Keith,

Two paragraphs from your article:

"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."

But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said. "The impact of HIV is so heterogeneous. In the US , the rate of infection among men in Washington DC is well over 100 times higher than in North Dakota, the region with the lowest rate. That is in one country. How do you explain such differences?"

So, de Cock says that nobody fully understands HIV transmission factors but that sexual behaviour *certainly* doesn't explain it alone. So no point wagging fingers at people.

Sexual networks are more important - which is exactly what I have been repeatedly saying about ghetto-ised minority communities.

Doesn't matter which way you go with this, my statements are very well supported.