Freethought & Rationalism Archive

scigirl · 08-14-2003, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by echidna
So far I can�t see how this can be anything other than an indicator of substantially higher promiscuity during that period.

I think you are forgetting a tiny detail. It's easier to get AIDS from anal sex than it is vaginal sex.

So - there in fact could have been an equal level of promiscuity, but the gay promiscuity led to more HIV cases than the straight promiscuity.

I brought up the needle point earlier because you seemed to imply that the entire epidemic was only due to sex, which was clealry incorrect.

scigirl

echidna · 08-14-2003, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scigirl
I think you are forgetting a tiny detail. It's easier to get AIDS from anal sex than it is vaginal sex.

Yes, that�s the dual factor from that first post of mine. But how much easier ? I don�t have any hard facts behind me. I was kinda hoping you would have better access to them than myself.

I find it very hard to believe that ease of transmission between anal and vaginal sex attributes for the entire difference in the rate of transmission between the two communities.

(I hadn't actually forgetten it BTW.

)

scigirl · 08-14-2003, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by echidna
I was kinda hoping you would have better access to them than myself.

Well if you want to slog your way through this debate, feel free. Warning - you have to be really fucking bored or insane to venture in there (even more insane to post in it - which of course I did several times).

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=59132

Some quotes from the famous Dr. Rick (from that debate):

Quote:

"At the end of 2001, an estimated total of 362,827 persons in the United States were living with AIDS (Table 28). Since the use of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) became widespread during 1996, trends in AIDS incidence have become less reflective of underlying trends in HIV transmission. However, because HIV surveillance data have not been available nationwide, AIDS surveillance data have been and continue to be used for formula-based distribution of federal funds for prevention and care. An Institute of Medicine (IOM) committee is assessing the adequacy and reliability of HIV surveillance data for use as the basis for distributing Ryan White CARE Act funding. For more information on the progress of the IOM committee or to provide feedback to the committee"

One of the reasons that HIV prevalence rates in the US are increasing is because a smaller percentage of people infected with HIV are dying each year now compared to ten years ago. However, "the estimated number of annual new HIV infections in the United States has remained at 40,000 for over 10 years" ( MMWR July 18, 2003 / 52(RR12);1-24)

Not sure if that's what you are looking for - but it's something.

Quote:

I find it very hard to believe that ease of transmission between anal and vaginal sex attributes for the entire difference in the rate of transmission between the two communities.

No I'm sure it doesn't account for the entire difference. Just some of it. Here's a table that Dr. Rick presented in that debate above. Receptive anal sex had a score of 100, versus receptive vaginal sex, with a score of 20. So 5 times more risky I guess.

scigirl

Chicken Girl · 08-14-2003, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scigirl
I think you are forgetting a tiny detail. It's easier to get AIDS from anal sex than it is vaginal sex.

and then there's the fact that gay sex has no risk of pregnancy, so pre-AIDS awareness, gays were less likely to use protection.

RevDahlia · 08-14-2003, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chicken Girl
and then there's the fact that gay sex has no risk of pregnancy, so pre-AIDS awareness, gays were less likely to use protection.

I was going to mention this too. You can't really blame a group of people for having spread a disease they didn't know existed.

(edited for verb agreement)

echidna · 08-14-2003, 11:59 PM

Thanks folks, thanks for that scigirl, I've run outta time & I won't be able to post properly until Monday. Cheers.

Mike in NC · 08-15-2003, 10:37 AM

As to the question of how AIDS spread so fast in the gay male community, I think the definitive account can be found in the late Randy Shilts' bestseller "And the Band Played On". He notes that the first cases were homosexual men who had an average of 1100 sexual partners. At this point straights usually gasp in disbelief and wonder how that is possible. Simple. Among urban gay male communities there were institutions known as bathhouses which , aside from their obvious functions, were optimized for anonymous, promiscuous sex and lots of it. They were virtual Grand Central stations for casual sex. Do the math; let's say a typical bathhouse patron goes there 5 nights a week and has 3 sexual partners a night; that's 15 partners a week, 60 a month, more than 700 a year! Add to that a blase attitude about STDs thanks to penicillin and you have the opportunity for a new disease introduced into this population to spread like wildfire. BTW I think it only fair to point out that even during the 70s not all gay men were promiscuous; some of us do believe in monogamy.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-14-2003, 11:59 PM	#96
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	Thanks folks, thanks for that scigirl, I've run outta time & I won't be able to post properly until Monday. Cheers.

08-15-2003, 10:37 AM	#97
Mike in NC Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 42	As to the question of how AIDS spread so fast in the gay male community, I think the definitive account can be found in the late Randy Shilts' bestseller "And the Band Played On". He notes that the first cases were homosexual men who had an average of 1100 sexual partners. At this point straights usually gasp in disbelief and wonder how that is possible. Simple. Among urban gay male communities there were institutions known as bathhouses which , aside from their obvious functions, were optimized for anonymous, promiscuous sex and lots of it. They were virtual Grand Central stations for casual sex. Do the math; let's say a typical bathhouse patron goes there 5 nights a week and has 3 sexual partners a night; that's 15 partners a week, 60 a month, more than 700 a year! Add to that a blase attitude about STDs thanks to penicillin and you have the opportunity for a new disease introduced into this population to spread like wildfire. BTW I think it only fair to point out that even during the 70s not all gay men were promiscuous; some of us do believe in monogamy.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.