NationStates Jolt Archive

In the other thread I saw a lot of people refering to "catching AIDS" or "the AIDS disease". This is a particular pet peeve of mine, so I wanted to make a thread in clarification.

AIDS is not a disease. You can not catch AIDS. AIDS is a condition caused by having Human Immunodeficiency Virus, or HIV.

AIDS stands for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. When HIV infection becomes advanced it often is referred to as AIDS. Under the definition of the Center for Disease Control, one has aquired AIDS when, as a result of HIV, his or her CD4 white blood cell count is below 200 per ml of blood.

Not everyone who has HIV has AIDS. If the HIV has not damaged his or her immune system to the point where he or she still has more than 200 CD4 white blood cells per ml of blood, he or she has not developed AIDS. When you hear something to the effect of "if his HIV gets worse it will cause AIDS" this means that if the HIV continues to deteriorate his immune system, his white blood cell count will have dropped to the point where he is considered to have AIDS.

This count is entirely artificial, it could be 100, or 500, or 1000, convention has placed it at 200, mostly because once it drops below 200, you are considered seriously ill, and has a very compromised immune system. Generally if ones immune system is above the point of having AIDS, one can generally survive. Once it crosses that line, it becomes very difficult for the body to survive. But again, the point at which one "has AIDS" is entirely arbitrary, but has been picked to be a practical, albeit artificial, place.

So once again, you can not catch AIDS, AIDS is not a disease. You catch HIV, HIV is a disease. AIDS is merely a descriptive term, used to describe a particular level of advancement of HIV in a person.

Nice rant.

It's called 'the AIDS' not 'AIDS'.

do people still mix these up?! *has not been following the other thread*

do people still mix these up?! *has not been following the other thread*

with dismaying frequency.

It's called 'the AIDS' not 'AIDS'.

Shuh, and only gay people and sinners catch it, who cares what you call it? Might as well call it "God's Divine Wrath....Syndrome...Take THAT Gays and Sinners"

or GDWSTTGS.

Awesome.

/silliness over

HIV is a disease.
HIV is a virus. Viruses are not diseases. Your rant is factually incorrect from the very title. AIDS is a disease. To say otherwise shows a gross misunderstanding of what a disease is.

All I know is that everyone (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggtaVqCnGRw) has AIDS!!!

AIDs!!!

It's spelt "AIDS" or "Aids." "AIDs" makes no sense as an acronym and is just plain old wrong.

As to the OP, it's just semantics.

I thought we already discussed this.

HIV is a virus. Viruses are not diseases. Your rant is factually incorrect from the very title. AIDS is a disease. To say otherwise shows a gross misunderstanding of what a disease is.

a disease is "an imparement of health or condition of abnormal functioning". AIDS is not a disease in the literal sense as it is not an impairment.

It is not anything. It's a count, nothing more. HIV, as a virus, is an imparement of someone's health, and can be considered a disease.

I thought we already discussed this.

Yeah but it got buried by 'God is a special and therefore can do what he wants, since it's His Will' and 'you're going to hell' statements, courtesy of Edwardis, known for reminding us that we are all damned to hell no matter what.

Technically, you can't catch a cold either, but good luck with stamping that out ;)

Yet another case where the technical term and the popular term do not match, and, unluckily for you, the popular term's meaning always wins.

Naturally words mean what you, as the speaker or the listener, think they mean. When Science attempts to create a solid, concrete definition it is going against the Nature of Language.

*cough* I caught teh AIDS! :(:eek::D *cough* *cough*

SNIP

I think your pushing this a bit. AIDS is descriptive of the symtoms and conditions, akin to the common cold. The phrase cold refers to not so much the virus itself but to the symptoms around it.

a disease is "an imparement of health or condition of abnormal functioning". AIDS is not a disease in the literal sense as it is not an impairment.

Yes, it is. It is an impairment. It is an impairment of the normal functioning of the immune system due to low CD4+ counts caused by an HIV infection.

