BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 06:03 AM

Seaham Cemetery

There is nothing, nothing whatseover to substantiate a campaign focussing on gay men. It is homophobic to do so.

National Aids Trust.
"The Government's continued funding of a national HIV prevention programme targeting the groups most at risk of HIV infection (gay and bisexual men and African communities) is welcome; more now needs to be done to evaluate the effectiveness of this programme. There needs to be an increase in the proportion of gay and bisexual men and African men and women choosing safer sex options such as consistent condom use and a reduction in multiple or concurrent partners with clear strategies to make this happen."

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 06:30 AM

Are all gays the same, of course not 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 06:44 AM

"You don't necessarily have to focus on just the homosexual aspects of it...HIV/AIDS is a physical killer,"

Tell that to Ake.

We've been trying for months, so good luck with that!

Incidentally, HIV doesn't kill anybody. People only die when it progresses to AIDS, which is becoming less frequent month on month.

If people like Ake focussed on the disease, rather than stigmatising one particular group of victims, a hell of a lot more WOULD get done.

The most significant factor preventing a near 100% take up of testing is the homophobic reaction of people like Ake.

Would you want to expose yourself to being ostracised, having reduced job prospects and being pointed at by miserable narrow minded people?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 06:53 AM

Hehe. Looks like someone doesn't understand what they are reading...

A campaign focussing on gay men is homophobic if not qualified as being proportionate nor in their interest. A health awareness campaign where gay men who use unprotected anal sex are part of the target group for awareness isn't homophobic. If there were a disease, disorder or condition that only affected gay men, then targetted awareness would be appropriate. Focussing on one group where everyone, including you and I could contract it, is stigmatising. Especially as gay men aren't at risk any more than men who read one newspaper more than another*. Only the few, like in any other lifestyle, prefer unprotected penetrative sex, especially promiscuously. I think that figure, which nobody knows, is not worth either the hate from bigots nor the sometimes unrealistic expectations of health pressure groups and charities. Your own cut &paste widens it to the at risk groups Seaham Cemetery refers to.

I know Keith. It is difficult at times eh?

Never mind. If everyone who attended my infrequent lectures defended me, I'd have to start telling the truth eh?




zzzzzzzzzz

*I did read once that more people who are HIV + read The Guardian, whilst those at most risk of CHD issues read The Sun. I stopped buying newspapers years ago.

Don't forget to read this quickly. Either my comments may disappear or Max's host may be asked to remove the whole thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 07:50 AM

Again Musket.
You must have misread it the first couple of times I posted it.

"The Government's continued funding of a national HIV prevention programme targeting the groups most at risk of HIV infection (gay and bisexual men and African communities)"

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 08:17 AM

Troubadour,
Incidentally, HIV doesn't kill anybody. People only die when it progresses to AIDS,

I think we all already knew that, but thanks anyway.
Did you know that it ALWAYS progresses to AIDS unless treated.
That requires testing.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 09:23 AM

There seems to be some confusion, there are people here who apparently believe that HIV affects all demographics at approx. the same rates. It does not.
The demographic most affected is MSM....by many tens of times, the infection rate is also rising also rising, while the infection rates in all other demographics are falling.
I would be sheer folly and ineffective, to test and contact trace the whole population for a condition which is extremely rare amongst heteros, but an epidemic amongst practicing male homosexuals.

The agencies suggest VERY FREQUENT testing and contact tracing for the WORST affect demographics, but are prevented from doing so by a political ideology which places idiotic dogma before health or life.

Studies in some parts of the US, found that half of all homosexual "marriages" or civil unions, were "open relationships" containing several different sexual partners; the article(which I linked to earlier), suggested that this partner sharing, increased the danger of HIV transmission.

As I said earlier homosexual "marriage" will certainly not guarantee monogamy.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 10:05 AM

monogomy  

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 10:22 AM

Repeating earlier snippets from Keith in case you missed them, ake.

MSM do use screening more, but infection continues to rise.

and

PHE do the calculation and publish their conclusion, that there is a real increase in infection as well as increased testing.

