Alarming health stats..
 

Firstly, let me apologise in advance if this topic offends anybody but in my humble opinion this is way too important to ignore.

In the course of researching a project for University, I have come across some rather alarming figures, well, I think they are pretty frightening and would love to know your opinions.

In February this year the Health Protection Agency published the latest figures for HIV statistics in the UK. The 2003 figures show that there have so far been 5047 new diagnoses of HIV in the UK. The figure is thought to be nearer to 7000, as they haven't yet received all the reports from various parts of the country. Last year, we had 4204 new diagnoses, so therefore we have 20% more new cases this year.

Only 1414 new diagnoses were made within the homosexual community, compared to 2785 within the heterosexual community, both men and women being affected. The report does not comment about where the rest of the numbers come from, I can only assume injecting drug use (IDU), vertical transmission (mother to baby) and infected blood products, transfusions in countries such as China being particularly dangerous.

Of these new diagnoses, 254 were acquired within the UK, the rest were acquired abroad.

Between 1995 and 1999 Sexually shared infections rose by 76% for Chlamydia, 58% for Gonorrhoea, 54% for Syphilis and 20% for genital warts (PHLS 2001) The majority of cases, especially Chlamydia/Gonorrhoea occur in age groups 16-21 in females, 20-25 in males. I don't know about anyone else on this site, but I find these figures alarming. Who is educating our teenagers about sexual health? Whose responsibility is it? What can we do as parents and responsible citizens to ensure that future generations are protected. I know that people may find this a distasteful subject, but the implications are huge in terms of cost to the health service, as complications from these infections can lead to both male and female infertility, pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, reactive arthritis and in the case of HIV, ultimately death.

I know because we're British, we don't talk about sex (although everybody does it) Maybe it's time to talk..

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I assume the figure of 254 new cases above is 254 of the total of 5047. In other words, 95% of all new HIV diagnoses pertain to HIV acquired outside the UK. Surely the answer is simple - keep the so-called asylum seekers and the rest of the riff-raff out of this country.

The medication bill alone for someone who is HIV positive is over £10,000 per annum; under current asylum law, anyone who is HIV pos has indefinate leave to remain in the UK.

Anyway, I could speak about this all day, but I'm going back to my Bacon Butty.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

That's right!! The HPA reckon that the figure will be nearer to 400 contracted in this country by the time the figures are all in. It costs roughly £188,000 to look after somebody with HIV during their lifetime after diagnosis. This includes the Antiretroviral drugs, cost of blood tests, nursing and medical care/ hospitalisation when terminally ill etc.
One concern at the moment, is that when the Eastern Europeans start to come over, their HIV statistics are huge, due to intravenous drug use, so will we end up with the increasing burden of having to provide care and treatment for them?
Anyone who wants to find out more about HIV, and STI's the following websites may be helpful..
www.hpa.org.uk
www.avert.org/treatmentnews.htm
www.doh.gov.uk
www.tht.org.uk


Enjoy your bacon butty..:eat:

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

In other words, the cost of looking after that lot from abroad - from just last year - who are here getting HIV treatment over their life expectancy will be just over £900m (Nine Hundred Million Pounds). Which is the equivalent, based on the Hyndburn Council budget agreed last week, of total council tax income for the next 75 years.

There is only one simple solution to this nonsense. If you are HIV positive & you are not British, then get out of the country.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

It is not an inconceivable notion that many of the cases brought in from abroad, would be found in white british people who travel, either to work or for pleasure. The Far East in particular are only just starting to tackle the problem of rising HIV cases. Thailand, which is a favourite destination with European visitors has a major problem, and I believe that the commercial sex workers over there are now using condoms more often than they used to (although not all the time). China only admitted to having a problem in about 2002, prior to that, the Chinese government tried to bury it under the carpet, even though their first reported cases were in the mid 80's. Major mode of transmission in China being infected blood/plasma transfusion, drugs are now becoming more prevalent, and although being openly gay is frowned upon, everybody there knows it happens. The only reason that the Chinese have now admitted to the problem is because they now have somewhere between 1 - 1.5 million affected people that they are aware of, and if the numbers continue to grow, they will eventually need help.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Hmmmm... are you guys trying to say something to me, all the places I've visted in the last 12 months - China, Thailand, Eastern Europe.... Anyway, the reason why these countries are having big problems with HIV is because they don't have 180000 per person to spend on the treatment, never mind the money to have a decent AIDS awareness campaign. However I would struggle to believe that any significant amount of these figures are composed of business or pleasure travellers returning from these places. The use of Condoms really is being promoted in these parts, although not for the STD reason, purely as birth control, of which the primary method in all of these places is an abortion!