It is not anything. It's a count, nothing more. HIV, as a virus, is an imparement of someone's health, and can be considered a disease.

Oh, come off it. You seem to have such a loose clue about HIV/AIDS, and here you are, ranting about it. The fact that one has AIDS at a certain CD4+ count, or when one presents with certain opportunistic infections, does not change the fact that AIDS is a disease of immunity that is defined in a certain way.

It is a disease of immunity caused by HIV - the fact that it is HIV and not AIDS itself that spreads is irrelevant, as many, many other diseases are different from their pathogens. Take group A streptococcal infections - they can present as Strep tonsillitis, or impetigo, or scarlet fever, or necrotising fasciitis, or meningitis or what have you. The latter are not made less diseases because their pathogen is what is spread and not, well, the physical symptoms/sequelae themselves.

Or would you claim SCID, another immunodeficiency for instance, is not a disease because it presupposes low lymphocyte levels and sensitivity to infections?

You have AIDS! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIsOMT5ETPI)

:D

It's spelt "AIDS" or "Aids." "AIDs" makes no sense as an acronym and is just plain old wrong.

As to the OP, it's just semantics.


I know that! I obviously mistyped it.

Cancer is a disease. There is no attached virus (Yes, HPV can lead to cancer in women, but the virus is not cancer in and of itself)

Cancer is labled when a human cell begins uncontrolled growth and division.

Under your theory, the "disease" would be smoking or asbestos or what-have-you.

A disease can be the condition and related symptoms.

The majority of adults, when tested, have carried the virus that causes mono. The majority of this group never displayed a single symptom, or displayed mild symptoms (a sore throat, etc). They have had the virus at high enough levels to trigger an antibody response, but not the disease.

a disease is "an imparement of health or condition of abnormal functioning".

Ergo, a broken leg is a disease.

In the other thread I saw a lot of people refering to "catching AIDS" or "the AIDS disease". This is a particular pet peeve of mine, so I wanted to make a thread in clarification.

AIDS is not a disease. You can not catch AIDS. AIDS is a condition caused by having Human Immunodeficiency Virus, or HIV.

AIDS stands for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. When HIV infection becomes advanced it often is referred to as AIDS. Under the definition of the Center for Disease Control, one has aquired AIDS when, as a result of HIV, his or her CD4 white blood cell count is below 200 per ml of blood.

Not everyone who has HIV has AIDS. If the HIV has not damaged his or her immune system to the point where he or she still has more than 200 CD4 white blood cells per ml of blood, he or she has not developed AIDS. When you hear something to the effect of "if his HIV gets worse it will cause AIDS" this means that if the HIV continues to deteriorate his immune system, his white blood cell count will have dropped to the point where he is considered to have AIDS.

This count is entirely artificial, it could be 100, or 500, or 1000, convention has placed it at 200, mostly because once it drops below 200, you are considered seriously ill, and has a very compromised immune system. Generally if ones immune system is above the point of having AIDS, one can generally survive. Once it crosses that line, it becomes very difficult for the body to survive. But again, the point at which one "has AIDS" is entirely arbitrary, but has been picked to be a practical, albeit artificial, place.

So once again, you can not catch AIDS, AIDS is not a disease. You catch HIV, HIV is a disease. AIDS is merely a descriptive term, used to describe a particular level of advancement of HIV in a person.

Here is another fact. The HIV virus has killed ZERO people.

But, many have died from stuff like the flu. They died because they had no white blood cells.

You have AIDS! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIsOMT5ETPI)

:D

Single worst part of Family Guy. I think that clip, more than anything else, made me go from loving Family Guy to absolutely hating it.

Here is another fact. The HIV virus has killed ZERO people.


Human Immunodeficiency Virus virus? Also, it has, on rare ocassions, killed people.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus virus? Also, it has, on rare ocassions, killed people.

Ia! Ia!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

*ahem* Sorry, lost control for a second, there...

