BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 01:10 AM

Well read it again, straight...not through the filter of 'political correctness'....I'm not implying anything that I didn't post. What I said was by definition, without spin, true. Not that all homosexuals are pedophiles...I never said that....I said that those males who prefer young males have an element of homosexuality. True??...Being as it would be with the same sex.
Now the element of being a predator is yet another issue.
A male predator usually gets close to the male child first, as a way of 'disarming' them...gaining their trust....(or at least talking themselves into believing they have their trust). Those male predators who prefer females, usually do so by force.
True?
So there is a another behavioral element involved, wouldn't you say?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 12:45 AM

GfS

Cappy Jack: "You seem to be implying that the pedophile who prefers girls is somehow not so "perverted." Is that what you are trying to say?"

How in the hell did you come up with that?

I came up with it from reading your post. I said "you seem" because I was not clear on what you were trying to say.

Its a simple question which you now seem to be avoiding. Would you please answer it "yes" or "no."

Thanks in advance.

"Cappy"

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 12:44 AM

Cappy Jack: "I think pedophiles, in fact all "sexual predators" are equally bad no matter who they prey upon. How about you?

Sex with two people of the same gender, is homosexuality...How about you?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 12:41 AM

GfS

I think pedophiles, in fact all "sexual predators" are equally bad no matter who they prey upon. How about you?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 12:40 AM

Cappy Jack: "You seem to be implying that the pedophile who prefers girls is somehow not so "perverted." Is that what you are trying to say?"

How in the hell did you come up with that????????????
(Working overtime trying to balance politics with reality).

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Mar 14 - 12:13 AM

GfS,

You seem to be implying that the pedophile who prefers girls is somehow not so "perverted." Is that what you are trying to say?

I think pedophiles, in fact all "sexual predators" are equally bad no matter who they prey upon. How about you?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 11:51 PM

Dave the Gnome: "GfS - Now you are linking homosexuality and paedophilia. Why? And why do homosexuals need defending?"

Noooo, you are jumping the gun....my first question asked "Is pedophilia between an adult male, with an male child a form of homosexuality?...as opposed to a a pedophile who chooses little girls? .."

The next question, (a separate question): ".....or are you just cherry picking, and defending homosexuals, in general??"

Homosexuality is sex with two of the same gender....pedophilia, is with minors, more over, prepubescent children. Now, if a male pedophile prefers males, over females....wouldn't you agree that there is an element of homosexuality involved??

HINT: (SSSSHHHHH....the answer is ......Shhh........'yes'...but don't tell anybody.....they'll accuse you of being a homophobic hater, of whales sunning themselves in the Arctic, to relax, because of global warming......for Jesus!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 09:59 PM

Ed. I've pointed out all of those things to Akenaton at different times. But I think it was very difficult to cut through the noise.
People tend to get their backs up when badgered.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 09:41 PM

>>From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:41 PM

Dr. Cemetry Made a good point about the statistics, in the manner described, any male contracting AIDS would be presumed to have got it from MSM, while there is no reason to conclude that there was NOT a percent who would get the virus by the same vectors as the rest of the community.

Actually it is a very silly point that no informed person would make.

People involved in high risk behaviour actually getting infected by indulging in much lower risk behaviour will never be significant.<<

Unless their MSM behavior is monogamous, or celebate, or with condoms and they share needles, or they got it from their wives, or blood transfusion.

I don't know who is informing you, but it seems they tend to jump to conclusions based on incomplete data.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 06:54 PM

Another dimension, Ed, is that both Ake and Guffers ex-amity are both utterly obsessed with homosexuality. I find that to be rather suspicious, actually. It is the favourite topic of both by a country mile. Yet one claims to be a socialist and the other claims that he has counselled people with all manner of personal problems. You shouldn't be so amazed that no progress is made here in humanising these two people. There is something horridly obsessive, vindictive and thoroughly ingrained about their prejudice. You don't change people like that in a hurry.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Ed T
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 06:30 PM

Ake says that he "does not "dislike" or hate homosexuals".
I prefer to take him at his word, unless proven otherwise.

