BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:05 AM

It is good that treatment is improving, but the median age of death from AIDS is 47, and "Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all
deaths among MSM in 2007." (HPA)

Can you challege any single statement in my last post?
Can you fault any of the logic? One example?
Is there one single false assertion?

I showed that the proportion of MSMs who succumb is well over 10%, and possibly many times that.
Perhaps 40%.
That is the proportion who succumbed to the most cataclysmic epidemic in human history.
The Medieval Black Death.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:11 AM

Royston,
"about 1.6% of gay men, overall, are HIV+"
I deny that and defy you to quote any reliable source for it.

Are there any MSMs below age 15?
5.3% age 15 to 44 are HIV positive.
No one gets better so that number GOES UP after age 44, except that they die of AIDS.

1.6% is a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:33 AM

On the 1.6%

The HPA says that there are about 32,000 MSM's living with HIV

The NATSAL indicates that there are AT LEAST 1,984,500 MSM's

So the proportion of MSM's is probably about 1.6%

I have stated several times where the defect lies - we need to find a way of removing kids from the population figures. 1.6% remains a good indication.

It is necessary to quote that alongside the HPA 5.6% figure for a slice of 15-44 year olds.

I have always quoted both figures together. Neither of them are lies.

Until we have some figures with better banding for age groups, your points are totally unsupported by anything. We have no idea whether the number/age line is linear. We have no idea how well the ages are distributed in the group. There are no reliable conclusions that can be drawn. We have no idea whether most of the HIV+ in that group are in their 20's, 30's or 40's

You are making leaps in the dark in order to support your prejudices.

If you claim that your observations are fact or even supported opinions, then you are a liar.

You have totally failed to understand the HPA statistics.

When they say "Deaths within the first year of diagnosis" they are referring to people that first presented themselves in 2007 with full blown symptomatic AIDS. Those people have generally been HIV+ for a very long time but undiagnosed and therefore untreated. So by the time they dragged themselves to a doctor, it was too late. Tragic. Totally tragic.

There will be statistically anomalous cases - as in flu or other diseases - of people that get infected in May and are dead by December, but they are the statistical 'blips' the extreme exceptions.

The Median age of death at 47 is the median age TO DATE. It is slewed by the early-years, pre-treatment tidal wave of funerals.

Going forward, HIV+ people have normal life expectancy. As they die at ripe old age, so that median age figure will rise daramtically, but it will not rise for a long time, because the positive and healthy people are not going to die for a long time.

So, Keith. You need to correct your assumptions and insinuations from these figures, which you have failed to understand.

I am not calling to call you a liar. Just ignorant. Are you ready to learn yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:43 AM

Keith. Your quote: "Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all
deaths among MSM in 2007." (HPA)"

Can you tell me which document that came from?

I'm concerned that you might have selectively clipped that from an observation on the dangers of late diagnosis.

If you did then I will wish to have a field-day at the further expense of your credibility.

If you did not clip it, then fine. I have explained the context for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:54 AM

Oh, just one thought that occurred to me, Keith.

If Kevin de Cock and I were so stupid as to think that sexual networks - all other factors being equal - were the most important determinators of HIV risk, then how do you explain that for gay men in the UK, the biggest differentiator of HIV prevalence is where you happen to live?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 07:06 AM

I don't intend to answer your dispute over the 1.6% figure again. I have given the same clear answer many times. People know my view, they know yours.

How about you answer some of the points put to you.

We are still waiting to hear your explanation or your withdrawal of the rumination that it is "not certain" that only a minority of MSM's are HIV+

We want to know why - on a quest for understanding the overall prevalence of MSM's living with HIV - you keep trying to distort the size of the group and try to discount large numbers of healthy people and try to count the dead as living. And you say you are not prejudiced?

We are waiting for your acceptance that the median age of death for HIV+ men is the median age to date and can't possibly tell us anything about the future, in view of the effects going forward of treatment which is giving people diagnosed today, a normal life expectancy.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 10:04 AM

1.6% and the HPA figure can not both be true, but you kept putting them together to detract from the true HPA figure.
No one else spouts your ridiculous figure.
You constructed it yourself out of bogus figures, i.e " The NATSAL indicates that there are AT LEAST 1,984,500 MSM's"

No it does not.
Nothing like that.
A ludicrous over estimate to give you your ludicrous under estimate of the proportion of MSMs infected.
I had put you straight on that before, but you hoped to get it past us again.

I see a change in your position.
Having been proved wrong on everything you have claimed about AIDS, you are now saying that AIDS is not so serious anyway!
What happened to the caring Royston who though every case a tragedy?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 10:33 AM

So, nothing of substance to add then, Keith?

Jolly good.

We'll treat this as finished then.

I have nothing more to say to you either.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 11:07 AM

Nothing of substance!
I have just shown that you have been deceiving the forum with fake statistics, and shown how you faked it.
I have just shown that the epidemic among MSMs, which you keep trying to understate, is comparable to the greatest plagues in history.

