Is Thailand As Promiscuous As A Country Can Be.

[sanmiguellight]

OK this has nothing to do with the sex industry in LOS.

If i were to have unprotected sex with a HIV infected female the chances of me actually catching it are something like 1 in 300, and 150 to 1 chance for an infected Male to pass it to a female. http://www.ukcoalition.org/HIV-Transmission/4705.htm so from these stats it could be said that it takes a lot of unprotected sex to become HIV +.

Now i dont adhere to the Thais arent educated about condom use, that is a lie they know all about there use and the risks of not using them.

From a personal point of view Thailand more so then any country in the world Thailand is easier to pull a girl on a night out or day at the shopping mall, im not talking girls in the pay4play industry but girls with normal jobs and often boyfriends. (now i realise my research is obviously flawed)

But is this the reason that HIV rates in Thailand are so high, in that both males and females are far more promiscuous here then in nations with lower HIV/Aids rates?

Edited August 21, 2009 by sanmiguellight

[barrybankruad]

OK this has nothing to do with the sex industry in LOS.

If i were to have unprotected sex with a HIV infected female the chances of me actually catching it are something like 1 in 300, and 150 to 1 chance for an infected Male to pass it to a female. http://www.ukcoalition.org/HIV-Transmission/4705.htm so from these stats it could be said that it takes a lot of unprotected sex to become HIV +.

Now i dont adhere to the Thais arent educated about condom use, that is a lie they know all about there use and the risks of not using them.

From a personal point of view Thailand more so then any country in the world Thailand is easier to pull a girl on a night out or day at the shopping mall, im not talking girls in the pay4play industry but girls with normal jobs and often boyfriends. (now i realise my research is obviously flawed)

But is this the reason that HIV rates in Thailand are so high, in that both males and females are far more promiscuous here then in nations with lower HIV/Aids rates?

I'm not sure that I agree with you about Thais being adequatly informed about condom use, certainly not here in the NE anyway. Having has children and relatives go through school I feel they are woefully under educated about these things. Thais seem to have a strange attitude (from a farang perspective) towards sex. On the one had it is often a 'taboo' subject, but on the other hand sex is 'fun', part of the 'sanook' attitude towards life I suppose.

[sanook2me]

I don't think your stats are quite stats as they give no indication of what, when, how or who was surveyed or where this evidence came from it appears just be the writing of someones thoughts..

From a personal point of view Thailand more so then any country in the world Thailand is easier to pull a girl on a night out or day at the shopping mall, im not talking girls in the pay4play industry but girls with normal jobs and often boyfriends. (now i realise my research is obviously flawed)

This is whats called empirical research and thus the findings from your own stats have clear evidence to support your crazy theory.

I'm far to lazy to go and research the stats myself and as you started the thread you should have done this already but can you get some proof to support your statement of -

But is this the reason that HIV rates in Thailand are so high, in that both males and females are far more promiscuous here then in nations with lower HIV/Aids rates?

[dave111223]

Try looking up some facts to support your theory. The HIV rate in Thailand is 1.5% of population, which is not so far from the USA with 0.6% and a far cry from countries such as Zimbabwe with 24%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...prevalence_rate

[sokal]

OK this has nothing to do with the sex industry in LOS.

If i were to have unprotected sex with a HIV infected female the chances of me actually catching it are something like 1 in 300, and 150 to 1 chance for an infected Male to pass it to a female. http://www.ukcoalition.org/HIV-Transmission/4705.htm so from these stats it could be said that it takes a lot of unprotected sex to become HIV +.

Now i dont adhere to the Thais arent educated about condom use, that is a lie they know all about there use and the risks of not using them.

From a personal point of view Thailand more so then any country in the world Thailand is easier to pull a girl on a night out or day at the shopping mall, im not talking girls in the pay4play industry but girls with normal jobs and often boyfriends. (now i realise my research is obviously flawed)

But is this the reason that HIV rates in Thailand are so high, in that both males and females are far more promiscuous here then in nations with lower HIV/Aids rates?

which nations are you comparing it to ? You cant compare 3rd world countries with modern countries.

