BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 04:43 AM

"Just open your eyes, and realize,
The way it's always been.
Just open your mind and you will find 
The way it's always been.
Just open your heart and that's a start"
Moody Blues

""The health agencies need to get involved with the homosexual organisations to make it clear ....that the prevalence of promiscuous and risky behaviour must be amended""

(Note that I took out redundant words to get the potential intended message).

Good luck with that...as if the so named"gay organizations", have any direct control over "amending" (whatever that means or could entail) individual behaviour.

On a positive front, government agencies are, and have been, increasingly reaching out to impacted groups to better design programs to better reach potentially impacted individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 04:57 AM

I didn't miss it at all, ake. Given your inclination to class homosexuality as being driven by nothing but sex I chose to ignore your views on targeting. I am also puzzled by how you will "make it clear that the present state of affairs is not acceptable" etc. You have already stated, in no uncertain terms, that education will not work. How are these organisations to bring about this change in attitude without education?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 06:17 AM

Everybody has called for more vigilance in at risk groups. Charities representing gay issues concentrate on gay issues, as is right and proper. But..

Nobody, I repeat, nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Full stop.

That is what the worm said, and the is what the worm meant. He is vilifying gay people.

Everybody wishes more testing of people deemed at risk. These include people who use anal sex, and people who use any form of unprotected sex. Gay charities mention MSM as appropriate, and agencies such as PHE point out the high prevalence.

You can't call for testing of gay people any more than you can call for testing of heterosexual people. People in monogamous or no relationship exist, so nobody in any professional or indeed responsible position wants them to to come forward for testing. A waste of money, time and effort.

Contact tracing of HIV positive people has been offered since 1989 in England. Contact tracing of people deemed at risk of irresponsible behaviour has been possible through magistrate warrant for many years.

Testing of all Scottish people for heroin would be a good public health initiative on the same lines as Akenaton claims. If he wishes to undergo tests, there is a substance misuse drop in centre where you can have your name added to the list. You end up of course with a list of people in Scotland on heroin. We already know the central belt is a black spot, so why not turn up? You don't need to use heroin, just be Scottish! A bit like not carrying out unprotected anal sex with multiple partners, just be classed as gay!

Bastard.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 06:47 AM

The Sound of Stigma  

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 06:54 AM

Some myths  

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 07:00 AM

cdc 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 07:06 AM

stigma 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 01:10 AM

Targeting MSM for testing would be more cost effective than for any other group.
That is why NHS does it.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 01:21 AM

Yes the "NHS" does target as per a population. So in certain London boroughs gay men are encouraged. In Hull needle sharers are encouraged.

Etc.

But all groups are encouraged in all areas. It is emphasis based on prevalence that counts. You write in agreement with me but in a way designed to contradict me. You really are a nasty little shit, aren't you Keith?

By the way, it's local authorities who have the budget for health promotion not NHS bodies. But I'll excuse your ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 03:46 AM

The epidemic can only be halted by increased targeted testing of MSM.

HPE say that not nearly enough male homosexuals are coming forward for testing....apparently, there is a movement amongst MSM to stigmatise those who volunteer to be tested......it is important that this movement is censured.

This movement is exactly the reverse of what I have been advising for some considerable time, as a solution to the problem..... self regulation by the MSM demographic, assisted and encouraged by the homosexual agencies/pressure groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 04:12 AM

"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;"
(National Aids Trust)

I'll excuse your ignorance again.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 04:13 AM

Targeting of specific demographics has always been more cost effective. Which is why big advertising companies do it. Educating a particular demographic that product A (testing in this case) is better than product B (not being tested) is what it is all about. But of course ake has already informed us that education does not work and it is not worth spending any more money on it.So I wonder how these specific demographics will be given the information they need?

DtG

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

Nobody, I repeat, nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:11 AM

Nobody, I repeat nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:18 AM

National Aids Trust (NAT)
"NAT want to see a change in testing culture in the UK. 'At least annual' testing must become the norm both for gay and bisexual men"

- See more at: http://www.nat.org.uk/our-thinking/prevention-and-testing/testing.aspx#sthash.uJK02ss4.dpuf

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:38 AM

PHE.
" Get tested regularly for HIV if you are one of those most-at-risk:
a. Men who have sex with men are advised to have an HIV and STI screen at least annually, and every three months if having unprotected sex with new or casual partners."

