More straight guys were diagnosed with HIV in Western Australia in 2019 than gay guys

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

For the first time since the HIV/AIDS crisis began, more straight identifying men in Western Australia tested positive for HIV in 2019 than their gay counterparts, according to DNA Magazine.

HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with other men was down by 51 percent this year compared to the average over the previous five years. The news was less promising for straight identifying, who saw a 21 percent uptick in diagnoses.

Researchers attribute the spike in new infections to straight identifying men having unprotected sex while traveling in south-east Asia.

Queerty

The gay cancer: "Not just for gays anymore!"™

Also, RIP opedo

[Sol]

To be fair, Western Australia.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Misleading title, wrong board.

[Mr. Morden]

wrong board.

Indeed.  Western Australia news now counts as "US General Discussion"?  Western Australia is roughly as distant from the USA as you can get if you're limited to Earth-based landmasses. 

[dead0man]

it is very unlikely (almost impossible) for a male to get HIV from normal vaginal intercourse.  I understand many people HATE this fact, but hating a fact doesn't make it not true.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Due to currency exchange rates, and subsequent lowered travel and holiday expenses in South East Asia, more guys in Western Australia are visiting Thailand and The Philippines for a 'fun' holiday.

Hence the increase in HIV infection amongst this demographic.

As for the lowered HIV rates in the homosexual community, I cannot say. I only know one gay guy, and he lives happily in Sydney.

[Meclazine for Israel]

To be fair, Western Australia.

Yup, the state that provides China with the bulk load of it's iron ore to manufacture goods to sell to the USA to drive your country towards 3 Trillion US dollars in debt.

Don't choke on it while you are having a laugh.

[cp]

it is very unlikely (almost impossible) for a male to get HIV from normal vaginal intercourse.  I understand many people HATE this fact, but hating a fact doesn't make it not true.

People "HATE" hearing this because it's untrue, and dangerous.

If a woman is not on ARV treatment and achieved an undetectable viral load then her vaginal secretions will contain thousands, even millions, of HIV virons. The virus can pass to a man having penetrative vaginal sex with such a person by coming in contact with the mucus membrane around the urethra or, if he's uncircumcised, through the thin skin under the glans of the foreskin.

If you doubt this, I would point you to the millions of people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa, the overwhelming majority of whom contracted the virus via heterosexual intercourse. 

[dead0man]

it is very unlikely (almost impossible) for a male to get HIV from normal vaginal intercourse.  I understand many people HATE this fact, but hating a fact doesn't make it not true.

People "HATE" hearing this because it's untrue, and dangerous.

If a woman is not on ARV treatment and achieved an undetectable viral load then her vaginal secretions will contain thousands, even millions, of HIV virons. The virus can pass to a man having penetrative vaginal sex with such a person by coming in contact with the mucus membrane around the urethra or, if he's uncircumcised, through the thin skin under the glans of the foreskin.

If you doubt this, I would point you to the millions of people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa, the overwhelming majority of whom contracted the virus via heterosexual intercourse. 

If people in sub-Saharan Africa had normal sex and still got the HIV on the regular you'd have a point.  But they don't.

I first heard about "dry sex" when one of my friends returned from Malawi, where she was doing work with women and cervical cancer screenings. Dry sex, she told me, is the practice of reducing moisture in your vagina in order to seem tighter and cause more friction during intercourse. This is believed to be more pleasurable for the person with the penis, but for the women involved, it's incredibly painful. It's an idea linked to the perception that a tight vagina is one that hasn't been stretched out by overuse, which speaks to the low level of sexual education in the region.

It gets worse. To achieve dryness, some women insert chalk, sand, pulverized rock, herbs, paper, or sponges before sex. Douching with caustic liquids such as detergents, antiseptics, alcohol, and bleach is also common. The use of these substances, in combination with un-lubricated penetrative sex, can lead to vaginal abrasions and increased condom breakage—which compounds the spread of HIV.