[sokal]

Try looking up some facts to support your theory. The HIV rate in Thailand is 1.5% of population, which is not so far from the USA with 0.6% and a far cry from countries such as Zimbabwe with 24%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...prevalence_rate

Thank you Dave123. I just knew the original poster was phony.

[topben]

Try looking up some facts to support your theory. The HIV rate in Thailand is 1.5% of population, which is not so far from the USA with 0.6% and a far cry from countries such as Zimbabwe with 24%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...prevalence_rate

SO, THAILAND STILL OK? LIKE THE usa? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAY?

[sokal]

Try looking up some facts to support your theory. The HIV rate in Thailand is 1.5% of population, which is not so far from the USA with 0.6% and a far cry from countries such as Zimbabwe with 24%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...prevalence_rate

SO, THAILAND STILL OK? LIKE THE usa? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAY?

I am saying that its not like more sex = worse numbers like the OP said. If that was true then Thailand should be in the red.

[geriatrickid]

Man, I so hate threads like this. Promiscuity has nothing to do with the increasing HIV rates in Thailand. The growth is due to some of the following factors;

1. Young population. (The under 21 year old generation did not have the same education as did the population in the 1990s. The prevention proogram was everywhere 15 years ago. They also haven't seen the horrors of what HIV can do and have been lulled into complacency by the take a pill and you'll be ok fallacy.)

2. Increasing population of IV drug users, particularly in the Bumese border areas.

3. Reduction of medical outreach programs precluding early diagnosis thereby allowing unknowing HIV+ people to infect others.

4. An absence of community activists, particularly in the hardest hit communities. In the west, it was social community groups that pushed the message. Gone are the days when Mr. Condom could walk around handing out goodies. The prudes of Bangkok didn't want to see that again.

If you think Thais are more promiscuous than elsewhere, please get out more. According to surveys it appears that Canada is the world's hotspot of sex. (No I didn't make that up.) The Russians make Pattaya's night crawlers seem tame in comparison and on and on it goes.

Thailand has a crisis with HIV now because the previous governments over the past 5 years cut funding for prevention and education as soon as the cases started to drop. Cuts seem to have accelerated as soon as the military took over.

Edited August 21, 2009 by geriatrickid

[Scott]

People are by nature promiscuous. If we weren't, most of wouldn't be here.

One problem I see in Thailand is that values are so externalized. A lot of people don't follow the rules, but expect others to. From a young age, they are spoon fed and doted over to the point where a lot of values don't ever get internalized. So, I guess unless Mom is in the bedroom (or short time room) to put the condom on Junior, he just won't do it himself.

Teaching these things takes a long and sustained effort.

[Heng]

I'm not going to generalize for the entire population but in my social group (let's say, mostly when I was about 5-8 years younger), the gals would find condom use offensive because it means 'she's not the one.' Carrying condoms, much less a stock of condoms meant you were a player, which IMO a good portion of fellows are. And that's about as much blame as I would shift towards women here. Sure there are player gals around but in a hundred, I might know five that fit that bill.

For some reason, some folks suggest that it is both men AND women responsible for the high rates of infection among housewives, but the pool boy, gardener, mailman thing seems to be some kind of programmed international porn fantasy that doesn't quite translate here. Very few degrees of separation here, it's pretty easy to trace who caught what from who. The guys really are the problem IMO in this case.

Edited August 21, 2009 by Heng

[dondraper]

HIV rates are going to be significantly under-reported in countries like Thailand.

Prostitution is not the deciphering factor, its the lack of condom use. In the Nevada legalized zone, I do not believe a prostitute has ever tested positive for HIV. In Thailand though, the prostitutes probably have boyfriends who they sleep with unprotected who have a high chance of being drug abusers and promiscuous themselves.

[DP25]

From a personal point of view Thailand more so then any country in the world Thailand is easier to pull a girl on a night out or day at the shopping mall, im not talking girls in the pay4play industry but girls with normal jobs and often boyfriends. (now i realise my research is obviously flawed)

Good luck with that buddy, would like to see you try pulling a girl at a shopping mall. Please put it on youtube. You'd probably have better luck at Walking Street.

As for HIV, it's a non issue. The infection rate in Thailand is roughly the same as the US. Thailand's infection rate has dropped from 150,000 per year in the early 90s to 10,000 per year. And no, Bar Stool Expats, infection rates are not going to be undereported in 'countries like Thailand', Thailand actually has one of the best anti HIV programs in the world and testing for the virus is far more widespread than most countries.

Edited August 21, 2009 by DP25

[Ulysses G.]

Mom is in the bedroom (or short time room) to put the condom on Junior, he just won't do it himself.

Now that is kinky.

[IanForbes]

From what I've read, HIV has been highest in the gay community and the needle drug abusers group. Most of the infected Thai prostitutes were in the northern brothels used by the army. Most of the Thai women I've known insisted on condoms. The ones that didn't were not active in the trade or I was their steady boyfriend. I use them because at my age I don't want to start another family. I've had some pretty frank discussions with lots of women in the trade.

[Harcourt]

".....The infection rate in Thailand is roughly the same as the US......"

Disregarding IV drug use:

To be fair to the OP, the stats don't quite say it all. The simple statistic that Thailand's infection rate vs America's does not take into acount that America's rate is largely amongst the male homosexual demographic...thus what the OP is saying has some pertinance because Thailand's women are infected more than America's, proportionately.

It's reasonable to suggest female promiscuity.

Having said that, someone has pointed out about promiscuous men who do not take precautions.

The HIV level in Thailand might be due in some part to promiscuous women, but is more likely to do with promiscuous and careless men.

Then take into account drug addicts.....

[dumbnewbie]

When HIV/AIDS was first discovered 30 years ago, relatively few people had it. Just think - if we had quarantined those few people, even putting them up in a network of luxury resorts - some by the beach, some near ski slopes, whatever - how much suffering and death could've been avoided (and money saved) since that time?

And no, I don't mean to discriminate against gays, or drug users, or anyone else. Indeed, those very populations would've benefited the most during the last 30 years if we'd nipped this in the bud.

I think spending billions on "medical research" which never seems to go anywhere is the wrong way to go (any cure for cancer yet? or AIDS for that matter? heart disease? anything in sight? I didn't think so). Prevention is a much simpler, quicker, cheaper solution, but nobody wants to talk about that. Let's see - pharmaceutical companies and the entire medical industry would be opposed, because prevention would dramatically slash their profits. Religious groups are opposed, because they're freaks. Civil liberties groups are opposed, because they're misguided ideologues who can't think logically.

I don't know. If it were up to me, I'd have universal health care (doesn't mean government owned and run - it could mean a competitive, private system where everyone is required to have insurance, and government subsidizes insurance for those who can't afford it.) The required care would cover emergency room care and preventive care, but not the expensive end-of-life treatments that make up the major portion of expenses but do minimal good (extend an 80-year old's miserable life another 6 months or a year? Why?). If people want that kind of expensive end-of-life treatment, they can work harder in their youth and buy supplementary health insurance to cover that. Me? I'd rather have a fatal dose of opium or whatever can give one a pleasant death experience.

Instead, I'd have everyone checked for communicable diseases, and then cured, or if no cure exists, then quarantined until one does exist. And again, quarantine doesn't have to mean some dreary prison or insane asylum type situation. There's no reason there couldn't be a network of luxury resorts for these people to choose from, or move from one to another. The money we save on "treating" hundreds of millions of people after they contract easily preventable diseases could easily pay for such luxury quarantine.

