For instance:
"78% of homosexuals are affected by STDs"
What % of heterosexuals are affected by STDs?
Without a comparison, that number is quite meaningless.
Or this statistician's worst nightmare:
"Of homosexuals questioned in *one study* reports that 43% admit to 500 or more partners in a lifetime, 28% admit to 1000 or more in a lifetime, and of these people, 79% say that half of those partners are total strangers, and 70% of those sexual contacts are one night stands (or, as one homosexual admits in the film "The Castro", one minute stands)"
Why just use *one study*? Did they just cherry pick the data that best suited their previously held beliefs? And again, why is no corresponding data provided for heterosexuals?
"Homosexuals account for 3-4% of all gonorrhea cases, 60% of all syphilis cases, and 17% of all hospital admissions (other than for STDs) in the United States (5)."
The (5) directs the reader to a study that is over 20 years old. Why look back so far when there is data compiled every year by the CDC? Why not provide the up to date data?
And was the sexual health data collected from sexual health clinics? If so, surely then that's like assuming that the typical patient at a dentist is representative of the population at large. If I surveyed people in the dentist's waiting room I could conclude 98% of people need cavities, and if I was in the eye clinic I could assume that 75% of people are short sighted.
How do they know that all the reported cases of syphilis are either homosexual or heterosexual? Do they do a blood test to find out? How do they capture undisclosed homosexuals in the data?
All those 'facts' are numbers that no reasonable, thinking person would take at face value.
There is too much noise in the data and too many lingering questions about its collection and interpretation for anyone to take it seriously.
Dodgy statistics, mostly.
For instance:
"78% of homosexuals are affected by STDs"
What % of heterosexuals are affected by STDs?
Without a comparison, that number is quite meaningless.
STDs are high in the heterosexual population too:
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats07/Surv2007FINAL.pdf
Or this statistician's worst nightmare:
"Of homosexuals questioned in *one study* reports that 43% admit to 500 or more partners in a lifetime, 28% admit to 1000 or more in a lifetime, and of these people, 79% say that half of those partners are total strangers, and 70% of those sexual contacts are one night stands (or, as one homosexual admits in the film "The Castro", one minute stands)"
Why just use *one study*? Did they just cherry pick the data that best suited their previously held beliefs? And again, why is no corresponding data provided for heterosexuals?
"Homosexuals account for 3-4% of all gonorrhea cases, 60% of all syphilis cases, and 17% of all hospital admissions (other than for STDs) in the United States (5)."
The (5) directs the reader to a study that is over 20 years old. Why look back so far when there is data compiled every year by the CDC? Why not provide the up to date data?
And was the sexual health data collected from sexual health clinics? If so, surely then that's like assuming that the typical patient at a dentist is representative of the population at large. If I surveyed people in the dentist's waiting room I could conclude 98% of people need cavities, and if I was in the eye clinic I could assume that 75% of people are short sighted.
How do they know that all the reported cases of syphilis are either homosexual or heterosexual? Do they do a blood test to find out? How do they capture undisclosed homosexuals in the data?
All those 'facts' are numbers that no reasonable, thinking person would take at face value.
There is too much noise in the data and too many lingering questions about its collection and interpretation for anyone to take it seriously.