And so i wrote to ST Forum, CC to Dr. Balaji and his folks as follows, and he replied!!
#####

I refer to Dr Balaji Sadasivan remarks to Straits Times after the Life! Theatre Awards which was published on Thursday March 17. Dr Balaji claimed that his remarks was to raise awareness and not to discriminate against the gay community. Well just to allay Dr Balaji’s fear, awareness was indeed raised as the figures published by Actions For Aids (AFA hereafter) showed
that in the similar period where there was 28% increase in infection, there was actually a 68% increase in the number of people going for HIV test. An increase from 748 in 2003, to 1252 in 2004. So mathematically speaking, there’s actually less infection per number of people tested and that is an encouraging sign.

So unless Dr Balaji is not very good at mathematics, or he is just out to twist the figures and further deepening any stigma associated with the community; which Dr Balaji claimed he is not. Any statistic that anybody receive can be used to any advantage, in this case, as we clearly see, by only telling a half truth, it seems as if an ‘epidemic’ is happening to the gay community in Singapore, where in actual fact, comparing to the VAST increase in the number of people going for the HIV test, the number of people with infection, in relative terms has actually fallen. Which is a good sign that the government should encourage and applaud the efforts of AFA and the gay community who knows that “they can go to Kelantan Lane and
get themselves tested”

If Dr Balaji’s intention was to raise awareness of the problem, there are other ways to do it, without sounding as if he is discriminating against gays which SM Goh Chok Tong said could contribute effective to the nation and would be able to work in sensitive position in the Civil Service. But after 2 such remarks, and after using evidence from a female magazine when
speaking to the parliament, it would serve to make the gay community wonder if that was his true intention.

I am sure some people would say that we are just armchair critics and that we don’t propose any solution, we do. In this case, instead of slamming the gay community outright, Dr Balaji could have given a more responsible statistic by stating that while there is a 28% increase in infection amongst gay men, there is 68% increase in the number of people who went for
the test. And by encouraging the gay community to do more while acknowledging their efforts will definitely go a long way. Secondly to really tackle the root of the problem, talks and discussion must be held, like what Ms Lydia Lim suggested on Saturday’s ST; that “if an issue has a bearing on public health, should it be raised for discussion at least?”

And as the youth of this nation I would like to say for one that all of us youth would like discrimination against anybody to end.
#####

To which he replied:

Error in your mathematics (red)
The prevalence of HIV in gays who went for testing in 2003 was 3.5%. ie
about 1 in 29 gay persons who were tested was positive. The prevalence in
2004 was 4.3%. ie, 1 in about 23 gay persons who were tested was positive.
This is an increase of 28.5%. The fact that more people are going for the
aids test does not affect the prevalence rate. Therefore , if there is a
68% increase in absolute numbers of gays being tested and the increase in
prevalence is from 3.5% to 4.3%. the increase in the absolute number of
hiv+ gay persons being tested will be about 84%.
#####

To which i replied, all of which goes to the same folks and the ST forum, muahaha:

Sir,

Do pardon my error, because as it was reported on the Straits Times, you said that there was "28% in 2004 reaching a high of 311 from 242 the year before" which is mathematically correct. There is indeed 28% increase in the based on that statistic. So based on that statistic, as compared to a 68% increase in the number of people who went to test for HIV, it would imply that there is actually a decrease of 7.51% of the number of HIV + gay person being tested. But I am sure sir you will pardon me because there wasn’t sufficient statistic released by the yourself as I a commoner got my information from only the press. Perhaps more information could be published to prevent such mistakes in the future?

Regards,
Scott
#####

I love writing to ministers... hehehehe