Skip to comments.AIDS Infection Rate in U.S. Higher Than Previously Estimated
Posted on 08/02/2008 12:22:48 PM PDT by neverdem
Updated federal estimates of the annual number of new HIV infections in the United States, released today, reveal that while the AIDS epidemic here is worse than previously thought, prevention efforts appear to be having some effect.
Even though the number of Americans living with HIV has risen by more than a quarter million people since 1998 -- largely the result of life-extending antiretroviral drugs -- the number of new cases each year has declined slightly over that period. That suggests that a person's likelihood of transmitting the virus to someone else is substantially lower now than it was a decade ago.
The new, if indirect, evidence that prevention programs are paying off was one of the few encouraging findings in an update on the American AIDS epidemic released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the eve of the 17th International AIDS Conference, in Mexico City.
"Over 95 percent of people living with HIV are not transmitting to someone else in a given year," said David R. Holtgrave, an expert on AIDS prevention at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University. "What that says is the transmission rate has been kept very low by prevention efforts."
Those include targeting public health messages to high-risk groups, promoting widespread AIDS testing, and getting quick medical care for newly diagnosed cases, which in most cases lowers the person's infectiousness.
The CDC spends about...
The epidemic in the black community is distinctly different from the national epidemic.
From 2001 to 2005, 38 percent of the new diagnoses in African Americans were in women, and 46 percent of new infections overall were from heterosexual contact. Among whites during the same period, 16 percent of new infections were in women, and 16 percent were from heterosexual transmission...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I couldn't find anything new at JAMA. They need to find out what's happening with blacks. Is it immunological, or is it more "down low" behavior than they are willing to admit?
HIV and AIDS is only about behavior.
Minorities hit hardest looks to be true in this case.
If you would like to be added to the RETHINKING AIDS PING LIST drop me a FReepmail.
AIDS is the biggest public health scam in medical history. Like global warming, AIDS is being used to push a powerful leftist political agenda. For over two decades the Public Health Establishment has used your tax dollars and the full power of the federal government to wage a massive propaganda (and intimidation) campaign designed to (A) dupe the American public into believing that HIV is the cause of AIDS (B) scare the public into thinking "we are all at risk" (C) coverup the extreme toxicity of AIDS chemotherapy drugs (which are not just used on "fast-track" gays and junkies, but also given to pregnant mothers, infants, and children) (D) use this fear to push a leftist social agenda that includes socialized medicine, and the promotion of homosexuality and explicit sex "education" to tender-aged school children (E) use their "public health mandate" to bypass the authority of parents and local school boards who object to their social engineering schemes (F) create a massive federal bureaucracy encouraging the use of addictive drugs, to include prescription heroine (G) use threats and intimidation to silence dissenting scientists and to keep the press from covering the debate (H) and finally, to use AIDS as a model to push similar social agendas with respect to future epidemics.
Every single point above can be documented on my profile page.
By that token, so are most diseases. You won't get tetanus if you avoid deep skin punctures, and you probably won't get the common cold if you avoid crowds and wash your hands frequently.
If HIV isn’t the cause of AIDS, then what is?
By correlation, does this mean there are more queers that reported?
How about an explanation in non-Layman’s terms?
If HIV is not the source of AIDS, then what is?
Because there are more homosexuals, bi-sexuals, and metrosexuals than previously estimated.
Looks like they are targeting the gay and intravenouses drug user communities,and yet the infections are higher,maybe those groups don't want to change their behavior.
“By that token, so are most diseases. You won’t get tetanus if you avoid deep skin punctures, and you probably won’t get the common cold if you avoid crowds and wash your hands frequently”
Maybe she should have said HIV and AIDS is about unnatural, abnormal, immoral, filthy, disease riddled behavior.
My son had to get stitches the other day for a skateboarding accident where sharp metal went through his calf. He’s out skateboarding right now with stitches in his leg. Tetanus shots up to date. Normal, natural childhood behavior.
How about an explanation in non-Laymans terms?...If HIV is not the source of AIDS, then what is?
I’m glad you asked. Prof. Peter Duesberg’s most recent paper on AIDS summarizes the evidence against the HIV/AIDS hypothesis, and points to the evidence the suggests the real cause(s) of AIDS.
It can't be.
I LOL’d when I first saw that too. LOLing again...GGG
You're most likely to get HIV through certain behaviors, but you can also get it from monogamous heterosexual sex, from blood transfusions, organ transplants, etc. I don't think it does anybody any good to pretend that everyone with HIV/AIDS has engaged in sodomy or drug use.
No, it is because the CDC is gearing up for the next big AIDS extravaganza and needs some alarmist news to make a headline and remind congressmen to vote them more funds. The tipoff is the false attribution of 16% to heterosexual activity. What they mean is 16% among heterosexual IV drug abusers.
That’s good answer. Wallow in filth and body fluids everyday, drink contaminated water and eat rotten food. It’s just six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Needle exchange is one thing. Show me prescription heroin.
Correct. They and other STDs are diseases of "CHOICE", you make the wrong choices and ...............
Duesberg's claims have been rejected by the scientific community and are not supported by data.
HIV as a cause of AIDS meets Koch's postulates.
“I don’t think it does anybody any good to pretend that everyone with HIV/AIDS has engaged in sodomy or drug use.”
No, but those who have it and didn’t engage in one of those two behaviors were infected because of those who have.
I’m a nurse that has been stuck with a dirty needle twice so I can appreciate the tragedy of being infected in that way. Thank God, neither of the male patients had HIV because if one of them had, I might not be here right now, my last child wouldn’t have been born, my two sons wouldn’t have a mother, and my husband would be raising them alone. Unless he remarried of course but I don’t think he would. Point is, a lot of people have died and terrible pain and tragedy has been inflicted upon innocent people and family because of the destructive and selfish behavior of others.
Excerpt from THE HIDDEN AGENDA BEHIND HIV:
Other public health officials have been even more forthright. As an officer of the Centers for Disease Control, Donald Francis had in 1984 drafted the CDCs proposed AIDS strategy. In his 1992 retirement speech at the agencys Atlanta, Georgia headquarters, Francis voiced the ambitions held by many of his fellow officers in describing the opportunity that the HIV epidemic provides for public health (JAMA, 9-16-92). He stated in no uncertain terms the radical nature of the plan:
The cloistered caution of the past needs to be discarded. The climate and culture must be open ones where old ideas are challenged. Those who desire the status quo should seek employment elsewhere. The American HIV prevention program should be the place where the best and the brightest come, where the action is, where history is being made. This is the epidemic of the century, and every qualified person should want to have a piece of the action.
The action described by Francis was a set of programs that would, as he fully recognized, need strong political protection from angry taxpayers and voters. For example, he bitterly attacked public opposition to condom distribution programs, and called for powerful legal measures to bypass parental discretion. The ongoing controversies involving abstincence and condoms typify the morass into which schools can fall, Francis complained. If, in the opinion of those far more expert than I, schools cannot be expected to provide such programs, then health departments should take over, using as a justification their mandate to protect the publics health.
Francis also included proposals for dealing with the AIDS risk of intravenous drug use including a call for prescription of addicting drugs with Federal government sponsorship. Even libertarians who advocate legalizing drugs would balk at such notions, which would ultimately create a massive bureaucracy encouraging drug use. Following a more enlightened model for drug treatment, including prescribing heroin, would have dramatic effects on HIV and could eliminate many of the dangerous illegal activites surrounding drugs, he insisted, knowing that only fear of the AIDS epidemic might make such proposals tolerable to the public. Ignoring the toxic, and possibly AIDS-inducing, effects of drugs, Francis emphasized that In addition to treatment, safe injection [!] must be stressed both for those in treatment programs and those out of treatment. The provision of sterile injection equipment for drug users should be the standard of public health practice in the United States.
Most chillingly of all, Francis saw the possibilities in harnessing other epidemics to advance similar agendas. As he put it, if we establish new mechanisms to handle the HIV epidemic, [these] can serve as models for other diseases.
Unbelievable, but LOL.
That is excellent work GGG, I’ve read your page. We have literally smothered this issue in $$ and to what avail??
Yes, I have read all those (and many, many more). Rethinking AIDS scientists have shredded their arguments long ago, and continue to do so now. You are correct to point out they are in the minority, but the movement to challenge the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is growing all the time, both in the scientific and medical communities, and in the general public. And besides, science is not decided by majority opinion. Indeed, just think the state science would be in if it was decided by majority vote!
Good science is decided by meeting certain tests. Koch’s is an excellent example of clearly identifying a pathogen.
I happen to agree with a good deal of what you have written, but not on the source angle. HIV is well-defined, and repeatable as causation. Recreational drugs as a source of an autoimmune disorder is just not supported by the data.
That’s a proposal from 1992 for prescription heroin by an official since retired. It was never enacted. Get real. HIV & AIDS is real. Global warming from the sun has stopped.
Thanks. It's nice to get a little encouragement here and there. I have been steadily adding new people to my Rethinking AIDS ping list, and yet I haven't heard a peep from almost anybody. Perhaps they are still in the learning phase. As for smothering this issue with $$$, it's worse than to no avail...if you take the time to understand AIDS Rethinker scientists and medical doctors, they maintain all that $$$ is actually maiming and killing people via the chemotherapy drugs they are using to treat so-called AIDS patients. Very sad. Needless to say, you can't keep the truth bottled up forever. Someday, in the not to distant future, there will be a reckoning. And the longer it takes, the bigger that reckoning will be.
All the best—GGG
Gangsta behavior/prison/gansta behavior
==Thats a proposal from 1992 for prescription heroin by an official since retired. It was never enacted. Get real. HIV & AIDS is real. Global warming from the sun has stopped.
I said the AIDS/public health establishment has been “pushing” for these measures, not that they have enacted all of them. Big difference. As for getting real...HIV is real (but harmless). The diseases associated with AIDS are real diseases, but they are not caused by HIV. As for Global Warming, I couldn’t agree more.
Just after our asinine government committed another $48bils to “fight” AIDS in Africa.
I guess the domestic gay lobby wants to get a bigger chunk of the trough.
The AIDS scam has been going on since the early and mid 80s. Homosexuals and their dishonest apologists working to make the public believe that anyone could contract AIDS....homosexuality was not a factor which truly increased risk. Naturally the point was to convince the American people that vast amounts of money had to be spent to find a cure, for everyone was at risk! The wealth of the homosexual community translates itself into political pull and facts go out the window. SOP.
I used to use MEDLINE when it was updated monthly by new CD-ROMs. Then I could retrieve a citation by entering its unique identifier with an entry like UI: 3299089 into the query box. When I try PMID: 3299089 at PubMed, I get nada. Do you know what I'm doing wrong?
Somehow I missed your reply. The story is absolutely correct, and the message has been repeated by AIDS Rethinker scientists and medical doctors for decades now. But nobody in the AIDS establishment has been willing to listen. There are a few scientific papers that are belatedly recognizing that poverty and malnutrition are one of the chief causes of “AIDS” in Africa. The fact that they were even allowed to be published at all suggests that the AIDS establishment is finally on the threshold of recognizing the obvious.
No I don’t, I just copied the reference. I just now typed Medline PMID: 3299089 into google and it took me right to a site. Try it.
Have you bothered to read what AIDS Rethinker scientists have dug up on AZT? The paper you cited (and many others of a similar nature) has been refuted dozens of times.
All one needs to read is Duesberg's "paper" in an Indian Medical Journal:
By the end he is not discussing science but rather crying about peer review and whining about an unfair system trying to censor his 'research'. It's more conspiracy theory ramblings than good science. To add to that, the people privately funding him are a bunch of Paulbots, listed at the end of his diatribe, and one wouldn't be surprised if they thought 9/11 was an inside job too.
HIV is real, AIDS is real, and they are connected. They emerged from the same hellhole that has graced us with Ebola, Marburg, monkeypox and heaven knows what else nature can brew up with man and monkeys living in proximity.
I think that may explain part of it, but I haven't seen citations supporting it with hard data. I wonder if it has to with chemokine(sp?) coreceptors ccr5 or cxcr4.
I entered (ccr5 or cxcr4) and bubonic plague into PubMed's query box. That was one of 16 hits involving CCR5.
==HIV is real, AIDS is real, and they are connected. They emerged from the same hellhole that has graced us with Ebola, Marburg, monkeypox and heaven knows what else nature can brew up with man and monkeys living in proximity.
Can you be more specific. Are you saying that AIDS was originally spread by monkeys?
PS c-y-c, it would be nice if you could simply make a point, rather than issuing (badly formatted) quote bombs. Make SPECIFIC arguments, cite your sources, and I will be glad to engage.
If HIV is completely harmless/does not cause AIDS, you might as well be talking about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
I keep hearing that from you but what I read are long winded rants against this or that but nothing of value. On the other tread I left much of what I posted here but since you’re convinced that HIV has nothing to with AIDS the only possible explanation for all the studies contrary to your beliefs is a conspiracy.
So which one of those “dozens of times” studies would like me to read?
I am stating (and have NIAID’s link above) that proves by every modern scientific test that HIV is causative of AIDS.
Genomes were identified as early as 1959 in plasma samples taken from a man in the Congo. HIV is highly likely to have been a derivative of SIV. Zoonosis is not uncommon when you have a bunch of people hunting and eating monkeys.
LOL! Thanks for the feedback.
If you sit down, keep your mouth shut and don’t stick things in your body that don’t belong there, chances are good that you won’t contact HIV/AIDS.