Red is in the Rainbow: A Closer Look at Blood Donation Discrimination

via HuffPost Gay Voices, by Emily Horowitz

We met this past August: six of 42 American University freshmen selected to participate in the School of Public Affairs' Leadership Program.

We were tasked with identifying a social issue connected to gender and sexuality and working to change it. After two months of intense, sass-filled discussions, we zeroed in on an issue that we all felt needed to be changed: the Food and Drug Administration's policy that bans men who have had sex with men (MSM) even once since 1977 from ever donating blood.

Enacted in 1985 at the height of the AIDS scare, this measure was deemed necessary by confused scientists and puzzled politicians.

Today, however, it is outdated and unreasonable. It is difficult to resist concluding that the continuation of this policy is the result of homophobic stereotypes.

In order to fully understand the ban and the issues stemming from it, we first assembled a policy memorandum that examined all sides of the policy.

We learned how blood is tested for HIV and that with current technologies, there is a 1 in 1.5 million chance of infected blood passing through the screening processes.

We also learned that the United States is in the midst of a critical blood shortage, which America's Blood Centers states would end if we increased the annual blood supply by just 1 percent.

In 2010 the Williams Institute at the University of California's Los Angeles School of Law estimated that if the MSM blood ban were lifted, there would be approximately 219,000 additional pints annually, an increase of 1.4 percent.

This means we could increase the lives saved by blood donations each year by up to 657,000 (given that one pint donated can save as many as three lives) and eliminate blood shortages for the foreseeable future.

Also in 2010 a group of 18 United States Senators, including John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), advocated that the FDA change its policy, to no avail.

Keeping this knowledge in mind throughout the fall semester, we became further impassioned by the need for reform. We forged relations with nearby organizations such as the D.C. Center for the LGBT Community, and with nearby college campuses. Finally, spring semester arrived, and the hands-on action commenced: it was time to start our project.

Our three-point plan is comprised of education, awareness, and political action. We established ourselves as Red Is in the Rainbow.

Through social media websites such as Facebook and Twitter, we are spreading the word about the blood ban and facts pertaining to it.

To make a personal impact, we will be hosting blood drives across Washington, D.C. this April. To bring awareness to how many people are prevented from donating blood, we will be distributing stickers stating, "I have a friend who can't donate blood.

Ask me why," and "I can't donate blood. Ask me why." We hope that these will encourage discussion of the discriminatory policy and further spread the word. Finally, we aspire to put political pressure on the FDA to change its policy.

By coordinating a letter campaign, we seek to communicate to policy makers just how much harm this ban inflicts and put forward an alternative we believe more appropriate: a one-year waiting period between male-to-male sexual contact and blood donation, the same waiting period that a person who has sex with a prostitute or a person infected with HIV/AIDS must undergo.

A one-year deferral period has become the choice of most other industrialized nations who have amended their policies, the most recent of which was the United Kingdom.


Read the rest

4 Colored Boys Like Me

via HuffPost Gay Voices, by Dane Harrington Joseph

I am not a racist.

There's a perfectly sound reason why my new project, Langston's, is subtitled "a film by (4) colored boys." Besides the obvious answer (it's a collaboration between four noted black and latino filmmakers), there's also a much more personal reason, dating back about 20 years to when I was a little colored boy myself (as my grandma would affectionately call me).

Back then, I would occasionally wet my bed at night. After such incidents I'd hide my gold-tinted "tighty whities" from my father, who would undoubtedly "whoop" me if he found them.

Nonetheless, despite my best efforts, he would sniff them out after they had festered for a few days in some ill-concealed location.

He would then call out for me in his ironically shrill, baritone voice, and, after a series of insults, proceed to beat me, accentuating verbally my various flaws with each lash.

My worst offense, however, would be crying, because "black men don't cry," an adage he'd bark at me whenever my eyes started to well up.

So I would just bite my lip until he was finished, then retire to my room and cry secretly into my pillow, all the while thinking, "I need help."

Of course, I didn't mean I needed to be rescued from my father's "tough love." Rather, I needed help controlling my compulsion to be me. I didn't want to be me. I hated me.

"Me" needed help, and I knew no other little "colored" boys like me who could show me the way.

So I looked to pop culture for guidance: music, movies, TV. Bill Cosby? No. Montel Williams? Denzel Washington? No. Flava Flav? Hell no.

There was not one media personality or public figure that reflected me. I wasn't relevant. I didn't matter.

I grew up, cried a little less, and, as a teen, became even more obsessed with the idea of finding someone to connect with -- other little colored boys like me. I discovered this newfangled thing called "the Internet" at the library.

I made new virtual "friends" and consequently put myself in unsafe situations, sexually and emotionally, just to feel something, to relate to someone.

