 |
 |

Sex at Risk: Politically or Factually Correct?
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
To the Editor. One of the secondary themes of my book,1 reviewed by Dr Post in JAMA,2 is that political correctness largely precludes factual correctness. The review by Post was another example of this.
For example, she substitutes "paradoxically" for "phasically" in a quoted passage that should read "intercourse but not masturbation phasically increased men's testosterone levels."1(p99) She also states that I claim to be "nonpartisan," although in my preface I explicitly note, "The review of the low risk of HIV [human immunodeficiency virus] transmission during vaginal intercourse is more partisan than the other two reviews, because of the common assumption of such a risk in both lay and professional circles."1(pviii)
Post opines that because I prefer the neutral term homosexual to gay, I am "culturally nonrepresentational" and therefore "nonscientific." It is debatable whether failure to use the faddish term gay is nonrepresentational (sampling bias is among the . . . [Full Text of this Article]
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Sex at Risk: Lifetime Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse, and the Low AIDS Risk of Vaginal Intercourse
Laura L. Post
JAMA. 1998;279(12):963.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
 |
The Status of Immunization Measurement and Feedback in the United States
LeBaron et al.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000;154:832-836.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|