Plenty of substance there.
You just have no reply.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 12:54 PM

I will not overstate my own case.
Probably approaching the Great Plague but not The Black Death.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:09 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!""

No, Ake, not my description, merely a word I used to highlight the attitude you display toward these people.

You profess to have their best interests at heart, yet would selectively compel them to undergo testing which is illegal in the UK for very godd reasons.

This is biased and discriminatory. Anyone who is HIV positive poses a risk to those indulging un unsafe sex, yet your attitude is to say some groupings are too small to be worth testing.

Your agenda is utterly transparent, but fortunately the laws of his country prevent bigots from forcing their ideas upon others.

Nobody in the UK can, or should be forced to accept any medical procedure, and it is a good thing too. It prevents the next logical discrimination, namely euthanasia for those you wish to remove from your proposed healthy culture.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:19 PM

Don,
some groupings are too small to be worth testing.

This is true.
Anyone can get bowel cancer, but only over 60s are screened.

With finite resources, testing low risk groups means you can not test so many from high risk groups.
That means more cases are missed, and lives needlessly lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:20 PM

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

If you are talking about HIV Keith, you are wrong because only 50% of HIV positives actually develop AIDS at all.

If you are talking about AIDS sufferers, you are still wrong because The figures you are using relate to HIV diagnoses, and the number of AIDS cases won't become clear for approximately ten years, and maybe (with improved treatment) not even then.

In short, Royston's figures, culled from the HPA, are bound to be much closer to the truth than your flawed and slanted claims.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:37 PM

Don....I dont understand you, why do you continue to print lies about what I say, when one only has to scan up the page to read what I actually wrote.

I did not say any grouping was too small to be tested, what I did say was that I would be in favour of universal testing, but that testing everyone, like very large groups with very small infection rates would be a waste of money which could be better used on other prevention methods like contact tracing.

I am in favour of targeting small groups with very high percentage of infections, like male homosexuals, African immigrants, perhaps some other immigrant groups as the Aids picture becomes clearer, intravenus drug users and sex workers.

Is that clear enough for you?
If Aids figures continue to rise amongst "at risk" groups you can be absolutely sure that these measures will be implimented....there is no doubt of that....those who make the laws can also change them, when it suits them to do so.

Dont lecture me on the problems of drug abuse, I know better than most what is in the interests of addicts.....and what is in the interests of idiot political dogmatists!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:40 PM

Sadly Don, all HIV positive people do go on to develope AIDS.
Retrovirals just delay it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:46 PM

ANTI retrovirals!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:55 PM

Yeah, you asked for it Keith.

The full context of your misleadingly selected and clipped quotes from the HPA about AIDS deaths.

"Late HIV diagnoses, AIDS and death

In 2007 19% (499/2,679) of MSM were diagnosed after the point at which
treatment should have begun (CD4 cell count less than 200 cells per mm3), a reduction from 30% (417/1,384) seen in 1998.

Between 2003 and 2007, late diagnosis (CD4<200) was associated with a 13-fold increase in mortality within a year of diagnosis, compared to those diagnosed more promptly.

Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all deaths among MSM in 2007. Late diagnosis is more common among older MSM and those diagnosed outside London [3].

Since 1996 new diagnoses of AIDS and deaths (from any cause) among HIV
positive individuals have remained low. In 2007, there were 193 cases of AIDS reported among MSM, of which 74% (142) were made at the same
time as their HIV diagnosis. MSM accounted for 32% (159/495) of deaths
among all HIV-infected people in 2007. The median age of death was 47,
with 57% occurring in those aged over 50."

Lie after lie upon lie with you Keith. And I was spot on when I identified this latest one even befor needing to check it out.

All because - if you're honest - you want to round 'em all up and drag 'em down the clinic.

You lie and you distort and you twist and turn to support your prejudices while claiming some sort of saintly impartiality.

Well you are busted mate.

Keep going, just you keep going.

Are you going to answer the points put to you about your other lies?

We are still waiting to hear your explanation or your withdrawal of the rumination that it is "not certain" that only a minority of MSM's are HIV+

We want to know why - on a quest for understanding the overall prevalence of MSM's living with HIV - you keep trying to distort the size of the group and try to discount large numbers of healthy people and try to count the dead as living. And you say you are not prejudiced?

We are waiting for your acceptance that the median age of death for HIV+ men is the median age to date and can't possibly tell us anything about the future, in view of the effects going forward of treatment which is giving people diagnosed today, a normal life expectancy.

If Kevin de Cock and I were so stupid as to think that sexual networks - all other factors being equal - were the most important determinators of HIV risk, then how do you explain that for gay men in the UK, the biggest differentiator of HIV prevalence is where you happen to live?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 02:07 PM

And for the last time, the NATSAL survey does INDICATE how many MSM's there are.