I thought that love manifested physically between a 41-year-old Italian bear and a 15-year-old little colored boy could fill a void, could help substitute for the lack of love I felt for myself; it didn't.

I recall going to my mom a few months later and having her take me for my first HIV test, and crying, and then her crying, and then us crying again when the results came back negative.

And I remember thinking I would never be self-destructive in that way again.

I must admit, however, that the lure of boys and booze to fill a void still lingers, to gain instant gratification to temporarily replace constant feelings of illegitimacy.

And while this could, in truth, be the story of anyone of any race, I find that my existence as a gay man of color has rarely been validated; how I felt as a little colored boy looking to the media for validation still resounds today as a grown colored man.

Aside from a slew of big black men in pretty dresses (RuPaul, Tyler Perry, Eddie Murphy, Martin Lawrence, Jamie Foxx, and Flip Wilson, all of whom I admire, but almost all of whom aren't gay) and some admirable attempts by a few noted filmmakers (Patrick Ian Polk, Maurice Jamal, and Roger Omeus, to name a few), there has not been a constant presence of gay men of color in mainstream media or popular culture.

Coupled with negative societal perspectives on homosexuality, the diminished presence of black-themed entertainment that was so pervasive in the '80s and '90s, and the Euro-centric focus of most gay entertainment and advertising, it's not so surprising that self-destructive actions among young gay black men are on the rise, with the CDC reporting that new infections among said demographic saw a dramatic increase of 48 percent in recent years, with 59 percent of those carrying the disease unaware of their status.


Read the rest

When Sexual Health Requires Stealth

via BiMedia, by admin

Bisexual men have unique health needs compared to exclusively homosexual and heterosexual men, but the stigma they face makes learning of their needs – and even reaching bi men in their “hidden communities” – difficult for public health professionals, say researchers at Indiana University in the USA.

The reported need for privacy, because of the perceived stigma and lack of acceptance in both homosexual and heterosexual communities, is so pervasive that bisexual men often do not feel comfortable accessing sexual health-related services, even those targeted toward “gay and bisexual men,” because of a concern over what others would think of their bisexuality.

A more general approach to providing services, framed as “men’s health” or “men’s sexual health,” will most likely be more effective, researchers learned.

“In terms of designing a specific program for behaviorally bisexual men, we’ve learned it will not be effective to openly advertise about it or put it on billboards; we have to be more discreet,” said Brian Dodge, associate director of the Center for Sexual Health Promotion at IU.

Dodge’s research for nearly 10 years has involved bisexual behavior and associated health needs, yet these findings from his recent study were “surprising.”

“The fear of disclosure, desire for privacy, and anticipation of stigma are even more problematic than we anticipated,” he said.

“The reasons for these issues eventually need to be addressed not only with bisexual men but also at the societal level if we are to increase participation in effective health services without operating in stealth.”

While the findings are from the USA, at BiMedia we suspect things are very similar here in the UK.

Read the rest

"He Won't Wear a Condom"

via Advocate, by Steven Petrow

Question: Every so often I meet a guy who tells me he just won’t use a condom because (take your pick): (1) He can’t stay hard; (2) He’s too big; (3) He’s allergic to latex; (4) He’s HIV-negative; or 5) It’s a mood killer. How do you suggest I handle these situations — especially when I’m really turned on?

Answer:  Let me start today by noting that it’s World AIDS Day, which is observed December 1 each year and — as the official site in the U.K. proclaims — “is an opportunity for people worldwide to unite in the fight against HIV, show their support for people living with HIV and to commemorate people who have died.”

That being said, there’s no better way to observe this day than to pledge to protect yourself and your prospective partners from HIV.

And if there’s any tool we have to prevent the continued spread of the virus, it’s the much-maligned, low-tech (but lifesaving) condom. 

I know you’ve heard this before (I certainly hope that you have) but latex and plastic rubbers, when used properly (and yes, that’s key) with a water-based lubricant, provide a high degree of protection to each partner.

But sometimes information alone doesn’t do the trick. If only. Instead of going to the experts (as Mr. Manners often does) I decided to ask a friend of mine who recently became infected why his knowledge of safer sex didn’t safeguard him:

“You can be armed with all of the information in the world, but it's much harder to put it into practice when you combine casual sex, alcohol, and drugs — and put places like Fire Island into the mix,” he told me.

“My suspicion is that somewhere along the line I wasn't sober enough to do what I needed to do to protect myself, and there were enough of those nights that the statistical odds became stacked against me.”

So, how do I suggest you respond to these periodic ploys (and that’s what they are) to have unprotected sex?  It would be facile for me to suggest that you just say no.

Still, you can’t make sound judgments if you’re stoned, high, drunk, tweaked, or toasted — and there’s no question that drug and alcohol use are closely linked with new HIV infections.


