BS: Real Non-belief/not militant

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 10:23 AM

These figures are 3 years out of date, the MSM infection rates have worsened considerably since 2011.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 10:26 AM

There IS cause for concern.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 10:58 AM

Yes Keith, I was talking about new cases because Akenaton was.

4.7 % is a long way from a majority. 10 times 4.7% is not a majority.

Akenaton, My mathematics is just fine. 1 in 12, your worst case, is not a majority, You cannot generalize 1 in 12 to all. That is stereotyping.

Yes there IS cause for concern, 6,300 people getting HIV is 6,300 too many IMHO. But there is no cause for opposing same-sex marriage and testing all gay men in the figures you provide.

Please, find better data or find another topic.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 11:27 AM

Dave the Gnome: "'...and how many homosexuals, do you know, who settled down with their first 'lover'?'
"What a stupidly loaded question. How many PEOPLE do you know who settled down with their first lover?"

Actually, quite a few people I have known, and still do, who got together with their first love, settled down and raised their families.
My son, for one, married his high school sweetheart, has 9 kids, all by the same girl, my closest friend for 52 years married his first, my parents, another very close friend who is a VERY well known executive chef, and their entire circle of friends, my next door neighbors...and more, seemed to have been able to do it, AND are not complaining about it, at all...in fact, they are still very much in love. It sounds like you have either not known of ANY, or just never bothered to inquire. That being said, I have known several homosexuals, and very talented people, some have died of AIDS, but NONE of them are with their first partner.......Well, you asked!

Most of them (the family by 'the first') don't even think about homosexuality. I've never gotten the impression that any of them 'hate' homosexuals, either...they are too busy relating to their own families....that being said, from the conversations we've had, none of them like their noses being rubbed in having to relate to the whining of homosexuals, who think their practices should be taken as seriously as they'd like. If anything, regular family folk are focused on their needs, to facilitate their families, and BEING a family. NONE of them, sit around hoping their kids will grow up to be homosexual....and I'll go a step further...if their kids did decide to pursue a homosexual lifestyle, the parents would have considered it a failure, on their part......(it's not uncommon, you know).

That all being said, does it mean they HATE homosexuals?...No, not at all. They don't even think about them, and at best are annoyed by their public displays, relating to them as an assault on a healthy society.
Hate, homophobia, bigotry has absolutely NOTHING to do with it...they are too busy caring for and nurturing their own families. The rabid frothing of homosexuals seeking 'legitimacy' is the furthest thing from their minds.

Hope that doesn't 'bother' you, but that's the way it is.

GfS

P.S. Virtually the only time I even discuss the issue, is on here, as well...having to address other mega-whiners who just don't get it.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 11:33 AM

GfS,

Will you concede that many people do not settle down with their first lover and that it is not my business or yours if they choose not to?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 11:34 AM

A cartoon for Ake and GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 11:51 AM

Cappy Jack: "Will you concede that many people do not settle down with their first lover and that it is not my business or yours if they choose not to?"

Sure.... Will you concede that many people do settle down with their first lover and that it is not my business or yours how they choose to view people than don't?

GfS

P.S. Growing up in our neighborhood, and until we were 18-19, did we, or our family, even know anyone who was even divorced!..True story. The break up of the nuclear family, is in fact, one of the most tragic and destructive things that have happened to a thriving society...akin to the devastation of war, itself...wouldn't you agree?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 11:56 AM

There must be a misunderstanding Jack.
Ake clearly did not mean that most of the demographic were infected in one year.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 12:45 PM

Maybe I did not make myself very clearly Jack, of course I was referring to those LIVING with HIV in the UK.
The worst case scenario was some inner cities where 1 in 5 are affected.
The new infections are running about 60% of all people tested, and almost 80% of all men tested. These are epidemic rates, and if they were duplicated in the heterosexual demographic, society would disintegrate.

I take it that we agree that promiscuity and risk taking causes the high rates of transmission?
Marriage either homosexual or heterosexual is no guarantee of monogamy.    Monogamy is most likely in a traditional family environment.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 12:47 PM

Keith A of Hertford: "There must be a misunderstanding Jack.
Ake clearly did not mean that most of the demographic were infected in one year."

'Misunderstandings'??....in other words 'spin' to alter the topic, to steer it to their 'talking points', more than something that really is.

