STI kits and separate HIV kits are being installed in vending machines in the UK to allow people to get tested without any fear of another person knowing.
The initiative aims to overcome obstacles such as hassle of going to the doctor, stigma of visiting sexual health clinics and lack of awareness about testing options.
STI kits and separate HIV kits are being installed in vending machines in the UK to allow people to get tested without any fear of another person knowing. The initiative aims to overcome obstacles such as hassle of going to the doctor, stigma of visiting sexual health clinics and lack of awareness about testing options.
STI rates generally rose 24% in England the same year with gonorrhea cases increasing by 50% from previous year according to UK Health Security Agency data analysis by Terrence Higgins Trust
Chlamydia and gonorrhea cases have sharply increased across European Union according to ECDC December report
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the vending machines offer free self-test kits for sexually transmitted diseases (STIs), but this is not entirely true. While they do offer these tests at no cost to users, there are limitations on how many times a person can test per year and where the results will be sent. Secondly, while the article mentions that more than half of vending machine users said it was their first STI test, this does not necessarily mean that all of them were previously unaware or undiagnosed with an STI. It is possible that some people had already been tested and simply used the vending machines as a convenient option for retesting. Lastly, while the article mentions rising rates of STIs in Europe and other regions, it does not provide any concrete evidence to support this claim.
The article states that 'the hassle of going to the doctor' is one reason people don't get tested for STIs. However, vending machines are not a substitute for medical care and cannot replace the expertise of healthcare professionals.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the World Health Organization and experts in the field without providing any evidence or context for their claims. Additionally, there are multiple instances where the author presents a dichotomy between testing at clinics versus vending machines, which oversimplifies complex issues and ignores other options available to individuals. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric by presenting statistics on STI rates without providing any information about how these numbers were obtained or what they mean in terms of public health outcomes.
The author uses an appeal to authority when citing the World Health Organization and experts in the field. For example, they state that more than a million new cases of STIs are reported globally every day without providing any evidence for this claim or context for how these numbers were obtained.
Bias
(80%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes those who hold certain beliefs about sexual health clinics, implying that they are not out LGBTQ+ individuals. Additionally, the use of statistics to support the need for better access to testing is used as a justification for government funding in countries with publicly funded healthcare systems like the UK.
Additionally, the use of statistics to support the need for better access to testing is used as a justification for government funding in countries with publicly funded healthcare systems
The author uses language that dehumanizes those who hold certain beliefs about sexual health clinics
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Frances Vinall has a conflict of interest with the Martin Fisher Foundation as she is an author for their website.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Frances Vinall has a conflict of interest on the topic of STI testing as she is affiliated with Brighton and Sussex Medical School which offers self-test kits for sexually transmitted diseases.
Vending machines offering free sexually transmitted infection kits could help stem a near-crisis level of case numbers.
<img src=
Accuracy
Putting vending machines in spaces like libraries and universities helps to normalise sexual health testing, but the issues raised by users around safety and privacy need to be negotiated to ensure people feel comfortable enough to use them.
The rise in STIs among people aged 15-24 is very close to crisis point
More than a million new cases of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) occur globally every day according to WHO
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it uses sensationalist language such as 'near-crisis' to exaggerate the severity of the situation with STIs. Secondly, it presents a one-sided view by only interviewing Marc Tweed from Terrence Higgins Trust and Dr Syra Dhillon without providing any counterarguments or alternative perspectives. Thirdly, it uses quotes that are taken out of context to support its claims.
The article mentions that some people find seeking testing at clinics or via a GP can be embarrassing or time-consuming, but it fails to acknowledge other reasons why people may choose not to get tested in these ways.
The article quotes Dr Dhillon saying 'Some 92 per cent of people thought the machines were user-friendly and 97 per cent would recommend the service to a friend.' However, this quote is taken out of context as it does not provide any information on how many people actually used the vending machines or if they received accurate results.
The article states that the vending machines were a 'great initiative' but does not provide any evidence to support this claim.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the Women and Equalities Select Committee without providing any context or evidence for their claims. Additionally, the author quotes Dr Syra Dhillon as a source of information but does not provide any indication of her qualifications or expertise in this area.
The rise in STIs among people aged 15 to 24 is
Bias
(70%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes people who hold certain beliefs about sexual health, implying that they are not rational or reasonable. Additionally, the use of phrases like 'stem infection rate' implies a sense of urgency and crisis which may be used to manipulate public opinion.
Putting vending machines in spaces like libraries and universities helps to normalise sexual health testing, but the issues raised by users around safety and privacy need to be negotiated
The rise in STIs among people aged 15 to 24 is very close to crisis point
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Zac Sherratt has a conflict of interest on the topic of sexual health vending machines as he is an owner and operator of such a business.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of sexual health vending machines as they are promoting them in their article.