However, I draw attention to two statements, which seem to be problematic (and may lead people to conclude he is insensitive, takes liberties with data- not fully looking at all possible factors, and is less than logical and "clear thinking" on many aspects of this issue (less than logical than on discussions of other issues presented on Mudcat, that is):

"I think Homosexuality is a perversion"
(Oxford Dictionary: Perversion: 1) Distortion or corruption of the original course, meaning, or state of something. 2)sexual behaviour that is considered abnormal and unacceptable).

The use of this "extreme", if not offensive word could lead some to put Ake in a camp of people who are anti-homosexual for a number of reasons. It is certainly insensitive to this broad group of people.

"Anyone who does not see serious health problems associated with male homosexuality, must be blind, or wilfully stupid".

This statement confounds me, as it is insiteful, is limiting to logical discussion, does not take all factors into consideration, and is simplistic in nature (for example, does not take into consideration heterosexual/homosexual factors of transmission, does not consider the prostitution factor in HIV transmission, and that some higher risk sexual acts transcend any sexual group. More seriously, it does not consider that, increasingly, many loving male homosexual couples (regardless of what sexual acts they engage in at home) are not promiscuous, engaging in sex only with their partner (probably at a similar rate as those in the heterosexual community).

Many of these discussions on this topic has occurred on Mudcat previously. What amazes me is how little advancement is made through so much discussion:(

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 05:31 PM

GfS - Now you are linking homosexuality and paedophilia. Why? And why do homosexuals need defending? They have done nothing wrong1

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 05:21 PM

From: Jack the Sailor - PM
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 12:36 PM

...Nor does he personally attack people

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton - PM
Date: 26 Feb 14 - 01:54 PM

...Cant believe anyone with a brain wrote that.

No, Jack. Ake never makes personal attacks. He is the perfect saint. I suppose you have covered yourself with 'not that I have seen'. Well, now you have seen.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:32 PM

Is pedophilia between an adult male, with an male child a form of homosexuality?...as opposed to a a pedophile who chooses little girls? ..or are you just cherry picking, and defending homosexuals, in general??

GfS

P.S. I don't see Akenaton or Dave, or Keith 'hating' anyone, as a group. HOWEVER, that being said, some of those on here tend to paint them as 'haters' and homophobic, as a means to create a bias, because a CONSENSUS can be formed, to give the accuser an excuse for not dealing with the FACTS, and shout the accused down, just to promote their baseless, erroneous 'point'!

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:05 PM

???

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:41 PM

Dr. Cemetry Made a good point about the statistics, in the manner described, any male contracting AIDS would be presumed to have got it from MSM, while there is no reason to conclude that there was NOT a percent who would get the virus by the same vectors as the rest of the community.

Actually it is a very silly point that no informed person would make.

People involved in high risk behaviour actually getting infected by indulging in much lower risk behaviour will never be significant.

The opposite case is not at all silly however.
To many people, especially from some Asian and African cultures, to be gay is the most deeply shaming thing imaginable.
They may well claim to have become infected in a different way.

So the only likely effect of this factor is to hide some MSM infections.
The true figures for MSMs would be even worse than reported.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:31 PM

Radio Lab: Patient Zero

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 02:24 PM

"Dr. Cemetry Made a good point about the statistics, in the manner described, any male contracting AIDS would be presumed to have got it from MSM, while there is no reason to conclude that there was NOT a percent who would get the virus by the same vectors as the rest of the community."

Jack could you explain what that statement means please? and how it relates to my views on the HIV epidemic among male homosexuals

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 02:19 PM

Jim, you are a liar.
I do not "dislike" or hate homosexuals.
I do not believe them to be "unnatural"....whatever that means.
I do not their behaviour would respond to "treatment" and I have never said such a thing.
Jack, I think the data which I quote, proves there is a huge problem associated with male to male sexual intercourse. Not just HIV, but all other sexually transmitted diseases are hugely over represented in the MSM demographic, in every country in the world, including African countries which have a high infection count due to a promiscuous heterosexual culture.
The MSM rates of infection are still many times worse.