Read the rest

When Condoms Aint Enuf...

via TheBody, by Allen Kwabena Frimpong and Michael Terry Everett

"I also want to mention that we are increasingly becoming better at incorporating conversations about 'harm reduction' into the realms of substance use (needle exchanges, safe injection sites, pill testing, etc.), but we often fail to adequately translate this model when speaking of communicating risk reduction in sex (strategic positioning, sero-sorting, viral load suppression, etc.). My question back to the group then is, how do we more effectively communicate to young people the abstract concept of 'harm reduction' for sex within the context of a sex phobic society?"

This was a question posed by Jamie Forrest of Vancouver, Canada in the North America, Western Europe, and Caribbean CrowdOutAIDS Open Forum on Facebook. CrowdOutAIDS is UNAIDS new collaborative online youth-led project.

He posed this question to the group after people were discussing what they considered to be the main reasons for HIV infection among young people.

Reading the responses on Facebook gave us one of those jolted reactions.

The dominant message about sexual health in relation to HIV prevention has been focusing on condom usage. Jamie's question was one that I saw as challenging; given the propaganda that the HIV/AIDS field has been pushing around what it means to have safer sex.

My colleague at the Harm Reduction Coalition, Michael T. Everett, was also raising this same question especially among young men who have sex with men (YMSM) of color given that their rates of infection have been steadily increasing while rates of infection among injection drug users has been on the decline.

The question for us became what (besides the exchange of needles) was accounting for the decrease in transmission of HIV among injection drug users, and how could we use what works in harm reduction messaging and education when it comes to drug use (if anything) for other high-risk populations greatly affected by the epidemic through sexual transmission.

We considered this in light of the following:

1. We cannot exchange condoms like we do syringes.
2. We know people are not using condoms all the time, and the possibilities of HIV and other STI's has not scared enough people into doing so, and so ...
3. If people have been harboring condom use as the dominant end all be all harm reduction response- well then something is terribly wrong with this picture.

The place to begin the conversation around the idea of prevention of at-risk behaviors like having unprotected sex is a great place to start.

We need to engage an intentional conversation concerning the reality that the message of safe-sex, by way of condom usage, may not resonate with people because it is limited and does not allow one to ponder the spectrum of other possible harm reduction practices.

The point is: we want people to still live a healthy life without causing further harm to themselves and others. The spectrum of harm reduction practices includes everything from prevention to helping those who are most affected by the collateral consequences of their at-risk behavior.

The spectrum does not begin or end with condom usage only.


Read the rest

Does Gay Sex make one Homosexual?

via blackgaymensblog, by Storm

The previous blog post about black gay and bisexual men seducing straight men prompted a lot discussion on Facebook and on Skype.

I decided to start a separate dialog, because there was a lot of focus on whether or not a man could be considered straight if he has had gay sex.

For me, the previous blog post had more to do with wanting someone, who was unattainable and lusting after straight men, who are often perceived as sexually superior, than whether or not straight men who might engage in gay sex are still heterosexual.

The minute straight men are mentioned on Black Gay Men’s Blog, some of us immediately lose sight of the totality of the article and focus on whether or not straight men, who engage in gay sex can still be straight.  So, I thought we could explore that here.

Personally, I do not believe that engaging in gay sex once makes a man(or woman) gay. I don’t believe sexuality is that clear cut – it all depends on the circumstances surrounding the sexual encounter.

I am not suggesting homosexuality is a choice, but I think engaging in homosexual acts can be. Let me make one thing clear, I am not talking about repetitive, on-going sexual encounters or referring to those men, who might be in denial. 

I think that any man who has gay sex for a prolonged period of time, or has numerous male sexual partners is at the very least bisexual.

Especially, if he does so when he has free access to women and the life of a loved one is not threatened.  This is just my opinion and not the opinion of other contributors on Black Gay Men’s Blog. 

I have never claimed to be politically correct 100% of the time. Quite frankly, I prefer being thought-provoking and getting us to have some sort of dialog, than being politically-correct.

I think some gay men are too quick to want to label anyone who has had homosexual sex as gay or no longer straight. Sexuality is simply not that black and white – not all sexual encounters define one’s sexuality.

The label “gay” is a western concept and there are societies, in which that label doesn’t exist and others where the gender of one’s sexual partners is not as big a deal as it might be here in the USA. 

In those societies, “gay” is not a political statement  and Black Gay Men’s Blog does have readers from all corners of the globe, so I try to look at things more broadly.

We don’t have to agree, but we can respect and maybe learn from one another.


Read the rest

Black and Latino MSM Identity and HIV Risk

via Poz, by Trenton Straube

New research uncovers mistaken assumptions fueling HIV rates among black and Latino men who have sex with men (MSM).

The belief that having sex with someone of your own race lowers your risk of contracting HIV is a misperception that needs to be addressed among black and Latino men who have sex with men (MSM).