For what it's worth.....I met one of the most sweetest ladies that I've ever met, her name was Dina. I met her in the late 70's. She was quite a bit older than me at the time...and while talking to her, at the table, I noticed that her forearm had a row of tattooed numbers on it. She had in fact been in a German concentration camp, during WWII. She opened up to me, and in the course of the conversation, related to me, that she was there from the ages of 14 through 19. Her whole family was there with her. She relayed how most of her family died there, and watching their corpses being dragged off, and thrown in a pile of other bodies, to be burned up...and in her graciousness, without bitterness, even though she did fight back a few tears, she relayed that the greatest loss, was not for her country, Germany..but to all the families like hers, and her friend's families that had been torn apart during that time...and the devastation that resulted to her homeland on such a widespread level. She relayed to me about the displacement of so many friend's families, who had been scattered, never to see each other again....and 'unless you've experienced that', she said, 'you'll never know just how sacred, and how dear, the time we were together was. All I have now, is their memories, and our love has sustained me all these years. Of all the things that happened to our homeland, this was the most tragic. I cannot continue to mourn...the best I can do, is honor them by living, and being the best that I was raised to be, and bring love and peace to those, who just don't know'.

I've never forgotten her, or her words.

YES! The lasting fabric of the nuclear family, so taken for granted...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 01:05 PM

No, GfS, it doesn't bother me at all. Why the quote marks round bother this time? Is it an American thing? Why would you think it may bother me?

I am also very pleased for you that your experience has been so good but I can assure you that the number of people not with their first partner is significant in any demographic. Glad to say that neither my partner nor I nor our two married sons fall into that category but I know many people who did not settle down at the first attempt. I also know that personal experience is a very subjective thing and your, and my, experience is clouded by the circle of friend we move in. Good attempt but no prize I'm afraid.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 01:34 PM

Dave the Gnome: "I am also very pleased for you that your experience has been so good....Glad to say that neither my partner nor I nor our two married sons fall into that category ...."

Why are you 'Glad'?..are you referring to the alternative??

"Good attempt but no prize I'm afraid."

You just haven't thought it through all the way....BTW, Regards.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 01:52 PM

You expressed Happiness, in using the words 'pleased' and 'glad'. Those feelings create an ambiance in the home, that I sincerely hope your children carry with them, into their homes, without the pains of trial and error,as well. If they do/can/will, then your parenting has been a success....and I truly hope they do/can/will!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 02:38 PM

"You expressed Happiness, in using the words 'pleased' and 'glad'."

He was being polite to you sir.

You ought to try it.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 02:50 PM

Keith, 1 in 450 contracting HIV this year, 1 in 12 living with it does not PROVE that the whole population is promiscuous. To say that it proves that is stereotyping.

You cannot extrapolate from 1/12 or even 1/5 Akenaton to the whole population. You can't even truthfully say that you know that ALL OF the 1/5 you claim are living with AIDS were all promiscuous.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:34 PM

Cappy Jack: "He was being polite to you sir. You ought to try it."

...and I gave him my 'Regards'....maybe you ought to cool down.

..and while you're at it, here's a little folk song, if you will, that was much overlooked during his string of hits....
to what we all knew....'way back when'.....before being 'politicized'! ...and taught to be stupid!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:38 PM

No one IS saying that all homosexuals are promiscuous Jack.
What I am saying, is that the rates of transmission of STDs including HIV, are massively higher amongst male homosexuals than in the population at large.
Draw your own conclusions as to why this is the case.
Infection rates are rising by approx. 8/10% per year in the MSM demographic, the agencies say more testing is required to discover those who are HIV positive, but unaware of their status.....a ticking time bomb.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:40 PM

You are telling me to cool down?

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:42 PM

Why are you 'Glad'?..are you referring to the alternative??


Both my sons, my partner and I all found our true loves at the first attempt. The alternative would be that we had not found our life partners that time and would have been disappointed until we did. It is not difficult to understand why I would be glad about that.

I am also pleased that you did not experience the disappointment of thinking you had found someone, only to be let down. Finding someone to love, who returns the compliment, is something to be happy about whether it is yourself or someone else.

What I am not so happy about is the implication that people who have not yet been as successful in love as us are, somehow, inferior, promiscuous or perverted. Not saying that is what you mean but some of the posts that have been floating around recently seem to be heading in that direction.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:46 PM

Draw your own conclusions as to why this is the case.

That is all we are trying to do but you seem to feel that yours is the only one!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:57 PM

"No one IS saying that all homosexuals are promiscuous Jack."

You said that more than half or the males are.

You have no evidence. You have evidence for 450th of the gay male population per year. You have evidence for 1 in 20 of the total demographic currently infected 1 in 12 of the current demographic living in London.

I have drawn a very reasonable conclusion based upon the information you have provided. You are mistaken in your mathematics. It does not follow that more than half are promiscuous.

There is certainly a problem with the sliver of the population that is reckless enough to become infected the 1/450. But with that small a percentage it is unwise for you to suggest that any preventative measures be applied to the whole "demographic."   

Perhaps you can reformulate your ideas to take this into account?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 04:10 PM

Dave the Gnome: "What I am not so happy about is the implication that people who have not yet been as successful in love as us are, somehow, inferior, promiscuous or perverted. Not saying that is what you mean but some of the posts that have been floating around recently seem to be heading in that direction.
Cheers"

..and then in that case.....

