BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 05:49 AM

Let me break this down for you, Keith.

5.3% of MSM's aged 15-44 are HIV+

about 1.6% of gay men, overall, are HIV+

Both of those have factual support, both of those can be true. They are not mutually exclusive.

I have not misled anyone if I have always stated the two figures together.

I have always stated the two figures together.

I copied and pasted the posts where I did so.

So stop with the lies, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 05:44 AM

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/HIV_Life_Expectancy_Now_Normal_999.html

http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/170/1/6

Ake, you told us that you don't believe in equality or fairness and that some people have less rights than others. I respect your honesty, but in every other respect; why can't you just go and bother someone else with your rants?

Keith - delicious. Thank you. Your ignorance and your prejduce just jeeps oozing out with every post.

Overall, HIV+ people will suffer challenges and complications but have a life expectancy - and quality of life expectancy - pretty much the same as someone who is HIV-

It is one of the principal reasons why total numbers living with HIV are rising.

So it betrays two of your principal prejudices - that they're all at it and they've all got it; along with the assumption that they're all dying.

If there are about 2mm gay people and only about 32,000 gay men that are HIV+ then however much it upsets your prejudices, there are only about 1.6% of gay men living with HIV.

You have never felt the need to strip out so many portions of other demographics - like straight people - in order to inflate the results of your fiddling, have you? Why is that?

I have not misled anyone - I have always quoted the 5.6% figure for 15-44 year olds alongside the 1.6% overall estimate. But we had to recover that 5.6% from your lies that put it at 10% or more. OK, so no more lies, Keith."

I have friends that HIV+ and healthy after 20, nearly 30 years. I have one friend who is HIV+, healthy after 18 years and doesn't even yet require drug-treatment - and that is not an isolated event.

The thing is Keith, that your internal narrative on this and so many other subjects is utterly false.

I said to you about 10 days ago that at various points in this dialogue you might have stopped and reconsidered a) your prejudices and b) that you just don't know or understand as much as you like to think that you do.

Are you ready to think yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 03:55 AM

Straight talk.
If you say HPA supports your figure of 1.6%, that is a deliberate lie to conceal the scale of the problem.
HPA STATES 5.3%.
Not for London, but overall for England and Wales.

As an average for ages 15 to 44, if a steady rise from zero, at age 44 it will be at 10.6%.
(If the rise is not linear, that will be an underestimate.)

10.6% will be a great underestimate of the proportion who have succumbed because by age 44, half have ALREADY DIED.

And the figure will go on rising for another 30 years.

1.6% is a lie Royston.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 12:14 AM

"Homosexuals appear unable or unwilling to modify their behaviour, for example the number of casual sexual partners."

All Indians walk in single file. At least the one that I saw did.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 08:20 PM

There is much less prejudice against homosexuals than there was a few years ago, but the health figures are much worse.

What you are saying does not make sense.

Homosexuals appear unable or unwilling to modify their behaviour, for example the number of casual sexual partners.

International Aids Agencies like UNAIDS are saying that "new and effective measures to combat infection must be introduced, ALONGSIDE education on sexual promiscuity and condom use".

This was made clear much earlier in the thread, so please dont start posting more falsehoods.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 07:48 PM

Ake: ".if 5% of heteros were to become infected, we would be facing a national emergency"

Exactly. So where is the action to teach sex and sexual health in a fashion that is relevant to gay people in schools?

Reach people early, get the message across.

Why aren't we teaching kids to celebrate diversity, to fight prejudice.

Why aren't we having discussions about challenging stereotypes and social "hang-ups" so that we remove the fear and stigma that presently stops at risk groups from accessing prevention and treatment resources?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 06:58 PM

And don't you dare to claim that you give a shit about anyone.

For you, gay men are a "scourge". They cannot and should not be equal or treated as such.

For you, HIV is just proof of and justification for your prejudices and a weapon that you can use to attack minorities with.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 06:54 PM

Ake, there is nothing that here that tries to deny the scale or seriousness of anything.

It's how to approach it that is important.

You and Keith continue to pursue a racist and homophobic agenda that men who have sex with men and black people need to be forcibly "dealt with" in some way that other groups do not.

You both seek to inflate the scale of the problems affecting those groups to the extent that you both tell lies to the extent of claiming that "most" gay men or black people are HIV+.

