BIG Brother's steamy scenes are encouraging young people to "play Russian Roulette" with sex, a top health boss said today.
The attack came as figures show rates of of HIV and sexually-transmitted infections are rocketing across the region.
Macclesfield's Stuart Wilson, 20, and his girlfriend Michelle Bass, 23, hit the headlines after becoming the first couple to apparently have sex on the British version of Big Brother.
The north west director for public health, Professor John Ashton, said producers were "putting viewing figures before social responsibility".
During last week's Big Brother, Stuart, a former pupil of King's School in Macclesfield and a psychology student at Leeds University, and Michelle, from Newcastle, crept into a makeshift tent under a table, where it was widely believed they had sex.
But a spokesman for Big Brother said: "We do not know what they were doing under the table. It has been implied they were having sex, but we have not seen anything or broadcast anything which would prove what they did or that sex took place.
"Housemates are allowed to take condoms into the house and they can ask Big Brother if they want condoms. I don't know if Michelle or Stuart had any but Jason brought some into the house. They are both over 20, so they are both adults capable of making an informed decision."
Prof Ashton said: "The impression is given that two people, who know little or nothing about each other's history, are having sex under a table.
"No consideration is given to the risks. There's no mention of safe sex or condoms and no obvious signs producers did anything to stop it or to counsel the couple on the dangers. Not only is this a new low in British television history, but it sends out a signal that casual sex with a comparative stranger, with no regard to the risks, is okay.
"If Michelle should become pregnant or if either one of the couple should pick up a sexually-transmitted infection, then the producers are culpable, in my view.
"They have put viewing figures above social responsibility and they deserve to be held to account for it.
"Programme makers, whether for film or television, need to be more responsible about how they portray sex."
Prof Ashton said film makers and TV producers should ditch the "James Bond" image of sex on the screen and take a more responsible attitude.
He said if James Bond were a real person he would have almost certainly been HIV positive and was more at risk from careless sex than he was from arch enemy Blofeld.
He said: "We keep hammering home the safer sex message and warning young people that unprotected sex with a new partner is a lottery, with more losers than winners, yet on film and television people jump into bed together with no reference to condoms or any other form of protection - and there are no consequences. It's a nonsense.
Earlier this month the North West Health Protection Agency revealed 80 people a day in the region are contracting a sexually-transmitted infection. In Greater Manchester alone, 12,809 people needed treatment last year for infections including syphilis, gonorrhoea and chlamydia.
New national figures out today show an increase in sexually-transmitted infections across the country, with syphilis up from 2002-3 by 28 per cent, chlamydia up by nine per cent, and the numbers being diagnosed with an infection up by four per cent.
Is health chief John Ashton right to speak out?
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Prof. Ashton is right to point out the irresponsibility of such cavalier sexual behaviour, as well as the partial culpability of cynical programme makers. From day one, the impression is given to applicants, and indeed the selected housemates, that a willingness to perform live sex on TV will ensure ones 15 minutes of fame, or in this case, notoriety. Such stunts become an inevitability, and programme makers cannot walk away from this explotation of wannabe desperados.
Surely John Ashton is misreading the situation. If every couple waited the amount of time that Michelle and Stuart did the STI rates wouldn't be rocketing.
I believe that he is right to highlight the fact that Big brother is using a sexual experience between two people who have only met each other to get their viewer ratings high.
I believe that it sends out a message that sex is okay for two people who barely know each other. I wish that young people were taught by television that it is better to date for a while and get to know each other properly first before entering into a sexual relationship.
At least Stuart and Michelle seem to have been responsible if they used a condom to do whatever they did. That doesnt make it right though as they could have problems with their relationship once outside the house.
Why certainly the health chief should not speak out. The Brits have the NHS to take care of the STDs. No one should tell people not to have their sexual fun and games, regardless of the cost to society.
Of course the Docor was right in making his comments. In my oppinion he has an obligation as a health professional to make these comments.
On another note... Why are you Brits watching the same kind of stupid crap they watch in America? I thought you were more intelligent than us?
Young people should also be told that abstinence and faithfulness are the only sure ways to prevent sexually-transmitted infections.
If it is only "assumed" that they had sex under the table.... then why is it "assumed" that it was unprotected? Unless you see the Willy, you have no idea if it was covered or not.
It's about time someone spoke out. Obviously, these so called adults are behaving like irresponsible school kids and the media is egging them on.
As any BB addict will tell/bore you... Michelle and Stuart used a condom. Michelle even advised Stuart on how to get rid of it.
I hope this puts an end to the doctor's half-baked knee-jerk rehashed nonsense. Muppet.
The good prof can say whatever he wants. Is he right to say it? No. These are adults, making adult choices for themselves. If he expects the producers to prevent adults from adult decisions, well shame on him! We could easily assume they didn't have sex, as well as assume they had protected sex. This is a whole lot of hooey over nothing.
The better question would be: What is missing in the lives of so many that they have to watch this incessant drivel? The fact that this "show" is so popular underlines the fact that morality and a life of your own are things that are distant memories to so many.
If you have watched more than 3 minutes of this show, discussed it with friends, cared about its inmates, or cancelled other things just to watch it, then you do not have a life. Life is to lived, not just watched.
How funny that this story appears on the same page as a scantily-clad lady for a lingerie ad.
The problem is just as much one of the viewers as it is the producers...
I do indeed think Mr Ashton is right in speaking out. Casual sex has become so common and the increase in STD on the rise. Why do the producers feel it is so necessary to promote these type of shows that are aimed at young audiences?
Completely agree with those who pointed out two things: 1, why is it assumed that they had unprotected sex? 2, is it normal to watch this rubbish every evening? As for the instance as such... To change things, it is not enough to close the Big Brother. You will also need to stop showing all soap operas and editing all fashion magazines. And teach sexual education at schools. When I see how many teenagers have babies, I feel like the sexual revolution had never happened. How many people do actually know what the condom or the pills are?
Big Bother is a totally immorale programme, a heap of rubbish, encouraging younsters to act badly and without respect. The goverment should not allow such rubbish to be shown on telelvision, but then they are making money out of it. There is so much of it these days that no wonder health professionals and servicesproviders usch as the police are finding it difficult to control sexually transmitited diseases, proscuition, derpression, crime and so on. Isn't it about time people stopped being driven by sex and crime. surely there is more to life.