A professor at the Yale Medical School named Sydney Spiesel writes in Slate:
About this time every year, the CDC issues its annual statistical report about sexually transmitted diseases in the United States. The surveillance report for 2007 has just come out (it takes about a year to compile and process the statistics). It is long—almost 170 pages—and, as usual, disquieting. Our uncomfortable feelings about sexuality have caused STDs to be stigmatizing ...
Now, I'm not a doctor, but it's my impression that rather than our "uncomfortable feelings about sexuality" that "have caused STDs to be stigmatizing," it's more the oozing sores.
Later on the good doctor notes, without specifying any facts, "the very different case rates between ethnic groups." He doesn't explain what those differences are, but looking in the government report, I find that it looks like STD rates are quite similar to crime rates in their racial ratios. For example, the CDC says: "In 2007, the gonorrhea rate among black men was 26 times higher than that in white men," although that is anomalously high -- the usual black-white ratio for the various diseases is more like 8 to 1, with the Hispanic to white ratio typically in the 2 or 3 to 1 range, and Asians the same or healthier than whites.
In Slate, Spiesel asks plaintively:
Are the germs really ethnically and geographically prejudiced?
Haven't the germs heard about Obama yet? We live in an era of post-racial transcendence. Get with the times, germs!
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
Why don't they call them "venereal diseases" anymore?
ReplyDeleteBecause classical allusions go over the head of the average dumbed-down lemming today.
Also, names become "offensive" and must be changed, when what they are naming is intrinsically offensive. "Garbage man" (though IMO a perfectly respectable profession) becomes "sanitation engineer," for example. Polishing turds keeps busy the lexicographers formerly known as ink-stained wretches.
Our uncomfortable feelings about sexuality have caused STDs to be stigmatizing ...
ReplyDeleteSome diseases are more avoidable than others. Some disproportionately strike those who have low impulse control and low future time orientation. Sometimes the diseases we have can say things about our character. Some of the things they say about said character aren't good. Hence the stigma. This stigma is a good thing - it's one of society's immune responses against (societal) disease. You'd think a doctor would understand this.
This is the sort of thing that everyone understands instinctively, but which social climbers strive to pretend to not understand in order to score their social climbing points with the demonic powers that be.
To recap: all decent people's uncomfortable feelings about recklessness, stupidity, low impulse control, etc. have caused STDs to be stigmatizing.
Those who try to remove this stigma are lowering a society's immunity to societal diseases. They do this because they hate our society. Simply put, they want it to die.
IMHO, blacks dont use condoms
ReplyDeletesince they want to impregnate lots of women and gain status for having fathered a brood
In this pursuit, it is necessary not to use a condom
The side effect is a very high STD rate
At least they seem to have given up calling them STIs.
ReplyDeleteOff-topic, I saw VDare hasn't covered this yet, but San Francisco is handing out city ID cards to illegal immigrants with almost no screening involved. Wrote it up here:
S.F. ID cards
I guarantee you that somehow the high rate of STDs amongst black men will be blamed on whites. Black inability to put on a condom is yet another bitter fruit of racism!
ReplyDeleteFunny post! I suppose Steve can tout this as "proof" that race is more than just a social construct.
ReplyDeleteObviously the higher rates of STDs among blacks are caused chiefly by differences in sexual behavior. However there are some interesting theories about AIDS relating to the apparent fact that roughly 10% of whites are immune to all known forms of HIV. Some people hypothesize that there was an HIV epidemic a very long time ago, and the virus has lain dormant all this time, using chimps as a reservoir species, only to re-emerge and start an epidemic thanks to the invention of modern transportation.
ReplyDeleteThe HIV immunity mutation is not exclusive to whites, but is believed to occur at much lower rates in Africans and Asians. This would seem to mean that it occurred after the split between Mongoloids and Caucasoids, which would seem to place the original epidemic in Europe or at least the Middle East. This does not necessarily contradict the chimpanzee theory, as there may have been a low-level persistence of HIV throughout the entire human race in the early days of man, but only reaching severe epidemic proportions in the branch of humans that went on to become Europeans.
However, another theory points out that other diseases seem to use the same 'trick' as HIV in order to enter human cells, and that there might have instead been an epidemic of some other disease which caused the immunity mutation. One potential culprit is the Black Death. I remember once reading an armchair researcher's essay claiming that HIV rates in England today correlate negatively with geographical areas that were most strongly affected by the Black Death.
What is the black/white ratio for other infectious diseases? (Tho come to think of it how many serious infective diseases do we have any more?)
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that most readers here are familiar with the behavioral component that is probably responsible for the lion's share of this. To be fair, however, there almost certainly are ethnically-based differences in immunities that play some role as well. Researchers with the VA found last summer a gene in most blacks linked to a protective mutation against malaria (the same one that can lead to sickle-cell anemia) that makes HIV infection following exposure significantly more likely. Europeans also had the Black Death and a host of other pandemics fostered by our history as pastoral, agricultural and urban peoples. (The "germs" in Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel") Immunities arising from those are a part of our genetic heritage. 10-15% of whites in Europe and North America have been found to have a gene that confers a strong resistance to HIV infection, for example.
ReplyDeleteGood lord. As a pre-med student, I am not looking forward to being forced through this doublethink in med school.
ReplyDelete"IMHO, blacks dont use condoms
ReplyDeletesince they want to impregnate lots of women and gain status for having fathered a brood"
Jerry Springer and Maury Povich have taught me that this is not true. Haven't you ever seen all the ecstatic hollering and running around the set when these guys find out that they are not the baby daddy?
Only the most conservative religion can help these poor people. It's good for everyone, but even more beneficial for the least of us.
in Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel
ReplyDeleteIt's been a while since I'd heard that book referenced. Interesting that it was published when Diamond was sixty years old, in 1997.
Earlier in life Diamond had a long and varied scientific career studying physiology, evolution and also birds and ecology in New Guinea.
But by the late nineties Stephen Jay Gould had slowed down. And maybe some publisher suggested to Diamond that he could take up Gould's slack.
However it worked out, later in life Diamond apparently felt the need to write evolutionary science books that methodically worked to separate the biology of the white world from the achievements of the white world.
This sort of scientific writer is a tradition in the western bookstore. He represents the Propositional Civilization school of thought.
I saw this old article (November 29, 1987) from the NY Times about the NY Blood Center, while looking for unrelated info, since I donate blood quite frequently:
ReplyDeletehttp://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?
res=9B0DE0D9123CF93AA15752C1A961948260
&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=print
This section is relevant to this discussion:
Oversupply of Type A
Primarily due to its imbalanced supply, the center admits to wasting 8 percent of its blood during certain periods this year. This compares with an average 4 percent rate of loss nationally.
Blood supply officials say the imbalance occurs because 90 percent of donors are whites, who have a third more type A than blacks. (Anectodotally, this seems true to me - usually the only blacks I ever see at the Blood Center are the nurses. I see a fair number of Asian donors though.)
In contrast, blacks have twice as much type B as whites.
As a result, there is a constant oversupply of type A blood, which has gone bad on storage shelves and in hospital blood banks, and a chronic shortage of type B. Type O blood is the most common among whites and blacks. It also is ''universal'' and thus can be used to replace other positive types that are in short supply, like type B. As a result, hospitals keep running short of type O, too.
Type B blood is chronically scarce, officials said, because the center historically has had poor responses from blood drives in predominantly black areas of the city and has consequently been reluctant to mount new ones in those areas.
They said, moreover, that blood collected in such areas had a high rate of rejection because of a higher rate of infection and disease among racial minority groups with large numbers of poor people.
(Ironic fact for me: I'm blood type B+, and there's no mistaking I'm white (East European origin)!)
Although this article is quite dated, I would imagine the facts still are true today.
Anonymous writes: "I guarantee you that somehow the high rate of STDs amongst black men will be blamed on whites. Black inability to put on a condom is yet another bitter fruit of racism!"
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think the point of bringing up the Tuskegee study is?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_Male
"Get with the times, germs!"
ReplyDeleteThis is a funny line worthy of "Red Eye", the refreshingly un-P.C. absurdist news discussion show on late nights on Fox.
"In Slate, Spiesel asks plaintively:
ReplyDeleteAre the germs really ethnically and geographically prejudiced?
Haven't the germs heard about Obama yet? "
It's worth remembering the Michelle Obama's reaction to the different rates of STDs/VDs among different ethnic groups, blocking the efforts of medical researchers to protect the most at risk groups:
"When the human papillomavirus vaccine, which can prevent cervical cancer, became available, researchers proposed approaching local school principals about enlisting black teenage girls as research subjects.
Mrs. Obama stopped that.
Eric Rasmusen: Tho come to think of it how many serious infective diseases do we have any more?
ReplyDeleteGoogle MRSA and Acinetobacter.
In the USA, hospitalization is now the third leading cause of death [behind cancer & heart disease]; in the UK, long-term hospitalization is a death sentence.
PS: I wonder whether infections like MRSA and Acinetobacter have a racial angle?
I also often wonder whether, when really serious contact-tracing is performed on the hospital staff, whether there is a racial angle as regards just who it is who is most likely to pass the bugs on to their patients.
I have my suspicions about this, but no hard facts to base it on.
Peter W: Good lord. As a pre-med student, I am not looking forward to being forced through this doublethink in med school.
In this day and age, you'll be lucky if you can find a medical school which doesn't require you to murder the unborn child in the womb as part of your training.
Peter W - In addition to doublethink, PC can be aptly described by "Crimestop." From 1984:
ReplyDeleteCrimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.
IMHO, blacks dont use condoms
ReplyDeletesince they want to impregnate lots of women
Maybe. Occam's Razor suggests that they don't use condoms because it's easier than using one.
Why dont they call them "venereal diseases" anymore? Same reason they dont call it impotence,they call it ED,erectile dysfunction. It sounds more,uhm,serious. Of course,if you have ED,maybe you have less chance of getting STD's..(reminds me of a Jerry Lewis joke about a grocer whom a lady asks if he "has nuts". The grocer says no. Then she asks if he has "dates".He replies,"If I had nuts,I'd have DATES!" ) The rates of infection for black people are gruesome. Scarey stuff. Interetsing how the whole "vaccine" push is aimed at whiter peoples daughters;(witness those dumb ads with a girl playing baseball and another riding a horse...WTF??)when there is such a bigger prob with the "mino's"!
ReplyDeleteIn African society there is the practice that girls can have sex as much as they want before marriage, but must remain faithful thereafter. Men basically can just continue having loose sex as much as they want. That's why this data does not surprise anyone who’s from that continent. You can ask any pastor down there. They will tell you horror stories about trying to get the black congregants to come into line with biblical fidelity. And then we are talking about people who take Christianity seriously.
ReplyDeletePresumably black sexual morality was better prior to Civil Rights, as much as white sexual morality was. The humanist, feminist and Jewish intellectual attack on white Christendom with its Victorian sexual mores was later on reinforced through popular culture with its emphasis on jazz and pop music, both of which have African origins and both of which encourage loose sexual mores. This certainly did not help whites, but also damaged black society which was more biblically oriented prior to Civil Rights.
Venereal disease is widespread in Africa, where the Aids epidemic is just the worst form of sexually transmitted diseases. Sexual permissiveness in Africa is one of the main reasons why that continent is in such a bad state. Creative thinking and hard work just don't go along with easy sexual mores.
Before everyone jumps off on to the HIV wagon, remember, the salient fact is about gonorrhea infection rates. Unless we've got a plague explanation for that one, it's behavior all the way down.
ReplyDeleterec1man said...
ReplyDeleteIMHO, blacks dont use condoms since they want to impregnate lots of women and gain status for having fathered a brood
In this pursuit, it is necessary to not use a condom
The side effect is a very high STD rate
Or they could be drunk, stoned or high when they get infected, since they are well known for dealing and using drugs. It should also be noted that Black men have very low rates of circumcision compared to Whites IIRC, which could make condom use uncomfortable.
Maybe the reason the term venereal is no longer used is because the term derives from the godess Venus and connotes heterosexual vaginal intercourse. Gay males also have much high STD rates, largely from anal intercourse.
ReplyDeleteBlacks I believe are more prone (no pun intended) to engage in anal intercourse than whites and asians.
Non-circumcised males are also more likely to contract and pass on certain STDs. And blacks, disproportionately, don't get cicrumcised.
ReplyDeleteBlacks are simply more likely to have had sex with more people, and more likely to have had sex with someone who's had sex with lots and lots of people. The risk increases geometrically, not arithmetically.
In early 1980's London I knew a female doctor who was scandalized to find out that local hospitals were rejecting black and or African blood donors.
ReplyDeleteShe never said why but even though this was before AIDS hit the big time it is obvious that such donations were often of no use for one reason or another.
Richard
Anyone on the ball in regard to overall impact of particular cultural practices on the general US healthcare expenditure, i.e. 2600% disproportional spike ..this translates to quite some money...
ReplyDeleteHow about enforcing Three Strike Rule on this issue as well?
Defending one's homestead against the guns or germs, state should render judgment equal...esp. if there is a record of Recidivism.
Sir, why did you refrain from posting my comment?
ReplyDeleteThanks.
"Sexual permissiveness in Africa is one of the main reasons why that continent is in such a bad state."
ReplyDelete"Or they could be drunk, stoned or high when they get infected, since they are well known for dealing and using drugs."
That such behavior has inevitable destructive consequences, both personally and socially, is the rather explicit message of The Wrester. You wouldn't really know it, though, from listening to discussion about the movie in the media. No way the elite want to admit that their own sexual mores might have adverse consequences for those with lower IQs and social status.
Wade Nichols: I saw this old article (November 29, 1987) from the NY Times about the NY Blood Center, while looking for unrelated info, since I donate blood quite frequently... Blood supply officials say the imbalance occurs because 90 percent of donors are whites, who have a third more type A than blacks. (Anectodotally, this seems true to me - usually the only blacks I ever see at the Blood Center are the nurses. I see a fair number of Asian donors though.)
ReplyDeleteThe people who give blood are also disproportionately more likely to be conservative Republicans than liberal Democrats.
Compare:
Excerpt: Who Really Cares
arthurbrooks.net
...The differences go beyond money and time. Take blood donations, for example. In 2002, conservative Americans were more likely to donate blood each year, and did so more often, than liberals. If liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply in the United States would jump by about 45 percent...
The so-called African AIDS crisis is a crock of spit because the theory of HIV-AIDS is simply untrue.
ReplyDeleteAnd the notion that the incidence of circumcision correlates with that of STD transmission is just plain daft. Outside of America and the Muslim/Jewish world, the practice is not widespread.
Hill demonstrates that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing with this statement:
ReplyDeleteAnd the notion that the incidence of circumcision correlates with that of STD transmission is just plain daft. Outside of America and the Muslim/Jewish world, the practice is not widespread.
It was practised for several generations in the country I come from.
Now, I'm not a doctor, but it's my impression that rather than our "uncomfortable feelings about sexuality" that "have caused STDs to be stigmatizing," it's more the oozing sores.
ReplyDeleteEh, STDs mainly scare the crap out of people who've never had them. Think about this: if they were bad enough to stop people from fucking, they wouldn't spread, now would they? Let's go through the list:
Herpes is probably the worst, since it can't be cured (yet - probably will be cured within 3-5 years now that they know how it remains latent in nerve endings), but it's basically a relatively minor nuisance and can be treated with inexpensive drugs.
HIV is the one that really scares people, but it's hard to catch, and as a previous poster points out, it doesn't actually cause AIDS, as anyone who has ever looked at the evidence knows. But since people believe HIV causes AIDS, getting HIV could be inconvenient if you want to live overseas for example.
Genital warts - generally speaking a minor nuisance, men usually don't even have symptoms; can be treated.
Syphilis - damn near nonexistent these days, easily treated with antibiotics.
Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and all the other bacterial ones - easily treated with antibiotics.
Crabs - wash your pubes with some special shampoo.
Generally not a big deal.
I think the main reason for moving from VD to STD is that the traditional name was... traditional, and associated with traditional views on sex. The New Class types who control sex education, "reproductive health care", etc. seek not just dominance, but complete ideological hegemony, and one way of doing this is to mint their own vocabulary. That way, anyone who opens their mouth on the subject either acknowledges New Class dominance (by using the terms) or declares themselves marginal (by refusing to use them).
ReplyDeleteHalf Sigma had a discussion relating to this some time ago, about the lack of condom use and the resulting STD rate with NAMs, especially blacks.
ReplyDeleteNAMs, especialy blacks, don't use condoms because they either aren't intelligent enough to or don't care (or both). I don't know what the other reasons could be. It isn't like there hasn't been billions spent on education, free condoms and PSA's over the years. Yet the problem still remains.
Maybe "Truth" could enlighten us, but people like him have a tendency to steer clear of serious discussions like this.
Just in time to buttress the fact that AIDS is largely a disease of certain groups: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6217335.html
ReplyDeleteMost telling:
"Institutions in other cities with high infection rates, including New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and Washington, have received grants to participate in the project."
Blacks used to call Washington, D.C. "Chocolate City" because of its racial makeup.
Eric Rasmussen should also be aware of drug resistant TB.
ReplyDeletehttp://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/who-stop-drug-r.html
Think about open borders and all the infected persons who cross them frequently.
Typhoid Mary was a piker compared to TB Juan.
Off-topic, but since commentors here might know: What is the riskiness of (a) homosexuality, and (b) heroin use in terms of AIDS deaths? Or, put differently: what percentage of homosexuals and drug users have gotten AIDS? I'm interested in comparing this with the riskiness of cigarette smoking.
ReplyDeleteEric Rasmussen needs to do an Internet search of "AIDS + Russia + drug abuse"
ReplyDeleteMore info than you can digest.
None of it good.
As for the other, he should do likewise.
Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteOnly the most conservative religion can help these poor people. It's good for everyone, but even more beneficial for the least of us.
Do you mean paganism by any chance?
No way the elite want to admit that their own sexual mores might have adverse consequences for those with lower IQs and social status.
Why should the elite, i.e. people who have a certain amount of personal responsibility, have to live like Siberian monks just to keep the dummies from wasting themselves as they should?
This stinks of "we need to protect the children" nanny-state fascism. Maybe Venereal Disease (or in dumbspeak, Venusian Disease) - along with alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and other "sins" - is the very chlorine needed to keep the gene pool clean. Smart people know how to protect themselves.
And yes, I think that Venusian Disease would be a very good name for it. The super-dummies can crusade against the pagan she-demon Venus on the planet Venus, build a rocket to blow it up, and stop bothering us evolved humans!
"Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI think the main reason for moving from VD to STD is that the traditional name was... traditional, and associated with traditional views on sex. The New Class types who control sex education, "reproductive health care", etc. seek not just dominance, but complete ideological hegemony, and one way of doing this is to mint their own vocabulary. That way, anyone who opens their mouth on the subject either acknowledges New Class dominance (by using the terms) or declares themselves marginal (by refusing to use them)."
Good point. Control the vocabulary, and you control the debate. As for example, prostitute has become "sex worker".
"Reader said...
ReplyDeleteHIV is the one that really scares people, but it's hard to catch, and as a previous poster points out, it doesn't actually cause AIDS, as anyone who has ever looked at the evidence knows."
This statement is obviously false, as there are many people who have looked at the data, and concluded that HIV does cause AIDS.
Peter Duisberg's hypothesis was a fascinating one, and certainly merited consideration, but I believe it remains a minority opinion in the medical field - a very minority opinion.
Anyone who is more knowledgeable on the subject care to weigh in on this?
"AIDS is a political disease."
ReplyDeleteOr so said a family member who is a medical doctor.
It largely is a disease of those who have been anointed - to use the words of John Derbyshire - as DVGs, or Designated Victim Groups.
Yet the radical egalitarians would have us think otherwise.
"I don't know what the other reasons could be....Maybe "Truth" could enlighten us, but people like him have a tendency to steer clear of serious discussions like this"
ReplyDeleteAaaah, grasshopper;
If it is enlightenment you desire, enlightenment you shall find!