Quote: (01-15-2012 10:20 AM)playa_with_a_passport Wrote:
Quote: (01-15-2012 02:54 AM)joehoya Wrote:
Quote: (01-15-2012 02:07 AM)Hooligan Harry Wrote:
...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...121355.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCR5
Harry, thanks for the information. It is interesting reading. I retract my statement about there being no genetic link of decreased resistance. Thanks for keeping everyone honest and informed.
Come on joehoya, don’t tell me you are so easily bamboozled, by a Wikipedia article at that? There’s a reason why even shitty community colleges in the guetto don’t allow you to use it as a source for anything. While its true that most Black people lack CCR5 delta32 mutation so do most White people. So the genetic explanation is really moot. Funny, I always thought that Scandinavian had low HIV rates because easy access to health care,nutrition, education and overall low poverty rates. I wouldn’t have never guessed that it was because they were immune to the Monster.[/sarcasm] Thus, you prison population examples explains perfectly as to why HIV is higher among Blacks at least in the US....
I stand by my prison population example as being the PRIMARY reason for the difference. However, I cannot say that there are ZERO genetic factors that makes blacks more vulnerable. I ignored the Wikipedia article, and focused on the Science Today article, while checking its source.
There are a couple of other journal articles that appear to raise some issue with the findings. HOWEVER, when reading them I came to the conclusion that I don't have the adequate background in Biology (a C in AP Biology almost 20 years ago) to make a judgement without clouding it by what I WANT to see in the data.
If I am not competent to make a judgement on the validity of the scientific evidence, then I won't make one.