• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Gay Men Get New Flesh-Eating Disease

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tenebrae

A follower of The Way
Sep 30, 2005
14,294
1,998
floating in the ether, never been happier
Visit site
✟41,148.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
MRSA is not a flesh eating disease

It is a staph strain that has morphed over the years and become more and more resistent to different types of antibiotics


When undergoing MRSA testing for working in hospitals, they test up the nose, groin and armpit I think. MRSA flourishes in moist warm places such as groins, annuses noses, eyeballs and the like, it is highly infectious so would only take a one or two promiscuous people with mrsa in their anus to create an epidemic


Not new and not limited to gay people. Now if the study had a slightly wider research area eg a few more countries the results could be generalised to the larger gay population. However the results appear to be hightly specific to san francisco,
 
Upvote 0

Tenebrae

A follower of The Way
Sep 30, 2005
14,294
1,998
floating in the ether, never been happier
Visit site
✟41,148.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Tt is the overuse of antibiotics in the food supply and over prescription of antibiotics etc that is causing these infection and other reasons which don't fit into the OT's paradigm..

The problem is not so much the overuse of ABs is that when a person is charted a course of antibiotics and may only take two thirds of the course.
 
Upvote 0

Tenebrae

A follower of The Way
Sep 30, 2005
14,294
1,998
floating in the ether, never been happier
Visit site
✟41,148.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
It was poor judgment on my part to expect this crowd to read something and understand it.

I read it


Understood it, and your OP, was a bad misrepresentation of the actual study


21% (n=532) of the total study population 2495 had the new strain of MRSA

Hardly a large enough percentage of the study to draw a conclusion from that it is a gay plague.

The flesh eating part comes from the infected wounds which this was how the majority of the respondents contracted it, not through having gay sex. The flesh dies due to the infection. In the HIV clinic study, the majority of the paitents contracted MRSA through a leg wound or celulitis eg 179 paitents. Only 45 of the paitents had infections in the buttocks, anus or genital area and in the community side of the study only 37% of the paitents had contracted MRSA in the buttocks, genitals, anus or those sorts of nether regions.


So in other words, well over half of the study participants were found to have MRSA in a wound, cellulitis, joint or on the skin.

It could be said, however the study does not cover that so one can only hypothesise that a third of all the infected clients, (n=532) could have contracted MRSA through hay sex

So some interesting conclusions, in the OP but proved wrong by your own study.
 
Upvote 0

Tenebrae

A follower of The Way
Sep 30, 2005
14,294
1,998
floating in the ether, never been happier
Visit site
✟41,148.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Case closed.

considering that a third of the new cases of MRSA could have been transmitted through gay sex, the case is very much not closed.


The study participants who could have aqquired the infection through gay sex amount to about 7% of the total study population. Definately not big enough to draw a definative conclusion


Case definately not closed, and can i recommend that people actually read the study because the points made in the OP, are not well supported by the study data
 
Upvote 0

Tenebrae

A follower of The Way
Sep 30, 2005
14,294
1,998
floating in the ether, never been happier
Visit site
✟41,148.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
The medical report is titled ver batim:

Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant, Community-Associated, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clone USA300 in Men Who Have Sex with Men

Are you telling me the report is a misrepresentation, or what are you telling me? This is really confusing.

The misrepresentation is that only round about 7% of th study participants could have aqquired the MRSA strain through gay sex.


The rest had the strain in skin, eyes, and other non genital areas of the body
 
Upvote 0

ladyt28

God's Grace Fills My Life
Jun 12, 2007
15,861
1,442
65
Michigan
✟44,955.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
oh for crying out loud, try more credible sources for your information!!

This is from the CDC:
"Overview of Community-Associated MRSA - Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) is a type of staph that is resistant to certain antibiotics. These antibiotics include methicillin and other more common antibiotics such as oxacillin, penicillin and amoxicillin. Staph infections, including MRSA, occur most frequently among persons in hospitals and healthcare facilities (such as nursing homes and dialysis centers) who have weakened immune systems."

