This topic is nasty, but the facts are clear that anal sex is a far more risky behavior than vaginal sex as a cause of AIDS transmission. Every source on this subject agrees with the above quote.
And yet this fact is being suppressed by AIDS workers and by those engaged in efforts to eradicate AIDS. The rate of AIDS transmission is far greater because this fact is being suppressed by those engaged in the war against AIDS.
For starters, health care professionals do not speak of "AIDS transmission" rather HIV contamination. AIDS being the acute phase of HIV sero positive and being HIV sero positive does not automatically mean having AIDS.
As to the vectors facilitating HIV contamination, they are universally applied as "unprotected, multiple and anonymous partners". Precisely via the exchanges of 2 specific bodily fluids, semen and vaginal fluids being both a favorable hosting environment for the virus.
In Africa there is a crusade to promote condom use for prevention, and yet a much more effective measure would be avoidance of anal sex.
As if the ratio of identified HIV sero positive individuals in Sub Sahara Africa is the product of any broad wide practice of anal sex versus vaginal intercourse. Do you have any data confirming that the route for HIV contamination in Sub Sahara Africa has been identified as anal sex?
The above webpage shows the extreme degree of misinformation among AIDS workers in Africa:
“What people preach out there, it’s just vaginal sex - not information on anal [sex],” said a young woman from Salgaa, Kenya, who was quoted in the research. “So somebody thinks, ‘if I do [sex] this other way, then I will not get HIV.’”
Even more worrying was that research showed healthcare workers often held similar views, and some incorrectly believed HIV was only present in vaginal fluid. The virus is, in fact, also present in male sperm and blood.
“Me, I do not want to practice vaginal sex because that is the highest [risk] sex that transmits HIV, so it is a belief… that non-vaginal sex does not transmit HIV,” one Kenyan healthcare worker reported.
A nurse in Malaba, Uganda, said: “As you go and have sex vaginally you can get HIV, but these other methods, they do not expose you [to HIV].”
So these healthcare workers are saying exactly the opposite of the truth about the risk of anal sex. Not only are Africans being told nothing about the far higher risk from anal sex, but are being misled into believing anal sex is safer or risk-free.
So then, why is this misinformation taking place and why is nothing being done to educate Africans and other high-risk populations about the much higher risk of anal sex behavior, which would lead to the desired result of a great reduction in AIDS cases?
So, essentially your contention here is that due to the incidence of Sub Sahara native health care workers who, for whatever reason are not mandated to take CEUs or Continuous Education Units to maintain their certification or license, "nothing is done to educate Africans and other high-risk populations" about the routes and vectors (to include anal sex) which present a high risk of sexually transmitted HIV contamination.
This is an example of censorship by the general population, not just those in high positions of power, but among average low-level common people. Everyone seems to be complicit in the furtherance of this deception and suppression of the truth.
Really? I am not aware of any "censorship by the general population" and "everyone" being "complicit in the furtherance of this deception and suppression of truth" considering that yearly I am mandated to take 12 CEUs including Infectious/Contagious Diseases Control and Prevention also covering HIV relying on data provided by the CDC. The obvious difference between me and those quoted Sub Sahara native health care workers is that they are not benefiting of such updated continuous education and most probably because they live and work in nations where governments are not actively invested in training and educating health care workers while mandating a set of conditions for them to maintain their certification or/and license.
The absurdity of your conclusion needs to be exposed considering that nations like Uganda persecute gay males and if any justification they would rely on to promote their anti gay policies it certainly would be to designate them as the culprits-to-be for their ratio of HIV infected population due to anal sex. It is possible you are unaware of the anti gay mentality predominant in several Sub Sahara nations. It certainly would not be to the benefit of the governments in anti gay Sub Sahara nations to adopt a politic of "censorship" since those governments thrive on persecuting gay males.
Usually when we speak of anal sex, the reference is about MSM (male on male sex) not heterosexual. That of course does not dismiss anal sex as being part of one of the sexual activities some heterosexuals will favor. To make a case that in Sub Sahara Africa the route of HIV transmission is somehow related to anal sex, one would have to demonstrate how Sub Sahara culture is somehow inclined to favor anal sex over vaginal intercourse or/and there is a high ratio of MSM in Sub Sahara Africa.
What we do know (which you appear not to know) is this :
http://data.unaids.org/pub/GlobalReport/2008/20080715_fs_ssa_en.pdf
with the predominant factor of women being the most HIV affected segment of the population and that due to ,
http://www.unaids.org/documents/20101123_FS_SSA_em_en.pdf
Key populations play a key role in the region’s HIV epidemics
Paid sex is an important factor in HIV epidemics in Western, Central and East Africa. An estimated 32% of
new HIV infections in Ghana, 14% in Kenya and 10% Uganda are linked to sex work
With women being most susceptible to be sex workers of course comes the other predominant factor of HIV transmission resulting from pregnancy and/or breastfeeding affecting their children.
