An essay can have many purposes, but the basic struc­ture is the same no matter what. When writing an essay to it may be to argue for a particular point of view or to explain the steps necessary to complete a task. Some of the steps nec­essary to take in order to accomplish a better essay are by supporting the thesis. For example, that would be brainstorm­ing and organizing information has to be used in order to be­gin. Secondly support the thesis in the body paragraphs. Lastly when finished revise and edit by adding material. Either way, essays will have the same basic format. If following a few simple steps, an essay almost writes itself. Supplying ideas for the essay are the important part of the essay anyway.

When preparing to write an essay brainstorming for ideas that support your thesis statement is one of the few simple steps to follow in order to start the essay. Whether brainstorm­ing on a piece of paper or a few pieces of papers narrow all brainstorming down by restating what is written down or just restate what you have written down to make it sound better. Organize the ideas into an outline, keeping in mind the method or methods of paragraph development (details, examples, rea­sons, cause and effect, comparison/contrast). Using an out­line, begin a rough draft. Make sure that every sentence is directly related to the assigned topic (as stated in your thesis statement). Again, do not stray off the topic.

When writing an essay support for the thesis will appear in the body of the essay, which is the “illustrating” part of the paper. In the body, it is very important to show facts about what is going on in the essay and what point wants to be crossed. To do this examples are going to be needed. Being as specific as possible is one of the main things. Give several carefully chosen examples; provide very detailed accounts of them. If the examples are well described, it will be clear to the reader that the writer has excellent reason.

When finished with the rough copy, revise and edit it by adding, deleting, rearranging, and substituting material (use a dictionary and a thesaurus). First read the essay over slowly to yourself (or even aloud) and catch any mistakes seen. As well, correct errors in spelling (use the spell-checking feature in word processing program), capitalization, punctuation, subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, pronoun agreement, sentence errors, and usage. Edit out anything in the paper that seems to be going in a different direction. The paper shouldn’t contradict itself.

In conclusion essays have lots of purposes, but supply­ing ideas is what makes the essay complete. You must always remember to make sure there are smooth transitions between parts of the essay. The essay should have each paragraph fol­low from the previous one, so the whole essay flows along. There’s a simple way to do this: make the last sentence in each paragraph reflect or echo the first sentence in the next.




Aids and Society The number of newborns infected by vertical transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus is increasing as the prevalence of HIV-positive women in­crease within India. It is estimated that while seven thousand HIV-positive women become pregnant each year, between one thousand and two thousand of their newborns will be HIV-positive. This research paper will concentrate on the trans­mission of the human immunodeficiency virus from mother to child, the benefits of drugs intervention, and whether or not the HIV-screening process of pregnant women should re­main voluntary or become mandatory.

The HIV-virus has proven that it is not a disease to be taken lightly or ignored. I chose this topic because I want to be informed about the virus and its rate of vertical transmis­sion so that I will be able to inform others about such ethical topics: Does the baby have rights and should pregnant women be denied her right to privacy with respect to HIV?

Data shows that AIDS is now increasing faster among females than males, with women accounting for seven per­cent of cases in 1985 and nineteen percent in 1995. The incidences of HIV-positive heterosexual women have risen dramatically over the past decade, and AIDS is now the third leading cause of death among women ages twenty-five to forty-four. The one thing that all of these women have in com­mon is that they all are of child bearing age. Consequently, the incidences of HIV-positive newborns have also increased. As mentioned previously, about seven thousand HIV-infected women give birth each year, and about twenty-five percent of their babies are HIV-positive. “Maternal transmission ac­counted for ninety-two percent of all new AIDS cases reported in children in 1994″(Davis).

