[humblegunner]

"People are not taking risks because they're stupid, or because they wake up one day and say, 'I'm going to take a risk today,' " Dr. Halkitis said. "They do it because the sexual risk fulfills a need, or somehow makes them feel better about themselves."

Yeah, right up until they die they feel better.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

My question is this: If you have sufficient research funding to compare the availability of public health brochures in gay bars in London and NYC - wouldn't you think there might have been funding for accurate and unbiased presentation on the cost impact of HIV in the US?

Doh!

Here in the United States you have the Attorneys General of numerous states bonding together to extract a multi-billion dollar settlement from the tobacco manufacturers. Why? Because the states had to bear the burden of increased healthcare costs via Medicare and Medicaid programs to treat the effects of tobacco use. Fair enough. Anyone see any action by the attorneys General against anyone responsible for the foisting of billions of dollars in health care costs of the general public (taxpayers for Medicare and Medicaid expenses, public in general via private pay insurance) caused by the reckless transmission of HIV? Of course not.

It had to be about 20 years ago when I was first insulted with PSA's in movie theaters, in public transportation and on television and radio. The use of the broad brush approach was an attempt to make sure we all knew that "everyone is at risk", which - as Michael Fumento pointed out in 1990 - is not true. A select subset of the population is at risk - and because of their conscious choices.

We need to find a way of making the costs of this matter fall on the people who make those choices - that will be the fastest way to stop HIV transmission.