Encouraging but also confusing when a story a couple of days ago said which global figures were down the uk’s were up. 74% in 8 years if I remember rightly. Mixed messages?
No mixed messages.
If 1820 gay men were diagosed with HIV in the year 1999 and 3160 were diagosed in 2007 then that is a 74% increase in the space of 8 years.
And the figure dropped to 2760 in 2008 then that is a 10% drop. It is still an increase from 1999 however.
Statistics are easily manipulated to suit the agenda of a story.
The 24,000 diagnosed and 9000 undiagnosed are the ‘real’ figures.
fine but surely it would have been better to have published these figures altogether so that we can see progress is being made.
It is great to see Deborah Jack of the NAT starting to talk so much sense and bucking the trend of the other HIV orgs, who insist on clinging to out-moded practices that have advanced more than they have prevented the spread of HIV while defending the rights and feelings of HIV “victims” above the right of the rest of us to not be infected. Compare to Nick Partridge of THT who continues to do his usual sales pitch and who, like Gordon Brown just the other day, can hardly contain his enthusiasm for gay men to get tested after years of failure and neglect. Why can’t Partridge just have the dignity and good grace to say “Sorry, I failed you all” and fall on his sword? That way he could just go off and work for Glaxo full time…
It amazes me that STD are covered freely on adverts, softly siftly approach mind but HIV is still not covered full stop. Surely both Gordon Brown and Nick Partridge must know they have it in their power and the means to cover this issue extensively to reach all the people to better equip with all the advertising, info and education. I really truely hope the teaching of HIV from 2011 in school will help bring down these figures even more. Although sometime just a simple hard hitting campaign is just as effective.
While in principle the teaching of HIV to schoolkids is a move in the right direction, of more importance is the nature of the information they will be indoctrinated with, for want of a better word. My fear is that it will be the same PC garbage that gay men have been spoon fed these last few years and so could make HIV acquisition seem like an occupational hazard like standard STIs or even desirable and nothing to fear. Who will be writing the syllabus for this new education and to whose or what agenda? That is key here. The Government has shown time and again it is more aligned to the corporations and often regards the public as a nuisance and even with thinly veiled contempt, hence increasing mutterings on these discussion boards that HIV was allowed to fester as a pretext for now encouraging gay men to get tested and therefore boost the bottom line of the HIV support service providers and the AIDS drugs manufacturers.
Furthermore, only recently Pink News reported that THT had received a Lottery grant to counsel 10-18 year olds. What qualifies THT to enter into this new field of sexual health when it cannot lay claim to having succeeded in preventing 3 generations of gay men from becoming infected with a lethal sexual disease? It is rather like letting the fox guard the hen house if you ask me. The whole approach to children’s education in the UK is back to front and upside down after 12 years of New Labour, so lets not get too excited about teaching HIV to schoolkids until we know exactly ‘what’ they are being taught first…
Would it not make more sense to give the percentage of people being tested who show as positive? That way the number of people coming forward is taken out of the equation.
More people are coming forward for tests, so the number of Pos results will invariable rise.
Just my penneth.
Rob , sorry to tell you they’ve been doing it for years
but you’re the bloke who thinks this is “ full-on child abuse” and that THT’s young people’s means that “ today’s 10-18 year olds – being effectively groomed for HIV infection and lined-up for a life time on Aids meds,” or so you thought in one of your posts from August . Is this part of your conspiracy that everyone at GMFA & THT is in the pocket of the drugs companies and deliberately strives to get the world infected? You’re a bit bonkers aren’t you?
Let’s get back to the article in question. A rise since 1999, but a dip from 2007 – mixed news clearly, but surely something to be celebrate with the dip? The figures clearly showing the biggest rise in those heterosexuals acquiring the virus in the UK. More worrying is the number of undiagnosed people, across the board. Isn’t the call for a national testing programme a good one?