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:40 AM

"why am I opposed to the normalization of homosexual behavior? Because I love black males. I want black males to live long, prosperous, healthy, disease-free lives"


Interesting view? 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:45 AM

Does denying marriage to gays make you a bigot? Interesting views on both sides of this issue on this debate site:




<1a href="http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-denying-marriage-to-gays-make-you-a-bigot">debate 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 09:38 AM

On your second post there Keith, you start to get there.

Of all gay men who would need to go for testing if gay was the test, that would include Stephen Fry. I mention him because a) he is gay and b) he would be sent home without being tested for wasting the clinic's time. Despite being possibly the most well known for promoting gay issues, he has the disadvantage of celebrity so we all know that he has never had penetrative sex with a man.

So, do all gay people need to go for testing on the basis of being gay yet heterosexual people who have sex with more than one partner and / or don't practice safe sex not? You should keep reading and not stop when you see something about your favourite category.

You are getting to sound like Akenaton, who can't think of gay people without a sordid fascination with anal sex. I wonder if he thinks of anal sex when he encounters heterosexual women? Do you?

See? Eventually, you begin to keep up with PHE. Just like those who work alongside them. zzzzzzz

ADIS. Don't die of dyslexia.



Just out of interest, I wrote to Duncan Selbie recently saying that targeting for screening in all areas can be too prescriptive and misunderstood. I didn't supply any answers, but sexual health campaigns were prominent in my concerns, (written by me, co signed by all nine regional heads of commissioning.)

Like I said, I am too close to this subject to suffer fools.












Let alone thick twats.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 10:01 AM

debate 

Let's try this link, as the one before did not work.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 04:49 PM

I agree that people who do not have sex are not at risk from sexual transmission.
I am just surprised you thought it needed saying.

Nobody, I repeat, nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Yes they are.
PHE, NAT and all the other agencies.

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

Silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 05:05 PM

The call should not be for testing on the basis of being gay. It should be for testing on the basis of being at risk.

Can you not see the difference?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 06:14 PM

MSM is the massively most "at risk" demographic.

This is publicised by CDC, HPA, HPE, and all other health agencies.
It is even quoted by the Terence Higgins Trust, Stonewall and other homosexual agencies.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 06:21 PM

In the USA, African Americans are the fastest growing demographic, which is significant, given their lower representation in the population. This is not surprising, as they are low on the economic and education scale and have traditionally been marginilized in this society.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 06:28 PM

MSM is the massively most "at risk" demographic.

Are they "at risk" or at risk? Big difference. Like "marriage" and marriage. Get it?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:15 AM

The "African American demographic" contains African American MSM.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:25 AM

Just to state the obvious. Both the worm and Keith A Hole of Hertford have conveniently and continuously made MSM and homosexual interchangeable terms. That way it is easier to vilify a lifestyle rather than a physical act. The agencies Keith quotes make the distinction, although not always as well as they might, and that sadly gives a toe in for far right hate groups and their supporters.

Fucking disgraceful.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:14 AM

Male homosexuals are the highest risk group, and are targeted for screening. MSM is a recognised abbreviation.
Bisexuals are also high risk and targeted.

Lesbians are not a risk group.

PHE.
" Get tested regularly for HIV if you are one of those most-at-risk:
a. Men who have sex with men are advised to have an HIV and STI screen at least annually, and every three months if having unprotected sex with new or casual partners."

National Aids Trust (NAT)
"NAT want to see a change in testing culture in the UK. 'At least annual' testing must become the norm both for gay and bisexual men"

These statements contradict your statements that "Nobody, I repeat, nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay."   and,

"There is nothing, nothing whatseover to substantiate a campaign focussing on gay men. It is homophobic to do so."
.
Let's be more careful with our wording to avoid this kind of disagreement.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 04:37 AM

MSM is another term for homosexual?

Glad you said that. Your mealy mouthed bigotry can sometimes read as trying to be reasonable.

Nice for you to get the homophobia out in the open.