*drowns IDF in a bucket of AIDS*

HIV is a virus. Viruses are not diseases. Your rant is factually incorrect from the very title. AIDS is a disease. To say otherwise shows a gross misunderstanding of what a disease is.
Of course it is, of course they are not, it sure was, again it definately is, and yes it does.

It astounds me that if people are inclined to be all judgemental and get on their high-horses claiming annoyance at other people's ignorance, to the point of starting a whole thread just to sermonise about the issue, that they wouldnt spare their own dignity by at least getting their facts straight. If the supposed ignorance they think they are exposing is something to get on their high-horse and be all annoyed about, then what the frig ought we make of their ignorance? Especially when they've started a thread whose main point appears to be 'ignorance of thing X is sucky, annoying and displays poor understanding/comprehension'.


a disease is "an imparement of health or condition of abnormal functioning". AIDS is not a disease in the literal sense as it is not an impairment.

It is not anything. It's a count, nothing more. HIV, as a virus, is an imparement of someone's health, and can be considered a disease.
Way to dig the hole deeper! A compromised immune system is indeed an impairment of health and a condition of abnormal functioning, it nearly defies belief that anyone would try to claim otherwise.

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.

Shuh, and only gay people and sinners catch it, who cares what you call it? Might as well call it "God's Divine Wrath....Syndrome...Take THAT Gays and Sinners"

or GDWSTTGS.

Awesome.

/silliness over

It used to be called GRID.

Short for "Gay-Related Immune Disease".

Seriously.

I'm just waiting for someone to make the connection between this and the AIDS/aides connection vis a vis South Park. Episode about the Subway -advertising Jerry.

ATSS

Acquired Trivial Semantics Syndrome.

I'm just waiting for someone to make the connection between this and the AIDS/aides connection vis a vis South Park. Episode about the Subway -advertising Jerry.

bah i was going to, but i guess i've been beaten to the point.

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.
hehe i was waiting for that.

Does it matter? Disease or not it's still lethal.

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.

Since it is a cure from this Almighty, Always-Right figure. Care if I inject you with 500mL of oh-so-Divine HIV serum?

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.

AIDs might very well be God's cure for immorality...but we're talking about AIDS here. AIDs doesn't exist. AIDS does. Understand yet?

I'll spell it out. You're ignorant. Educate yourself.

All I know is that everyone (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggtaVqCnGRw) has AIDS!!!

ROFLMAO

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.

Yes!
How dare immoral people such as Ryan White (http://www.ryanwhite.com/) be born with hemophilia!
How dare they contract "God's cure" through blood based medicines that they need to live!
How dare they insist on being treated as human beings!
:rolleyes:

Your "morals" are absolutely disgusting.
I would never worship your angry, jealous, petty and childish "God".
There is no redemption for your type as you get to live in your own self-made hell all the days you walk this earth filled with you self righteous self-hate.

You will never know any true joy in your life for the teachings of Christ are beyond your tiny hate filled mind's power to conceive.

I am not even a Christian and I am a better Christian than you!

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.

Be careful, you've posted on the same thread as a gay. You've basically caught the aids already, and God will send you to hell.

Single worst part of Family Guy. I think that clip, more than anything else, made me go from loving Family Guy to absolutely hating it.

...weird.

Why?

AIDS is not a disease. You can not catch AIDS. AIDS is a condition caused by having Human Immunodeficiency Virus, or HIV.



AIDS is the disease caused by the progress of Human Immunodeficiency Virus through the body. You can catch AIDS as you can catch flu or any other viral disease.

you are correct. AIDs is not a disease.

It is God's cure for the immorality of our age.

Who let you on to this thread?

Okay, that was mean of me...

...If I ever get banned, it will probably be for ripping on someone like this.

Ia! Ia!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn!
Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

*ahem* Sorry, lost control for a second, there...

*drowns IDF in a bucket of AIDS*

weve been over this before... you dont drown people in buckets of AIDS. you drown people in buckets of HIV and then they get AIDS.

read the OP before commenting, please.

