Sat | Jul 24, 2021

Questions for anti-Bain bunch

Published:Wednesday | May 28, 2014 | 12:00 AM

THE EDITOR, Sir:

Everyone should be pleased to see the newspaper report headlined: 'Easier access to public health care for HIV-infected gay men'.

The report stated that these men "now experience little or no barrier in accessing services at the island's public-health facilities despite Jamaica's stringent buggery laws".

Is this laudable outcome even partially attributable to the work of CHART under the leadership of Professor Brendan Bain?

How does this mesh with the ideological position of the UWI (an academic institution) that repeal of said buggery law is necessary in order to facilitate access to services for these men?

Why then was Prof Bain unceremoniously dismissed by the UWI (on behalf of CHART) for saying that he was unaware of any published data showing that repeal of such laws would lead to decreased rates of HIV in this population?

Why did the JFLAG-Gomes consortium vilify Bain for the alleged inference that retention of the law was not a barrier to access to care? Is the Ministry of Health now corroborating the evidence from Singapore ( buggery law) and France (no buggery law) and supporting the contention that repeal of such laws is neither necessary nor sufficient to control HIV in men who have sex with men?

Your readers deserve to know the truth in order to draw their own conclusion about who is propagating junk science.

Dr D. Brady-West

drbradywest@gmail.com