Jim Cooper's Orange County; Proposition 64: The AIDS initiative is debated.

Jim Cooper's going Scotty is made possible by grants from the Harry and Grace steel foundation providing charitable assistance to deserving organizations in the areas of health education and culture by signal landmark incorporated developer of Southern California real estate and builder of Landmark homes by Robert Half an account temps providing permanent and temporary accounting financial and EDP personnel and by Disneyland Park an important part of Orange County for over 30 years. Should California end with AIDS or those who are carriers of the HTL B3 virus be placed on the list of reportable diseases of the State Department of Health Services. Proposition 64 the AIDS initiative statute placed on the November ballot by the Lyndon LaRouche organization says that they should backers argue that such mandatory listing for a victims and those found to be carriers of added body to the AIDS virus will improve the public protection against the disease. But the California Medical Association and other statewide health organizations strongly argue against it saying it would drive AIDS

underground and make the AIDS problem much worse. I'm Jim Cooper in today up a Zen spokesmen on both sides of this controversy the issue. With us today are two widely recognized spokesmen on both sides of the proposition argument. But first let's look at what the California voters will find on their ballot for this issue listed as Proposition 64 proposition 64 Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome AIDS declares an AIDS virus carrier a contagious condition subject to quarantine and reportable disease regulation fiscal impact the measures cost would vary greatly depending upon its interpretation by health officers and the courts. If existing discretionary communicable disease standards were applied to AIDS given the current state of medical knowledge there would be no substantial change in state and local costs. If

measure were interpreted to require added disease controls costs could range to hundreds of millions of dollars per year depending on the measures taken. And now let's meet our guests William Diana Meyer congressman of the thirty ninth district in Fullerton was the first California public official to give his support to proposition 64. He has also carried out a long battle in the Congress with the Public Health Services Center for Disease Control to bar homosexuals from donating blood and for tighter public health control to fight AIDS. He was a signer of the state ballot issue in an argument in favor of Prop 64. Marvin Silverman MDA chairman of the Committee on AIDS and sexually transmissible disease is the AIDS Task Force for the California Medical Association. His immediate past president of the American Foundation for AIDS Research the first foundation dedicated to research into the cause and cure of AIDS. He's director of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation involving care of people involved with AIDS. He was for eight years director of the health for the city of San Francisco. Now I asked each of our guest to make a two minute opening

statement after which I'll ask questions on the issues. At the close of the program it will be asked to make a summary statement. And let's start with Congressman down there. Thank you Jim. During the course of the second world war this nation was 290000 combat personnel to killed in action status. That carnage took place over the course of some three years and eight months. We have about a million in the hands of persons in America today with the virus raids in their blood and we Californians have about 22 percent of that total namely older somewhere around three hundred thirty thousand in my estimate. Any person with a virus in their blood has the capacity to convey that fatal virus to another by a transfer of bodily fluids. What we know today tells us that within five years roughly 30 percent of that total of 300000 or about 100000 Californians will die from

AIDS. The other 70 percent of those that have the virus will suffer some of impairment of their immune system that will bring them into contact with the public health care system. I believe that it's time given the magnitude and extent of this major epidemic in America that we stopped treating and considering AIDS in those with the virus in their blood. As a civil rights issue and begin treating it as a public health issue as our public health officials are required by law to do all along. Jim you says the initiative will add the list of aides to the list of reportable diseases that's a misnomer. It's a common Miss Dormer is a fact. Since March of 83 in this state AIDS has been listed as a reportable disease. All the initiative will do is just add those with the virus to the list of reportable diseases. Initiative is not going to mandate that anybody be tested. It's not going to mandate that anybody be quarantined. It's not going to result in

anyone losing their jobs. That is not already caused by an existing provision of the law. Thank you Chip. I thank you Doctor so much. Thank you. There's absolutely no question this is a serious tragic disease. If the numbers don't indicate it. Just looking around and seeing people in the prime of their life coming down with this serious disease going through a terrible illness and dying. These 86 words which Jim Cooper read to you will do nothing to alter that situation. It is serious. It will continue to be serious. It won't help though it will hurt. It will drive people underground. They won't get tested. They won't come in for treatment early and they won't participate in research which is so necessary for us to get to the end of this disease. There is absolutely nothing in this initiative that gives any powers that do not already exist with public health officials today. We also have a second epidemic. And this