So, there has been increased testing and screening but the rate of infection is still rising. How do you explain that?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 10:25 AM

Interesting article this morning in the Daily Mail (I know, I know, but I like the puzzles pages) about a lady of middle age who had quite a long relationship with a British chap but didn't use any protection. He ended the relationship and she became ill. Luckily her savvy doctor tested her for HIV and the poor woman was shocked to find she had contracted it. She had felt that at her age STDs aren't an issue, especially not HIV, and as the man hadn't been in an 'at risk' category it hadn't crossed her mind. Just shows that no matter who is having sex with whom, protection is essential. It would be very difficult to insist on a new partner having an HIV test (or any STD test) before going ahead with a sexual relationship. But really, it would seem prudent. The lady is having retro-viral medication and will have a normal life and lifespan, but sadly, people have asked her not to come to their house or go near their children as they are afraid of the disease.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 10:33 AM

By the way, how would anyone here feel if someone who was HIV positive came to their house and say, cuddled one's children or used the loo? Or shared the chalice at church? I know full well the disease can't be caught this way, and I have every sympathy for any poor person who has the virus, but being honest, I'd be a little wary. (It's dreadful to admit this, but one can only be honest.) One of 'my' prisoners was HIV positive from needle-sharing (he was a heroin addict) and although I always gave him a hug when he arrived in the Visits Room, I wouldn't have been too happy if he'd given me a peck on the cheek. I'm ashamed of this, but it's how it was.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 02:08 PM

'Guest', your link, 'Monogamy' by Arthur Fox, was so full of holes, that I was originally going to address them, point by point, but it would have taken too much time to cover it all. This guy is a spin-meister of major proportions, leaving out several KEY factors, in regards to monogamy...then I checked him out....he is an attorney blogger...."Arthur Fox, a public interest litigator, has devoted his career to working within the union movement to assist democratic-minded union leaders, members, and dissident organizations to reform autocratic unions and to strengthen the collective bargaining process on behalf of workers. He was a founder, in the 1970s, of the Teamster reform movement." --Huffington Post

As I've posted before, let's leave the politics OUT of getting to the FACTS!..His is a political position, NOT a public health position!

One glaring omission in his opinion piece, was, while targeting the root 'causes' of monogamy, being Judea-Christian, was the FACT, that the instinct of pair-bonding for the rearing of offspring was completely ignored and omitted!!! He was coming from a political viewpoint, and sidestepped, (through is 'litigator tactics'), the very basic thread of the nature of humans in regards to this matter!!

Most of the links you have provided have 'some' good information in them, and usually some spin. I suggest you do some fuller homework, when posting a link. Instead of posting a DEFINITION of monogamy, you posted a political spin from a fast taking lawyer/blogger!!..attempting to sidestep, while demeaning the traditional nuclear family, from which most of us came from!...I strongly suggest that you curtail the links that have a political agenda as an underlying premise.....especially from a lawyer, who has financial interests in promoting his/her position.

Respectfully (for now),

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 02:57 PM

Eliza. That is the complacency that Public Health England (PHE) are very concerned about. Health education can be construed as Nanny state if you are not careful, but HIV is a blood borne virus and is very much into equality in terms of whom it affects.

It isn't HIV per se but HIV viraemia that is the issue. In other words, the virus getting into the bloodstream. The best comparison is MRSA. Many of us carry it, even the old and vulnerable. It becomes an issue when it gets into the bloodstream, or MRSA bactoreamia as it is known. Similar with HIV. So cuddling a HIV + child or shaking hands with a HIV + adult is not deemed an issue. Even far more intimate contact, you would be unlucky to contract it. That is why needlestick injuries to healthcare staff where a known HIV + blood is in question rarely leads to HIV. I have had plenty of contact with HIV + people, including the child cuddling aspect, and have had a needlestick for that matter. I am not HIV +

Anybody who engages in unprotected sex, especially anal sex is at a heightened risk. With the ease of access to hard core porn and the increase in degree of porn available, more younger women are having anal sex, as more younger men see this as the norm. As we don't have much in terms of historical data to go on, this is one of the hardest to reach groups. If we take historical prevalence into account, gay men who practice unprotected sex with other men are statistically at high risk here, as are people of African origin largely due to the much wider root cause in many African States, including blood product delivery in hospitals and mother to child, as well as the high forced sex numbers in some countries. Sadly, a huge factor in many African countries is homophobia, which as well as targeting hate on gay people, also allows complacency in heterosexual people.

This is why I really have a no surrender attitude to expressed hate and homophobia on these pages. It isn't just missing the point, it can create a self fulfilling prophesy. Some would like that, such as the far right American Christian groups funding Ugandan political attempts to introduce death penalty for loving the wrong person, all the way to calling marriage "marriage" here.

Sadly, they also have their apologists who support their outlook whilst claiming otherwise. It's a sad mad world. It feeds the awful "don't come round to our house" fear. Nobody tells you to keep granny away in case she has C.Diff and shits all over their sofa....

With regard to gay people, we are lucky in that they are, as a demographic, very responsible and are far more prone to screening than some other groups, hence more picked up by screening. This is a statistic used by political, religious and other hate inspired people to try to say it is a gay issue per se. If you can stomach it, scroll up and read some of it, it is fascinating and awful in equal measures..