Dave, I think Homosexuality is a perversion which is extremely dangerous for those males who practice it.
I do not think that homosexual have any more of an interest in paedophilia than heterosexuals.
The priest scandal and history suggest that they ARE attracted to youths and teenage boys, but that is NOT paedophilia, it is simple homosexual assault.
I view paedophilia as sexual contact between adults and pre-pubescent children.
I have also said that male homosexuals should be persuaded by their agencies, to present themselves for regular HIV testing and contact tracing.....before long, it should be seen as socially unacceptable Not to be tested, by the male homosexual demographic.....compulsion probably would not work, but already the health agencies like HPE and CDC, are pushing the "opt out" system of routine testing in "designated areas"
Anyone who does not see serious health problems associated with male homosexuality, must be blind, or wilfully stupid.

Guest Seaham Cemetery, says that he/she knows me personally, he/she has printed lies concerning my treatment of dogs in my care, as well as other stuff of a personal nature......he is also a stalker and a troll. I have had to have many of his posts removed by admin, who describe his posts as "extremely creepy"
Does this MO sound to anyone here, like a qualified doctor?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 12:36 PM

"
As a Christian who believes homosexuality tp be a replacement for paternal affection I doubt if it registers as 'ranting' on "

I think I see the problem here now. I did not say any such thing. I was talking about reasons for rebellion in young men and was speculating that gay young men brought up by authoritarian fathers, as I was, who did not believe being gay was a choice, as mine did, would be likelier to rebel than most. I had it bad enough and experienced many a rant because I liked movies and reading. My theory about this is not that of a homophobic or fundamentalist "Christian?" It stems from trying to understand the young man's point of view through the perspective of my own experience.

I don't know how you get the idea that what Akenaton is doing is ranting. But he doesn't curse or insult or go off on wild tangents. Nor does he personally attack people based on what they have said on other threads, not I have seen.

He does seem to constantly repeat erroneous conclusions that he has formed from UK Health Ministry data. A practice which is irritating, but in my opinion, not ranting. I'd like to see him back down because the data he produces does not support his premises. But I have not seen him rant.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 12:02 PM

"I don't see what Akenaton is doing as ranting."
Ake has a track record going back at least five years on this forum
He dislikes homosexuals, believes them to be unnatual and in need of treatment
As a Christian who believes homosexuality tp be a replacement for paternal affection I doubt if it registers as 'ranting' on your scale - it takes all kinds!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 10:33 AM

HPA produced the last several annual reports of HIV stats.
It is now part of PHE whose name is now on the last report, published last November.
There is no other source.
NHS Choices, National Aids Trust and Office National Statistics all use those same figures.

If there is another source, please identify it.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 08:51 AM

The statistics are just that. They are not conclusions. We extrapolate and draw conclusions at our peril.

Just what I have been saying for ages about umpteen other things as well! Thanks Jack - You put it far simpler and more concise that I ever did.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 08:43 AM

I don't see what Akenaton is doing as ranting. I believe that he is probably misinterpreting statistics to conveniently fit his argument. but he is quite calm about it.

Dr. Cemetry Made a good point about the statistics, in the manner described, any male contracting AIDS would be presumed to have got it from MSM, while there is no reason to conclude that there was NOT a percent who would get the virus by the same vectors as the rest of the community.

The statistics are just that. They are not conclusions. We extrapolate and draw conclusions at our peril.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 08:21 AM

"That means he admits it, which is a lie."
It means no such thing - he constantly rants on about homosexuals as he has here and elsewhere
I have yet to meet a racist like yourself who has admitted to being a racist, but their/own views make it clear that they/you are exactly that.
No lie - just taking what is written as read - from both of you
"More lies about me."
To sate that the male gender of an entire racial community is "implanted" is racist, whoever says it - you have said it therefore you are a racist.
You've requested me to put it up often enough - I'm happy to do so again if you wish
Or maybe you would explain how such a statement isn't racist
It really doesn't get any more difficult that that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Seaham cemetry
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 07:35 AM

I must admit, I hadn't realised the scale of the issue.

