Re: NATAP: HIV/Sex-Social Media-Facebook/Twitter

[Guest guest]

A person does not get infected with any STD, including HIV, through the Internet . . . not Facebook, not Twitter, not Craigslist. The only virus you might get over the Internet is a computer virus. The only way you can get a human virus from using your computer is if you actually are stupid enough to hook up with someone and have sex with out using protection.We need to be more careful with such "reporting" . . . more accurate & factual. Is there a scientific, journaled study that shows the Internet is really the cause of any increase in transmission of STD's/HIV in Jefferson County Alabama? Or are their other factors involved, at work, that are contributing to the alleged rise in communicable infections?Or is it simply that bad newspaper reporting contributes to public perception of HIV?If this alleged news -- spread by a *FOX* affiliate -- is picked up by other newspapers, TV or radio personalities, one can easily see how such rumors hurt the community, rather than offering any real education.Jon MarkleRaleigh, NCOn May 24, 2012, at 6:04 AM, jules levin wrote:Subject: NATAP: HIV/Sex-Social Media-Facebook/TwitterHealth experts: Anonymity of social media helps spread HIVBy HardisonMay 23 2012BIRMINGHAM, AL (Fox-WBRC) - Technology can be great but also dangerous as many have seen with cellphones and distracted driving.Now something else you access on your cellphone can be dangerous. From Facebook to Twitter to Craigslist,social networking is the reason health officials say they're seeing a lot more cases of HIV."It allows anonymity," said Lee Eakins, program manager for the Jefferson County Health Department. "It allows a person to go online and have sex without having to give any basic information about that."Jefferson County already has one of the country's highest HIV rates and now the number of HIV and STD cases are surging because it's easier than ever to find a random partner to hook up with."Some people are caught up in the heat of the moment, just seeing a great description, a great picture," said Arthur Wynn, staffer at AIDS Alabama.What staffers at AIDS Aalabama have found is random encounters mean less responsibility."Sometimes when people walk in I ask them, 'Why are you here?'" Wynn said. "And they say ‘I received a text after the relationship was over, saying, '[i'm] HIV positive, get tested.' So we see that relationship between Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist and possible HIV infection," Wynn said."Basically when people have a face-to-face with you they're less likely to mislead you," Eakins said. "You tend to get more body language from someone and say there's something suspicious about this person, whereas a person could disguise all of that online."To try and combat the surge, the health department and AIDS Alabama are using social networking to warn "before you engage in risky activities or meeting someone, it's kind of like that thing where if it's too good to be true, it's probably not good," Wynn said.

[Guest guest]

"We need to be more careful with such "reporting" . . . more accurate & factual. Is there a scientific, journaled study that shows the Internet is really the cause of any increase in transmission of STD's/HIV in Jefferson County Alabama? Or are their other factors involved, at work, that are contributing to the alleged rise in communicable infections?"I'm sorry, I have to disagree.The internet might not actually be the "cause" of an STD, a microorganism is, but it dramatically facilitates the recruiting of large numbers of sexual contacts that spread the diseases. Since the first detection of a syphilis cluster in an AOL San Francisco M4M chat room a decade ago, countless cases have been linked to internet contacts, contributing to the soaring rates of STDs we now see.Certainly, the abandonment of safer sexual practices is involved, too, but increasing one's numbers of sexual contacts will increase the risks of STDs.JB

[Guest guest]

Good points.

I find this to be a typical local health department's inept attempt at media

engagement. They understandably want to raise awareness of disease prevalance

or trends. With what are probably sadly good intentions they think using fear

mongering and a few scary anecdotes will make a difference, and they use words

like " surge " which mean next to nothing without details..

I don't believe it does and I think it's counterproductive.

There's probably fault all around. The health department makes statements they

can't support with data. Media encourages and selects attention-getting sound

bites, particularly local news. The local ASO gets sucked in by an opportunity

to be mentioned as a major player in the media.

There's no doubt that internet hook-up sites facilitate . . . well, duh . . .

hooking up, including anonymous hooking up. On the other hand, so do bars,

parties, parks, boothstores, etc. The internet can be a bit more anonymous and

a bit more efficient. It's probably true that they detect clusters of

infections that are linked to the internet. Again, duh. But those have likely

replaced the old linkages.

