Skip to comments.THE "BUG-CHASERS" -- is there any hard evidence at all to support the 25% claim?
Posted on 01/22/2003 10:12:37 AM PST by xm177e2
THE "BUG-CHASERS": I read Drudge's synopsis of the Rolling Stone piece arguing that one quarter of all gay male HIV transmission is now deliberate. The piece is not online, but the precis reads like Stephen Glass. Is there an actual study showing this? Nope. Just one doc mouthing off. Is there any evidence supporting such an extraordinary claim? None that I can see. There's one lonely fact, though:
Dr. Cabaj estimates that at least twenty-five percent of all newly infected gay men fall into [bug-chasing] category. With about 40,000 new infections in the United States per year, according to government reports, that would mean 10,000 each year are attributable to that more liberal definition of bug chasing.But those alleged 40,000 are for all cases of HIV transmission, and as anyone knows, gays form a declining proportion of those cases - maybe a little more than half at this point. So the only actual fact in the extract is obviously wrong. This urban myth was peddled in the 1990s and couldn't get any traction. Is Rolling Stone that desperate for sales? I guess I'll wait to read the piece.
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
When I ponder upon the history of AIDS in this country and the world I always remember that cautionary quarantine. Had those three men brought back some disease of the magnitude of HIV, what would we have done with them? Gassed them, then incinerated the quarantine trailer? I wonder.
AIDS has been a tragedy of biblical proportion. It is also a public health issue that has been, from the start, horribly mis-managed. It seems that it still is.
Who said this? You? Or are you claiming that Dr. Cabaj extrapolated 10,000 out of 40,000? Please provide your cite.
Dr. Cabaj estimated twenty-five percent of all newly infected gay men, not twenty-five percent of all new infections.
Apparently, party attendees pay entrance to such parties at private Bay Area homes. Two rules prevail; no condoms, and no talk whatsoever of HIV status. The catch?
Only the hosts of the party know for sure what person or persons at the party have THE BUG.
How many such people are present? I don't know that, but I guess it varies. I got the feeling that at most parties your odds of getting staying healthy afterwards are pretty good for a 1-time visit, assuming you have only a couple partners.
Look in the SF Chronicle about 18 months ago or so. The article was listed here at FR around that time, and drew many, many hits.
I'm not really an expert on this issue, but I'd wager that what we're dealing with here is an ironic side-effect of acceptance of homosexuality.
Eroticism, you see, comes from transgressing some kind of taboo.
In the old days before reliable contraception, sex outside of wedlock was quite a bit more erotic than the sex of this very same type prevalent these days. The reason is that part of the thrill was the awareness that you could be creating a new, unwanted life- obviously something heavily laden with implications for both parties.
But with the arrival of The Pill, part of the air fizzled out of the tire. Today, yes, you have people hooking up on a much more frequent basis, but I'd wager it's not as exciting.
Same thing with gay sex: in the stuffy old days when guys ran some risk of getting cracked upside the head with a police trucheon for persuing their natural inclinations, such assignations realllllly got these guys' pulses racing --it must have been realllllllllly hot stuff.
Times have changed: you've got gay marches that take over cities. You've got mainstream TV programs with gay characters. You've got straight people required at at some schools' orientation programs to introduce themselves as, "My name is Mike, and I AM GAY" --especially if they AREN'T, just to break down perceptions and barriers.
Much of the taboo against homos has gone up in smoke, and with that, much of the eroticism that gay people crave.
-->SO FACED WIT TOLERANCE, BUG CHASING IS WHAT SOME DO TO RECAPTURE EROTICISM.<--
I have some really strange-sounding advice for these guys: Go to Tehran, and your PULSE WILL RACE ON!
The link at the top of this page clearly goes back to Andrew Sullivan's web site. I am not Andrew Sullivan, so no, I did not say any of this. If you read what was posted, you would have noticed this "The piece is not online, but the precis reads like Stephen Glass". That's clearly where the quote is from. Sullivan hasn't linked to it because it isn't online, or at least, he doesn't know where it appears online.
I disagree. A "normal" homosexual would find satisfaction with someone who was "clean". gaijin's point is that flirting with death is PART of the erotisicm of bug chasing.
I understand your point to be that hepatitis is a risk when engaging in watersports etc. There IS a risk. However, those engaging in these activities are seeking the thrill of that specific experience. That they could become infected probably never crosses their mind.
A very huge part of Bay Area culture revolves around AIDS issues, and after a while of "just" being gay, it probably is a little off-putting to sit on the sidelines.
By the way Shawn Hannity had the author of the article on his show today.
you would have been happier not knowing. I believe another term for it is yellow discipline.