Gays, lesbians, bisexuals

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Hi Chrys! Nice to see you again

and you, Ri

[Nurvingiel]

Maybe this should go in the advertising thread... but I wanted to say Vancouver's Gay and Lesbian newspaper is available on-line at Xtra.ca. I picked up a copy once to see what it was about and was happy to find it witty and full of edgy humour (this is all my opinion of course). At least some GLBT people find these articles relevant. And so did I.

I hope that wasn't too over the top there.

[Spock]

A difficult call but we'll leave it here for now as it is somewhat related to the topic title.

[Nurvingiel]

Okay, thanks. (I can always move it later if you think I should. )

[inked]

Nurv, is Ontario, like, a separate world or something? This is alarming!

http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/blog/index/weblog/3642/

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by inked

Nurv, is Ontario, like, a separate world or something? This is alarming!

http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/blog/index/weblog/3642/

Woah, woah, woah. Back the pony up. Blogs are acceptable news sources now?

I saw that in one of our free newspapers (Vancouver has a number of them and some are good, but not the 24 Hours) recently. Citing a blog as news. *shakes head*

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Woah, woah, woah. Back the pony up. Blogs are acceptable news sources now?

I saw that in one of our free newspapers (Vancouver has a number of them and some are good, but not the 24 Hours) recently. Citing a blog as news. *shakes head*

anything that fits inked's spin is acceptable, and anything that does not isn't

[inked]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Woah, woah, woah. Back the pony up. Blogs are acceptable news sources now?

I saw that in one of our free newspapers (Vancouver has a number of them and some are good, but not the 24 Hours) recently. Citing a blog as news. *shakes head*

Nurv, the blog's the site where I saw the news. My question is the news accurate?

Sorry you got your undies in a dither over the source of citation. My undies were in a dither because of the data reported in the blog account of the news by the EPIDEMIOLOGIST, you know the science guy whose role is to study the course of disease in a population.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

HIV on the rise in Ontario immigrants, gay men

Despite education campaigns and increasing collective knowledge of the causes and effects of HIV, it continues to spread, and in Ontario the rise is especially alarming.

Over the past five years the incidence of HIV in Ontario has increased by 37 per cent, with an average annual increase of about six per cent, according to new figures by Dr. Robert Remis, a University of Toronto professor who heads up the Ontario HIV Epidemiologic Monitoring Unit.

“I think it’s discouraging and perhaps even alarming that in 2005 with all we know about the epidemic that we’re still seeing trends of continuing increasing of HIV infection in many of these populations,� Dr. Remis said.

The most dramatic increase, he said, occurred among certain groups of recent immigrants and among people infected heterosexually.

“But in two groups in particular: Those persons from sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean and other persons infected heterosexually, those have increased 87 and 77 per cent in terms of prevalence in the past five years.�

The incidence of HIV among gay men is also alarming, said Remis. His findings indicate there have been 3,800 new cases of HIV among gay men in the past five years, representing a 28 per cent increase.
Remis attributes this increase to several factors. A chief cause, he believes, is that many gay men are experiencing “safe-sex fatigue,� and they’re simply tired of being bombarded with the safe-sex message.

“Gay men have been hearing this message now for going on 25 years, and it’s very difficult to maintain these kinds of behaviours,� Remis said.

[...] Among the gay community some efforts have been underway to promote prevention.

Peter Bochove of Spa Excess, a gay bath house in Toronto, has brought in health counselors to provide HIV tests, safe-sex advice and free condoms.

[...] Remis said he expects the problem to continue to grow, and said it will only be slowed by increasing research and education dramatically. Ontario’s problem, he said, could be a microcosm of what can be expected to occur across the nation.

“I think the bottom line is this is a big epidemic. It’s a major public health challenge for Ontario and for Canada as a whole,� Remis said.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++


Did you even note the article and it's facts? Or have you elected, like BJ, to merely shoot the messenger who happens to have facts you do not wish to know?

Read the final sentence.

Also, note that the call is to PREVENTION by "safe-sex" techniques and that some are paying attention.

[Insidious Rex]

The most dramatic increase, he said, occurred among certain groups of recent immigrants and among people infected heterosexually.
“But in two groups in particular: Those persons from sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean and other persons infected heterosexually, those have increased 87 and 77 per cent in terms of prevalence in the past five years.�

So the issue is largely with heterosexuals and immigrants and we stick it in the gay thread? The article itself says that the rate of increase among gays is just a fraction of what it is among these HETEROSEXUAL populations. So why are we tagging this onto the gays ONLY? Did we lose track of the AIDS thread again? Or is this another one of those lets take a pot shot at gays things?

[Rían]

I won't comment on where this info belongs, but rate of increase is different from rate of infection. Anyone know what rate of infection is among the various groups?

(This is just a comment and a question. Please don't attack me, anyone.)