James, do you seriously think 2700+ gay men getting infected with HIV last year is something to celebrate do you? I think that says it all really. Next you will be saying the THT and GMFA’s HIV-incendiary campaigns are to thank for this year’s slight dip! How very convenient for the THT to call for a national testing program now, after years of fanning the HIV rates with their treacherous policies. But when you have service user targets to hit and Pharma donors to appease what do you expect? The testing program is needed, I agree, but it is a national scandal that THT in tow with charities like the GMFA has made this necessary by presiding over a colossal rise of HIV infections. It should have its charity status revoked forthwith, certainly NOT blatantly profiteering from its own failures.
Celebrate was maybe a wrong choice of word but I do get what you mean James and indeed agree. THT have been very helpful to me in the past. It would be a massive loss if we were to loose them because they are one of the main sources of information and support. They are widely known too so people can discreet go if they needed to. If you’d had to used them for whatever you’d see they are a vital service. I think its a bit harsh to blame them for the HIV rise though. They can’t go round following all individuals and put the condom on for them. Everyone makes there own choose when it comes to safe sex. Thats why the info usually is explicit to try and speak to the groups about HIV in the way they understand, not just a printed sheet.
It would be a great loss without these charities, they do much more than you realise.
Rob – Do I think anyone (gay or straight) getting infected is something to celebrate? No. (What a stupid question)
Do I think a reduction in the number of gay men being infected is something to celebrate? Yes. (don’t you?)
Do I seriously think that THT, GMFA and whoever else are to blame for the number of men being infected with HIV? No.
Do I think they’re part of the problem? No.
Do I think that there is a link between barebacking and the rise of HIV? Yes. But I don’t think harm minimisation campaigns are the great evil that you do. It simply isn’t enough to only say ‘wear a condom’. On its own that doesn’t work.
Why aren’t you directing your anger towards the porn companies, to the magazines that accept their advertising (and they all do it, even the one that seems to be the new anti-bareback champion – great you’re onboard even if it smacks of hypocrisy)?
Do I think campaigns showing HIV+ men sitting on the toilet having diarrhoea work (like the infamous US one)? No.
Do your research. Fear campaigns don’t work. If it was that easy we’d have stopped smoking, drinking, no one would take drugs and every other public health issue would have been solved. Stop smoking campaigns regularly go down that path and the evidence shows they are as much use as a chocolate fireplace.
Do I think there is a need to review the safer sex message? Yes. But not in the way you suggest. I think your arguments are simply not based on evidence. Expert evidence from around the world will tell you fear campaigns are not effective. Google the research. Worldwide research and evidence says you are wrong. However, somehow you know best.
I think you have an axe to grind. I have read some of your comments and they are simply away with the fairies. If people reading these posts wish to hang on to the words of a man who calls a young people led counselling project ‘child abuse’ and who seriously thinks that THT and GMFA’s hundreds of staff deliberately want to infect people so that they can get donations from the drug companies, then my view of common sense needs a re-think! You seriously think there are “service user targets to hit and Pharma donors to appease”(your words)? What, 100 quid for every infected person? You’re Lady Ga Ga mate. I think your views and those of the nutter gang around you are dangerous and have totally distorted what could have been a great opportunity for dialogue and discussion. As it is, I hope people go off, do their own research and start approaching this from a sensible perspective.
Incidentally I’d love to hear your theory around who’s to blame for the heterosexual rates? I’d blame the lack of a national HIV campaign, lack of SRE in schools and Government fear to tackle the right wing and moral majority head on around and work effectively with refugees and immigrants coming into the country. You probably think the Government are working with the drug companies and are working to infect the world, clone Elvis and that Queen Lizzie really is a giant lizard.
I am not saying that the THT do not provide adequate services for those already infected with HIV, but that is just it. They want to be a jack of all trades where HIV is concerned but it just isn’t working, and charities like THT are at cross purposes providing a multitude of services to those already infected with HIV while being entrusted to prevent the ongoing spread of the virus. The fact is that they are funded to provide these services and the more people who become infected the more funding they receive. You say that everyone makes their own choices when it comes to safe sex and that they must be responsible for those choices. Tell me then how they can be responsible for those choices when they are being subliminally encouraged by the THT into having unsafe sex by confused campaigns that teach risk minimization techniques such as pulling out before cumming instead of advocating condom use every time? When the THT refuses point blank to criticise those who bareback and won’t speak out about bareback porn? When it aggressively markets PEP for unsafe sex on behalf of the pharmas in the absence of promoting effective HIV avoidance campaigns? When it is telling youngsters that HIV is now a manageable condition and you can expect to live a healthy life into old age when HIV remains a chronic terminal condition that will curtail your life with any multitude of side effects that ingesting toxin drugs on a daily basis for the rest of your life will eventually induce?
How can you honestly expect people to make the right choices when almost a half of gay men under the age of 25 today consider HIV to be no more of a threat than curable STDs? You really are living in cloud cuckoo land if you really believe they can with the appalling quality of information that is out there. Its all very well speaking to smaller subsets of gay men in a way they will understand about avoiding HIV, but where is the universal “Always play safe” message that the majority of gay men need to be hearing all the time? Where are the campaigns to deglamourize Barebacking? Where are the campaigns that tell people not to catch HIV because the medications could stop being supplied on tap one day? That the condition can cause isolation, social deprivation and stigma? That it affects different people in different ways and some may be resistant to different classes of anti-retrovirals? That recent studies have concluded that by age 50 it may impair brain and immune system function to resemble someone overage 80? That HIV will cut your life short by an average of 21 years?
It is because these facts have been suppressed by the HIV charities that gay men have assumed such a blase attitude towards HIV and rates are now so high. How cynical to now be so heavily pushing testing after years of literally encouraging gay men into unsafe practices and making barebacking socially acceptable. It is because charities like the THT have become so transparent in their practices that people are now drawing such unpalatable conclusions.
“Why aren’t you directing your anger towards the porn companies, to the magazines that accept their advertising…”
Er, hello? Why the hell should I when it is by definition the sexual health charities remit to be doing this? You honestly think these companies would listen to a bystander compared to the clout that an organization such as the THT would hold with its revolving door into central Government? It could bring great pressure to bear for questions to be asked in Parliament for laws to be changed, but the whole point is that it won’t because it perversely refuses to criticize those who bareback and even supports the rights of groups of individuals to meet for this very purpose in public spaces.
As for fear campaigns including around HIV, they are proven to work every time. Indeed where is your research to suggest otherwise? May I remind you that HIV rates declined to their lowest level in the UK when hard hitting campaigns were common place, and as Paul Burston reports in the latest Attitude a hard hitting campaign launched in San Francisco earlier this decade succeeded in reducing HIV rates there by 20% between 2001 and 2006, during which period HIV rates increased in the UK by over 50% thanks to the switch to so-called “risk minimization” campaigns. So do YOUR research James as you are either genuinely clueless of the facts or more likely an HIV sector insider desperately trying to cover up the truth while routinely twisting the facts.
I do not for one minute claim that all the many staff in these charities are in on any conspiracy, but the very fact that they take orders from the higher echelons – who have close relations with central government and the pharma companies who they are happy to take funding from – suggests that such sector staff are happy to implement policies which they must know are counter-productive but who put their jobs first.
Tell me this: if the charities are not to blame for at least encouraging the behaviours that have doubled HIV rates in just ten years, what is? And what heterosexual epidemic are you alluding to exactly? The one that is more or less contained to African asylum seekers who come over here en mass to take advantage of our generosity – oh, and who the THT court and earns bucket loads more money providing services to?
