Mudcat Café message #3511246 The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #150624   Message #3511246
Posted By: Musket
03-May-13 - 06:06 AM
Thread Name: BS: P.E. stops you being gay?
Subject: RE: BS: P.E. stops you being gay?
Akenaton _ I'm not a health care professional, and neither, thank Clapton are you.

Keith - When looking for statistics, look for the ones in discussion? Nobody is being complacent and the figures you quote, when drilled down regionally, are even more stark, especially BAC, sadly.

However, I was speaking of GU clinic take, which is just one service where HIV is occasionally diagnosed. ED (A&E to me & thee) picks up, as it were, far more, and elective screening most of the rest. The cost of antiretrovirals is immense, so targeting and helping people takes a lot of thought, a lot of analysis of facts and a hell of a lot of outreach. Demonising for bigoted or political reasons is an unnecessary distraction. There again, flipping to Mudcat to feed the trolls might be cathartic on a busy day, but if the general population were anything like as ignorant as you two prize twats, the HPA figures would spiral out of control.

My comments on increases in sexual health concerns have no bearing on the figures you quote, and those HPA figures are tied up in the substance misuse statistic. You try to appear intelligent so be so and read further. You will find that MSM is a group not a symptom, and substance misuse is highly prevalent. Hence the issues in linking transmission to sexual activity.

If highly vocal pond life such as many UKIP / BNP wannabe politicians and bigoted old men keep trying to inject hatred at the rate they do, substance misuse in a maligned set of people may well continue. If society insists on entertaining such pathetic views, stable monogamous relationships amongst gay people will be harder to be seen as acceptable.

You'd all just have to find someone else to hate. The clue is in the HPA stuff. The final recommendation isn't just MSM, so you can do an Enoch?

In the meantime, I shall remain in my job. Trying to reason with people with an agenda isn't something I enjoy doing, but reading some of the diatribe from you two at least reinforces my stance in the real world that evidence has to be treated in the entirety rather than subjectively if we are ever to tackle the issue of STDs, the myriad underlying causes and manage to address the red herrings brought about by people with despicable agendas. Out of interest, neither of you are in the same league as some we deal with and indeed answer to. At least they are challenging, mainly because they focus on facts, and healthcare provision isn't perfect.

Even The Daily Mail looks credible compared to you two...