[inked]

IR,

I looked for the AIDS thread but didn't locate it. Somebody bump it, please.

This article was discovered in a blog run by a Canadian about Canadian research and so I tagged it to NURV for information on credibility.

Note, too, IR, that I said the article was alarming. It was after Nurv's breakdance over blogs that I posted the article with appropriate enhancements of the text. Sorry to disappoint you and BJ over my intentions.

I rather thought the 28% increase in HIV in homosexual males due to "safe sex burnout" was apropos the thread and the steps taken at the bath house mentioned.

PS Do we need an immigrant or heterosex thread to not discriminate, is that your point?

But who am I to remind people of safe-sex practices, right?

[Rían]

IREx - IYO, was Peter Bochove of Spa Excess (the gay bathhouse mentioned in the article) being discriminatory in doing what he did?

[Insidious Rex]

I didnt say inked was being discriminatory (in this case necessarily). Just that he was being highly inconsistant.

inked: http://www.entmoot.com/showthread.php?t=11231

[Rían]

no, forget inked, I wasn't talking about him. Do you think Peter Bochove was being discriminatory?

[Insidious Rex]

I think hes being a good business man.

[inked]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

I didnt say inked was being discriminatory (in this case necessarily). Just that he was being highly inconsistant.

inked: http://www.entmoot.com/showthread.php?t=11231

Thanks for the bump, IR. I will try to use that thread in the future for the heterosexuals. But, what I want to know now, is if I split the articles that way am I still going to be accused of gay-bashing for reporting data?

[Insidious Rex]

Well my suggestion is if you find some information on AIDS then post it in the AIDS thread. Make sense?

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by inked

Nurv, the blog's the site where I saw the news. My question is the news accurate?

Sorry you got your undies in a dither over the source of citation. My undies were in a dither because of the data reported in the blog account of the news by the EPIDEMIOLOGIST, you know the science guy whose role is to study the course of disease in a population.

I do not have a wedgie right now, but thanks for your concern. Also, I wish I could breakdance. That would be awesome.

If the blog has news on it, I don't see why you can't cite the original source (newspaper etc.) from which the blog obtained the news. Go to the source for accuracy!

Originally Posted by Rian

I won't comment on where this info belongs, but rate of increase is different from rate of infection. Anyone know what rate of infection is among the various groups?

(This is just a comment and a question. Please don't attack me, anyone.)

Attacks Rian... with a HUG!
I don't know, but Inked would be a good person to ask. Unless he finds the information on a blog.
What is the difference between rate of increase and rate of infection (WRT meaning of the terms)?

Originally Posted by inked

Thanks for the bump, IR. I will try to use that thread in the future for the heterosexuals. But, what I want to know now, is if I split the articles that way am I still going to be accused of gay-bashing for reporting data?

If it's like some of the other *cough* data you've posted, then I would fail to reject the null hypothesis. (Null hypothesis: You would be accused of gay-bashing.)

[The Gaffer]

They key thing is the difference between prevalence and incidence.

Prevalence is the number of cases at a given point in time. Incidence is the number of new cases appearing over a given time period.

Unfortunately, the use of percentages is confusing because it can be unclear what it's a percentage of.

So, if you've got 1,000 people with HIV (prevalence=1,000), and 100 new cases in 2002 (incidence=100), then there are now 1,100 cases and we can say that the prevalence has gone up by 10%.

Let's say in 2003 there are 150 new cases. Now we can say that incidence has gone up by 50%; however prevalence has gone up by (150/1,100 = ) 13.6%.

So:

incidence of HIV in Ontario has increased by 37 per cent, with an average annual increase of about six per cent

tells me that there are more new cases appearing each year than there used to be. What it doesn't tell you is what the baseline number of cases is.

What the author doesn't point out is that incidence amongst the heterosexual population has increased more than amongst homosexuals. This data should, I would have thought, undermine the "gay is a diseased lifestyle" bigots.

His findings indicate there have been 3,800 new cases of HIV among gay men in the past five years, representing a 28 per cent increase.

This statistic looks like a prevalence percentage, i.e. 5 years ago there were 2,968 cases of HIV amongst gays in Ontario, but now there are (2,968 + 28%= ) 3,800. We don't know how much the incidence amongst gays has changed.

However, it is not clear.

However however, it is a very valid point that perhaps the prevention message is getting "fatigued" amongst the gay community and needs to be addressed. I'm glad that people in Ontario are on the case.

And finally, I don't have a problem with blogs per se. I see worse reporting of health stories in newspapers every day, where the journos' only interest seems to be getting the most shocking headline possible.

This really does belong in the HIV thread...

[inked]

Excellente! Gaffer. Excellente!

I thought they taught statistical analysis in schools, which goes a long way towards explaing the difficulties encountered here in the past.

WHAT do they teach in the schools these days?