Skip to comments.World AIDS Day: Reflections on the Pandemic
Posted on 01/02/2003 5:49:29 AM PST by Remedy
December 1 is now traditionally called World AIDS Day, a time of remembrance for those individuals who have died from AIDS, a time to assess the current status of the epidemic, and a time to evaluate the effectiveness of our efforts to control it. Now well into the third decade since the recognition of AIDS, it is estimated that more than 70 million people have been infected with HIV, clearly making this one of the worst epidemics of our time. Projections for the next ten years suggest that the situation will become even more serious as we reach 100 million infected individuals.
As part of its World AIDS Day assessment, UNAIDS released its annual report on the status of the global AIDS epidemic, AIDS Epidemic Update, December 2002. This article will summarize highlights from the report. The report, which was released jointly with the WHO, identified four major trends in the epidemic:
Approximately 76,000 people became infected with HIV in the high-income countries in 2002 resulting in 1.6 million people living with HIV. The introduction of ART since 1996 has dramatically reduced HIV/AIDS-related mortality, although this trend has leveled off in the past two years. Longer survival has led to a steady increase in the number of people living with HIV in high-income countries. About 500,000 people were receiving ART through 2002. However, there has also been a continued shift of the epidemic into marginalized populations that lack access to the services and information needed to protect themselves against infection. Furthermore, there has been a marked increase in heterosexual transmission. In the U.S, African Americans now account for an estimated 54% of all new HIV infections. AIDS-related illnesses remain the leading cause of death for African American men aged 25 to 44 and the third leading cause of death for Hispanic men.
Complacency has increased and prevention efforts have dwindled as a result of declining mortality. Multiple studies within these countries illustrate that prevention efforts are not reaching the large number of at-risk individuals who engage in unsafe sex. High rates of sexually transmitted infection among men who have sex with men (MSM) have been documented in Australia, Great Britain, Canada, and the United States. Rates of gonorrhea, syphilis, and chlamydia have more than doubled in the last five years among MSM in selected cities. Renewed efforts to enhance prevention efforts, particularly in HIV care clinics are being echoed throughout all of these countries.
Next Article: 2001 Syphilis Rates Show Increase: Does This Portend a New Wave of HIV Infections?
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released their final surveillance summary for 2001 syphilis rates in the U.S. in November of this year: Primary and secondary syphilis rates rose for the first time since 1990. Though the overall increase was slight (2.2 cases per 100,000 up from 2.1 per 100,000 in 2000), the increase occurs in the context of a very aggressive national syphilis elimination campaign launched in 1999. The national goal of syphilis elimination is to improve local capacity to respond to every syphilis case so there is no evidence of sustained transmission after an infectious case is detected (i.e., no transmission after 90 days of the report of an imported index case). This goal is numerically comparable to a reduction in the overall number of primary/secondary syphilis cases to less than 1000 by the year 2005. There were 6103 total cases of primary/secondary syphilis in 2001. Analysis of Current Trends What Might the Current Situation Mean for HIV Transmission? What Does This Mean for HIV Treatment Providers? Summary
In 2001, rates of syphilis increased 15% among men and decreased 18% among women; the male: female ratio of syphilis cases increased 50% (from 1.4 to 2.1). Public health surveillance data do not traditionally include behavioral variables, such as same-sex contact among the men who are represented among reported syphilis cases. However, this rising M:F trend, coupled with the explosive outbreaks of syphilis among men who have sex with other men (MSM) reported in several large U.S. cities [MMWR 2001; 50:117; MMWR 2002; 51:853] indicates that the rise in U.S. syphilis rates for 2001 is due to new epidemics of syphilis among MSM.
Biologic and epidemiologic data support the concept that untreated syphilis biologically enhances HIV transmission. Data from cities reporting new epidemics of syphilis in the MSM community suggest that an increasing proportion of persons with syphilis are also HIV-infected compared to those diagnosed with syphilis in prior years. Thus, rising rates of syphilis among MSM may be a marker of changes in sexual practices among both HIV-infected and -uninfected individuals in this era of HAART and treatment optimism. This may well indicate increasing HIV transmission in many MSM communities.
