Comments on: CDC and Journal of the American Medical Association Confirms New HIV Estimates

By: John Howard

John Howard — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 01:24:57 +0000

thanks for those answers. Another thing I was wondering, does the CDC know if the percentage of “men who have sex with men” is increasing, or what that percentage is?

By: Jim Burroway

Jim Burroway — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:53:02 +0000

Here’s something else to answer your question. This is from the JAMA article:

The development of laboratory assays that differentiate recent vs longstanding HIV infections now makes it possible to directly measure HIV incidence.

In other words, when you get tested for HIV, the test itself can tell if you were recently infected or if you’ve been infected for several years.

By: Jim Burroway

Jim Burroway — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:24:53 +0000

I don't know how test methods play into this. I suspect the change has more to do with how they make their estimates, which I went into here last November. AIDS diagnoses is reportable to the CDC, but HIV+ test results are not necessarily reported. You can now get tested pretty much anywhere, not just in a clinical setting. You can even take a home HIV test. Also, the CDC is trying to get a handle on estimating the number of people who are HIV+ but who haven't been tested. All this makes an accurate count of everyone who is HIV+ impossible. Hence the estimates.

By: John Howard

John Howard — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:40:06 +0000

Sounds like they are making that up about better reporting accounting for the increase. Why aren’t there hard numbers to report, based on real patients getting positive HIV tests? Are they saying that lots of people got false negative tests back then? What is the basis to make such a claim?

By: Blondie Writes

Blondie Writes — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:45:42 +0000

Very informative article. But there are so many people that have HIV that are not gay and people want you to beleive that only gays have HIV.