This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
STD Prevention
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
Maybe some mass sterilization effort by the government to at least stop the spread to a new generation?
Way way way way
way
too extreme.
Possibly tougher laws to combat people knowingly passing along an STD?
So requiring somebody to get tested before sex? While schools try to get people to do that, it doesn't happen.
A record keeping system where people to have been conformed to have the disease be put in some database so people could check to see whose infected?
Fairly sure that violates privacy laws.
As for the actual question, I've got nothing =P
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
xaratherus
A record keeping system where people to have been conformed to have the disease be put in some database so people could check to see whose infected?
Fairly sure that violates privacy laws.
I don't know that they keep a database of them, but I do know that a number of state health departments require a 'track back' when someone comes in for treatment of an STD.
The asinine thing is that STDs are one of the few types of diseases that we actually would have a chance to control or eradicate, yet the 'sacred' right to privacy keeps us from doing so.
I'll be utterly honest here: Back when I turned 21, I had to get treatment for a case of chlamydia. I honestly don't know where I got it from; I gave the doctor the names of the two people I'd had relations with in the past six months and they came up clean, so I really, really don't know. However, if registering me in a database meant that it could help trace back the disease and eventually stop its spread, I'd be fine with that.
Post by
Monday
I'd be fine with that.
You'd be fine with that, but others might not be. It all comes down to personal preference, which isn't a very stable way to go about something like this.
Post by
124027
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
You can't stop people from having sex; instead of making 'sex cool and awesome' just start teaching the kids about real safe sex methods instead: Condoms, spermicide, birth control(pills and shots), about getting regular check ups to make sure you aren't infected or can catch it in time.
Post by
124027
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ExDementia
The biggest problem is that so many of the people with the STD's don't know they have it until they have already passed it on.
My cousin got gonorrhea from a girl (who found out she had the STD at the same time she found out she was pregnant, she didn't know who the father was either...), then he passed it on to two other poor girls.
Post by
Orranis
Mine was too. It was hilarious. Especially when the teacher would say 'doing it' which is 1000x more impossible to keep a straight face on then 'having sex' or even '#$%^ing.'
So my question is what do you think should be done to help reduce the spread of STD's especially viral STD's since the majority of the population won't abstain from sex?
Preaching abstinence is a complete waste of effort. Throw in that it's the only way to reduce chances of STD or pregnancy by 100%, but telling everyone to be abstinent forever, or even throughout their teenage years. It's just ineffective. Niezche would agree.
Possibly tougher laws to combat people knowingly passing along an STD?
I do actually agree here. I think if you have sex with someone, knowing you have an STD, it's comparable to rape.
Maybe some mass sterilization effort by the government to at least stop the spread to a new generation?
If they're sterilized there will be no new generation. Similarly, people will still have sex and give each other STD's.
Or maybe a record keeping system where people to have been conformed to have the disease be put in some database so people could check to see whose infected? This also brings up the debate of whether the government should be allowed to meddle in individuals lives even if it could help prevent the spread of STD's.
Too difficult. I agree that the Government has the right to help prevent the spread of STD's, but this plain wouldn't work, not without an incredibly massive undertaking. Maybe maintaining it wouldn't be too difficult, but starting it up would be incredibly hard.
Post by
Kalisha
You honestly don't see the problem with a public database? Do you have any idea how people that have/had an STI are treated? Are you even living on the same planet I am?
It's not just a matter of privacy.
Potential employer? You're unclean and untrustworthy. Denied.
Potential landlord? We don't want your kind living here. Denied.
Your family is going to know. Your friends are going to know. Your neighbors are going to know. If you go to church? They're going to know. And they're all going to judge you. And if they're the type? Make your life a living hell and never let you forget just what a horrible person you are.
And what if it isn't your fault? What about rape victims? What about people who get an infection unknowingly from a straying spouse? What about blood transfusions? They're all going to be judged and punished just the same.
It's not up to the government to protect you from all of those "dirty" people out there. It's not up to the government to decide who is and isn't allowed to have sex, or have babies. The answer is REAL sex education - not this abstinence stuff. Sounds nice in theory, doesn't often work out in reality.
Take responsibility for yourself and don't worry about what everyone else is doing. That includes using protection - and insuring the person you're with has been tested if need be.
Stop treating STDs like you treated cooties when you were a kid.
Post by
MrSCH
It's not going to be long before we aren't allowed sex, just in case.
Post by
Orranis
The best part was that the person next to me played WoW.
My Jamaican-American old Health teacher is Illidan.
"Am I ready to have sex?"
"You are not prepared!"
Post by
Squishalot
Can I point out, abstinence is a good way of combating the *spread* of STDs, if people would stick to it reasonably. Less sexual partners per person = less proliferation of STDs, plain and simple. It wouldn't eradicate it, but nothing will, short of genocide.
To be clear: spreading STDs to your partner only = better than spreading STDs to a whole number of people.
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
The only valid point you have is employers and landlords.
Nice downplay. That was pretty much the whole point of the post.
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
Already does; tell someone you have AIDs, and they treat you like a freaking leper.
Post by
Squishalot
viking, consider that:
1) People don't go out of their way to check if their partners have STDs at the moment.
2) What makes them any more likely to check in future if there is a public list of some sort?
If you can't talk to someone about STDs at present because it breaches some sort of privacy code, there's no way that any sort of public list will be acceptable to people.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.