initiative is so amoral because it is stimulating and fostering and fueling the second epidemic. And that's the Epidemic of Fear. In fact they call their group panic which I think is evidence enough of what they're trying to do. But don't be misled. Those against this this initiative of the California Medical Association the California nursing association the California Health Officers Association the California hospital association and as Jim Cooper said Congressman Danny Meyer is the first public health official to come out for this he is the only public official to come out with this. So the candidate Sal Senator Cranston the governor. Mayor Bradley and Senator Wilson are all opposed to this. Everyone who is responsible every health institution every responsible physician is opposed to this initiative and I really urge everyone to listen and vote against it.

And perhaps we can help for our viewers who are going to be listening to this discussion. If we get what the prevailing information is from the Department of Health Services as of today these figures are the latest figures that are available about this terrible disease called AIDS. The total cases since they were first reported in January 1981 five thousand nine hundred ninety two total deaths two thousand nine hundred sixty six from the disease and infected 300000 to 500000. And that's estimated I emphasize the word estimated. That means that those 300000 to 500000 have estimated have the anti-bodies to the aids. In other words the anti-bodies that they're carrying means that they've been exposed to it. And because I say that they've been exposed to does not mean they've got the disease and the preventative of ailing medical wisdom is that 30 percent of that 300000 to 500000 who are carriers of the AIDS anti-body 30 percent of those will go on to get the disease so I think we at the outset of this discussion we all reckon recognize we're dealing here with a very very limp and very deadly disease. The question is I'd like to start with and we should try to come to you when the truth of this is. Well the

California effort against they'd be better or worse if this initiative passes. So my first question gentlemen what would it really do if it becomes law again. Let's see what we can do with 83 86 words that they're going to have decided what will really be the effect if it becomes law. Mr Downer. Jim I think I can illustrate that for our listeners by describing a situation that any physician in our state would encounter. Today if a patient comes to a doctor's office and the doctor examines the patient and finds that that patient exhibits common material disease such as syphilis and gonorrhea that's reportable one of the 58 under existing law the event or going to the public health authorities and the doctor is required by public law to report the finding of that communicable very very ill curable disease to public health authorities. Those are all confidential records as they should be but the point is it's it's part of the accountability of that person to the public health care

system. But contrast that situation with a person that comes into that doctor's office for treatment that has symptoms and a virus for AIDS in their blood the antibodies the antibodies under a law that the male homosexual community got passed in the state legislature in 1985. Get this now before that doctor can test that person's blood with the end of June for the virus for AIDS yes to get the written consent of that patient to do that. And after that doctor gets the written consent of the patient to do that. The law says the one passed in 1985 if that doctor transmittance knowledge of that virus to the public health authorities that doctor is committing a crime. Now contrast where we are or what if it passes the question if it passes what will that how will that situation be addressed. If 64 passes it will take away this non accountability of those with the virus for AIDS in their blood to make them accountable to the public health care system just like any other

person in our society who manifest a curable venereal communicable disease. Doctors don't. Yes and the point that comes in then a minor makes is that it's for curable diseases for the most part. AIDS is not curable so finding out these people and is is not going to help in any way which if you found out that someone was infected you could treat them and carry on with their condition. The real problem that we face here is if it were just a public health issue would be one thing. But people like Congressman Dan Meyer who are so opposed to homosexuals and the homosexuals lifestyle I would like to see them constrained isolated separated which will help in no way to reduce the spread of this disease knowing that someone is infected. That doctor the state the individual. That the individual should know whether they're infected. They will stay away from getting testing under this initiative for fear of being exposed losing their insurance benefits losing their job losing their living

