Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

CDC, FDA, CBC, and WHO consider homosexuality a health risk

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


Erm, I'm quite a bit older and I know my memory is not what it used to be, but do you have some facts to back up your claim that it started with drug users in the 80's?

All information I have found indicates it was spread from the african monkey to Haitians, who ate it for food, and then spread it to homosexuals during the Haitian homosexual hay day of the 70's and 80's. From there it spread to the U.S. via homosexuals.

[edit on 10/12/09 by idle_rocker]




posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikerussellus
Lets discuss something silly like. . . . . facts.

Is there anyone out there with data that can support the allegations?

There's data in the original post, and I posted this on page 3 of the thread. It's a report that was published in August 2009.

CDC Fact Sheet - HIV/AIDS among gay and bisexual men



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by dbates
 


My bad. I'll shut up now and read.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by dbates
 


Your argument has merit. Can't argue with the facts.

My hat is off to you, sir.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   
This thread just points out the insanity we face on a daily basis. So the CDC, WHO, and others put in place a ban on homosexuals giving blood for the very sensible reason that it could spread aids to others. Makes sense to me, so how can people come on here and say they have right to give blood when a bunch of highly intelligent well paid people who have nothing against homosexuals says its a health risk. I guess if I was born with Hepatitis I should be allowed to give blood, because I was born that way.

This thread just points out the insanity and utter lengths that some people will go to just to feel alright about themselves. Lets give AIDS to more people so homosexuals don't get their feelings hurt. You gotta be kidding me.

Here is why homosexual men cannot donate blood. A perfectly good reason.
AIDS Rate 50 times higher in homosexual men - CDC

[edit on 12-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by dbates
 



If homosexuality is safe then why does the Center for Disease Control and the Food and Drug Administration consider this risky? It looks as if this behavior is a serious health hazard.


Homosexuality is just as safe as heterosexuality, since both deal with attraction and not physical intercourse. A celibate monk in Tibet is just as likely to contract HIV as a celibate gay man that works at a gay bar; therefore, the behavior is not the problem.


Someone is lying to you. Is homosexuality something we're born with or a life style choice? Is homosexuality safe or dangerous? Apparently all the leading health organizations see it as a health risk.


I fail to see the relevance of why it matters whether or not it's innate or acquired. There are no real scientific studies out there that say homosexuality is taught, learned, or chosen, so I'm not seeing why this is relevant.

Now to the science. I fully support marriage rights and equality for homosexuals. That being said, the rate of HIV infection among homosexual males is much higher than other groups but has remained relatively stable over time. The prevelance of the infection rate and the risk factor with the demographic, coupled with the fact that it can take up to 6 months for HIV to show up on a blood test, gives health organizations every right to institute a ban anyone who takes part in these high-risk activities. Until there's something akin to a "next day" test it only makes sense to do so.

I also seriously doubt the 1 in 5 number. The people willing to partake in scientific surveys such as this are much lower than the actual number of people who partake in sexuality studies. But I could be wrong!

In conclusion, I fully support homosexual equality but the risk factors right now just don't support a reason to remove the bans in my opinion. The lesson we should take from this is to spend more time educating those who are at the most risk at a national level so the prevelance of infections go down.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   


You ever read the "And the Band Played on"? It was a fact based indictment of the sick and twisted happenings of the homosexual community. Who wrote it? A very worried homosexual.

That is where I get my facts. From the homosexual community itself... Right from the horses mouth... Have a nice day!


So you are going to quote a book which was written in....let's see...


And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic is a nonfiction book written by San Francisco Chronicle journalist Randy Shilts, published in 1987.


Source

Let's do the math shall we? One homosexual 22 years ago wrote a book about homosexual activity. And for some reason you think that it can be used as an accurate depiction of homosexual lifestyle today?

Your argument needs to be updated for the times at hand my friend.

I am a homosexual man (and you'll probably think Im in the PC Crowd) who has lived in various different countries including San Francisco's gay village and what was happening in the 80's is almost something of a myth now.

That behaviour which you call "anal tearing, Bathouse experiments" are not something that is glorified in the Homosexual community, it's actually looked down upon just like any straight man or woman who participates in orgies.

I agree with the CDC based on the statistics that gay men because of the percentage of infected or likely infected should shy away from giving blood. It's simply a safety issue, not discrimination as far as I am concerned.

But please do not bash a lifestyle using 22 year old arguments. If you dont' agree with my lifestyle that's fine, I have no quams, you are no less of a person in my eyes. I don't think any of you are bigots or intolerent, you have the right to your own opinions and they are respected by me.

I remember going to church a few years ago and the pastor was giving a sermon about homosexuality and how they are all God's children and should not be hated for any reason. That it was up to God to judge them. Somebody in the crowd got up and yelled some incoherent hate.

The preacher simply waited till the man sat down, look at him in the eyes and said very plainly. God gave you a neck, so you could look the other way.

That's what it comes down to. It isn't about the PC crowd, I hate that crap as much as the next person. Facts are facts. There is no need however to demonize a group of people continually.

~Keeper


[edit on 10/12/2009 by tothetenthpower]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by northof8
 


Sorry but that is not true, that became later, the first group that were found to have HIV were intravenous drug users.

The spread of HIV it goes both ways is spreads among heterosexual to homosexual and anybody that have sex with more than one partner without protection or testing.

Read the facts.



The fact is this was once called GRID too. The PC Troll Patrol got that name changed too. Does that mean it now is any less a gay disease? Not in the eyes of the CDC and WHO.... The name may have changed to pacify the homosexual community but both those organizations still consider homosexuals the main perpetrators of this dreaded disease.

Reading the facts as you see them is very different than reading the facts as they are. People in the homosexual community will still decide to live in ignorance no matter the science. Only when it suits the agenda does science play any roll in the PC Troll Patrol argument.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by northof8
 


Care to provide any links to back up your opinion?



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Found this on Wikipedia, not sure if it helps or not.


Gay-related immune deficiency (GRID) (sometimes informally called the gay plague or GRIDS) was the 1982 name first proposed to describe what is now known as AIDS,[1] after public health scientists noticed clusters of Kaposi's sarcoma and Pneumocystis pneumonia among gay males in California and New York City.[2]

During the early history of AIDS, an ad hoc organization called Gay Men's Health Crisis was founded to combat what appeared to be a homosexual-only disease produced by sexual promiscuity, intravenous drug use, and/or usage of poppers. Soon after, clusters of Kaposi's sarcoma and Pneumocystis pneumonia were also reported among Haitians recently entering the United States[3] and men with hemophilia, among female sexual partners of AIDS patients, and among blood transfusion recipients with no obvious risk factors.

The term AIDS (for acquired immune deficiency syndrome) was proposed in 1982[4] by researchers concerned with the accuracy of the disease's name. In this new name, scientists were supported by political figures who realized that the term "gay-related" did not accurately describe the demographic that the disease affected. On April 23, 1984, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary announced at a press conference that an American scientist, Dr. Robert Gallo, had discovered the probable cause of AIDS: the retrovirus subsequently named human immunodeficiency virus or HIV in 1986.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
We are talking about the same health organizations that freaking promote swine flu vaccines, these idiot government agencies don't know what they are talking about.

And guess what i'm a homosexual and i've donated blood, and guess what, I lied! Shoot me!

The reasons for this are baseless, heterosexual couples who have had anal sex donate blood. If it's not about anal sex what exactly is it about? Just being homosexual? Sorry but that's just not a good enough reason for me.

When I see FACTS saying that homosexuals donating blood is a health risk with a lengthy list of good reasons for designating it as a health risk then I will listen. But this just sounds bigoted to me.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Uniceft17
 


It is because homosexual men are 50x more likely to have AIDS than the general public. People who violate the CDC recommendations just to prove a point should be arrested for adding to risk for others.

[edit on 12-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by StinkyFeet
 


Like I said, Let me see some facts. And specific ones please. You added no sources to your claims so as far as im concerned its BS.

And my donations were to family members, along with bone marrow and my homosexual blood cells were good enough for them. Get over it.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by StinkyFeet
 


You cannot go around spouting off something like that without providing a link my friend.

Please show me a study that says that gays are 50X more likely to get AIDS...I beg of you.

~Keeper



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uniceft17

And guess what i'm a homosexual and i've donated blood, and guess what, I lied! Shoot me!


This is the reason we don't have good records about who is transmitting the disease.


When I see FACTS saying that homosexuals donating blood is a health risk with a lengthy list of good reasons for designating it as a health risk then I will listen. But this just sounds bigoted to me.


The facts are listed above. Records show the disease has increased among homosexuals. Please, as a human being I urge you, to be careful and use protection especially if you are giving blood. This is not a bigoted requested.

[edit on 10/12/09 by idle_rocker]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower


You ever read the "And the Band Played on"? It was a fact based indictment of the sick and twisted happenings of the homosexual community. Who wrote it? A very worried homosexual.

That is where I get my facts. From the homosexual community itself... Right from the horses mouth... Have a nice day!


So you are going to quote a book which was written in....let's see...


And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic is a nonfiction book written by San Francisco Chronicle journalist Randy Shilts, published in 1987.


Source

Let's do the math shall we? One homosexual 22 years ago wrote a book about homosexual activity. And for some reason you think that it can be used as an accurate depiction of homosexual lifestyle today?

Your argument needs to be updated for the times at hand my friend.

I am a homosexual man (and you'll probably think Im in the PC Crowd) who has lived in various different countries including San Francisco's gay village and what was happening in the 80's is almost something of a myth now.

That behaviour which you call "anal tearing, Bathouse experiments" are not something that is glorified in the Homosexual community, it's actually looked down upon just like any straight man or woman who participates in orgies.

I agree with the CDC based on the statistics that gay men because of the percentage of infected or likely infected should shy away from giving blood. It's simply a safety issue, not discrimination as far as I am concerned.

But please do not bash a lifestyle using 22 year old arguments. If you dont' agree with my lifestyle that's fine, I have no quams, you are no less of a person in my eyes. I don't think any of you are bigots or intolerent, you have the right to your own opinions and they are respected by me.

I remember going to church a few years ago and the pastor was giving a sermon about homosexuality and how they are all God's children and should not be hated for any reason. That it was up to God to judge them. Somebody in the crowd got up and yelled some incoherent hate.

The preacher simply waited till the man sat down, look at him in the eyes and said very plainly. God gave you a neck, so you could look the other way.

That's what it comes down to. It isn't about the PC crowd, I hate that crap as much as the next person. Facts are facts. There is no need however to demonize a group of people continually.

~Keeper


[edit on 10/12/2009 by tothetenthpower]


So because I have a neck I am supposed to look the other way while a potential AIDS victim taints the blood supply? We have enough risks in this world without at least trying to minimize the damage the "gay community" has already done with this dreaded disease.

The CDC and WHO consider the homosexual community the largest threat to the blood supply and that is what this is about. Not some preacher and I doubt that preacher would want a homosexual donating blood for his family so don't confuse the two. Don't confuse tolerance with science.

The homosexual community would use their flawed logic to force the rest of us to allow their AIDS infected population to donate their blood all in the name of political correctness if we let them.

The homosexual community doesn't need anymore influence where logic, reason and science are concerned. They barley know how to use logic and reason as demonstrated in this thread. If it wasn't so laughable it would be absurd...



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Uniceft17
 


Here you go. I posted it a few posts back but I will spare you the time of finding it.

AIDS Rate 50 times higher in homosexual men - CDC



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by StinkyFeet
 


One problem. I don't have aids, the point of the article is that it's more prevalent in gay men? Sorry but that's still not a good enough of a reason, I may be gay but that doesn't mean I have unprotected sex with every man I see on a street corner. Which is basically what that study is saying, how else do you get aids?!



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by northof8
 


Alright then, just deflect the facts and go with your biased rhetoric about how we are diseased group of people who pose a danger to society,that's great.

ohh and the link your provided states this...


An official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced the CDC's estimate Monday that in the United States AIDS is fifty times more prevalent among men who have sex with men ('MSM') than the rest of the population.


See that word ESTIMATE.....yeah..that's "proof" alright.

~Keeper



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by idle_rocker
 


It was at the request of a family member, no blood or bone marrow was donated to anonymous individuals. My blood was screened too, isn't that a requirment anyways? I'm perfectly healthy, besides the fact that I have a loving significant other in my life who is also a male.





new topics




 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join