It is quite obvious that you are another HIV sector shrill trying to limit the damage caused by recent coverage that reflects the feelings of the “nutter gang” majority of the community. The clamour for change is being demanded from all quarters and your sector is running out of places to hide in trying to cover up its mistakes, deliberate or otherwise. So much easier to just say sorry than to cling to the myths and delusions that have got us into this mess don;t you think?
jesus – i actually work in housing, Rob. And working in housing I know that if THT are providing services to asylum seekers then bloody brilliant as its a damn sight more than we’re allowed to do as a council.
I was going to respond to the rest of your post but you’re laughable and dare I suggest a little paranoid and even more bonkers than I thought. Your final rascist comment about ‘African asylum seekers’ sums up the type of man you are.
HIV tourism is a myth. And even if it wasn’t I’d want to be part of a system that provides health care services to people with HIV and prevents death. Clearly you’d rather people weren’t able to ‘take advantage of our generosity’. Shame on you
So James reveals himself to be the PC loon he really is and who shares the same insane theories as the HIV sector drones. Which is why he doesn’t know how to respond to honest, direct points. So much easier to use that old PC trick of labelling people racist to try to win the argument, but even as New Labour is discovering that no longer works as the outcry against the failure of mass immigration, sold to us as the myth known as “multi-culturalism”, has grown too loud to duck and dive from. Looks like the days of the PC lunatic fringe which impose their deceitful nutcase doctrines on the majority of honest people are being exposed like the cockroaches they are when the light is turned on.
Rob – I challenged your racist lie around HIV tourism. The facts do not support your argument in the same way that the facts do not support your theories around public health campaigns. You respond with a mad rant around immigration which I equally think is a pile of sh*te. I would hope most sane poeple reading this would agree.
If being a PC loon (oh the irony coming from you) means being a million and one miles away from your views and then I am the biggest PC loon going.
I do not think you’re a rascist for wanting to discuss immigration. I wish our Governement had the balls to do it themselves and to expose the cr*p and bile that passes itself off as the ‘truth’ these days. I think you’re a rascist for suggesting that asylum seekers come here en masse to access our health care system, for speaking the exact same words of scum like Nick Griffin and for suggesting that there is we somehow should be ashamed of belonging to a country that celebtrates diversity. You will no doubt claim to speak on behalf of ‘ordinary folk’ and for ‘our community’ – well you don’t. The ‘moral majority’ aren’t and I suspect that whatever I say you will dismiss.
So you can’t win the main argument around HIV prevention, you divert this into a totally unrelated argument altogether! I am not blaming asylum seekers for coming here for free housing and treatments. They would be crazy not to when our Government has made it so easy for them to do so and in so doing have caused our public services to deteriorate and buckle under the strain. Call me whoever you like if it makes you feel better, but you just end up looking like the ranting, hysterical, extremist nutter you accuse others of being for shining the spotlight on the HIV sector’s willful incompetence which many, many people are waking up to. Or haven;t you been following Pink News and much of the rest of the popular gay press, Attitude, Time Out, etc etc The louder you shriek and wail and attempt to brand those who speak the truth as racist the more absurd in your theories and isolated you become.
Rob raised some very serious questions and makes dome important points which Jame’s evasive tactics and side-stepping does nothing to address. In simple terms then, if the hiv sector isn’t to blame for the cultural shift that has normalized hiv and popularized barebacking then what is? It is quite evident that the vast amounts of energy that once went into keeping us safe and the community spirit that saw gay men rally round each other has been diverted to ensure that gay men are systematicaly deprived of the information they need to protect their health. Why are these charities who receive funding from the makers of avr drugs also being funded to prevent the spread of the same disease? It doesn’t make sense. They are the foxes and we are in the chicken coop!
Oh yes, and answer Rob’s point that if most heterosexuals with hiv in the Uk today are not from Africa then where are they from? They are certainly not indinigous as the mainstram epidemic predicted 20 years ago never happened. And I see nothing racist in what Rob says. Indeed be says he doesn’t blame anyone for commg here for arv treatment that is not available in their home countries, and instead points the finger at the government for actively allowing unrestrained immigration. That is a FACT whether u like it or not so do us a favour and get off your high horse before u fall of and land on yr head!!!!!
