Number of STD cases in the US reaches record high as public services 'stretched thin'


he number of reported cases of sexually transmitted diseases reached a record high in the US last year, figures show, as officials warned that stretched services meant people were slipping through the “public health safety net”.

In its latest report, the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention said the sharp rise in syphilis was of particular concern.

“We have reached a decisive moment for the nation,” Dr Jonathan Mermin, a director at the CDC, said.


Promiscuity kills.

Abstinence = no STDs


Proof that giving kids condoms is an effective strategy.



And nobody saw this coming? :shrug:


This is clearly a case of nature discriminating against the promiscuous. Nature must be wrong.:rolleyes:


What a lie our youth have been told when they have been taught about “safe sex.” STD’s, teen pregnancy etc prove that was false.



XX and XY are married. One of them has sex once with a third party. The other one doesn’t suspect anything, or suspects but fails to persuade the cheater to be tested for STDs, or has sex with the cheater before the test results are available.

Promiscuity can kill people who aren’t promiscuous. Misplaced trust is just as dangerous as promiscuity.

On the other hand, in a society where paternity tests are considered to be shocking signs of distrust, receiving a request from your spouse for you to be tested for STDs is unlikely to be seen as a wonderful opportunity to demonstrate that your body is clean and safe for your spouse.


Anecdotal data from a few people I know suggest condom use and limiting partners declined once people stopped dying of AIDS as prominently as during the 90s.


As a curiosity I suppose, many people do not believe that HIV causes AIDS. One of the most notable persons to believe that HIV is a harmless passenger virus is the nobel prize winner for discovering HIV, Professor Luc Montagnier. In interviews he will talk about how it is easy to catch and easy to loose HIV, similar to a cold.

Another notable person that doesn’t believe there is proof that HIV causes AIDS is nobel prize winner Kary Mullis. He wrote an article about his attempt to find a research paper proving HIV causes AIDS.


… In 1988 I was working as a consultant at Specialty Labs in Santa Monica, CA, setting up analytic routines for the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). I knew a lot about setting up analytic routines for anything with nucleic acids in it because I invented the Polymerase Chain Reaction. That’s why they hired me.

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), on the other hand, was something I did not know a lot about. Thus, when I found myself writing a report on our progress and goals for the project, sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, I recognized that I did not know the scientific reference to support a statement I had just written: “HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.”

So I turned to the virologist at the next desk, a reliable and competent fellow, and asked him for the reference. He said I didn’t need one. I disagreed. While it’s true that certain scientific discoveries or techniques are so well established that their sources are no longer referenced in the contemporary literature, that didn’t seem to be the case with the HIV/AIDS connection. It was totally remarkable to me that the individual who had discovered the cause of a deadly and as-yet-uncured disease would not be continually referenced in the scientific papers until that disease was cured and forgotten. But as I would soon learn, the name of that individual - who would surely be Nobel material - was on the tip of no one’s tongue.

Of course, this simple reference had to be out there somewhere. Otherwise, tens of thousands of public servants and esteemed scientists of many callings, trying to solve the tragic deaths of a large number of homosexual and/or intravenous (IV) drug-using men between the ages of twenty-five and forty, would not have allowed their research to settle into one narrow channel of investigation. Everyone wouldn’t fish in the same pond unless it was well established that all the other ponds were empty. There had to be a published paper, or perhaps several of them, which taken together indicated that HIV was the probable cause of AIDS. There just had to be.

I did computer searches, but came up with nothing. Of course, you can miss something important in computer searches by not putting in just the right key words. To be certain about a scientific issue, it’s best to ask other scientists directly. That’s one thing that scientific conferences in faraway places with nice beaches are for…

…I like and respect Peter Duesberg. I don’t think he knows necessarily what causes AIDS; we have disagreements about that. But we’re both certain about what doesn’t cause AIDS.

We have not been able to discover any good reasons why most of the people on earth believe that AIDS is a disease caused by a virus called HIV. There is simply no scientific evidence demonstrating that this is true.

We have also not been able to discover why doctors prescribe a toxic drug called AZT (Zidovudine) to people who have no other complaint other than the fact that they have the presence of antibodies to HIV in their blood. In fact, we cannot understand why humans would take this drug for any reason.

We cannot understand how all this madness came about, and having both lived in Berkeley, we’ve seen some strange things indeed. We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake.

I say this rather strongly as a warning. Duesberg has been saying it for a long time.


Or, some people see risk differently. I don’t think it is a denial of HIV causing AIDS though.

Anyway, dating sites/apps play a large role imo. They enable people who wouldn’t otherwise meet to find other people interested in those activities. Basically, the stigma is a nonfactor because the woman can find suitors outside her normal social circle and the man let’s his risk of being the “creepy” guy who hits on his female friends.


This reminds me of something:

[ stance is that as long as NO one else is affected, or ALL affected parties agree, it is no one else’s business. Two (or more) people, who have no commitment to others AND have complete agreement can do whatever they want.

Some opponents want to bring in “adultery”, but that is nonsense. Adultery presupposes marriage. But even in that case, if the married parties agree on an “open marriage”, where both members give permission to the other to have sex with outside partners, it is only their business.

Society is not affected. The actual partners have a mutual agreement. Other people are not even aware of the act. rational](“”)

According to Wikipedia:
The first written records of an outbreak of syphilis in Europe occurred in 1494/1495 in Naples, Italy, during a French invasion.

Now, if there is no record of the specific sex acts (names, locations, dates, and times) that occurred in 1495, then people aren’t even aware of those acts, so it is impossible for society to be affected by them.

Sexually transmitted diseases from many hundreds of years ago could not possibly affect society today, because the details of the sex acts through which they were transmitted haven’t been recorded and passed on along with the pathogens.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit