Alarming health stats..

[Tealeaf]

Thats right, Lettie...it's Stigma & Shame...just 2 words - but they work far more effectively than any amount of government intervention or contraception.

[Bazf]

Have a quick gannder at this!!!!!!!!



http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0..._story_related

[lettie]

Quite a scary read that one Bazf....

[Tealeaf]

What it does not say is what is the proportion of new heterosexual HIV cases that are non-UK (recent arrivals)...the figures that I have seen indicate that figure to be in the order of 95% or so. Not that it makes any difference.....the taxpayer will still have to pay for it.

On a similar note, have you seen where the Asylum seeker who got sent down for 7 years for deliberatly infecting 2 women with HIV? Looks like he's coming out on appeal because thew trial was'nt fair. ah well.

[Tealeaf]

Here's something from today's Times - just proves my point above.



April 05, 2004


Free pills and condoms 'boost promiscuity'
By Alexandra Frean, Social Affairs Correspondent

Venereal disease increase shows failure of sex education policy




GOVERNMENT attempts to reduce high-risk sexual behaviour among teenagers have had exactly the opposite effect, according to an authoritative new study.
Expanding contraceptive services and providing the morning-after pill free to teenagers have encouraged sexual behaviour rather than reducing it, according to economists at Nottingham University.



In a study which throws into question the Government’s entire teenage sexual health strategy, they discovered that sexual activity and sexually transmitted diseases have risen fastest in those areas where the Government’s policy has been most actively pursued.

Critics said that the findings exploded the official line that the best way to tackle rising teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) was by making contraception more easily available. Robert Whelan, of the independent think-tank Civitas, said: “The method which the Government’s teenage pregnancy strategy relies upon is almost guaranteed to produce these results. They have always promoted condom use, but have never contemplated the possibility of teaching young people abstinence.”

By making the morning-after pill free to teenagers, the Government had masked real levels of sexual activity among teenagers, he said. Because the pill causes early abortions, some conceptions are never counted in the teenage pregnancy figures. “The morning-after pill may cut pregnancies, but it won’t do anything to decrease STIs. That is why the STI rate is now a much more reliable indicator of sexual activity among young people.”

But proponents of widespread family planning for young people rejected the findings. Anne Weyman, chief executive of the Family Planning Association, said: “The evidence is that in areas other than London, teenage pregnancy rates have fallen by between 8 and 15 per cent since 1998.

“The awareness of sexually transmitted infections is quite low among young people. In the last few years, increased screening has been introduced, particularly aimed at young women, and of course, if you start looking for more infections you will find them.”

She believed that the teenage pregnancy strategy could be improved. “One area where it needs to be greatly strengthened is the provision of sex education to young people,” she said. “We want to see young people delaying having sex until they are able to make responsible decisions. I don’t think this research helps to achieve any of those aims.”

The Government has welcomed falling teenage pregnancy levels. But last month figures showed that after three years of decline, the number of teenagers becoming pregnant increased by 2.2 per cent to 41,868 in 2001-02.

The new study, to be presented today at the Royal Economic Society’s annual conference in Swansea, is based on data collected by 95 health authorities in England between 1998 and 2001. They covered a wide range of indicators of teenage sexual activity and contraception, including teenage pregnancy rates, reported cases of STIs and the number of local family planning sessions. It also took into account factors such as family background, parental employment rates and educational qualifications.

The results show that the areas with the biggest increases in family planning sessions since the introduction of the teenage pregnancy strategy in 1999 have seen greater increases in STI rates than others. A doubling of the clinics in an area led, on average, to a 6 per cent increase in STI rates.

The study also found that the availability of more clinic sessions did not lead to bigger reductions in teenage pregnancy. In some areas, increased clinics were linked with higher pregnancy rates for under-18s.

David Paton, the author of the study, said: “When you introduce policies that seem obvious, it is important to factor in the possibility that the policies may actually cause people to change how they behave. In this case, it appears that some measures aimed at reducing teenage pregnancy rates induced changes in teenage behaviour that were large enough not only to negate the intended impact on conceptions, but to have an adverse impact on another important area of sexual health — sexually transmitted infections.”

The Government had assumed, he said, that adolescent sexual activity was the outcome of random decisions. His findings suggested that adolescents thought rationally about the decision to become sexually active.

So, when the cost of birth control goes down, its use goes up. This was true both for adolescents who were previously having sex and not using birth control and for adolescents who were previously not having sex.

This interpretation is underlined by Professor Paton’s data on the morning-after pill. Areas where the pill was made available free had seen no reduction in teenage pregnancy rates, but STI rates had risen.

“Teenage sexual behaviour appears to be little different to other fields in at least one important respect: incentives matter to teenagers too,” he said.

John Reid, the Health Secretary, said: “We are aware that the number of cases of STIs are rising among younger poeple, and we are not complacent about this. But individuals as well as government have a responsibility to tackle this problem.”

[Darby]

Such problems will affect everybody at some time or another, whether it's overloading of the NHS or spreading the diseases.