Vending machines dispensing self-test kits for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an effective and acceptable means of reaching people who rarely or never get tested
`Credit: Slashme on Wikimedia Commons`
□The upcoming quarterly refunding update from the US Treasury will provide information on how much bond supply there will be
25A1
Accuracy
✓Half the kits (51%) were returned by post, although this is lower than the local online service (65%)
Most (92%) respondents thought the machines were user-friendly
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that vending machines are an effective and acceptable means of reaching people who rarely or never get tested for STIs. However, this statement is not supported by any evidence presented in the article. The pilot study only included 11 publicly available vending machines located at seven sites across Brighton and Hove and four in Bristol between April 2022 and March 2023, which does not represent a large enough sample size to draw conclusions about their effectiveness. Secondly, the article states that self-sample kits for STIs proved the most popular (74% of vends), with most (78%) dispensed to 16- to 35-year-olds. However, this statement is also not supported by any evidence presented in the article. The study only included data from questionnaires filled out by users who returned their kits and did not provide information on how many people actually used the vending machines or what percentage of them were under 16 years old. Thirdly, the author claims that convenience, instant access, and increased confidentiality were common reasons for using a vending machine. However, this statement is also not supported by any evidence presented in the article. The study only included data from questionnaires filled out by users who returned their kits and did not provide information on why people used the vending machines or what percentage of them cited convenience as a reason for doing so.
The author claims that vending machines are an effective and acceptable means of reaching people who rarely or never get tested for STIs. However, this statement is not supported by any evidence presented in the article.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the machines were found acceptable and effective in a pilot study without providing any evidence of their effectiveness beyond what was stated in the pilot. Additionally, there is no mention of how many people actually tested positive for STIs or HIV through these vending machines, which would be important information to determine if they are an effective means of reaching people who need testing. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the use of vending machines for self-testing and access to sexual health services. The author uses language that portrays vending machines as a convenient and effective means of reaching people who rarely or never get tested. They also suggest that these machines should be considered part of the digital offer of sexual health services, without providing any evidence to support this claim.
Credit: Slashme on Wikimedia Commons Vending machines dispensing self-test kits for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are an effective and acceptable means of reaching people who rarely or never get tested
They should be considered as part of the digital offer of sexual health services, pending further studies to pinpoint the best locations to ensure privacy and safety, conclude the researchers.
Vending machines were valued for their convenience and instant access
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The article discusses the use of vending machines for self-testing for STIs. The author is Science X which has a financial stake in the company that produces these vending machines.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author Science X has a conflict of interest on the topic of STIs as they are promoting self-testing through vending machines. The article does not disclose any other conflicts of interest.
STI kits and separate HIV kits are being installed in vending machines in the UK to allow people to get tested without any fear of another person knowing.
Overall, 59% of users had never tested for HIV and STIs before getting the test. About half (51%) of STI kits were returned via post, which researchers said was lower than the local online service (65%).
Some 42% and 66% of people respectively reported worries about safety and privacy.
The initiative aims to overcome obstacles such as hassle of going to the doctor, stigma of visiting sexual health clinics and lack of awareness about testing options.
Accuracy
STI rates generally rose 24% in England the same year with gonorrhea cases increasing by 50% from previous year according to UK Health Security Agency data analysis by Terrence Higgins Trust
More than a million new cases of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) occur globally every day according to WHO
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it implies that vending machines are a great initiative for people who find current methods of testing embarrassing or time-consuming. However, this statement ignores the fact that many people may not be aware of these other options and therefore cannot make an informed decision about which method to use.
The article states that some 51% of STI kits were returned via post, which researchers said was lower than the local online service (65%). However, this comparison is misleading as it does not take into account factors such as cost and accessibility. The study also fails to provide any information on how many people who received a test kit through the post actually used it.
The article implies that vending machines are a great initiative for people who find current methods of testing embarrassing or time-consuming. However, this statement ignores the fact that many people may not be aware of these other options and therefore cannot make an informed decision about which method to use.
The article quotes Dr Syra Dhillon stating that vending machines are a great initiative for people who find current methods inaccessible. However, this statement is not supported by any evidence and may be biased.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by citing a study as evidence for the effectiveness of vending machines offering free STI kits. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing some people's embarrassment about getting tested at clinics or via GP. Additionally, there is a dichotomous depiction of the convenience and safety concerns associated with using these machines.
The study suggests that vending machines offering free STI kits could boost testing numbers
Some people find it embarrassing to get tested for an STI at a clinic
People really like the confidentiality, speed and convenience aspects of the machines.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article is DPA and they have a financial stake in vending machines as well as STI kits. They also report on topics related to confidentiality which could be compromised by using vending machines for testing.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of vending machines as they are promoting them in their article. The author also has a financial stake in the company that produces these vending machines.
