Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

1 in 5 Gay/Bi Men Have HIV, Nearly Half Don't Know
Web MD ^ | 9/23/2010 | Daniel J. DeNoon

Posted on 05/11/2012 3:14:05 AM PDT by tobyhill

One in five gay/bisexual men in the 21 U.S. cities hardest hit by AIDS have HIV infections -- and nearly half don't know it, a CDC survey finds.

Black gay/bi men and under-30 gay/bi adults are least likely to know of their HIV infections.

The findings show that HIV infection rates remain strikingly high among gay and bisexual men, says Kevin Fenton, MD, PhD, director of the CDC's center for HIV/AIDS, viral hepatitis, STD, and TB prevention.

"The number of new HIV infections each year is increasing among men who have sex with men [MSM], while remaining stable or decreasing in other groups," Fenton said in a statement. "Currently, MSM account for nearly half of the more than 1 million people living with HIV in the United States."

To get these numbers, CDC teams visited bars, dance clubs, and other venues frequented by gay and bisexual men in the 21 cities with the highest number of AIDS cases. They interviewed 8,153 self-identified gay and bisexual men who agreed to undergo HIV testing.

The findings: 19% of the men tested positive for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. 28% of black, 18% of Hispanic, and 16% of white men tested positive for HIV. 44% of the men who tested positive for HIV had been unaware of their infection. 59% of black, 46% of Hispanic, and 26% of white men who tested positive for HIV were unaware of their infection. 63% of the HIV-positive men age 18-29 were unaware of their infection.

(Excerpt) Read more at webmd.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: hiv; homosexualagenda; homosexualhiv
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

1 posted on 05/11/2012 3:14:06 AM PDT by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

One in five? They may be unaware, but they’ll soon find out.

I haven’t been paying attention, but these sound like explosive numbers to me. Has there been a huge upsurge because HIV has become considered a maintenance disease in the gay community, like high blood pressure?


2 posted on 05/11/2012 3:21:12 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
"men who have sex with men [MSM]"

I thought MSM was main-stream media.
3 posted on 05/11/2012 3:21:41 AM PDT by The people have spoken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

and what of other STDS, syphliss, ghonorea etc, i bet they are out of this world. Plus, the anti-biotics are becoming more and more resistence to these diseases.. but you will never hear about this...


4 posted on 05/11/2012 3:23:06 AM PDT by scbison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
So the CDC recommends routine HIV screening for everyone age 13 - 64 to cover for the necessary targeted screening of the at risk population. Did anyone screen Obama?
5 posted on 05/11/2012 3:26:01 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
While Obama is playing politics with “gay marriage”, there is an epidemic growing in America and this is subject to growing outside the gay community. M-M, M-F, F-M-M-M-M, M-F-F-F-F, etc.
6 posted on 05/11/2012 3:28:10 AM PDT by tobyhill (Conservatives are proud of themselves, Liberals lie about themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
Dunk Magic Dunk!

1984: The virus-AIDS hypothesis takes over.

By 1983 AIDS had become big enough in the American and European press to pique the interest of the influential infectious disease establishment, particularly the cancer virus hunters.

At that time the virus hunters had been enga- ged for over a decade in president Nixon’s War on Can- cer with unsuccessful attempts to find a human cancer virus (Duesberg 1996b; Fujimura 1996; de Harven 1999).

Now they were looking for new diseases that could be attributed to viruses (Duesberg 1987). Perhaps AIDS could at last yield clinically relevant lymphoma-, Kaposi’s sar- coma- or immunodeficiency-viruses (Duesberg 1996b).

Indeed, virus hunters from the CDC were the first to alert the public that AIDS may be “transmissible” (Francis et al 1983). A similar alert came from a French virus team, which had discovered a retrovirus in a homosexual man at risk for AIDS, which a year later became the accepted cause of AIDS (Barre-Sinoussi et al 1983).