A major breakthrough in drug intervention began in Feb­ruary 1993. The AIDS Clinical Trials Group administered a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study of zidovudine, also known as AST. Four hundred seventy-five women were enrolled in the study. These women were ran­domly assigned to one of two groups. One group received zidovudine while the other, the control group, received a pla­cebo. The administration of either zidovudine or placebo be­gan in the second trimester of pregnancy and continued through labor. For six weeks after birth, the babies received the same treatment as the mothers in a syrup form. Because it was a double-blinded study, neither the researchers nor the patients knew who was actually receiving the zidovudine. Only three hundred sixty-four babies of the four hundred twenty-one born were available for testing. Results showed that, “of the three hundred sixty-four available for testing, fifty-three were infected with HIV; thirteen were born to mothers receiving zidovudine and forty to mothers on placebo” (FDA Consumer). According to this data, when both mothers and babies received zidovudine, there was a transmission rate of 8.3 percent.

This was a dramatic decrease in the rate of transmission when compared to the control group who had a transmission rate of 25.5 percent. With results such as these, drug inter­vention with respect to both pregnant women and newborns should become more commonplace with each day. For ex­ample, if the decrease in maternal transmission rate is dupli­cated from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group study, and the es­timated seven thousand HIV-infected women deliver infants while accepting treatment with zidovudine, one will conclude that “under these hypothetical conditions, as many as two-thirds, or twelve hundred, of all vertically acquired HIV-infections could be prevented annually”(Davis).

This decrease in maternal transmission would be ideal if all conditions were met, but there seems to be one major flaw. Many pregnant women do not know they are infected with HIV. The problem now is how to identify HIV-infected pregnant women at an early enough stage, so that the use of AZT could drastically reduce the chances of the baby being born with HIV.

It is critical that the physician know of a women’s HIV-infection prior to or early in her pregnancy. Because many women who are at risk are completely unaware of it, a grow­ing national debate has centered on mandatory HIV testing of all pregnant women. This notion of mandatory screening has raised many ethical issues. It is certain that those who test positive and accept treatment with AZT would have a de­creased transmission rate, but according to some, this notion takes into account only the child and not the mother. Oppo­nents on the other hand want to consider the woman’s right to privacy. A Center for Disease Control spokesman says, “Man­datory testing destroys the relationship of trust between the women and her health care provider”(Kent).

Many feel that because of the stigmatization associated with the HIV-virus/AIDS, pregnant women should not be sin­gled out. As of August 1994, voluntary testing of pregnant women seems to be the most viable way to get the coopera­tion for both testing and treatment. Medical groups say, “man­datory testing simply does not work for the populations most at risk (for the HIV-virus), and could undermine physicians’ effort to build collaborative, trusting relationships with pa­tients” (Shelton).

Mandatory testing could also be viewed as a deterrent to obtaining prenatal care. Those who would find it as a disin­centive would most likely be those individuals most in need of education, counseling and treatment. The result would be the loss of opportunity to provide both counseling and treat­ment. Because of these findings, voluntary testing seems to be the most effective.

On July 1, 1995, the Center for Disease Control released guidelines specific for HIV-screening. The guidelines, “rec­ommend that physicians counsel all pregnant women about HIV and that they are to offer them the chance to be voluntar­ily tested” (Kent).

According to the Center for Disease Control guidelines, those found to be HIV-positive are then offered zidovudine which has been found to reduce prenatal HIV transmission by as much as two-thirds. These guidelines were established because it is believed that pregnant women who are given information about HIV are more eager to comply than those who feel as though they are being coerced.

Aggressive voluntary strategies have been shown to work. One study showed ninety-six percent of almost thirty-six hundred women at Grady Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, chose to be tested after being counseled. Along with the vol­untary testing offered to pregnant women, there is a mandate testing of all babies born to women who do not receive a prenatal test for the HIV-virus. The combination of the two testing procedures works well by accounting for the rights of the newborn child. Even if the mother refuses testing and is HIV-positive, there is about a seventy-five percent chance the baby would not acquire the virus during pregnancy and labor. However, the HIV-infection can be transmitted to the infant from the mother even after birth. Breast-feeding has been shown as a way of contracting the human immunodeficiency virus. Therefore, breast-feeding should not be an option for those infants whose mother is HIV-positive. Because of the mandatory testing of the newborn, one who tests positive for the HIV-virus can be given treatment for AIDS related dis­eases.

