So do I Bill. But whilst ever bigots have access to the internet, I just can't stop myself challenging those who seek to twist information to suit their odious agenda.

In The UK, during Prime Minister's question time, there is a tradition which requires the PM to say "I refer the honourable member to the answer I gave earlier." Snag is, there is nothing honourable in The pre formed attitudes of two Mudcat members, at least one of which occasionally shows enough intelligence to know better.

The situation over here isn't much different Bill, in reality. Younger people are a hard to reach group and feel, as with most sexual disease, that they are invincible, and that now antiretroviral drugs are available that it is no different to a course of antibiotics for an itchy cock. Infections have gone down over the years in incidence per 100,000 population but not fast enough. The potential for MSM is high but reports, including the one Keith waves at us, have only historical data to go on, whilst meta analysis trawling information from other clinical specialties, especially emergency acute and colo rectal indicate a rising uptake in unsafe sex, especially anal sex, in younger women. This is being factored into specialised commissioning, (the government NHS system provides 99% of sexual health funding in this respect) and those working in the field see the proration balance working towards heterosexual infections, with actual numbers of new cases falling as the present screening programme goes beyond its peak.

A fascinating subject at an academic level, but awful that it is part of this debate, as it merely shows the lengths bigots and so called Christian concern will go to demonise sections of society for their own prejudice. They can't even claim more than 33% of HIV out there is from gay sex, yet wish to round them up, whilst not giving a shit about the other 67%. It's as awful as it is wicked.