6.3% of men at least admit to having had genital sex with another man.

63mm people or thereabouts in the population

Half of them are men - 31.5mm

6.3 of 31.5mm is 1,984,500 MSM's

It's not perfect, it is an indication.

The HPA figures are for one slice of men aged 15-44. They are totally different. It is a truth, but it is a partial truth.

I would never (and did not) put the NATSAL derived figure forward on its own - but it is a fair observation.

You, on the other hand, only want to count those MSM's at peak risk - discounting everyone else, and you want to add in the dead to boost your prejudiced view of this awful problem and your odious opinion which amounts to an assertion that gay men make up a tiny group of deviants who are all either dead or dying and deserved it. You toxic little man.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 02:16 PM

Keith, why don't you call the Lighthouse Centre in Ladbroke Grove (The Terence Higgins Trust centre)

They will probably confirm that all the gay men who come to them for health and counseling services are HIV+

So that would probably have you concluding that all gay men are HIV+ and all HIV+ men are gay.

Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 02:27 PM

Royston, in replying to your assertion that many AIDS victims now survive much longer (which is true) I pointed out that Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all deaths among MSM in 2007.
That is a fact, and pertinent to our discussion.
No need for a vast cut and paste that no one will read.

No lies from me. Ever.

My "but not certain" statement.
You had stated as fact that most MSMs were not infected, but you had not established that.
You still have not.
I have looked into it and I am now confident that it is true.
No lies from me. I just like to be sure of the facts.

You say I try to count the dead as living.
It is convenient for you that death removes infected people from the statistics.
I am concerned with the numbers of people who succumb.
Those who have died are entitled to be counted.
No lies from me. I regard it as deceitful to try to hide the dead.

You say the median age of death tells us nothing about the future.
I was concerned with the present situation.
For the future, the median age is creeping up.
No lies from me.

Kevin de Cock.
Have you decided to reinstate him?
I thought everything he said had been repudiated.
He made one passing mention of "networks" but his explanation of what he meant, multiple and concurrent sexual partners, is really a description of behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 10 - 05:39 AM

Gosh..I've been pretty busy..and spending a LOT of time in the studio, so I was away, for a bit.....

So, you're still arguing over the statistics? Mercy! I've got a great idea...

Why doesn't everyone who is all for minimizing the effects of 'how many get what', and 'why', and with the odds, you've figured out, convince yourselves that there is hardly any chance you won't get anything, because its all safe now, it's your civil right,too, and the road to eternal bliss....and fuck everything in sight, with a smile on your face,..because you felt 'right'! You won't catch anything because, sheesh,.. you fancy yourself a liberal, and everything is O.K., and you are exempt from consequences, and common sense!

Oh well,.....Hey, Hi, All
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Mar 10 - 05:42 AM

Been gone so long, forgot to sign in right...... (Joe, hi!..you can delete the one with just 'Guest', it was me. Thank you)


Gosh..I've been pretty busy..and spending a LOT of time in the studio, so I was away, for a bit.....

So, you're still arguing over the statistics? Mercy! I've got a great idea...

Why doesn't everyone who is all for minimizing the effects of 'how many get what', and 'why', and with the odds, you've figured out, convince yourselves that there is hardly any chance you won't get anything, because its all safe now, it's your civil right,too, and the road to eternal bliss....and fuck everything in sight, with a smile on your face,..because you felt 'right'! You won't catch anything because, sheesh,.. you fancy yourself a liberal, and everything is O.K., and you are exempt from consequences, and common sense!

Oh well,.....Hey, Hi, All
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 10 - 11:16 AM

Royston, you said "The HPA figures are for one slice of men aged 15-44. They are totally different. It is a truth, but it is a partial truth."

Are there any MSMs beow age 15?
It IS a partial truth, because no one gets better as they get older.
The numbers in the higher age group are EVEN HIGHER, ignoring the fact that AIDS is reducing their number by killing them.

I am a little man, but neither toxic nor an idiot.
You seek to conceal the size of the epidemic.
I seek the facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 10 - 04:15 PM

The official figure for the number of MSMs infected was inconveniently far bigger than your own figure.
To persist with it showed arrogance and a determination to push your own agenda.
As an honest man, you would want to know where your calculation went wrong.
I will tell you anyway.
Meanwhile, 2100 is there if anyone wants it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Mar 10 - 04:21 PM

The first problem is your source for the proportion of MSMs.
You used a NATSAL survey that you yourself said had too small a sample (FEB 5th).
You could have used the other NATSAL survey that was nearly double the size, but it found barely a half as many MSMs.
So that did not suit you.
You probably started off with an overestimate.
You then applied that proportion to the whole population.
That means you are counting in thousands of children who are not yet sexually active, and old men who are no longer sexually active.
All these are not at risk.
You thus overestimate the number of active MSMs thereby underestimating the risk factor.