Next, we should ban tobacco, hydrogenated oil, corn syrup and other poisonous substances, and declare fat a disease, and change the culture so that people don't get fat anymore. Because fat leads to just about every other disease: diabetes, heart disease, stroke, cancer, Alzheimers, etc. And it's apparently just about impossible to get back to a healthy bodyweight and maintain it once you've become fat. And we know how to prevent it! Give people incentives to get daily exercise, and also change the food culture. Soda should be banned, as should most desserts. Fruit would still be legal. Does anyone get fat from eating too much fruit? I never heard of it. Salt in our diet should be drastically reduced - maybe by putting a huge tax on it so it's very expensive. Grains and the flours made from them should probably also be banned, as they are little better than sugar.

Maybe rice and some other grains are OK - Asian peasants subsisting on rice don't seem to get fat, but Mexican peasants eating tons of corn tortillas do, and Europeans, northern Indians and northern Chinese get fat eating wheat based breads and noodles. Instead of giving billions of dollars to mega agricultural companies to produce harmful food (corn & soybeans which are fed to livestock instead of their natural food - grass for cows, worms & insects for chickens, algae for fish, etc.), this money should be used to produce more affordable organic healthy food. Ugh. It all seems so simple. Why is the world so messed up?

Are these such terrible ideas?

Edited August 22, 2009 by dumbnewbie

[dumbnewbie]

Whatever the origin, it's a crime that the people who could've nipped this epidemic in the bud didn't do so.

[sanmiguellight]

Good luck with that buddy, would like to see you try pulling a girl at a shopping mall. Please put it on youtube. You'd probably have better luck at Walking Street.

Some of us were under 30 not too long ago with all our teeth glistening, with devastating wit the girls struggled to keep there underwear on my learn-ed best friend!

OK i had to bullshit this topic up a bit to make it Thai related.

BUT .... In the countries where HIV is prevelant in for example 1 in 100 people (like Thailand) is it a TABOO subject that promiscuity (multiple partners) is a MAJOR factor behind why HIV is so prevelant.

1st world 3rd world it doesnt matter ive nothing against <deleted> as many people as what tickles peoples fancy (so long as they arent trading down!) but for all you devastatingly witty people, im just curious as to whether this is a MAJOR factor behind the spread of HIV ... as ive never heard it mentioned before but in my simplistic view of planet earth there is a chance it could be!

Edited August 22, 2009 by sanmiguellight

[Ulysses G.]

I think spending billions on "medical research" which never seems to go anywhere is the wrong way to go (any cure for cancer yet? or AIDS for that matter? heart disease? anything in sight? I didn't think so).

"Never seems to go anywhere"?

There have been giant strides in treating all of these diseases. They have not developed total cures yet, but, they have accomplished remarkable things compared to the past..

[scottyd]

dumbnewbie your ideas are good, but I think ugly should be declared a disease too, i'm sure my eyes became short sighted because they were tired of looking at ugly people all the time.

[dumbnewbie]

I think spending billions on "medical research" which never seems to go anywhere is the wrong way to go (any cure for cancer yet? or AIDS for that matter? heart disease? anything in sight? I didn't think so).

"Never seems to go anywhere"?

There have been giant strides in treating all of these diseases. They have not developed total cures yet, but, they have accomplished remarkable things compared to the past..

Sure... I didn't mean to suggest ending medical research - I'd actually like to see it stepped up big-time. What I meant to say was that progress has been terribly slow and very discouraging (to my mind, anyway), and while increasing our efforts to find cures for all these diseases, we should also be making every effort (as a society, because it's obviously impossible for most of us to go against the tide of the culture of toxic habits we've developed) to prevent diseases from developing (or spreading, in the case of contagious diseases) in the first place, especially as prevention would seem to be a much cheaper and more efficient way to go about it. dam_n, that sentence is messed up.

Edited August 22, 2009 by dumbnewbie

[dumbnewbie]

dumbnewbie your ideas are good, but I think ugly should be declared a disease too, i'm sure my eyes became short sighted because they were tired of looking at ugly people all the time.

There is indeed an epidemic of ugliness, and it is of course a disease. Think about it - who would want to be ugly? Not only are you a pain to all those whose eyes fall upon you, but your self-esteem suffers in the process, no doubt leading to rejection, loneliness, depression, lower productivity in school and career, drug or alcohol abuse, food abuse and resulting obesity, lowered immunity, disease, and probably suicide or at least an early death.

The cure is obvious - the government should pay beautiful people for their sperm and eggs, and generously donate them to the ugly, so their children might at least be average looking, and so on, generation after generation. Eugenics is a great idea really - it has nothing to do with racism or murder, and its a real shame that the <deleted> Nazis had to burn that association into everyone's minds.

In the meantime, we could adopt and adapt a practice from our Muslim friends, the niqab/chador/burka or whatever you want to call it - the "black ghost outfit" - but only required for the ugly, of both genders - for the benefit of all concerned.

[IanForbes]

Nature needs to find a way to kill off MORE humans. There are already too many of us. AIDS didn't do a good enough job. The smart people learned to use condoms and women were more concious of using prevention. The remainder work on the Darwin theory. Doctors are too efficient in learning cures for diseases. But, there's never been a cure for stupidity.

[dumbnewbie]

True. Lee Kwan-Yew of Singapore has tried in vain to get highly educated people to have more babies.

Then there's the American movie "Idiotocracy", which portrays a nightmare society of total idiots that we may be evolving into due the phenomenon IanForbes touched on. It starts out with a narrative comparing a highly-educated Yuppie couple who keep putting off having kids until it's too late, while their low-life counterparts (white trash, in order to be politically correct) pump out baby after baby, for instance going ahead with unprotected sex in the pickup truck because neither of them have a condom in the heat of the moment. Oh well!

So the genes for intelligence, discipline and responsibility die out, while the genes for stupidity, impulsivity and irresponsibility multiply.

[Jingthing]

Careful with the genetics is destiny theories, that was what the Nazis were all about, you really don't want to go there.

[Heng]

So the genes for intelligence, discipline and responsibility die out, while the genes for stupidity, impulsivity and irresponsibility multiply.

Doesn't matter. It doesn't take hundreds of millions of smart genes to control the dumb ones. Just look at any empire in history, various minority groups controlling entire industries and sometimes entire nations all over the world (Thailand included).

[dondraper]

The gap between that .0001% of the human population who created medicine, built airplanes, and continue to advance technology is monumentally bigger than the gap you perceive exists between yourself and the rednecks who are on welfare with their eight children. What is it that you guys do for a living that you think society would benefit so greatly from if only people with your genes were around?

Edited August 22, 2009 by dondraper

[JRinger]

OK this has nothing to do with the sex industry in LOS.

If i were to have unprotected sex with a HIV infected female the chances of me actually catching it are something like 1 in 300,

Last month my wife's nephew was cremated after dying from AIDS, it took about 18 months from whorehouse to ashes. He made claim to only one visit to the local whorehouse. He also infected his wife who has been bed ridden for many months and isn't expected to live much longer. They have three children. I guess some people don't believe in statistics.

FYI... - India: total population: 1.06 billion people (mar 2004)

- daily population increase: about 50,000 people

- one baby born in India: every 1.25 seconds......talk about promiscuity...and: - number of gays, lesbians and transgender individuals: 70 million (estimate by Humsafar Trust)

- estimated percentage of sexually active males in India who have had sex with men

at least once: 25 % (estimate by National AIDS Control Organisation health survey)....

Edited August 22, 2009 by JRinger

[IanForbes]

No one group or country has a lock on promiscuity. It's everywhere and makes humans act the way they do the world over. Most humans never reach their maximum potential, and given the proper parenting, even children with a low IQ can still far exceed others who have a much higher IQ but lack proper teaching at an early age.