2% of U.S. population, but 55% of those living with HIV

The 1980s called, they want their headlines back.

Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor!

That isn't surprising. You are 18 TIMES more likely to contract HIV through anal sex than vaginal sex. And that is for unprotected sex with someone that is infected. One of the studies sited found that a single act of vaginal sex has an estimated transmission rate of %0.08, while a single act of anal sex has a transmission rate of %1.43.

Wow. You're telling us that the disease that was originally called "Gay Related Immune Disorder" and colloquially referred to as "Gay cancer" is more prevalent in the homosexual community?

Why would anyone want to put it up some guy's poophole is beyond comprehension.

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:

Sounds like HIV is doing exactly what it was designed for.

Nobody in the civilised world dies from HIV anyway. Most live as long as anyone else these days.

And what is the breakdown on numbers for producing unwanted pregnancies, unwanted children, abortions, fractured or broken families, and rape?

trollism wrote:

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:

Sounds like HIV is doing exactly what it was designed for.

Nobody in the civilised world dies from HIV anyway. Most live as long as anyone else these days.

This would indicate that you have no idea what your'e talking about.

Wtfunny wrote:

And what is the breakdown on numbers for producing unwanted pregnancies, unwanted children, abortions, fractured or broken families, and rape?

It is much easier to obtain data on out-of-wedlock pregnancies and children born out-of-wedlock than it is to obtain data on "unwanted pregnancies, [and] unwanted children." And a recently published article noted that:

"despite the universal acknowledgement that the act of abortion results in a death, abortion is not reported as a cause of death in the vital statistics system in the United States. Nor is this exclusion limited to the United States. Although there are nearly 200 nations where the procedure is legal, and a conservatively estimated 45 - 50 million are performed annually worldwide, there is no country which considers induced abortion as a reportable death [5] [6]." -

.

But it is clear that since the early 1960s when direct abortion was rare in the US, the out-of-wedlock birth rate has risen from about 5-7% to about 41% today when direct abortion is legal and not rare.

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:

trollism wrote:

Nobody in the civilised world dies from HIV anyway. Most live as long as anyone else these days.

http://mobile.aidsmap.com/Life-expectancy-in-HIV-positive-people-in-the-US-still-lags-13-years-behind-HIV-negative-people/page/3040314

This would indicate that you have no idea what your'e talking about.

I said most, and a 13 year difference between HIV +ve and -ve is hardly indicative of it being a death sentence. A big part of this discrepancy will probably come down to HIV +ve positive people living a particularly unhealthy lifestyle and also being susceptible to mental health issues.

(and I said civilised world, a lot of the US is particularly uncivilised when it comes to healthcare, a lot of HIV +ve patients won't have full access to proper treatment if they're not fully covered.)

That's no way to flourish. The pelvic left has won, and everybody loses.

trollism wrote:

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:http://mobile.aidsmap.com/Life-expectancy-in-HIV-positive-people-in-the-US-still-lags-13-years-behind-HIV-negative-people/page/3040314

This would indicate that you have no idea what your'e talking about.

I said most, and a 13 year difference between HIV +ve and -ve is hardly indicative of it being a death sentence. A big part of this discrepancy will probably come down to HIV +ve positive people living a particularly unhealthy lifestyle and also being susceptible to mental health issues.

(and I said civilised world, a lot of the US is particularly uncivilised when it comes to healthcare, a lot of HIV +ve patients won't have full access to proper treatment if they're not fully covered.)

You did say civilised. Did you mean civilized?

Flyingdale Flyer wrote:

Wtfunny wrote:

And what is the breakdown on numbers for producing unwanted pregnancies, unwanted children, abortions, fractured or broken families, and rape?

It is much easier to obtain data on out-of-wedlock pregnancies and children born out-of-wedlock than it is to obtain data on "unwanted pregnancies, [and] unwanted children." ....

It's also much more convenient for your narrative to do so. And it's not at all what I asked about, is it?

Do you blame the gays for this?

Hopefully, President Trump will bring back forced quarrentines.

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:

Sounds like HIV is doing exactly what it was designed for.

Pretty sure everyone missed the meaning here... He meant that HIV/AIDS was designed to kill off the gay population.

Wtfunny wrote:

Flyingdale Flyer wrote:

It is much easier to obtain data on out-of-wedlock pregnancies and children born out-of-wedlock than it is to obtain data on "unwanted pregnancies, [and] unwanted children." ....

It's also much more convenient for your narrative to do so. And it's not at all what I asked about, is it?

Do you blame the gays for this?

Getting data about wanted vs unwanted is rather difficult, and I simply pointed that out.

No, I do not blame the gays for that. Who do you blame for that?

Sbeefyk1 wrote:

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:

Sounds like HIV is doing exactly what it was designed for.

Pretty sure everyone missed the meaning here... He meant that HIV/AIDS was designed to kill off the gay population.

Yeah, we got it. Thanks for explaining anyway.

Flyingdale Flyer wrote:

Wtfunny wrote:

It's also much more convenient for your narrative to do so. And it's not at all what I asked about, is it?

Do you blame the gays for this?

Getting data about wanted vs unwanted is rather difficult, and I simply pointed that out.

No, I do not blame the gays for that. Who do you blame for that?

I don't think wanted vs. unwanted is really even a valid metric, because most cases will fall somewhere between the binary extremes. My wife and I are planning to wait a while before having our first kid, but if she happened to get pregnant today, we'd deal with it just fine and we'd ultimately be perfectly happy about it. So would that be a wanted pregnancy or an unwanted pregnancy?

There's a big difference between a "there's no way I can take care of a child" unwanted pregnancy and a "we planned to stop at 2, but now that the third is on its way, we're totally excited about it" unwanted pregnancy.

Sbeefyk1 wrote:

Performance Enhancing Douche wrote:

Sounds like HIV is doing exactly what it was designed for.

Pretty sure everyone missed the meaning here... He meant that HIV/AIDS was designed to kill off the gay population.

Someone on letsrun that's not retarded. That's refreshing.