The issue being the elngths some people will go to in order to perpetuate evidence that fits their views.

There are many sources of data and Public Health England collate some, as per the work they inherited from The Health Protection Agency, and from next year, they will have data that HPA never collected. The NHS uses their data, chiefly because PHE is the national advisory body, and commentaries on the data are published by many bodies, including PHE, (archived HPA at present.)

The data Musket referred to can be found on the PHE site, NHS Choices site, and nicely put together in one page of links by this site;

NAtional Aids Trust historical statistics 2012

I am most curious as to why Keith A of Hertford (sic) insists on this trivial but important idea that the defunct HPA are the only source of data, when they wre the main advisor, using data supplied by others? If he knows something The Dept of Health doesn't, perhaps he would like to share it.

By the way, Dr Deplech doesn't work for HPA, but she is quoting the statistics Musket quoted above, and for some reason Keith is quoting the same figures in order to say Musket and I were lying? I do accept that PHE re for now calling that fucntion HPA, but it is a department in an organisation, it isnt a definitivee anything as it doesnt in itself exist. What's more, from April, its functions will be spread out anyway. Advisory function is moving to a core PHE role and public health observatory will pick up the anaysis. Use of HPA will, according to The Health Service Journal still be used casually, in the same way as health authority is now. I understand your confusion but your petulant insistence that HPA still exists can only be to spread doubt on the words of others. A pity, as Mudcat can be such a good place for debate when your tactics aren't on view.


Quoting figures that shape our work and then calling the only two people who declare their professional interest liars? A pity Musket isnt around at the moment, as I seem to be flying his flag, which is a bit presumptious. (He is one of my assessors after all!)

What point are you trying to make? Do you have any data to back it up? You seem to be using the same data as we do, but come to different conclusions. I suggest you submit a paper to BMJ, you are wasted here on a music website.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 07:08 AM

NHS Choices using HPA stats.

"The number of people with HIV in the UK is rising, and gay men are one of the highest risk groups.

Around 83,000 people in the UK are living with HIV. According to the Health Protection Agency, around a quarter (27%) of them don't know they have it.

Dr Valerie Deplech, an HIV expert at the Health Protection Agency, says: "We are seeing an ever-increasing pool of people living with HIV and AIDS in the UK." "

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/LGBhealth/Pages/HIV.aspx

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 06:51 AM

Cemetry (sic),
he then posted a link to an independent HIV advice website that has the figures,

No, he/you did not.
He/you have just made that up.

as well as saying they can be found on NHS CHoices and Public Health England websites.

NHS Choices use HPA/PHE figures.
"Public Health England" also use the same figures as HPA has been subsumed by them.
There are no other HIV infection stats. for UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 06:44 AM


"He has always strenuously denied being in the least homophobic."
He would say that, wouldn't he?

You stated "Ake has never made any secret of his homophobia"
That means he admits it, which is a lie.

Islamophobic racist that you are

And now you start telling lies about me.

- despite your "implants" and defence of racist sites...

More lies about me.

You are incapable of challenging what I actually say and have to quit the discussion, then weeks, months or years later misrepresent what I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Seaham Cemetry
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 06:43 AM

Yes, and Hitler would have denied being a monster...

I have been folowing this thread with interest. Partly because as a registrar doctor, I am doing my three month attachment in community sexual health clinics, (GU medicine.) I deliver the details of test results to people, both from screening and referral most days, together with next step advice.

Luckily, HIV is fairly rare, compared to most sexual health issues and in a large city, seeing about 40 patients per clinic, four clinics per week, I have yet to find a new HIV case. Statistically, I shall before the end of this month. A GP contacted me this morning over one they have picked up, a needle share in this case.

Musket quoted the figures for England for 2012/13, and when the naysayers called him a liar, he then posted a link to an independent HIV advice website that has the figures, as well as saying they can be found on NHS CHoices and Public Health England websites.

So I find it rather interesting to see spurious statistics are being banded around and the historical actual numbers dismissed as liberal propoganda. I won't be making a career in sexual health, (I major in endocrinology) but I do take a huge interest in it of course, as even low key issues such as chlamydia can cause long term issues and infertility. HIV and hepatitus are conditions you are reminded of each and every day for the rest of your life.

Some of the homophobia this website has to put up with by those equating sexual health with a small part of the population beggars belief. This is not a gay issue. The majority of people I see walking into the drop in clinics for screening are indeed gay, as historically they were a majority when it comes to sufferers, but even with that history, as you can see when you look up this thread, they may be the largest single group but they are by no means the majority. Added to whcih, as statistics have to always be treated with caution, NHS coding in some areas of the country class needle stick and needle share as MSM if the person ticks themselves as gay on the screening form. New nationally consistent coding criteria is something Public Health England are bringing out from this April, (and likewise under service level agreements for Scotland, Wales and NI.)

The moral, religious, social and sexual aspects of sexual health are perhaps interesting debating points if you can stomach some of the rather astonishing words used by presumably intelligent people, but when it comes to the clinical side, well.... You can't throw figures around because this is a field of healthcare with the most subjective data you can get. The Health Protection Agency had access to GP and hospital figures but had to estimate from commissioning statistics the confidential clinic figures. From April, a more representative prevalance dataset will be used, so in just over a year, the picture will, the experts think, look more like that forcast by one of our Profs, who you know as Musket. He is in The USA at present, presenting a paper on World Health Organisation alignment of screening. (To include cancers, his pet area etc. not by any means just STDs.)

I was told that last week, speaking to medical students, he mentioned Mudcat as an example of intelligence not being an indicator of objectivity. I'm not surprised...

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 06:34 AM

"He has always strenuously denied being in the least homophobic."
He would say that, wouldn't he?
You have always strenuously denied being the Islamophobic racist that you are - despite your "implants" and defence of racist sites...
The proof of the pudding...
A church denying the right of contraception to devout Catholics in areas where AIDS is rampant - that's what I call "incomprehensible".
Suggesting that this has nothing to do with religion is beyond words.
You (wisely) haven't mentioned Ake's support for Breivik's ideas I notice.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 05:22 AM

Ake has never made any secret of his homophobia

Completely untrue Jim.
He has always strenuously denied being in the least homophobic.
Your other accusations do not stand up either.
Why can you never just challenge what people actually say, instead of just slandering them?

I get the same thing from you.
We discuss something.
You fail to make your case, but later, on an unrelated thread, you start misrepresenting what was said weeks, months or years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 05:11 AM

Jim,
Christians dismissing the intervention of their Church's interference in the prevention of the spread of AIDS only confirms this.

Incomprehensible, but your only contribution to this discussion has been a contrived and ridiculous attempt to blame religion for the spread of HIV.
Religion is not at all an issue in this, and you need to find another platform to ride your favourite hobby-horse across.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:34 AM

No problem, Keith. I knew what you meant that time :-) Now, if only ake and the Daily Mail would stop trying to link people who are trying to do some good with paedophiles we really would be getting somewhere!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:10 AM

Er, I mean I agree that it would not be a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:09 AM

I agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:07 AM

Oh - And the link that you provide is very interesting. Forced registration and testing will work wonders to stop the stigma of AIDS won't it :-S

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:05 AM

I am sorry Dave.
I did not mean to suggest that you had made anything up.
I was referring to Musket who did make that claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:01 AM

He did not suggest that gays were paedophiles.
That was made up

Neither did I Keith. My exact words were

I feel it is quite a feeble attempt to link the same 'liberal agenda', as ake puts it, that accepts gay relationships, with paedophilia.