What’s more, health care workers are missing opportunities to test this population for HIV—even when the men are engaged in care and disclose their sexuality to their doctors.

These are just two findings of research looking at black and Latino MSM who are HIV positive but unaware of their status. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 53 percent of new HIV cases in the United States are among MSM and that 54 percent of these MSM are black and Latino.

In addition, HIV-positive black and Latino MSM are less likely than their white counterparts to know their status—which is one factor that amplifies HIV rates among these populations.

To explore these dynamics, researchers led by Gregorio A. Millett, MPH, the CDC/HHS Liaison to the White House Office of National AIDS Policy (ONAP), analyzed data from 1,208 MSM (597 black and 611 Latino) who participated in studies in Los Angeles, New York City and Philadelphia.

Eleven percent of them (18 percent black, 5 percent Latino) turned out to be HIV positive but unaware of their status (referred to as “HIV-positive unaware”).

Researchers found that certain variables were more common among the MSM in this group.

For example:

Black HIV-positive unaware MSM were associated with:

•Gay identity
•Earning a moderately higher income
•Having health insurance
•Disclosing sexuality to current health care provider
•Fewer than three lifetime HIV tests
•High perceived risk of testing HIV positive
•Belief that sex with other black men reduces HIV risk

Latino HIV-positive unaware MSM were associated with:

•Nongay identity
•High perceived risk of currently being HIV positive
•Belief that sex with other Latino men reduces HIV risk


POZ spoke with Millett, who arrived at ONAP via the CDC, about the implications of these findings, which were printed in the September Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes in an article titled “Mistaken Assumptions and Missed Opportunities: Correlates of Undiagnosed HIV Infection Among Black and Latino Men Who Have Sex With Men.”

We also asked Millett how his team in DC might use the data as they implement the National HIV/AIDS Strategy.


Read the rest

Progress through Resiliency

via Positively Aware, by Amy Herrick, Mary Hawk, Mackey Friedman, Chingche Chiu, James Egan, Mark Friedman, and Ron Stall

While improvements in approaches to HIV prevention have been made over the 30 years since the start of the AIDS epidemic, HIV among MSM is far from eradicated.

Despite more than two decades of prevention efforts focused toward MSM, the rates of HIV infection in this population continue to rise.

What is the state of the HIV/AIDS epidemic among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the U.S.?

A 2008 report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that MSM accounted for 46% of all new HIV infections and HIV infection rates among young MSM increased at a rate of about 12% each year between 2001 and 2006.

This report further noted that MSM were the only risk group who experienced an increase i n infection rates during this time.

In fact, according to a recent study by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh, even if the rate of HIV infection among MSM remains at the current level, by the time a group of young MSM (18 years old) reach the age of 40, 41% of them will be HIV-positive.

We cannot make any progress in fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the U.S. unless we find ways to lower rates of HIV transmission among MSM.

How do other health disparities among MSM relate to risk for HIV/AIDS?

A growing set of recent scientific papers had shown that health problems among MSM are interconnected and function as a group to increase HIV risk in this population.

Because they are sexual minorities, gay, bisexual, and other MSM experience massive minority stress and social marginalization (for example, widespread bullying, gay-bashing, and other forms of violent harassment).

Studies suggest that these negative experiences increase a person’s risk for multiple health issues, including depression, anxiety, drug use, and sexual risk behaviors.

This process happens over time as people are exposed to discrimination and social marginalization.

These experiences cause stress to the individual, resulting in lowered self-esteem, increased emotional distress, and a sense of social isolation, all of which cause a person to be more vulnerable to serious emotional and physical health problems.

According to the CDC, a syndemic is, “Two or more afflictions, interacting synergistically, contributing to excess burden of disease in a population.”

In other words, negative health conditions are thought to interact to form a syndemic: synergistic epidemics that, together, can lower a person’s overall health and make him or her more susceptible to disease.

For example, health problems such as drug use, depression, and domestic violence have been found to interact so that their impact on the overall health of the person is greater than what we might expect from looking at each affliction separately.

While many studies involving MSM have shown interconnections between health problems, such as drug use and high-risk sex, two recent studies have focused on syndemic conditions in samples of adult MSM and young MSM.

These two studies showed that as the number of psychosocial conditions (such as depression, anxiety, and experience of abuse) a person has increases, so will his likelihood of having unprotected anal sex, as well as his likelihood of becoming infected with HIV.

It has been suggested that this set of co-occurring psychosocial health problems operating together as a syndemic may actually be driving the HIV epidemic among MSM, while also working to raise the levels of other health problems among MSM.