The CDC surveillance summary underscores the importance of maintaining a high level of suspicion for syphilis. This remains true for all clinicians, but most importantly for clinicians who treat HIV infected patients. Clinicians should be aware that the growing connectivity of this information age allows for diverse opportunities for their patients to meet sex partners in distant cities or on distant continents: Epidemics of syphilis have been described among individuals who met in Internet-based chat rooms or through website postings, so that syphilis epidemics can be rapidly introduced tomorrow into jurisdictions reporting low syphilis morbidity today. Providers should also be aware that the clinical manifestations of syphilis may be atypical: Because oral sex is recognized to be a lower risk activity than other acts with respect to HIV transmission, clinical presentations such as oral chancres (appearing first at the site of T. pallidum inoculation) should always trigger a discussion of sexual risk behavior and serologic testing for syphilis. A request by a patient for HIV testing should prompt syphilis testing as well, and conversely, HIV testing should be recommended for any person treated for syphilis.
In past decades, rising rates of syphilis have preceded rising rates of HIV among specific populations. Though intensification of syphilis control and prevention efforts have markedly reduced syphilis rates in groups most impacted by syphilis in the past decade, these gains have been offset by rising rates among MSM. Developing effective new strategies for education, screening, and risk reduction in the MSM population will be necessary to meet syphilis elimination goals in the U.S.
Analysis of Current Trends
What Might the Current Situation Mean for HIV Transmission?
What Does This Mean for HIV Treatment Providers?
(Excerpt) Read more at hopkins-aids.edu ...
The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a medical horror story --imagine exchanging saliva, feces, semen and/or blood with dozens of different men each year. Imagine drinking urine, ingesting feces and experiencing rectal trauma on a regular basis. Often these encounters occur while the participants are drunk, high, and/or in an orgy setting. Further, many of them occur in extremely unsanitary places (bathrooms, dirty peep shows), or, because homosexuals travel so frequently, in other parts of the world.
Every year, a quarter or more of homosexuals visit another country. Fresh American germs get taken to Europe, Africa and Asia. And fresh pathogens from these continents come here. Foreign homosexuals regularly visit the U.S. and participate in this biological swapmeet.
Most of the 6,349 Americans who got AIDS from contaminated blood as of 1992, received it from homosexuals and most of the women in California who got AIDS through heterosexual activity got it from men who engaged in homosexual behavior. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Linda Valleroy and colleagues did a five-year CDC study of 3,492 men in seven US cities who have sex with men, and found one in six also had sex with women.
A quarter of those men, aged 15 to 22, said they recently had unprotected sex with both men and women, Valleroys team told the 13th International AIDS Conference. She said nearly seven percent of the men in the study were HIV positive.
"The study confirms that young bisexual men are a bridge for HIV transmission to women," the CDC said in a statement.
CDC researchers said they were confirming studies that show a worrying rise in risky behaviour among gay and bisexual men who are still the main victims of HIV in the United States.
Dr Paul Denning of the CDC and colleagues said they had interviewed 1,942 gay or bisexual men living in 12 cities who had just been diagnosed with HIV.
They said 19 percent had at least one episode of unprotected anal sex the riskiest sexual behaviour in the year before in 1997 and 1998. That is a 50 percent rise from 1995 and 1996, when only 13 percent of men said they had unprotected anal sex.
"Gay men of all ages remain at an alarming risk," Dr David Holtgrave of the CDC told a news conference.
He said one problem was that men believed drug cocktails that suppress the virus prevented its spread. "They perceive that sex partners with low viral loads present less risk than men with high viral loads," Holtgrave said.