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 03:24 PM

Musket: "With regard to gay people, we are lucky in that they are, as a demographic, very responsible and are far more prone to screening than some other groups, hence more picked up by screening."

You must not be reading the links indicating that the homosexual communities are intimidated and NOT volunteering to be screened, and blaming it on other people's homophobia...either you are right, or the 'other guy' posting those links is. You two should figure it out, because the two of you seem to have conflicting views on that.

..Now if only the needle shares and bisexuals would be more accommodating to their own best interests....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 03:32 PM

Even lawyers, and union supporters have the right to be heard, and considered, as do people here with other "spin" agendas (those often skewed to loosly link to, so-called facts).

Only the Mudcat mods control what viewpoint or information is posted or linked, though some attempt to limit information and discussion from various viewpoints (some of those cloaked behind negative homophobic stereotyping, intertwined with a brand of right-wing religious-based beliefs, while others spin are not so strongly evident).

At a minimum, most links posted are much more respectful than some of the inflamatory posts put forward by the very few current thread contributors.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 04:21 PM

guest you must be looking at a different thread.
There has been no " right-wing religious-based beliefs" on this one.

Musket, is it your opinion that anal sex is more prevalent now, or have you research findings?
My own impression is that is has always been prevalent.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 04:56 PM

Regarding homophobia in some/all African countries, I think it's pretty widespread. In Ivory Coast, Ghana and Senegal, which I know well, gay people are daily attacked, beaten and even killed in the open street by men who seem enraged by their very presence. It isn't anything to do with HIV, but both Muslim and Christian cultures over there are viciously and unequivocally anti-gay. I've seen signs in airports in all three countries warning western tourist passengers to turn around and go straight home if they have any intention of conducting gay relationships or indulging in homosexual practices. The signs are menacing and threaten instant Police arrest. Some of this stems from sex-tourism, a scourge of under-developed countries. For very little money, one can 'hire' a sexual partner of any age or gender; due to the terrible poverty, people are driven to any acts in order to eat. But the authorities seem to target gay men particularly.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Mar 14 - 06:50 PM

'Guest': "Even lawyers, and union supporters have the right to be heard, and considered, as do people here with other "spin" agendas (those often skewed to loosly link to, so-called facts)."

Then I suggest that you post links that are consistent with your views, or state that the views in the links that you post are not what you think. Fair enough??

You might even check your posts, and sources to see if they are politically motivated, or factual.
Fair enough, again?

"Even lawyers, and union supporters, (both those are NOT known for being very truthful) have the right to be heard, and considered, (do we have to 'consider' more bullshit??..haven't we had enough of THAT!?!?)as do people here with other "spin" agendas...."

Let's see if we can get through the spin...wouldn't you rather discuss or debate honest info, than deceptive spins?......just for once??
Let's at least 'pretend' that musicians are not stupid and gullible people, easily lured into fallacious levels of spin....after all, what is better to serve people with, Lies to support a political angle, or the TRUTH????
Fair enough?

Still respectfully....but don't push it....,

GfS

P.S. You MIGHT even post YOUR views...They might even be 'enlightening'.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 04:08 AM

I don't think this thread is about moral judgements, it is about getting the facts on HIV transmission rates and some conclusions on the best way of curtailing them.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 04:13 AM

Sorry Sanity, didn't see your post.   I was responding to Eliza.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 04:21 AM

But surely moral 'judgements' and attitudes have a bearing on whether people (gay or otherwise) feel comfortable about seeking help with testing or advice?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 05:07 AM

Exactly, Eliza. And if people were not so quick to judge those who are born different then those at risk may well be more likely to go for testing and advice. As it is, while people brand them as perverted, they are more likely to keep their sexuality hidden.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 07:53 AM

Stigma impacts testing-USA experience 


Good points Eliza, though some with other perspectives (and possibly agenda) regularily attempt to lead the discussion away from discussing other perspectives. Link to a related perspective,from direct USA(with source references).

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 08:08 AM

Msm stigma-research related to prevention/testing 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 08:40 AM

In the last 10 years, stigma and discrimination in the UK has fallen dramatically.
Civil Union and homosexual "marriage" have been legislated for, homosexuals have a huge disproportionate voice in the media, yet infection rates are rising at the same rate....or fasrer than they were 10 years ago amongst the MSM demographic.