situation having to be pushed out onto the street. So the only thing that will come from knowing about this will be a tax on the individual. What won't come from knowing this is any better public health. Because if it were better why wouldn't every public health official instead of none be supporting this none support this in the state. They have the power to do as much as can be done with this disease right now. All this bill will do is drive it underground and we're going to end up spending so much money we're spending money now trying to defeat it in trying to pass it. None of which is going into care none of which is going to cure none of which is going in the research. And as the estimates you showed if it's going to be enacted and done something different than what public health officials have to do right now it will be very expensive for the state into the billions of dollars according to a Berkeley study. All right you're talking about the testing. Let me read a statement by the

camas California Medical Association Council statement on the rush. And I should have and ask you both to react to it. This statement says that the approach used by this initiative wouldn't necessitate isolating over 250000 individuals for an indeterminate period of time possibly for life testing alone could cost taxpayers over a billion dollars without any discernible benefit and could possibly give individuals who initially test negative a false sense of security. You want to react very quickly to that one yes. First of all the rouge has made it very clear in many publications that his goal is to isolate and quarantine everyone infected with the virus or who has a voice. So what that's going to do obviously is put the fear of I would say almost death into individuals who are going to be tested for fear that the knowledge the results of those tests are going to be used to isolate or quarantine the individual neither of which practice is going to reduce the spread of the disease and as I think you mentioned in that it would cause a false sense of security

because people would assume everyone who is infected is put away somewhere so they could continue to engage in possibly high risk activity such as homosexual activity Well that would let me make it very clear the virus is indiscriminate. It doesn't matter with the old young gay straight black or white or Hispanic it doesn't matter if you have if you engage in high risk activities the intimate sharing of body fluids during sexual relations or sharing a needle and syringe you are putting yourself at risk. If you don't the risk is so minuscule to make this law foolish. All right would you react if you heard the woman matter when I when I read 250000 and then determine a creative time isolation when I read the rationale of the California Medical Association Executive Committee several months ago coming out with that data I was appalled. It's absolutely irresponsible it's absolutely ridiculous. And I truly am saddened that members of the California Medical Association as much as we citizens respect them have had

smoke blown in their face by male homosexual community in the state that they would put out trash like this. There's nothing in the initiative that mandates that anybody is to be tested in Dr. Silberman you know that. I didn't mean is since there is nothing in there today and a congressman but you keep saying that the homosexuals male homosex are the ones who guard the one and they got the CMA to put out this nonsense this server has to go and people are going to respond to your earlier point doctor about. And as chair of the AIDS Advisory Committee for the California Medical Association I did it and I am not a homosexual let me respond to the claim you've made that it would drive people on the ground the state of Colorado about a year ago adopted a similar law to what we're talking about of prop 64 and there he experienced and that state has not been that it drove people underground to avoid testing on the contrary. The percentage of people in Colorado that are being tested for the virus in relation to the number that have AIDS is higher than the percentage of people in California that are being tested for the virus that we have AIDS in our state. Another point on this driving people on the ground. Every single one of these people with the virus in

their blood without exception is going to manifest some impairment of their immune system in the next five years the 30 percent to get AIDS they'll be dead unless we can find a cure. But the 70 percent because they will suffer an impairment of immune system are going to come into contact with the health care system they can't hide doctor there's no place for him to hide when they come into contact with the health care system. We will treat them just like any other patient in need of treatment of health care services and as a non physician I don't know where the Congress and gets that 70 percent figure there's no nothing to indicate that a Danish study that was published about six months ago precisely on this point I'm going to I can't predict that because we haven't had it that somebody predicted it. The point is made is very very clear. We we don't need this bill. We don't need this in the sheets in any way shape or form to reduce the spread of the disease what's happening in Colorado. And the congresswoman and I were on a public television frontline when the state of Colorado the director of Health said

