Dear group

I want to repsond to Edwards prompt to discuss the low prevalence in the
Philippines. Of course there are some mysteries regarding low prevalence, but
its maybe not so complicated. Look at Laos, its probably even lower, yet it
borders the Golden Triangle and Chiang Rai, probably the hottest HIV spot in
Thailand. And it has lareg-scale migration into Northeast Thailand. Why is
Vietnam still regarded as in its initial stages (see Philippines artice)?
Because it 'only' has an IDU tranmsitted disease, and as bad as that is it does
not have a sexually transmitted epidemic, therefore it does not have an
'explosion'. It looks like further explosions may not happen, slow moving tricky
epidemics may emerge though.

Why? the ingredients for an explosion required, it seems, at least in Asia, high
intensity sexual contacts (like brothels with high turnover rates); the
existences of high rates of STI; and young immature girls in the sex industry
helps.

Like it says in the Philippines article:

"Experts say a lucky combination of factors may for the moment have slowed the
arrival of an epidemic, including a low ratio of customers to sex workers,
low rates of certain other sexually transmitted diseases and limited
intravenous drug use".
sounds too simple but may be applicable to the three countries mentioned - two
of them communist countries that almost wiped out STIs.

regards, Allan Beesey
E-mail: a_beesey@...