I do think one reason why we are in this mess is that the hiv sector is made up of a pot if men with the virus who control the decision making processes, some of whom are well known presences at venues where barebacking is common. There for they are projecting their world view onto all gay men and in turn are assimilating us into their world, whether knowingly or otherwise. But they are doing so with the blessing of these charities’s exec. comitties which surely can’t be right, and it is the execs where the blame ultimately lies.
“There for they are projecting their world view onto all gay men and in turn are assimilating us into their world, whether knowingly or otherwise.”
Yes, Sam. and lizard people are controlling our minds to fool us into a New World Order run by the “Barbarian Movement”. Its why I wear a tin foil hat.
Why does this site attract so many frickin paranoid delusional nutters who think the world is out to get them? Since when do schizophrenia patients get access to all these computers?
Sam, unless you can provide some proof of this conspiracy theory of yours by HIV+ gay men, this is a ridiculous statement to make, bordering on insanity.
The PinkNews article tells us that the number has decreased amongst gay men, while an article on the BBC site today tells us that with respect to the overall number “The number of estimated cases rose by 8% between 2007 and 2008, says the Health Protection Agency.”
Furthermore, the BBC report states: “The figures also show that 58% of new diagnoses were among heterosexuals, two-thirds of whom were Black Africans who are likely to have acquired the infection abroad. But the proportion all new heterosexual diagnoses acquired in the UK is steadily rising ”
This rather shoots holes in the sails of the AID-Denialists, who claim that HIV is only diagnosed in gay men, that AIDS is “a political disease”.
Only this morning on “The House of Numbers” thread at
I took Rob to task for his demanding to know how it could possibly be true that heterosexuals are getting infected when, he said, the numbers say they aren’t, yet, he said, vast numbers of heterosexual married men are being anally penetrated on Hampstead Heath without the use of condoms! Well, Rob, you now have the evidence that heterosexuals are being diagnosed as having contracted HIV and perhaps some of them are some of your heterosexual married men up on Hampstead Heath in the dark hours of the night!
What? Sam, in #19, says “Indeed he [Rob] says he doesn’t blame anyone for coming here for arv treatment that is not available in their home countries”.
What? Rob doesn’t blame HIV+ Africans for coming here for free ARV treatments?
Hold on! On other threads Rob has claimed that HIV medications (ARVs) don’t help people who have AIDS – because AIDS is not caused by HIV and therefore any drugs which attack or limit the virus are ineffective and just a great big money-making ploy and conspiracy by the pharmaceutical companies!
But now, apparently, Rob has slipped up and said he doesn’t blame HIV Africans coming here to receive HIV medications!
Laughable. Absolutely laughable.
This Rob has very very little intellectual integrity – or he is not as much in control of his marbles as he should be, poor fella.
The latest Health Protection Agency report includes the following statistic: ‘Preliminary results for 2009 indicate that around 1 in 5 of gay men newly diagnosed with HIV infection were likely to have acquired their infection within the last 6 months’ – current HIV prevention campaigns are demonstrably not working.
Here here the facts:
Recently-acquired HIV infection
The Recent Infection Testing Algorithm (RITA, formerly called STARHS) testing is now a routine component of public health surveillance of HIV. These tests allow the identification
of individuals who have probably been diagnosed within six months of infection, highlighting those groups currently at greatest risk of infection in the UK. At present, around half of all
newly diagnosed HIV infections are being RITA tested, with national coverage planned by the end of 2010. Preliminary results for 2009 indicate that around one in five of MSM newly diagnosed with HIV infection were likely to have acquired their infection within the last six months. This compares with one in ten among heterosexuals.
David “current HIV campaign are demonstrably not working”. What number of new infections would show that current campaigns “work”? Do you expect that health promotion campaigns have such power that they should stop every new infection? Does working mean no HIV transmission, no increase in transmissions in absoloute numbers or a decrease in the face of ever rising numbers of men with HIV? The number of men with HIV is increasing because people are living longer and healthier lives (thank goodness). More men with HIV having more sex would suggest more chance of exposure and infection. I should hope that the proportion of new infections being in the last 6 months increases because that means that men are getting diagnosed quicker than they once were with potential for treatment and having knowledge of their actual status to inform their sexual decisions. Also just after seroconversion is a time when men are likely to be more infectious. If more people were diagnosed sooner and during this time then there would be a real opportunity to decrease transmission. Your comparison with heterosexuals says to me that gay men are more likely to test sooner after infection than heterosexuals with HIV. This has got to be a good thing for gay men and not such a good thing for heterosexuals with HIV.
“Preliminary results for 2009 indicate that around one in five of MSM newly diagnosed with HIV infection were likely to have acquired their infection within the last six months. This compares with one in ten among heterosexuals.”
I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here. Its logical to assume that given the last 30 years of culture change on HIV testing among gay people, something that wasn’t ingrained as much among heterosexual culture (given most thought, and stupidly still do, that it is a “gay disease”), its more likely gay people get tested more often and more regularly then straight people.
I can’t back that up with anything solid, other then an observation:- all of my gay friends test regularly as something normal to do, while none of my straight friends have ever been tested.
Oh Eddy, do get off your pulpit. You remind me of the climate “experts” who were recently caught red-handed twisting and tampering with the evidence to support their religious belief in climate change. Let’s put this into perspective shall we? Gay men make up 4-5 per cent of the population (about 3 million), heterosexuals for arguments sake make up 60 per cent (about 35 million). With gay men making up a third of all infections (2700), indigenous heterosexuals who make up one third of heterosexual infections account for about 1600. Now, I daresay there are quite a few thousand heterosexuals whose lifestyles put considerable stress on their immune systems to the point where they could be found to have Aids-like symptoms, and not necessarily the undisclosed number of “straight”-identified men being buggered on Hampstead Heath and at Chariots sauna and who screw their wives and girlfriends as well but who don’t come forward for testing and yet are not dropping dead like flies! Furthermore, where have I ever questioned the efficacy of Aids treatments, similarly where have I ever said that HIV doesn’t cause Aids? I am merely waiting for the evidence that tells me it does before subscribing 100 per cent to that theory, because until it does it remains just that. The populist view is that HIV does cause Aids and the anti-retrovirals delay the onset of Aids, and it is that belief that has caused the influx of “treatment tourists” to come to the UK for free treatments, and who could blame them for doing so? So do get off your holier than thou high horse and get your facts straight before questioning others’ intellectual integrity and throwing your favourite buzz phrase “Aids denialist” around willy nilly. You are starting to sound like a stasi thought police for atacking people’s right to express their own views and any that don’t conform to your belief system. And for twisting what others are saying it is you who is the one lacking intellectual integrity around here.
And as a final response to James, I would describe as child abuse any charity that seeks to inflict the same kind of insane mind play techniques that have fudged up HIV prevention onto impressionable, sexually confused children. I have already written to my MP voicing my outrage that THT has been paid almost half a million pounds of Lottery funding to sexual counsel these poor kids and no doubt screw them up even more, and I hope that others will consider doing the same.
“You remind me of the climate “experts” who were recently caught red-handed twisting and tampering with the evidence to support their religious belief in climate change.”
What a load of nonsense! And your associating climate change proof with HIV/AIDS proof, is a fools argument. You did this in another thread, so let me explain again:- your foolish argument (or lack thereof) employs an association fallacy, which is an inductive formal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association. This is your argument??? An irrelevant association, in lieu of any proof of your statements??? Daft.
