63% of all the HIV infections in the United States occurs among the Sodomites

[Wilikon]

are HIV virus still that dangerous i heard that it can be killed at 60°, and there are numerous people that survived it, it's curable already

 

Sure it is. Go have random unprotected anal sex and run right away in a hammam just after. Make sure it is at least 60°. 30 to 45 min. Do this for 48 hrs with 30 min. break between the anti-aids sessions. Don't sleep. Please avoid having anal sex again in the hammam or you'll need to restart the whole anti-aids prescription all over again...

If you've managed to type an url and create a profile to post your question here, there is hope you'll find your answer.

 

[1713595758]

1713595758

[1713595758]

1713595758

[1713595758]

1713595758

[1713595758]

1713595758

[1713595758]

1713595758

[1713595758]

1713595758

[protokol]

Regarding the ban on blood donation, I feel that it is morally justified to stop people from a high-risk demographic giving blood. However, I don't see why they couldn't be tested for HIV first, and then allowed to donate after a negative result.

Not as simple as that. There is a window period for the HIV virus, which can range from 3 months to 6 months. During this window period, the HIV virus will remain invisible in the blood. If a newly infected person donates his blood even before this window period (i.e before 6 months after he got infected), then there is a chance that the recipient will become HIV +ve.

Thanks, this makes sense. I may not agree with your opinions on homosexuals but you are clued up on some things. I have nothing against gays but, as I said, I would agree with a ban on gays donating blood seeing as they are a high risk demographic, for whatever reason.

I made my views clear in my previous post about why I think gay men are a high risk HIV group, feel free to pick holes in my conclusions.

[HigsonPP]

Well there can be many reasons behind it. One of the major reasons is , that HIV spreads faster while having anal as compared to the vaginal sex. This is one of the reasons . There are many logical reasons behind it.

[jaysabi]

The reason why homosexuals are so frequently infected with HIV is due to the fact that they have multiple partners unlike the heterosexual men.

Lol of the day right here!

It can be seen as natural selection. Sure.

This is natural selection.

Also, you might want to learn what natural selection is before you try to post about it. Since a gay individual won't pass on their genes without an interest in the opposite sex, "the process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring" (Natural Selection) wouldn't be applicable.

OP shouldn't be viewed as anything other than a bigot looking for attention or desperately trying to find other bigots to validate his dying-off worldview.

[bryant.coleman]

Thanks, this makes sense. I may not agree with your opinions on homosexuals but you are clued up on some things. I have nothing against gays but, as I said, I would agree with a ban on gays donating blood seeing as they are a high risk demographic, for whatever reason.

I made my views clear in my previous post about why I think gay men are a high risk HIV group, feel free to pick holes in my conclusions.

There are other groups which are banned from donating blood as well. But most of the people only concentrate on homosexual males (homosexual females can donate blood). These groups include intravenous drug users, prisoners, sex-workers, people originating from countries such as Swaziland and Botswana, transplant patients.etc. That said, no blood donation is 100% safe. Even groups which are allowed to donate blood can infect others with HIV and HBV, although the chances are far lower. It is a shame that the medical science can't find a solution to this issue yet.