Beware the high-risk 'gay lifestyle'
IN THE article, 'Most with Aids virus don't know they have it' (ST, July 18), Senior Minister of State Balaji Sadasivan announced that a study of 3,000 blood samples in government hospitals showed that 1 in 350 samples was positive for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) which causes Aids. The male to female ratio of these cases was 15:1.
What conclusions can we draw?
The 15:1 ratio means that the HIV epidemic is still confined mainly to the high-risk groups (concentrated epidemic) and has not spread to the general population (generalised epidemic). If it were already in the general population, the ratio would be much closer to 1:1.
Therefore we still have time to do something before the situation gets worse.
Who constitutes these high-risk groups?
Data released by the Ministry of Health on HIV last year showed two groups of men were responsible for approximately 83 per cent of HIV cases.
53 per cent of the cases were men who contracted HIV via unprotected high-risk heterosexual sex. This group was infected overseas or by local unlicensed prostitutes; our licensed prostitutes are screened for HIV.
30 per cent of the cases comprised men having sex with men (MSM). Based on the prevalence of 2.8 per cent of men being homosexual or bisexual, there are about 67,000 men in Singapore who engage in MSM.
I highlight this second high-risk group as it is a matter of public interest and concern, given the ongoing debate on the review of the Penal Code relating to Section 377A.
Extrapolating from the infection rate of 1 in 350 and 15:1 ratio of males to females, the conclusion is that among men who indulge in MSM, about one in 20 has HIV and does not know it.
This means that someone who indulges in MSM and has 20 sexual partners would have exposed himself to HIV.
A survey conducted in the United States has shown that 75 per cent of homosexual men have more than 100 sexual partners and 28 per cent of them have more than 1,000 partners.
I feel that not enough has been done to warn our youth that leading a 'gay lifestyle' is not cool. On the contrary, it is very unhealthy. There is a very high risk of contracting not only HIV but also a slew of other sexually transmitted diseases.
Dr Alan Chin Yew Liang
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This twit of a doctor is at it again!!
If risky sexual behaviour leads to higher rates of HIV infection, then criminalise RISKY SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR. Why single out the homoseuxals?
What conclusions can we draw? (Dr Chin's style)
Is he
a) very stupid
or
b) homophobic
or
c) a religious zealot?
5 comments:
This debate seems to be heating up in the Straits Times forum.
I wonder why. Any clues?
Great blog. I don't agree with some of your points in the earlier posts, but you write clearly and sharply.
Subscribed.
Probably due to the contradictions with religious teachings.
For example if homosexuality is legalised/decriminalised, it creates a situation where people might ask "If homosexuality is wrong according to the gods, why is it that the majority of the people do not oppose it? Is it because the teachings of the gods are wrong?"
Somewhat similar to what happened when galileo expressed his heliocentric ideas.
I know the reasons behind the debate, but I'm wondering why it's so heated recently.
Is the review of Section 377 concluding soon? Maybe they need to get their point across now to prevent this section from being repealed.
I guess some of the gay activists are pushing their case really hard and it unsettles the "righteous morality" of some.
Not sure if the review of section of 377 is concluding soon though.
rather cynically, i think there's only debate now because LKY mentioned it. sad that the impetus came from his whims in the end, not at the end of all the efforts of Activists over the years.
Post a Comment