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
The plague abettors Through 20 years of political correctness and political pressure, the gay establishment has caused AIDS to spread like wildfire. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do FECAL SEX About 80% of gays (see Table) admit to licking and/or inserting their tongues into the anus of partners and thus ingesting medically significant amounts of feces. Those who eat or wallow in it are probably at even greater risk. In the diary study,5 70% of the gays had engaged in this activity--half regularly over 6 months. Result? --the "annual incidence of hepatitis A in...homosexual men was 22 percent, whereas no heterosexual men acquired hepatitis A." In 1992,26 it was noted that the proportion of London gays engaging in oral/anal sex had not declined since 1984. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
The New American - A Question of Morality - June 8, 1998 Dr. Edward R. Annis, a distinguished medical doctor and a past president of the American Medical Association, writes in his book Code Blue: Health Care in Crisis (1993) that, "The anus and rectum are not sexual organs; they are the drainpipe of the body's sewer. Anyone foolish enough to play in a sewer can expect unhealthy consequences." Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
First, men having sex with men are practicing anal intercourse, or sodomy. The anus and rectum are not suited to receive the penis. The anus functions to control emission of gases and expulsion of feces from the intestine. The ring of muscles called the anal sphincter serves as a valve, meant to direct one-way expulsion. The excretory system carries waste, putrefying matter, and live disease captured and expelled by the body¹s defenses. These organs are designed wondrously for expulsion, not penetration. When penetrated by the penis, the anus and rectum reflexively contract. But neither of these organs secrete any lubrication, as does the female vagina. Anal intercourse results in minute tears and lesions deep in these delicate interior tissues, causing bleeding and giving disease germs and virus return access to the man¹s bloodstream.
Medical records show that gays have HIV/AIDS and STDs disproportionately higher than the rest of the population. Reported among ³MSM,² men having sex with men, are 82.2 percent of California¹s AIDS cases cumulative 1981-¹95. This includes 8.4 percent gays who were also intravenous drug users (Health Profile ¹96, Department of Health Services, Sonoma County, 85). In 1997 MSM represented the largest proportion (60 percent) of men diagnosed nationally with AIDS (AIDS Prevention Fact Sheet, 1997-1998, Centers for Disease Control). Representing less than five percent of the total national population, homosexuals have been infected with 50 percent of the nation¹s syphilis cases (Atlantic Monthly, J ¹88). This high-risk group carries over half the nation¹s cases of intestinal infections and gonorrhea of the throat. (Kassler, Gay Men¹s Health, 38). A majority, even 90 percent of men having sex with men demonstrate chronic or recurrent viral infections with herpes, hepatitis, and genital warts (Ostrow et al, Diseases in Homosexual Men).
In the first decade after the legalization of sodomy, the San Francisco venereal disease rate increased to 22 times the national average. Over a ten-year period, the annual rate of hepatitis A increased 100 percent; hepatitis B increased 300 percent; amoebic colon infections increased 2500 percent. Each year of that ten-year period, the city¹s venereal disease clinics received 75,000 patients; nearly 80 percent were gay males. Twenty percent of these carried rectal gonorrhea. (San Jose Mercury News, Apr 24, 1980), (San Francisco Chronicle/ Examiner, Apr 23,¹79).
Furthermore, homosexual monogamy, particularly among males, is myth. One survey reported to the American Public Health Association that in a lifetime a typical gay may have 49 sexual partners and that 8 percent-12 percent have more than 500 partners in their lifetimes. (McKusick, ³AIDS and Sexual Behavior Reported by Gay Men in San Francisco,² American Journal of Public Health, May ¹85).
Early in the AIDS epidemic, investigative research conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control of Atlanta found the typical homosexual had over 500 different partners. In that same study group, that portion who were diagnosed HIV positive averaged 1100 different sexual partners (reported in Psychology Today, Jan ¹84, 56). An April ¹94 article in gay-oriented magazine Genre concluded that relationships between gays who live with partners are possible because the partners have ³outside affairs.² Psychologist Guy Baldwin, whose practice is largely a gay clientele, says in the Genre article, ³With all the talk about legalizing marriage for gays, there¹s an assumption in the minds of most (gay) people that I talk to that only rarely does that legalization include monogamy.²(34)
Destructive to personal physical health, the high-risk lifestyle is also destructive to social stability. That children learn by example, by imitation, is a well-known fact of child development. It is therefore not in a child¹s best interest to be raised by same-sex couples, who would model a high-risk, disease-prone lifestyle. Such an upbringing would deprive the child of best opportunities to develop male or female identities. Gay men and women may have wonderful personalities and talents to share, but these are best shared as aunts and uncles, not parents. They may make great contributions to society, but raising children best not be one of them. There need not be stigma in acceptance of this simple limitation.