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I accept that a (relatively) small number of new HIV cases are those of British people who have travelled abroad for business or holiday & have contacted the disease. The vast majority are not that...they are quite simply asylum seekers or from Sub-Saharan Africa who enter the UK in the full knowledge that the NHS will provide free treatment for them, guaranteed under UK law, and with no fear of repatriation to their home country. Naturally, they are free to carry on here having unprotected sex with whoever they please with the knowledge that even if they are caught & jailed, they will still have recourse to free medication.

And Eastern Europe is full of 'em. Is'nt it nice to know that we are one of only 2 countries giving free entry when the new eastern states join. Oh, the other country don't have an NHS.....I wonder whats going to happen????????

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I see two separate topics here:
1) why should the british tax payer pay for HIV positive immigrants
2) how can we stop HIV coming into the country, and more importantly spreading within the country among British citizens.

Spontaneously, I would suggets HIV tests for all immigrants and people who travel to risky countries. The problem is, if they test positive, what do you do?
Regarding immigrants, you could refuse them entry to the country, as with rabid dogs, but regarding British citizens, you have to let them back in.

Of the two groups I find the latter the most offensive. The number of Europeans that go to Asia and the Far East, not to mention Easten Europe for "cheap sex" holidays is increasing and it is precisely those people that are more likely to return to Britain and spread the disease. As a naive Brit, I would be more likely to contract the disease from some white, British male that has been abroad on such antics, than from an African immigrant, who I consider risky.

The question is, why not introduce complusory HIV tests? It would be cheaper in the long run and would allow the government to control entry of infected foreigners and monitor affected Brits. Every citizen should have a HIV-free stamp on those famous ID cards that are going to be brought in..................
Sorry if it sounds like I'm jesting, I'm not - I just feel that everyone has the right to know about the HIV status of new partners, I don't feel it's enough to just educate - and statistics are beginning to show that.

ps I wanted to ask Lettie if pregnant women are automatically tested for HIV in the UK? I had to have the test when I was 8 weeks pregnant and then again at 20 weeks. I think I have to have it re-done again at 30 weeks.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Sorry Roy, not getting at you!! I too have travelled to the far east, and one of the reasons for dodgy blood products is a lack of funds to make them safe. I do concede that the majority of HIV being brought into the country is by immigrants, but a small number of brits have definately caught the infection abroad. Although the numbers may not be significant in a statistical sense, when you look at the long term implications ie, spread to others, long term medical costs etc then I think it is very significant.


Jo, in December 2000 the UK launched ante natal screening for HIV for all pregnant women. This is an opt out test, so if the woman does not wish to be tested she has to say so. Counselling is given by the Midwife prior to testing and we are aiming for an 80% uptake of the test, which I think we have roughly achieved in our area. Worryingly we have had positive results in young women through heterosexual sex. Women are tested only once during each pregnancy. This is usually done at about 14-16 weeks. I personally think that there should be at least 2 HIV tests in pregnancy, bearing in mind that even in long established relationships, both parties are not always faithful and it takes about 12 weeks from HIV contact for the blood to seroconvert.

I did ask at Uni about the screening of immigrants, and the tutor ( a GUM clinic health advisor) mentioned that it was once an idea that was bandied around Parliament, but was chucked out on ethical grounds. I have not seen anything in writing which backs this up, but am still looking for material. I have until May to get my work in, and when you search the net for info regarding STI's there's millions of pages containing info (not to mention the odd porn site that comes up when you search for anything in this topic area) I also have stacks of papers on hard copy from various journals, so this project is turning into a mammoth task.