And that is even before we get on to the fact that you think gay men are "to blame".

So after those lies of exaggeration are out there, you - but not necessarily Keith - seek to impose punitive and discriminatory measures. Measures that all the UN and other experts assert unequivocally are unhelpful and damaging to the cause of tackling this disease.

The experts - without exception - are clear that prejudice and stigma against at risk groups and against HIV+ people are two of the biggest blocks to prevention and treatment for many people.

The problem is easy to see. The causes are more subtle. The solutions are even more subtle and require a level of experience and intellect that you are utterly lacking.

All you need to do is read the damned stuff that you keep talking about, but it seems even that mental facility is beyond you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 06:45 PM

Royston.....If the figures for male homosexuals were replicated in the heterosexual community, the UK health service would be unable to function, we would be unable to afford a treatment programme, society would virtually collapse.

Trying to equate Hetero and Homo figures in the UK or US is disingenuous....if 5% of heteros were to become infected, we would be facing a national emergency

Why do you try to hide the seriousness of the situation....do you not care what happens to your community?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 04:04 PM

Well honestly, Keith. If you'd said at the start that your post was based on guess-work extrapolation aimed at supporting your slanted view of things then I would never have bothered responding.

My 1.6% estimate is a valid proposal supported by HPA facts and a NATSAL survey.

We both agree on the 5.6% HPA figure from HPA for a segment of the population, so what was your point?

And you were lying when you repeated twice the lie that I was not using official figures in my assertions.

So can we take it then that you withdraw your rumination...

"It is probably, but not certainly, true that a minority of MSMs are infected"

...on the grounds that it is patently absurd, we all know it to be undeniably true - thankfully - that a small minority of people of any grouping will have to bear the pain of living with HIV.

I'm so glad we are having these chats. Your days of perceived unbiased contributions are well and truly at an end here.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 03:44 PM

Don....I would have absolutely no objection to the universal testing of immigrants but the cost would be prohibitive and the exercise would be of very limited value, given the low numbers of infections in other groups(of immigrants)
In much the same way, I would support the testing and contact tracing of other "at risk" groups like male homosexuals and "junkies"( your very non PC discription of intravenus drug users)

I wonder why your "liberal" ideology does not extend to these un fortunate people......not flavour of the month obviously!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 03:42 PM

Royston posted:-

""Now to your 8.5% HIV prevalence among 15-44 y/o MSM's. The rest of the sentence from from the HPA report says:

" The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%) within London"

In the interest of total honesty, it concludes:

"...3.7% (range 3.1-4.5%) elsewhere in England and Wales and 5.3% (range 4.7-6.1%)overall."

So screw me if you weren't lying yet again. I trusted you on that, I didn't imagine even you would twist a lie out of a simple document like that. You just can't be trusted on anything can you?

So put all that together and you get a figure of 4.7% to 6.1% MSM HIV prevalence in the sexually active age groups which is kind of in the ballpark of the 4% figure that we were all thought was basically realistic - until your prejudices got in the way of whatever common sense you have.""


This is the whole of the HPA comment, out of which you extracted one sentence, to support your erroneous understanding of the issue.

Your figure related to London only, and last time I checked, London and England were not in the thesaurus as synonyms.

The figure for England was pretty much what Royston has said all along.

Stop trying to move imaginary goalposts, and you might even make sense once in a while.

I'm not holding my breath though.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 03:30 PM

No lies from me Royston.
I use the most reliable figure from the most reliable source.
It does seem devious that you keep using the smaller figure.
As if you were trying to deceive people.

At age 15, I am sure the number of boys infected with HIV through having sex with men is zero, or very, very close to zero.
It will rise steadily with age.
If 5.6% is the average for ages 15 to 44, it will be about 11% at age 44, and still rising except that the median age of death is about 40.

If it is 11% at age 44, were it not for deaths, the proportion would only grow.
No one ever gets better.
Most people are sexually active into their 70s
Do you know how many would have succumbed by then?

My guess would be as valid as yours.
But only a guess.
I do not know.
Unless you have reliable figures, neither do you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 02:51 PM

""Regarding racism, I see little difference between the views being expounded by the BNP and those from a large section of the Conservative party....A party which Don is proud to support.

In fact, the biggest racist idiots that I ever met were right wing Tories!""