Busted

Fucking

Flush

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 05:12 AM

"I don't hate you.. I just don't like that you exist" 
― Gena Showalter, Seduce the Darkness

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 05:22 AM

"I don't hate people. I just find their views disturbing"

Prof. Fucking important dude.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 06:11 AM

Men who have sex with men are advised to ...

That is the proper term, used by the agencies that know.

Male homosexuals are the highest risk group

That is the term used by some on here.

As you said, Keith, "Let's be more careful with our wording to avoid this kind of disagreement".

Not all homosexuals have sex. Not all homosexuals that have sex have sex with multiple partners. Not all homosexuals that have sex with multiple partners have unprotected sex. You see, they are just like heterosexuals in that. No different at all. Which is why vilifying homosexuality is wrong. Yes, target the at risk groups. The highest at risk group are men who have unprotected sex with multiple partners. Not all homosexuals.

Hope that helps.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 09:43 AM

I thought MSM is an abbreviation for male homosexuals and bisexual men, if sexually active.
Is that wrong?

Of course all members of a group are different.
It does not need saying.
Of course many are not sexually active.
It does not need saying.

The agencies refer to some groups as high risk and needing testing without feeling the need to specify "except those who do not engage in high risk behaviour" because it does not need saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:28 AM

"The "African American demographic" contains African American MSM."


Yes it does. But, a reasonable approach for those seeking to reduce it is not to stigmatise those impacted by alluding to it as being an "african american" health issue -caused by folks being african american. They look deeper into the root causes, to assist in prevention in the short term and over the long term. Approach is very important in seeking voluntary participation in reducing future infections.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 10:52 AM

The definition of MSM is quite clear and should be obvious to even an NHS pen pusher.

MSM.....Men who have sex with men. This demographic includes homosexual and bisexual men, apprx 12% of the total are bisexual(Simon Levy 2011)

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 11:27 AM

But homosexual does not equal MSM. And MSM are only at risk if they have multiple partners and unprotected sex. Why use the terms as if they mean the same? Why keep saying homosexuals should be targeted? Why say all MSM should be targeted?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 11:37 AM

I think that all the agencies do say that Dave.

It is taken as understood that some members do not put themselves at risk, but the group, with all its exceptions, is considered a high risk group.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 01:43 PM

Well, I'm back from intense recording sessions, and see that the conversation has wandered around to hair splitting about homosexuals, again, and how much more or less they are even a factor. 'Guest' posted some links, (where I last left off), and must NOT have read them very well, especially the one from the CDC, which has the pie chart....then he goes on to banter how he made such a wonderful point, that being stigmatized keeps homosexuals from being tested.....well isn't that perfectly STUPID??!!..then goes onto provide links from homosexual sites 'backing up' that STUPID allegation!!! Oh Whaaa!
Now THIS applies to everyone, whether homosexual or heterosexual.
Before one engages in sex, male or female, homo or hetero, before you DECIDE whether to stick your dick in, whatever orifice who choose, aren't you at least curious, or doesn't the thought occur to you to question if that is a safe place to put your dick?...For instance, you meet someone, male or female and you 'entertain' the thought that you have a few things in common, and it seems like a personable exchange, so you 'entertain' thoughts of wanting to fuck....without thinking twice, if that person is going to get 'knocked up'...or if she might be the person who is open to such casual encounters...so you want to fuck her.....and IF you don't think twice, then you are, in every sense of the word, a 'Dumb Fuck Stupid Fucker'! If you want to stick your dick into someone, that may cause one of you to contract a fatal disease, and you do it, you are a 'Dumb Fuck Stupid Fucker'! If you allow someone to stick their dick into you, and you suspect that you have an STD of any sort, whether in be herpes, syphilis, gonorrhea or HIV, you are a Dumb Fuck Stupid Fucker'....if you are sexually active, with more than one fucker, and don't get yourself checked, at least once in a while, you are a 'Dumb Fuck Stupid Fucker'!! ...I think instead of continuing to type 'Dumb Fuck Stupid Fucker' repeatedly, I think I'll just abbreviate it to 'DF', Okay?
To make excuses for ANY reason, to put OTHER people at risk, just so you can get your rocks off, makes you a 'DF'. To pretend that a 'stigma; of being a DF, keeps you from warning those considering fucking you, makes you an even bigger DF....keeping yourself STUPID and IGNORANT of finding out if you are carrying a fatal disease, makes you a DF Stupid Fucker!!! Denying that Stupid Fuckers are anything less than Stupid Fuckers, is downright Stupid and evil, being as you are promoting death and illnesses to people who don't have to get ill and die, just to get their rocks off... OR impregnate a 'casual acquaintance' to get their rocks off, just for you to make a 'political point' is being a DF Stupid Fucker.....regardless of the 'stigma' you leave the woman and/or the child ....and really, who pays attention to Stupid Fuckers???...only a D.F.!...(Stupid Fucker!)
...and promiscuity is being a Stupid Dumb Fucker!!!...it burns out you own circuits..

