ok maybe i should've said not all STI's were diseases then
ok maybe i should've said not all STI's were diseases thenit must've been before they knew some of em weren't diseases
calling them STIs is a matter of choice and has no actual purpose
I can sometimes tell if research is good or not, and this def isn't :s
THEN WHY DO pEOPLE DO ITIM SO CONFUSED
STD used to be the term that was used, but it has fallen out of favour with many because it is not accurate. Technically, a disease has symptoms. And many "STD's" are asymptomatic and have no symptoms. So, technically, they are infections. A person can be infected with something and show no symptoms. So, STIs is much more accurate and recognizes the troubling asymptomatic infections that often occur.
there's your reason for using STI
yay all the gay research is gone
oh, okay thenbut in normal usage there still isn't a reason you can't use either term, literally everyone will understand, and in fact you'd have to specifically make note if you meant only diseases with symptoms
in turn if you wanted to be specific you'd have to make note its an infection because the STD has no symptoms
uh, that applies to both terms
NoI know if someone is gayunless they are bi