Disease prevention seems an adequate reason that society should deny endorsement of ³sexual orientation² as a protected status. Is the spread of disease a civil right? It is clear anti-sodomy laws were based on wisdom, not prejudice.
Anatomy alone speaks simply, yet eloquently against homosexual expression. The Potter who shaped the Clay and called it good wondrously designed two to become one flesh. The Master Designer also gave prescriptions against homosexuality and sodomy. In His omniscience could He have known what we are learning the hard way? Men having sex with men spawn disease. Women having sex with women cannot become one flesh. Neither gay men nor gay women may produce the fruit of one-fleshness or share in the miracle of procreating life. Those unions are unhealthy, unsound, and unnatural. While society can respect and encourage the bonding and affection that may occur between two of the same sex, these relationships do not warrant sexual expression, let alone constitutional designation as an inalienable civil right. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Richard Wetzel, M.D. States - "Genital anal intercourse is the sex act most often associated with the gay lifestyle. It is an accepted norm among essentially all gay, yet it is unhealthy, it is unnatural, and most people consider it to be offensive. Anal sex is unhealthy. Aside from sexually transmitted diseases, these acts lead to many other medical conditions including Gay Bowel Syndrome, hepatitis A, unusual infections of the epididymis, and other disorders of the anus and surrounding muscles such as fissures. Homosexuals who practice anal intercourse are as much as eighty-four times more likely to develop anal cancer than the general population."
"Anal sex is unnatural. It obviously is traumatic to the anus, which simply is not made to accommodate the male organ. Not only does the anus have no natural lubrication, but it is clearly the wrong size for genital contact. As evidence of this, consider the difference in size of the speculum and the anoscope. The speculum, which the physician places inside the woman during a gynecological exam, is roughly the size and shape of the erect male organ. The anoscope, used to examine the anus, is half the diameter of the speculum - more similar in size to an adult forefinger. Any physician who would be foolish enough to attempt to examine a patient's anus with a speculum would quickly realize how unpopular that move would be."
"The act of anal sex is analogous to cleaning excrement from a bedpan with one's bare hands. Feces is unhealthy to handle and can lead to illness. Furthermore, gay sexual behaviors often go well beyond anal intercourse. For example, most gays actually put fingers and hands into each others' anuses and touch each others' anuses with their mouths and tongues." Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Researchers report in the Winter 2001 edition of the Bulletin of Experimental Treatment for AIDS that anal cancer rates and rates of anal neoplasia (abnormal cell growth) are substantially higher among gay men than among the general population.
The rates are higher still among gay men who are HIV-positive.
The anal cancer rate among HIV-negative gay men is more than 35 cases per 100,000 people; in the general population it is 0.9 cases per 100,000 people.
The use of highly active antiretroviral therapy by HIV-positive men, which has shown benefits in reducing occurrences of other opportunistic infections, does not appear to affect anal cancer rates; in fact, prolonging the lives of HIV-positive gay men through HAART may actually increase the rates in this group over time. Anal neoplasia and cancer have been strongly linked to infection by the human papillomavirus (HPV), which is transmitted sexually. Anal HPV infections are significantly higher among gay men than in the general population. A study at the University of California, San Francisco, found that 61% of HIV-negative gay men and 93% of HIV-positive gay men are infected with HPV. Because of this, researchers recommend that gay men receive anal cancer and HPV screeningsincluding anal pap smearson a regular basis, preferably once annually for HIV-positive men and either every other year or once every three years for HIV-negative gay men."
(Advocate.com news Apr 6 2001)
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Family Research Report - Nov 2001 Oral-anal sex:
Unlike mouth-to-genital sex, mouth-to-anus activities cannot possibly be considered medically benign. There is simply no way to 'safely' lick or insert the tongue into the anus without ingesting biologically significant amounts of fecal material. Not only do a host of viruses (e.g., Hepatitis A), bacteria, and other infectious organisms (e.g., Giardiasis, amebiasis) reside in feces, but various forms of hepatitis, herpes and many of the same organisms that cause food poisoning are transmitted through its ingestion.3
Separating feces from the food chain and living areas via modern sanitation has arguably been the single most important contribution of modern public health. Avoiding the ingestion of fecal material in either food or in sex practices is healthy; any oral exposure to feces is unhealthy. This is precisely what much of modern 'sanitation' is about.
