Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Blood banks today are quite adept at screening "blood" so if somebody who has HIV/Aids it will be detected & the donor will be informed. It's simply ridiculous to deny a certain segment of society to donate based on a stereotype.
As for the 46% of Gays being infected? Does that number only include those who identify themeselves as "Gay"? How about the tons of bi sexuals who don't "Identify"?
But current exams can only test for the virus presence 3-6 weeks after exposure. If someone became infected a day or week before donating blood it probably wouldn't show up on a the screening.
As for the stats, I think he misunderstood them. What they're actually saying is that a large percentage (let's use 46%) of HIV infected individuals are gay not that 46% of the gay population is infected.
Blood banks today are quite adept at screening "blood" so if somebody who has HIV/Aids it will be detected & the donor will be informed. It's simply ridiculous to deny a certain segment of society to donate based on a stereotype.
As for the 46% of Gays being infected? Does that number only include those who identify themeselves as "Gay"? How about the tons of bi sexuals who don't "Identify"?
That's not what the article said. The article talks of percentage of new HIV diagnoses. Not percentage of the total gay/bisexual male population.
That's just Nomander's dishonest distortion of the article.
Again using his "logic": if 54% of new HIV cases are straight people, then 54% of ALL straight people must be HIV positive. See how he twisted it?
You what? Nowhere does it say that 46% of gay men are HIV positive. it talks about the percentage of new diagnoses.
"The rate of HIV infections remains disproportionately high among gay and bisexual men in New England.
According to the Rhode Island Department of Health, there were 54 new cases in the men having sex with men (MSM) population in 2010. That figure represents 51percent of the total of infections. That number has been steadily increasing within the past five years. In 2009, there were 59 cases of HIV infection among gay and bisexual men. The percentage for that year was 47. In 2008, the percentage was 41.
Similar findings have been reported in neighboring states. In Connecticut, 46 percent of HIV/AIDS diagnoses in 2009 were gay and bisexual men. Of that total, 67 percent were white men. 34 percent were black..."
Misread that, my bad.
To add though, it is showing an increase in such, and while my initial evaluation (quickly read) of the issue was wrong specifically, the overall aspect of increasing cases with gay men is not invalid. So, again... if such cases are on the rise and occurring more commonly in such, is it unreasonable to make such a precaution?
Amazing how wearing anti-gay blinders affects someone's ability to actually read an article honestly isn't it?
Let's use Nomander's "logic" and apply it to him:
If 100% of men who rape women are straight, that means 100% of ALL straight men are rapists. Ergo, if Nomander is a straight man, he must be a rapist. See how that works? (or doesn't)
Admitted my misread, but you continue to pat yourself on your back for your rhetoric.
Admitted my misread, but you continue to pat yourself on your back for your rhetoric.
I can admit when I am wrong, can you?
Misread? LOL.
Is that what all the anti-gay crusaders do when then flood the internet with "articles" that completely distort and misrepresent studies about homosexuality and gay people?
They just ...ooops...misread them? Funny.... they never seem to admit when they are wrong. Glad you did. This time anyway.
Is that what all the anti-gay crusaders do when then flood the internet with "articles" that completely distort and misrepresent studies about homosexuality and gay people?
They just ...ooops...misread them? Funny.... they never seem to admit when they are wrong. Glad you did. This time anyway.
Now you are just being an antagonist. As I said, I can admit when I misread something, or make a mistake. You seem to capitalize on it to imply a further position. It just makes you look like a fool.
With current testing techniques, along with the provision if Leucocyte removal of blood products, any contaminated blood will be eliminated prior to any transfusion being given. It helps with the blood shortage.
With current testing techniques, along with the provision if Leucocyte removal of blood products, any contaminated blood will be eliminated prior to any transfusion being given. It helps with the blood shortage.
So they improved the testing technique? I was still under the impression that the tests could only start detecting the virus 3-6 weeks after the exposure.
A large portion of these infected men are married to women. These are the men who are on the DL and are not educated in how to protect themselves. This is why the category is "men who have sex with men", as opposed to "gay men." Many of these self loathing married men come from homophobic cultures in which they are afraid to come out. This is why they feel compelled to marry women, and infect their wives. By the time they are diagnosed, it is too late. It's just a vicious cycle, and it has to stop. Many of these responses on ga;y threads here on CD are only proving my point. Homophobia can kill! Stop the hate already.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
See how that works? (or doesn't)