Folks who are familiar with the cultural mentality in the majority of those nations would acknowledge that the mentality remains strongly patriarchal, causing women in general to be removed from access to education and health. Women in those nations are certainly not given any choice as to their sexuality and reproductive rights.
What you attempted to portray as some type of conspiracy (and failed to) is a phenomenon resulting from local governments still obstructing access to health and education and is certainly not the product of :
If the truth about this were told to poor populations, thus leading to a significant reduction in AIDS transmission and prevention of millions of cases of AIDS, would that end up being a disaster for our future, because of the inevitable new population explosion that would result and which must be prevented at all cost?
considering that anal sex in Sub Saharan cultures is NOT the reason why there is such a high ratio of HIV sero positive individuals. And resulting, if not placed on prophylactics, high ratio of fatalities when those HIV sero positive individuals reach the acute stage of AIDS.
The other consequence related to poor access to health care and early detection being a high number of non identified HIV sero positive. The typical scenario being such individuals reporting to a health care facility/clinic/dispensary by the time they have developed symptomatic ailments induced by the acute AIDS phase. Too little too late. For example in Ivory Coast, HIV detection relies on symptomatic ailments such as pneumonia and TB. As an aside, our French managed health care dispensaries in our ex colonies are certainly NOT engaging in some "silence" conspiracy. French nationals who manpower those dispensaries/clinics are fully trained and educated. What they are up against is what other European managed dispensaries/clinics are up against : the restricted access to education and health affecting rural and poverty stricken populations.
The explanation must be: We humans generally have agreed, perhaps tacitly, to a conspiracy of silence about this, because we apparently believe that sometimes it is best to lie to each other about certain matters because it is in the public interest.
Really? And may I ask which conspiracy of silence the CDC is guilty of in view of :
http://www.cdc.gov/std/life-stages-populations/STDFact-MSM.htm
Being a certified health care worker, I am not aware of any "conspiracy of silence" concocted by any official health department, administration, "high position of power" or the general population which includes all health care professionals and workers. What I am fully aware of though is the myth of the "gay disease" propagated in the US in the early 80's.
We want Africans and poor populations generally to refrain from reproducing, no matter what it takes to get them to do this, and we are willing to in effect lie to them or mislead them into believing falsehoods in order to get them to control their reproducing behavior.
Do you have any data supporting such speculation on your part? Preferably not from conspiracy theorists but reliable sources which can support your claim that there exist documentation/data demonstrating an organized First World movement including "high position" persons who would purposefully set out to control over population in the Third World by sending health care workers and professionals in those regions and nations instructing the native populations to have anal sex because it would be safe.
When it comes to lying or deceiving people in order to manipulate them to do what we want, the overriding principle is that the end justifies the means. It's obvious that this is what virtually everyone believes, no matter what they preach to the contrary.
Is it in the best interest of future human welfare to lie to poor people worldwide about AIDS transmission and encourage them believe that anal sex is no riskier, or is even less risky, than vaginal sex?
But you have made NO case that there is any worldwide conspiracy to "lie to poor people worldwide about AIDS transmission and encourage them believe that anal sex is no riskier, or even less risky, than vaginal sex".
My counter argumentation to expose the absurdity of your claim and resulting questions in the style of "have you stopped beating your wife" is based on local governments in those regions of Sub Sahara Africa obstructing access to education and health while also reflecting the traits of patriarchal mentalities who profoundly disadvantage women (at any age by the way) by maintaining them in a state where they have no say as to their sexuality and reproductive rights.
And is it therefore dangerous or a threat to future human welfare to allow the truth to be told to them (that anal sex is 20 times riskier), and should this truth be suppressed for the public good (as it is currently being suppressed with apparent approval from everyone)?
"apparent" and certainly your remark being the direct product of total lack of knowledge on your part as to the content of CDC data and other First World nations corresponding centers for infectious diseases control.
Is this an example of a dangerous topic that should not be discussed and even should be banned?
"this" is an actual example of how conspiracy theorists thrive on concocting absurd and profoundly uneducated conclusions. And speaking of "manipulating" I must add that their influence targets equally uneducated and very gullible people.
If the truth about this were told to poor populations, thus leading to a significant reduction in AIDS transmission and prevention of millions of cases of AIDS, would that end up being a disaster for our future, because of the inevitable new population explosion that would result and which must be prevented at all cost?
You have not made any clinically/medically supported case that anal sex has been a predominant factor in the high incidence of HIV sero positives in Sub Sahara Africa. How can you even dare speak of reduction when once more you have been speculating that anal sex has been the predominant contributing factor to HIV infections in Sub Sahara Africa?
This entire diatribe of yours is nonsensical.