Indeed, in 1981, at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, Dr. M Heller, Director of the Division of Emergency Medicine at the University of California's Moffitt Hospital, San Francisco, observed4 that "the large number of patients, virtually all male and all gay, with these diseases [various enteric infections collectively called 'gay bowel syndrome'] is indeed a new phenomenon" which he noted was associated with "the emergence of a well-defined 'gay scene,' including gay bars, restaurants, movies, clubs, indeed whole neighborhoods catering openly to the gay lifestyle."
The recipient of oral-anal sex is not immune to infection either. Unlike the mouth, the anus is designed to eliminate waste, not to process and incorporate semen, saliva, etc. So it has few protective devices. The mouth can and does transmit sexual infections to the anus. Ultimately, for either the 'doer' or the one to whom oral-anal sex is done, the claim that "engaging in... anal sex does not result in... physical dysfunction" is absolutely false. Penile-anal sex:
Placing a penis in the anus is also fraught with medical risks. For the recipient, there is good evidence to suggest that the rectum and anus are negatively affected over the long term by the insertion and movements of the penis during sexual activity. Men who are the recipients of penile-anal sex are many times more apt to develop anal or rectal cancer and to lose sphincter tonus, perhaps up to 20 times the national average.5 Those who put their penis in others' rectal cavities are also more apt to get urinary infections. After all, the penis is bathed in feces or surrounded by fecal residue during the process.
The bottom line is that the rectum was not designed for sexual activity. Indeed, because of its one-cell-wall thickness and rich supply of blood vessels, the rectum is almost 'perfectly suited for infection.' This is undoubtedly the reason that the vast majority of MSM who have gotten infected with HIV practiced penile-anal sex.
While only a smattering of evidence suggests that the 'insertor' of the penis has contracted HIV from anal sex, there is overwhelming evidence that the rectal 'insertees' got their HIV from penile-anal sex. Indeed, the practice of penile-anal sex is associated with well over 95% of all HIV infections among MSM.
There is also fair evidence that a disproportionate degree of HIV infection among women is due to penile-anal as opposed to penile-vaginal sex.6 The same is true of hepatitis B, syphilis, and all the other blood-borne pathogens. In short, the natural functions of the rectum (e.g., efficient absorption of water and other nutrients from the fecal mass) act to make it unsuitable for penile intromission.
Furthermore, there is good evidence that depositions of semen in the rectum are deleterious, per se, to the functioning of the immune system. This was first demonstrated in rabbits and has been confirmed in both male and female prostitutes.7 Oral & Anal Sex: Not Benign
Oral & Anal Sex: Not Benign
Analysis of the obituaries of over 9,000 gay men suggests that they are unusually subject to cancer of the mouth, pharynx, stomach, and esophagus, all of which may be related to typical sexual practices among MSM of ingesting semen, urine or feces.8 Indeed, while the constellations of morbidities differ between the groups (with men who have sex with men [MSM] exhibiting higher rates of infectious diseases than heavy drinkers or illicit, but non-shooting/non-IV drug users), the lifespans of MSM are similar to the lifespans of very heavy drinkers or heavy consumers of illicit drugs, but not as short as regular IV drug abusers.
The evidence on women who have sex with women [WSW] is less certain, but it appears that their lifespan may be only a few years longer on average than the lifespan of MSM. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
a) "Natural" is not determined by what you want sexually, but by how you function sexually.
1. The body was built to function a specific way.
2. Men were not built to function sexually with men.
b) Natural desires go with natural functions. The passion that exchanges the natural function of sex for the unnatural function is what Paul calls a degrading passion.
c) Jesus clarified the natural, normal relationship:
1. Matthew 19:4-5 "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said 'For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife and the two shall become one flesh [sexual intercourse].'?"
2. The desire is unnatural because it abandons the natural function.
a. Extramarital heterosexual sex is wrong because it exploits a natural function in an immoral way.
b. Homosexuality is worse because it's an immoral act based on the perversion of a natural function.
