-88-
Registered
AIDS: Avoidable Immunodeficiency Syndrome
By: DR. TAMAS NAGY
Published on: Sunday, September 18 @ 13:58:29 CDT.
The most obvious ways not to catch this modern plague.
The weekend of September 10-11, 2005 is the date for the annual AIDS Ride or Life in the Ithaca area. The goal is to raise money, among other things, for prevention of AIDS. It sounds like a lofty goal, but AIDS prevention can be done with minimal resources if the prevention emphasizes methods that work. However, the so-called AIDS advocacy groups (code name for Lefty hedonists) do not offer proven methods to prevent AIDS.
If one opens any authoritative book on human medicine, for example Robbins Pathologic basis of Disease, it is obvious that AIDS is a disease overwhelmingly linked to certain behaviors. According to the 7th edition (2005) of the aforementioned textbook, 50% of AIDS patients are homosexual and bisexua
l men, additional 25% are intrave
nous drug abusers, while 33% of the patients are heterosexuals. These groups are the main ones affected by the disease. The 4th edition (1990) of the textbook has different figures: 71% are homosexual and bisexual men, 18% are intravenous drug abusers, and only 3.9% are heterosexuals.
Based upon these statistics and what we currently know of the HIV virus, it can be concluded that one can get this virus either through sexual acts or through shared needles. In other words one has to be a promiscuous degenerate (either a hetero or a homosexual type) or a junkie to get this disease. Other modes of transmission are exceedingly rare. Moreover, if one looks at the world, AIDS is almost exclusively a sexually transmitted disease, linked to promiscuous sexual behavior. Based upon the differences in sexual behavior, in Africa AIDS is a largely heterosexual disease, because sexual promiscuity is almost exclusively heterosexual (due to the presence of Muslim influence and its
con
demnation of homosexual acts
and severe punishment of sodomy). On the other hand in the Western World AIDS first spread like wild-fire within the homosexual community, because homosexual men are extremely promiscuous. According to the 1994 National Health and Societal Life Survey only 4.5% of homosexual men in committed relationships had been sexually faithful (compared to 75% of married men).
In light of this, what do AIDS advocacy groups propose and demand? Of course they want more money spent on prevention, treatment, and research. These are all fine goals, but what are the details? Treatment and research are on-going, but due to the nature of the virus, treatment is costly and there is no vaccine (and there probably never will be). The best and cheapest way to curb the AIDS epidemic would be prevention, true prevention: discouraging profligate sexual behavior and other self destructive attitudes.
Instead the Left wants more instruction on safe sex. Give me a break! We have been
hearing
about how safe sex education
would curb the rise of sexually transmitted disease. Where is the proof? The rising numbers of sexually transmitted diseases are indicating that safe sex education will not halt the spread of sexually transmitted diseases; rather it would exacerbate the problem. So what do they offer as a solution for junkies? Needle exchange programs! Well, from 1990 to 2005 the percentage of junkies within the AIDS patients rose from 18% to 25% (that is almost a 50% increase!) despite the efforts of compassionate folks who go around in shooting galleries offering clean needles.
So what would truly work? Quit sleeping around and quit shooting yourself up! The emphasis on abstinence and faithfulness in marriage over condom drops worked at least in one African country: Uganda. In South Africa, where the condom pushing is in full tilt and there is no abstinence message, AIDS is on the very steep rise. What other proof does the Left want?
http://www.cornellamerican.com/main/module...=article&sid=85
Comment from Reader :
Re: AIDS: Avoidable Immunodeficiency Syndrome (Score: 0)
by on Saturday, September 24 @ 11:02:29 CDT
Dr. Tamas Nagy's excellent summary article is long overdue. He presents a solid case against homosexual behavior and drug abuse from the standpoint of disease prevention.
His claims are documented in publications of the Centers for Disease Control.