So, in that perspective, the most sure remedy is obvious!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 01:46 PM

Keith - You posted this yourself -

PHE.
" Get tested regularly for HIV if you are one of those most-at-risk:
a. Men who have sex with men are advised to have an HIV and STI screen at least annually, and every three months if having unprotected sex with new or casual partners."

So not all agencies are making the mistake of equating the at risk groups with all homosexuals. And what makes you assume that "it is taken as understood etc." Nothing should be taken as understood. Particularly on the internet. Not everyone is capable of understanding.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 01:52 PM

If the mods were serious about creating an atmosphere for respectful dialogue, for all, not just a few, they would consider erasing gfs's last insulting post-that adds nothing to what seemed to be a discussion back on a respectful and productive course (a reason I joined back in again).

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:11 PM

The worm just said that an NHS pen pusher should know that MSM means homosexual.

Well, I know quite a few NHS pen pushers. In fact I help educate a few and give support to many others. I have never been one myself mind, I am a retired businessman, non paid director of a teaching hospitals trust and visiting Prof, as well as some national advisor bits as a hang over from chairing trusts and regulating them, but I think it is safe to assume I can speak for NHS pen pushers when I say

Nothing is taken as understood. Everything has to be tried to be understood in order to help the situation. Nobody is advised to come forward for testing by dint of being homosexual. People who are at risk of HIV are more prevalent in the gay and African demographic, hence the targeted health promotion campaign but the mental leap our resident homophobes delve into is borne of bigotry.

Goofus is his lucid self again. I reckon he has problems nobody here can address..




I wish I was an NHS pen pusher. The pension scheme for a start......

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:21 PM

Musket: "Goofus is his lucid self again. I reckon he has problems nobody here can address.."

Ed T: "not just a few, they would consider erasing gfs's last insulting post-that adds nothing to what seemed to be a discussion back on a respectful and productive course.."

Oh NO!...You're going to give me a 'stigma'...Maybe you should tell those who are reluctant of getting a 'stigma' to get themselves tested, before they kill someone else.....but then why hurt someone's feelings, when they can gleefully go off and kill someone???

Get over it!....and tell them to get over it, and think of others than themselves, rather than how they get their rocks off!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:25 PM

What a pleasent person you seem to be gfs.
Do you believe trash talk like that adds to your standing here, or the liklihood that your posted views would be taken more seriously?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:33 PM

Whatever gets the point across, Ed....are you trying to insinuate that people who ignore getting tested, and/or are promiscuous, without being careful are that way because they are smart??????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:41 PM

I wish you peace and prosperity, gfs
I have no need to have a discussion directly with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 02:43 PM

Yeah, well I can see why.

GfS

P.S. So if someone from the U.K. says 'wanker', it's OK, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:06 PM

Dave, what is the difference please between sexually active male homosexuals and MSM?
Is the only difference that MSM also includes bisexual men?
I think that the accepted usage is to equate them, but I am no expert.

MSM are said by all agencies to need annual testing or more frequent.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:12 PM

Define, sexually active. It seems quite broad, in any group, except for my grand dad.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:25 PM

I assume the expression means having sex?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Apr 14 - 03:43 PM

"Havng sex" would include most, if not all, the homosexual community (regardless of monogomous relatinshils, being responsible or not) thus the significant difference in opinion, and a big source of discourse, on the thread.