Posted on 02/15/2005 8:29:02 AM PST by Jimmyclyde
You know ... years ago stopping the spread of AIDS was a priority for me. I was not too concerned about what happened to the gays who persisted in having unsafe sex, but I cared a lot about the taxpayers who had to take care of these people for years while AIDS slowly killed them. It was a very expensive deal. But this new improved version of AIDS sounds like it is quicker and therefore will be a less of a burden for taxpayers. AIDS is easily preventable and if these people won't take the steps to protect themselves, why should the taxpayers care what happens to them?
It's as if the government is supposed to indemnify them against the consequences of their behavior, and it's all Bush's fault because he can't. ;)
Hatemonger! Homophobe! Intolerant!
I don't care.
Have your bath houses, in fact have a thousand bath houses...........I don't care.
The Final Solution awaits you.
I always did like Jesse a lot, particularly when he'd whistle "Dixie" next to Carol Mosley Braun in an elevator.
ROFLOL!
<><
Gee, I'm married and my wife and I are both committed to each other.
That's MY solution for not having to worry too much about contracting aids, or any othet STD for that matter.
What a novel concept.
This much I do know: heterosexual men do not get AIDS.
The CDC considers the "infection" rate of heterosexual men as "statistically insignificant."
Intuitivally, we all know this to be true.
Heterosexual men still frequent prostitutes. This was going to be the "path" for AIDS to jump to heterosexual men.
Never happened.
In the US, 98% of AIDS cases are homosexual men. The remaining 2% are black women and hemopheliacs(sp).
Sounds like you might have a bad case of "cabin fever" from residing in a "Log Cabin"?
When I read the headline, I thought they were all going to chop off Mr. Johnson.
bravo to you, that is how it should be, but we seem to be amongst a generation, hetero and homo, where hedonism is the rule, they didn't call the Baby Boomers the ME generation for nothing, we call them the left wing of the DNC now, LOL....
fortunate for me, I was raised in a conservative household in the first place, I didn't have parents smoking pot and having key parties in the 1970's
let's check some stats here, because I think IV drug use is also being dismissed here....
this doesn't delineate sexual preference or transmission
HIV/AIDS in North America
Adults age 15-49 with HIV/AIDS, 2003 990,000
New HIV infections, 2004 44,000
Adult HIV prevalence (%), 2004 0.6
Women age 15-49 with HIV/AIDS, 2004 260,000
Children with HIV/AIDS, 2003 11,000
AIDS deaths, 2004 16,000
http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/global?page=cr07-00-00
more kids than I would have anticipated for North America, how sad......if those stats are accurate, 25 per cent of AIDS/HIV cases in North America are indeed female.......hmmmm
let me try another source
AIDS ReSearch Alliance, Women and the HIV/AIDS Epidemic
HIV/AIDS is one of the most urgent health issues facing women today. Women are the fastest rising HIV infection group in the United States and AIDS is the 5th leading cause of death of U.S. women. Globally, women account for 40% of all AIDS cases.
http://www.aidsresearch.org/
hmmm, no specific stats on the US.....oh now this is funny, this is from a dentist's website, because I guess AIDS is an occupational hazard:
During the 1990s, the epidemic shifted steadily toward a growing proportion of AIDS cases among black people, Hispanics and women, and toward a decreasing proportion in MSM (men having sex with men), although this group remains the largest single exposure group. Blacks and Hispanics have been disproportionately affected since the early years of the epidemic. In absolute numbers, blacks have outnumbered whites in new AIDS diagnoses and deaths since 1996, and in the number of people living with AIDS since 1998. In 2003, blacks accounted for 50% of all HIV/AIDS cases diagnosed
The most recent statistics available concerning the AIDS epidemic can be found by clicking here and here. The pie chart on the top shows the proportion of cases of HIV transmitted in either direction between men and women since the beginning of the epidemic in 1981. The chart on the bottom shows the same data for 2003. A comparison of the two charts is useful to see how the epidemiology of this disease has evolved over the years. Since the acute phase of the epidemic is now over and the data has settled down to nearly a flat line since about 1998, we can probably expect the proportion of heterosexual transmission to all other combined means of transmission to remain about the same as that in the lower chart. The "other means" figure is composed mostly of MSM (men having sex with men) plus IDU (Intravenous Drug Users). Over the course of the entire epidemic, slightly over half of the AIDS diagnoses in women were due to sexual relations with men, the remainder being due to intravenous drug abuse and unknown causes. As of 2003, however, (hetero)sexual intercourse has grown in importance to become the leading cause of AIDS in women by a ratio of approximately 5 to 1.
Now the dentist here relies on this for his stats:
http://www.avert.org/statindx.htm
who get their numbers from the CDC, well that's a pretty reliable source:
People living with AIDS
At the end of 2003, the CDC estimates that 405,926 persons were living with AIDS in the USA.
Of these,
36% were white
42% were black
20% were Hispanic
2% were of other race/ethnicity.
Of the adults and adolescents with AIDS, 77% were men. Of these men,
58% were men who had sex with men (MSM)
22% were injection drug users (IDU)
11% were exposed through heterosexual contact
8% were both MSM and IDU.
Of the 88,815 adult and adolescent women with AIDS,
63% were exposed through heterosexual contact
35% were exposed through injection drug use.
An estimated 1,998 children were living with AIDS at the end of 2003
http://www.avert.org/statsum.htm
Now the first numbers I quoted include carriers of the virus I guess and not just with full blown AIDS....yep from the CDC figures, about 22% of AIDS cases are female...not 2 per cent and if we take the CDC numbers on transmission, yeah about 66 per cent is from a combination of gay sex and IV drug use, the rest is from IV drugs and heterosexual contact or 34 per cent - not numbers to dismiss though yes the high risk group is self evident.....
Another tenet: the more people do something bad, the less bad it becomes.
There are people who want the AIDS virus to spread. I see no realistic way of checking it as long as that remains the case.
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.