If you had ever taken the opportunity actually to read my comments, you would not be stupid enough to accuse me of being a right wing anything. I am a Tory, but so far to the left of the party as to be better qualified as a Socialist than either Blair or Brown.

""Virgin....My posts were on topic, as to discuss "racist teachers" one must determine the naqture of racism.

My view on hiv testing had nothing to do with race per se, but the fact that these particular immigrants have very high levels of infection and THAT is a fact, not an opinion.""

I'm still unconvinced, as you do not express any concern about the possibility of white immigrants bringing this "plague" (your word) into the country.

However few those immigrants might be, it would seem logical to want to prevent them bringing an infection, unless of course your real concern is other than one of health.

I believe that you use "concerns about health" to hide your antipathy to immigrants, and particularly to African and Asian immigrants.

You gave pretty clear indications of that in the immigration thread.

In short I don't believe your protestations of impartiality.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 01:52 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston - PM
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 05:40 AM

Keith, please don't drag this back by two weeks.

Minimum 1,984,500 gay men (from the NATSAL survey)

The total figure for gay men living with HIV from HPA was whatever is was when I posted it 10 days or so ago. The calculated overall prevalence was 1.6%

I specifically quoted 5.6% as the median prevalence for 15-44 year olds from the HPA dataset.

So I hoped I was being quite scrupulous in putting both numbers forward.

Please don't obscure the point - that HIV is a tragic, minority experience whether you are gay, straight, black or white in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston - PM
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:13 PM

Thanks, Don. F.

Ake, hedonism does not spread HIV. Promsicuity does not spread HIV.

Having sex without a condom spreads HIV.

Whatever the cause of HIV spreading, the prevalence amongst gay men overall is only 1.6%

98.4% of gay men are not hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe. Delete as appropriate.

Take the most sexually active, highest risk demographic of 15-44 year-olds and you have 5.6% prevalence.

So 94.4% of the statstically riskiest gay men are, errm, NOT hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe.

So you are just a relentlessly fucking stupid bigot.

--------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston - PM
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:23 AM

[GONORRHEA SECTION REMOVED]

Now to your 8.5% HIV prevalence among 15-44 y/o MSM's. The rest of the sentence from from the HPA report says:

" The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%) within London"

In the interest of total honesty, it concludes:

"...3.7% (range 3.1-4.5%) elsewhere in England and Wales and 5.3% (range 4.7-6.1%)overall."

So screw me if you weren't lying yet again. I trusted you on that, I didn't imagine even you would twist a lie out of a simple document like that. You just can't be trusted on anything can you?

So put all that together and you get a figure of 4.7% to 6.1% MSM HIV prevalence in the sexually active age groups which is kind of in the ballpark of the 4% figure that we were all thought was basically realistic - until your prejudices got in the way of whatever common sense you have.
--------------------------------------------------------------

So there are your lies exposed, Keith. I have been using HPA figures consistently. It was I that extracted the truth of them from your initial attempts to distort them.

You just don't know when to stop digging, do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 01:44 PM

Keith, what on earth are you talking about?

I used both figures, together in the same post and explained where each of them came from.

There are no false assumptions. I gave sources for a reasonable estimate of the number of MSM's in the population and the HPA fact of the number of HIV+ MSM's. The result is not a false. It is a credible estimate of 1.6% HIV prevalence in the overall MSM population.

Where is the error? Explain yourself.

Why do you say I chose not to use the HPA figure - when I did use it? Alongside the 1.6% estimate.

Why do you lie all the time?

What on earth do you mean by:

"It is probably, but not certainly, true that a minority of MSMs are infected"

Are you seriously suggesting the possibility that most MSM's are HVI+

Are you? Really?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 10:53 AM

Thank you Royston.
So your figure is your own calculation, based on false assumptions. The official figure provided by the government sposored Health Protection Agency is rather more reliable I think.
Why do you choose not to use it?

It is probably, but not certainly, true that a minority of MSMs are infected, in the same why that only a minority succumbed to The Great Plague.
Historians regard that as rather serious though.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 10:32 AM

Keith, why can't you just read and remember things? It would stop these circuitous wastes of time.

My post here...

http://www.mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2857047

...sets out the reasoning and the sources for 1.6% overall HIV prevalence in MSM's. It also sets out the biggest defect in the calculation - that I don't know how to remove male children from the population figures, but I invited others to do it and to improve the figure.

