States that ban homosexuality to lose aid.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.guardian.c...lity-lose-aid-cameron

Is he fair to do this?

I think it is a jolly good idea, at least it will reduce our overseas aid bill by a considerable amount.

[andy-hughes]

I admire Mr Cameron's stance, but not is consistency in applying it.

Banning homosexuality - surely bad grammar, but that's a side debate - is an apsect of Human Rights, and Mr Cameron is less keen it seems to trumpet his Human Rights issues with countries like China who have some of the most appaling abuses in the world - when he needs to sanctiob borrowing money from the Chinese to prop up the abuses os spending by his own banking system.

[keyplus90]

Yes, I am sure that states that ban homosexuality they may lose aid but will win against aids.

[andy-hughes]

Keyplus - your remark - unless it is tongue-in-cheek - infers that AIDS is a disease spread by homosexual activity exclusively.

Where have you been for the last twenty years?

[ummmm]

Reading the Koran....

[rov1100]

What worries me is that £7bn+ annually is devoted to overseas aid. If they don't pay out to one country the others will get more!

[barry1010]

Considering that homosexual acts were illegal in the UK until 1967 and the equality laws that ended discrimination of the legal age of consent did not happen until 2000, I think our government has a cheek.

[Amy90]

Other countries to lose aid should include any that can afford to send rockets into space and any country that hosts a F1 grand prix. Yes India, that's you.

[anotheoldgit]

birdie1971

Did you have to be so rude towards keyplus?

I am no expert on 'Aids' just as I imagine you are not also, so please give people a little slack when they they assume that 'Aids' seemed to start amongst the Gay fraternity, when aids first came to light, Rock Hudson, Liberace, and many other Gay celebrities, were prime examples.

Yes quite a bit of PC has been woven around the whole question of Gays contacting Aids, and it is still gay celebrities who are the largest supporters of Aid charities?

But that is not to say that now it is as you say, "Aids is now also being passed amongst heterosexuals, predominantly due to unprotected sex".

[ummmm]

How was that rude?

[jackthehat]

Keyplus 'assumption' has nothing to do with the origins of HIV/AIDS and everything to do with his mistaken belief that homosexuality continues to be, on a global, basis the 'petri-dish' for the disease.

[NOX]

It's not rude when it's a fact Doc, it's just a fact.

[ummmm]

That's not rude. It's pointing out a fact. His ignorance on this subject knows no bounds....

[DrFilth]

i wonder how many people have died from aids over the years but their death is blamed on something else

>> 1955–1957: David Carr

The oldest putative case of the then-unknown syndrome was thought to be a 1959 observation, when David Carr, a 25-year-old British printer who had served in the Royal Navy between 1955 and 1957 (but apparently not in Africa) sought help at the Royal Infirmary of Manchester, England. He was reported to be suffering from puzzling symptoms, among them purplish skin lesions, for nearly two years. His condition deteriorated during Christmas 1958 when he started suffering from shortness of breath, extreme fatigue, rapid weight loss, night sweats, and high fever. Doctors thought he might be suffering from tuberculosis and even though they found no evidence of bacterial infection, they treated him for tuberculosis as a safety measure, but without success. Carr continued to weaken and he died shortly after in August 1959. His autopsy revealed evidence of two unusual infections, cytomegalovirus and Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP, later renamed Pneumocystis pneumonia when redetermined to be P. jirovecii), very rare at the time but now commonly associated with AIDS patients. His case puzzled his doctors, who preserved tissue samples from him and for years retained some interest in solving the mystery.

Sir Robert Platt, then president of the Royal College of Physicians, wrote in the printer's hospital chart that he wondered "If we are in for a new wave of virus disease now that the bacterial illnesses are so nearly conquered". It was only 31 years later, after the AIDS pandemic had become well-known and widespread, that they decided to perform HIV tests on Carr's preserved tissues, which initially returned a positive result. The British medical journal The Lancet reported Carr's case in its July 7, 1990 issue, but later retracted its claim of positive identification in the January 20, 1996 issue, reporting that the tissue sample had become contaminated in the laboratory. <<

[ummmm]

Yes. You can point out their ignorance.

[DrFilth]

morning doc