What he is doing is putting paedophilia in mind when talking about liberals and gays. A classic tactic for undermining someone is to try and link them with something wrong. That is what is happening. And I am afraid, Keith, that you are also doing it - When you say 'That was made up' in a response to me, you are implying I made it up. As I just proved, I did no such thing.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 04:01 AM

This article has a suggested explanation for the rise in young cases in US.
http://www.aidsmeds.com/articles/versatile_sex_1667_24534.shtml

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:46 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-staley/gay-on-gay-shaming-the-new-hiv-war_b_4856233.html

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:45 AM

"Ake is known for his views on liberalism."
Now this thread has arrived at where it was heading for in the first place
Ake has never made any secret of his homophobia - he is noted for his contempt for gays and their 'evil practices'.
His progressive attitude on world affairs was summed up by his suggestion that mass-murderer Anders Breivik had a point that should be listened to.
Support for someone on a thread professing to express concern for AIDS if paying lip-service to the subject in hand - homophobes circling their waggons in defence onf one anothers' views.
Christians dismissing the intervention of their Church's interference in the prevention of the spread of AIDS only confirms this.
Isn't it a always the case that hypocrites who start threads expressing concern usual corner themselves into having to expose their real vies - Homs Horror all over again.
Well done lads, you never disappoint me.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:44 AM

Here is a piece from Friday by a gay/AIDS activists that suggests Truvada, a PrEP drug, is in common use now as an alternative to condoms.
Also very revealing about a tension within the gay community about HIV status.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-staley/gay-on-gay-shaming-the-new-hiv-war_b_4856233.html

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 14 - 03:24 AM

Ake is known for his views on liberalism.
The media, and not just the Mail, has been discussing the activities of NCCL in seventies where gay rights were being promoted (good) and childrens' rights to sex with adults (bad) were being promoted simultaneously.

Of course Ake would use that against his reviled libs.
He did not suggest that gays were paedophiles.
That was made up.

Jack, thanks for that info.
I wondered why I had never heard of PrEP before.
I was also surprised that they made so much of "the biological factor" of anal sex.
As Musket rightly pointed out, that is not just a gay thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 09:43 PM

Pretty much explains you, Greg.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 09:41 PM

AIDS =Annally Injected Death Serum

AIDS =Adios Immoral Dick Sucker

These terms were frequently used in a So Cal athletic office in the mid 1980's.

Sincerely,

Gargoyle

In 2014 a few people have N1H1 influenza and everyone starts wearing masks.
Millions of people have aids and no one wears condoms

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 05:20 PM

Just in case you wonder why, this was a quote from ake a few posts back.

Someone on TV last night described the "liberal agenda" as "a sort of madness", they were discussing "liberal" attempts to have the age of sexual consent lowered to 10 years of age. :0(

As I said at the time, I feel it is quite a feeble attempt to link the same 'liberal agenda', as ake puts it, that accepts gay relationships, with paedophilia. If you don't see it as that, fair enough, but lots of people do.

Oh, and following up on your post One positive suggestion is that healthy MSM should be persuaded to take drugs that give some protection. This is called Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis or PrEP.
Is that a rights abuse?

No, it isn't. Note the word persuaded. It is not the same as forced. To be forced to do something against your will is an abuse of human rights. To be persuaded is something that will never happen on Mudcat but does not infringe anyone's liberties.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 05:10 PM

I do not think Akeneaton deserves the opprobrium heaped on him.

Fair enough. You don't. I do. Ain't life a bitch.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 04:32 PM

Quote from Keith A.

>>One positive suggestion is that healthy MSM should be persuaded to take drugs that give some protection. This is called Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis or PrEP.
Is that a rights abuse?
http://healthland.time.com/2012/07/20/hiv-continues-to-spread-among-gay-men-studies-show<<<

Not a rights abuse. But not a practical solution. I think the Time Article you posted is a PR piece for a drug company.

Here is what www.newyorker.com has to say.


Gilead provides assistance to purchase the drug, which has a sticker price of thirteen thousand dollars per year.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 14 - 04:13 PM

Ake is still guilty of branding gay men as promiscuous perverts and linking them to paedophilia

Musket accused him of making a link to paedophilia.
I thought that was a false accusation, as did Joe.

I do not think Akeneaton deserves the opprobrium heaped on him.