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
SAN FRANCISCO - He is safe most of the time.
Use-a-condom safe. Protect yourself and your partner safe. Are you positive or negative safe?
But there are also times when Seth Watkins, or Twilightchild, as he is known in the personal advertisements he places on the Internet, is not so careful.
For example, when he visits the back room of the Powerhouse, a bar on Folsom Street, and has unprotected sex with men he does not know.
Or, when, lonely and "in a depressed state," he drinks too many Malibu pineapples and finds someone he hopes to see again, as happened one night last summer, he said, the night he believes he became infected with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS.
Mr. Watkins, 24, is an H.I.V. prevention educator and counselor in San Francisco. He knows how H.I.V. is transmitted and how to avoid becoming infected.
But like an increasing number of gay men in San Francisco and elsewhere, Mr. Watkins sometimes still puts himself and possibly other people at risk.
"I have had to come to terms with the fact that I wasn't always practicing what I was preaching," Mr. Watkins said. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol 26, 657-661, "Modelling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men. In a major Canadian centre, life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years will not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Resurgent Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Disease Among Men Who Have Sex with Men... Reasons for the increasing rates of bacterial STD in MSM in King County are unknown but may include an increased frequency of unprotected sex among some MSM. Anecdotal reports by MSM with bacterial STDs suggest that such behaviors are linked to sex with anonymous partners in bath houses, which may be related to improvements in the treatment of HIV infection or to changing patterns of recreational drug use. The age distribution of syphilis cases suggests that in King County, relapse in sexual safety among older MSM is a more important determinant than failure of young, newly sexually active MSM to adopt safer sex practices. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
HIV infection and risk behaviours among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver The incidence of HIV infection is unacceptably high among this cohort of young gay and bisexual men. Preliminary results suggest a disturbing trend toward increasing levels of unprotected anal intercourse. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Need for Sustained HIV Prevention Among Men who Have Sex with Men In the United States, HIV-related illness and death historically have had a tremendous impact on men who have sex with men (MSM). Even though the toll of the epidemic among injection drug users (IDUs) and heterosexuals has increased during the last decade, MSM continue to account for the largest number of people reported with AIDS each year. In 2000 alone, 13,562 AIDS cases were reported among MSM, compared with 8,531 among IDUs and 6,530 among men and women who acquired HIV heterosexually.
Overall, the number of MSM of all races and ethnicities who are living with AIDS has increased steadily, partly as a result of the 1993 expanded AIDS case definition and, more recently, of improved survival.
Abundant evidence shows a need to sustain prevention efforts for each generation of young gay and bisexual men. We cannot assume that the positive attitudinal and behavioral change seen among older men also applies to younger men. Recent data on HIV prevalence and risk behaviors suggest that young gay and bisexual men continue to place themselves at considerable risk for HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).
These data highlight the need to design more effective prevention efforts for gay and bisexual men of color. The involvement of community and opinion leaders in prevention efforts will be critical for overcoming cultural barriers to prevention, including homophobia. For example, there remains a tremendous stigma to acknowledging gay and bisexual activity in African American and Hispanic communities. Need to Combat Other STDs
Need to Combat Other STDs
Studies among MSM who are treated in STD clinics have shown consistently high percentages of HIV infection, ranging from nearly 4% in Seattle to a high of almost 36% in Atlanta. (See CDC's National HIV Prevalence Surveys, 1997 Summary, Table 1.) Some studies have shown that the likelihood of both acquiring and spreading HIV is 2-5 times greater in people with STDs, and that aggressively treating STDs in a community may help to reduce the rate of new HIV infections. Along with prompt attention to and treatment of STDs, efforts to reduce the behaviors that spread STDs are critical.
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Webster's dictionary4 defines 'homosexual' by "sexual attraction toward [or relations with] a person of the same sex" (p. 464). Yet as both the FRI and the Kinsey studies demonstrate, sexual flexibility rather than a fixed interest in or exclusive performance with members of the same sex is characteristic of 'homosexuals.' Almost all 'homosexuals,' in fact, manage to have sex with the opposite sex.