From MedilinePlus:
Causes
Staphylococcus aureus (“staph”) are common bacteria that normally live on the skin. The bacteria also live harmlessly in the nasal passages of roughly 30% of the U.S. population. Staph can cause infection when they enter the skin through a cut or sore. Infection can also occur when the bacteria move inside of the body through a catheter or breathing tube. The infection can be minor and local (for example, a pimple), or more serious.
Most staph infections occur in people with weak immune systems, usually patients in hospitals and long-term care facilities. MRSA infections in hospitalized patients are known as healthcare-associated MRSA (HA-MRSA). People who have been hospitalized or had surgery within the past year are at high risk for HA-MRSA. People receiving certain treatments, such as dialysis, are also at high risk. MRSA bacteria account for a large percentage of hospital-acquired staph infections.
Over the past several years, MRSA infections in people not considered high-risk have increased. These infections, known as community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA), occur in otherwise healthy people who have no history of hospitalization in the last year. Many such infections have occurred among athletes who share equipment or personal items (such as towels or razors) and children in daycare facilities."


From MedicineNet:
"How do you get infected with MRSA?
There are two major ways people become infected with MRSA. The first is physical contact with someone who is either infected or is a carrier (people who are not infected but are colonized with the bacteria on their body) of MRSA. The second way is for people to physically contact MRSA on any objects such as door handles, floors, sinks, or towels that have been touched by an MRSA-infected person or carrier. Normal skin tissue in people usually does not allow MRSA infection to develop; however, if there are cuts, abrasions, or other skin flaws such as psoriasis (chronic skin disease with dry patches, redness, and scaly skin), MRSA may proliferate. Many otherwise healthy individuals, especially children and young adults, do not notice small skin imperfections or scrapes and may be lax in taking precautions about skin contacts. This is the likely reason MRSA outbreaks occur in diverse types of people such as school team players (like football players or wrestlers), dormitory residents, and armed-services personnel in constant close contact.
People with higher risk of MRSA infection are those with obvious skin breaks (surgical patients, hospital patients with intravenous lines, burns, or skin ulcers) and patients with depressed immune systems (infants, elderly, or HIV-infected individuals) or chronic diseases (diabetes or cancer). Patients with pneumonia (lung infection) due to MRSA can transmit MRSA by airborne droplets. Health-care workers as a group are repeatedly exposed to MRSA-positive patients and can have a high rate of infection if precautions are not taken. Health-care workers and patient visitors should use disposable masks, gowns, and gloves when they enter the MRSA-infected patient's room."



From WedMD:
"Who is at risk for community-associated MRSA?
Outbreaks have been reported among athletes, prisoners, and military recruits; risk factors include sharing close quarters and personal hygiene products like razors or towels. Infections are increasingly being seen in the general community and have been reported in schools, gyms, and even day care centers."



I find these sources of information a LOT more credible than the few sources that seem to have an agenda to point a finger at the homosexual community regarding MRSA. The bottom line becomes this: if you want credible information, you go to credible sources. If you want the lunatic fringe, you go to sources like the OP of this thread.
 
Upvote 0
B

BigBadWlf

Guest
First, as BBW says, your primary "news" source is confusing several differnt bacteria that are out there. MRSA is not the so-called "flesh-eating" organism. It is a variant of staph which is resistant to many antibiotics, making it harder to to fight.

There has been a minor outbreak here where I work. The people that it has hit are all straight. It definitely does not "only pick on gay men."

According to WebMD, a MRSA infection is just like any other staph infection, but it cannot be fought with many of the more common anti-biotics. The high-risk places to avoid are prisons, military barracks, sports centers/gyms, and schools. Cases that are not associted with these high-risk locations are called Community-Associated cases (abbreviated CaMRSA)

The study that you posted, but did not read is a study of CaMRSA, so they ignored all cases arising from the high-risk sources. They chose hospitals not only in cities with a higher than average gay population, but in parts of the cities where there are more gays than straights, so of course most of the subjects were gay. That most of the infected subjects were gay was part of he design of the study, not the result of the bacteria.

And despite what was reported, the actual conclusion that the study actually concluded was that people whose immune systems were compromised, such as people with HIV, were hit harder by CaMRSA.

Which makes sense. Without effective antibiotics, you have to rely more heavily on the body's own defenses. If you are already fighting a different infection, or if something is suppressing your immune system, like HIV, you will have a harder time fighting the MRSA.
Thanks for the facts. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
B

BigBadWlf

Guest
Hopefully, this won't spread to the straights the way AIDS did when the homosexual community disregarded the dangers of that disease.
Which doesn’t explain why the earliest known cases of HIV were in heterosexuals

Of course there will be more talking about their rights more than their responsibilities again. We learned nothing over the death of Ryan White.

Many people learned that it is wrong to use a disease to justify hatred. Shame you didn’t learn that from young Mr. White.
 
Upvote 0
B

BigBadWlf

Guest
This is one of the most common and easiest ploys in homosexual debate to defeat.

We are not discussing race, we are discussing how disease is spread through sex.

Becuase this disease as STD is easiest spread through anal inter-course then the spread primarily through the gay male community is the issue.

Racial discrimination is not the issue unless you are using it as a ploy.
No… disease is being used to justify bigotry.

Making false claims about a “gay disease” to that end is no different from making false claims about a “black disease” to justify racism.

The motives and the tactics are the same
 
Upvote 0

Ohioprof

Contributor
Jun 27, 2007
988
219
70
✟28,933.00
Faith
Unitarian
The problem is not so much the overuse of ABs is that when a person is charted a course of antibiotics and may only take two thirds of the course.
I have heard this, but I don't understand it. Can you explain why people not taking a full course of antibiotics as prescribed renders antibiotics less effective in general? How does an individual's decision not to take a full course of an antibiotic undermine the effectiveness of antibiotics in the wider population?

I suspect many people do not take a full course of antibiotics as they are told to do, because they start to feel better after taking some of the antibiotic, and so they stop. I imagine that possibly most people do this, without telling anyone.
 
Upvote 0

BAFRIEND

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2007
15,847
1,173
✟23,362.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
No… disease is being used to justify bigotry.

Making false claims about a “gay disease” to that end is no different from making false claims about a “black disease” to justify racism.

The motives and the tactics are the same
We are talking about a disease not about skin color, sorry.

This is sexually transmitted.

This is the same attitude that got Ryan White killed.
 
Upvote 0

Melethiel

Miserere mei, Domine
Site Supporter
Jun 8, 2005
27,287
940
35
Ohio
✟99,593.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I have heard this, but I don't understand it. Can you explain why people not taking a full course of antibiotics as prescribed renders antibiotics less effective in general? How does an individual's decision not to take a full course of an antibiotic undermine the effectiveness of antibiotics in the wider population?

I suspect many people do not take a full course of antibiotics as they are told to do, because they start to feel better after taking some of the antibiotic, and so they stop. I imagine that possibly most people do this, without telling anyone.
This is just an assumption, mind you, but a possible reason that springs to my mind is that people stop taking meds when they feel better, but "feeling better" does not equate to "killing all bacteria". Due to the process of natural selection, any bacteria that remain will naturally be more resistant...apply the process of evolution...
 
Upvote 0

Ohioprof

Contributor
Jun 27, 2007
988
219
70
✟28,933.00
Faith
Unitarian
This is just an assumption, mind you, but a possible reason that springs to my mind is that people stop taking meds when they feel better, but "feeling better" does not equate to "killing all bacteria". Due to the process of natural selection, any bacteria that remain will naturally be more resistant...apply the process of evolution...
That makes sense.
 
Upvote 0

ladyt28

God's Grace Fills My Life
Jun 12, 2007
15,861
1,442
65
Michigan
✟44,955.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
We are talking about a disease not about skin color, sorry.

This is sexually transmitted.

This is the same attitude that got Ryan White killed.

Why do you so consistently ignore all of the other sources of information refuting the claim that it is "sexually transmitted"??? The attitudes that kill people like young Mr White are those that ignore ALL of the facts as they try to focus on one slim aspect of a situation. Just what are you going to do when someone in your own family contracts this because people like yourself feel oh-so-safe being a heterosexual?
 
Upvote 0

Lisa0315

Respect Catholics and the Mother Church!
Jul 17, 2005
21,378
1,650
57
At The Feet of Jesus
✟45,077.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Why do you so consistently ignore all of the other sources of information refuting the claim that it is "sexually transmitted"??? The attitudes that kill people like young Mr White are those that ignore ALL of the facts as they try to focus on one slim aspect of a situation. Just what are you going to do when someone in your own family contracts this because people like yourself feel oh-so-safe being a heterosexual?

:thumbsup: I think that some people want gay people to be punished so badly that they cannot even see reason anymore. No one is arguing whether or not gay sex is a sin. I am a Conservative Christian, and I believe that sexual sin is sexual sin. However, in the age of grace, there will be no Sodom and Gommorah's. It will rain on the just and the unjust.

With this line of reasoning, it makes me think...If God is punishing gays with AIDS and MRSA, then, why isn't God punishing the adulterers and the pedophiles in the church?

I just cannot understand how people can be so blind. They see what they want to see. No matter how the facts are laid out, they will see this as a gay disease.

Lisa
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.