BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 10:08 PM

ake, when my daughter was 9 or so, she came home, disgruntled. She said, Sharon said I am bossy. And all my friends agreed with her.

I said, Well. Are you?

If you don't understand that little analogy, who was it said something to the effect that if one person calls you an ass, shrug and forget him. If everybody/em>s says you are an ass, give up and order a saddle.

Or something like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 09:20 PM

I just read what you post. Homosexuality is inherently risky. Homosexuals should be cured. The best model for dealing with homosexuals with AIDS is quarantine.

Honey that's insulting right there, if I were to say it about anybody of whom it wasn't true.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:12 PM

I see no logic in your last post.
Someone above said you were "bloody brilliant"...I thought you were having a laugh.

It appears THEY were.

It was actually you who insulted me, by your remarks on my motivation.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:04 PM

I see your discourse is little better than that of the other three regulars.

If you can't meet a person's actual logic, insult them. They will never notice what you have done, and will think their arguments have been rebutted.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

I see your discourse is little better than that of the other three regulars.
"democracy".....the last refuge of a "liberal"? :0)

Would you care to address seriously the measures the Cuban govt have adopted?
Behind bars? Did you even bother to read the link?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 07:23 PM

Well that makes a bit more sense, Ake -- although a few words by way of introduction as to why we were going to Cuba would have been ..... rational.

The difference between Cuba and here (whether "here" means the US&A or the UK) is that they are a dictatorship, and we are not. This means two things: (1) we cannot impose the kind of quarrantine on chunks of our society that you would like to see. Which I think is the whole of what you want to say think and do about homosexuals. (2) we don't have the kind of closed borders that could keep further infected people from coming in.

So in short we cannot do what Cuba has been able to do -- it doesn't need to worry about civil rights because it's a dictatorship. We're not, so we do. That and it's the right thing to do but what does that matter to you?

What it all boils down to is that you want to place all homosexuals behind bars "for their own safety" (of course). Because of course we know there is no anal sex in prison.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 06:17 PM

In the interest of accuracy in the use of political science terminology, whenever Ake uses the word "liberal," his understanding of the word is, essentially, as follows:

Wibble Wibble.

Glad to clarify these details. No need to thank me.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:46 PM

Did it again - Not 33.8%,

I meant "The factor 33.8 does not refer to the efficiency of vaginal or anal sex as ways of contracting HIV, it refers to the comparative likelihood of being infected via those means in conjunction with numerous other factors, such as the likelihood that your partner is infected, and the realities of your life, their life and your circumstances which affect that likelihood."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:40 PM

correction - it was not 33.8%

Apologies.


The factor 33.8% does not refer to the efficiency of vaginal or anal sex as ways of contracting HIV, it refers to the comparative likelihood of being infected via those means in conjunction with numerous other factors, such as the likelihood that your partner is infected.

So as the proportion of heterosexual HIV infections increases, that factor will decrease proportionately.

The efficiency of vaginal as compared to anal sex in transmitting HIV is represented by the figures I have quoted.

So being Gay and having anal sex are not what make HIV a risk, but circumstances are what matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:28 PM

"Lox, here is that risk comparison again."

Yes Keith, thats the one I'm talking about too.

The figure 33.8% includes men as well as women.

It is based on approx 1 in 10 chance during vaginal sex as an average.

which works out at about 1 in 6-7 for women and 1 in 14-16 in men.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:27 PM

Come on mousethief, you asked me what I would do about the already high and rising homosexual hiv rates, I cited the action taken by Cuba and suggested that we adopt similar measures....how is that "trying to drag you into an argument about Cuba"?

I am an admirer of Castro and what he attempted in social,educational and health programmes.

Do I sense a "liberal" cop out?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:22 PM

I seee you have found an article by Brendan O'Neill.

Who he?

The Guardians own Devils Advocate.

click here for a list of his other articles.


Among them some wild claims about Tienanmen Square in 1989, and a lot of "global warming is a myth" stuff.


I am not prepared to go into some of the issues he has ranted about, but one I remember as if it was yesterday was the Tienanmen Square Massacre.

I was in Hong Kong throughout the whole period, and myself and my Dad, who was a senior civil servant in the HK government, paid very close attention to the whole thing as it unfolded from the moment that the students started to pitch their tents, right through seeing Wu Er Kai Shi's unrestrained public admonitions of Deng and Li Peng, and finally the live news describing the carnage being inflicted.


Brendan O'Neills agenda is simple. Find an issue and slag off the "trendy" stereotyped romantic politics associated with it.


I suspect that such an approach is not that far from yours Keith ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:20 PM

Lox, here is that risk comparison again.
Transmission 33.8 times more likely with penile-anal sex than penile-vaginal sex.
http://www.natap.org/2008/Trans/Trans_03.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:12 PM

Very good link Keith!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:12 PM

How did my name get dragged into a tangent about Cuba? Is it because I once said something unfavourable about Hemingway? Or favourable about their ability to provide health care to a greater percentage of their population than the United Shame of America? Ake, no matter how you slice it, you've got the wrong end of the stick here. And trying to drag me into a side-argument about Cuba is just bizarre.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:59 PM

I remember the research you posted.

It stated that the chances of catching HIV from a HIV positive partner via unprotected anal sex was 1 in 3

It stated that the chances of catching HIV from a HIV positive partner via unprotected vaginal sex was 1 in 10


Howver, this second figure was the average figure for men and women, as we know from mention of the differences with or without a foreskin etc.

Figures which compare men and women, show that women are just over twice as likely to catch HIV from a HIV positive partner via unprotected vaginal sex, as are their male counterparts.

This changes the 1 in 10 figure to about 1 in 14-16 in men and 1 in 6-7 in women.

So vaginal sex is nearer to being half as risky as anal sex.


But wait - there is more ...

... another factor in Africa, other than ignorance of sexual health, that makes women more vulnerable, is the issue of being infected by other STI's.

And as we know, adolescent girls and young women are the highest demographic to suffer from these in the UK.

As they get older, this figure will become the case for middle aged and older women, and without a change of some sort, will continue to be the case for the next generation of young women too.

With 60% of teens interviewed saying they don't use a condom with a new partner, we can see trouble on the horizon for the human petri dish that is our young female demographic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

Another view of de Cock's admissions.

Much of the media has treated Dr De Cock's admission as a startling revelation. In truth, experts have known for many years that in the vast majority of the world, Aids has little impact on the "general population". In her new book The Wisdom of Whores, Elizabeth Pisani – who worked for 10 years in what she refers to as "the Aids bureaucracy" – admits that by 1998 it was clear that "HIV wasn't going to rage through the billions in the 'general population', and we knew it".

Some people knew it earlier. In 1987, my friend and colleague Dr Michael Fitzpatrick wrote a fiery pamphlet titled The Truth About the Aids Panic. At the height of the Conservative government's scary tombstone campaign ("Don't die of ignorance"), he wrote: "There is no good evidence that Aids is likely to spread rapidly in the West among heterosexuals." In Britain, most of the small-scale spread of "heterosexual Aids" has been a result of infected individuals arriving from Africa. In the UK in the whole of the 1980s – the decade of the Great Aids Panic – there were 20 cases of HIV acquired through heterosexual contact with an individual infected in Europe.

And it isn't the case that the heterosexual pandemic failed to materialise because officialdom's omnipresent pro-condom propaganda was a success. According to James Chin, a clinical professor of epidemiology at the University of California at Berkeley and author of the new book The Aids Pandemic, it was always a "glorious myth" that there would be an "HIV epidemic in general populations". That myth was the product of "misunderstanding or deliberate distortions of HIV epidemiology" by Unaids and other Aids activists, says Chin.

It is time to recognise that the Aids scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the past 30 years. Instead of being treated as a sexually transmitted disease that affected certain high-risk communities, and which should be vociferously tackled by the medical authorities, the "war against Aids" was turned into moral crusade.

Both Conservative and New Labour governments exploited the disease to create a new moral framework for society. Through baseless fearmongering, officials sought to police and regulate the behaviour of the public. No longer able to appeal to outdated Victorian ideals of chastity or restraint, the powers-that-be used the spectre of an Aids calamity to terrify us into behaving "responsibly" in sexual and social matters.

