People who have HIV and Aids and who are on anti-retroviral treatment (ART) tend to take greater sexual risks than those who are positive but who are not on treatment.
That's according to a recent study by the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) into perceptions and behavioural risk relating to people who are HIV-positive.
The study's findings indicate that HIV-positive people on treatment tend to practise safe sex less frequently compared to those who are not on treatment.
They appear not to view the disease as a threat.
The study was conducted by Vuyiswa Mathambo, a research manager in the Child, Youth, Family and Social Development research programme.
The research was conducted by sampling a group of 104 HIV-positive men and women who had been receiving ART for more than six months and 111 HIV-positive men and women who were not receiving ART at the time of the study.
Most of those surveyed were women aged 26 to 30, unmarried, with a secondary level qualification and unemployed.
People in both groups were asked about their perceptions of the impact of HIV and Aids on the frequency with which they practised safe sex.
The report is published in the HSRC Review.
In terms of the statistics, more people who were in the treatment group viewed Aids as a disease that was no longer life-threatening and reported practising safe sex less often since starting treatment.
Of those interviewed, 84 percent of those in the treatment group said Aids was no longer a threat compared to 76 percent in the non-treatment group.
Sixty-three percent of those in the treatment group practised safe sex compared to 51 percent of those in the non-treatment group.
Mathambo writes that the study's findings showed a need to communicate appropriate HIV-prevention messages to those on treatment as it was still important to practise safe sex.
"ART is known to reduce viral loads, Aids-related illnesses and death and to improve the quality of life of those taking this treatment but concerns have been raised about the perceptions of risk as well as the behaviour of those receiving ART...
"While acknowledging the difficulty of linking risk perception and sexual practices, it was notable that some respondents had sought treatment for STIs (sexually transmitted infections) in both groups in the past two to three months," she says.
Mathambo adds that the study site was located within a hospital founded on a Catholic ethos, meaning that condoms may not have been as readily available.
Meanwhile, a comprehensive study by the Institute of Security Studies says that the politicisation of HIV and Aids has impacted on corruption and accountability.
The study, A Lethal Cocktail by Collette Schulz-Herzenberg, explores the impact of corruption on HIV and Aids prevention and treatment efforts in South Africa.
"It (politicisation) appears to relate indirectly to instances of abuse and corruption on the part of public officials and other individuals by affording a degree of protection."
Keisha Shakespeare-Blackmore, Staff Reporter
With the passage of time, the acceptance of same-sex relationships in our society has increased. On March 12, Flair's Sex and Relationship feature looked at the topic, 'Can homosexuals be cured?' This generated a lot of debate among the homosexual community. Below are excerpts from the feature.
Jamaica is considered to be a highly homophobic society, but in recent times, more homosexuals have been 'coming out' of the closet.
In February, there was wide-ranging discussion after a number of homosexual commercial sex workers spoke out on a current affairs television programme. Many viewers were astonished that they were so bold, while others were angry. Others felt a sense of compassion, believing that homosexuals were 'sick' and needed help.
Clinical psychologist, Dr. Asquith Reid, said whether a homosexual can be cured depends on how you define it. "If you look at it from a religious perspective where homosexuality is seen as wrong and a sin, then certainly, they can be cured.
"If it's a matter of choice, then you can choose to or not to engage in such practices. But if you think it is biological, then it would be hard to change."
Other view
Chris, 24, is a commercial sex worker who sells his body to men. He is from an inner-city community in Kingston. When Flair asked him if he believed homosexuals could be 'cured', his immediate response was, "Yes. I was not born like this."
"I believe that homosexuals can be cured because we were not born like this. It is just the mentality, and often a homosexual is like a child who sees certain things and wants a certain lifestyle."
Reaction
After the feature hit the papers on March 12, many readers lashed out and emails poured in. Below is one response:
First of all, sexuality and sexual desires are not things that people acquire, develop or catch along the way. They are innate. They are part of our psychological and emotional make-up. In essence, a homosexual man has absolutely no sexual desire for women.
In the same way a straight man was born with desires for females, a gay man was born with desires for men. Sexuality can't be learned. Just like hunger, sex is a natural need. Nobody can teach a man to be gay or straight. Ask a straight man if anybody taught him to have an erection for a woman, and he will tell you no. Ask a gay man if anybody taught him to have an erection when he sees an attractive man and he will definitely say, no way, José!
In response to Chris' view, what he doesn't understand is the difference between being gay and living a whoring life. So, when he speaks about change, it's not change from being gay to straight. It's about a change of lifestyle, that is, stop having sex with men for money. But, if he is truly gay, his desires for men will never change.
So, to answer that question, no, there is no cure, because there is no need for one.
Nobody but a gay man knows the unspeakable pleasure that two men derive from being entangled in a passionate embrace.
A countrywide survey on the lifestyles of children aged between 10 and 14, has revealed that kids are eating too much junk food and too few vegetables, prompting risk of dying a decade younger than their parents.
The survey conducted on more than 1,000 British children has underlined fresh warnings of a threatening obesity epidemic.
The study showed that 62 per cent of the kids did not eat the recommended five portions of fruit and vegetables a day and almost 18 per cent had less than three full portions a day.
About 39 per cent did not have breakfast every day, despite the recommendations that it is the day's most important meal and a quarter had it four times a week or less.
Further, a fifth of children admitted to going without any lunch at least once a week, while 63 per cent had at least one takeaway meal a week with their families, exposing them to high levels of fat, sugar and salt.
The figures also established that the youngsters were at a further risk of obesity as they did not do enough physical exercise or play any sport.
Approximately 17 per cent did not exercise at all, while 48 per cent exercised for less than an hour a day.
The statistics were alarming for Dr David Haslam, clinical director of the National Obesity Forum.
"It's often correctly stated that fast food, or takeaways are 'ok' as an occasional treat, but the kids having at least one takeaway per week are the same kids who have at least one trip to McDonald's a week, and no breakfast or physical activity, so for these kids, the risk stacks up alarmingly," the Telegraph quoted Haslam, as saying.
"These are the kids who will become obese, and lose a decade of life," he added.
Under age boozing also spurred fresh concerns among the campaigners.
The figures revealed that more than 72 per cent of the youngsters had tried alcohol and more than 29 per cent had actually been drunk.
A significant number were regular consumers of drinks like alcopops, cider and lager to brandy and vodka.
However, majority of the children, that is 95 per cent, had not tried cigarettes undermining earlier government figures saying nine per cent of youngsters were regular smokers.
London, Decemeber 31 : A mother and daughter have given birth to two beautiful babies - just four days apart.
Amanda Nesling, 41, delivered a 2lb baby boy Curtis Leeroy William White seven weeks early.
And days later, Nesling's 18-year-old daughter Natasha gave birth to Brooke-Ellie.
"We were both surprised at one another's pregnancy and that they would be so close together," the Mirror quoted Natasha, as saying.
Nesling's son, who was due in January, is in a special care baby unit until February.
Labels: Interesting, News, odd