AIDS is the disease caused by the progress of Human Immunodeficiency Virus through the body. You can catch AIDS as you can catch flu or any other viral disease.

no, you cant. you cant catch aids as any other viral disease because aids isnt a disease, merely symptoms of HIV working through your body and killing your white blood cells

AIDS = Aquired ImmunoDeficiency Syndrome
HIV = Human Immunodeficiency Virus

and no, you cant catch HIV like the flu. the flu virus can be carried through saliva; HIV simply cannot

no, you cant. you cant catch aids as any other viral disease because aids isnt a disease, merely symptoms of HIV working through your body and killing your white blood cells

AIDS = Aquired ImmunoDeficiency Syndrome
HIV = Human Immunodeficiency Virus

and no, you cant catch HIV like the flu. the flu virus can be carried through saliva; HIV simply cannot

And, correct me if I'm wrong here, HIV has a very short lifespan when outside of a host, I.E. the virus dies quickly when exposed to air. The Flu Virus, once again correct me if I'm wrong, is a bit more hardy.

As an aside, how quickly does HIV mutate? Is it quite quick, such as with Influenza, or is it rather slow? If slow, why is the HIV virus so difficult to make a vaccine for? If fast, it would make sense, but if slow not so much so with my limited knowledge on how vaccines work.

syn-drome 

noun

1. Pathology, Psychiatry. a group of symptoms that together are characteristic of a specific disorder, disease, or the like.

NOTE: NOT A DISEASE

And, correct me if I'm wrong here, HIV has a very short lifespan when outside of a host, I.E. the virus dies quickly when exposed to air. The Flu Virus, once again correct me if I'm wrong, is a bit more hardy.

As an aside, how quickly does HIV mutate? Is it quite quick, such as with Influenza, or is it rather slow? If slow, why is the HIV virus so difficult to make a vaccine for? If fast, it would make sense, but if slow not so much so with my limited knowledge on how vaccines work.

HIV dies extremely quickly when exposed to air. the flu virus is very hardy and can be picked up by physically contacting something infected with it (ie a toilet handle or a computer mouse, etc.). therefore it can survive in aerobic conditions.

and im not sure as to the mutation cycle of HIV...

the answer to that may also hold the answer to the cure to it.

HIV dies extremely quickly when exposed to air. and im not sure as to the mutation cycle of HIV...

the answer to that may also hold the answer to the cure to it.

Indeed. I have always pondered this question, as to why we have yet to make a vaccine for HIV. We seem to have a vaccine for many viruses, but HIV seems to not only not have one, but also not being really considered.

Perhaps it is because it is extraordinarily difficult to get test subjects for said vaccine?

I also suppose that the way in HIV works would hinder the purpose of the vaccine, or it may be far to strong to do so. Really, I'm no expert on HIV, and I'm very sure there is likely a reason.

As an aside, a quick trip to Wikipedia uncovered this:

"HIV differs from many other viruses as it has very high genetic variability. This diversity is a result of its fast replication cycle, with the generation of 109 to 1010 virions every day, coupled with a high mutation rate of approximately 3 x 10-5 per nucleotide base per cycle of replication and recombinogenic properties of reverse transcriptase.[62] This complex scenario leads to the generation of many variants of HIV in a single infected patient in the course of one day.[62] This variability is compounded when a single cell is simultaneously infected by two or more different strains of HIV. When simultaneous infection occurs, the genome of progeny virions may be composed of RNA strands from two different strains. This hybrid virion then infects a new cell where it undergoes replication. As this happens, the reverse transcriptase, by jumping back and forth between the two different RNA templates, will generate a newly synthesized retroviral DNA sequence that is a recombinant between the two parental genomes.[62] This recombination is most obvious when it occurs between subtypes.[62]."

So basically, it reproduces extremely quickly for a virus.

