STD's on the Rise

It irks me to no end when I see an article like this:

A recent rise in syphilis rates in the United States is probably due to natural cycles rather than an increase in unsafe sex or other behaviors, according to a new study.
The finding is encouraging to public-health officials who have worried that increasing syphilis infection, especially among gay and bisexual men, is a sign people at high risk for HIV have grown complacent about practicing safe sex.

Is global warming a natural cycle also? That's for another day however. The thing that bothers me is this; scientists claim that an intrinsic trait of syphillis is the eleven year swing and the short-term immunity of the populace after it sweeps through a city:

The key to the difference between syphilis and gonorrhea is immunity. Unlike those who catch gonorrhea, people who recover from syphilis can resist reinfection for some time afterward. That means that when the disease sweeps through a city, it leaves a relatively immune population in its wake and infection rates fall.
But as the population evolves, the proportion of susceptible individuals rises and so do infection rates. Using a computer model, Grassly and his colleagues showed that the time from one peak to the next should be about a decade.

How long is the resistance to reinfection? They don't say; but it stands to reason that if the period is short-term, say a few months or even up to six months, wouldn't the disease then spread to the suburbs and then be reintroduced within the city at a constant rate?

Why are people so afraid to say that more sexual partners and more frequent sex increase the chance of contracting an STD. Perhaps the reason that STD's are on the rise is because you don't hear as much on TV about wearing a condom and protecting yourself.

I recall when I was a senior in high school in 1986. HIV was really starting to emerge as a supposed epidemic but was mainly infecting homosexuals and drug addicts. Very soon thereafter, the virus started infecting heterosexuals at increasing rates. A concerted effort was made to make the public aware of protection and monogamy. The infection rates started to slow and by the late 1990's--thanks to protease inhibitors (aka AIDS Cocktails) and other drugs--the disease was not an automatic death sentence.

Now that we are not constantly being bombarded by ads telling us to protect ourselves and not having numerous partners, the rates for HIV and STD's are rising again. I conduct alot of training, and one topic I discuss is toxicology. I ask twenty-somethings about their memory of condom commercials aimed at protecting yourself from infection, not pleasure, and they look at me like I have a third eye. One guy actually told me that he believed that you can cure AIDS with drugs.

My point of this whole bloviating post is this: Monogamy is by far the best protection for sexually active people to avoid contracting an STD. I'm not so naive as to think that this is practical but it was an option that was at least discussed during the HIV awareness days of the late 80's and early 90's. Condom use was also a major part of curbing the spread of STD's. Why do supporters of sexual freedom get crazy whenever a report shows that STD's are on the rise? They publish reports that say ridiculous things like natural cycles and trends. These people react just like the pro-abortion folks do when you even mention eliminating the abhorrent practice of abortion, they go right to the defensive and find a million reasons why it should remain legal instead looking at the deeper problems associated with it.