Read the rest

Getting to the Bottom of It

via PostivelyAware, by Gary Bucher

Gary Bucher, MD, FAAFP is a leading anal dysplasia and anal cancer prevention specialist in the U.S. Dr. Bucher is certified in performing high resolution anoscopy for the evaluation and treatment of anal pre-cancerous lesions. He is the founder and medical director of Anal Dysplasia Clinic MidWest with locations in Chicago and St. Louis, and is involved in clinical trials in the field. 

Gary was one of LifeLube's distinguished speakers at Project CRYSP's last community forum for the year "Get Freaky" hear the podcast here Courtesy of Feast of Fun!

I have witnessed and taken part in the many changes in HIV care over the past 25 years. At the beginning of the epidemic, silence and fear was the name of the game.

It took HIV activists taking control of their health care destiny to force the medical community to treat the disease and the patient.

HIV is now a chronic treatable disease, but it has a whole new set of issues regarding conditions related to prematu cian should feel for any tender areas, thickened lesions, shallow indentations, firm masses, or other abnormalities.

I also ask the patient if they have performed an anal self-exam by using their finger to feel around for any lumps or bumps inside their anus. This can help guide me when I perform the digital anorectal exam.

Anal Pap smears are performed in a similar fashion to cervical Pap smears, with the area being swabbed to collect cells, which are then examined under a microscope.

They can detect abnormal cells (anal dysplasia), but the anal Pap smear may be less likely to correlate with the degree of anal dysplasia that can be seen on a biopsy of an anal lesion revealed by high resolution anoscopy (HRA).

 Because such specificity is lacking, and there haven’t been any evidence-based clinical trials to evaluate anal cancer screening methods in preventing anal cancer, many clinicians feel that anal Pap smears should not be done at this time. However, I agree with other experts in the field who have proposed yearly anal Pap smears for all HIV-positive individuals.

If the anal Pap is normal, continued annual screening is suggested. Experts also recommend anal Pap smears every one to two years for other high-risk groups and if normal, continued screening every two or three years. If any abnormal cells are detected, HRA with biopsy is recommended.

However, these guidelines may be limited by the need to train a greater number of clinicians in performing HRAs and biopsies. It is also important for these screening tests to be administered in a non-hospital setting, to maximize patient compliance with screening and follow-up.

High-risk HPV subtypes, especially 16 and 18, are associated with cervical, anal, penile, vulvar, vaginal, and oral cancers. Cervical cancer is an AIDS-defining malignancy and its incidence has been decreasing with aggressive screening and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions or higher grade cervical dysplasia.

Cervical cancer affected 35-40 per 100,000 women in the general population prior to cervical cancer screening and treatment and has now decreased to about 8-10 per 100,000.

Though most genital and oral cancers are caused by high risk HPV, these cancers are not increasing as fast as anal cancer in HIV-positive individuals and other high-risk groups.

Compared to the more common lung cancer, penile, vaginal, and vulvar cancers are rare—between 0.42 and 1.8 per 100,000. Oral cancer affects an average of six men and 1.76 women per 100,000.

Anal cancer in the general population is still very rare and affects more women than men. The incidence in men is 1.14/100,000 compared to 1.76/100,000 in women.

Individuals at increased risk for developing anal cancer include HIV-positive men and women; HIV-negative men who have sex with men (MSM); women with a history of cervical, vaginal, or vulvar cancer or cervical dysplasia; chronically immunosuppressed organ transplant patients; men and women with a history of anal warts; and people who smoke tobacco.

Read the rest

 

Get Freaky Recap!

via Windy City Times, by Blair Mishleau

Everything from anal cleanliness to the benefits of kissing and cuddling before sex—and many tangents in between—were covered Oct. 25 at "Get Freaky: A sexual health forum for Men who have Sex with Men."

Approximately 50 audience members gathered for the event, held at the Center on Halsted with hosts/bloggers Feast of Fun moderating it.
 
It was an opportunity for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, to learn and ask about the parts of sex not covered in health class.
 
The forum was hosted in conjunction with Project CRYSP and LifeLube, which are both gay men's sexual health projects, as well as the Chicago Black Gay men's Caucus.
 
The forum is likely the last to be held in the series, which has run four times a year for the last four years, as the grant that funds the program has ended.
 
"We've covered all different topics," said Jim Pickett, director of prevention advocacy in gay men's health at the AIDS Foundation of Chicago. "We've covered things from alcohol in the gay community to sex online to homophobia to 'what is justice for gay Black men' [ and ] trans rights—we've had a number of topics."
 
The three "sexpert" panelists included Gary Bucher, an anal-health specialist and director of the Anal Dysplasia Clinic Midwest; Debby Herbenick, a sex researcher and sex columnist for TimeOut Chicago; and John Stryker, a nurse practitioner at the Howard Brown Health Center.
 
The event started with light snacks, mingling and a series of vendors demonstrating sex toys. The panel commenced after that.
 
To make the panel more interactive, audience members were given clickers and asked various questions that appeared on-screen, with the audience results appearing in real time.
 