The real problem will be the children of to-day and the youth of to-morrow, who will either have to learn how to handle (avoid would be better) it, or go down the drain and be part of the problem. Society and the politicians are failing. I haven't got any answers either..................

[Tealeaf]

We should certainly end the provision of social housing & other benefit transfers to these young people...that will certainly act as a deterrant on the pregnancy issue. As regards HIV, then I think the simple solution is if people wish to receive very expensive taxpayer funded medication to delay the full development of full-blown AIDS, then I suggest Tattooing them on their head - HIV+ - so at least they can be avoided when it comes to Nooky. ID cards & Test certs are no good.

[Darby]

Fine practical thoughts Tealeaf...but you would be infringing their "Human Rights" ala Brussels.

I'm afraid its going to turn into "US and THEM" in the near future.

[Tealeaf]

Sod their human rights! What about everyone else's human rights - and the cost to the British Taxpayer? Medication for an HIV carrier costs £10,000 per year - why should the taxpayer fork out for this - after all its not a cure, merely a delay on the final outcome. HIV is, for most people, acquired through lifestyle. Fair enough - most people who acquire lung cancer do so through smoking - lifestyle - but at least tax is paid on the "sin" and a lifetime smoker will have more than paid through taxes the cost of his medical treatment (and will also save through not drawing the state pension)

I really despair at our priorities. Two-Thirds of all our HIV cases now are people who have contracted it outside the UK, and two thirds of these are Asylum Seekers/Immigrants. Those are DOH figures. I am at a loss to understand just why the hell we are paying for their treatment - people who have not contributed to the public kitty or are unlikelely to do so - while at the same time we have waiting lists for various surgical operations, such as hip replacement, of up to 11 months.

What is in fact more galling is that without some form of readily identifiable marker, these people are free to continue their dodgy lifestyle. In the case of the Asylum seekers - then ship 'em home; as for the rest, if you want the medication, you can have it - but the public need to know who you are.

[Darby]

Too simple and too practical Tealeaf. Why should the politicians do something easy when they can make it difficult and not understandable? :banghead8 :banghead8

[Jo]

Tealeaf,

Tattoiong HIV + on people's head would be contrary to the UN Declaration of Human Rights Article 5:

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

However, we all have the right to know the sexual background of people we sleep with, so without having to degrade anybody, it could become obligatory to have AIDs test every year - FOR EVERYONE. That way, before you sleep with someone you could always ask to see their "HIV-free" certificate. There would be a cost to the testing process but it may break even with the savings on treatment.
Obviously there would have to be laws to prevent prejudice against those that are positive (eg. employment and housing law), ie. in fields where having the disease is not an issue.

[Tealeaf]

I'm only suggesting Tattooing because it is less stressful than branding...and after all, we don't want to humiliate these people, do we? The problem with AIDS certificates is that they can be forged, and after all, a year is a long time between tests.

We know where the problem age-group is, i.e. 16-25 year olds so I would suggest that we combine the very frequent drugs raids on various "nightclubs" with the AIDS test..as everyone is lined up for frisking for the Estacy Tablets stick a needle up in their bum, say "thats it mate, you've just been aids tested...name & address and you'll get your result in a week"......we'll soon find out whose is HIV pos and who ain't.

[lettie]

There really are no easy answers to any of these issues, and although comdom sales have increased according to Durex, most of the research into the use of condoms show that people are not using them every time they have a casual encounter or with a regular partner. Some of the research has been done by Durex (who are actually not bad at this) and the main one really was 1999-2001 NATSAL, published in the Lancet on 1/12/01 (National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles) This showed that more teenagers are having their first sexual encounters before the age of 16, some as young as 13 (which I know anyway, as I've looked after em in labour) and that although many of them use contraception the use is sporadic. Many of these kids also believe that the pill protects them from infections, which is of course total nonsense. There have been pilots for a National Chlamydia screening programme just in 2 sites that I'm aware of whereby all women are screened when they go to the doctors/ family planning/ smear tests etc. The reason they have singled out women is that they are more likely to comply, as we are used to being fiddled with, and that they are more likely to attend. Ironically in Sweden, think it was about 20 years ago, they recognised an upsurge in sti's, they immediately implemented a national screening programme, picked up infections early, treated them and reduced their pelvic inflammatory rate by approximately a sixth (quite a lot of money) the screening programme would probably have paid for itself with IVF savings. For UK, the country who pioneered IVF, you'd think that more money would be spent on prevention rather than a very expensive means of getting pregnant.

[AnthonyS]

Are you guys serious? Do you realise just how humiliating it would be to have a tattoo on your head saying your HIV!!!!! Or if you were out on a night out and you were ambushed and tested for it. That is the ultimate humiliation. If tests were to be carried out, they would have to be volunteers who take part and they would have to pay. The government wouldnt have it any other way.

[Tealeaf]

I'm perfectly serious, Anthony. These are desperate times & and so we need drastic measures. Anyway, whats the problem with tattoos? Alot of people pay good money to get them done...young girlies paying 30 quid for a butterfly on their bum and all this nonsense...a HIV pos tattoo on your forehead would become a fashion statement.