MRSA Action Group March 10, 2008 / FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
If Gay Sex is So Unhealthy, Why are There So Many Healthy Gay Men?
A Response to the Chronicle’s
MRSA Story
This last January the
Chronicle sparked a global disease scare about an aggressive
strain of staph. A new epidemic was rumored to be headquartered in
San Francisco’s gay population. The
Chronicle reported the
virulent strain "on the loose", "resistant to antibiotics" and
headed directly toward America's sacred family value system--you
know, the whole "general population" thing.
Anyone tired of that story line?
As reported, this bad bug was sure to get you, especially if you
lived within local zip codes. The
Chronicle may as well have
dubbed it San Francisco's "Zip Code Disease".
Laughing matter or not, there are serious scientific errors in the
article, especially relevant for gay men. Errors which have been
followed by tsunami after tsunami of the ugliest anti-gay defamation
not heard since the early days of the HIV epidemic. The following
are typical of public postings found on the web within days of the
Chronicle story:
..."Homosexuals should be quarantined to protect society from this
plague"... ..."San Fran has to be nuked, save the world before it
spreads"...
..."It's called butt fucking, if you don't do it you don't have to
worry!"... ... Staff (sic) infection is epidemic in the gay business
community"...
..."According to the article all they have to do is shower after
they butt fuck and they won't get it, this is why I don't like
shaking gay's hands"...
..."It's the bisexuals that spread it all over the place"...
..."Not just the bisexuals... some of the sickest homosexuals will
engage in sex with women solely to spread their filthy diseases to
heterosexuals"...
In the general population, the public education campaign had begun.
Imagine for a moment how you might feel trying to heal from a new
mystery contagion in the context of the cultural war games of the
"Concerned Women for America" who took the occasion to characterize
"homosexual conduct" as "a breeding ground for the often deadly
disease".
Imagine for a moment you are a guy like Todd M., a member of our group and a gay man who was kind
enough to visit an ailing
friend in the hospital. A few days later, he came down with a MRSA
infection. His infection quickly became severe, painful and
difficult to treat, with repeated courses of antibiotics and
-repeated outbreaks of MRSA for years. He soon overextended his sick
days and lost his job. Then, without income he soon began missing
his rent, was evicted from his apartment, and now knows the depth of
trauma you can encounter in our broken health care system.
What Todd needs is an angel or a group of angels to provide a
shelter in the storm, not defame him when he is ill. Global
experience in the HIV epidemic has shown what works for someone like
Todd is to connect with
people of compassion and courage--people who can deal skillfully
when insults are heaped upon naturally occurring injury.
Hey Chron, You're Getting Under My Skin-
The Chronicle article
gave the reader five false impressions:
1. MRSA disease is new.
2. San Francisco is the epicenter of MRSA.
3. The MRSA epidemic is associated with gay men.
4. MRSA is transmitted by gay sex.
5. MRSA is the New AIDS.
Not one of these impressions is true.
1. MRSA disease is NOT new.
MRSA has been around for years and is an equal opportunity
infection that affects everyone.
Anyone can find the evidence.
In Feb. of this year a UK journal
The Observer reported the aggressive strain of staph USA300 to be
"already epidemic in the US" and to be in nine European countries as
well as England and Wales. The Brits are way ahead of the USA on
staph and find it mostly in hospitals there.
MRSA disease occurs throughout the world.
Check it out --- Google key words "MRSA""UK" and you will get
2,220,000 web sites to help you deal with education, prevention,
support groups, treatment and everything else including natural
treatments.
Two months ago a form of MRSA USA300 killed four children in
Louisiana and Georgia. Did you hear an alarm bell sounding in the
Chron about a "New Killer Plague Emerging from the Bible Belt"?
In August of 2007 Lisa Rosetta of the Salt Lake Tribune reported
"4,904 cases of MRSA in Utah, making it the second most common
reportable communicable disease". Ever read a front page story about
"Mormon capital an epicenter for virulent disease"?
You have to wonder what would have happened at the
Chron if someone
mistakenly ran that story.
Additionally USA300 has been found for years among pro football
players and college sports teams. Ever read a splashy story in the
sports section about a "Super Bowl of Infection"?
So now that a handful of gay men here get an infection you have to
wonder who decided that it was time for the
Chron to decontexualize a
global health concern by running a front page story like "S.F. Gay
Community an Epicenter for a New Strain of Virulent Staph"???
What were they thinking?
2. San Francisco is not the epicenter of MRSA. Around the world
there is no one epicenter of MRSA.
3. MRSA is not unique to gay men.
After the Chronicle story
the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta felt
it necessary to reassure the public. Their response: "These
infections occur in men, women, adults, children and persons of all
races and sexual orientations."
4. MRSA is not a sexually transmitted disease. MRSA is and can be
transmitted by sex, gay or not—just like a common cold. Sex is not
the primary mode of transmission.
All varieties of staph infection can be transmitted by sexual
contact since staph is transmitted by skin to skin contact. The UCSF
study quoted by the Chron clearly states:
"Specific sexual behaviors were not assessed or documented in
clinic charts; we therefore cannot comment on the association
between multidrug-resistant USA300 infection and specific male-male
sexual practices."
5. MRSA is not the New AIDS.
Worldwide media picked up the Chronicle story and ran with it,
multiplying the effect of the errors and creating panic. After a
London Tabloid dubbed MRSA "The New AIDS", Newsweek magazine asked
Dr. Henry Chambers, the coauthor of the UCSF study, if "there is a
new HIV-like public health epidemic on the horizon?" He replied
"This is definitely NOT the new AIDS."
NOT ONE of the five impressions Equating gay men with contagion
created by the Chronicle is true!
So what's going on at the Chron?
Is this whole mess due to ignorance, laziness, bone headed malice
or mischievous intention?
Who's responsible and who's in charge?
And most important what is the Chron going to do about it and when?
UCSF's Department of Public Affairs has already stepped up to the
plate and offered an apology deploring the "negative targeting of
specific populations in association with MRSA infections o, other
public health concerns". The New York Times has also apologized for
inaccuracies in its coverage. At this time no gay community
representatives have officially accepted either of the above
apologies.
The Columbia Journalism Review wrote "to peg 'gay sex' as the
culprit in the headline is completely misleading and
journalistically irresponsible". The Journal added that UCSF is
"bearing the burden of an apology that should have been made by the
journalists." And that it is "likely the reporters didn't read the
original scientific paper carefully enough".
To date S.F. supervisor Tom Ammiano has confronted author and
senior Chronicle medical writer, Sabin Russell in city hall and
publicly denounced Sabin's handiwork as "morally repugnant".
The MRSA Action Group takes the stand that now is the time for the
Chronicle to start explaining.
After the MRSA storm broke, a group of health advocates, doctors,
scientists and concerned citizens formed to protest the distortion
and sensationalism inherent in the Chronicle story and to demand an
apology from author Sabin Russell and the Chronicle for distorting
the facts end promulgating homophobic stereotypes.
The group seeks:
1. A meeting with the Chronicle editorial board to discuss the
assumptions about gay men's sexuality in their coverage.
2. A declaration from the Chronicle acknowledging-
A. How their "health" messages are based on deeply embedded
confusion in which Chronicle staff can no longer distinguish between
healthy aspects of gay sexuality and disease?
B. Their commitment to eliminating the metamessage that "gay
sex=contagion" by providing San Francisco and the world with health
stories about gay men and gay men's sexuality as an integral part of
what keeps gay men healthy.
C. Their commitment to researching and providing San Francisco and
the world with stories about the many gay communities in S.F. which
are epicenters of health, acknowledging once and for all the efforts
of countless gay men over the last twenty eight years in containing
the HIV epidemic.
It's so long overdue to read "S.F. Gay community an epicenter of
health."
Regarding the MRSA story:
-The group seeks a public retraction from the Chronicle
acknowledging-
1. How this story needlessly frightened local MRSA patients, gay
men, Castro residents and resulted in a global disease panic.
2. A demonstration of the Chronicle's commitment to public health
by acknowledging in a front page story that MRSA has been around for
years and is an equal opportunity infection that affects everyone.
3. The Chronicle's support for better public education about MRSA,
including how to prevent and treat MRSA.
4. The Chronicle's support for all the various kinds of medical
resources needed to protect communities in San Francisco from MRSA
infections.
5. The Chronicles recommitment to accurate unbiased reporting.
6. The Chronicle's willingness to correct the errors in the MRSA
story it printed this last January.
7. The Chronicle's willingness to include stories of actual people
with MRSA so that the "angels" in and around the S.F. Bay Area can
step in and provide the necessary healing for the citizens of San
Francisco.
What follows below is the MRSA Action Group's point by point
examination of the errors in the Chronicle article. Read it and you
will understand why voices and anger are rising to demand an
apology from author Sabin Russell and the Chronicle for distorting
the facts and promulgating homophobic stereotypes of gay men.
A COMPARISON OF THE MRSA STUDY
in
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDCINE
with the
S.F. CHRONICLE ARTICLE
REPORTING ON IT
(by Sabin Russell, January 15, 2008)
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE ARTICLE
In addition to the issues noted in the detailed comparison below,
these aspects of the Chronicle
article weakened it considerably:
--No MRSA expert or researcher unconnected with the study was
quoted. Such an expert or researcher might well have offered a
useful perspective and/or contextualizing information. For example,
on February 15, Annals of Internal Medicine posted an online “Rapid Response” to the
MRSA study, authored by Ken Katz, MD, Jeff Klausner, MD, and Kyle
Bernstein, PhD, of San Francisco’s Department of Public Health. They
wrote: “We are concerned that this finding
reflects, at least in part, ascertainment bias rather than a true
difference in disease incidence.” No coverage of this response had
appeared in the Chronicle as of March 3.
--The headline “S.F. gay community an epicenter for new strain of
virulent staph” reflected and reinforced problems detailed below:
the use of the over-general term “gay community” and the overwrought
term “epicenter.”
--The article contained no quotation from or reference to the lived
experience of a gay man with staph. Such material would have
mitigated the article’s implicit, one-sided portrayal of gay men as
Typhoid Marys on the verge of contaminating the “general population”
with a “virulent” new disease.
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE
1st paragraph:
“A new variety of staph bacteria, highly resistant to antibiotics
and possibly transmitted by sexual contact, is spreading
among gay men in San Francisco, Boston, New York and Los Angeles,
researchers reported Monday”
--Since it is possible for all varieties of staph to be transmitted
by skin-to-skin sexual contact, it is unclear why this fact would be
highlighted with respect to the new variety. (See additional
discussion under paragraph 7, below.)
--The study presents no data regarding “spread”: as its title
indicates, the study focuses on the “emergence” of the new variety.
--The research released Monday contained data only for San Francisco
and Boston, not New York or Los Angeles. Its only mention of New
York and L.A. is a sentence referring to the “recently noted”
emergence of a “similar” strain in those cities. The study presents
no data from the other two cities; instead, the New York mention
merely cites a letter last February to
Archives of Internal Medicine,
while the L.A. mention merely cites “unpublished data” from Binh
Diep. The article’s lead thus contradicts its paragraph 15, which
correctly notes, “The latest study focuses on the spread of the more
drug-resistant strain in San Francisco and Boston . . . . ”
2nd paragraph, first half:
“The study . . . found . . . the highest concentrations . . .
in and around SF’s Castro district”
--The paragraph fails to contextualize “highest concentrations” in
any way. “Highest” compared to whom--the nation, the state, the
city? This information is not provided in the article, although the
study itself indicates that the context for “highest” is a set of
532 cases of multidrug-resistant MRSA in SF residents.
--The concentrations were found not “in and around” the Castro, but,
more exactly, in residents of eight contiguous SF zip codes
(including the Castro). These zip codes showed 10.3% male-male
couples in the 2000 Census, versus 2.2% male-male couples in S.F.’s
other 18 zip codes.
--“In and around SF’s Castro district” fails to specify that the
concentrations were found in individuals residing in the Castro (as
opposed to, for example, public places in the Castro).
2nd paragraph, second half:
“The study . . . found . . . the highest