Male AIDS cases by exposure category and by Race, 1999 [jabpage.org]
Male HIV diagnosis by exposure category and by Race, 1999 [jabpage.org]
But, besides Dr. Nagy's accurate assessment of male homosexuality and drug abuse as being risk factors for the transmission of HIV, there is another obvious risk factor that he declined to identify: having sex with Black men.
Look at the numbers, and get out your calculator.
By the e
nd of 1999, in t
he United States, there had been 290,537 AIDS cases among White men (with 12,855 cases
developing that year) and 199,248 AIDS cases among Black men (with 14,946 cases developing that year). Those numbers include both homosexual and heterosexual men of each race.
The Black to White per capita rate ratio for AIDS cases is 4.4 over the epidemic period through December 1999, and it is 6.9 for 1999 alone. Those ratios go way up when you filter out the homosexuals and consider the normal men only, since among Whites (more so than among Blacks) AIDS is primarily a homosexual problem; i.e., among Blacks nominally "straight" males have a higher disease rate than is true for sexually normal White men.
By the end of 1999, in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection reporting (at that time), there had been 37,950 HIV infections among White men (with 5484 infections discovered that year) and 40,548 HIV infections among Black men (with 6746 infections discovered that year). T
hose numbers include
both homosexual and heterosexual men of each race.
The per capita rate ratio (B/W) is 6.8 ov
er the epidemic period through December 1999 and the per capita rate ratio (B/W) for 1999 alone is 7.3. Those ratios go way up when you filter out the homosexuals and consider the normal men only, since among Whites (more so than among Blacks) HIV infection is primarily a homosexual phenomenon; i.e., among Blacks nominally "straight" males have a higher disease rate than is true for sexually normal White men.
Now let's look at the CDC data more closely.
Among sexually normal White men (i.e., White men who were not homosexuals), 3854 new AIDS cases developed in the United States, during 1999.
Among Black heterosexual men (i.e., Black men who were not homosexuals), 9819 new AIDS cases developed in the United States, during 1999.
Among White heterosexual men, 1964 new HIV infections were reported in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection repor
ting, during 1999.
<b
r>Among Black heterosexual men, 4759 new HIV infections were reported in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection repor
ting, during 1999.
Among White heterosexual men, there were 50,093 AIDS cases in the United States, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
Among Black heterosexual men, there were 109,849 AIDS cases in the United States, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
Among White heterosexual men, there were 11,529 HIV infections in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection reporting, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
Among Black heterosexual men, there were 25,906 HIV infections in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection reporting, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
The White to Black population ratio for the United States in December 1999 was 5.9. We'll assume that the "average" White to Black population ratio for the United States during the epidemic period t
hrough December 1999 was 6.4
(the ratio for April 1990).
Black-to-White per capita rate ratios, among heterosexual males, of:
1. AIDS cases, 1999 only: 5.9 (9819/3854) =
15.0
2. AIDS cases, epidemic period though December 1999: 6.4 (109849/50093) = 14.0
3. HIV infections, 1999 only: 5.9 (4759/1964) = 14.3
4. HIV infections, epidemic period through December 1999: 6.4 (25906/11529) = 14.4
The obvious conclusion: Black HETEROsexual men are 14 times more likely to be AIDS cases or HIV carriers than White HETEROsexual men. Having sex with Black men is a large risk factor all by itself.
Furthermore, Blacks have much higher rates for nearly all sexually transmitted diseases, not just AIDS alone. In 1997, Blacks accounted for 77% of total reported cases of gonorrhea; the Black to White per capita rate ratio was 31.1 for gonorrhea infections. During the same year, Blacks accounted for 82% of all reported cases of syphilis; the Black to White per capita rate r
atio was 44.0 for syphilis infec
tions. (For both gonorrhea and syphilis, the infection rate among mestizo Hispanics was about three times the rate for Whites, in 1997.) Source: Sexually Transmitted Di
sease Surveillance 1997; prepared by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention; published September 1998.
http://www.cornellamerican.com/main/module...=&order=&thold=
By: DR. TAMAS NAGY
Published on: Sunday, September 18 @ 13:58:29 CDT.
The most obvious ways not to catch this modern plague.
The weekend of September 10-11, 2005 is the date for the annual AIDS Ride or Life in the Ithaca area. The goal is to raise money, among other things, for prevention of AIDS. It sounds like a lofty goal, but AIDS prevention can be done with minimal resources if the prevention emphasizes methods that work. However, the so-called AIDS advocacy groups (code name for Lefty hedonists) do not offer proven methods to prevent AIDS.
If one opens any authoritative book on human medicine, for example Robbins Pathologic basis of Disease, it is obvious that AIDS is a disease overwhelmingly linked to certain behaviors. According to the 7th edition (2005) of the aforementioned textbook, 50% of AIDS patients are homosexual and bisexua
l men, additional 25% are intrave
nous drug abusers, while 33% of the patients are heterosexuals. These groups are the main ones affected by the disease. The 4th edition (1990) of the textbook has different figures: 71% are homosexual and bisexual men, 18% are intravenous drug abusers, and only 3.9% are heterosexuals.
Based upon these statistics and what we currently know of the HIV virus, it can be concluded that one can get this virus either through sexual acts or through shared needles. In other words one has to be a promiscuous degenerate (either a hetero or a homosexual type) or a junkie to get this disease. Other modes of transmission are exceedingly rare. Moreover, if one looks at the world, AIDS is almost exclusively a sexually transmitted disease, linked to promiscuous sexual behavior. Based upon the differences in sexual behavior, in Africa AIDS is a largely heterosexual disease, because sexual promiscuity is almost exclusively heterosexual (due to the presence of Muslim influence and its
con
demnation of homosexual acts
and severe punishment of sodomy). On the other hand in the Western World AIDS first spread like wild-fire within the homosexual community, because homosexual men are extremely promiscuous. According to the 1994 National Health and Societal Life Survey only 4.5% of homosexual men in committed relationships had been sexually faithful (compared to 75% of married men).
In light of this, what do AIDS advocacy groups propose and demand? Of course they want more money spent on prevention, treatment, and research. These are all fine goals, but what are the details? Treatment and research are on-going, but due to the nature of the virus, treatment is costly and there is no vaccine (and there probably never will be). The best and cheapest way to curb the AIDS epidemic would be prevention, true prevention: discouraging profligate sexual behavior and other self destructive attitudes.
Instead the Left wants more instruction on safe sex. Give me a break! We have been
hearing
about how safe sex education
would curb the rise of sexually transmitted disease. Where is the proof? The rising numbers of sexually transmitted diseases are indicating that safe sex education will not halt the spread of sexually transmitted diseases; rather it would exacerbate the problem. So what do they offer as a solution for junkies? Needle exchange programs! Well, from 1990 to 2005 the percentage of junkies within the AIDS patients rose from 18% to 25% (that is almost a 50% increase!) despite the efforts of compassionate folks who go around in shooting galleries offering clean needles.
So what would truly work? Quit sleeping around and quit shooting yourself up! The emphasis on abstinence and faithfulness in marriage over condom drops worked at least in one African country: Uganda. In South Africa, where the condom pushing is in full tilt and there is no abstinence message, AIDS is on the very steep rise. What other proof does the Left want?
http://www.cornellamerican.com/main/module...=article&sid=85
Comment from Reader :
Re: AIDS: Avoidable Immunodeficiency Syndrome (Score: 0)
by on Saturday, September 24 @ 11:02:29 CDT
Dr. Tamas Nagy's excellent summary article is long overdue. He presents a solid case against homosexual behavior and drug abuse from the standpoint of disease prevention.
His claims are documented in publications of the Centers for Disease Control.
Male AIDS cases by exposure category and by Race, 1999 [jabpage.org]
Male HIV diagnosis by exposure category and by Race, 1999 [jabpage.org]
But, besides Dr. Nagy's accurate assessment of male homosexuality and drug abuse as being risk factors for the transmission of HIV, there is another obvious risk factor that he declined to identify: having sex with Black men.
