EDITORIAL

We hear on all sides that venereal disease among homosexuals is increasing at an alarming rate. Reports of widespread incidence come from public and private health agencies, venereal disease councils, officials and individuals — all of whom are much concerned with the situation, and most of whom claim to have the statistical data to support their beliefs.

Without question, much of this talk is anti-homosexual propaganda, but also unquestionably, some of it is true. Separating the fact from the fiction has become the main problem for us. We long ago found that there is more to the situation than meets the eye.

We can remember the day when a venereal disease contact from an homosexual experience was highly unlikely-when, in fact, no one even remotely known to us, no matter how promiscuous, had ever picked up a disease through a homosexual source. Apparently things have changed. Dr. Edgar C. Cumings, Associate Director of the American Social Health Association, addressing the August 25th Mattachine Conference in San Francisco, said that the most recent San Francisco City Health Office figures attribute 80% of all reported venereal disease cases to homosexual origins. Los Angeles and New York report about the same; Buffalo's records show 30% male contact. Other major cities find no transmission through homosexual contacts.

The high figure of 80% we quite simply don't believe. And there is a shocking variable between 0-80%. Where does the truth lie? Dr. Cumings, himself, in his talk was careful to add, "No one knows the answer." This is what we have felt all along.

There is another and even more ominous side to the situation that ONE can document: public health authorities in their determination to stamp out this dread disease have, in some cases, used unethical practices when they suspect a homosexual contact. A certain investigator for the Los Angeles City Health Department, Hollywood District, got the names and addresses of several innocent and unsuspecting homosexuals during the questioning of a man he believed to be homosexual and who had come to the City Health Department for a checkup. The investigator put the man at ease by suggesting that he (the investigator) was a friend of ONE and that he had written for ONE Magazine. Neither statement was true. Other persons have been routed out of bed at early hours and ordered to come to the city health office for questioning where their names had been given as a possible contact. It is yet to be established that information given to the public health office is not also available to the public, the police and courts. But all authorities deny this possibility vehemently. They contend the Health Department files are confidential.

We hope these gentlemen are sincere, and that what they say is genuinely so. As it now stands the homosexual may be afraid of having a venereal disease, but he may also be afraid of having a checkup. As long as the law against homosexual acts exists this is not illogical. But the solution is simple. Under

one