The infant may test false positive due to the fact that
maternal antibodies can cross the placenta and enter the baby’s bloodstream. The ELISA test may record a positive test
because of the presence of maternal antibodies to the HIV-
virus. Testing of the baby periodically will determine whether
or not the HIV antibodies present are actually produced by
the baby’s own immune system, or whether they were passed
across the placenta from the mother’s antibodies. This combination of the two tests, “encourages women to have the test, but for women who do not, who fall through the cracks, this
protects their babies” (Kent).

One question remains about the Center for Disease Control’s guidelines, “Who will pay to screen the women who give birth each year in the United States?” (Kent).

While many are concerned about the costs associated with HIV testing and treatment of HIV-positive pregnant women, they fail to look at the entire picture. One would have to ask them in return, “Who is paying for the extensive treat­ment required by those HIV-infected children.” It seems as though there would be economic benefits to the screening process. The expected total drug costs for zidovudine per case under the AIDS Control Trials Group 076 regimen including all phases of treatment was estimated at eight hundred ninety-five dollars. On the contrary, “estimated lifetime cost of pediatric HIV-infection has previously been reported to be one hundred thousand dollars” (Mauskopf et al).

Voluntary screening programs can enhance cost savings and health benefits for pregnant women. Cost savings will occur for a wide range of zidovudine efficacy rates and life­time treatment costs for pediatric HIV-infection. It should also be noted that reducing the number of HIV-positive infants has more effects than simply the potential savings in cost. There are also important issues related to avoiding grief as well as the increased life expectancy for the infant.

This paper demonstrates both the health and the eco­nomic benefits associated with treating HIV-positive preg­nant women and their newborns with the drug, zidovudine. I feel that voluntary screening programs offered to all pregnant women would help to avoid the problems associated with discriminations, whether it is a demographic location or an individual’s background. The high-risk pregnant women may be more likely to participate in the human immunodeficiency virus screening because every pregnant woman would be of­fered the same regimen. Therefore, there would be fewer stig­mas associated with the screening process. One would not be as likely to shy away from prenatal care because it would be understood that all pregnant women receive the same oppor­tunity for testing and treatment.

Although there are still ethical question about whether the mother’s right to privacy or the baby’s rights are more important, there has been some agreement. As the incidence of HIV infection among women of childbearing age contin­ues to increase, programs of voluntary screening and AZT treatment, along with continued educational efforts, should be considered integral components of HIV prevention pro­grams.


Essay Writing about AID FOR AIDS


AIDS is a life and death issue. To have the AIDS dis­ease is at present a sentence of slow but inevitable death. I’ve already lost one friend to AIDS. I may soon lose others. My own sexual behavior and that of many of my friends has been profoundly altered by it. In my part of the country, one man in 10 may already be carrying the AIDS virus. While the figures may currently be less in much of the rest of the country, this is changing rapidly. There currently is neither a cure, nor even an effective treatment, and no vaccine either. But there are things that have been PROVEN immensely effective in slow­ing the spread of this hideously lethal disease. In this essay I hope to present this information. History and Overviews:

AIDS stands for Acquired immune Deficiency Disease. It is caused by a virus.

The disease originated somewhere in Africa about 20 years ago, There it first appeared as a mysterious ailment af­flicting primarily heterosexuals of both sexes. It probably was spread especially fast by primarily female prostitutes there. AIDS has already become a crisis of STAGGERING propor­tions in parts of Africa. In Zaire, it is estimated that over twenty percent of the adults currently carry the virus. That figure is increasing. And what occurred there will, if no cure is found, most likely occur here among heterosexual folks.

AIDS was first seen as a disease of gay males in this country. This was a result of the fact that gay males in this culture in the days before AIDS had an average of 200 to 400 new sexual contacts per year. This figure was much higher than common practice among heterosexual (straight) men or women. In addition, it turned out that rectal sex was a par­ticularly effective way to transmit the disease, and rectal sex is a common practice among gay males. For these reasons, the disease spread in the gay male population of this country immensely more quickly than in other populations. It became to be thought of as a “gay disease”. Because the disease is spread primarily by exposure of one’s blood to infected blood or semen, I. V. drug addicts who shared needles also soon were identified as an affected group. As the AIDS epidemic began to affect increasingly large fractions of those two populations (gay males and IV drug abusers), many of the rest of this society looked on smugly, for both populations tended to be despised by the “mainstream” of society here.

But AIDS is also spread by heterosexual sex. In addi­tion, it is spread by blood transfusions. New born babies can acquire the disease from infected mothers during pregnancy. Gradually more and more “mainstream” folks got the dis­ease. Most recently, a member of congress died of the dis­ease. Finally, even the national news media began to join in the task of educating the public to the notion that AIDS can affect everyone.

Basic medical research began to provide a few bits of information, and some help. The virus causing the disease was isolated and identified. The AIDS virus turned out to be a very unusual sort of virus. Its genetic material was not DNA, but RNA. When it infected human cells, it had its RNA direct the synthesis of viral DNA. While RNA viruses are not that uncommon, very few RNA viruses reproduce by setting up the flow of information from RNA to DNA. Such reverse or “retro” flow of information does not occur at all in any DNA virus or any other living things. Hence, the virus was said to belong to the rare group of viruses called “Retro Viruses”. Re­search provided the means to test donated blood for the pres­ence of the antibodies to the virus, astronomically reducing the chance of one’s getting AIDS from a blood transfusion. This was one of the first real breakthroughs. The same dis­coveries that allowed us to make our blood bank blood sup­ply far safer also allowed us to be able to tell (in most cases) whether one has been exposed to the AIDS virus using a sim­ple blood test.

The Types of AIDS Infection:

When the AIDS virus gets into a person’s body, the re­sults can be broken down into three general types of situa­tions: AIDS disease, ARC, and asymptomatic seropositive condition.

The AIDS disease is characterized by having one’s im­mune system devastated by the AIDS virus. One is said to have the disease if one contracts particular varieties’ (Pneumocystis, for example) of pneumonia, or one of several particular varieties of otherwise rare cancers (Kaposi’s Sar­coma, for example). This disease is inevitably fatal. Death occurs often after many weeks or months of expensive and painful hospital care. Most folks with the disease can trans­mit it to others by sexual contact or other exposure of an uninfected person’s blood to the blood or semen of the in­fected person.

There is also a condition referred to as ARC (“Aids Re­lated Complex”). In this situation, one is infected with the AIDS virus and one’s immune system is compromised, but not so much so that one gets the (ultimately Lethal) cancers or pneumonias of the AIDS disease. One tends to be plagued by frequent colds, enlarged lymph nodes, and the like. This con­dition can go on for years. One is likely to be able to infect others if one has ARC. Unfortunately, all those with ARC are currently felt to eventually progress to getting the full blown AIDS disease.

There are, however, many folks who have NO obvious signs of disease what so ever, but when their blood serum is tested they show positive evidence of having been exposed to the virus. This is on the basis of the fact that antibodies to the AIDS virus are found in their blood. Such “asymptomatic but seropositive” folks may or may not carry enough virus to be infectious. Most sadly, though, current research and expe­rience with the disease would seem to indicate that EVEN­TUALLY nearly all folks who are seropostive will develop the full blown AIDS disease. There is one ray of hope here: It may in some cases take up to 15 years or more between one’s becoming seropositive for the AIDS virus and one’s develop­ing the disease. Thus, all those millions (soon to be tens and hundreds of millions) who are now seropositive for AIDS are under a sentence of death, but a sentence that may not be carried out for one or two decades in a significant fraction of cases. Medical research holds the possibility of commuting that sentence, or reversing it.

There is one other fact that needs to be mentioned here because it is highly significant in determining recommenda­tions for safe sexual conduct which will be discussed below: Currently, it is felt that after exposure to the virus, most folks will turn seropositive for it (develop a positive blood test for it) within four months. It is currently felt that if you are sexu­ally exposed to a person with AIDS and do not become sero­positive within six months after that exposure; you will never become seropositive as a result of that exposure.

Just to confuse the issue a little, there are a few folks whose blood shows NO antibodies to the virus, but from whom live virus has been cultured. Thus, if one is seronegative, it is not absolute proof one is not exposed to the virus. This cat­egory of folks is very hard to test for, and currently felt to be quite rare. Some even speculate that such folks may be rare examples of those who are immune to the effects of the virus, but this remains speculation. It is not known if such folks can also transmit the virus.

Transmission of AIDS:

The AIDS virus is extremely fragile, and is killed by exposure to mild detergents or to chlorox, among other things. AIDS itself may be transmitted by actual virus particles, or by the transmission of living human CELLS that contain AIDS viral DNA already grafted onto the human DNA Or both. Which of these two mechanisms is the main one is not known as I write this essay? But the fact remains that it is VERY hard to catch AIDS unless one engages in certain specific activi­ties.

What will NOT transmit AIDS?

Casual contact (shaking hands, hugging, sharing tools) cannot transmit AIDS. Although live virus has been recov­ered from saliva of AIDS patients, the techniques used to do this involved concentrating the virus to extents many thou­sands of times greater than occurs in normal human contact, such as kissing (including “deep” or “French” kissing). Thus, there remains no solid evidence that even “deep” kissing can transmit AIDS. Similarly, there is no evidence that sharing food or eating utensils with an AIDS patient can transmit the virus. The same is true for transmission by sneezing or cough­ing. There just is no current evidence that the disease can be transmitted that way. The same may be true even for BITING, though here there may be some increased (though still remote) chance of transmitting the disease.

The above is very important. It means that there is NO medical reason WHAT SO EVER to recommend that AIDS suffers or AIDS antibody positive folks is quarantined. Such recommendations are motivated either by ignorance or by sin­ister desires to set up concentration camps. Combined with the fact that the disease is already well established in this country, the above also means that there is no rational medi­cal basis for immigration laws preventing visits by AIDS suf­fers or antibody positive persons.

The above also means that friends and family and coworkers of AIDS patients and seropostive persons have nothing to fear from such casual contact. There is no reason to not show your love or concern for a friend with AIDS by embracing the person. Indeed, there appears still to be NO rational basis for excluding AIDS suffers from food prepara­tion activity. Even if an AIDS suffer cuts his or her finger and bleeds into the salad or soup, most of the cells and virus will die, in most cases, before the food is consumed. In addition, it is extremely difficult to get successfully attacked by AIDS via stuff you eat.

AIDS cannot be transmitted by the act of GIVING blood to a blood bank. All equipment used for such blood donation is sterile, and is used just once, and then discarded.

How is AIDS transmitted?

Sexual activity is one of the primary ways AIDS is trans­mitted. AIDS is transmitted particularly by the transmission of blood or semen of an infected person into contact with the blood of an uninfected person. Sex involving penetration of the penis into either the vagina of a woman or the rectum of either a woman or a man has a-very high risk of transmitting the disease. It is felt to be about four times MORE likely for an infected male to transmit AIDS to an uninfected woman in the course of vaginal sex than it is likely for an infected woman to transmit AIDS to an uninfected male. This probably re­lates to the greater area of moist tissue in a woman’s vagina, and to the relative likelihood of microscopic tears to occur in that tissue during sex. But the bottom line is that AIDS can be transmitted in EITHER direction in the case of heterosexual sex. Transmission among lesbians (homosexual females) is rare.

