Emerging face of HIV [PC spin alert]

Chicago Tribune (IL) ^ | March 28, 2004 | Dahleen Glanton

[Sweet Land]

[...] Deborah Grant and her boyfriend, Larry Frazier, both 45, represent an emerging face of HIV and AIDS in America. They are African-American, poor, heterosexual, and they live in the rural South.

In a striking parallel to the AIDS epidemic in Africa, HIV is sweeping through black communities in the South, where stigma, inadequate medical care and poverty hamper efforts to educate and prevent its spread.

[much later in the article ...]

Despite declines in HIV among men who have sex with men, such men still account for an estimated 42 percent of all new HIV infections, according to the CDC. It is a leading cause of infection in black men, along with intravenous drug use. [...] Of 735 newly infected men in North Carolina from 2000 to 2003, 11 percent were black male college students. The majority of them attributed the disease to having sex with men in a sexual network linked to campuses across the Southeast and in Washington. About 40 percent of them also had sex with women. [...]

[Sweet Land]

Ignore the spin; man-on-man sex and needle-sharing are still the culprits.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Of 735 newly infected men in North Carolina from 2000 to 2003, 11 percent were black male college students. The majority of them attributed the disease to having sex with men in a sexual network linked to campuses across the Southeast and in Washington. About 40 percent of them also had sex with women.

---

And the dog that isn't barking? Why aren't we hearing about the women who these men infected? Because there aren't any! It is too darn difficulat to transmit heterosexually (in the absence of third world genetial sores from other untreated STDs.)

HIV will never be a disease among healthy heterosexuals who don't stick inappropriate things in their bodies.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Deborah Grant and her boyfriend, Larry Frazier, both 45, represent an emerging face of HIV and AIDS in America. They are African-American, poor, heterosexual, and they live in the rural South.

---

Here's a little tidbit about the lady down in the article:
"Grant, a former heroin addict who was diagnosed with HIV in 1998..."

What is "emerging" about junkies getting AIDS?

[Atlas Sneezed]

Two years passed before a doctor suggested she take an HIV test. In the meantime, she said, she likely transmitted the virus to Frazier.

---

If this were true, it would be the first medically-verified case of F->M transmission via conventional sex in the US. But when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras. Odds are that a guy with a girlfriend who is a junkie also shares common pastimes with her.

[Atlas Sneezed]

>>For almost eight years, 28-year-old Lizzie Porter was one of them. She was diagnosed with HIV at age 17 but was in denial and refused to see a doctor. Porter, who changes her hair color from red to blue to fit her mood, said she contracted the virus through unprotected sex with a man in his 30s.

"Said" being the operative word. No drugs could have possibly been involved. After all admitting that would cause her to lose her "victim" status.

>>During the time she was not getting medical care, Porter said she married a childhood friend and believes she transmitted the virus to him. Her husband knew she was HIV-positive, she said, but he refused to use protection.

Does anyone really believe this? Again, this is medically unheard of for a healthy man to become infected by sex with a woman.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"We had unprotected sex because he acted like a normal man. You never would have thought he was messing around with men," said Thompson, 23, who was diagnosed with AIDS last year. "He knew he had it, but he didn't tell me. I found out later that he had given it to five other girls before he died in 2000."

---

If this is true, and considering medical research that shows it takes 500-1000 sex acts for a man to infect a woman (HIV being so difficult to transmit this way), then this bisexual man must have preferred dishing it out to women the way he dished and received with men.

[Atlas Sneezed]

I found out later that he had given it to five other girls before he died in 2000

---

The awful thing is that because it would stigmatize gays, college students do not hear the medical advice that would save lives like theirs: "Anal sex is dangerous. We exaggerated the risk of regular sex, but anal sex transmist AIDS very easily. At least use a condom."

[Skooz]

The AIDS advocacy groups have been pushing the "AIDS is also a hetero disease" cart for almost 20 years now. To their chagrin, it hasn't happened yet, but that doesn't keep them from spouting the same nonsense.

The fact is this: If you do not engage in homosexual sex or share needles, or have sex with those who do, you ain't gonna get AIDS. End of discussion.

[cyborg]

Wow they managed to lump in all the media's fav stereotypes in one article!

[Sweet Land]

Why aren't we hearing about the women who these men infected?

At least one is mentioned in the article.

It is too darn difficulat to transmit heterosexually

Half right; female-to-male transmission is quite rare.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Deborah Grant and her boyfriend, Larry Frazier, both 45, represent an emerging face of HIV and AIDS in America. They are African-American, poor, heterosexual, and they live in the rural South.

And emerging, and emerging, and emerging,...

[EdReform]

GRIDS Ping

[CJ Wolf]

Some of what you say true but some of it is false.

'It's difficult for a man to get it from a women.' -Pretty much true, but nonetheless I wouldn't encourage non-infected men to go at it with known infected women based on your say so, it's a risk not worth taking.

'If this is true, and considering medical research that shows it takes 500-1000 sex acts for a man to infect a woman (HIV being so difficult to transmit this way)'

This is false and dangerous to suppose so, just using your numbers '500-1000' would make it silly to even suggest. And it also sounds like you are suggesting that it's OK for a women to have unprotected sex with an infected man as long as it's not anal. The chance being way too low.