News, that the cause of AIDS may be a virus, and thus transmissible to the general population, immediately set off a national panic that opened the doors for new sur- veillance programs by the CDC and predictably set off a race among virus hunters for the AIDS virus (Shilts 1987).

According to an international press conference called by the US Secretary of Health and Human Services in Washington DC on 23 April 1984, that race was won by government researchers from the NIH who had found in some AIDS patients antibodies against a new retrovirus closely related to a hypothetical human leukemia virus (Altman 1984).

The virus was introduced as fortunate fallout of the failed War on Cancer. The next day the new virus was already termed, the “AIDS virus”, by the New York Times (Altman 1984). Overnight nearly all AIDS researchers dropped the lifestyle-AIDS hypothesis to work on the new “AIDS virus”, which was already endorsed by the US government.

The CDC’s director of the Task retrovirologists officially sealed the seemingly tight package of a new “AIDS virus” and the CDC’s assumption that immunodeficiency was the common denominator of the 26 AIDS-defining diseases (table 1) by naming it, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) (Coffin et al 1986).

Even before the AIDS virus became the officially accep- ted cause of AIDS, the CDC had already made antibodies against the virus the only definitive criterion to diagnose any of the heterogeneous diseases as AIDS in 1985 (Cen- ters for Disease Control 1985, 1987, 1992).

Their unorthodox decision to use antibodies against the virus (normally functioning as a vaccine), instead of the virus, for the diagnosis of AIDS was based on the flawed analogy with some bacterial pathogens. For example, syphilis bacteria can be pathogenic despite the presence of antibodies, e.g. the Wassermann test for syphilis (Brandt 1988).

But viruses are typically unable to enter cells in the presence of anti-viral antibodies – the basis for the effectiveness of Jennerian vaccines. Because of the CDC’s decision, AIDS is diagnosed worldwide if antibody against (!) HIV, rather than HIV, is detectable in a patient along with any of the CDC’s 26 diseases.

Since 1992 even low T-cell counts are diagnosed as a condition, termed “HIV/AIDS”, which is treatable with anti-HIV drugs provided it occurs in the presence of antibodies against HIV (Centers for Disease Control 1992), (see table 1, and § 4.2).

Discrepancies between the predictions of the virus-AIDS hypothesis and the facts Despite its spectacular birthday the HIV-AIDS hypothe- sis has remained entirely unproductive to this date: There is as yet no anti-HIV-AIDS vaccine, no effective preven- tion and not a single AIDS patient has ever been cured – the hallmarks of a flawed hypothesis.

Indeed the hypo- thesis was born with several serious birth defects and has developed further defects since; most of these should have given pause to HIV-AIDS researchers to rethink and reconsider. However, in the race to claim a share of the new viral cause for AIDS and of virus-based AIDS treat- ments, “The Trojan horse of emergency” (Szasz 2001) was saddled so quickly that there was little time and no interest to address these defects, not even the most fundamental ones (Weiss and Jaffe 1990; Cohen 1994; O’Brien 1997).

An analysis of the defects of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis based on its failure to predict AIDS facts is shown in table 4. Our analysis is based on the most recent and most authoritative case made for the HIV-AIDS hypothe- sis since 1984, namely the Durban Declaration that was published in Nature in 2000 and has been signed by “over 5,000 people, including Nobel prizewinners” (The Durban Declaration 2000).

It can be seen in table 4 that the HIV-hypothesis fails to predict 17 specific facts of AIDS. The most fundamental discrepancy between the HIV-AIDS hypothesis and the facts is the paradox, that a latent, non-cytopathic and immunologically neutralized retrovirus [a virus that is inherently not cytopathic (Duesberg 1987)], that is only present in less than 1 out of 500 susceptible T-cells and rarely expressed in a few of those, would cause a plethora of fatal diseases in sexually active, young men and women.

