightful)

shadowofwind (1209890) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860268)

Under the guise of banning hysteria reporting, china bans anything that makes corrupt public officials look bad.

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860272)

If you got AIDS from a blood transfusion, would you be saying "Gee, I'm so glad they didn't waste money testing that blood"?

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (5, Interesting)

sarysa (1089739) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860350)

I think their greater concern is that because their healthcare system is government run, the panic you describe would make people question the government's competency, thereby undermining its authority. I'm curious to how China would react if the subject of the documentary got HIV through sex.

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860722)

Probably by putting the blame solely on the subject, as the subject has clearly demonstrated morally questionable behaviour unfit for a Perfect Citizen.

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861054)

China's health care isn't nearly as government-run as you probably think it is. As with most other aspects of the Chinese economy, it's been communist-in-name-only for decades; the health care "system" they have now is a public-private patchwork that's just as Byzantine as it is in the US.

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860364)

Sure, nothing can be perfect. However, medical fuck-ups are hardly uncommon. I personally know of a dozen people who were misdiagnosed or otherwise abused by the medical and dental "professions". There are many, many more incompetent doctors, nurses, and techs than you can imagine. Butchers - a lot of 'em.

'Hysteria reporting'? Nope. (1)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860500)

The use of a few isolated cases to make the public panic and demand very expensive 100% fixes is not good for society.

A bit of Googling would tell you that HIV infections are relatively small part of China's population. BUT: blood transfusions being a significant cause. And with infections to donors too: donate blood, get HIV, can you believe that.

I read numbers ranging from thousands to tens of thousands in linked reports. That's AIDS caused in that manner. Confirmed cases and/or educated estimates. So that would not include HIV-infected people that haven't got AIDS yet (some multiple of above numbers). With the medical science being where it is, eventual AIDS cases too. That would also not include unconfirmed/unreported cases, people who are infected with HIV but don't know this yet, or recent infections due to blood transfusions. Which are probably still happening here & there.

All of this combined very newsworthy I think, and certainly more than 'a few isolated cases'. So Chinese government is definitely hurting their people by sweeping this under the carpet.

Re:good move, USA should also ban hysteria reporti (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861370)

Of course, the film and the group behind it also advocate just compensation and support for those isolated cases who suffer because the system isn't 100%.

Whereas the US? (0)

mutherhacker (638199) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860286)

Whereas the United States doesn't? Check WikiLeaks^^

It's bad, mkay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860322)

Censorship is bad, mkay.

china has overpopulation (1)

allo (1728082) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860650)

they have no problem with some people dying of hiv ...

Not so unusual (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32860672)

If you're familiar with the Chinese government who have been willfully ignoring and denying the high infection rate of AIDS among the rural population.

unusual? (4, Informative)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 4 years ago | (#32860840)

"Amnesty International is reporting an unusual case of censorship"

TFA doesn't use the word "unusual". And censorship like this isn't at all unusual. Aids activists have been censored, threatened and killed in many countries, not just China.

Re:unusual? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32865222)

TFA doesn't use the word "unusual".

Of course it doesn't. That's due to "Value Add" (tm) by our beloved "editors" at this site.

Fuck them. Really.

wow (2, Insightful)

Entropy997 (1694668) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861004)

Those frikkin' Chinese will censor ANYTHING that makes them look bad. Our blood banks were tainted until what, the late 80's? We at least can talk about it.

Maybe... (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861118)

...the powers that be are trying to cover up corruption?

I can imagine that the communist overlords wouldn't want their state run hospital implicated in anything naughty.

How China's censoring of epidemic info will fare.. (1)

christoofar (451967) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861342)

Oh this is like the last time they tried to censor information about Avian Fl*COUGH*COUGH*burp*hack*COUGH*cough... :-(~~~~~~~

The final AIDS solution (1)

daeglo (1822126) | more than 4 years ago | (#32861750)

I'm surprised that China doesn't go with a more aggressive stance towards the problem of HIV/AIDS. (Keep in mind this was suggested to me by my great-uncle as he was dying of AIDS in the early 90's:) After having a positive test and confirming with a second more controlled test for HIV/AIDS, have the person immediately euthanized. And before any of you try the cop out of "My relation/friend had AIDS I don't want them killed," keep in mind had we done that 25 or 30 years ago it would have saved MILLIONS of lives since. The deaths from AIDS in it's entire history would have been in the hundred thousands. My uncle would gladly have been euthanized after being diagnosed had the law allowed it.

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

kanto (1851816) | more than 4 years ago | (#32862560)

Yeah, let's create a situation where getting caught with a disease means instant death; then we'll really be on top of things.

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 4 years ago | (#32863218)

In the US, life is considered so "precious" that we mandate everyone live in agony for as long as possible no matter the condition.

Re:The final AIDS solution (2, Insightful)

Urkki (668283) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864950)

In the US, life is considered so "precious" that we mandate everyone live in agony for as long as possible no matter the condition.