It's sad because Birmingham hosts some great sexual health research at UAB. But

the Bham health departments is way behind the ball if they are just now engaging

with the internet and social media.

The article completely fails to mention the fact that we have good data

indicating that a majority of HIV positive folks reduce their risk once they

know they are positive. It ignores the fact that some sites provide an

opportunity to disclose which can facilitate better decision making and

seroadaptation. A researcher at CROI this year cited this as a factor in higher

status discussion rates than other groups. If fails to mention that an increase

in non-HIV STI's may be be due to serosorting and not be a harbinger of

increased HIV transmission.

Finally, I don't buy for a minute, and find it highly irresponsible to imply

that having a face to face encounter will allow someone to somehow magically

discern HIV status. That's not only bullshit but it's a dangerous message to

send. It's also nonsensical. What kind of circumstance where transmission

occurs do they imagine there's not a person to person encounter?

Sadly typical.

mark

Nashville TN

>

> >

> >

> >>

> >> Subject: NATAP: HIV/Sex-Social Media-Facebook/Twitter

> >>

> >> Health experts: Anonymity of social media helps spread HIV

> >>

> >> By Hardison

> >> May 23 2012

> >> BIRMINGHAM, AL (Fox-WBRC) - Technology can be great but also dangerous as

many have seen with cellphones and distracted driving.

> >>

> >> Now something else you access on your cellphone can be dangerous. From

Facebook to Twitter to Craigslist,social networking is the reason health

officials say they're seeing a lot more cases of HIV.

> >>

> >> " It allows anonymity, " said Lee Eakins, program manager for the Jefferson

County Health Department. " It allows a person to go online and have sex without

having to give any basic information about that. "

> >>

> >> Jefferson County already has one of the country's highest HIV rates and now

the number of HIV and STD cases are surging because it's easier than ever to

find a random partner to hook up with.

> >>

> >> " Some people are caught up in the heat of the moment, just seeing a great

description, a great picture, " said Arthur Wynn, staffer at AIDS Alabama.

> >>

> >> What staffers at AIDS Aalabama have found is random encounters mean less

responsibility.

> >>

> >> " Sometimes when people walk in I ask them, 'Why are you here?' " Wynn said.

" And they say `I received a text after the relationship was over, saying, '[i'm]

HIV positive, get tested.' So we see that relationship between Facebook,

Twitter, Craigslist and possible HIV infection, " Wynn said.

> >>

> >> " Basically when people have a face-to-face with you they're less likely to

mislead you, " Eakins said. " You tend to get more body language from someone and

say there's something suspicious about this person, whereas a person could

disguise all of that online. "

> >>

> >> To try and combat the surge, the health department and AIDS Alabama are

using social networking to warn " before you engage in risky activities or

meeting someone, it's kind of like that thing where if it's too good to be true,

it's probably not good, " Wynn said.

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

"Finally, I don't buy for a minute, and find it highly irresponsible to imply that having a face to face encounter will allow someone to somehow magically discern HIV status"I don't think that's the implication. I do think the article is sensationalized.I do think that men who go online for sex are more likely to have a sexual encounter than those who show up at a bar.JB

[Guest guest]

I think online sex sites should be required to have several permanent profiles that are always online with hot pics and something like this in the profile: " Need to know anything about HIV? I am here to help, so ask me any question"This basic concept could help a lot. But it has to be mandated. From: J Barrowster <barrowster@...>Sender: Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:15 -0400< >Subject: Re: NATAP: HIV/Sex-Social Media-Facebook/Twitter"Finally, I don't buy for a minute, and find it highly irresponsible to imply that having a face to face encounter will allow someone to somehow magically discern HIV status"I don't think that's the implication. I do think the article is sensationalized.I do think that men who go online for sex are more likely to have a sexual encounter than those who show up at a bar.JB

[Guest guest]