And, that the plethora of the diseases attributed to this virus would not show up for 5–10 years after infection (table 4). As a re- sult of the many discrepancies between the HIV hypothe- sis and the facts, we conclude that HIV is not sufficient for AIDS, and is most compatible with being a passenger virus.

Surprisingly our conclusion is supported by a survey of AIDS researchers conducted by the New York Times, shortly after the publication of the Durban Declaration. At the 20th anniversary of AIDS, on 30 January 2001, the New York Times interviewed a dozen leading AIDS researchers for an article that turned into a list of que- stions, “The AIDS questions that linger” (Altman 2001a), similar to those asked by us in table 4:

“In the 20 years since the first cases of AIDS were detected, scientists say they have learned more about this viral disease than any other, and few have dispu- ted the claim. … Despite the gains … experts say reviewing unanswered questions could prove useful as a measure of progress for AIDS and other diseases. Such a list could fill a newspaper, and even then would create debate. (E.g.): How does H.I.V. subvert the immune system? . . . Why does AIDS predispose infec- ted persons to certain types of cancer and infections and not others? . . . Dr Anthony S Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said, ‘It is the rare person who gets up and strips himself of his personal agenda and articulates what we really do not know because by saying that they would diminish the impact of their own work, which is their agenda’. (Regarding anti-HIV medica- tions:) . . . the new drugs do not completely eliminate H.I.V. from the body, so the medicines, which can have dangerous side effects, will have to be taken for a lifetime and perhaps changed to combat resistance.

The treatments are now so complicated that it is diffi- cult, expensive and time-consuming to answer basic and practical questions. What combinations of drugs should be started first and when? Why do side effects like unusual accumulations of fat in the abdomen and neck develop? . . . Anti-H.I.V. drugs suppress replica- tion of the virus, which should give the functioning parts of the immune system a chance to eliminate re- maining virus. That does not happen. ‘So something is bizarre about that, that we don’t understand’, Dr Fauci said. Is a vaccine possible? . . . many unanswered questions exist about whether and when one can be developed.”

Thus HIV-AIDS researchers have not solved the discre- pancies and paradoxes of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, but still do not follow the scientific method of searching for alternative explanations (Costello 1995).

Since 19 years of HIV-AIDS research have failed to produce tangible benefits for AIDS patients and risk groups, and since there are no paradoxes in nature only flawed hypotheses, the scientific method calls for an alternative, testable hypothesis. Here we offer one such hypothesis. Our hypothesis extends the early, and now abandoned “lifestyle” hypothesis (§ 2) and subsequent drug-AIDS hypotheses from us and others (Duesberg 1992; Duesberg and Rasnick 1998).

4. Chemical AIDS.

“Historically, the first step in determining the cause of any disease has always been to find out if there is any- thing, apart from the disease itself, that sufferers have in common” (Cairns 1978). However, the traditional search for the cause is only completed, if something that suf- ferers have in common can also be shown to cause the disease; in other words if Koch’s postulates can be ful- filled (Merriam-Webster 1965).

This is true for viruses just as much as for drugs. Following this tradition, we try here to provide proof of principle for our drug and mal- nutrition hypothesis of AIDS – alias chemical AIDS.

4.1 The chemical-AIDS hypothesis and its predictions The chemical-AIDS hypothesis proposes that the AIDS epidemics of the US and Europe are caused by recreatio- nal drugs, alias lifestyle, and anti-HIV drugs (Duesberg.

1. Since HIV is “the sole cause of AIDS”, it must be abundant in AIDS patients based on “exactly the same criteria as for other viral diseases.”

But, only antibodies against HIV are found in most patients (1–7)**. Therefore, “HIV infection is identified in blood by detecting antibodies, gene sequences, or viral isolation.” But, HIV can only be “isolated” from rare, la- tently infected lymphocytes that have been cultured for weeks in vitro – away from the antibodies of the human host (8). Thus HIV behaves like a latent passenger virus.

2. Since HIV is “the sole cause of AIDS”, there is no AIDS in HIV-free people.

But, the AIDS literature has described at least 4621 HIV- free AIDS cases according to one survey – irrespective of, or in agreement with allowances made by the CDC for HIV-free AIDS cases (55).

3. The retrovirus HIV causes immunodeficiency by killing T-cells (1–3). But, retroviruses do not kill cells because they depend on viable cells for the replication of their RNA from viral DNA integrated into cellular DNA (4, 25). Thus, T-cells infected in vitro thrive, and those patented to mass-pro- duce HIV for the detection of HIV antibodies and diag- nosis of AIDS are immortal (9–15)!

4. Following “exactly the same criteria as for other viral disea- ses”, HIV causes AIDS by killing more T-cells than the body can replace. Thus T-cells or “CD4 lymphocytes . . . become depleted in people with AIDS”.

But, even in patients dying from AIDS less than 1 in 500 of the T-cells “that become depleted” are ever infected by HIV (16–20, 54). This rate of infection is the hallmark of a latent passenger virus (21).

5. With an RNA of 9 kilobases, just like polio virus, HIV should be able to cause one specific disease, or no disease if it is a passenger (22).

But, HIV is said to be “the sole cause of AIDS”, or of 26 different immunodeficiency and non-immunodeficiency diseases, all of which also occur without HIV (table 2). Thus there is not one HIV-specific disease, which is the definition of a passenger virus!

6. All viruses are most pathogenic prior to anti-viral immunity. Therefore, preemptive immunization with Jennerian vaccines is used to protect against all viral diseases since 1798.

But, AIDS is observed – by definition – only after anti- HIV immunity is established, a positive HIV/AIDS test (23). Thus HIV cannot cause AIDS by “the same criteria” as conventional viruses.

7. HIV needs “5–10 years” from establishing antiviral immu- nity to cause AIDS.

But, HIV replicates in 1 day, generating over 100 new HIVs per cell (24, 25). Accordingly, HIV is immunogenic, i.e. bio- chemically most active, within weeks after infection (26, 27). Thus, based on conventional criteria “for other viral disea- ses”, HIV should also cause AIDS within weeks – if it could.

8. “Most people with HIV infection show signs of AIDS within 5–10 years” – the justification for prophylaxis of AIDS with the DNA chain terminator AZT (§ 4).

But, of “34⋅3 million . . . with HIV worldwide” only 1⋅4% [= 471,457 (obtained by substracting the WHO’s cumulative total of 1999 from that of 2000)] developed AIDS in 2000, and similarly low percentages prevailed in all previous years (28). Likewise, in 1985, only 1⋅2% of the 1 million US citizens with HIV developed AIDS (29, 30). Since an annual incidence of 1⋅2–1⋅4% of all 26 AIDS defining diseases combined is no more than the normal mortality in the US and Europe (life ex- pectancy of 75 years), HIV must be a passenger virus.

9. A vaccine against HIV should (“is hoped” to) prevent AIDS – the reason why AIDS researchers try to develop an AIDS vaccine since 1984 (31).

But, despite enormous efforts there is no such vaccine to this day (31). Moreover, since AIDS occurs by definition only in the presence of natural antibodies against HIV (§ 3), and since natural antibodies are so effective that no HIV is detectable in AIDS patients (see No. 1), even the hopes for a vaccine are irrational.

10. HIV, like other viruses, survives by transmission from host to host, which is said to be mediated “through sexual con- tact”.

But, only 1 in 1000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits HIV (32–34), and only 1 of 275 US citizens is HIV-infec- ted (29, 30), (figure 1b). Therefore, an average un-infected US citizen needs 275,000 random “sexual contacts” to get infected and spread HIV – an unlikely basis for an epidemic!

11. “AIDS spreads by infection” of HIV.

But, contrary to the spread of AIDS, there is no “spread” of HIV in the US. In the US HIV infections have remained constant at 1 million from 1985 (29) until now (30), (see also The Durban Declaration and figure 1b). By contrast, AIDS has increased from 1981 until 1992 and has decli- ned ever since (figure 1a).

