*sigh*

Feb. 12th, 2003 01:19 pm
geminigirl: (Default)
[personal profile] geminigirl
HIV/AIDS up in US for the first time in a decade.

I guess I've got a lot more work to do.

Date: 2003-02-12 03:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tigerfemme.livejournal.com
*said aloud, sarcastically* Lovely. Lovely lovely lovely. *sigh*

I think the younger gay men especially, are thinking that HIV/AIDS is just something you take a pill for, you know? Does that make any sense? The flip-side of successful "cocktail" drug treatment.

Keep the faith, hon. Maybe you'll like my mantra as a social worker: If you reach one person a month - even in six months or in a year - you've changed a life. In your case, you've not only changed a life, you've saved a life! Please don't forget that! *hugs*

Date: 2003-02-23 09:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grendelgongon.livejournal.com
It's funny--I look at this article and see, as much as depressing news, an incomplete picture. In my hat as a science writer, I wish people would provide error rates. An 8% increase with 9% error is no increase at all, for instance. And considering differing demographics in different states, the states reporting (and their shifting demographic makeup) may have made a difference, since state-to-state sample makeup variation is likely to be considerable. And reporting methodologies have improved in the last few years, which makes a difference too. Not to mention that as the surviving base of people living with HIV increases, you *expect* a certain amount of increase in transmission (because there is likely to be a correlation between that population and number of undiagnosed individuals with HIV, if for no other reason.)

So, belatedly, don't be in too much of a hurry to be depressed. Not saying that complacency is a good thing or doesn't exist, but without a *lot* more information than the article presented, the numbers are pretty meaningless. They're probably meaningfully discussed in the CDC report (the CDC does good work on this sort of thing, in general) but who knows what they mean from the article.

Irritating--the poor standards of reporting that don't describe error or much about method or provide a means of getting to the sources.

Profile

geminigirl: (Default)
geminigirl

May 2017

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
141516171819 20
21222324252627
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 4th, 2026 05:08 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios