AIDS doesn't work as population control at all. The child who was cured was born with it, because her mother had been somehow infected. It didn't impact her reproductive ability in the slightest.
It kills people slowly and nastily, filling them with despair as it does so and greatly reduces their health in the meantime. And when that is going on in a sizeable portion of the population it really helps to stagnate social development and keep conditions the way they are. Those conditions being easy HIV transmission, high infant mortality poverty, violence...
Nate's right. When quality of life and health is improved, birthrate drops. Indeed, when birthrate drops people's quality of life also improves. People are inclined to have less children when they aren't used to so many of them dying or don't need every hand possible working the fields or family business just to keep living hand to mouth. When these issues are resolved there will be less people being born to die and becoming part of that 3 million figure.
"Do we really want three million more people in the world each year?" In that question I heard, "wouldn't you rather three million innocent people die horribly each year?" I have to ask why anyone would be happy with that. I know the answer is going to come down to population growth and resource distribution. Which ultimately means: "I don't want those people to survive, because if they live that's going to negatively impact my lifestyle!"
__________________
| (• ◡•)| (❍ᴥ❍ʋ)
|