As an aside, a quick trip to Wikipedia uncovered this:

"HIV differs from many other viruses as it has very high genetic variability. This diversity is a result of its fast replication cycle, with the generation of 109 to 1010 virions every day, coupled with a high mutation rate of approximately 3 x 10-5 per nucleotide base per cycle of replication and recombinogenic properties of reverse transcriptase.[62] This complex scenario leads to the generation of many variants of HIV in a single infected patient in the course of one day.[62] This variability is compounded when a single cell is simultaneously infected by two or more different strains of HIV. When simultaneous infection occurs, the genome of progeny virions may be composed of RNA strands from two different strains. This hybrid virion then infects a new cell where it undergoes replication. As this happens, the reverse transcriptase, by jumping back and forth between the two different RNA templates, will generate a newly synthesized retroviral DNA sequence that is a recombinant between the two parental genomes.[62] This recombination is most obvious when it occurs between subtypes.[62]."

So basically, it reproduces extremely quickly for a virus.

viruses spread incredibly quickly on their own, and this is no exception.

the best way to avoid it is to not catch it, im afraid.

viruses spread incredibly quickly on their own, and this is no exception.

the best way to avoid it is to not catch it, im afraid.

The best way to avoid getting HIV is to not catch it?

The best way to avoid getting HIV is to not catch it?

I think he meant not to expose yourself to it. I.E. safe sex, abstinence, etc.

The best way to avoid getting HIV is to not catch it?

Quite the interesting phrasology.

Quite the interesting phrasology.

Akin to "Tautologies are tautologies"

no, you cant. you cant catch aids as any other viral disease because aids isnt a disease, merely symptoms of HIV working through your body and killing your white blood cells

So flu isn't a disease?

and no, you cant catch HIV like the flu. the flu virus can be carried through saliva; HIV simply cannot

I wasn't talking about HOW you catch a specifical disease. I'm pretty aware of how the HIV is transmitted.
I was talking about the use of the verb "catch" about a disease. You're saying that you cannot "catch" a disease; you "catch" a patogenic virus/bacterium/whatever and suffer the symptoms of that infection, but that's not a disease - that's what you're saying. I'm quite puzzled about your use of language.

In the other thread I saw a lot of people refering to "catching AIDS" or "the AIDS disease". This is a particular pet peeve of mine, so I wanted to make a thread in clarification.

AIDS is not a disease. You can not catch AIDS. AIDS is a condition caused by having Human Immunodeficiency Virus, or HIV.

AIDS stands for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. When HIV infection becomes advanced it often is referred to as AIDS. Under the definition of the Center for Disease Control, one has aquired AIDS when, as a result of HIV, his or her CD4 white blood cell count is below 200 per ml of blood.

Not everyone who has HIV has AIDS. If the HIV has not damaged his or her immune system to the point where he or she still has more than 200 CD4 white blood cells per ml of blood, he or she has not developed AIDS. When you hear something to the effect of "if his HIV gets worse it will cause AIDS" this means that if the HIV continues to deteriorate his immune system, his white blood cell count will have dropped to the point where he is considered to have AIDS.

This count is entirely artificial, it could be 100, or 500, or 1000, convention has placed it at 200, mostly because once it drops below 200, you are considered seriously ill, and has a very compromised immune system. Generally if ones immune system is above the point of having AIDS, one can generally survive. Once it crosses that line, it becomes very difficult for the body to survive. But again, the point at which one "has AIDS" is entirely arbitrary, but has been picked to be a practical, albeit artificial, place.

So once again, you can not catch AIDS, AIDS is not a disease. You catch HIV, HIV is a disease. AIDS is merely a descriptive term, used to describe a particular level of advancement of HIV in a person.

AIDS is a disease. It isn't a virus, but it is a condition. Conditions that are bad are diseases. That's what the word means. Dis-ease. Not at ease. You are at ease when you feel good, you are at dis-ease when you feel bad. When you catch the Human Immunodeficiency Virus it will, probably, at some point put you in the state of disease known as AIDS.

Alzheimer's is a disease. Schizophrenia is a disease. ALS is a disease. As far as we know none of them are caused by viruses. One suffers from diseases. One does not suffer from descriptive terms. I however suffer from having read this pointless rant.

no, you cant. you cant catch aids as any other viral disease because aids isnt a disease, merely symptoms of HIV working through your body and killing your white blood cells
You are not making sense. Viruses are not diseases, they can cause disease (viral diseases to be specific). HIV is a virus capable of causing a disease - AIDS. AIDS is a disease that can be contracted as a result of being infected by the virus known as HIV, just as the flu is contracted as a result of being infected by an influenza virus. Both AIDS and the flu are diseases, the viruses that cause them are not. The very fact that you use the phrase 'viral disease' should have clued you up to the fact that the disease is not the virus, but rather something a virus can cause.

AIDS = Aquired ImmunoDeficiency Syndrome
HIV = Human Immunodeficiency Virus

AIDS is a an unhealthy condition of the body (aka a disease), it's caused by HIV which is a virus, thus it is a viral disease. I'm confused as to what you think a viral disease is, if you think it is something other than a disease caused by a virus, such as for instance AIDS.

Do not be confused by the fact that not all syndromes are diseases. That a syndrome is not necessarily a disease does not mean that every syndrome is necessarily not a disease. It's no different to the fact that a fruit not necessarily being an apple doesnt necessitate that an apple is not a fruit.

And, correct me if I'm wrong here, HIV has a very short lifespan when outside of a host, I.E. the virus dies quickly when exposed to air. The Flu Virus, once again correct me if I'm wrong, is a bit more hardy.Right. Influenza has a thicker protein coat and can live outside the host. HIV cannot.

As an aside, how quickly does HIV mutate? Is it quite quick, such as with Influenza, or is it rather slow? If slow, why is the HIV virus so difficult to make a vaccine for? If fast, it would make sense, but if slow not so much so with my limited knowledge on how vaccines work.[/QUOTE]HIV mutates fairly rapidly, as well as reproducing very quickly

syn-drome 

noun

1. Pathology, Psychiatry. a group of symptoms that together are characteristic of a specific disorder, disease, or the like.

NOTE: NOT A DISEASE
AIDS is ny a syndrome. A syndrome of AIDS is the rash you get. Or the low white cell count. Or easy bruising. Those syndromes together give you...


wait for it...

It's a good one...

A DISEASE!

I think in order to determine whether or not AIDS is a disease, you have to break "disease" down into its component parts and fully assess what it itself means.

Disease is made up of two smaller words: "dise", and "ase". What these words mean is a mystery, therefore we may never discover whether AIDS properly fits the description. In any case, it'll require a greater mind than mine.

I also suppose that the way in HIV works would hinder the purpose of the vaccine, or it may be far to strong to do so. Really, I'm no expert on HIV, and I'm very sure there is likely a reason.


I think the problem is that it mutates a lot and enters the cell a funky way that might make it harder to identify?

AIDS is ny a syndrome. A syndrome of AIDS is the rash you get. Or the low white cell count. Or easy bruising. Those syndromes together give you...


wait for it...

It's a good one...

A DISEASE!

your wording is rather screwed up. AIDS doesn't have a syndrome, it IS a syndrome, auto immunodeficiency SYNDROME.

a group of symptoms that together are characteristic of a specific disorder, disease, or the like.

A syndrome is not a disease. A syndrome is the presence of symptoms characteristic OF the disease.

HIV is the disease. HIV gives you the symptomes, AIDS is a syndrome, it is the presence of the symptoms caused by HIV.

It is not the disease itself, it is the PRESENCE OF the disease.

A syndrome is not a disease. A syndrome is the presence of symptomes caused by the disease. If a syndrome was a disease, syndromes would have syndromes.

HIV is the disease.

HIV is a virus. Hence the V.

your wording is rather screwed up. AIDS doesn't have a syndrome, it IS a syndrome, auto immunodeficiency SYNDROME.



A syndrome is not a disease. A syndrome is the presence of symptoms characteristic OF the disease.