Unfortunately women are much more easily infected in a normal sexual manner and it only takes one time. However, the linkage to women getting it, pretty much starts with a bisexual man who is infected with HIV via same sex sex or via a man or herself who does intravenous drugs.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Why aren't we hearing about the women who these men infected?

At least one is mentioned in the article.

---

There was no mention that the college boys infected any women. Which case were you referring to?

[Ciexyz]

btt

[Atlas Sneezed]

>>This is false and dangerous to suppose so, just using your numbers '500-1000' would make it silly to even suggest.

Your argument is with the medical literature, not me. (Google "Padian AIDS" or visit http://www.fumento.com/suaids.html)

>>And it also sounds like you are suggesting that it's OK for a women to have unprotected sex with an infected man as long as it's not anal.

No I'm not, but anal is probably about 100 times more dangerous, which is the public health secret the public health people seem not to be willing to tell.

>>Unfortunately women are much more easily infected in a normal sexual manner

Yes, more easily than men, who are essentially impossible to infect if they are healthy. Which does not change the fact that it is still VERY difficult to infect a helathy woman via vaginal sex.

>>and it only takes one time.

Perhaps in the unusual (1 in 1000) case, but not on average. In the Padian study, they followed couples with an infected male partner and uninfected woman, and it turned out that only 20% of the women EVER became infected before the man croaked or became too pooped to party.

>>However, the linkage to women getting it, pretty much starts with a bisexual man who is infected with HIV via same sex sex or via a man or herself who does intravenous drugs.

If she never does IV drugs, and never has unprotected anal sex with someone who does IV drugs or who receives anal sex, she is probably pretty darn safe, unless she has repeated unprotected vaginal sex with an infected partner.

AIDS is about medical facts, not a metaphor for teaching responsible behavior. There are plenty of dangerous and irresponsible behaviors that are not AIDS-risky.

[Sweet Land]

There was no mention that the college boys infected any women.

You're right; the woman was infected by a different man.

[CJ Wolf]

"Your argument is with the medical literature, not me."

Then it is with medical literature that you quote. IMO, The whole medical community is suspect with this 'syndrome' in any rate, and you can find contradictory studies pretty much anywhere, depending on the funding source.

"If she never does IV drugs, and never has unprotected anal sex with someone who does IV drugs or who receives anal sex, she is probably pretty darn safe, unless she has repeated unprotected vaginal sex with an infected partner."

So bottom-line, (no pun intended) anal, vaginal sex or IV use with an infected partner is bad and may result in infection. Here lies the problem, anecdotal evidence suggests (as such in that article), that many women do not know the past history of their partners and the partners may lie as well, many do not know they are infected and those that do sometimes don't care that they may be infecting others or wear condoms thinking that they will be safe... All the above is sickening behavior, as in behavior that makes you sick.

[Atlas Sneezed]

>> Then it is with medical literature that you quote. IMO, The whole medical community is suspect with this 'syndrome' in any rate, and you can find contradictory studies pretty much anywhere, depending on the funding source.

But there are no literature that disagree with the M->F infection odds. The two studies out there found 500 and 1000 acts being the mean number to seroconversion.

>>So bottom-line, (no pun intended) anal, vaginal sex or IV use with an infected partner is bad and may result in infection. Here lies the problem, anecdotal evidence suggests (as such in that article), that many women do not know the past history of their partners and the partners may lie as well, many do not know they are infected and those that do sometimes don't care that they may be infecting others or wear condoms thinking that they will be safe... All the above is sickening behavior, as in behavior that makes you sick.

The difference being that there is a BIG (factor of hundreds) difference in the risk between receiving unprotected anal sex and receiving unprotected vaginal sex (both from an infected man). There is a similar risk ratio with condoms. Not telling women that anal sex is vastly worse is witholding vital public health info. I wouldn't be surprised if anal sex was responsible for the majority of (the relatively smalll number of) female heterosexual infections.

Everything is risky, but people need to be told what is by far the most risky (compare the 500-1000 acts for serconversion M->F, with 1-2 for anal sex.) Sadly, lots of young women who are bending the rules now and then don't know when absolutely not to bend the rules. Like the difference between shooting a pistol straight up (that bullet might come down and hit you) and playing Russian Roulette with 3 of 6 chabers loaded.

[jordan8]

In addition, some African-Americans have a profound distrust of the public health system, largely because of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, which has come to symbolize medical racism. From 1932 to 1972, the federal government supported experiments in which black men in rural Alabama were not given treatment for syphilis.

While I really doubt that the Tuskegee study has much effect on AIDS rates amongst blacks in the South, nevertheless the irresponsible harping on that study has undoubtably caused much death, here, in Africa and elsewhere. Here is an important essay, Tuskegee re-examined, that takes a cold look at that study.

Being gay in the South is totally taboo. You are mentally, physically and verbally abused," said Wayne Dicks, a health specialist who leads male support groups at HopeHealth. "There are a lot of `down low' brothers who live with a woman and go out at night and sleep with men. They don't consider themselves gay. They consider themselves straight.

PC taboos on asking questions about whether blacks have a greater propensity for bi-sexuality (perhaps aggravated by incarceration rates) or a biological vulnerability to HIV may contribute to the AIDS rate amongst them. AIDS has been higher among blacks for years but the establishment has been very quiet about broadcasting that fact lest they seem critical of a minority.