World AIDS Day

Despite the dramatic costs that the AIDS virus is still exacting, many people have the mistaken impression that the epidemic has been virtually conquered in the US and is now just a scourge of poor nations abroad.

Today -- the 20th anniversary of the first World AIDS Day -- is a good time to check the numbers, usefully compiled by the Think Progress blog.

AIDS is the number one killer for black women between the ages of 25 and 34.

Black women are now almost 15 times as likely to be infected with HIV and 23 times more likely to be diagnosed with AIDS as white women.

The HIV rate in Washington, D.C., our nation's capital, is 1 in 20--the same as the overall rate in sub-Saharan Africa.

A total of 56,300 people in the United States were newly infected with HIV in 2006, a number 40 percent higher than previously estimated.

A national AIDS strategy is clearly a priority. A good plan would start with the immediate passing of the Early Treatment for HIV/AIDS Act and the reauthorization the Ryan White Care Act.

Beyond lobbying your reps for passage of these acts, the World AIDS Day website offers numerous good ways to help in the fight against the AIDS pandemic. Join a campaign. Attend an event. Send a letter. Raise money. Volunteer your time. If you're in school, see what you can do on your campus.

Comments (18)

1. lvliberty-Homosexuals or IV drug users have zero chance of getting AIDs if they are monogamous or do not share needles.Getting AIDs from a legal prostitute is virtually unknown.Homosexuality,IV drug use,and prostitution have nothing to do with AIDs .Over two thirds of new cases are heterosexuals.

   Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 1:49pm

2. Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 1:49pm

   Shhhh! Don't bring up facts like that, you'll make him cry!

   Posted by TexasFlood at 12/01/2008 @ 1:59pm

3. Heterosexual monogamous couples who do not use drugs through needles and have no previous sexual partners have a zero percent chance of contracting AIDS

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/01/2008 @ 1:37pm

   Not quite zero. The little boy, Rodney White or something, got AIDS through a blood transfusion.

   Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 2:07pm

4. Homosexuals or IV drug users have zero chance of getting AIDs if they are monogamous or do not share needles.

   Homosexuality,IV drug use,and prostitution have nothing to do with AIDs.

   Over two thirds of new cases are heterosexuals.

   Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 1:49pm

   Also not true. Aurther Ashe contracted the AIDS virus through a transfusion.

   Also not true. Homosexuality, IV drug use and prositition are the primary causes of infection (in developed countries). With condom use, that risk drops dramatically, nonetheless, not enough people use condoms to eliminate the spread of AIDS or these methods of infection from the top three.

   Barely true and grossly misleading. I saw a statistic a number of years ago. 90% of new AIDS infections occur in sub-sahara Africa. These infections occur in cultures that are decidedly not monogamous.

   Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 2:14pm

5. darin-Getting AIDs from transfusions rarely happens anymore.Homosexuality,IV drug use,and prostitution can't cause AIDs,although one can get it that way,but it is just as easy to get it from heterosexual sex and heterosexual sex is the most common way to get AIDs..Two monogamous gays will not get AIDs.Nor will an IV drug user who does not share needles.Getting AIDs from a legal prostitute is virtually unknown since they are checked for it and tend to protect themselves from it and tend to not be IV drug users..

   Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 2:22pm

6. Peter, why are you surprised with the number of new HIV infections? It should be of no surprise at all. Probably one reasons at-risk individuals are getting infected at an alarming rate is because of false signals being sent out by medical/scientific community.

   When the dynamic of the disease was down-graded from "a virtual death sentence" to "a treatable chronic disease", people stopped listening.

   Posted by ACook at 12/01/2008 @ 2:23pm

7. lvliberty-In other words,it's numbers of partners and not sexual orientation that matters.Of course,there are cases where neither had much experience,but got AIDs anyway.In Nevada and Holland AIDs is quite rare amongst legal prostitutes because few are IV drug users and condoms are required.The answer is monogamy for all and do not share needles,but that will never happen so other solutions must be sought..

   Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 2:32pm

8. lvliberty-Lesbians have the lowest rates of AIDs amongst sexually active people so homosexuality has nothing to do with AIDs.In America gay men are slightly more likely to get AIDs,but heterosexuals are the fastest growing group here and the largest group world wide.

   Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 2:49pm

9. See, the lesbian thing or the monogamous heterosexual men thing or even the use condoms every time thing...

   is the real stumper for our friends on the Right who want to keep AIDS/HIV only to gay/bi men and drug users.

   And I think we all know WHY they want to keep it to only those groups. It fits nicely with their "moral code" which sees, as Rev. Falwell et al said so long ago, that AIDS is a "punishment from God" for sinful behavior.

   Problem is...God doesn't seem to be punishing the homosexual WOMEN that much....odd?!!??!?? And the Big Guy seemed to have forgotten that he endowed Nature with a substance known as "latex" which allows the rest, with some smarts, to avoid His clever scheme for smiting the Sodomites.

   Oh, and LVLIB on the other thread, slipped up, and posted another CDC figure...that showed that HETEROSEXUAL sex (high risk of course, which means no condoms) was nearly EQUAL to the gay/bi- infection spikes.

   Posted by Mask at 12/01/2008 @ 3:40pm

10. lvliberty-When I look through past CDC studies I'm seeing that gay men and IV drug users have always had those high rates,but that it's heterosexuals with the growing rate,particularly worldwide..

    Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 4:31pm

11. lvliberty-I'm not finding anything that shows that gay monogamous men are at risk which means that human behavior, and not being a gay male, is what gets one AIDs.It appears from the studies that engaging in certain high risk sexual behaviors makes both gay males and straights much more likely to get AIDs with gay males only slightly more likely to get AIDs than straights,as your CDC post on the other board shows.Thanks Mask.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 4:43pm

12. Despite the absence of confirmed cases of female-to-female transmission of HIV, the findings do not negate the possibility.---Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/01/2008 @ 3:41pm

    See? LVLIB still holding out hope that the lesbian Sodomites will get smote too!

    LOL

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2008 @ 4:52pm

13. In other words,it's numbers of partners and not sexual orientation that matters.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 2:32pm

    This statement is not entirely correct, however, it is not necessarily a lie, either.

    The type of sex matters. Anal intercourse is far more likely to result in tears and lisions that increase the risk of transmission when compared to vaginal intercourse.

    While some heterosexuals engage in anal intercouse, I would not characterized the practice as common. However, transmission is only possible if one the people engaging in sex is infected and is transmitting bodily fluids.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 4:53pm

14. Finally, monogomous, heterosexual couples are not risk free, either. The first person I knew who was HIV positive, was a woman I worked with who THOUGHT she was in a monogomous, heterosexual relationship.

    Her boyfriend cheated.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 4:56pm

15. Problem is...God doesn't seem to be punishing the homosexual WOMEN that much....odd?!!??!??

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2008 @ 3:40pm

    Having Rosie O'Donell as your public face is punishment enough.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 4:59pm

16. In America gay men are slightly more likely to get AIDs,but heterosexuals are the fastest growing group here and the largest group world wide.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 12/01/2008 @ 2:49pm

    What is you definition of "slightly"?

    30,000 infections out of a population of 3 million is a rate of 1% (Gays)

    30,000 infections out of a population of 300 million is a rate of .01% (Heterosexuals)

    Does a two order of magnitude increase in risk constitute "slight"?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 5:04pm

17. is the real stumper for our friends on the Right who want to keep AIDS/HIV only to gay/bi men and drug users.

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2008 @ 3:40pm

    This is a disingenous caricature.

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 5:07pm

18. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 12/01/2008 @ 5:07pm

    Re-read LVLIB's original post on the "Obama AIDS" thread, Darin.

    He "oddly" forgets to mention straight sex between non-married couples. He did after I pointed it out, but not at the time.

    Why? Because he WANTS AIDS to be a "punishment from God" for homosexuality and drug use....just as his mentors Falwell and Robertson preached.

    Problem is, a monogamous GAY couple can avoid said punishment, and even promiscious lesbians seem to avoid it.

    So maybe God likes gay marriage....and "hot girl-on-girl action"???

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2008 @ 8:05pm