But if you don't like that, then fine. Stick with the trimmed and sliced and carefully selected fact that tickles your prejudices and just stick with the 5.6% prevalence among MSM's 15-44. My point still stands, HIV is thankfully a minority experience for all groups affected in this country.

It really doesn't matter to anyone what age the HIV+ people are - unless you now have an age-related line of attack on HIV+ people? I can't see what point you are trying to make except to twist numbers again to suit some more of your prejudices.

But I am sure you will treat us to an explanation.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 08:43 AM

At age 15, I am sure the number of boys infected with HIV through having sex with men is zero, or very, very close to zero.
It will rise steadily with age.
If 5.6% is the average for ages 15 to 44, it will be about 11% at age 44, and still rising except that the median age of death is about 40.

So where does 1.6% come from?
Can you post a source?
Did you make it up for your own purposes?
Please explain, because it appears to be another attempt to deceive.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 05:40 AM

Keith, please don't drag this back by two weeks.

Minimum 1,984,500 gay men (from the NATSAL survey)

The total figure for gay men living with HIV from HPA was whatever is was when I posted it 10 days or so ago. The calculated overall prevalence was 1.6%

I specifically quoted 5.6% as the median prevalence for 15-44 year olds from the HPA dataset.

So I hoped I was being quite scrupulous in putting both numbers forward.

Please don't obscure the point - that HIV is a tragic, minority experience whether you are gay, straight, black or white in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 04:57 AM

Royston, again where do you get the 1.6% figure, and why do you dismiss the much higher figure given by HPA?
Don Firth, what is your explanation for the massively higher rate of all STIs including AIDS among MSMs?
Don T, black Africans, IV drug users and MSMs are the highest of all risk groups, but you don't believe that truth can be spoken because it offends your ideology.
Do I have that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:32 PM

No, I don't think Ake is stupid. And that's what makes it worse.

I DO stand by "bigot." Harsh, perhaps, but judging from what Ake keeps posting and comparing that with the dictionary definition, he meets all the criteria.

Sorry, Ake. I'm not the one who is branding you as a bigot. You are.

Don Firth

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

Yes, Ake, gay men are at greater risk.

Most gay men are not, and never will be at risk.

Therefore you can't just keep banging on at the 94.4% to 98.4% of gay men that have nothing to worry about.

Why is that simple fact so hard for you to understand?

The answer is that *you want* to throw stones and blame and guilt at the people *you don't like or value*

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:21 PM

The groups I mention as being "at risk", are the same groups listed by UNIADS and other respected bodies, and all the vile abuse will not change that.

You are I'm afraid, all slightly mad.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:20 PM

I think that is false. Ake is not stupid. And I think bigot is a stretch.

I shant repeat myself. Ad infinitum. Over and fucking over and...

See you next thousand.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:13 PM

Thanks, Don. F.

Ake, hedonism does not spread HIV. Promsicuity does not spread HIV.

Having sex without a condom spreads HIV.

Whatever the cause of HIV spreading, the prevalence amongst gay men overall is only 1.6%

98.4% of gay men are not hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe. Delete as appropriate.

Take the most sexually active, highest risk demographic of 15-44 year-olds and you have 5.6% prevalence.

So 94.4% of the statstically riskiest gay men are, errm, NOT hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe.

So you are just a relentlessly fucking stupid bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:11 PM

""I did not say only Homosexuals should be tested and contacts traced.

What I said was that "at risk" groups should be tested including male homosexuals, sex workers, intravenous drug users and some immigrants.""

Yes indeed Ake, my mistake.

You did include those other two groups you despise and blame for the existence of HIV/AIDS.

Gays, Junkies and Africans.

No prejudice there then!

No comment then about Gay Junkies, Gay Africans, and African Junkies?

The permutations are there for you to tie your argument in knots.

Bottom line, I didn't lie. I simply forgot about the number of groups you discriminate against.

Funny though, you haven't mentioned Gay Travellers, Traveller Junkies , or for that matter African Travellers.

You're not slipping,........are you?

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:58 PM

It's considerably more than just a couple of friends, Ake. I've been acquainted with this issue for a long time and I've kept my eyes open.

When I knew nothing about homosexuals and what they do, I had the usual prejudices. But I have since learned that those prejudices (which, incidentally, means "to pre-judge") are not true in most cases. I revised my ideas accordingly.

And when the church I attend adopted the "Affirmation of Welcome," I learned a great deal more about the matter. So what I am saying comes from actual knowledge of people, not just faceless (and I might add, edited) statistics.

What your keep saying is that because some members of a group do something, ALL of them do it. Ake, that's what is known as bigotry.

Sorry, but that's what it is!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:44 PM

Don.....With the greatest respect, your friends do not sound as if they are representative of the homosexual lifestyle, as shown in the health and promiscuity figures.

You simply cannot construct an argument based on the way a couple of your friends behave and ignore studies by respected organisations.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:28 PM

Ake, I repeat: you don't know diddly-squat about homosexuals and their "lifestyle." You have your own little fiction cooked up and you keep dipping into that same rancid pot.

I know a fair number of homosexual men, and most of them are in stable, monogamous relationships, whether the law recognizes those relationships or not. They do want those relationships to be legally recognized so they, too, can have the same legal advantages that heterosexual couples enjoy, hence the gay-marriage movement.

There is no more promiscuity among this group than their is among heterosexuals. And what they want is for ignorant and prejudiced people to stop butting into their lives, harassing them, insisting that they are "perverts," and basically treating them like lepers when what they are and do in the privacy of their own homes simply does not affect anyone else.

Even if there are individual homosexual males who do not want to form stable relationships and prefer a life of promiscuity, the same holds true for a lot of heterosexual males as well! Anyone who is not aware of this hasn't been paying attention to the world around them!

What these men (and women) want are the same rights that heterosexuals have, and this is what makes it a civil rights issue.

It's really very simple.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:06 PM

Yes...but are you prepared to settle for what is happening right now?

If homosexuals will not help themselves...what do you propose?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 02:52 PM

Ake, we all know what you think and didn't really need reminding of it.

You are entitled to your thoughts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 01:31 PM

Royston, I don't believe that "stigma" causes homosexuals to reject testing.

As far as I can see homosexuality is more tolerated now than it has ever been, yet the hiv and promiscuity figures continue to rise and has been said many times, the hiv figures in percentage terms are horrific.

I think this has to do with the lifestyle of many, not all, of homosexual men, who seem to see hedonism, risk taking and promiscuity as defining their sexuality.....a symptom of psychiatric problems.

Homosexuals have had ample time to put their sexual practices in order but are unwilling or unable to do so.
The article I linked to on homosexual marriage details how many homosexuals favour "open marriage" with multiple sexual partners, which would lead to another re-definition of traditional marriage.
Same sex and multiple partners?    Where are we going, if we find this acceptable?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 12:34 PM

I think there is a case for compulsory testing of immigrants from places where AIDS is endemic.
I accept all expert recomendations.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 11:37 AM

Yes, indeed. I would not disagree with those assertions.

I just still wonder why you cannot sign up to the unabridged views and recommendations of all the experts.

"as no one knowingly at risk would be likely to refuse

That is the most important issue here. People are in denial, people do refuse. Because they don't self-identify as being at risk because they fear prejudice and judgement. Both for *being* at risk and then for *being* HIV+.

So some prefer to live in ignorance and hope for the best.

Everyone has the same tendency. Example: the mass-media campaigns to get folks to face up to the other STI's.

If there were less stigma, less fear, more understanding and acceptance of lifestyles and of HIV status, then the epidemic can be managed better. It is the same message for Africa, America, Germany, UK...

Any attitudes or social pressures that keep people underground or on the margins, makes them hard to reach and keeps them from taking the support and treatment they need.

Do you understand that? It is the expert view, not just something that Liberal Royston dreamed up. Prejudice and stigma is killing people. Not just in Africa, in Europe as well. Those statements by the EU and UNAIDS and other bodies are not aimed at any one country or demographic, they are universal statements.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 11:13 AM

Your opening posts asserted that non African heteros had become a high risk group and needed targeted intervention and testing.
We now have established that that is not true.
I see no need for compulsory testing, as no one knowingly at risk would be likely to refuse.
Confidentiality, but it must remain a notifiable disease.
Happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 10:32 AM

You need to be clear, Kaith, about what is meant by intervention.

I am totally in favour of targeted education, outreach, support, empowerment, encouragement aimed at getting at-risk people to be savvy and tested. Regularly tested.

I have said it many times. It is the view of all experts in the field. The other prerequisite for makind headway with this disease is the promotion of tolerance and acceptance both of each other's lifestyles and of people who are HIV+. All the experts are clear that at risk people need to be respected, valued, de-marginalised. That their human and civil rights must be valued and protected.

Testing must be a freely made choice, and HIV-status must remain confidential.

If you agree with the expert's on that broad definition of 'intervention' then you and I are in agreement. Is that what you are saying? Just be clear?

Because your opening post allied your views with Ake's - and he is not thinking in the same way as the experts. He believes something quite different.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 07:18 AM

Royston, I have been looking at your posts.
Sometimes you seem to be in favour of intervention targeted at high risk groups.
If you are, you do agree with the experts and I have no problem.
They advocate that MSMs and black Africans should be tested every 6 months.
Happy with that?
No suggestion that other sexually active people need testing as often, or even at all.
Happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:18 AM

Don T....I'm sorry to say it, but you are lying.

I did not say only Homosexuals should be tested and contacts traced.

What I said was that "at risk" groups should be tested including male homosexuals, sex workers, intravenous drug users and some immigrants.

As far as Homosexuals are concerned, the message has been out for over twenty years about the use of condoms and the dangers of promiscuity.......They are simply not responding voluntarily, the figures continue to worsen in an already high demographic.

Time to stop viewing this as a political issue.
Lets try a bit of humanitarian thought and start trying to save lives.

Royston, for a "well educated person", you display disappointingly poor understanding of the stance taken here by myself, Keith and Sanity. The debate has become heated from time to time, but your continued use of the B word to describe anyone who does not agree with your views, undermines your complete stance .....which is unfortunate.
You do appear to have a good grasp of the issues involved, unlike your supporters. Just relax, and stop getting so paranoid and we may begin to make some progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 02:30 AM

Don Firth, we agree.
It was Don T who made the false comparison with flu, and I pointed out that they were not comparable.
We do provide flu vaccination here but only for people more at risk.
Improved treatment has extended lives of AIDS victims, but there is no cure.
They get the best treatment free of charge here, but the median age of death is about 40.

Royston, we all know that the situation in S.Africa is totally different. Heteros are high risk there.
All your cut and paste is irrelevant.
You are irrelevant.
(Your second paste says "Specific policy measures are crucial for making prevention, care and support available to men who have sex with men. ")

You say I show prejudice, but I have not even expressed an opinion.
I have merely reported what the experts say, e.g. The National African HIV Prevention Programme, Department of Health, Health Protection Agency, National Aids Trust, Avert, Terence Higgins Trust,etc.
Can you find a single expert who agrees with you?
If not, why should we take any notice of you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:00 PM

So, Keith, there is just a small example of the expert opinions I have supported consistently.

What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:57 PM

From the UNAIDS website:

The term "men who have sex with men" - frequently shortened to MSM - describes a behaviour rather than a specific group of people. It includes self-identified gay, bisexual, or heterosexual men, many of whom may not consider themselves gay or bisexual. HIV responses for transgender populations are also often considered alongside MSM initiatives.

MSM are often married, particularly where discriminatory laws or social stigma of male sexual relations exist. Largely because of the taboo, the female partners of men who have sex with men are often unaware of their partner's other liaisons, and may therefore be exposed to additional HIV risks. Forced sex among men is not uncommon, especially in men-only environments such as prison settings.

Sex between men occurs in every culture and society, though its extent and public acknowledgement vary from place to place. Sex between men is thought to account for between 5 and 10% of global HIV infections, although the proportion of cases attributed to this mode of transmission varies considerably between countries. It is the predominant mode of HIV transmission in much of the developed world.

There is the potential for rapid HIV transmission within populations of men who have sex with men, especially if the rate of unprotected anal intercourse is high. There is also high potential of prevention benefit of the programmes among men who have sex with men. However the coverage of the prevention has been low: where countries report on coverage, only around 40% of men who have sex with men have access to the HIV prevention and care services they need. Many factors contribute to this situation including denial by society and communities, stigma and discrimination, and human rights abuse. Also where prevention programmes are in place, potential increase in risk behaviours due to prevention fatigue should be taken into consideration on the programming.

Vulnerability to HIV infection is increased where sex between men is criminalized, as men are either excluded from, or exclude themselves from, sexual health and welfare agencies out of fear. The essential HIV prevention measures for men who have sex with men include consistent and proper use of condoms, including access to condoms and water-based lubricants, must be promoted. High quality HIV-related services like voluntary counseling and testing and specialized clinics must be made available as well as specific and targeted information on prevention and risk reduction strategies designed to appeal to and meet the needs of men who have sex with men. Further quality treatment for sexually transmitted infections with referral for HIV services must be made available.

Specific policy measures are crucial for making prevention, care and support available to men who have sex with men. First and foremost, they must be included in national HIV programming and funding priorities. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities must be empowered to participate equally in the social and political life of their communities and countries.

Legal and policy reforms to promote human rights and access to health services of men who have sex with men and transgendered people, should be undertaken, where barriers exist. There is need to respect, protect and fulfill the rights of men who have sex with men and transgendered people and address stigma and discrimination by amending laws prohibiting sexual acts between consenting adults in private; enforcing anti-discrimination; providing legal aid services, and promoting campaigns that address homophobia.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:57 PM

UNAIDS official policy on HIV testing

http://data.unaids.org/una-docs/hivtestingpolicy_en.pdf

Read it, weep then piss off Keith.


World AIDS day 2009:

Statement by UNAIDS and the European Union
World AIDS Day ─ 1 December 2009
The Presidency of the European Union (EU) and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) welcome South Africa's strong focus on HIV prevention and HIV testing.

The EU and UNAIDS stress the need for the full respect of all human rights -- that no man,woman, boy or girl must be subject to stigma and discrimination due to his or her HIV status,sexual orientation, age, or gender.

The rights of women, young people and key populations must be protected. Their voices must be heard and their needs must be met. An effective AIDS response requires gender equality. Women's and girls' rights must be respected, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. All forms of gender-based violence must come to an end.

Evidence-based and comprehensive HIV prevention policies and programmes must be scaled up, and access to the full range of HIV services must be secured. HIV must be part of the broad health and development agenda.

HIV services must be integrated into other comprehensive health services; sexual and reproductive health and rights must be recognised as an essential component in the HIV response. The EU and
UNAIDS reiterate their commitment to and support for the continued response to the epidemic.

Today in Pretoria, South Africa, the Swedish Minister for International Development Cooperation, Ms Gunilla Carlsson, on behalf of the European Union, and Mr Michel Sidibé, UNAIDS Executive Director, warmly welcomed the renewed South African focus on HIV and
AIDS. They strongly supported the focus on prevention and South Africa's call for all people to get to know their HIV status. Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé emphasized that HIV testing is crucial for en effective response to HIV and AIDS. They also recognized that testing must build on the full respect for human rights, the absolute need of not being forced to disclose your HIV status and that counselling and other support activities must be provided.

In welcoming this renewed South African focus, Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé noted that not only Africa but also the rest of the world needs this clear message from South Africa. They stressed that the South African leadership is necessary for a continued effective response to the pandemic.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé stressed the need for the full respect and adherence to all human rights. The right not to be subject to stigma and discrimination must be guaranteed. They noted that this is relevant for all men and women, children and young people, regardless of HIV status, sexual orientation, age, or gender.

They emphasized that an effective response to HIV and AIDS requires increased gender equality. Women's and girls' rights must be protected, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. All forms of gender-based violence must come to an end. Gender norms must be changed, traditional roles of women and men and the relationship between them must be addressed. Both the beliefs and behaviour of many men and boys must be changed.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibe stressed that evidence-based and comprehensive HIV prevention policies and programmes must be scaled up. Access to the full range of services and commodities must be secured, including life skills and sex education for adolescents, male
and female condoms and HIV harm reduction programmes, based on relevant UN recommendations.

They emphasized that HIV and AIDS must be part of the broad health and development agenda. HIV services must be integrated into other comprehensive health services; sexual and reproductive health and rights must be recognised as an essential component of HIV and AIDS programmes and prevention. They noted that the real challenge in the response to the pandemic is to translate principles, declarations and agreements into reality on the ground.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé recognized the important role to be played by international partners in the response to HIV and AIDS. They emphasized that such support must be based on harmonised projects and programmes, aligned to national priorities, plans, budgets and systems. They reiterated the strong commitment and support by the European Union, the 27 member states and the EU Commission, and UNAIDS in the further response to the epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:25 PM

Oh, and Keith, there was a time - when my life was more interesting in that way - that I myself attended quite diligently for an MOT at the GUM clinic. I am responsible and well educated. I know what I'm taling about But I understand how difficult that is for many. You neither understand nor know what you talk about.