They were aided and abetted by the rump of the radical left. Gay rights campaigners, feminists and left-leaning health and social workers stood shoulder-to-shoulder, first with the Tories and later with Labour, in spreading the "glorious myth" of a possible future Aids pandemic. An unholy alliance of old-style, prudish conservatives and post-radical, lifestyle-obsessed leftists latched on to Aids as a disease that might provide them with a sense of moral purpose.

And they ruthlessly sought to silence anyone who questioned them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/12/aids.health

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:33 PM

Thanks Lox, but I had little choice!
I can not let your statements pass without comment.

Anal sex is much more than twice as risky. Remeber I found some research that calculated the risk to one decimal place. it was several times I think.( I must be careful now)

Domestic hetero infection rates are compararable with rare diseases like Huntingdons, and are definately NOT increasing exponentially.
It is a slow, linear increase.
MSM rates are dramatically higher, of the order of 50 times higher.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:27 PM

Keith,

if the increase in locally acquired HIV in the UK hhad been from 9% to 15% over 5 years, you might be able to say that it was just a reasonable fluctuation.

However, for it to increase 5 fold in so few years is dramatic in the extreme, and evidence of a sea change.

As more are infected, so more run the risk of being infected etc, with the result that the Gap will continue to close ever faster.

The fact that Gay men have been proportionately more likely to be HIV positive has been a phenomenon.

It won't be long before that phenomenon is past tense.

And anyone who agues that resources should diverted away from heterosexual HIV education into HIV education for Gays and Africans would have to be wilful, obstinate and deeply irresponsible in the extreme.

In fact, the ony reason to continue supporting a view like that would be a deliberate clinging on to untenable views of homosexuals and Africans.

We already know that Ake is racist as he has ignored stats in the past to press home his idea that foreigners are responsible for the credit crunch, and he has slandered Moslems and Tinkers, and he has also described Gays as a scourge with a natural propensity to abuse children, and described in detail just how his imagination gets all steamed up at the thought of Gay men having sex.

So it shold be no surprise that he has an agenda when it comes to "caring" for homosexuals health.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:26 PM

Royston....I dont agree with everything that is contained in my link, but I do agree with the main thrust, which is when applied to the UK that high risk groups like homosexuals and African immigrants cant just be handed a few condoms and left to get on with it as you "liberals" suggest.

In the UK today we have two minority groups male homosexuals and African immigrants, who between them compose perhaps 3/4% of the population, contracting between them over 60% of new hiv/aids infections........job done?....back to bed sonny, Ive phoned the doc!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:12 PM

"no, I got it wrong!
I do apologize and I do retract.
keith. "


Keith you are an honourable man, I was 100% right to engage you with an open mind, despite what I feared might have been a partisan desire to support Ake's position.

I would like to continue if I may.

You said,

"Lox, you will find similar ignorance about most things supposedly taught in schools."

You agree then that there are many in the UK with a por education and that this is the case across the board, not just in relation to sexual health.

The UK has its problems and could improve its education system, but generally, there is significantly better access to education in the UK than there is in much of Africa.

Poverty and ignorance are vicious conspiring bedfellows, and in Africa they have spawned an epedemic between them.



Ake,


you are on your own now.


Keith has acknowledged that the risks of vaginal sex are only just less than half those of anal sex.

He has also acknowledged that domestic infection rates amongst heterosexuals are in fact significant after all, and rising exponentially.


Your position has been stripped down to your original position - that homosexuals are a scourge and what they do is revolting.


I expect you to carry on repeating the same old crap though, its what you always do, because you are more loyal to your prejudice than you are to the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:59 PM

Keith,

I did not say there was an epidemic in the straight population. I said that the numbers were rising steadily year on year, which has to be worrying.

I speculated that as the number of carriers rises, it could lead to an exponential rise, an epidemic. As a scientist you will know that this is possible. It remains, however, a speculation.

"Although most new diagnoses in the UK heterosexual population are thought to have been acquired outside the country, the numbers of domestic heterosexual infections are also rising and as the pool of carrier grows so the rate of infecton amongst those being unsafe will increase. Exponential rise on the horizon.

Were my exact words.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:56 PM

Shit for brains (Ake)

Retreating back to your old comforts, having produced even more evidence that contradicts your view.