Some questions asked included preferred position in sex ( top, bottom, versatile, doesn't apply ) . The audience was mostly bottom, followed by versatile and then top.
 
Other questions asked about anal cleansing, getting tested for HIV and more. Panelists were then called upon to talk about these poll numbers, alongside greater national information.
 
"We try to make them feel interactive, so people feel engaged and they have the forum they want to have," Pickett said. "It really depends on the people who show up and how they interact with our panellists."
Audience members were also encouraged to ask questions, with topics like HIV prevention, anal douching and the difficulty of finding a boyfriend as gay men, being discussed.
 
"One of the things we always get criticized for not bringing up is 'how to get yourself a man,'" said co-host Fausto Fernos of Feast of Fun, as he introduced a question from an attendee.
 
Herbenick, who teaches a sexuality seminar at Indiana University, gave some advice regarding young gays trying to find long-term relationships.
 
"There's no easy answer, but I do think that young people do want relationships," said Herbenick. "I've been teaching college students for eight years, and I haven't seen that change at all. I think the vast majority of men and women of all orientations talk on and on about wanting relationships.
 
"That doesn't mean they don't have periods of sexual exploration and that sometimes people want to have one night stand. But ultimately, the majority, if not all of them, really want relationships. I think it's difficult for people to be honest with what they want and to share that."

HPV is a Gay Men's Health Crisis

via Advocate, by Ilan H. Meyer

A committee from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently made headlines by recommending human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations for boys and young men.

Previously, vaccination, which also protects women from cervical and other cancers, was recommended for girls only.

I commend the committee’s decision: Vaccination can all but eliminate HPV-related cancers. Almost all instances of anal cancer are caused by HPV, which is sexually transmitted.

HPV also causes many oral and other so-called head and neck cancers.

HPV is a gay men’s health issue. Anal cancer affects about two in 100,000 people in the U.S., but the rate of anal cancer among gay and bisexual men is as much as 44 times higher.

 Although vaccination is an important step, this recommendation is not enough. Prejudice and stigma continue to hinder an adequate public health response to HPV.

 As with HIV/AIDS, for HPV and anal cancer silence equals death.

Even though the HPV vaccine, called Gardasil or Silgard, was approved and recommended for use in girls since 2006, it has been hard to get girls vaccinated.

The exchange about HPV in a recent debate among Republican presidential contenders sheds light on Americans’ reluctance:

As former senator Rick Santorum charged, “this disease is spread through sexual contact... unless 11- and 12-year-olds in the state of Texas are somehow encouraged to participate in that activity, this is not something that the state or federal government should be doing.”

The argument is that vaccinating girls encourages them to engage in sex. This is a ludicrous suggestion because Gardasil protects against infection at any time over a lifetime — it is not specific to sex in youth.

Other arguments — concerning the safety of the vaccine, for example — have been repudiated repeatedly by medical authorities.

If it has been so hard to get girls vaccinated, for fear of encouraging heterosexual sex, it is no surprise that public health authorities in the U.S. have been reluctant to recommend HPV vaccination to protect boys who, when they become sexually active, may engage in same-sex anal sex.


Read the rest

Odds for Detecting HIV Varies By Method, New Study Finds

via At a Glance

The odds for effectively detecting HIV in African-American men vary by method, researchers have found. The study, which appears in the Annals of Behavioral Medicine, suggests that HIV-prevention efforts must be multi-faceted, taking into account differences in within this demographic.

To do so, they examined three different avenues for testing among African American MSM in New York City and looked at which methods showed the highest rates of positive HIV tests. By linking a method for getting tested with positive HIV results, the researchers could then better understand which methods were most likely to identify new HIV cases.

The three approaches for HIV testing included the following:

·         Partner services, which involves identifying, locating, and interviewing HIV-infected persons to provide names and contact information of their sex and needle-sharing partners, notifying partners of their exposure to HIV, and providing HIV counseling, testing, and referral services to those partners;

·         Alternative venue testing, in which rapid HIV testing is conducted in bars, churches, or mobile units;

·         The social networks strategy, where HIV testers engage either HIV-positive individuals or those at high risk of seroconversion to become “recruiters.” Through active enlistment and coaching processes, staff build relationships and help recruiters engage people in their social circles into HIV testing.


Read more.

Gay men weigh their risk behavior choices with PrEP

via AIDS Map, By Michael Carter

“PrEP offers much promise as the first biomedical intervention to have success in at-risk men who have sex with men,” comment the researchers.

They therefore undertook further analysis to see how likely the men who participated in the study were to use PrEP and if its availability would change their HIV risk behaviour.

They undertook a survey in December 2010, immediately following the release of the IPrEX results, using Facebook and Black Gay Chat to recruit participants. A total of 1155 gay and other men who have sex with men were recruited to the study.