The only way the government have been able to roughly establish the numbers, has been by unlinked anonymous testing. This has been happening since the 80's and what basically happens is - when you go for a blood test, after the local lab has checked your blood for whatever they need to. All the labelling is taken off the blood tube, and the blood sent to a central lab and tested for HIV. There is absolutely no identification on the blood bottle, not even the health authority in which the test originated apparently. So if the lab get a positive result, it is just a number, there is no way to contact the person and let them know that they're positive. I know that they have done this on routine antenatal blood in the past and on baby heel prick scriver test spots. This kind of testing enables the DoH to write lots of bumf about how the NHS can cope with the numbers in the future. The figure for UK is 45.000 affected people so far and they reckon a third of those are unaware due to the unlinked screening.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Funny you should mention that. To get a 12 month visa to Russia you do have to have an aids test and be clear, or they wont let you in, and they don't stop at that, just to renew your visa you have to have the aids test again. Yet we can waltz back into the UK like we've just been down the pub for a pint, as can any other foreigner. It is a bit strange that our rules seem so lax. We can't even blame Europe for this one as they have a totally different visa scheme to us in the UK....

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I agree with Roy...we're the soft touch here. Every other Western Country has external restrictions on entry & internal identity controls...the US, Australia, the rest of the EU...if you want to enter those countries you apply for a visa in your own country & if you're going for a work visa you pass your medical. You also vouch not to be a burden on the state. If you suddenly need medical treatment, you show your ID or Health Insurance documentation.. What system do we have here? Butlins - they pay you.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I totally agree with pre immigration testing, and also think that all non-british entrants to the country should have health insurance to cover the cost of their care for however long they are here for. We all have to pay for our care abroad, so why not the other way round.
I think the pre immigration testing is to do with ethics, bearing in mind that some people would not want to know if they were positive or not. Also, groups and societies formed to educate and reduce stigma regarding HIV and AIDS have probably had a hand in any decision our soft touch government have made regarding the issue. If the numbers of HIV positive people continue to rise (which they will do) then I think eventually the gov. will have no choice but to impose compulsory testing on immigrants, probably due to public demand, but how many people would agree to compulsory testing for everyone? because all the do gooders out there would be up in arms (distibuting pamphlets) How many people on this site would volunteer to take a test? If you have a positive result, who do you tell? Would you be eligable for a mortgage? life insurance? How would you feel if your son/daughter told you they were positive? Could you and your family cope with the stigma?
A lot of food for though in this issue isn't there? I am glad to hear your opinions, as it will help me in my studies. Any volunteers to write this assignment for me would be gratefully welcome..

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Whats the title?

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

The title is. - Critically analyse the increasing burden of sexually transmitted disease in the United Kingdom. Or. - Critically evaluate the current NHS service provision for the screening of sexually transmitted infections. Haven't quite decided which one to go for yet, but am veering toward the increasing burden one.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

No....go for the second one...the first question has been worded by an idiot.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I hate how Universities set questions. You should have seen the last one I did. It was about research and statistics and I never understood the question, I swear it wasn't even in English, but in this made up academic mumbo-jumbo. I passed the assignment, but still don't understand which question I actually answered, it will forever be a mystery.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Done some digging on the pre immigration testing, and yes it has definately been discussed. At least 70 other countries do this, for people who are going to be there for any length of time. These countries include USA, Australia, Russia, China and most of the Arab States. At the discussion stage the WHO jumped in there, and said it was discriminatory, some British experts commented that it was a useless practice, as the rates in Russia and China are still rising rapidly despite the pre immigration testing. To cap it all the Institute for Public Policy Research said that screening immigrants would drive the problem underground and increase risk by stigmatising victims. The IPPR instead called for 'Welcome Health Checks' for immigrants instead of compulsory screening. These health checks would hopefully also be screening for Hepatitis B, and TB, as both of these diseases are rife in the Middle and Far East.

Also stumbled upon some information regarding Africa and our lovely President, Mr. Bush. Last year, the US promised $15billion to Africa to try and ease their HIV situation, and enable the purchase of Antiretrovirals, amongst other things. This money has never been paid, only about $3-4 million of it, and no more has been forthcoming. The Africans claim that Mr. Bush is personally biased. The only bias that springs to my mind is that, many of the clinics which offer care to HIV sufferers, also offer contraception, condoms, health advice and terminations of pregnancies (bearing in mind that these clinics are in regions where rape is a common problem) Mr. Bush is anti-abortion, and therefore won't fund these clinics. The US have been very selective about where the funding they have already sent has gone. It has only been sent to specified areas apparently.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

A couple of points Lettie:

1)Immigration - I don't think there are many people who wish to emigrate to China or Russia...their HIV problem is essentially an internal one

2) As for the IPP, their argument is crap.It is not inconcievable for a blood test to be taken when a visa application is made. Naturally, the applicant pays for the cost. If the test is neg, fine - they get the visa; if not, they don't.

3) I don't know where you get the figure of $15bill.....I thought that was the overall aid budget for Africa, not AIDS budget...surely the main change was to license the generic manufacture of retroviral medication and to sell at cost, so that the overall medication bill becomes more affordable.

4) In any case, I would'nt worry to much about Africa; the place is a basket case whose rotten & corrupt leaders blame everything on the West rather than themselves. The more aid that place gets, the worse it becomes.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Agree about the rises in China and Russia, as all the literature supports that their problems are internal ones. Also the document I have read about the so called British experts saying that the testing is useless, doesn't say who these experts are, or what they are experts in. They could be experts at building or joinery for all I know, the IPPR are a labour think tank. Lets face it, how many immigrants are going to volunteer for a 'welcome health check' I think it's the usual large British institutional way of saving money by false economy quite frankly.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

the main problem, again, is the civil liberties mob. The idea that you can come into the UK, have a friendly health check, be found HIV pos and then say to them "sorry, you can't stay" is absurd. The trendy do-gooders would be up in arms Here's one statistical question for you...How many HIV pos immigrants have been returned to their own country? Answer - None. Not one. Not in the last 20 years.

It is going to be interesting to see what the politico's are going to say about this when the General Election comes up next year.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

How wrong you are tealeaf in that statement. Take a look around the world and just realise which countries are really doing well these days. Europe and the USA have totally lost it... Russia is on it's way back up and China is just amazing! China right now has more investment going on than anywhere else in the world. People from all over the world are moving there to be in on it. You really would not believe what is happening there! Foreigners are literaly queuing to get themselves visa's/work permits/immigrated to these countrys... trust me, i know!

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Well, there is no doubt of China's phenominal growth rate over the last 20 years...however, when I hear of 20 lancastrians drowning off Kowloon Island while out Cockle Picking for 50p a day, then I'll accept your case.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Well, I've just read this evenings Telegraph with dismay. MP Nigel Evans (amongst others) is opposing the mobile sexual health bus aimed at young people. This will take advice out to rural communities regarding relationships, contraception and sexual health. He states that they only have 20 per 1000 teenage pregnancies in the Ribble Valley. Well I'm sorry Mr Evans, but that is 20 per 1000 too many!!!

This facility will be provided by LCC, The teenage Pregnancy unit and Brook. The argument against the service is that it will encourage teens to be sexually active (which they already are) Agengies such as Brook put emphasis on counselling young people (under 25's) about relationships, self esteem, how to say no etc. It is also part of the Governments Sexual Health Strategy to reduce the number of teenage pregnancies in this country this means the under 20's.

When contraception is given to teenagers, they are first counselled regarding safer sex, sti's etc. When the client is under 16 years old, they have to meet a certain criteria, and be what we consider to be Gillick competent. These Criteria are officially called the Fraser guidelines (after Lord Fraser House of Lords) and require the young person to understand the advice given, that they cannot be persuaded to involve their parents, that they are likely to begin or continue to have sexual relationships with or without contraception and that the young persons best interests require them to receive treatment with or without parental consent to prevent damage to physical or mental health. The Telegraph article makes it sound like we go giving condoms to kids willy nilly. The Fraser guidelines were brought about by the case of Gillick vs Norfolk and Wisbech AHA & DHSS in 1985, I'm sure some of you will remember seeing this case on the news at the time.

On a lighter note, I have come across a campaign in Liverpool and Sefton, aimed at street workers to reduce the incidence of Gonococcal infection amongst them. It's called the "Whip Clap Away" campaign. I don't think I'll ever be able to watch Calamity Jane again without laughing.:jump3:

Just as an extra point, teenagers in the North West are referring to sti's as the "greeblies" these days, so if you hear it, you'll know what they're on about..

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Anything that help's to put a stop to teenage pregnancies and std's has to be a good thing in my book, no matter what the cost.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

The Yanks have managed to cut their teenage pregnancy & STD rate by 14% in the last 3 years by promoting the vitues of celebacy, abstinence and Christian virtue. It seems to work.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

During his term in office George Bush has increased funding for the US sexual abstinence movement. Results of research into STI rates amongst 'virgin' teens are being presented at the National STD Conference in Philadelphia. Data was gathered from 12000 adolescents, ages 12-18. They were questioned again 6 years later.

According to the study STI rates were.