For example, Laumann, et al.5, reported that, of men with male sex partners since puberty, a mere 10% reported only having had sex with other males, and of women with female sex partners since puberty, only 5% reported only having had sex with other females. For those who reported same-sex partners since age 18, about 20% of such men and 10% of such women only had sex with others of their sex. Put in population terms, Laumann, et al. estimated that only 0.6% of "all men" and 0.2% of "all women" have, since puberty, only had sex with their own sex (p. 312).
Given the apparent changeability of human sexual behavior, the term 'homosexual' -- rather than describing 'a condition' or 'state of being' that 'causes' sexual desire to fixate on one's same sex -- seems an inappropriate label for most of those who have same-sex sex. The term certainly does not seem to fit ex-homosexuals, many of whom express no further interest in sex with their sex. Further, the sexual flexibility that the great majority of 'homosexuals' exhibit over their lifetimes does not fit the 'compulsive' nuances associated with the term 'homosexual' either.
As an alternative to 'homosexual,' if we were to consider individuals with a history of sexual relations with both sexes, or who could have sex with both sexes, or who desired to have sex with both sexes, as "omnisexual," very few, if any, 'homosexuals,' would fail to qualify. By shedding the relatively recent, largely psychiatric, and political term 'homosexual' for 'omnisexual' we might get rid of the implication that 'homosexuals' have an unchangeable 'orientation' -- a notion clearly at odds with the empirical reality.
In fact, the Kinsey Institute's use of "sexual preference" far better matches the sexual choices that omnisexuals make. And when an omnisexual decided to quit homosexual activity for heterosexual activity, or changed his mind again, it would not appear linguistically odd, but would instead describe the situation neatly. Better still, there would not be the same 'mystery' about the choice, involving often untestable theories about 'unconscious needs,' parental miscues, or hormonal or genetic differences. Rather, sexual flexibility would be seen as something that omnisexuals often exhibit.
If perhaps only 3-4% of adults have at some time in their lives either engaged in homosexuality or would currently declare themselves interested in doing so by saying they were 'homosexual' or 'bisexual,' and maybe an additional 1-2% or so of the remaining adults are 'ex-homosexuals,' then perhaps 4-6% of adults have been 'homosexuals' or homosexually involved at some point in their lives.
Additionally, about 1-2% of current heterosexuals say that they have some homosexual desire -- i.e., are homosexually 'tempted.' It therefore seems possible that the total pool of adults who are, and who always have been, exclusively heterosexual may be on the order of 92-94%. But perhaps 6-8% of the population is omnisexual -- these individuals can be and often are involved in homosexual relationships at some time. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Table 27. Estimated persons living with AIDS, by age group, sex, exposure category,
and year, 1993 through 1999, United States¹
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
In 2000, 1,688 young people (ages 13 to 24) were reported with AIDS, bringing the cumulative total to 31,293 cases of AIDS in this age group. Among young men aged 13- to 24-years, 49% of all AIDS cases reported in 2000 were among men who have sex with men (MSM); 10% were among injection drug users (IDUs); and 9% were among young men infected heterosexually.
Surveillance data analyzed from 25 states with integrated HIV and AIDS reporting systems for the period between January 1996 and June 1999 indicate that young people (aged 13 to 24) accounted for a much greater proportion of HIV (13%) than AIDS cases (3%). These data also show that even though AIDS incidence (the number of new cases diagnosed during a given time period, usually a year) is declining, there has not been a comparable decline in the number of newly diagnosed HIV cases among youth.
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Why Isn't Homosexuality Considered A Disorder On The Basis Of Its Medical Consequences? The co-author of my own medical reference book, Saunders Pocket Reference for Nurses,[i] was the head of the surgery department at Stanford. She related case histories of homosexuals needing emergency surgery due to "fisting," "playing with toys," (inserting objects into the rectum) and other bizarre acts. I am certain--in light of my clinical experience, and since doing considerable amount of studying about it since that time--that homosexuality is neither normal nor benign; rather, it is a lethal behavioral addiction as Dr. Jeffrey Satinover outlines in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.[ii]
As far as I know, there is no other group of people in the United States that dies of infectious diseases in their mid-forties except practicing homosexuals. This, to me, is tragic, when we know that homosexuality can be prevented, in many cases, or substantially healed in adulthood when there is sufficient motivation and help.