Participants completed a questionnaire about their knowledge and willingness to use PrEP; perceptions of the risk of HIV infection from unprotected anal sex with or without PrEP; perceptions of sexual pleasure; and perception of likelihood to experience sexual pleasure with or without a condom and with or without PrEP.
The men had an average age of 33 years, 75% were white, and 51% reported unprotected anal sex at least once in the last twelve months.

The availability of PrEP did not alter the perception of the risk associated with HIV in the majority of men, regardless of whether they were the insertive (75%) or receptive (60%) partner in anal sex.

Three-quarters of men stated that the 44% efficacy of PrEP in the IPrEX study would not affect their use of condoms. However, 7% reported that they would use condoms less frequently.

Unprotected anal sex without a condom was perceived as very pleasurable by approximately 50% of respondents.

Read more. 

TOMORROW! Conversations: A Discussion about the Impact of the National HIV/AIDS Strategy on Black Gay/Bisexual Men in Chicago

 The Chicago Black Gay Men’s Caucus present.........

Conversations: A Discussion about the Impact of the National HIV/AIDS Strategy on Black Gay/Bisexual Men in Chicago

 TOMORROW!!
Thursday, August 11, 2011

6:00pm-9:00pm

Gary Comer Youth Center
7200 S. Ingleside (Located 2 blocks southeast of the intersection of East 71^st St., Cottage Grove Ave., and South Chicago Ave.)

 With special guests:

-- John A. Schneider, MD, MPH (Assistant Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology – University of Chicago)

-- Chris Brown (Assistant Commissioner of Public Health for the STI/HIV/AIDS Division – City of Chicago)

-- David D. Robertson (Prevention Specialist – Comer Children’s Hospital at the University of Chicago)

-- Mildred Williamson, PhD, MSW (HIV/AIDS Section Chief – Illinois Department of Public Health)

Moderated by: Keith R. Green, MSW (CBGMC Co-Chair/Director of Federal Affairs at the AIDS Foundation of Chicago)

Light refreshments will be served! Please RSVP to CBGMCevents@gmail.com

Sex Toy Story

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

New H.I.V. Cases Persist at 50,000 a Year

via New York Times, By Donald G. McNeil Jr.

Despite years of great progress in treating AIDS, the number of new infections with the virus that causes it has remained stubbornly around 50,000 a year for a decade, according to new figures released on Wednesday by federal officials.

The American epidemic is still concentrated primarily in gay men, and is growing rapidly worse among young black gay men.

That realization is causing a rift in the AIDS community. Activists say the persistent infection rate proves that government prevention policy is a flop. Federal officials are on the defensive even as they concede that the epidemic will grow if prevention doesn’t get better, which they know is unlikely while their budgets are being cut.

And some researchers believe it is impossible to completely wipe out even a fatal, incurable disease when it is transmitted through sex and carries so much stigma that people deny having it and avoid being tested for it.

Looking backward, epidemiologists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention believe new cases peaked at 130,000 a year in the 1980s, sank slowly during the 1990s and plateaued at 50,000 around the year 2000.

Both Dr. Kevin Fenton, chief of AIDS prevention for the C.D.C., and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, chief of AIDS research at the National Institutes of Health, took issue with Mr. Kramer’s interpretation. While both agreed that 50,000 new annual infections was, in Dr. Fauci’s words, “a great concern,” both pointed to some areas where substantial progress had been made and said that new studies were seeking ways to get more people tested and treated early in the course of the illness, which would make them less infectious and drive transmission rates down.

“The C.D.C. is absolutely not resting,” Dr. Fenton insisted. “It was a major accomplishment to drop infections from 130,000 to 50,000, and we’re dealing with an epidemic that is dynamic.”

But, he conceded, 50,000 is an “unacceptably high level,” and without better prevention efforts, “we’re likely to face an era of rising infection rates.”

Read more.

HHS Moves to Review Outdated Lifetime Gay Blood Donor Deferral

[Sources: Senators John Kerry (D-Mass) & Representative Mike Quigley (IL-05) , GMHC]

LifeLube today applauded the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for outlining concrete steps toward ending the outdated, discriminatory lifetime ban on gay men from donating blood.

In a question-and-answer document, HHS described four areas of necessary study to allow a further review of the existing policy, and implementation of the June 2010 recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability (ACBSA).

These areas include:

•    How the risk of blood transmissible diseases in the current donor population relate to the risk factors in donors;

•    The root cause of quarantine release errors (QRE), the accidental release of blood not cleared for use that potentially put the blood supply at risk;

•    If potential donors correctly understand the current questionnaire and if men who have sex with men (MSM) would comply with modified deferral criteria; and

•    If alternative screening strategy (e.g. pre- and/or post-qualifying donation infectious disease testing) for MSM (and potentially other high-risk donors) would assure blood safety while enabling data collection that could demonstrate safe blood collection from a subset of MSM or other currently deferred donors.


