[ajross]

> careless about other types of STIs.

Maybe true, though sounds awfully spun. I think a better read is that the early years of the AIDS outbreak were ones notable for particular caution in sexual behavior, not the baseline you want to look at.

> Given that our antibiotics are losing their ability to treat many common STIs

Kinda true, though you seem to be evoking the spectre of a multi-drug-resistant syphilis that AFAIK doesn't exist. It also sorta misses the point that the overwhelming majority of STDs are viral.

> an HIV cure without some advancement in antibiotics will be swapping one epidemic for a series of others

Wat? This doesn't follow. At all. Are you one of those people who opposes the HPV vaccine too because it will lead to more sex?