we're doing this and it won't cut down and then they did a remote to Colorado and men sitting there said that's why we're not getting tested others getting tested or using false names. It is a farce. It is not working in this state. We know it will drive it underground because we know people who have the infection who say they would not participate in any of these things research or testing. For fear of that kind of direction the fact that the congressman instead of talking really that much about AIDS constantly talks about homosexuals indicates what the motivation of the congressman and evolution. They are like two peas in a pod when it comes to this kind of an initiative and the issue is not AIDS. The issue is homophobia. My issue is public health and AIDS not someone's lifestyle. I would like to respond to his almost all the ideas that you have a big name in my office although this is a usual argument that comes out when used by him is that you know has our society reached the point where I'm supposed to apologize for expressing

affirmation and support for the heterosexual I think. I don't at all. I don't hate anybody. I hate the sin of homosexuality but I don't hate the sinners the people that are engaging in a homosexual lifestyle. Well it wouldn't on your point about driving under granny I'll quote from what I was about Whalen who wrote in the A C S H news and views in September 86. The AIDS virus does not have rights nor do individuals who persist in engaging in activities which put the others the lives of others at risk. It is blatantly selfish for an individual to reject knowledge that would help him prevent the death of another person. I think that's an appropriate comment with your suggestion doctor that somebody is going to be driven out of Google should not be irresponsible and if what you'll do now is make it so people will not know they're infected because you will keep them from going in and getting tested so will just what you want to happen will not happen the reverse will take place. Let me know I'm at the point another point out Jim is that we have a provision of our law 30 198 of the Health and Safety Code today makes it a misdemeanor for a person in

our state to have sexual relations who has of an aerial disease. That's our public policy that's existing law. Now that bear in mind by and those venereal diseases are defined to be such as syphilis or gonorrhea. Not the public policy of the state to prevent the transmissibility of an earl is either so profound we make it a misdemeanor to do that. And for goodness sakes how does it come to be if that is sound public policy. How does it come to be that we do it. We don't treat those with a virus for AIDS on the same basis because the AIDS virus is a communicable venereal disease but it happens to be non curable. Well again please explain this initiative will do nothing to get to the goal that the congressman is talking about. This initiative will do the reverse. It will keep people from getting tested. What the congressman doesn't know what he should know because the facts are here is that the lifestyle changes in those in the affected groups has changed dramatically. This is now everyone's disease.

Heterosexuals homosexuals it doesn't matter. So if we are going to drive people underground if they're going to fear what the results of their test are going to do for their livelihood for their future for their insurance for things like that they won't get tested and many many outside the old categories of high risk groups are ignorant that they could be infected. They certainly won't go out of their way to get tested if this initiative passes. But talk about research if research is the key to this attack on a terrible disease will this initiative if it passed help or hurt research that was over definitely hurt research wise in San Francisco starting about seven or eight years ago. We started a program which was designed and which has come to fruition to produce a hepatitis B vaccine. If this kind of initiative were in place at that time relating to hepatitis B we would have gotten almost no one I can imagine anyone who would come in and voluntarily allow themselves to be tested and the results of that test get filed and then things that we see happening and I have even in the state of

Colorado insurance being taken away from a man who just took the test he wasn't even a gay man but because they said since he took the test he must have something wrong with them. So you think there would be a stigma that was attached that would threaten jobs threaten. Absolutely it's there that appear is there right now the fear is there without this initiative with this initiative the fear will be extreme question as well as help or hurt research and that and the doctor referred to the state highlighters had to be a push on research for the reason that I've indicated Jim as a result of this tragic disease anyone who has a virus is going to have need of health care and they're going to come into contact with some doctor and at that point we can treat them in good research and to sticks. The point is that at the present time in California 91 percent of those who have AIDS come from the male homosexual community. I admit it is it is easy it knows no barriers it is moving into the heterosexual community because frankly prostitutes in our society now a high percentage of them have AIDS in males frequent prostitutes and then go back to have