Oral sex is an extremely common form of sexual activ­ity among both gay and straight folks. Such activity involves contact of infected semen or vaginal secretions with the mouth, esophagus (the tube that connects the mouth with the stom­ach) and the stomach. AIDS virus and infected cells most certainly cannot survive the acid environment of the stom­ach. Yet, it is still felt that there is a chance of catching the disease by having oral sex with an infected person. The chance is probably a lot smaller than in the case of vaginal or rectal sex, but is still felt to be significant.

As mentioned above, AIDS is also transmitted among intravenous drug users by the sharing of needles. Self right­eous attitudes by the political “leaders” of this country at lo­cal, state, and national levels have repeatedly prevented the very rational approach of providing free access to sterile in­travenous equipment for IV drug users. This measure, when taken promptly in Amsterdam, was proven to greatly and SIG­NIFICANTLY slow the spread of the virus in that popula­tion. The best that rational medical workers have succeeded in doing here in San Francisco is distribute educational leaf­lets and cartoons to the I.V. drug abusing population instruct­ing them in the necessity of their rinsing their “works” with chlorox before reusing the same needle in another person. Note that even if you don’t care what happens to I.V. drug abusers, the increase in the number of folks carrying the virus ultimately endangers ALL living persons. Thus, the issue is NOT what you morally think of I.V. drug addicts, but one of what is the most rational way to slow the spread of AIDS in all populations.

Testing of donated blood for AIDS has massively reduced the chance of catching AIDS from blood transfusions. But a very small risk still remains. To further reduce that risk, ef­forts have been made to use “auto transfusions” in cases of “elective surgery” (surgery that can be planned months in advance). Auto transfusion involves the patient storing their own blood a couple of weeks prior to their own surgery, to be used during the surgery if needed. Similarly, setting up dona­tions of blood from friends and family known to be antibody negative and at low risk for AIDS prior to scheduled surgery further can decrease the already small risks from transfusion.

AIDS and SEX: What are the rational options?

The “sexual revolution” of the 1960’s has been stopped dead in its tracks by the AIDS epidemic. The danger of contracting AIDS is so real now that it has massively affected the behavior of both gay and straight folks who formerly had elected to lead an active sexual life that included numerous new sexual contacts.


The safest option regarding AIDS and sex is total absti­nence from all sexual contact. For those who prefer to in­dulge in sexual contact, this is often far too great a sacrifice. But it is an option to be considered.

Safe Sex

For those who wish to have sexual contact with folks on a relatively casual basis, there have been devised rules for “safe sex”. These rules are very strict, and will be found quite objectionable by most of us who have previously enjoyed unrestricted sex. But to violate these rules is to risk unusually horrible death. Once one gets used to them, though, the rule for “safe sex” do allow for quite acceptable sexual enjoyment in most cases.

For those who wish to indulge in penetration of the va­gina or rectum by a penis: The penis MUST be sheathed in a condom or ‘rubber”. This must be done “religiously”, and NO exceptions are allowed. A condom must be used by a man even when he is receiving oral sex. Cunnilingus (oral stimulation of a woman’s genitals by the mouth of a lover) is NOT considered to be safe sex. Safe sex includes mutual mas­turbation, and the stimulation of one genital by another’s hand (provided there are no cuts in the skin on that hand). But manual stimulation of another’s genitals is NOT safe if one has cuts on one’s hands, unless one is wearing a glove.

Note that even when one is conscientiously following the recommendations for safe sex, accidents can happen. Condoms can break. One may have small cuts or tears in ones skin that one is unaware of. Thus, following rules for “safe sex” does NOT guarantee that one will not get AIDS. It does, however, greatly reduce the chances. There are many exam­ples of sexually active couples where one member has AIDS disease and the other remains seronegative even after many months of safe sex with the diseased person. It is particularly encouraging to note that, due to education programs among San Francisco gay males, the incidence of new cases of AIDS infection among that high risk group has dropped massively. Between practice of safe sex and a significant reduction in the number of casual sexual contacts, the spread of AIDS is being massively slowed in that group. Similar responsible action MUST be taken by straight folks to further slow the spread of AIDS, to give our researchers time to find the means to fight it.