12. Many of the 3 million people who annually receive blood trans- fusions in the US for life-threatening diseases (51), should have developed AIDS from HIV-infected blood donors prior to the elimination of HIV from the blood supply in 1985.

But there was no increase in AIDS-defining diseases in HIV-positive transfusion recipients in the AIDS era (52), and no AIDS-defining Kaposi’s sarcoma has ever been observed in millions of transfusion recipients (53).

13. Doctors are at high risk to contract AIDS from patients, HIV researchers from virus preparations, wives of HIV-positive hemophiliacs from husbands, and prostitutes from clients – particularly since there is no HIV vaccine.

But, in the peer-reviewed literature there is not one doctor or nurse who has ever contracted AIDS (not just HIV) from the over 816,000 AIDS patients recorded in the US in 22 years (30). Not one of over ten thousand HIV researchers has con- tracted AIDS. Wives of hemophiliacs do not get AIDS (35). And there is no AIDS-epidemic in prostitutes (36–38). Thus AIDS is not contagious (39, 40).

14. Viral AIDS – like all viral/microbial epidemics in the past (41–43) – should spread randomly in a population.

But, in the US and Europe AIDS is restricted since 1981 to two main risk groups, intravenous drug users and male homosexual drug users (§ 1 and 4).

15. A viral AIDS epidemic should form a classical, bell-shaped chronological curve (41–43), rising exponentially via virus spread and declining exponentially via natural immunity, within months (see figure 3a).

But, AIDS has been increasing slowly since 1981 for 12 years and is now declining since 1993 (figure 1a), just like a lifestyle epidemic, as for example lung cancer from smoking (figure 3b).

16. AIDS should be a pediatric epidemic now, because HIV is transmitted “from mother to infant” at rates of 25–50% (44– 49), and because “34⋅3 million people worldwide” were al- ready infected in 2000. To reduce the high maternal trans- mission rate HIV-antibody-positive pregnant mothers are treated with AZT for up to 6 months prior to birth (§ 4).

But, less than 1% of AIDS in the US and Europe is pedia- tric (30, 50). Thus HIV must be a passenger virus in new- borns.

17. “HIV recognizes no social, political or geographic bor- ders” – just like all other viruses.

But, the presumably HIV-caused AIDS epidemics of Africa and of the US and Europe differ both clinically and epidemiologically (§ 1, table 2). The US/European epi- demic is highly nonrandom, 80% male and restricted to abnormal risk groups, whereas the African epidemic is random.

7 posted on 05/11/2012 3:33:46 AM PDT by Doc Savage ("I've shot people I like a lot more,...for a lot less!" Raylan Givins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Has the US always had so many gays?
I was propositioned by two, back in the 70s.
When at university (Tennessee) in the 60s, I remember a street in Knoxville where “queers” as they were called, hung out, but to me it was just an isolated incidence.
I never quite understood Homosexuals.
There are many from age 15 and up here in the Philippines.


8 posted on 05/11/2012 3:37:33 AM PDT by AlexW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlexW
The problem is that there is only 2% gays in America but they are 95% of the problem, especially when they are “bi men”. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama came out of the closet and states he has HIV.
9 posted on 05/11/2012 3:44:17 AM PDT by tobyhill (Conservatives are proud of themselves, Liberals lie about themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

I’m actually surprised the infection rate is that low; given the rates of alcohol/drug abuse in that group, coupled with the urge to molest/be molested by complete strangers (the “monogamous couple” nonsense is the exception, not the rule), I thought the rate wuld be much higher - there is a reason they have shorter lifespans.


10 posted on 05/11/2012 3:54:28 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The people have spoken
"men who have sex with men [MSM]" I thought MSM was main-stream media.

There's enough overlap that it doesn't matter.

11 posted on 05/11/2012 3:55:16 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: scbison

You’re right; there is a wide range of other illnesses this group is at high risk for.


12 posted on 05/11/2012 3:55:49 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I did make a mistake..I said 70s...I meant 60s.
Yes, I would not be at all surprised if Obumbo is gay...more likely Bi.


13 posted on 05/11/2012 3:56:04 AM PDT by AlexW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Truth29
Did anyone screen Obama?

He's looking mighty thin these days. And a little peaked.

14 posted on 05/11/2012 3:57:51 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
"Currently, MSM account for nearly half of the more than 1 million people living with HIV in the United States."

500K gay men with AIDS. They are 20% of the gay population. That calculates the gay population as being around 2.5M men, or about 2% of the adult male population.

That 20% AIDS figure means that any adult male homosexual attempting to molest your child should be treated as a deadly threat.

15 posted on 05/11/2012 4:00:57 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

If Obama had a son, he’d have HIV and not know it.


16 posted on 05/11/2012 4:01:46 AM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I thought MSM stands for Main Stream Media.


17 posted on 05/11/2012 4:03:07 AM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The people have spoken

I am way behind the eight ball.


18 posted on 05/11/2012 4:04:41 AM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

If they don’t know, how does anyone else know?


19 posted on 05/11/2012 4:08:13 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

don’t be homo. check

don’t hang out with liberals. check

amazing how following these two little rules will make your life so much better


20 posted on 05/11/2012 4:08:24 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Yeah but homosexuality is still a perfectly safe and natural expression of love with low risks to get disesease and that’s why the gays should be allowed to math. /sarc


21 posted on 05/11/2012 4:09:17 AM PDT by erod (This Chicagoan will crawl over broken glass to vote the fake Chicagoan Obama out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Funny that you don’t see the MSM whining about the medical costs of HIV—though it must be astronomical.


22 posted on 05/11/2012 4:10:07 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]





After I win re-election I will be able to be more flexible




23 posted on 05/11/2012 4:11:59 AM PDT by devolve (------ ---- ---------toss_subhumans_in_Hannibal*s_wild_boar_pit----------- ---------------------)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
The findings: 19% of the men tested positive for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. 28% of black, 18% of Hispanic, and 16% of white men tested positive for HIV.

Good news this morning, the self inflicted thinning of the fag herd.

How's that unprotected anal sex working out for them?

24 posted on 05/11/2012 4:17:54 AM PDT by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorist savages, start today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: devolve

Solution...change behavior.


25 posted on 05/11/2012 4:19:50 AM PDT by FES0844
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

this is not the statistic that I need to know... what I need to know is what percentage of HIV/Aids sufferers are gay/bi..


26 posted on 05/11/2012 4:23:09 AM PDT by joe fonebone (If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you are still voting for evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
"Good news this morning, the self inflicted thinning of the fag herd."

Your statement makes me think of two bumper stickers I saw on a dirt bike once. One simply said "Aids cures fags", but the other one was priceless. It had a pic of the rabbit on the Trix cereal boxes, and the caption said "Silly faggot...dicks are for chicks".

27 posted on 05/11/2012 4:30:49 AM PDT by Mich Patriot (Today if you invent a better mousetrap, the government comes along with a better mouse. RReagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
63% of the HIV-positive men age 18-29 were unaware of their infection.

Match this with the number of men and women in the same age range who are unaware that they have herpes.

We have raised an entire generation of kids who have been encouraged to be promiscuous and not really consider that they will acquire an incurable sexual disease.

If someone has even a season of one year where they go to parties and clubs and hooks up with whoever they find that night, there is a very high chance that they will end up diseased for the rest of their lives. And our society doesn't try to get that message across to them.

It's really sad that oreos and cigarettes are considered horrible health risks that must be stopped, but sexual diseases are something from bad 70s after-school specials.