We should ALL hope that our children do NOT have to suffer, as the result doing whatever the latest political trend points to...no matter who is saying it!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 05:05 PM

"
That is all we are trying to do but you seem to feel that yours is the only one!"

Nobody has advanced any other explanation Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 05:30 PM

Ake, I refer you back to my unlikely ally of 25 Feb 14 - 03:57 PM. Your explanation is flawed. Your conclusion from that flawed explanation is to abuse human rights. I have already said that I am not willing to speculate and will not offer an explanation of medical matters where that is best left to those who know what they are doing. Thankfully most people know that you do not belong to this group and take as much notice of you as I do.

GfS - Amen to that. No matter who is saying what indeed. I hope that, in the words of the song, I taught my children well :-) At least well enough to spot weasel words when they arise.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 05:30 PM

Akenaton, if we are all agreement why is there a discussion?

What is your position please, on same-sex marriage and on equal rights for gay people?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 06:04 PM

Jack, your stats appear to be wrong.
Yours come from a small study done in 2005, which estimated the number of homosexuals in the population as 3.6 million, 6% of the population
The latest figures come in a huge study done by the Office of National Statistics in 2012.
They state that 1.5% of the population of the UK are homosexual.
350000 of them are male.
Total homosexual population(male and female) 720000.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 06:10 PM

Link to Office of National Statistics here

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 06:21 PM

Thank you for that Dave, I knew you were being disingenuous. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 07:04 PM

Assuming your figure of 350,000, 1 in 79 instead of 1 in 450 does not make you right. You cannot extrapolate 1 in 79 to the whole "demographic."

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 01:04 AM

Facts we all know, requiring no medical or statistical expertise.

It is very hard to catch HIV.
It requires the exchange of body fluids.
Sexual transmission is easily prevented by use of condoms.

In any epidemic, infection can only increase if infected people infect others.
Only untreated HIV victims are seriously infectious, a small proportion of the demographic under discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 01:07 AM

One more.
Infection is only increasing in one demographic.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 03:06 AM

Infection is only increasing in one demographic.

One interesting statistic that has been left out of the above is that the demographic where the infection is increasing is not just classed as homosexual males. It is young homosexual males. Which may indicate that the issue is, as I said what feels like years ago, that further educational effort is required, specifically targeted at this group.

I know I may be banging my head against a wall but someone needs to point out that there are other options to rounding them up, registering them and eventually going the way of Uganda.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 03:12 AM

Sometimes, being too close to a subject means you have to bite your lip. However, now The Commons Health Select Committee has waded in (a bit like a senate or congressional hearing for those in The USA) Duncan Selbie the CE of Public Health England is being questioned for not being frank enough with advice. They are the body that collates statistics, which some here mistakenly call HPA, which ceased to exist last year. Their most recent data is used in analysis though.

One major criticism is not acknowledging sexual health data that is not coded. Boring and technical maybe, but acknowledges that we don't know the full picture as such clinics offer a confidential service that is anonymised rather than charged against your NHS number.

So we can argue all we like. The facts are as follows;

Being gay or straight makes no difference to your attitude towards anal sex.

More women receive anal sex than men.

Most people use condoms for anal sex.

Data commentary on health statistics uses the 95th percentile to ensure risk is not ignored.

The 95th percentile is where most HIV outcomes reside.

The historic gay prevalence is an example of how that demographic is more likely to come forward for screening than some others such as needle share and promiscuous females.

Perhaps our professors of health bigotry would like to look at the data, you'll find it where Christian websites find the data you throw at us, comparing screening versus symptom registration. That blows the myth. It is dangerous to plan a trajectory based on incidence.

That is why PHE like HPA before it is there to collate and advise, not plan and supply.




But of course, I am not a fellow queer basher so everything I say above is pure lies eh. ?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 03:33 AM

HPA does still exist as part of PHE.
Its stats are definitive, and they do "supply" stats.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 03:39 AM

HPA/PHE re age of newly diagnosed MSM 2012.
"The median age at diagnosis among MSM was 34 years, and one in nine MSM were diagnosed at the age of 50 years or over."

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 03:58 AM

Try this one containing the lines "AIDS
continues to pose a grave threat for gay men in the U.S., who constitute the largest proportion of new HIV infections. Young MSM are the only risk group for which HIV incidence appears to be increasing"

I am more than happy to exchange statistics but I think it is pretty futile.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 04:16 AM

"Among MSM, the greatest number of new diagnoses (1,102) were in men aged 35-49, representing a third of MSM who were newly diagnosed with HIV in 2012. However, there are also more older people living with HIV than ever before, partly to do with an ageing population living with HIV and partly to do with increasing new infections in older men. In 2012, one in nine MSM who was newly diagnosed was 50 or over. "

There is clearly a different pattern in US.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 04:49 AM

There is clearly a different pattern in US.

