SIDA

During my Portuguese lesson I had quite a despondency-inducing debate with Ilidio about AIDS (SIDA in Portuguese).

Ilidio’s theory is that AIDS was artificially introduced to Africa by Europeans to suppress the population growth rate, and that it is maintained in the human population as part of a grand plan. His description of why Europeans would wish to do such a thing - because Africans are seen as more promiscuous - clearly has its roots in colonial attitudes.

The widely criticised former South African leader Jacob Zuma popularised these theories across Southern Africa, and he won’t be the only politician using such arguments to whip up negative sentiments accidentally or deliberately against Europe, the US or whichever other countries have allegedly been involved in the secret AIDS introduction project.

Ilidio acknowledges that the disease originated in wild primates but thinks there has been tampering of the human strain because death comes more quickly to untreated humans than to other primates. In reality it’s hard to know the prognosis in wild primates but if the disease has been present in their populations for longer, which it has, they’ve likely developed ways of resisting whilst living chronically with it.

I believe there is a irrefutable correlation between the proliferation of AIDS and both poverty and suppression. Wherever there are examples of high incidence of HIV or AIDS in a group, I am sure there is an easy comparison to make with a less disadvantaged group. If multiple disadvantages or a history of oppression constrain access to healthcare and information, reduce access to safe practices or generally drive activities underground, then it’s fair to conclude that incidence rates are going to be higher. This theory would fit with sex workers in Cambodia versus Cambodians who aren’t as stigmatised, gay men in the United States who historically haven’t held the same rights as heterosexuals, or black South Africans compared to white South Africans, with greater historical disadvantages in every metric you could wish to investigate.

The theory that the spread of the AIDS epidemic is somehow controlled by a secret nerve centre is upsetting. I felt Ilidio’s comments exposed a damning view of how Africans see themselves in the world order. Yes Africa has been woefully suppressed and providing comprehensive access to fundamental human rights such as education and health services has failed. Yes there is a (deepening?) legacy of economic exploitation of poorer nations by wealthier countries and companies. Yes many in the pharmaceuticals sector prioritise the profiteering of life-saving drugs over the actual matter of saving lives. All of these very complex factors contribute to why Southern Africa has higher rates of HIV and AIDS than somewhere like the UK. And they should be sources of shame for countries and companies that have led exploration and suppression.

Arguing that AIDS is not engineered and introduced might seem to oppose the historical record of how rich have treated poor. But I’m not a conspiracy theorist and all information I’ve ever learnt about HIV and AIDS convinces me of its tragic but natural transmission into the human population in Central Africa and its spread through some of the world’s most disadvantaged groups, with an explosion amongst the general heterosexual population of many African countries.

I tried extremely hard to rebuff the idea that AIDS was engineered by European countries to control fast-growing populations in poorer countries. Doing this convincingly in Portuguese was somewhat of a challenge. If it didn’t have the desired impact, at least it was good practice...