HIV is the disease. HIV gives you the symptomes, AIDS is a syndrome, it is the presence of the symptoms caused by HIV.

It is not the disease itself, it is the PRESENCE OF the disease.

A syndrome is not a disease. A syndrome is the presence of symptomes caused by the disease. If a syndrome was a disease, syndromes would have syndromes.

Your logic is wrong. The virus (HIV) is seperate from the disease.

Let's look at Streptococcus pyogenes (GAS) for an example.

Symptoms: Sore, red throat with white patches on the tonsils, high fever, cold sweats, trouble swallowing
Disease: strep throat.
Virus: GAS

Symptoms: Fever, fatigue, headache, vomiting, red rash over the body spreading from chest and ears, blanches with pressure, red tongue
Disease: Scarlet fever
Virus: GAS

Symptoms: Painful skin to begin, turning red, hot, swollen. May become purplish and develop blisters. Eventual death of tissue. Fever.
Disease: Necrotizing Fascitis
Virus: GAS

The virus is not the disease. As I stated before, the majority of adults have had the virus that causes mono at a high enough level to trigger a release of antibodies. Most adults, however, have not had mono. The virus is not the disease.

Additionally, we have things like cancer and diabeties, which are, in fact, diseases with no viral cause.

We also have people who carry HIV for years without ever showing a symptom (iirc, the incubation can last up to twelve years). They have the HIV virus, but do not have the disease, which is refered to as AIDS.

HIV refers to people who are infected with the virus. They may show some early signs of AIDS (much like those people who had mono, but never developed the disease). AIDS, however, is having both the virus and disease. AIDS is a disease. The virus HIV is not.

HIV is known to progress in stages. AIDS is the best known stage, but there are, in fact, others. The stages prior to AIDS are refered to as acute retroviral syndrome, progressing to AIDS. It is not only viral levels in the blood that is considered, but also other symptoms. Ergo, even when you do not have AIDS, the disease is not called HIV, but ARS.

One can also have aids without HIV.

At the VERY best and MOST generous, the OP is just a distinction without a difference.

Why this was posted by an otherwise pretty decent and reasonable poster is beyond me.

One can also have aids without HIV.

No, they cannot. And it's AIDS.

your wording is rather screwed up. AIDS doesn't have a syndrome, it IS a syndrome, auto immunodeficiency SYNDROME.

A syndrome is not a disease. A syndrome is the presence of symptoms characteristic OF the disease.
Not necessarily, Downs Syndrome for instance is a syndrome without a disease.

HIV is the disease. HIV gives you the symptomes, AIDS is a syndrome, it is the presence of the symptoms caused by HIV.
HIV is a virus (or to put things into your format)
HIV is IS a virus, human immunodeficiency VIRUS.
A virus is not a disease.

It is not the disease itself, it is the PRESENCE OF the disease.

A syndrome is not a disease. A syndrome is the presence of symptomes caused by the disease. If a syndrome was a disease, syndromes would have syndromes.
AIDS is the name of a disease. In many cases the terms disease and syndrome are interchangable, in a few cases for reasons particular to the condition concerned or particular to a group of related conditions and/or pathogens, a distinction will be made between the two. However in the absence of such a distinction particular to a condition and/or pathogen, the two are often interchangable.

The fact that you criticise others for considering the symptomology to be the disease, while absurdly insisting that a virus is a disease, is odd. Do you honestly, truly believe that a virus is a disease (rather than a disease causing agent - aka a kind of pathogen) or are you simply attempting to defend the position of your OP by digging the hole you started in even deeper?

Okay:

AIDS  /eɪdz/ Pronunciation Key -
–noun Pathology
a disease of the immune system characterized by increased susceptibility to opportunistic infections, as pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and candidiasis, to certain cancers, as Kaposi's sarcoma, and to neurological disorders: caused by a retrovirus and transmitted chiefly through blood or blood products that enter the body's bloodstream, esp. by sexual contact or contaminated hypodermic needles.

AIDS. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1). Retrieved November 29, 2006, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/AIDS