<snip>

they also have more concurrent partners than anywhere else on the planet, which spreads HIV faster, they don't get tested, the whole "virgin cure" myth (if you have sex with a virgin, your AIDS goes away), once a sub-Saharan African finds out he has the HIV, he's much more likely to not tell people for as long as he can so he can keep having sex, yes, lack of circumcision doesn't help, their flavor of HIV/AIDS does it's thing much faster than the flavor we have in the west.  There are lots of non-"normal" reasons that add up to them having a whole heck of a lot more AIDS than we do.  Perhaps I shouldn't have used the words "almost impossible", but it is very very hard for a normal male to get the HIV, having normal vaginal intercourse with a woman who has the HIV.  If it's in the butt, if he prefers she douches with sand first, if he's unsnipped, if he recently got into a naked fight with a porcupine then the chances are less good.

another cite

Vaginal sex
A meta-analysis of 10 studies exploring the risk of transmission through vaginal sex was published in 2009.4 It estimated the risk of HIV transmission through receptive vaginal sex (receiving the penis in the vagina) to be 0.08% (equivalent to 1 transmission per 1,250 exposures).

A meta-analysis of three studies exploring the risk from insertive vaginal sex (inserting the penis into the vagina) was estimated to be 0.04% (equivalent to 1 transmission per 2,500 exposures).

[Person Man]

Just because you can’t get pregnant doesn’t mean you don’t have to wear a condom.

[cp]

it is very unlikely (almost impossible) for a male to get HIV from normal vaginal intercourse.  I understand many people HATE this fact, but hating a fact doesn't make it not true.

People "HATE" hearing this because it's untrue, and dangerous.

If a woman is not on ARV treatment and achieved an undetectable viral load then her vaginal secretions will contain thousands, even millions, of HIV virons. The virus can pass to a man having penetrative vaginal sex with such a person by coming in contact with the mucus membrane around the urethra or, if he's uncircumcised, through the thin skin under the glans of the foreskin.

If you doubt this, I would point you to the millions of people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa, the overwhelming majority of whom contracted the virus via heterosexual intercourse. 

If people in sub-Saharan Africa had normal sex and still got the HIV on the regular you'd have a point.  But they don't.

I first heard about "dry sex" when one of my friends returned from Malawi, where she was doing work with women and cervical cancer screenings. Dry sex, she told me, is the practice of reducing moisture in your vagina in order to seem tighter and cause more friction during intercourse. This is believed to be more pleasurable for the person with the penis, but for the women involved, it's incredibly painful. It's an idea linked to the perception that a tight vagina is one that hasn't been stretched out by overuse, which speaks to the low level of sexual education in the region.

It gets worse. To achieve dryness, some women insert chalk, sand, pulverized rock, herbs, paper, or sponges before sex. Douching with caustic liquids such as detergents, antiseptics, alcohol, and bleach is also common. The use of these substances, in combination with un-lubricated penetrative sex, can lead to vaginal abrasions and increased condom breakage—which compounds the spread of HIV.

<snip>

they also have more concurrent partners than anywhere else on the planet, which spreads HIV faster, they don't get tested, the whole "virgin cure" myth (if you have sex with a virgin, your AIDS goes away), once a sub-Saharan African finds out he has the HIV, he's much more likely to not tell people for as long as he can so he can keep having sex, yes, lack of circumcision doesn't help, their flavor of HIV/AIDS does it's thing much faster than the flavor we have in the west.  There are lots of non-"normal" reasons that add up to them having a whole heck of a lot more AIDS than we do.  Perhaps I shouldn't have used the words "almost impossible", but it is very very hard for a normal male to get the HIV, having normal vaginal intercourse with a woman who has the HIV.  If it's in the butt, if he prefers she douches with sand first, if he's unsnipped, if he recently got into a naked fight with a porcupine then the chances are less good.

another cite

Vaginal sex
A meta-analysis of 10 studies exploring the risk of transmission through vaginal sex was published in 2009.4 It estimated the risk of HIV transmission through receptive vaginal sex (receiving the penis in the vagina) to be 0.08% (equivalent to 1 transmission per 1,250 exposures).