28 posted on 05/11/2012 4:36:03 AM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

1 in 5 ? Last time I heard it was 1 in 10 This whole “take in the rear for a beer thing” is being pushed by BIG PHARMA making money off of and encouraging dangerous disgusting unhealthy sexual pracrices. Oh ! That’s right according to a former president no less doing oral sex sex isn’t sex.

The Creator didn’t put those stimulations in US for physical gratification they’re there for procreation .That’s why misuse is a sin


29 posted on 05/11/2012 4:46:17 AM PDT by mosesdapoet (The best way to punish a - country is let professors run it. Fredrick the Great p/p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

...and people give me crap for smoking yet this “lifestyle” is 3x more dangerous.


30 posted on 05/11/2012 4:50:22 AM PDT by TheRhinelander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Here’s a part of the financial motive to have same sex marriage made legal. By doing so those of a high risk lifestyle enter a larger group, essentially to spread the cost of their lifestyle upon normal married couples. I’ve nothing against gays forming permanent unions but do object to their calling it “Marriage” for financial motivation and changing an established definition.


31 posted on 05/11/2012 4:59:03 AM PDT by Boomer One
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
To get these numbers, CDC teams visited bars, dance clubs, and other venues frequented by gay and bisexual men in the 21 cities with the highest number of AIDS cases....

Then the headline is misleading. This ignores gay men who don't go to bars, dance clubs, etc. and it ignores gay men who live outside the 21 AIDS hot spots. It would be like assessing Democrats by sampling only Berkeley and The Village. Conclusions about a self-selecting sample should be properly qualified. Like those car insurance adds about how much money people saved by switching "on average". Well, who is going to switch to a company that charges more?

For example, one of my daughter's friends and one of my high school classmates have long-term relationships with other men and they go to work each day and come home like the rest of us. They don't go out "clubbing" looking for sex. They would be missed by this sampling even though they live in NYC, which is likely in the top 21.

32 posted on 05/11/2012 5:03:05 AM PDT by Dilbert56 (Harry Reid, D-Nev.: "We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

There’s no such thing as bisexual.

Once you’ve crossed that line you’re simply a pole smoking homo.


33 posted on 05/11/2012 5:03:39 AM PDT by TSgt (The only reason I have one in the chamber at all times, is because it is impossible to have two in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Newsflash:

Nearly 0 in 1000000 straight, monogamous, non-IV drug using men are infected with HIV.

Scientists are baffled.


34 posted on 05/11/2012 5:03:57 AM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

How many of those who do know don’t care about passing it on? A large percent, I’d imagine.


35 posted on 05/11/2012 5:06:20 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The people have spoken

Both are very diseased.


36 posted on 05/11/2012 5:07:22 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TSgt

bump for later commenting


37 posted on 05/11/2012 5:32:26 AM PDT by freebird5850 (Just don't have a tagline today. This administration makes me quite sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
"this is not the statistic that I need to know... what I need to know is what percentage of HIV/Aids sufferers are gay/bi."

Everything from the CDC to Conservapedia suggests it's just over half. Makes no sense. Underreporting Amish on the down low? I don't know.

This following stat doesn't makes sense, either, but it's an issue waiting to be re-awakened:

"In 1995, 44 percent of Americans believed that AIDS was the most urgent health problem facing the nation. In 2009, only six percent of people believed the same."

38 posted on 05/11/2012 6:00:04 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert56

Headline writers are traditionally the lightweights in any newsroom. Some of them were likely part of this study...


39 posted on 05/11/2012 6:12:36 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Perhaps the Surgeon General needs to place a warning label above every glory hole in every gay bar.


40 posted on 05/11/2012 6:23:05 AM PDT by Buckeye Battle Cry (Not Romney - Not ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSgt; tobyhill
There’s no such thing as bisexual.

Lot's of bi women out there-many if not most are married. I would say 15% is about accurate...and their hubbies do not know.