Can anyone refute that anal intercourse tears the rectal lining of the receptive partner, regardless of whether a condom is worn, and the subsequent contact with fecal matter leads to a host of diseases?
Diseases to which active homosexuals are vulnerable can be classified as follows:
Classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with Shigella species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, ["gay bowel disease"], Hepatitis A, B, C, D, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (related to and/or resulting in fecal incontinence, hemorroids, anal fissure, foreign bodies lodged in the rectum, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).[iv]
Can anyone refute that increased morbidity and mortality is an unavoidable result of male-with-male sex--not to mention the increased rates of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide and other maladies that so often accompany a homosexual lifestyle?[v] People with this whole cluster of behavior patterns are somehow "normal"?
My primary question is: why isn't homosexuality considered a disorder on the basis of its medical consequences alone? Dr. Satinover and others have made a solid case for why homosexuality parallels alcoholism as an unhealthy addiction. It should have a parallel diagnosis.
As the Court notes, ante at 192 , the proscriptions against sodomy have very "ancient roots." Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law. See Code Theod. 9.7.6; Code Just. 9.9.31. See also D. Bailey, Homosexuality [p*197] and the Western Christian Tradition 70-81 (1975). During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed. 25 Hen. VIII, ch. 6. Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries *215. The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching.
This is essentially not a question of personal "preferences," but rather of the legislative authority of the State. I find nothing in the Constitution depriving a State of the power to enact the statute challenged here. ++++"Rejuvenating Blackstone" Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
Federalism Project: Supreme Court Are State Sodomy Prohibitions Unconstitutional?
Are State Sodomy Prohibitions Unconstitutional?
Lawrence v. Texas No. 02-0102
In Lawrence v. Texas, the Court will review a Texas law that criminalizes homosexual (but not heterosexual) sodomy. The inconveniences of democratic, decentralized decision making will be pitted against the charm of judicial fiat. Judicial fiat will win. For those who don't remember Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), it's just as well; the decision, and its cautionary approach to finding new constitutional rights, is about to be discarded.
That is too bad. The country has enjoyed a rough consensus on sodomy statutes. Most states don't have them. A few-increasingly few-still do but don't enforce them. (Lawrence, like Bowers, is a trumped-up test case.) That legislative-driven outcome is both a bit hypocritical and dissatisfying to fanatics on both sides. But the formula has allowed states to reflect their citizens' varied moral sentiments. It has allowed the liberalizers to make progress. Above all, it has spared us a national, first-principles debate about, of all things, sodomy.
What possessed the Court to yank up this made-up case from a Texas criminal court? Likely answer: the four liberal Justices, who think they can pick up a fifth or sixth anti-Bowers vote from Justice Kennedy or O'Connor. Nor is it far-fetched to surmise that the cert granters in this case had their eyes on the prospect of a judicial nomination fight, where the homosexual rights issue will be very awkward for the administration and its prospective nominee. Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ W
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ
What Would Jefferson Do?
Ñ Ñ Ñ Ñ To the FECAL FANS & FACTOPHOBES Those who advocate/defend/excuse/permit or claim that anyone was born/oriented/wired to eat **** are full of same and should be *
To the FECAL FANS & FACTOPHOBES* of SCOTUS:
Those who advocate/defend/excuse/permit or claim that anyone was born/oriented/wired to eat **** are full of same and should beIMPEACHED.
\Fac"to\, adv. [L., ablative of factum deed, fact.] (Law) In fact; by the act or fact.
I'm not interested in any syrupy emotional phrases. In the last nearly 40 years I have watched this nation decend into a swill of destructive egocentric hedonism in which the only rule is to hell with everything and everybody. But there are things people shouldn't be doing. As far as I'm concerned if HIV becomes twice as virulent and twice as lethal to impress that lesson upon people it would be a benefit. If nothing else ir would wipe out the pathological system of thought underwriting the spread of AIDS.
|Homosexual Agenda Index|
|Homosexual Agenda Keyword Search|
|All FreeRepublic Bump Lists|
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.