If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
1. Maybe they need to learn a little about how infection happens then. last time I looked HIV was not transferred through immigration...
2. Or maybe you should read that again. The rise in HIV cases is partly down to immigration but no mention of increased infections which is a different statistic altogether.
3. Can you link to this statement?
So, just explain how immigration causes a rise in HIV cases for me then?
It's simple. You have one case, you admit someone to your country who is HIV+ and therefore you now have two cases. That is a rise.
What it doesn't say is that the immigrant infected someone, which is a different issue completely. This is an example of statistics saying one thing being used to say something else and I'd expect little better of someone life Territt TBH.
well you get a large group of HIV infected people move into a country, they have sex with people, whose people catch HIV, so forth, understand yet?
at the end of the day I cant see what the problem is in protecting your people, I mean would be having this chat if AUZ was to ban murders from entering? And I am sure HIV kills more people
Dude, the answer is simple. Getting people to do it isn't
ETA: Much as I dislike the catholic church, if we followed their teachings then HIV would be eradicated in a generation. On that point their message is correct. People though aren't so comformist. It isn't the message which is wrong, it's behaviour and that is much, much harder to change.
Thank you for making my point.
That isn't what you "quote" from the public health officals says, is it?
People are not going to stop having unprotected sex. Fact.
And changing immigration law will not change that fact either, dude.
2005 UK
765 people murdered
503 died from an A.I.D.S related illness.
No shit. So why make the problem worse as you suggest?
So what would you about people (birn there) in Australia that have HIV?
Rubberskin - can I just ask you where you got from stats from please?
Better shut down this forum...
AIDS related deaths in UK
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=654 but the link doesn't work now
Murders in the UK
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/page40.asp
If the single aim is to prevent AIDS infections and they think they can do this by stopping people with AIDS entering the country then if you go abroard, and get AIDS then you shouldn't be allowed back in, if they were being consistent......
For a country that is determinedly against the nanny state, I find the logic of this impeneterable - where is the personal responsibility of Australian citizens and potential citizens in stopping the transmission of the AIDS virus in this? Surely the Governments concern in this is to educate and support, not dictate. It is a flimsy excuse to control immigration, based on fear and an increasing tendency to centralise power and reduce state influence.
Personally, I won't even contemplate going back to spend any time there until mini-Bush is elected out.
Which is what I would support.
It depends entirley.
Something like HIV can easily be spread by people. Having sex is enough, and we all know that happens easily enough when you're pissed.
Somehing like Cancer isn't going to be spread.
TB, that is dangerous. Shouldn't be allowed on a fucking plane for certain, the recirculated air will get to everyone. TB is easily spread on planes.
HIV isn't alone in needed a solution. The sooner we find one, the sooner we can stop isolating people. This policy is a reaction to a problem. Don't like it? Stand up to your government and tell them to stop wasting money on fucking pointless wars and start investing it into a medical science. And stop bullshit private companies charging over the odds for the cure once it's out.
HIV is actually quite hard to catch.
Unprotected sex happens pretty easily...
HIV isn't passed on that easily from unprotected sex. Obviously people should use protection, but HIV is one of the harder STI's to catch.
I always though that was standard operating procedure in all countries?
Thought all countries have a medical ?
Well since most of those affected by HIV were infected through unprotected sex I'm not sure that the risk should be played down. And the HIV risk for some kinds of sex, e.g. anal sex between gay men is very high. Although I do agree with you in that HIV isn't the only STD people need to be worried about.
Equally it's important not to overstate the problem. Unprotected sex with someone you know is HIV positive has a risk somewhere between 300-1 and 1000-1 of catching the infection, depending on who you ask (200-1 for anal apparently). In the western world at least, there are far more problematic STD's to worry about.
I find any such measure deeply disturbing and nauseating as well.
if they dont then they really should,