Do you agree with mandatory AIDS testing? Or that its more important than personal privacy?

I put this question up before but no one answered and I need something QUICK! Im doing a debate tomorrow for this resolution, I picked to be for it but now Im thinking I should have been against it.

Resolved: That the protection of society's health interests through broad based mandatory testing for AIDS ought to be more important than personal privacy rights.

What do you think? I dont need to know if you are against or for it I just need something good to say.

Okay remember I said that it was for a debate that I didnt really care if you were against or for it. Im against it too because its stupid but I HAVE to be for it. I know what to say now if I was against but Im not. I need things that result in me being for it. What you are saying is good but not if you are Affirmative, what you are saying if its for Negative. I need AFFIRMATIVE

The fact of the matter is that mandatory testing, followed by effective action on the part of the government, is the only way a transmissible disease has been controlled. TB, polio, etc... What about typhoid? How many people would failure to test, and eventually imprision Mary Malloy, killed? The sad fact is that given the nature of the disease, the manner in which it can be transmitted, and the long incubation times, it is in the best interest of society as a whole to have mandatory testing. What right does ANYONE have to kill others in the society in the name of "privacy."

I don't feel that AIDS testing should be mandatory. I just seen an article last week wherein people have the possibility of being infected with Hep. C and HIV due to dirty syringes. This is appalling. Whenever you mandate issues the government take the control and run with it.

No it is a bad idea. Testing for AIDS like all testing should only be done to high risk groups. The total population of AIDS patients is a smaller percentage than the error rate of the HIV tests. If you test everyone, you are going to ruin millions of people's lives.

The most likely people to have a false positive are people who have a stressed immune system. Since the HIV test is only looking for immune reaction characteristics, those immune reactions can be setup by other health problems in a minority of people who have those problems. These include people with the flu, pregnant women, TB, Malaria, and every known viral or bacterial based disease. No test is perfect, and no person's immune system reacts identically to any particular disease.

HIV tests are most effective when they are applied to high risk populations. If applied to 100% of americans today, in theory as many as 50% of the positive results would be false. Let's keep it a theory.

Well damn I'm sorry for not reading your question closer. Mandatory testing for everyone will not win you a debate, there is no science or social argument that work. However repeated mandatory testing for specific segments of the populations, would be a workable argument. Mandatory testing for anyone who has been arrested on drug charges. As well as testing for known contacts for people who are HIV positive. For example if a person who is HIV positive on a test identifies people that he/she slept with or shared needles with they could be required to be tested, since they are the most likely people to also be positive.

You could develop a whole set of arguments based on selective mandatory testing. The only thing it violates is medical privacy.