Whites who pledged virginity 2.8% - did not 3.5%
Blacks: pledgers 18.1% - non pledgers 20.3%
Asians: pledgers 10.5% - non pledgers 5.6%
Hispanics: pledgers 6.7% - non pledgers 8.6%

Doesn't seem to be much difference really, but the authors say that the teenagers who pledge abstinence have fewer partners and get married earlier, but they are much less likely to use condoms.
These results and extra comments can be viewed on BBC news website.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Lettie - who has taught you statistics? The above is meaningless....it's like saying 99% of all men between the ages of 18 and 65 in Accrington have more than than the average number of legs.
How do you explain the Asian/Hispanic discreprancy on pledgers/non-pledgers?
How do you explain the overall ethnic discreprency?
Pledging is one thing - it's what people actually do that matters - and those stats indicate nothing.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Basically 93.7% of whites, 61.6% of blacks, 83.9% of Asians and 84,7% of hispanics didn't pledge either way. What's that supposed to mean then?
Quite useless info Lettie I think, unless I've misunderstood!

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Well, info such as this is not always usless.........the use of accurate and reliable statistics are the foundation to the science of epidemiology. Unfortunatly, those stats (above) are such that it is impossible to derive any indicative data.

My original case was that in the last few years the US has taken a different road to the problem of teenage pregnancy than in the UK where policy has been to accept sexual activity without responsibility (in fact, to actually reward pregnant teenagers through welfare). US policy has been to invoke moral obligation and the outcome has been a substancial fall in teenage pregnancy rates. So something is working over there - but not here, where despite free contraception on demand, teenage pregnancy rates are continuing to rise. So the question is - do we continue to condone kids having nooky, giving them contraceptives which they may or may not use, so getting pregers & then getting the obligatory council house or do we stand back and remind them of their consequential responsibilities and the burdens they will have to bear.

However, this is what we get instead - Evening Telegraph Website at 2pm today:


Lottery grant helps family groups

The voluntary organisation Home Start helps to promote the welfare of families which have at least one child under five years old.

Home Start offers support and help to families under stress, and each branch of the group is locally run.

Now a grant of £299,752 has been awarded to the registered charity from Community Fund, a branch of the lottery.

The cash will be used to start a new Home Start base, and to recruit volunteers. The project will focus on Asian families in the area, and will be organised over three years.



New part-time posts will be created including bilingual staff, teenage pregnancy coordinator and a training officer.................................


Can someone please explain to me what the hell is going on here? What does a teenage pregnancy co-ordinator do? Co-ordinate with other teenage pregnancy co-ordinators?

This is money spent in the madhouse.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I posted those stats because they are useless and the difference between the two groups for sti's in not significant (which I did mention) the point being that people do not always do what they say they are doing. The way to reduce teen pregnancies would be to bring the stigma back and not to give teens benefits. Although in this country under 16's are not entitled to claim directly, their parents can claim on their behalf. This needs to stop. I believe in Holland and Sweden, even though they have far better sex education, they have such a stigma around teen pregnancies that their rates are much lower than ours.
I remember how sad I felt when I went out to a 14 year old a couple of years back, to be met at the front door by her mother who was overjoyed at being a grandma, then the first thing she asked me was how to claim.....

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Thats right, Lettie...it's Stigma & Shame...just 2 words - but they work far more effectively than any amount of government intervention or contraception.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Have a quick gannder at this!!!!!!!!



http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0..._story_related

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Quite a scary read that one Bazf....

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

What it does not say is what is the proportion of new heterosexual HIV cases that are non-UK (recent arrivals)...the figures that I have seen indicate that figure to be in the order of 95% or so. Not that it makes any difference.....the taxpayer will still have to pay for it.

On a similar note, have you seen where the Asylum seeker who got sent down for 7 years for deliberatly infecting 2 women with HIV? Looks like he's coming out on appeal because thew trial was'nt fair. ah well.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Here's something from today's Times - just proves my point above.



April 05, 2004


Free pills and condoms 'boost promiscuity'
By Alexandra Frean, Social Affairs Correspondent

Venereal disease increase shows failure of sex education policy




GOVERNMENT attempts to reduce high-risk sexual behaviour among teenagers have had exactly the opposite effect, according to an authoritative new study.
Expanding contraceptive services and providing the morning-after pill free to teenagers have encouraged sexual behaviour rather than reducing it, according to economists at Nottingham University.



In a study which throws into question the Government’s entire teenage sexual health strategy, they discovered that sexual activity and sexually transmitted diseases have risen fastest in those areas where the Government’s policy has been most actively pursued.

Critics said that the findings exploded the official line that the best way to tackle rising teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) was by making contraception more easily available. Robert Whelan, of the independent think-tank Civitas, said: “The method which the Government’s teenage pregnancy strategy relies upon is almost guaranteed to produce these results. They have always promoted condom use, but have never contemplated the possibility of teaching young people abstinence.”

By making the morning-after pill free to teenagers, the Government had masked real levels of sexual activity among teenagers, he said. Because the pill causes early abortions, some conceptions are never counted in the teenage pregnancy figures. “The morning-after pill may cut pregnancies, but it won’t do anything to decrease STIs. That is why the STI rate is now a much more reliable indicator of sexual activity among young people.”

But proponents of widespread family planning for young people rejected the findings. Anne Weyman, chief executive of the Family Planning Association, said: “The evidence is that in areas other than London, teenage pregnancy rates have fallen by between 8 and 15 per cent since 1998.

“The awareness of sexually transmitted infections is quite low among young people. In the last few years, increased screening has been introduced, particularly aimed at young women, and of course, if you start looking for more infections you will find them.”

She believed that the teenage pregnancy strategy could be improved. “One area where it needs to be greatly strengthened is the provision of sex education to young people,” she said. “We want to see young people delaying having sex until they are able to make responsible decisions. I don’t think this research helps to achieve any of those aims.”

The Government has welcomed falling teenage pregnancy levels. But last month figures showed that after three years of decline, the number of teenagers becoming pregnant increased by 2.2 per cent to 41,868 in 2001-02.

The new study, to be presented today at the Royal Economic Society’s annual conference in Swansea, is based on data collected by 95 health authorities in England between 1998 and 2001. They covered a wide range of indicators of teenage sexual activity and contraception, including teenage pregnancy rates, reported cases of STIs and the number of local family planning sessions. It also took into account factors such as family background, parental employment rates and educational qualifications.

The results show that the areas with the biggest increases in family planning sessions since the introduction of the teenage pregnancy strategy in 1999 have seen greater increases in STI rates than others. A doubling of the clinics in an area led, on average, to a 6 per cent increase in STI rates.

The study also found that the availability of more clinic sessions did not lead to bigger reductions in teenage pregnancy. In some areas, increased clinics were linked with higher pregnancy rates for under-18s.

David Paton, the author of the study, said: “When you introduce policies that seem obvious, it is important to factor in the possibility that the policies may actually cause people to change how they behave. In this case, it appears that some measures aimed at reducing teenage pregnancy rates induced changes in teenage behaviour that were large enough not only to negate the intended impact on conceptions, but to have an adverse impact on another important area of sexual health — sexually transmitted infections.”

The Government had assumed, he said, that adolescent sexual activity was the outcome of random decisions. His findings suggested that adolescents thought rationally about the decision to become sexually active.

So, when the cost of birth control goes down, its use goes up. This was true both for adolescents who were previously having sex and not using birth control and for adolescents who were previously not having sex.

This interpretation is underlined by Professor Paton’s data on the morning-after pill. Areas where the pill was made available free had seen no reduction in teenage pregnancy rates, but STI rates had risen.

“Teenage sexual behaviour appears to be little different to other fields in at least one important respect: incentives matter to teenagers too,” he said.

John Reid, the Health Secretary, said: “We are aware that the number of cases of STIs are rising among younger poeple, and we are not complacent about this. But individuals as well as government have a responsibility to tackle this problem.”

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Such problems will affect everybody at some time or another, whether it's overloading of the NHS or spreading the diseases.

The real problem will be the children of to-day and the youth of to-morrow, who will either have to learn how to handle (avoid would be better) it, or go down the drain and be part of the problem. Society and the politicians are failing. I haven't got any answers either.................. :sad8: :sad8:

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

We should certainly end the provision of social housing & other benefit transfers to these young people...that will certainly act as a deterrant on the pregnancy issue. As regards HIV, then I think the simple solution is if people wish to receive very expensive taxpayer funded medication to delay the full development of full-blown AIDS, then I suggest Tattooing them on their head - HIV+ - so at least they can be avoided when it comes to Nooky. ID cards & Test certs are no good.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Fine practical thoughts Tealeaf...but you would be infringing their "Human Rights" ala Brussels.

I'm afraid its going to turn into "US and THEM" in the near future.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Sod their human rights! What about everyone else's human rights - and the cost to the British Taxpayer? Medication for an HIV carrier costs £10,000 per year - why should the taxpayer fork out for this - after all its not a cure, merely a delay on the final outcome. HIV is, for most people, acquired through lifestyle. Fair enough - most people who acquire lung cancer do so through smoking - lifestyle - but at least tax is paid on the "sin" and a lifetime smoker will have more than paid through taxes the cost of his medical treatment (and will also save through not drawing the state pension)

I really despair at our priorities. Two-Thirds of all our HIV cases now are people who have contracted it outside the UK, and two thirds of these are Asylum Seekers/Immigrants. Those are DOH figures. I am at a loss to understand just why the hell we are paying for their treatment - people who have not contributed to the public kitty or are unlikelely to do so - while at the same time we have waiting lists for various surgical operations, such as hip replacement, of up to 11 months.

What is in fact more galling is that without some form of readily identifiable marker, these people are free to continue their dodgy lifestyle. In the case of the Asylum seekers - then ship 'em home; as for the rest, if you want the medication, you can have it - but the public need to know who you are.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Too simple and too practical Tealeaf. Why should the politicians do something easy when they can make it difficult and not understandable? :banghead8 :banghead8 :idunno: :idunno:

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Tealeaf,

Tattoiong HIV + on people's head would be contrary to the UN Declaration of Human Rights Article 5:

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

However, we all have the right to know the sexual background of people we sleep with, so without having to degrade anybody, it could become obligatory to have AIDs test every year - FOR EVERYONE. That way, before you sleep with someone you could always ask to see their "HIV-free" certificate. There would be a cost to the testing process but it may break even with the savings on treatment.
Obviously there would have to be laws to prevent prejudice against those that are positive (eg. employment and housing law), ie. in fields where having the disease is not an issue.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I'm only suggesting Tattooing because it is less stressful than branding...and after all, we don't want to humiliate these people, do we? The problem with AIDS certificates is that they can be forged, and after all, a year is a long time between tests.

We know where the problem age-group is, i.e. 16-25 year olds so I would suggest that we combine the very frequent drugs raids on various "nightclubs" with the AIDS test..as everyone is lined up for frisking for the Estacy Tablets stick a needle up in their bum, say "thats it mate, you've just been aids tested...name & address and you'll get your result in a week"......we'll soon find out whose is HIV pos and who ain't.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

There really are no easy answers to any of these issues, and although comdom sales have increased according to Durex, most of the research into the use of condoms show that people are not using them every time they have a casual encounter or with a regular partner. Some of the research has been done by Durex (who are actually not bad at this) and the main one really was 1999-2001 NATSAL, published in the Lancet on 1/12/01 (National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles) This showed that more teenagers are having their first sexual encounters before the age of 16, some as young as 13 (which I know anyway, as I've looked after em in labour) and that although many of them use contraception the use is sporadic. Many of these kids also believe that the pill protects them from infections, which is of course total nonsense. There have been pilots for a National Chlamydia screening programme just in 2 sites that I'm aware of whereby all women are screened when they go to the doctors/ family planning/ smear tests etc. The reason they have singled out women is that they are more likely to comply, as we are used to being fiddled with, and that they are more likely to attend. Ironically in Sweden, think it was about 20 years ago, they recognised an upsurge in sti's, they immediately implemented a national screening programme, picked up infections early, treated them and reduced their pelvic inflammatory rate by approximately a sixth (quite a lot of money) the screening programme would probably have paid for itself with IVF savings. For UK, the country who pioneered IVF, you'd think that more money would be spent on prevention rather than a very expensive means of getting pregnant.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Are you guys serious? Do you realise just how humiliating it would be to have a tattoo on your head saying your HIV!!!!! Or if you were out on a night out and you were ambushed and tested for it. That is the ultimate humiliation. If tests were to be carried out, they would have to be volunteers who take part and they would have to pay. The government wouldnt have it any other way.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I'm perfectly serious, Anthony. These are desperate times & and so we need drastic measures. Anyway, whats the problem with tattoos? Alot of people pay good money to get them done...young girlies paying 30 quid for a butterfly on their bum and all this nonsense...a HIV pos tattoo on your forehead would become a fashion statement.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

What are your suggestions Anthony S for halting the spread of HIV, Chlamydia, Gonorrhoea and Syphilis (also risen rapidly in the last 2 years). What do you think should be done??

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I think Anthony would rather bury his head in a condom

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

.young girlies paying 30 quid for a butterfly on their bum

its not on my bum its on the bottom of my back hehe:D

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Did you get a discount then?

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

it was 40 not 30 anyway

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I think I'll have a spider tattoo...one of these little fella's...

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

It is scary to think that girls as young as 13 are having their first consensual sex,and the resulting teenage pregnancies are equally alarming.I was classed as an "At Risk" mother because I had my first child at 30,obviously over the hill!But I was asked several times by the medical profession "are you sure this is your first?"Virtually all the ladies on the labour wards were a good deal younger than me;and the majority were into second or even third pregnancies!I wonder if the sex education our children get at school warns them of the emotional,physical,mental and economic effects of teenage pregnancies. It was very basic education when I was at school,would be interested to see how much it's progessed[!] :confused:

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Aids and h.i.v are not only found in people in this age group though, i think that random testing is one possible way of helping to stop the spread of theses illneses. A more fair way would be to do random testing of any age, starting this in built up areas and cities, say the london underground for example.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

The problem with 16-25 year olds is that they see HIV and AIDS as an old persons disease. By the time people actually die of AIDS, they are usually 40+. The newer antiretroviral therapies mean that HIV affected people now have a near normal life span (assuming they don't get run over or anything) Unfortunately, these therapies are very expensive as mentioned in previous posts so we all end up footing the bill. Chlamydia/Gonorrhoea are the diseases which are predominantly affecting 16-25's The 2 infections often accompany one another. Chlamydia is relatively cheap to treat (even cheaper not to catch in the first place) Gonorrhoea has become resistant over the years to the traditional antibiotics used and is more difficult to treat now. It sometimes requires several courses of antibiotics and tests of cure after taking them. The majority of these infections have no symptoms 50% of men with Chlamydia won't know they have it, neither will up to 70% of women. If left untreated it can eventually cause pelvic inflammatory disease in women, which leads to ectopic pregnancies and infertility. If a woman is already pregnant it is highly associated with premature births, infant eye infections (which can be severe) and neonatal pneumonia which can be fatal. In men it can cause epididymo-orchitis (painful infection of yer bits) men can also become infertile and it can cause reactive arthritis requiring months of pain relief and anti inflammatories and physio, not to mention blood tests and specialists. As taxpayers we are paying for people to have these treatments. Would it not be more cost effective to prevent the disease in the first place by having safe sex (and I don't mean tying yer other half to the bed so they don't fall off) Condoms cost pence, these treatments cost millions.....

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

10/10 to the Emmerdale team for tackling the issue of chlamydia in recent episodes of the soap.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Until recently, I thought Chlamydia was a fish dish in an Indian restaurant.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

:rofl38: :rofl38: Well, I won't be ordering that!!!!!

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

...the vindaloo version was wicked, so I thought..

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Well, I'm very pleased to say that I have finally finished my assignment, finished the essay yesterday and the references and printing today. Although this is a nice meaty topic to get your teeth into - so to speak, the actual assignment consists mostly of costs, statistics and campaigns. Hope it passes, as I really don't fancy doing it again. Thanks for all your opinions, I now have a break until September from my degree, but when I go back, I'm hoping to be looking at drug misuse, so watch this space......:)

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Drug Misuse? What, like beer & baccy?

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

More like heroin and cocaine, but these courses often throw in beer for good measure, and to make us feel bad about ourselves. The title of the course is Substance misuse - a midwifery and neonatal perspective... If it's running in semptember then I'm on it, but UCLAN haven't decided yet if they're going to do it. If not, I'm doing critical care, which is more my scene really, but critical care is not starting until january. Hmmm, maybe I'll just do nowt..

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Free Beer!!!??? Can anybody join this course??:D

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

I wish they threw in free beer, I'm sure it would make it more interesting, although I have been known to sneak off to the pub at lunchtime, if it's not my turn to drive. The last time I did that I fell asleep in the afternoon lecture.... twice!!! :drunk:

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

If your doing nowt till Jan, a spot of babysitting would be welcome!

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

Typical students....they should be paying attention and taking notes, not using any excuse for an afternoon siesta.

Re: Alarming health stats..
 

It's cruel to sit on babies grego..:)

How about we get mum to do it, and hit the town together, no making me stay up all night dancing and getting leathered like you normally do though:music8: