Friday, January 18, 2008

Hodge Podge

Some scary stuff is out there...

Doctors have been over-prescribing antibiotics at the behest of a drug crazed nation for a while now, and more and more drug resistant bacterial strains are coming of it. MRSA USA300 sounds pretty scary and is already immune to an array of antibiotics. Any disease that can manifest itself as necrotizing fassciitis is not to be messed with. This particular "superbug" is thought to have evolved in the hospital setting but a particularly virulent strain seems to be spreading among certain gay populations in San Francisco, L.A. and Boston.

What is strange to me is why this disease, as HIV did some years back manifests itself in gay populations first. When the first disease occurrences started happening in the general public, how did the disease wind up in the one subset of the population? From a hepatitis epidemic in the 1970's, the HIV, and now this - why is this population the first to be hit? I can imagine fairly clearly how the disease spreads since unprotected anal sex is a risky endeavor, but I can't reason why the disease would start in a certain population. Certainly, there are heterosexual men and women who live in the same area and frequent the same places, and yet there is no mention of them in the news. This also begs the question, are gay men as promiscuous as stereotype would have it? It's my belief that women are usually the rate limiting step in the process of having sex (i.e. -it's basically up to them, most men are game anytime), so if two men are attracted to each other, is casual sex more likely? This guy says that gay men are more promiscuous than lesbian women. (Unfortunately, when I'm trying to look up papers and statistics, I end up with stuff like this, which is when I stop looking), but I couldn't find anything about gay vs. lesbian vs. heterosexual (I'm sure it's out there, I didn't look too hard tho). Whether or not that is true, the fact that people forget how crucial protection is, and think of HIV and other STD's as a disease of yesteryear is pretty alarming.

With regards to the antibiotic resistant bacterial strains cropping up, many also believe that the hormones and antibiotics we force feed our livestock adds to the problem. Indeed, an incredible amount of antibiotics ingested in this country are done so all those animals we love to eat. All this got me interested in reading the first book by the green movements author de jour, Michael Pollan - The Omnivoire's Dilemma. In 8 years when I finish it, I'm sure it will be eye opening. I did read an interview of him in which he pointed out that no country is as obsessed with nutritional facts as we are, and yet, no country is fat. I had never thought about the obesity problem in that light. Yes, there is a genetic component, and it's probably very substantial. But most of the genes in this country are shared by people with similar alleles around the world; and the world does not have obesity like we do. We are off track for the Healthy People 2010 goal for obesity, and if North Dakota is any indication, we are only making negative progress.

What's the point of all this? I don't really have one. I would tell people to burn some calories making the sweet romance - but these articles make sex seem pretty scary regardless of sexual preference. I suppose I'll just wait until Wii-sex comes out. 'Course, there is still the danger of ejaculating your controller into the screen, so make sure you strap up before you play that as well.

-Other guy


Brown Guy said...

Um. Congratulations, man. You win the "he's off the chain" award for the week. STDs, the environment, Wii sex. I simply can't compete.

~Brown Guy

M. Viggy said...

This is quite possibly the longest thing I've read this week. Would you need a new controller for Wii-sex?