To be slightly fair Steve, MSM is the accepted technical term these days, as used in medical and social care circles. It does jar slightly but medically, it is a differentiator. It means three things together, male, gay and enjoying a sex life. Remove any one and with regard to STIs, the risk lowers.

A degree of what I reckon is historical political correctness means there is no similar common abbreviation for heterosexual sex with or amongst sub Sahara origin people, the second most vulnerable group.

In fact, as the report demonstrates, and I mentioned above, the sub Sahara demographic is large enough to skew figures. A worrying trend of not presenting early enough within this group leads to a false flag headline indicator of heterosexual infection rates, although the commentary I quoted from the report deals with that to prevent people claiming falling heterosexual rates vis a vis MSM rates.

The stance Keith and Akenaton are taking could lead you into thinking wrongly that if one sector is lowering, the other sector is rising. This is consistent with the many hate and pseudo religious website commentaries that twist these figures to demonise gay people. The increase in early MSM detection and lower late detection is one hell of a success story, and the report acknowledges this. It means an increasingly responsible attitude to screening amongst promiscuous people in gay relationships.

Our two homophobes have history.

Incidentally, at the top of the 2014 report is a list of contributors. One of those is Seaham Cemetary, who had his audit published a few months ago when doing his sexual health attachment as a medical registrar.