96% of homosexuals don't have HIV

On the whole, homosexual practice is therefore safe.

The Cuban model you love so much is praised for its care and compassion and its aggressive campaigning for social tolerance and acceptance.

Job done.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:45 PM

Royston ...These figures were designed to be read and digested by persons who have retained a degree of sanity.....now put out the light and get back into bed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:42 PM

OK, those figures.
The difference between gay and straight new infections is not as great as it was in the earlier BMJ survey, but is still dramatic.
New UK acquired infections are increasing by a hundred or so every year, but the increase is NOT exponential as Royston has claimed.
There is no evidence at all for an epidemic in the straight community.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:38 PM

On the whole experts are positive about the Cuban health figures and treatment regime, but find the high numbers of homosexual/bisexual infections and their annual rise "worrying".

Cuban health authorities depend very much on "contact tracing" in their fight against the disease; and the promiscuity and large number of "casual" sexual partners which seems to accompany homosexual practice works against an effective treatment...IMO.

Thus, I see homosexual practice as unsafe and unhealthy.
There may need to be an element of compulsion in any attempt to arrest the disease in US/UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:32 PM

The only thing, Ake, is that the article does not say that Cuba had
, or has, compulsory testing. It says that testing is urged or actively promoted for 'at risk' groups (the same as it is here). What is different is contact tracing and urging those contacts to get tested. It says that all blood tests require patient consent. That seems totally sensible to me.

It also praises the universal education program:

"Much of the Cuban health promotion material seen in 2005 was aimed at the general population, with some material aimed more directly at homosexual men or addressing the male responsibility for condom use. Another national pamphlet addressed cultural attitudes, urging readers to "judge your friends by their qualities, not by their sexual preferences" and stressing acceptance of "sexual diversity" to counter "prejudices and stigmas." It noted that "homosexual, bisexual, or transvestite . . . are simply forms of sexual expression, as is heterosexuality," and that understanding and accepting people as they are, will make you grow into a better person." Local music stars have been enlisted to help promote safe sex, for example in the national HIV magazine."

Which is the sort of universal, caring education and social tone that us "liberals" campaign for and which you hate so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:09 PM

Mousethief....You take a very belligerent tone, but in the hope that you are serious about this "discussion", I have linked to an article(containing up to date figures), on the treatment of high risk cases in Cuba.

Despite being in a high risk area geographically and having a high number of holiday visitors, the hiv/aids infection rate in cuba is the lowest in the Carribean area, and one of the lowest in the entire world.

While the Cuban infection rate has risen between 2005 and 2008, the highest rises have been among the male homosexual community.

I would suggest that we look seriously at the Cuban model of compulsory testing for high risk groups, a strict regime of contact tracing, and a concerted treatment and education programme

Link to article
hiv/aids infections in Cuba for 2008

Total   10454... All males 8363 ....homo/bi males 7119(63%)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:06 PM

Handsomely said.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 02:44 PM

no, I got it wrong!
I do apologize and I do retract.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 02:38 PM

Don, Royston may have clearly stated them to be UK acquired, but he has got it wrong.
Here is the site again.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135
Here is the explanation given about the tables incuding table A on page 6
Definitions used
HIV infected individual: an individual for whom HIV diagnosis and/or AIDS, and/or death with HIV
infection has been reported.
AIDS case: The European AIDS case definition is used for AIDS surveillance in the UK. It is based on
that developed in USA as modified in 1987 and 1993, but does not include a CD4 count of less than
200 in an HIV infected person as AIDS defining.
Death in an HIV infected individual: these include AIDS and non AIDS related deaths.
Date of HIV diagnosis: This is taken to be the date of the first HIV defining event for an individual in
the UK, for example, a laboratory report of HIV infection or a diagnosis of AIDS. Tables summarising
events over time are produced using the date of HIV diagnosis (and not the date of report). This
means that numbers, particularly for recent years, will rise as a result of receiving further reports.

I expect you will both want to apologize and retract.
Most of those heteros diagnosed here were infected in Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 02:01 PM

Keith,

Assuming that your figure of 9% of total heterosexual infections of HIV were UK acquired, rather than African imports, it follows that the 2008 figures show a UK acquired infection rate of 36.6% of the total.