For those who would have sexual activity, the safest ap­proach in this age of AIDS is monogamous sex. Specifically, both parties in a couple must commit themselves to not hav­ing sex with anyone else. At that time they should take AIDS antibody tests. If the tests are negative for both, they must practice safe sex until both members of the couple have been greater than six months since sexual contact with anyone else. At that time the AIDS blood test is repeated. If both tests remain negative six months after one’s last sexual contact with any other party, current feeling is that it is now safe to have “unprotected” sex. Note that this approach is recom­mended especially for those who wish to have children, to prevent the chance of having a child be born infected with AIDS, getting it from an infected mother. Note also that this approach can be used by groups of three or more people, but it must be adhered to VERY strictly.

What to AVOID:

Unscrupulous folks have begun to sell the idea that one should pay to take an AIDS antibody test, then carry an ID card that certifies one as AIDS antibody negative, as a ticket to being acceptable in a singles bar. This is criminal greed and stupidity. First, one can turn antibody positive at any time. Even WEEKLY testing will not pick this change up soon enough to prevent folks certified as “negative” from turning positive between tests. Much worse, such cards are either di­rectly or implicitly promoted as a SUBSTITUTE for “safe sex practices. This can only hasten the spread of the disease.

If you want to learn your antibody status, be sure to do so ANONYMOUSLY. Do NOT get the test done by any agency that requires your real name, address, or any other identifying information. Fortunately, in San Francisco, there is a public place to get AIDS antibody testing where you may identify yourself only as a number. Though that place has a three month long waiting list for testing, there are other private clinics where one may have the test done for cash, and may leave any false name one wish. The reason I suggest this is that currently there are some very inappropriate reactions by government and business to folks known to be antibody posi­tive. Protect yourself from such potential persecution by pre­venting your antibody status from being a matter of record. That information is for you, your lover(s), and (if need be) your physician and for NO one else.

There currently is NO treatment for AIDS (this includes AZT) that show significant promise.

In Conclusion:

It is my own strongly held view, and that of the medical and research community worldwide, that the AIDS epidemic is a serious problem, with the potential to become the worst plague this species has ever known. This is SERIOUS busi­ness. VASTLY greater sums should be spent on searching for treatments and vaccines. On the other hand, we feel strongly that this is “merely” a disease, not an act by a supernatural power. And while it does not seem likely we will find either a cure or a vaccine in the foreseeable future, it may be that truly effective treatments that can indefinitely prolong the life of AIDS victims may be found in the next few years. When sci­ence and technology do finally fully conquer AIDS, we can go back to deciding what sort and how much sex to have with whoever we choose on the basis of our own personal choice, and not by the coercion of a speck of proteins and RNA. May that time come soon? In the mean time, we must all do what we can to slow the spread of this killer. This article is in­tended to help accomplish that. Please circulate it as widely as possible.


Essay Writing Topics about YOUR VOICE – YOUR GLORY


“Face is the index of the mind,” says a great saying. Another one says “Do not judge the book by its cover.” These conflicting views lead to confusion, don’t they? But as the latter one says, among many aspects, the one that matters most is one’s voice!

Previously to attend an interview, an applicant had to go to places, some time out of state too. But with science and technology continually advancing, interviews are conducted over the phone. On such occasions, it is one’s voice that opens the door to success!

Way of communication: Experts say it is not what one says, but how he/she says is important. When Swami Vivekananda was given only five minutes to deliver a speech in Chicago about Hinduism, the way he began, arrested the attention of the audience and they wanted him to continue for the next 45 minutes!

