I was struck by an article I came across yesterday, a report from the AIDS conference going on this week in Montreal. Research was being reported of a study of over 3000 women across multiple continents using a product developed in Massachusetts, a gel that would be inserted into the vagina before sex. The report was good. The gel appeared to be working, or to be more blunt in this preliminary report, it appeared to not be doing harm. Previous research into gels had actually had the unfortunate result of exposing users to greater risk of HIV infection. It appears this gel doesn't do that and it also appears it can prevent infection during intercourse without a condom. A potential breakthrough for sure, but I was reminded of one thing that has always angered me: the lack of research specifically targeting men who have anal sex with one another.

Why are gay and bi men being left out of relevant studies about AIDS prevention? Surely that particular sub-group of the population should be included in a project as large as this study? I can't say this conclusively because it has been years since I've researched the subject, but for as long as we've had AIDS in the USA, there has been scant attention paid to man-to-man sex when it comes to researching transmission and prevention. Often the results are arrived at by using another group, but then applying the results to gay and bi guys. I remember thinking back in the eighties how absurd it was that no large scale research was being conducted involving sexual practices between men. Why? Well, it had mostly to do with the fact that anti-gay policies were ruling the day during the Reagan and Bush years (the first Bush). Simply put, you couldn't get funding from the American government if you wanted to study fucking between men. But that was a very long time ago. Surely we've advanced somewhat and studying prevention among sexually active gay and bi men should be normal practice?

We've heard for years about research bias against women. There have been numerous research studies that simply ignored the female population and even though women might ultimately benefit from the research, for whatever reason they weren't included. Speculation has centered on the riskiness of exposing women who might become pregnant during the testing, potentially harming the fetus.

I don't begrudge the value of this important research as a tool to help save the lives of women. I also know that gay and bi men may ultimately benefit from this research, but why not have a policy that specifically includes gay and bi guys when testing theories that obviously could benefit men having anal sex with each other? Imagine if you could insert some gel into your ass before heading into your local ABS, then set about taking cocks up your ass without worry of condoms, and come away with decreased risk of HIV infection? Wouldn't that be worth the research to provide guys that alternative? Of course the condom may always be the safer option, but then again the truly safer option will always be not having anal sex. For those who don't like either of those choices, a gel could help prevent further infections.