I think online sex sites should be required to have several permanent profiles that are always online with hot pics and something like this in the profile: " Need to know anything about HIV? I am here to help, so ask me any question"This basic concept could help a lot. But it has to be mandated. From: J Barrowster <barrowster@...>Sender: Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:15 -0400< >Subject: Re: NATAP: HIV/Sex-Social Media-Facebook/Twitter"Finally, I don't buy for a minute, and find it highly irresponsible to imply that having a face to face encounter will allow someone to somehow magically discern HIV status"I don't think that's the implication. I do think the article is sensationalized.I do think that men who go online for sex are more likely to have a sexual encounter than those who show up at a bar.JB

[Guest guest]

I think probably there are about as many viewpoints on this subject as there are

guys on this list-serve. And none would be entirely correct, and none would be

entirely wrong. Right now, all we have is our personal experiences. I don't

think the Internet as we know it today, has been around long enough to have had

any authentic scientific data collected to prove a point, one way or the other.

As in all things HIV, the bottom line is, not how the public perceives us. But,

rather, how we perceive, act and behave toward ourselves and our fellow

travelers.

Those of us who were " reared " in bars, clubs, bath-houses, etc., " back in the

day " , have a certain feel, a particular attitude that young gay men rarely catch

glimpse of any more, let alone, understand. Our viewpoint is a poignant mix of

guilt, pleasure, longing (for those care-free days), and gratefulness that we

are still alive, in spite of everything that says we should be dead. Most of us

from that era ARE dead. We miss our comrades. Because of the shear numbers of

our lost friends, we have memories, feelings and heartaches, more than young gay

men will ever know. But, because of what we remember, young gay men never have

to know that kind of anguished heartbreak. It is much like, I imagine, those

who have been to war in Viet Nam, or Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Who have made it

home alive and relatively intact. But, their buddies, their comrades, were left

behind, in bits and pieces . . . How can anyone imagine what that's like unless

we have been there and done that -- and come out the other side, hopefully

wiser, more compassionate, more devoted to loved ones and community?

The internet does provide an avenue that we did not have " back then " . We had

those 900 sex phone lines, we had newspaper ads, and we had the bars, clubs,

bathhouses, t-rooms, parks, beaches and rest-areas along the roads. Anonymity

was what you perceived yourself and your sexual partners to be. WE did not have

to think about HIV/AIDS.

AND -- we did not WANT to think about HIV/AIDS, when it became obvious that our

world was ending.

So . . . where am I going with this. I set out to say something, but ended up

saying more. What I wanted to tell about was my experience . . . I was once HIV

negative. And I met someone on the internet about 12 years ago. (I'm 66). We

had a 2 year affair of sorts. He declared he was negative. I had just been

tested. And was negative at the time. But, 8 years later, I got sick & tested

positive -- he was my last sexual partner. I have a partner now, for 10 years.

He and I met, also on the internet, after I had ended my relationship with the

other guy. But, my current partner and I do not have sex. It's a relationship

built on companionship, love, and other important things of our lives. And as

it turns out, it's most fortunate for him that we have not had sex, else he

would have been infected. As it is, both of us lost previous lovers to HIV . .

.. so we were and are familiar with the horrors of the ravages that can be AIDS.

I've said all this to try to get something across -- that it is not important

when or how or where we meet someone. What is important is how we treat

ourselves and them. We are all responsible, not only for taking care of

ourselves, but also our sexual partner. When we engage in the physical intimacy

of a sexual encounter, we are making a commitment, even if only for the moment,

to be authentic, truthful and honest in our transaction. If we cannot do this,

we have no business having sex. We are become a sexual predator.

I am not angry that my previous sexual partner did not tell me the truth about

his HIV status. I am not angry that at some point I thought it was safe and

stopped using protection. Perhaps he didn't know? We've lost touch.

But, I am very much aware that somewhere along the way, I allowed myself to be

sexually abused -- for the sake of momentary pleasure. Do I wish I had acted

differently -- YES! Do I have regrets? No, that wouldn't be useful. But, I

also wonder, how different my life might be today and for the past few years, if

I had taken care of myself.

Life is what we make of it -- internet and all. Don't blame the internet for

the spread of HIV. Look in the mirror. And be true to thyself.

Jon

Raleigh