4 ms·
Maybe you're looking somewhere I'm not, but the 0.8% figure under the 'Other' Category would seem to support what I'm saying, since it excludes people knowing s
by jcnnghm 17y ago
Maybe you're looking somewhere I'm not, but the 0.8% figure under the 'Other' Category would seem to support what I'm saying, since it excludes people knowing sleeping with people that are known to have AIDS, Needle Drug users, and gay males.
- spamizbad 17y agoI really can't believe I'm having this argument in 2010. You stated that it was confined to Gays and IV drug users. It's not. The statistics show heterosexuals contracting it. Whether they get it because they're sleeping with an IV drug user, someone who is homosexual, or another heterosexual who is classified as "high risk" doesn't matter: they're straight and they have HIV, therefor it's not "contained" to gays and IV users.
- _delirium 17y agoI agree he phrased it too strongly, but you could accurately say that it's effectively confined to MSM, IV users, and those two groups' immediate sexual partners. That sort of analysis is pretty common in epidemiology, describing a particular outbreak as "confined to group A and immediate contacts of group A". For example, when looking at diseases associated with health-care workers, people in direct prolonged contact with them but who aren't themselves health-care workers, like family members, are often counted as basically honorary health-care workers (or at least treated as a group separate from the general public).