If all the other demographics a able to regulate their behaviour to take account of HIV, why not MSM?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 08:45 AM

treatment research 

treatment research 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 09:21 AM

Please provide sources for last specific "stigma " statement, (related to Hiv/aids, geography, MSM specific grouping)so, they can be assessed as valid, not directly related, or merely opinion.

If it merelt based on opinion only, ok, but let it be clear.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 09:48 AM

stereotyping-long lasting impacts 

The impacts of discrimination, and stereotyping are long-lasting impacting attitudes and those targeted long after changes are made in legislation to turn if around. In addition, people hold on to related negative views in their subconcious, which defy conscious logic. This is what Eliza referred to in her personal experience.

An example in the link, related to lag times in changing attutudes in mental illness stereotypjng.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 10:27 AM

If all the other demographics a able to regulate their behaviour to take account of HIV, why not MSM?

How do you know they are not regulating it? A few/some/many/most? Self-evident, is it? All in the numbers, eh? What more do we need, eh? How do you know that the situation might not be a lot worse but for many gay people regulating their behaviour? You haven't a clue. This is a groundless, broad-brush stigmatisation of gay men. No surprises there then.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 12:02 PM

Prostitutes and promiscuous heterosexual men don't seem to be targeted for abuse and even police attack in Africa in the same way that gay men are. The hetero men are almost seen to be merely 'doing what comes naturally', and the female prostitutes are accepted as trying to earn a few bob. Gay men are forced to disguise their way of life in order not to be beaten or literally killed. I'm rather unsure if this discussion is limited to the UK, includes the USA, the whole of Western civilisation or the entire global scene, including Africa, one of the world's most seriously affected areas for HIV. As the world is now so small, with universal travel and migration, perhaps we should widen our picture. All humans are 'in this together' so to speak. Any virus which affects any population on the Earth threatens us all, therefore all (gay or straight, promiscuous or monogamous) should be encouraged with kindness and understanding to seek advice, help and testing.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 12:06 PM

You still haven't responded to what I believe is a fair question in the spirit of this debate, ake. It has been pointed out, by Keith, that while testing of homosexual men has increased, so has the incidence of HIV infection. How do you explain this and how does this fit with your view that testing and tracing is the only option?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 12:36 PM

Can't answer for other counties but I have given an overview of The UK situation.

Let me repeat. We do not have "marriage" we have marriage.

We don't have objectivity we have homophobia trying to influence debate.

A discussion regarding the technical facts of HIV is fine. Not addressing the social issues is disgusting. You cannot discuss helping the situation without acknowledging the issues.

Putting marriage in parentheses is a clue.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 01:25 PM

According to CDC, one of the main aggravating factors in the transmission of HIV, is the very high rates of syphilis amongst the MSM demographic.
Apparently syphilis causes lesions in the skin, which assists transmission of the virus.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 01:29 PM

HIV syphilis coinfection

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 01:37 PM

Homophobia is a social issue that has serious health impacts. So, it relates to HI V discussions, as it is a global factor, as is HIV and AIDs. Ignoring homophobia, in its various forms, and attempting to steer the discussion away from it is "disgusting". Doing so, belittles a serious health issue-an issue,which some falsely accuse others of ignoring.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 01:46 PM

It's a good job more American States are allowing everyone to marry then.

are we talking about HIV or just the issues relating to gay men? If so, why?

Is syphilis against natural law too worm?

Have you any idea how that relates to spread of HIV? Are you saying most men and women of African origin in The UK or the states for that matter have syphilis? How does that explain why more people living with HIV where you and I live aren't gay?

Keep digging, and explain to the decent boys and girls why you can't bring yourself to say marriage when applying to same sex. Remind us, why do you say "marriage"?

Why do your posts remain when law abiding citizens get theirs deleted for upsetting a criminal?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 02:10 PM

No comment needed 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 02:44 PM

No homophobia on this thread friends, the page on HIV syphilis co-infection comes straight from Centre for Disease Control.

Do the new infection rates for syphilis not alarm anyone?
75% of all new infections in the MSM demographic? You really are being awfully stupid in denying they exist.

My view that stigma and discrimination have fallen over the last decade are of course just my personal opinion, but I'm sure it is shared by every even minded member on this forum.
All are not driven by an idiotic, politically correct agenda, the important thing is to get transmission rates under control quickly, and this can only be achieved by "very frequent testing and contact tracing, amongst the worst affected groups"

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 02:48 PM

""Those who have diabetes worry about having diabetes. Those who have HIV worry their family will find out.""




blind spot   

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 03:27 PM

From GUEST'S link(Pink News).

"It is often said that the first step towards any recovery is admitting a problem exists. This is just as true for the HIV epidemic. If we want to stop the spread of HIV among gay men, then we as gay men need to accept we are still at a heightened risk of infection.

We need to protect ourselves by continuing to use condoms, we need to get ourselves along to our local sexual health clinic once every six months, and – if we have HIV – we need to make sure we're on treatment. This doesn't say anything about who we are as people; it's just the way the cards have fallen"

More or less just what I've been saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 05:06 PM

Note there the link provided refers to voluntary measures (promoted for some timec by the impacted community) This is a far reach from the "compulsary" approach promoted by some for awhile on this site. If these posters have now "come around" to workable solutions, that is indeed progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 05:06 PM

Note there the link provided refers to voluntary measures (promoted for some timec by the impacted community) This is a far reach from the "compulsary" approach promoted by some for awhile on this site. If these posters have now "come around" to workable solutions, that is indeed progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 06:03 PM

Most posters on this thread deny that there is an epidemic amongst MSM.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 06:24 PM

"Most posters on this thread deny that there is an epidemic amongst MSM"


From observing the discussion, outside of differences in definitions of terms and personalities (people fighting ego wars from other threads)it does not seem that way at all to me?

However, I also observed that many posters seem very cautious about anything that hints at homophobia and I suspect define it (and see it) quite differently than you do. I suspect you could have coloured (even inflamed) the discussion with a few bad choices in terms used (for example, perversion, and "marriage"). Additionally, your earlier rigid solution to the dilema likely limited the scope and tone of the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 14 - 06:38 PM

Additionally, while you seem to prefer a discussion on a local"epidemic" in the UK (and possibly the USA, (which seem to share some similar numbers, for an undetrmined reason), others see it as a "pandemic", with global implications, causes and patterns of infection and (of course)different solutions. This is quite reasonable, as Mudcat posters come from many nations, and view things quite differently than in the UK or USA, as the situation may be quite contrasting.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 14 - 03:25 AM

Pink News.
"Figures released in November last year by PHE showed HIV infections among gay and bisexual men at a record high.
In the same month the National AIDS Trust warned that too many doctors are failing to offer HIV tests to gay and bisexual men."

"Professor Noel Gill, head of Public Health England's HIV and STI department, said: "In the UK, people who are unaware of their infection are likely to be those most at risk of transmitting HIV to others. We must increase the speed at which we're reducing the number of undiagnosed HIV infections by encouraging earlier and more frequent HIV testing, especially by those most at-risk. Earlier diagnosis will help reduce new HIV infections across the UK.

"Around half of men who have sex with men recently diagnosed with HIV received their diagnosis the first time they tested, which is a strong indication that many men who should be testing are not. National HIV Testing Week gives people a great opportunity to get tested."

National guidelines recommend that HIV testing should be offered routinely to everyone admitted to hospital and people registering with a GP surgery in areas of the country with HIV prevalence greater than 2 per 1000 people. Introducing additional ways to get tested, such as home-sampling services, is also encouraging more people to test.

In September, the deputy executive director of the United Nations' HIV/AIDS agency said the worldwide HIV epidemic could potentially be over by 2030 – but only if infection rates among most at risk populations, such as men who have sex with men (MSM), fall substantially.

Last week, film producer and director David Furnish said in the London Evening Standard that high rates of HIV among gay men living in London was not something that could be ignored.

He wrote: "At the end of this month it is National HIV Testing Week. We need a big national push to get ourselves and our friends tested —without stigma, without shame and without stalling." "

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 19 Mar 14 - 03:44 AM

The heightened awareness and need for continued vigilance by those who speak up for gay people and the social and clinical issues they face is wonderful. If other at risk groups had the benefit of such a concerted and focused effort, we might get better at dealing with the issue, not the victims.

People who are shunned by society tend to cluster, often in cities. If The UK as a whole had the mental health / gay / ethnic minority health issues of London, the approach would be national. This is why you have a larger push on type II diabetes in Leicester than in Leicestershire. A bigger push on gay health in Manchester than in Lancashire etc.

Thanks as ever to Keith for supplying the quote by Noël Gill that he claimed I didn't have evidence of earlier. See? You get there in the end...

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Mar 14 - 04:28 AM

Someone had to claim 600
Why not a guest?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 14 - 04:53 AM

Keith for supplying the quote by Noël Gill that he claimed I didn't have evidence of earlier.
Explain please.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 19 Mar 14 - 07:18 AM

"Did you know that it ALWAYS progresses to AIDS unless treated."

Yes, I did! So what makes it different, in your estimation, than all the OTHER diseases which result, if untreated, in death?............The fact that it involves homosexuals?

I think you will find that applies to all the others too.