And I would say more than 15% women have tried it in HS, college etc but never did it again...went through a experimentation stage

Go to any swingers site and type in your zip code and see how many women are looking for other women in your area. You will be shocked and most people don't have clue how rampant this is. I typed in my hometown Zip and in my town of 4000 people over 60 popped up and that was just on that site. I knew many of these women or knew of them.

41 posted on 05/11/2012 7:02:17 AM PDT by trailhkr1 (All you need to know about Zimmerman, innocent = riots, manslaughter = riots, guilty = riots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
There’s no such thing as bisexual.

"You either .... .... or you do not .... ...., there is no in-between."

42 posted on 05/11/2012 7:03:35 AM PDT by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: scbison
and what of other STDS, syphliss, ghonorea etc, i bet they are out of this world. Plus, the anti-biotics are becoming more and more resistence to these diseases.. but you will never hear about this...

I get a survey every year from my health insurer, if I don’t fill it out they will raise my premiums.

They ask things like, what I eat and how much of it, how I exercise and how often, do I use tobacco products, alcohol?

I quit smoking about 4 years ago but prior to that, I simply lied on the form and said that I had never smoked and do not drink alcoholic beverages. The part about alcoholic beverages is true but it’s still none of their business.

They have already raised the rates of admitted tobacco users. Alcohol is next, no matter if you drink in moderation or not. Then will come raises for people who don’t exercise, then for people who don’t eat their correct amount of fruit and veggies.

The only question that is notably absent is whether I lead the queer life style, a known and very expensive, for insurers, killer.

They want to know how many servings of fruit I eat but can't ask if I am one.

43 posted on 05/11/2012 7:06:40 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (Romney vs. Obama? One of them has to lose, I'll rejoice in that fact, whichever it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Doc Savage

How does this hypothesis address those who have contracted AIDS from needle sticks and blood transfusions?


44 posted on 05/11/2012 7:50:25 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: palmer

LOL!


45 posted on 05/11/2012 8:02:47 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll protect your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
Gay
46 posted on 05/11/2012 8:04:08 AM PDT by sunny48 (America, home of the offended)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
Amazingly, the homo-perverts are using these numbers to bolster the "civil rights" of HIV/AIDS:
- "rights" to absolute secrecy as to your status, EVEN REGARDING SEXUAL PARTNERS
- "rights" to work for any employer regardless of employer's objections based on conscience and expensiveness of coverage and loss of work (keep in mind that smokers, a much less risky group, are often not hired.)
- "rights" to free, life-long, outrageously expensive testing and treatment for the disease
- "rights" even to donate blood with impunity even though in this very high-risk group.

It can convincingly be proven that homo groups WANT these numbers to go up - just to bolster the fiction that "it's everyone's problem."

47 posted on 05/11/2012 8:20:30 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: palmer
I thought MSM stands for Main Stream Media.

Main Stream Media, men who have sex with men - same thing.

48 posted on 05/11/2012 8:25:47 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill; P-Marlowe; Lancey Howard; wagglebee; cripplecreek; SoConPubbie; Patton@Bastogne

And in the military, this is the group from whom emergency blood will be taken to save the life of Your children/grandchildren.

And don’t give me the “they get tested” stuff. Infection and virulence are separated by just a couple months while testing takes place once every other year and ~sometimes prior to a deployment.

Gays are notoriously promiscuous, and you should have no doubt that they will find one another even when deployed. Who will it come from?... everyone from local population to short-term visitors from the government, military, business, etc. from our country and from others.

And Romney has supported a gay military in the past, and he says that now he won’t change what’s going on. Obama, of course, is solidly in favor of a gay military.

Santorum was outspoken against it, but he’s out of the race.

That leaves Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party as the only conservative running.


49 posted on 05/11/2012 8:44:37 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode not Evil (the lesser of 2 evils is still evil))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Thanks for the ping.
Pray for America. I think this nation may be over and the Democrats have won.


50 posted on 05/11/2012 8:48:44 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson