Skip to comments.CDC: Blacks, gays at high risk for new HIV infections
Posted on 09/12/2008 2:17:37 PM PDT by fightinJAG
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Young black gay men, black women and white gay men in their 30s and 40s are much more likely to be newly infected with HIV than other groups in the United States, according to a new analysis from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The analysis -- based on figures showing that the HIV infection rate for 2006 is much worse than previously thought -- looks at the number of new HIV infections and who gets them. The study appears in this week's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
It shows 53 percent of the estimated 56,000 cases of new HIV infection in 2006 were among gay and bisexual men, and 46 percent of the infections occurred among blacks. Within the gay and bisexual group, young black men (13 to 29 years old ) were roughly twice as likely to get infected as young white and young Hispanic men. And among women, black women were almost 15 times more likely to get HIV than white women and almost four times more likely than Hispanic women.
These new figures -- highlighting which age, gender and racial groups are at higher risk -- are based on data released by the CDC in August. Those numbers showed that new HIV infections for 2006 were 40 percent higher than the CDC had previously estimated.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
And in more breaking news.
Scientists have discovered that bears really do sh*t in the woods.
It’s funny how this is treated versus, say, tobacco use.
This data is several weeks old. I’m on the mailing list for it, and noted the patterns at the time. Why is CNN pushing this today? Did they get a memo from the Messiah saying these are this weekend’s talking points?
I believe as I have heard other scientists report that the reason for alot of blacks and other races being so succeptible to the actual AIDS is due to a genetic immunity from the Black Death in Europe.
They are now thinking that the Black Death was not the bubonic plague because the bubonic plague is a bacteria carried by rats and Iceland was hit with this plague where there were no rats or mice. So they believe the Black Death was viral in nature and a variation of the HIV virus, but more virulent.
This would make sense why there are so many cases of full blown AIDS in Africa and why they seem to die so much quicker.
“highlighting which age, gender and racial groups are at higher risk”
I thought it was certain BEHAVIORS that increased the risk of contracting HIV. Wouldn’t all heterosexual, monogamous, non-intervenous drug users be in the same demographic, regardless of ethnicity?
Great name for modern rock/punk band: The New HIV Infections.
If you form a band with this name, please credit library user. :O)
“Why is CNN pushing this (AIDS infection) today?
Maybe the media is planning to point out that with Candidate Palin’s abstainance only stance, and her own daughter’s pregnancy, and now this; it seems that the emphasis on abstainance only education may not be working very well.
Why is the HIV virus so racist and anti-gay rights?
I wondered that as well. I think the plan may be that the headline alone will induce certain people to go into rages at the supposed conspiracies against them.
The practical reason is that there is a group of people that engages in certain behaviors mostly with other people in that group.
Not all demographic groups are characterized to the same extent by “heterosexual, monogamous, non-intervenuous drug users.”
For whatever reason.
And I’m amazed that every time these statistics are reported, some loon still is quoted as saying there is an epidemic and it is out of control and everyone is still at risk.
Rather than embarass these two categories, wouldn’t it be better to headline this “DEMOCRATS AT HIGHER RISK FOR NEW HIV INFECTIONS.”
Wonder how many hudreds of millions of tax payer dollars they wasted figuring that out??
Like it was some big universal secret......
Another ‘I am a victim’ story. I get so sick of this. Just move to the paridise ANWAR and I guarantee your risk will be zero
...that we all need to do more...will end only when all of us...and then collectively commit....
Women, minorities, children, and gays hardest hit.
Again and again, as my doctors always tell me:
“Wear condoms, stick to one partner, don’t cheat, make sure your partner isn’t the cheating type and don’t do drugs.”
Chances are, if you do all of those, you will be a VERY low risk for HIV, black, white, Asian; gay or straight.
“Women, minorities, children, and gays hardest hit.”
The pro-pedophilia liberals deny that there are such things as “children”. Only delightful potential sex partners. That is why the author refers to thirteen year olds as “Men” in the article. With a little practice you can learn to spot these types right off.
I will guarantee that Andrea Kane finds the child lesbian seduction scene in “The Vagina Monologues” to be “Empowering”.
marked difference in age at the time of infection in the different racial groups. "They include the difficulty of consistently maintaining safer behaviors for many years or even decades, as well as homophobia, substance abuse and higher HIV prevalence within this group."
Can anyone explain that 2nd sentence? How does homophobia caure a marked increase in the infection rate?
Here's a tip... avoid anal or oral sex without a condom.
“Young black gay men, black women and white gay men in their 30s and 40s are much more likely to be newly infected with HIV than other groups in the United States, according to a new analysis from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”
This is a good example of how MERE statistics tell lies and at the same time actually demean the demographic categories they “report” on.
Because, for every single one of the demographic groups reported, the full and complete set of facts, must go to causation and not mere correlation and it would have to say:
If (1) someone is a (a)”Young black gay” man, (b)a “black woman” or (c)a “white gay man in their 30s and 40s” AND (2) “(a).................and/or (b) ....................... and/or (c)...............” [add your own behavioral ondition(s)] THEN they are “much more likely to be newly infected with HIV than” others who are someone who is either NOT (1) and/or does not (2).
Particularly, to simply say that “young black women” in general are more likely to get HIV ignores a whole raft of social circumstances, among “young black women”, that would leave a “young black woman” OUT of a high risk for HIV.
Ignoring behavior - statistics without behavioral categories - prevents truths, relative to actual cause and affect, from being told.
Maybe throwing money at this high risk, disenfranchised group will help.
What a bizarre logic twist that takes. Thanks for the explanation.