Yes.

More statistics.

UK Population: 63,395,574
US Population: 316,438,601

Can we extrapolate where there are more cases do you think?

People living with AIDS (UK):    85,000 (0.13%)
People living with AIDS (US): 1,200,000 (0.38%)

Which country do you think is most indicative? I'll leave that for others to decide.

One more thing. In either case we are talking < 0.5% of the population. Hardly an epidemic by anyone's statistics.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 05:08 AM

How facts can be twisted.

"More women than men receive anal sex"..... :0)

There may be a slight difference in the number of women in the population and the number of active homosexuals who indulge in anal sex!!

Additionally, to my mind, subjecting a woman to this treatment is usually a form of abuse, male domination. am sure few women welcome this sort of attention.

One would expect incidence to be higher amongst younger more sexually active MSM.

MSM are encouraged to come forward for testing, because they are the massively most affected demographic.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 06:12 AM

Musket,
I am fucking important. Important enough to know what I am talking about.

Even so, the Health Protection Agency is now part of Public Health England, an executive agency of the Department of Health.
It does still exist as part of HPA as I said.
I was right and you were wrong as usual.

Dave, I think the UK figures are indicative of the situation here, and the US figures indicative of the situation over there.
I was not aware of that US statistic.
I have learned a little more about all this.
Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 06:18 AM

In any case, equating being gay with unprotected anal sex per se demonstrates your odious worthless agenda and makes uncomfortable reading for decent people.

I have not done that Musket.
You made it up.

The HPA/PHE stats. are the only ones available (UK), and used by government and agencies for all planning and policy.
If you challenge that, please provide something more than your word for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 06:49 AM

I have learned a little more about all this.
Thank you.

No problem, Keith. Happy to be of service. I do hope that you realise that this does mean that we have shown statistics taken in isolation to be, at best, skewed and, at worst, misleading. Which is why you may have spotted that I will question any statistics quoted, not jut by you but by anyone. Even if they support what I am saying! As someone at lot wittier, and probably wiser, than me once said. There are lies, damned lies and statistics.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 07:05 AM

I have to disagree Dave.
It is correct to take UK and US stats. in isolation from each other, because they portray different situations and tell different stories.
If you averaged them you would create a picture of a land that does not exist.

Africa has a bigger population and more infection, but tells us nothing about patterns of infection anywhere else.
Likewise US and UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 08:18 AM

Well, this is an international forum, Keith, and I think we need to take that into account. But I am happy to agree to differ on that one :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 08:34 AM

Akenton, Keith, why are you arguing to support statistics which do not support your case in the first place. Everyone agrees that HIV is a bad thing. You can show no link between AIDS and same-sex marriage. Your statistics show that new infections are occurring in a small fraction of the gay male population. Any proposed solution that involves the whole "demographic" is wasteful and unfair.

Dave and Musket, I am not sure I can figure out why you continue to argue this. It is bad math and and faulty logic. I just don't see the relevance of which bureaucracy it came from. an infection rate of 1 in 79 cannot be extrapolated to the whole group.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 08:49 AM

Dave and Musket, I am not sure I can figure out why you continue to argue this.

What is it you cannot figure out, Jack? I cannot answer for Musket but I can try to explain what I am saying. I, like you, think that some serious stereotyping is occurring. I do not like stereotyping so I am arguing against it. I also do not believe tagging and testing is the best answer, so I am arguing against that as well.

Does that help?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 09:08 AM

Dave you were right to inform us about the situation in US.
Thanks.
Both countries and others are relevant to us as you say.
I just reported the situation here, which is what Musket and I disagree about.
Actually, what Musket and HPA/PHE disagree about.

Jack, I support SS marriage, and am not arguing a case.
I am disputing matters of fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 09:59 AM

I get that Dave, about the stereotyping. But you see to be discussing the underlying source of data which IMHO is not relevant because, no matter what the source, the figures quoted by Akenaton do not support his arguments.

   
>>Jack, ....
I am disputing matters of fact. <<

Other than to irritate Musket, Why?

Can't one of you just google "history of the PHE" and be done with it?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 10:23 AM

Sorry, but I think accuracy important.
Argument and opinion should be based on the true facts as known, or you are not entitled to one according to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 10:32 AM

Yes accuracy is important, but trivia is not.

I don't think it matters to the family of a person who has died which bureaucracy tallied up his death and put it in a database.

This is the Bull Shit section of an Internet forum about Folk Music. It is not a Royal Commission on the AIDS epidemic.

Even if it were that. You are holding Ian to a much much higher standard of "accuracy" than the commissioners would. They would be much more interested in who is dying and how to prevent it rather than who is counting the bodies.