It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The report, which was released on the Friday after Thanksgiving, analyzed data gathered in 2011.
According to the report, the percentage of men with HIV/AIDS having sex with other men without a condom had increased from 55 percent in 2005, to 57 percent in 2008, to 62 percent today.
Trying to get HIV-positive gay men to use condoms may prove difficult, as their use has plummeted among homosexuals. Anal sex without condoms increased by 20 percent among homosexual men between 2005 and 2011.
As a result, the rate of AIDS infection among homosexual males has remained an epidemic. Between 2008 and 2010, the number of homosexuals with HIV/AIDS rose by 12 percent, with an especially large increase among young men having sex with other males
That may have been a typo.
Four percent of the population is homosexual and two percent is bi-sexual (latest info) . Homosexual men are 44% more likely to be diagnoses with HIV/AIDS then the heterosexual population.
48 states to be exact. It would not be unreasonable to start with the figures that 4% of the population have 60% of the diagnoses. That leaves 96% of the population having 40% of the diagnoses.
Although MSM are a small proportion of the population, they represent the majority of persons diagnosed with HIV in nearly every U.S. state.
In the report, many MSM said they tried to reduce their risk of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections by only having sex with other men who are HIV-positive.
* Neither the respondent nor his sex partner used a condom all the time.
† Percentages might not add to 100 because of rounding; numbers might not add to total because of missing data.
§ Adjusted p-values for the 2005 to 2011 trend; all models include year, age, race/ethnicity, and city and interactions for year × age and year × race/ethnicity. Interactions for year × age and year × race/ethnicity were not statistically significant, suggesting that no overall difference in trend existed between race/ethnicity categories, likewise for age categories. P
Agenda agenda, what is they agenda?
in this day and age, you have to be dumber than a box of rocks to not know how to avoid both HIV/AIDS and unplanned pregnancy.
So does this mean that the vast of them are selfish, homicidal maniacs? Doesn't this prove the theory that it is a mental illness and not a choice, or orientation??
reply to post by ketsuko
I think that more to the point is why are people not using protection, and why is it only being expected on one group or another. The danger of this kind of study is that ultimately it will be used and referenced by those who would point to it and say see it is this group that is causing problems that leads to more legalized discrimination.
reply to post by ketsuko
Yes, but if you look at Africa, then you would see what I am talking about. People killed or imprisoned for being homosexual. Watching how people are ostracized for being infected with HIV, the records used to justify such.
We have seen this kind of work before, and it starts with the best of intentions, to separate the population, it starts with a simple report, then someone in power needs scapegoat, uses those records and that group to blame the woes of what ever is affecting society on such. Then the idea, lets separate that group from the rest all to protect the rest of society.
That is how it plays out and all done legally, after all perhaps if you look at history, it becomes clear, and even in the USA this has been done multiple times over. So you would advocate legalized segregation or an aparthide in the USA? Would you be so willing to see your own family divided cause one person is in the demographic group that is found to be unacceptable?