There is presently a general education campaign - on buses, tubes, TV, radio, appealing for heterosexuals to get tested for the diseases that are prevalent amongst their sexually active demographic groups.

I think there should be a similar general education and appeal towards gay men - because not all gay men receive the deluge of materials and outreach directed at the gay ghetto.

By the way, Keith, I am properly delighted to see your prejudices still oozing out. I don't even need to pull your strings anymore, do I?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:18 PM

The opinion of all the experts, Keith, is that at-risk groups should be educated, reached out to, encouraged, supported to come forward and be tested.

The experts say that this should be achieved by advocating acceptance, tolerance, compassion, equality, reducing stigma.

I agree totally.

I have said that plainly on many occasions in the course of this dialogue.

Bigots like you and Ake support rounding folks up and dragging them to the clinic. That is not supported by any expert opinion.

The experts say that you are part of the problem, part of the hindrance to effective outreach to at-risk groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:39 PM

Flu is pretty hard to avoid when an epidemic is under way. Get on an elevator with someone who has it (and who may not even know it at the time), be near someone who sneezes, touch a door knob shortly after someone with incipient flu has, or shake hands with them, and bingo! You've got it!

Flu gets easily passed from one person to another, often just by being in the same room at the same time as an infected person—or even shortly thereafter. Someone sneezes and you happen to walk through the aerosol cloud they left behind and there you are.

But even so. It can often be avoided by taking a few sensible precautions (avoid crowds if possible, wash your hands often). Several decades worth of flu epidemics have gone by and I haven't had the flu in all that time (knock on wood).

HIV/AIDs is a whole different matter. It is not anywhere near that easily transmitted. It requires the transfer of bodily fluids through such things as sex—either homosexual or heterosexual sex—or, say, a blood transfusion. Or, for that matter, druggies sharing needles. It is an "equal opportunity" infection. And it's easily avoided by taking a few intelligent precautions.

Also, if you check the figures, I think you'll find that flu affects a vastly larger number of people than does HIV/AIDs.

Apples and oranges.

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, AIDs is not always fatal. It can be handled by drugs, and there are many people (homo and hetero) who are surviving despite being infected.

One really needs to get one's ducks in a row.

P. P. S. Also by the way:   Flu can be passed between heterosexual couples. This is hardly a reason to ban heterosexual marriage. . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:34 AM

Flu is rarely fatal in otherwise healthy people.
AIDS always is.
All the experts in the field advocate targeted, not general intervention.
Do you think they are right about that Don, or do you and Royston have a better understanding?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:07 AM

Akenaton is suggesting that MSMs should be singled out as the only group to be forced to accept compulsory testing.

I don't know whether the news has reached Hertford and Scotland, but Britain is still a free nation.

Offering a screening service is perfectly acceptable, but dragging people in and performing tests or treatments "Will he, Nil he" is, in point of fact, illegal, and would require an act of parliament.

Royston and I are not advocating that MSMs should not be tested, if they so choose. We are also advocating that the screening program must include heterosexuals.

Influenza kills more people each year than AIDS, but we don't force Flu jabs on the public at large. People are allowed to make up their own minds.

By the reckoning of you and Ake, we should be hauling 'em in for the jab, because they are much more likely to cause an epidemic.

But neither of you are commenting on that, or other highly infectious diseases. It would seem that your criterion for taking an interest owes more to their sexual orientation, than to their, or anybody else's, health.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:24 AM

Akeneaton says that targeted intervention and testing of at risk groups is advocated by UNAIDS.
In the course of this debate I have looked at the sites of all the government and official health agencies, and the AIDS and British African organisations and charities.

Every site that expresses an opinion advocates such intervention.
The consensus is that MSMs should be tested for STIs incuding AIDS every 6 months. (It would probably take 10 years to test the whole population!)

The only opinion I have found to the contrary is Royston, who opposes it on ideological grounds.
As you are once again at odds with all expert opinion, will you reconsider your stance on this Royston?
After all, you have been wrong about everything else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 10:44 AM

Blah blah blah....liberals...blah blatter blah...fascists.....blah blah gays blah promiscuous.....blah blah.........


And on, and on, and on..............

Don T.