The Pronunciation: When at home, read aloud and practice yourself to fine tune your pronunciation, so that when you speak to someone in person or over the phone, the listeners will not get confused. TV news readers keep rehearsing what they are going to read. This will enable them to read out impeccably well. Almost all the politicians who address a meeting can be seen reading out from the script already given to them. Keep your jaws relaxed for that, experts advise to keep saying “va, va, and va,” for some time in different pitch in the voice.

Give a break: When narrating an incident, do not keep on talking. Give a short break in between. Complete your speech without letting it drift. Look directly into the eyes of the person you are talking to. And while so, avoid body language.

Voice modulation: This holds the key to success! Speak in a slow voice when narrating a tragedy, or condoling the death in a family. But when hearing some surprising news, give a grunt of exclamatory note. Likewise, concentrate on the sound of your voice, modulate to different situations. To sharpen your voice, practice again, saying, ‘nyeh, nyeh and nyeh.”

Voice-over person: Now there are good opportunities for a person with good voice in many Ads. Agencies and TV channels to work as a voice-over person.

Be bold when interviewed for a job opportunity or during an admission in schools and colleges. Keep yourself cool. Here again, experts advise to record your own voice, rewind and listen as if you are a listener. Make amends wherever necessary. Seek the guidance of some experienced persons. Now there are training institutes coaching on “Public Speaking Course.” It is a short duration course at an affordable fee. Watch TV when there is this “Focus” programme.

Above all, make sure that your voice sounds all right. The best way to judge this aspect is to see that the one you are talking to do not ask you to repeat what you are saying.

On speech making, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd President of America had said, “Be sincere; be brief; be seated.”




Introduction: Coined in a simple language, it straightaway conveys the message that mere birth of a person amounts to nothing and that in what way he served the society, either by a good deed or by rendering any service to mankind.

Explanation: God has created numerous species, including man. Some animals like cows, goats, dogs and cats and, similarly parrots and pigeons serve the man in different ways. This way, they are worthy of their birth, aren’t they?

When the animals and birds with only five senses make worthy of their birth, why not man who is superior by birth than these? Before one asks this question to others, one should ask oneself whether he/she had done anything useful.

It is not only the scientists alone. A great writer leaves behind an indelible high moral values; an engineer lays road and construct building in which we live, and medical practitioners invent new medicines which enable us to fight any illness and extend our lifeline. Even an uneducated donor is doing a useful thing.

The Indian population had crossed over 1.2 billion. But how many of them are worthwhile to others? If only Mahatma Gandhi had remained as an ordinary citizen and not a freedom fighter, we wouldn’t be enjoying the Independence now, would we?

Famous writer Goethe had said, “Nothing is worth more than this day.” What he meant to say was that, even if one didn’t do any good to the society so far, it does not matter. One can do anything at least today. It is to stress, “Better late than ever.”

M B Nirmal had started the Exnora as to how to keep one’s house and the environment clean. Dr. Swaminathan’s (father of Green Revolution) relentless work had helped India attain self-sufficiency in food processing. Hence rice and wheat and other agricultural crops and foods, though a bit costlier now, are available in the open market.

Well known Dr. Shantha’s (founder of cancer institute in Adyar, Chennai, India) initiative and efforts had saved many cancer affected patients from the jaws of death. By doing some kind of noble service to the society these stalwarts stand out tall like a lighthouse to the seamen. In other words, they have proved their worth.

To cite one more instant, take Mother Teresa. Her incomparable service and concern to the uncared, rejected and dejected, old and young had reduced numerous gruesome deaths. Man can invent anything but cannot produce a life. But by doing this noble service to the deserved, Mother Teresa made her birth worthy of it.

About this unique proverb, our ancient writer Seneca had rightly said, “As is a tale, so is life; not how long it is, but how good it is, what matters.”

Conclusion: shall we swear to do something good to the society, even if not as school children now at least later? If we think, we can, can’t we?