Highlighting what some of our state officials and partners have done for this effort thus far, we want to continue to fight to end discriminatory ban.

In February 2010, GMHC released a comprehensive report titled "A Drive For Change: Reforming U.S. Blood Donation Policies," which details the FDA's current blood donation guidelines and provides recommendations for alternative guidelines that emphasize behavior-based deferrals. In June 2010, GMHC provided testimony at the ACBSA meeting held to review the MSM policy. GMHC has long advocated for consistently applied standards of rigorous, scientifically-based blood safety, contributing to an increased pool of blood donors

In June 2010, Mark Skinner spoke on behalf of the American Plasma Users Coalition (A-PLUS) at the ACBSA meeting held to review the MSM policy.  A-PLUS is a coalition of national patient organizations created to address the unique needs of over 125,000 patients with rare diseases that use life-saving plasma protein therapies and are dependent on blood plasma therapies to lead healthy.  A-PLUS has acknowledged that the scientific basis for the permanent deferral requires review, and previously indicated that there are a number of factors which should be fully evaluated before making a revision to the policy. Such evaluation and research could lead to a policy revision that maintains or enhances the safety of blood and blood products.

Senator John Kerry has been a longtime advocate for updating this discriminatory policy.  Last year, he wrote two separate letters to the FDA urging them to abolish the policy along with an op-ed on the ban in Bay Windows, New England’s largest LGBT newspaper.

Congressman Mike Quigley spear-headed an op-ed co-authored by seven House Democrats urging HHS to revise its blood donation policy.  Quigley and Kerry also wrote also a bi-cameral letter to HHS calling for an end to the ban and submitted testimony to HHS for a two-day hearing reviewing the policy.

Gay men ‘unaware of HIV symptoms’

via  Pink News, By Jessica Geen

Sixty per cent of gay men are unaware of the symptoms of early HIV infection, a large-scale survey has found.

According to the research by National AIDS Trust, most of the men surveyed could not name the ‘triad’ of a sore throat, rash and fever as the most common symptoms occurring together.

Between 70 and 90 per cent of people experience symptoms soon after HIV infection but fewer than one in ten respondents were aware of this.
While 31 per cent said they would go to the doctor if they experienced the symptoms, 28 per cent said they would wait to see if the symptoms go away.

Read more.

Drug study sees up to 92-percent cut in HIV risk among gays

via Google, By AFP

[ This article offers a good overview of the data behind studies around pre-exposure prophylaxis]

Volunteers who responded most to a cocktail of antiretroviral drugs in an HIV prevention trial among gay men had a reduced risk of 92 percent of being infected by the AIDS virus, researchers said on Wednesday.

They presented the work as a last-minute, or "late-breaker", contribution to the world forum on AIDS science in Rome.

The research looked at a group of men who took part in a major trial called iPrEx HIV Prevention Study.
iPrEx explored the idea that an uninfected person taking daily AIDS drugs could be shielded from the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a novel approach called pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP.

The overall findings, published last November, found that use of a drug called Truvada reduced HIV infections by 44 percent compared with a dummy pill, also called a placebo.

The new study looked at a sub-set of men who had the highest concentrations of the drug in their blood -- a telltale that they had been highly disciplined about taking the pill and that their system had also absorbed it better.

Read more.

"Junk science" that could save lives

via the Salon, By Tracy Clark- Flory

[ LifeLube knew it! Here is a s a more level headed interpretation that explains the value of this research.]

Conservatives wrongly claim taxpayers funded a study of gay men's penis size -- and miss the survey's importance.
The Traditional Values Coalition's mission this week is to alert poor, beleaguered American taxpayers that they paid scientists to measure gay men's junk. You will surely be shocked to hear that this news has sparked a firestorm among staunch conservatives; the only problem is that none of it's true. Not only was the research paid for without government funds, but the study's findings could help save lives, and taxpayers' money.

Bloggers were quick to churn out the tabloid headlines that just write themselves: "Your Tax Dollars Going to Study Gay Men's Penis Size." Right-wing news sources like Fox and the Daily Caller got in on this orgy of outrage too. Naturally, the Daily Mail was not far behind.

But contrary to all of these reports, the NIH did not pay researchers to measure gay men's penis size. The data for the study -- "The Association Between Penis Size and Sexual Health Among Men Who Have Sex with Men" -- were "collected as part of a larger survey of the sexual health of gay men," says researcher Jeffrey Parsons, a psychology professor at Hunter College.

That survey was funded by the college's Center for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies and Training -- not the NIH. What's more, they didn't even measure men's penises: "We simply asked men to self-report if they felt their penis was above average, average, or below average," he tells me.

Read more.