That is a fourfold increase since 2003.

Seems a pretty significant rise for what you insist is a low risk group, wouldn't you agree?

It really doesn't inspire confidence in the claim that we will see no explosion in hetero HIV/AIDS cases, especially as the rate of pregnancies and STD infections proves that young women particularly are not taking the necessary safe sex precautions.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:44 PM

""Uk infected not UK diagnosed.
Most heteros diagnosed here were infected in africa.""

The figures Royston gave were clearly stated to be UK acquired infections of HIV.

To quote your fellow naysayer,.....Do keep up.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:43 PM

Keith: It is a very dangerous place to admit to being gay

Stop ignoring what is being told to you in favour of your silly lies.

If, as you say, gay men make up only 1-2% of populations then in Africa - which has HIV prevalence of 25-40% of populations, it is by any measure a disease that overwhelmingly affects heterosexuals.

The assertion would still be true at Kinsey esimates of 10%

Because Africa accounts for over two thirds of all global HIV cases, it is perfectly obvious that globally HIV is a disease predominantly of straight people. We already established that 50% of all HIV positive peoople are women (globally) and they didn't catch it from gay men, did they?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:40 PM

Africa is also intensely hot and moist. I suspect it makes for better viral survival.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:36 PM

No, Keith,

The 1,130 figure is of UK-Acquired UK-diagnosed heterosexually contracted HIV cases.

There were a FURTHER 3,090 heterosexual diagnoses of HIV that were contracted outside the UK.

Try to keep up Keith, or are you telling lies? It's just so hard to tell.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:30 PM

"It is the question we are asked most often – why is the situation so bad in sub-Saharan Africa? It is a combination of factors – more commercial sex workers, more ulcerative sexually transmitted diseases, a young population and concurrent sexual partnerships."

"Sexual behaviour is obviously important but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

Low rates of circumcision, which is protective, and high rates of genital herpes, which causes ulcers on the genitals through which the virus can enter the body, also contributed to Africa's heterosexual epidemic.

But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:27 PM

Ebbie, AIDS has been observed to be different in Africa.
WHO gives likely reasons. Royston gave basically the same reasons a few posts back.
Also remember what this thread was originally about.
It is a very dangerous place to admit to being gay.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 12:39 PM

But why is Africa considered a unique case? Surely if one area, one continent, one people, one city is impacted by anything, it follows that other areas, other continents, other peoples, other cities will also eventually be impacted? Extraordinary measures would make a difference, possibly even canceling, the inevitable spread of whatever it is, but until that is true and clearly shown, surely, surely, what goes around comes around?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 11:49 AM

Royston,
Uk infected not UK diagnosed.
Most heteros diagnosed here were infected in africa.
Can you come up with more recent figures than that?
The British Medical Journal figures I provided are only 6 years old.
They are still relevant.

Globally means over the globe, not just africa which by now we all know is a unique case.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 11:10 AM

Keith: Reports indicate that 21 115 adults (aged 15 or older) diagnosed with HIV in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland between 1985 and 2003 were infected through heterosexual intercourse (figure). Of these, 1901 (9.0%) were probably infected in the United Kingdom:

That from the BMJ piece discussed earlier.
That is an average of 158.4 per year

You are so unscrupulous Keith. I used to call you a liar for clouding and misleading a discussion with old data. OK, so technically what you say WAS true. It IS NOT true NOW. At best you are unscrupulous, at worst a liar.

Why have you come here with data 1985-2003?

Why Keith? Tell us.

When the most recent data for a full year of observation (2008) was for over 1,100 cases acquired in the UK by heterosexual sex. That was from the HPA figures that you and I both quoted the other day.

There are now 5 times the number of heterosexual UK-acquired diagnoses than there were in 2000.

But apparently that should not concern anyone because as Keith and Ake both know, HIV only affects blacks and gays.