“Now, I daresay there are quite a few thousand heterosexuals whose lifestyles put considerable stress on their immune systems to the point where they could be found to have Aids-like symptoms”
You dare say???? Do you have any proof of this? No? You “daresaying” means sweet FA in the field of science.
“I am merely waiting for the evidence that tells me it does before subscribing 100 per cent to that theory, because until it does it remains just that.”
W.T.F? What a laugh! And what exactly is it about the evidence that already exists that you don’t “get” exactly, apart for your obvious lack of education?
Here’s the science bit, Bob, I’ve simplified it for you…..
Proof of HIV causing AIDS:- Koch’s postulates, as listed below, have served as the litmus test for determining the cause of any epidemic disease:
1. Epidemiological association: the suspected cause must be strongly associated with the disease – numerous studies from around the world show that virtually all AIDS patients are HIV-seropositive.
2. Isolation: the suspected pathogen can be isolated – and propagated – outside the host – modern culture techniques have allowed the isolation of HIV in virtually all AIDS patients, as well as in almost all HIV-seropositive individuals with both early- and late-stage disease. In addition, the polymerase chain and other sophisticated molecular techniques have enabled researchers to document the presence of HIV genes in virtually all patients with AIDS, as well as in individuals in earlier stages of HIV disease.
3. Transmission pathogenesis: transfer of the suspected pathogen to an uninfected host, man or animal, produces the disease in that host – for example, transmission of HIV from a Florida dentist to six patients has been documented by genetic analyses of virus isolated from both the dentist and the patients. The dentist and three of the patients developed AIDS and died, and at least one of the other patients has developed AIDS. Five of the patients had no HIV risk factors other than multiple visits to the dentist for invasive procedures (O’Brien, Goedert. Curr Opin Immunol 1996;8:613; O’Brien, 1997; Ciesielski et al. Ann Intern Med 1994;121:886).
Nearly everyone with AIDS has HIV antibodies. A survey of 230,179 AIDS patients in the United States revealed only 299 HIV negative individuals. An evaluation of 172 of these 299 patients found 131 actually to be sero-positive. An additional 34 died before their sero-status could be confirmed (Smith et al – N. Engl J Med 1993;328:373).
Can’t see the correlation? It’s fairly conclusive to anyone with half a brain…. Is it stupidity, Bob, or don’t you want to see the truth?
“…I am merely waiting for the evidence that tells me it does before subscribing 100 per cent to that theory, because until it does it remains just that.”
“ The populist view is that HIV does cause Aids and the anti-retrovirals delay the onset of Aids…”
No, this is not the populist view rather it is the scientifically accepted view
“…it is that belief that has caused the influx of “treatment tourists” to come to the UK for free treatments…”
Please do something as simple as read current evidence or else stop peddling this rascist crap. There is NO evidence to demonstrate HIV health tourism to be a significant or real motivation for migration to the UK – please read Rob or do you know better than the NAT?
“And as a final response to James, I would describe as child abuse any charity that seeks to inflict the same kind of insane mind play techniques that have fudged up HIV prevention onto impressionable, sexually confused children.”
So a young people’s project, ran by young people for young people giving peer led emotional support and advice is child abuse???
Rob, I’d quit before you’re carted off in a van mate. You’re moving from the bonkers, to the down right dangerous…
Rob, you can accuse me of speaking down to you from a pulpit and of being “holier than thou” but it makes no difference. I caught you out in posts 21 and 22 and that’s a fact. Furthermore, your justifications for your stances on the heterosexual men you believe should be HIV because, you say, they are being fuc*ed senseless without condoms every night of the week on Hampstead Heath and in saunas, and on HIV’s relation to AIDS, are simply TRANSPARENTLY laughable! You gush with all these words that do not justify the position you hold.
Just because you have a bad thought in your head, it does not mean it is a fact.
You really do need to keep repeating this to yourself. All the time.