A meta-analysis of three studies exploring the risk from insertive vaginal sex (inserting the penis into the vagina) was estimated to be 0.04% (equivalent to 1 transmission per 2,500 exposures).

Your original contention was that it was "very unlikely (almost impossible)" to contract HIV that way. The second source you link to explicitly states the risk from insertive anal sex is 3-6 times more likely to result in HIV transmission than insertive vaginal sex. Other types of sexual activity may be higher risk, but that does not mean that vaginal sex is unlikely or impossible to result in contracting HIV*. Please stop spreading that misinformation.

The rest of your argument is based on racist stereotypes corroborated by sensationalist reporting (it's a Vice article, ffs). Actual medical investigations into so-called 'dry sex' are limited and inconclusive. Case in point: the studies below note the practice of 'dry sex' only in South Africa and a half dozen other African countries. It is not common across most of sub-Saharan Africa and comes nowhere near close to accounting for the prevalence and spread of HIV across sub-Saharan Africa since the 1990s

https://sti.bmj.com/content/75/3/178
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14681990500396568

*And this is a study of people who are presumably practicing 'normal' sex, whatever the hell that means.

[dead0man]

if all my reasons for the extremely high rates of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa are wrong, racist or racist and wrong, why do you think their numbers are so much crazier than EVERY OTHER PLACE ON EARTH?


also, .04% seems pretty freaking small to me.  Granted, if that was the odds my plane would crash, I probably wouldn't be flying very much and I'm in no way suggesting people go out looking for the rare woman with HIV just to prove a point.

[cp]

if all my reasons for the extremely high rates of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa are wrong, racist or racist and wrong, why do you think their numbers are so much crazier than EVERY OTHER PLACE ON EARTH?


also, .04% seems pretty freaking small to me.  Granted, if that was the odds my plane would crash, I probably wouldn't be flying very much and I'm in no way suggesting people go out looking for the rare woman with HIV just to prove a point.

So is 0.12% (the probability of infection for insertive anal sex). And women with HIV aren't 'rare' - they make up around 30% of cases worldwide. In either case, the likelihood of infection has more to do with the answer to your UNNECESSARILY CAPITALIZED question: education.

When people are taught about using condoms and how sexually transmitted infections are spread, rates of HIV decline. Most African countries lacked the funds and willingness to discuss the matter until the late 90s, by which point HIV prevalence was wide enough that it was far more difficult to combat with education alone.

That's why I'm going to ask you again to please stop spreading misinformation about how HIV is transmitted. It is dangerous, leads to more infections, and makes it harder to effectively combat the epidemic.

[Person Man]

if all my reasons for the extremely high rates of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa are wrong, racist or racist and wrong, why do you think their numbers are so much crazier than EVERY OTHER PLACE ON EARTH?


also, .04% seems pretty freaking small to me.  Granted, if that was the odds my plane would crash, I probably wouldn't be flying very much and I'm in no way suggesting people go out looking for the rare woman with HIV just to prove a point.

So is 0.12% (the probability of infection for insertive anal sex). And women with HIV aren't 'rare' - they make up around 30% of cases worldwide. In either case, the likelihood of infection has more to do with the answer to your UNNECESSARILY CAPITALIZED question: education.

When people are taught about using condoms and how sexually transmitted infections are spread, rates of HIV decline. Most African countries lacked the funds and willingness to discuss the matter until the late 90s, by which point HIV prevalence was wide enough that it was far more difficult to combat with education alone.

That's why I'm going to ask you again to please stop spreading misinformation about how HIV is transmitted. It is dangerous, leads to more infections, and makes it harder to effectively combat the epidemic.

For something this serious, people really are stupid about this.

[Sol]

To be fair, Western Australia.

Yup, the state that provides China with the bulk load of it's iron ore to manufacture goods to sell to the USA to drive your country towards 3 Trillion US dollars in debt.

Don't choke on it while you are having a laugh.

I wasn't shading the state--rather pointing out the rather colossally incorrect implications of the thread title.

Either way, great comeback!

[Adam Griffin]

the HIV