sexual relations with their wives and that's how that disease is spreading into the heterosexual community of our society today. But the the point I'd like to come back to Jim is something the question I'd like to ask Dr. Silberman He's a medical official of the CMA is in March of 83. He was added to the list of reportable diseases in the state of California. Now Section three or one of the Health and Safety Code defines those been areal diseases that when a person has it's a criminal offense for a person they have sexual relations with another human. I'm asking you as a member of the Medical Association Officiel why haven't why hasn't your organization recommended to the legislature that we add to the definition of an Ariel disease aids to fit within the structure of 30 198. You want to give it is sound public policy for a person with a curable communicable Dariel disease. To provide prohibit that person from having sexual relations for another word. How does it come to be unsound public policy we don't have the same structure with

respect to a person with an unlikely or a boulder an aerial. I mean look at the mansion at leeward we're castigating everyone who has AIDS as being some irresponsible person who is going out and having sex the statistics show otherwise. And I don't think public health should be in a position of going to the courts going to law to get people to stop behaving in a certain way. We've been very successful just by presenting the fact what the congressman hasn't mention is why putting this in the category it seems innocuous enough in the category that this initiative does it means that people who are infected who possibly are infected or who have AIDS could not work in schools could not work as food handlers could not work in health care situations. Three situations which every medical research expert has said is not a risk to others to patients to any two to customers. And this is what I mean it's going to that it keeps getting overlooked and the public is unaware that by putting it in this category which seems innocuous enough is actually very very serious and one of the

reasons why this would be driven underground Requiem when any person in our state manifest one of these 58 reportable diseases existing law says if they can't work in a commercial food establishment they can't get a license to teach in public school that's existing law why because of the national economy that's adopted by the let me let me finish. It's because they don't think we can help solve a shuriken quarantine that person that they deem fit. And my point I think is this if we have this existing policy for these disabilities for anyone having one of these 58 reportable diseases how in the world do we justify not having the same standard with respect to a person who has a virus for AIDS itself. I don't think you can defend that but I can defend it very easily. And that's the problem with having politics get into health instead of health stay in the health and ideas and that is that this is not a casually spread disease. The ones that keep kids hands you don't get you don't get it shaking hands eating in a restaurant sitting on a bus hugging someone being close to someone. The kinds of things that are on that list. Measles mumps chicken pox appetite as those things are

easily contagious with mostly the other ones are easily contagious and therefore they should be kept out of those situations numbers just out of that watch in one minute. Well you can respond if you have one minute now to do your summary so do whatever you want what you want about how much you're going to German. At the present time any of us when we manifest one of these 50 a reportable diseases even needs we are accountable to the public health care system as a result of an act passed by the state legislature at the request of the male homosexual community in 1905. Those with the virus for this non curable communicable than arial disease are not accountable to the public health care system at all. I don't think they can justify that non-accountability. I think that we're all equal before the law. This disease should be treated like any other of these 58 a reportable list of diseases and I think that's all prop 64 would do. It gives equality before the law for all of us not just over me. Yes age is a tragic disease. Nothing in this initiative is going to reduce the

tragedy. Nothing is going to reduce the spread of the California Medical Association California Nurses Association California Hospital Association California Health Office Association the governor Mayor Bradley. Candidate Senator Cranston Senator Wilson every responsible politician every responsible medical group is opposed to this initiative that ought to tell you something. It doesn't say that we're ignoring the problem. We're trying to solve the problem. We have to get away from bigotry and get back to public health. Let's keep politics out of this and let public health people do what they do best and that is to stop this epidemic. It is serious. But this initiative will do nothing to solve it. All right thank you. Remember that when you go to the polling place all you going to get is that the 86 word to look at it that's really not enough to make an informed decision. You can get the California voters happened at your nearest registrar voters and read all the arguments read the letter read the bill itself it is important everyone get involved in it because it's an important question.

Certainly a dreadful disease. Our time is almost up and I want to thank both of our guests for this timely discussion. This is about a special broadcast for public television with Congressman William Denham Meyer and Dr. Mervyn Silverman on Proposition 64 the AIDS initiative. I'm Jim Cooper. Thanks for being with us. Jim Cooper's always got he is made possible by grants from the Harry and Grace steel foundation

providing charitable assistance to deserving organizations in the areas of health education and culture. Why signal landmark incorporated developer of Southern California real estate and builder of Landmark homes by Robert have an account there.