I thought that the public health care in US is in such a state, that this doesn't happen? Who is mandated to pay for this kind of extended care?

Hmm, or was it so that there's this class of people who are considered too rich to have free health care, but too poor to insure themselves or pay for it themselves? So is it like, if you're poor enough, government will keep you alive as long as you live, and if you're rich enough, your insurance or your family will keep you alive. But if you're in the between, then you're free to rot to death at home?

Despite the tone of text above, I'm actually really curious. How is for example cancer or type 1 diabetes diagnosis and treatment in the US, for the poor, the middle class and the rich?

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

daeglo (1822126) | more than 4 years ago | (#32868060)

I can't respond as far as upper class goes, however when I had Hodgkin's lymphoma as a lower class child the government covered nearly every dime of treatment. When I move out on my own and became lower-middle class, simply having an abscessed tooth cost me about 2 months of my gross pay. Getting injured and taking an ambulance ride cost me about 7 months gross pay.

Given those experiences, I would be inclined to agree with each or your posits.

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

Cytotoxic (245301) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864496)

Yeah, why would a country that has rigid and draconian population controls (one child) in place avoid taking an aggressive stance against a deadly communicable disease? It is almost as if losing MILLIONS of lives is of no consequence to them!

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 4 years ago | (#32864926)

I'm surprised that China doesn't go with a more aggressive stance towards the problem of HIV/AIDS. (Keep in mind this was suggested to me by my great-uncle as he was dying of AIDS in the early 90's:) After having a positive test and confirming with a second more controlled test for HIV/AIDS, have the person immediately euthanized. And before any of you try the cop out of "My relation/friend had AIDS I don't want them killed," keep in mind had we done that 25 or 30 years ago it would have saved MILLIONS of lives since. The deaths from AIDS in it's entire history would have been in the hundred thousands. My uncle would gladly have been euthanized after being diagnosed had the law allowed it.

Eh, you're suggesting compulsory HIV tests, and anybody with positive results would be immediately arrested, and if followup test showed positive result (or perhaps, in especially in a country like China, somebody in power decided that this person clearly has HIV because of his political activities...), then *BANG*?

And you're from China...? If a lot of people think that it's ok for government to wield that kind of power, no wonder things are as they are over there... Well, I guess it's a cultural thing. I think in future (a few hundred years) history books (in whatever form they will be then), Mao will be considered an emperor... :-)

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

daeglo (1822126) | more than 4 years ago | (#32868144)

No, I am not from china. I am from the "good ol'" USA. And yes, the only actual "cure" for any virus to date has been a high velocity lead injection or a super sized dose of truth serum (sodium pentathol). Even the common cold (rhinovirus) simply has to run its course. Compulsory testing and removing the virus from the population would be the only solution, draconian or not. Should all virii such as rhinovirus have such measures, not in my opinion. Should virii which have the possibility of pandemic? Only if we wish to save more lives than would be taken manually.

Re:The final AIDS solution (1)

aamcf (651492) | more than 4 years ago | (#32865520)

Are you sure we would have saved millions of lives? Killing everyone who is HIV positive would not have stopped the pandemic, and may even have made it worse.

Today, HIV testing is routine and has very little stigma. If you have an HIV test, and it is positive, then you can take steps to minimise your chances of infecting other people, and you can manage the illness (at least to some degree). There is clear incentive to get tested, and so people do it. Stigma-fee HIV testing means the spread of the virus can be reduced.

But suppose a positive HIV test meant execution. Nobody would have one voluntarily. People would become HIV positive, and because they did not know they were HIV positive, they would continue to spread the infection. Probably the only people who would be identified were the people who were already in the terminal stages of AIDS.

two sides to every story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32862684)

Not sure why the Chinese would want to censor AIDS info, but it's probably akin to half the the time that I would like to censor western media bullshit under the guise of info/journalism.

For example, the media in the west have essentially stopped reporting the racial backgrounds of criminals, in order to try to deceive the citizenry that the blacks and browns are responsible for 80+% of the crime in western societies.
Wouldn't be kosher with the government/media desire for importing more third world parasites.

For example, American soldiers dying in droves in Iraq/Afghan, but Uncle Sam don't want you to know.
Sucks to be a "hero" these days. Especially since they died for nothing other than so some fat greasy puppet master can loot a foreign country for profit.

Anti-CCP Sentiment Prevention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32863238)

The CCP will censor anything that risks portraying the CCP as incompetent or inadequate. They do this to prevent anti-CCP sentiments and uprising against the CCP and maintain stability within the country. This is a very common strategy for them. Basically, this means the CCP will censor anything it feels insecure about.

well ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32867380)

the HIV-AIDS theory is full of holes anyway ...

Clever name (1)

Lew Perin (30124) | more than 4 years ago | (#32867810)

Whatever the merits of the documentary, the name of the organization Aizhixing is extremely sly. It literally means Love, Knowledge, Action; it rhymes with Aizibing, which means AIDS. This reminds me of the wordplay in the Grass Mud Horse [wikipedia.org] episode.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?