Since AIDS drugs arrived in 1996, HIV agencies have relentlessly pursued HIV management over HIV prevention, morphing from compassionate responders into dispassionate self-servers;

state-funded "quangos" dominated by "AIDS careerists" who use political correctness, media spin and deceit to obscure truth and further their own ends. This section reveals how their systematic indifference and neglect are undermining, demoralising and destroying gay men's health and lives by exacerbating the very problems - including the spread of HIV and crystal - they are publicly funded to fight…

• By LIFE OR METH's Founder

• Last updated May 5, 2008

"IN A WORLD of universal deceit, telling the truth is revolutionary."

~ George Orwell

HOW DID I come to create LIFE OR METH? Well, not so long ago, come World AIDS Day, I would readily throw cash into the gay-run HIV charity sector's collection tins to support "the cause", because I believed a healthy community to be an empowered one. I still do. But I also believed that the people drawn to working in these bastions of future hope embodied selfless devotion, going about their roles with the community's interests and health needs overriding all other considerations.

Then, around 2000, I decided to knock on a few of their doors, beginning in the US, to enquire why nothing was being done to combat the ugly, deathly spectre of crystal meth, which was silently but stealthily pervading gay communities in the major coastal cities. One by one, friends and acquaintances I had known during many Stateside trips throughout the 1990s were being entrapped by meth's seductive high, and its devastating low was destroying their livelihoods, inflicting soul- destroying depressions and manias, triggering suicidal tendencies and inducing the compulsion for multiple, disinhibited, unsafe, turbo-charged sexual encounters.

Anecdotal evidence had been stacking up for several years - on the West Coast for far longer - yet I was arriving at the uneasy conclusion that this new epidemic in our midst was being allowed to spread unhindered because no one, it seemed, was speaking out or acting against it!

My worst fears were realised when, one after the other, the same mental defense mechanisms whirred and clicked into place as the barely considered responses of each AIDS agency and sexual health organisation I approached amounted to nothing. In dull-eyed unison each routinely dismissed all of my anecdotal evidence out of hand, demanding instead immediate sight of non-existent scientific proof and statistics to quantify my claims, disinterested as they were in investigating these themselves. Surely it was their duty to quantify the risk posed by crystal meth; to establish all possible outcomes and their probabilities, to act on the findings and disseminate the appropriate information to enable their communities to make informed decisions?

How would they have reacted, I wondered, had I demanded proof that the HIV virus itself causes AIDS? After all, their multi-million dollar industry is built on this foundation notwithstanding the fact that scientific evidence has yet to emerge to support this universally accepted hypothesis. Why, then, were they hiding behind the mantle of scientific uncertainty in claiming that meth is no more phychologically or physiologically dangerous than any other party drug, despite the personal experiences of thousands to the contrary? And why, in a spiraling delirium of left-brain denial, were they summarily rubbishing all suggestion of a link  between crystal meth use and HIV infection?

"It is dangerous to rely on the lack of a ‘smoking gun' in terms of the exact mechanism to deny the need to recognise and change one's behavior. This is analogous to the public outcry when I and others suggested in 1982 that gay men refrain from unprotected anal intercourse until we knew what was causing AIDS, as we definitely knew that unprotected anal sex was the leading route of infection or exposure to whatever the causal factor would turn out to be."

~ Dr. David Ostrow, MD PhD [Chicago MACS Centre]

I was being asked to prove something as abstract as a psychological motivation when it was overwhelmingly obvious that, for many users, meth erases the memory of every safe sex message that ever existed in a way that no other drug comes close to replicating, while acting as an overpowering aphrodisiac that heightens every sensation and taboo, making the average user want to hump every person and lamp post in sight for hours and days on end, not stopping until his brain tires of producing so many happy chemicals that it will just give up, inducing a dark, desolate chasm of despair fueled by panic attacks and psychotic episodes that may cost him his job, life savings, home, friends and loved ones, or see him restrained in a psychiatric ward or OD'ed in a gutter somewhere, a slab of concrete at the local morgue his final resting place. Why, I despaired, was this such a hard sell?

Then I was shown the door by the leading gay men's sexual health charities in the UK - The Terrence Higgins Trusts (THT) and GMFA (formerly Gay Men Fighting AIDS) - where meth was starting to make its ubiquitous presence felt.

Would I now face the prospect of my own city, London, becoming a "crystal town" in a few short years, its thriving, bustling gay scene reduced to a ghost town with the rest of the UK and Europe following close behind? Or take whatever action necessary to pre-empt its arrival by alerting London's gay community that meth is like no other drug in its propensity to wreak havoc and destroy lives? I had witnessed enough carnage and suffering elsewhere to know that I could not follow their appalling example, stick my head in the sand and wait for scientific evidence to catch up with what was happening right here, right now.

"A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury."

~ John Stuart Mill [Philosopher]

Even were such "proof" to finally emerge, what guarantee then that the findings would be accurate and not misrepresented or distorted? After all, habitual, speeding meth users that such research seeks to identify fall largely outside of the reach of face-to-face interviews and lengthy questionnaires that require focused attention spans and coherent answers. By the nature of their addiction, meth users tend either to be unaware or in denial that they have a problem or plain dishonest about the extent of their usage, yielding unreliable data that can inevitably be seized upon by disreputable HIV agencies to show that no problem exists, thereby evading their duty to act.

[See Statistics and Lies]

To focus fully on this work I sold my publishing business and, on April 15, 2001 - the day I signed it over to the new owner - I flew to "viral hot-spots" of America's gay crystal meth epidemic in Palm Springs, then LA and Miami Beach before settling in New York - the epicentre of the affliction - for much of that year, witnessing for myself the social decay meth was wreaking on its gay community. I stayed with a friend in downtown Chelsea, someone I had known for years as outgoing and exuberant and just the latest of many to have withdrawn into the meth haze, contracting HIV in the process and restructuring his lifestyle exclusively around his musty, dimly-lit, black-draped apartment strewn with home-delivered fast food cartons, a sparkling new 17" Mac to herald the arrival of 24/7 instant cable connection, assorted meth paraphernalia and a revolving door of internet hook-ups of all shapes and sizes. This set-up would afford me a sobering insight into a hitherto secret, underground world...

I prepared my groundwork over the following year and, on November 1, 2002, LIFE OR METH was born. The site originally set out to warn and educate the London gay community about the oncoming storm but quickly became embraced and regarded globally as a powerfully truthful resource, striking a chord with meth users themselves and providing the impetus and wake-up call for over a quarter of a million people to date to quit - or at least want to quit - using. LIFE OR METH's independent - and unrestrained - global voice would preclude it from funding at local level, while international organisations like The Elton John AIDS Foundation snubbed requests for funding on the basis that, to quote, "crystal is not an AIDS-related concern".

So, next I sold my London home to support this near full-time, cost-intensive campaign, which required endless research, distribution of fliers, posters, adverts and interviews in the gay media, drumming up awareness in the mainstream press, endless petitioning of the Home Office for crystal's UK reclassification from Class B to Class A (finally accomplished January 19, 2007), and traveling from city to city to keep a finger on the pulse of this deadly new virus that was insidiously and indiscriminately infiltrating urban gay communities globally.

10,000 hits later, in May 2003, Marc Cohen of the UFA (United Foundation of AIDS) invited me to Miami to oversee North America's first national meth campaign, Meth=Death; a provocatively shocking but effective poster inspired by LIFE OR METH's upfront approach.

I was then contacted by Stop AIDS in San Francisco and other enlightened gay men's health groups - including Positively Healthy (UK), Positive Action (San Diego), Legacy (Houston) and, more recently, CAAMA  (Sydney) - and a number of "meth task forces" across America who work in tandem with such organisations to confront the meth problem head-on. All shared LIFE OR METH's ethos and were keen to get realistic, hardhitting

prevention messages that sought, above all else, to stigmatise crystal meth swiftly into the public domain, devoid of the arrogance, self-interest, vanity, square thinking and obtuseness that were clearly roadblocks to effective action among many of the bureaucratised gay-run AIDS bodies ("AID$ Inc.").

"In the fall of 2005, Legacy staff conducted interviews with current meth users, recovering meth users and those at high-risk of becoming meth users to determine what types of messages were needed to alert people to the dangers," explains Eric Roland, director of education at Legacy Community Services. "Participants said that a campaign should 'de-glam Tina' and provide a message that meth is not 'cool'. Others suggested shocking illustrations with a strong anti-meth message." As a result, four of LIFE OR METH's own posters were used by Legacy to promote meth awareness in Houston. [Click on Legacy PDF  link, left, for full details of this focus group survey]

Elsewhere:

• UFA's Meth=Death poster legitimised the stigmatisation of meth and stirred others across the US to take decisive action. In demand by everyone from high school teachers to CMA group meetings and Sheriffs' offices, the poster was the catalyst for all Stateside campaigns that followed;

• Stop AIDS' San Francisco campaigns around living with AIDS (AIDS Is No Picnic) and meth (Crystal Mess) - vividly depicting the physically ravaging effects of full-blown AIDS and meth dependency - contributed to the largest decline in HIV and meth use among men who have sex with men (MSM) of all major US cities;

• LIFE OR METH has itself become the most effective global meth resource for MSM. Two-thirds of meth users accessing it have been inspired or empowered to quit - over 340,000 visitors to date! With 200,000+ hits in the UK alone, LIFE OR METH has been at the forefront of impeding the largescale advance of meth into major European gay communities.

[See Testimonials]

"It is no secret that a number of the groups receiving funds for what is called health education are in fact using their new status as government-approved and publicly funded bodies to promote a homosexual political agenda. To look only at the most notorious case, in an expose of the [UK] Terrence Higgins Trust in August 1990, [medical] journalist Oliver Gillie wrote in The Independent of an organisation rent with political discord and pursuing political correctness at the expense of medical accuracy, and sometimes of common sense."

~ Ron Aitken [Free Life]

Those who work within the AIDS industry have been conditioned by political correctness not to be seen to judge people with the disease in any way since the early days of the epidemic, when gay men were afraid to get tested for fear that they would be demonised and driven underground.

"One of political correctness's most notable characteristics is its total intolerance for any viewpoint but its own."

Supposedly intended to counter HIV stigma, politically correct protocols, curriculums, "sensitivity training" programs and quality assurance measures were set up to ensure that HIV sector staff and volunteers were totally non-judgmental, many of which exist to this day. When a problem like crystal manifests, it is placed into the same mold and the same technocratic, non-stigmatising approach to users of meth and the drug itself are applied, effectively serving to legitimise and normalise the problem.

"I remember when we first started to consider an anti-

meth campaign and I saw some of the non-stigmatising 'manby-panby' campaigns. I remember saying that this isn't sex we are discussing, this is an illegal substance. I would never want to shame someone for having sex; a biological function and human nature. However, I should be able to shame someone for using an illegal substance, shouldn't I?"

~ Eric Roland [Legacy Community Services]

Inevitably, forward-thinking health awareness groups are incessantly discredited by AID$ Inc. for our non-PC efforts to remedy the damage caused by their failure to tackle meth - and, by association, HIV - effectively. Despite our notable successes they unceasingly criticise our methods, particularly the use of realistic, in-your-face imagery designed to deglamorise meth and, not least, the HIV virus which, they claim, serve only to demonise meth users and HIVers; a patently patronising response that lacks common sense, paints the target audience as stupid, and hails from the same school of politically correct lunacy that has seen the word "Christmas" airbrushed out of the American vocabulary and a British hospital ban hot cross buns at Easter on the pretext of not offending non-Christians. And despite the fact that recovering meth users themselves often testify how graphic images of meth-ravaged individuals gave them the wake-up call they needed to awaken to their addiction and repair their broken lives.

"Shock has a place in public health awareness, particularly where complacency has triggered significant increases in high-risk behaviours... It’s actually the argument that such campaigns DON’T work which is unsubstantiated."

~ Col [Sydney Star Observer]

By not stigmatising crystal meth, a climate of tolerance and acceptance is fostered; one that fuels the perception of meth as cool and chic, and contributes to peer pressure to use or risk being ridiculed and isolated from the "action". It was only after the arrival, in 2003, of campaigns like Meth=Death and San Francisco's Crystal Mess that "Tina" - which by then had become so thoroughly interwoven into the fabric of North America's gay social scene that everyone, it seemed, was using - became universally frowned upon and socially unacceptable. The same is also true of the HIV virus, for which hard-hittting campaigns which shocked gay men into practising safe sex have long been superseded by ads that blatantly sexualise and legitimise the virus, paving the way for the open sale of bareback videos, a social climate in which the solicitation of "raw sex" and "bug chasing" is common currency and, inevitably, record rates of HIV infection.

"Rising infection rates...suggest that polite ads simply do not work. Anything less than graphic, in-your-face messages pale next to a Nike, GAP, or Harley-Davidson ad. AIDS is an ugly disease, and we have to get down and dirty with our ad campaigns and prevention efforts if we're going to staunch this epidemic."

~ James [HIV Stops With Me]