As for "proving" that, globally, HIV is a disease predominantly of straight people, all you need to know is that in Africa there are about 22 million sufferers, from 33 million cases worldwide. Most of those African sufferers live in countries where the prevalence rate is in excess of 25% of the population. As you believe that only 1% of populations are gay, then just on those figures alone my assertion is proven.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 10:13 AM

Royston re
"Tell the hundreds of white British that get infected every year through heterosexual vaginal sex that "there is no risk of straight HIV" and see what their opinion is"

Reports indicate that 21 115 adults (aged 15 or older) diagnosed with HIV in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland between 1985 and 2003 were infected through heterosexual intercourse (figure). Of these, 1901 (9.0%) were probably infected in the United Kingdom:

That from the BMJ piece discussed earlier.
That is an average of 158.4 per year.
About two and a half times the number struck by lightning!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:47 AM

In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations may have been misdirected, Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:14 AM

Why can't you exchange points of view without calling people fuckwit, shitforbrains, etc.?
(I know, Don, I have used the word fool too often in the past, and used it here recently, but I took on board what you said to me a while back.)
You call me and others liar, but I have not lied.
On 10th Jan you stated as fact something false.
I do not think that it was ignorance. I think that you knowingly lied to bolster your argument. Why do that?

In the dark, bad old days, for an unmarried girl to get pregnant was such a disgrace that suicide was a preferred option for many.
But girls still got pregnant.
Kids take risks. It is what they do.
With STIs, drugs, motorbikes, internet, etc., we will not be with the kids when they are taking their risks.
All we can do is equip them with as much knowledge of the risks as possible.
I can tell them that all drugs are dangerous, but some are a greater risk than others. I can tell them that crack has a higher risk without implying that ecstacy is safe.
I am encouraged to be as "frank" as possible.
Not so with AIDS risks. Maybe there are sound political and social reasons to withold some information, but I am unconvinced.
This is not a huge issue for me, just a mild irritation.
I regret now raising it. This thread did not need extra controversies.

Lox, you will find similar ignorance about most things supposedly taught in schools.
Royston, yes anyone can get AIDS, but it is much more of a risk for gay men except in Africa.
Do you have evidence for the globally bit of "In Africa - and globally - it is overwhelmingly a straight disease."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 07:51 PM

Whom are you addressing, Lox?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 07:24 PM

Some interesting stuff.


Sexual ignorance UK


"Around 11% of people think standing up during sex prevents a woman from becoming pregnant"


Shall I bother with any more? or shall we asume that the same people may not know about pregnancy, but know loads about HIV?


How is the message "hitting home?"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:50 PM

Ake: You tried to assert only a few posts ago that hetero sex was as much a risk as homo sex

Show us that post, shit for brains. I have never asserted any such thing.

You and Keith and GfS claimed HIV was just a gay disease. It isn't. In Africa - and globally - it is overwhelmingly a straight disease. That is my point, it has never changed, even Keith agrees it is true.

Tell the hundreds of white British that get infected every year through heterosexual vaginal sex that "there is no risk of straight HIV" and see what their opinion is.

Go to Africa and tell it to the millions upon millions - 40% of the total population of some countries. Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:44 PM

Ake,

The answer, you fuckwit, for everybody is use a condom when you screw!

It is that bloody simple.

The rising figures show that too many white, straight, black and gay people are not getting the message. The numbers for EVERY GROUP are rising.

What would YOU do about all groups?

You and Keith can lash out at the people you don't like, but it won't solve anything. You could test the people you don't like and then ... what? If people are still not being safe they will get HIV. They will get it from the straight and white carriers, they will get it from people with clean results because it can take 3-6 months for viral load to be detectalbe in testing.

There is no way out of this other than for everyone to practice safe sex. Blaming is not going to help anyone.

If you made testing compulsory for the entire population, it would save lives because people would get the treatment and care they need. It can't / won't stop the spread or kill the disease because of the latency issue. Just testing "at risk" groups would be fucking ridiculous and pointless.

Ake, you are pointless. The only people left in this thread that don't understand reality are you and good old reliable Keith. You are both racist and homophobic bigots and this issue is closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:38 PM

Yes...but what are you going to do about the continually rising infection rates among male homosexuals?

Do you not think that the message has been out there for the last eight years?

With absolutely no effect.

What do you suggest? Shall we shoot them? Give us your precise remedies. Who will implement them? Who will pay for it? Don't be shy. Surely you must have some ideas, right, you're not just being obstreperous, right? Put up or shut up.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:30 PM

Nah. We'll just shoot them. Right?