Look at the numbers, and get out your calculator.
By the e
nd of 1999, in t
he United States, there had been 290,537 AIDS cases among White men (with 12,855 cases
developing that year) and 199,248 AIDS cases among Black men (with 14,946 cases developing that year). Those numbers include both homosexual and heterosexual men of each race.
The Black to White per capita rate ratio for AIDS cases is 4.4 over the epidemic period through December 1999, and it is 6.9 for 1999 alone. Those ratios go way up when you filter out the homosexuals and consider the normal men only, since among Whites (more so than among Blacks) AIDS is primarily a homosexual problem; i.e., among Blacks nominally "straight" males have a higher disease rate than is true for sexually normal White men.
By the end of 1999, in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection reporting (at that time), there had been 37,950 HIV infections among White men (with 5484 infections discovered that year) and 40,548 HIV infections among Black men (with 6746 infections discovered that year). T
hose numbers include
both homosexual and heterosexual men of each race.
The per capita rate ratio (B/W) is 6.8 ov
er the epidemic period through December 1999 and the per capita rate ratio (B/W) for 1999 alone is 7.3. Those ratios go way up when you filter out the homosexuals and consider the normal men only, since among Whites (more so than among Blacks) HIV infection is primarily a homosexual phenomenon; i.e., among Blacks nominally "straight" males have a higher disease rate than is true for sexually normal White men.
Now let's look at the CDC data more closely.
Among sexually normal White men (i.e., White men who were not homosexuals), 3854 new AIDS cases developed in the United States, during 1999.
Among Black heterosexual men (i.e., Black men who were not homosexuals), 9819 new AIDS cases developed in the United States, during 1999.
Among White heterosexual men, 1964 new HIV infections were reported in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection repor
ting, during 1999.
<b
r>Among Black heterosexual men, 4759 new HIV infections were reported in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection repor
ting, during 1999.
Among White heterosexual men, there were 50,093 AIDS cases in the United States, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
Among Black heterosexual men, there were 109,849 AIDS cases in the United States, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
Among White heterosexual men, there were 11,529 HIV infections in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection reporting, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
Among Black heterosexual men, there were 25,906 HIV infections in the 32 areas with confidential HIV infection reporting, during the epidemic period through December 1999.
The White to Black population ratio for the United States in December 1999 was 5.9. We'll assume that the "average" White to Black population ratio for the United States during the epidemic period t
hrough December 1999 was 6.4
(the ratio for April 1990).
Black-to-White per capita rate ratios, among heterosexual males, of:
1. AIDS cases, 1999 only: 5.9 (9819/3854) =
15.0
2. AIDS cases, epidemic period though December 1999: 6.4 (109849/50093) = 14.0
3. HIV infections, 1999 only: 5.9 (4759/1964) = 14.3
4. HIV infections, epidemic period through December 1999: 6.4 (25906/11529) = 14.4
The obvious conclusion: Black HETEROsexual men are 14 times more likely to be AIDS cases or HIV carriers than White HETEROsexual men. Having sex with Black men is a large risk factor all by itself.
Furthermore, Blacks have much higher rates for nearly all sexually transmitted diseases, not just AIDS alone. In 1997, Blacks accounted for 77% of total reported cases of gonorrhea; the Black to White per capita rate ratio was 31.1 for gonorrhea infections. During the same year, Blacks accounted for 82% of all reported cases of syphilis; the Black to White per capita rate r
atio was 44.0 for syphilis infec
tions. (For both gonorrhea and syphilis, the infection rate among mestizo Hispanics was about three times the rate for Whites, in 1997.) Source: Sexually Transmitted Di
sease Surveillance 1997; prepared by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD Prevention; published September 1998.
http://www.cornellamerican.com/main/module...=&order=&thold=
