Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 In Africa, I suspect so.Quite possibly. However we shouldn't be naive as to deny the fact if the infection mostly passes from the infected semen into the bloodstream through the anal cavity. Not from an infected woman being fucked by a straight man.And as it has been mentioned before we are not Africa. I understand the desire to frightened American public about AIDS. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 http://m.irinnews.org/report/93032/hiv-aids-anal-sex-hiv-risk-misunderstood-among-heterosexuals#.VEeX_hnD_qA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I don't feel like trawling back through more than the last page, so can someone help me to understand how ebola and AIDS are being compared? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Isn't that's what I asked just about 3 posts ago? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Yeah, was hoping someone could clear it up for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Oh I know what happened. The reality is that in any disease conversation AIDS is going to be mentioned. In drawing the distinction between AIDS and other highly infectious diseases someone pointed out that a huge percentage of the AIDS cases were transmitted either by homosexual activity or IV drug use. Someone else started complaining about the actual percentage. I would personally worry more about ebola or any disease you can get from simple contact. The flu for instance or the common cold. I think people might forget that bodily fluids doesn't mean taking a bath in someone's urine or sweat. Touch your eye shake someone's hand touches his eye... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Seems like you were originally suggesting that the concept of protecting one's self from ebola by making sensible decisions is great, but given the way AIDS can be avoided by making sensible decisions it's not likely to be that simple. Fair point - people know how AIDS is transmitted, and yet it still gets transmitted, although maybe by people who don't disclose, and that's in a developed country like america. In west africa, you're even less likely to make a sensible decision, because of the customs and not wanting to break the taboos involved. It was pointed out that "99%" of the time, you get AIDS by willingly engaging in some activity, whereas ebola you don't have to agree to anything. Fair point. Woody went a bit woody in trying to attack the 99% figure - which is probably not correct, but the sentiment is there - and we got sidetracked. Somewhere in it all, Cysko wanted to nuke africa, then burn the pilots who dropped the bombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Sure. think about it back in the eighties when we realized how age was transmitted if everyone who wanted to fuck somebody in the butt used a condom there would probably be no aids today. As for Africa? I am at a loss. The place seems like a cesspool. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Sure. think about it back in the eighties when we realized how age was transmitted if everyone who wanted to fuck somebody in the butt used a condom there would probably be no aids today. As for Africa? I am at a loss. The place seems like a cesspool. WSS In Africa it's perpetuated by people with AIDS having babies, a massive lack of contraception, including people not wanting to go against the catholic church's (prior) views on contraception, among other factors that aren't as prevalent in the developed world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I want the soldiers to not be in africa at all unless they are there to destroy ebola. I see no other reason to expose my brothers in arms to probable infection to a likely fatal disease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I want the soldiers to not be in africa at all unless they are there to destroy ebola. I see no other reason to expose my brothers in arms to probable infection to a likely fatal disease. They have no business being there in a medical capacity. They have equally no business being there just to wipe out half the population because they might have come in to contact with ebola. Besides, who's going to kill those 5000 soldiers who have recently been to west africa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 You can quarantine 5000 soldiers. Not the entire ignorant population of three countries. You are right though...they have no business being there at all. They'd be better off on the ground fighting isis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Contraception? Great, we can't even get civilized Americans to put on a fucking rubber. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Lol... I went a bit Woody. I think Chris gets the point I was attempting to make though. Throwing around numbers like 99% with nothing to back it up does us no good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Lol... I went a bit Woody. I think Chris gets the point I was attempting to make though. Throwing around numbers like 99% with nothing to back it up does us no good. I do, but you kinda missed the point being made. If he'd said "99% of left handed people are gay" or "99% of schoolteachers are paedophiles" then yeah, you'd want to see numbers. But when the sentiment is "the vast majority of people contract AIDS by engaging in voluntary activities" then whether it's 90%, 95% or 99% is somewhat immaterial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 He said "99% of the cases of aids being contracted is from making Retarded choices" Obviously that can't be proven one way or another and obviously there will be different ideas about what a "Retarded choice" is. But also obviously, a lot of cases stem from poor choices. My point was that throwing around a number like 99% with no source doesn't help anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 here's a mathematical exercise that would probably be interesting. Roughly 1/8 of AIDS cases are attributed to heterosexual sex. As I said that number is misleading because almost all of those cases are among women who have apparently had heterosexual sex with either an IV drug user or a bisexual. If we consider that percentage as defacto homosexual or IV user transmission what would be final percentage be? Just curious, I don't think any of us think the numbers are a lot different. You are probably a helluva lot better at math than I am. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Counting women having sex with bisexual guys as a homosexual transferral? I'm not sure I follow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 He said "99% of the cases of aids being contracted is from making Retarded choices" Obviously that can't be proven one way or another and obviously there will be different ideas about what a "Retarded choice" is. But also obviously, a lot of cases stem from poor choices. My point was that throwing around a number like 99% with no source doesn't help anyone. Shooting drugs especially with dirty needles is a Retarded choice. Having indiscriminate, unprotected sex with partners whose history is unclear either hetero or homo is a Retarded choice. Having a blood transfusion is NOT a Retarded choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Like I said there is no data which specifically states that 2 of 10,000 people contracted aids through means of which they had no control over. If you can go ahead and prove to me that more than one percent contracted aids by no fault of their own through means they had no control over I'll accept your whiny criticism of the 99% number. You can't do it though because it's not realistic. That's not how you get aids. You can however get ebola on a plane just sitting there if someone is hacking ebola particles all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Counting women having sex with bisexual guys as a homosexual transferral? I'm not sure I follow... Really? Don't be coy. She got it from a guy who got it from a guy bisexual includes homosexuality. Or it came from an IV drug user but still the target group were speaking of. She did not get the virus from a completely straight male. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 .... You said "Retarded decisions" not "no fault of your own"... Also, I'm pretty sure more elements have to be in play to get the disease in the situation you just described. Aaannnyyywwwaaayyy. This whole thing is dumb. Ebola isn't going to kill everyone. Don't buy in to the hysteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 .... You said "Retarded decisions" not "no fault of your own"... Also, I'm pretty sure more elements have to be in play to get the disease in the situation you just described. Aaannnyyywwwaaayyy. This whole thing is dumb. Ebola isn't going to kill everyone. Don't buy in to the hysteria. I said Retarded decisions? Where? If I did it was a speech to text typo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Cysko did I mean. My bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 It's just dumb to say. "This is the number. It's right unless you can prove me wrong." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Semantics. Hurr de durr you can't talk to me like that I went to Michigan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Shooting drugs especially with dirty needles is a Retarded choice. Having indiscriminate, unprotected sex with partners whose history is unclear either hetero or homo is a Retarded choice. Having a blood transfusion is NOT a Retarded choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 .... You said "Retarded decisions" not "no fault of your own"... Also, I'm pretty sure more elements have to be in play to get the disease in the situation you just described. Aaannnyyywwwaaayyy. This whole thing is dumb. Ebola isn't going to kill everyone. Don't buy in to the hysteria. I'm sure everyone in Liberia is comforted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 I'm sure everyone in Liberia is comforted I'm sure they aren't. But the hysteria isn't "oh my god! Not Africa". It's "Ebola will kill everyone you know! America I at risk! ISIS illegal Mexican carriers!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Semantics. Hurr de durr you can't talk to me like that I went to Michigan. Not at all. You are saying its on me to prove the number you pulled out of your ass wrong. That's Retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.