4 ms·

If you randomly select an HIV positive person from a Western country and know no other facts about them, it is correct to update your belief towards thinking th

by wycs 8y ago

If you randomly select an HIV positive person from a Western country and know no other facts about them, it is correct to update your belief towards thinking they are either homosexual or a user of IV drugs. If their gender is revealed male this is especially true. Obviously you cannot update this strongly if you are selecting from the global population but you would still update in that direction. Making these priors explicit is extremely taboo.

jacquesm 8y ago
You are dangerously wrong. No, it is not true that > 50% of the HIV positive people in Western countries are either gay or use drugs intravenously. It is that sort of stupid thinking that contributes to HIV spreading the way it does, after all: you are not a drug user and you are not gay, and neither is your partner, so what could possibly happen.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wycs 8y ago
  It’s possible I am wrong, but everything I am Googling seems to say that more than 50% of new HIV transmissions are among gay men alone. Perhaps this is changing, as I would not be surprised if extremely unsafe sexual practices are becoming more common among heterosexuals - and even a small effect here would have outsized impact given the relative proportions. I would be happy to adjust my prior on this if you have some accurate demographic information you would like to link to.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    It actually has changed, in the West the balance has shifted twice now, but globally (esp. Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America) things are still as I described. So thank you for causing me to update my prior.
  - boomboomsubban 8y ago
    It's possible that you're both correct. All those stats you link actually say around 50% of new transmissions are a result of male-on-male sex, which is later changed to "gays and bisexuals" in the reports. Those terms aren't exactly interchangeable, with some of the riskiest MSM groups may not consider themselves gay, such as sex workers, rape victims, and inmates.
- pwned1 8y ago
  https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/index.html Canada -> 53% of new HIV infections are MSM http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology-hiv-canada http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology... Australia - > 68% of new HIV infections are MSM http://www.hivmediaguide.org.au/hiv-in-australia/hiv-statistics-australia/ http://www.hivmediaguide.org.au/hiv-in-australia/hiv-statist... UK -> 54% of new HIV infections are MSM http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology-hiv-canada http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology...
  - wycs 8y ago
    Yes. This matches what I found. Jacquesm writes with such assurance and from such a high ground. It will be interesting to see if he replies.
    - jacquesm 8y ago
      See above. I do have to eat every now and then :)
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    It appears my facts on gay HIV are off but on drug users they are on (for the west). Globally the situation is much different and about the same number of men as women have HIV and drugs do not appear to be a big factor in to the equation. It is interesting how the data has changed over the years, for a long time gay men were not the largest group but maybe with the increased effectiveness of anti-virals combined with decreased mortality the balance has shifted substantially once again. In the beginning of the AIDS epidemic it was basically a disease afflicting predominantly gay people and only rarely heterosexuals. The two groups being somewhat socially isolated was an important factor in this. Then the balance shifted as more and more heterosexual people got infected and was made worse by people thinking that HIV would pass them by because they were not gay. So now we have come full circle. Still, 32% (at best) are pretty lousy odds so better be very careful.
- influx 8y ago
  Source? For new USA infections in 2015 it was 77% drug users and gay and bisexual men. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- kjeetgill 8y ago
  I don't want to argue the statistics, you probably know them better than I do. At least historically in the US AIDS: > found its way to the United States as early as 1960, but was first noticed after doctors discovered clusters of Kaposi's sarcoma and pneumocystis pneumonia in young gay men in Los Angeles, New York City, and San Francisco in 1981. Please don't equate being a little under-informed or less up to date with stupid thinking. EDIT: Ah, I think I mis understood your post. Your example at the end was of poor thinking but I don't the think the parent you had replied to was making that mistake either.
- refurb 8y ago
  That's not what the CDC says. 77% of all new infections are either homosexual men (68%) or IV drug abusers (9%).[1] [1]https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html

by wycs 8y ago

jacquesm 8y ago

You are dangerously wrong. No, it is not true that > 50% of the HIV positive people in Western countries are either gay or use drugs intravenously. It is that sort of stupid thinking that contributes to HIV spreading the way it does, after all: you are not a drug user and you are not gay, and neither is your partner, so what could possibly happen.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wycs 8y ago
It’s possible I am wrong, but everything I am Googling seems to say that more than 50% of new HIV transmissions are among gay men alone. Perhaps this is changing, as I would not be surprised if extremely unsafe sexual practices are becoming more common among heterosexuals - and even a small effect here would have outsized impact given the relative proportions. I would be happy to adjust my prior on this if you have some accurate demographic information you would like to link to.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  It actually has changed, in the West the balance has shifted twice now, but globally (esp. Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America) things are still as I described. So thank you for causing me to update my prior.
- boomboomsubban 8y ago
  It's possible that you're both correct. All those stats you link actually say around 50% of new transmissions are a result of male-on-male sex, which is later changed to "gays and bisexuals" in the reports. Those terms aren't exactly interchangeable, with some of the riskiest MSM groups may not consider themselves gay, such as sex workers, rape victims, and inmates.
pwned1 8y ago
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/index.html Canada -> 53% of new HIV infections are MSM http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology-hiv-canada http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology... Australia - > 68% of new HIV infections are MSM http://www.hivmediaguide.org.au/hiv-in-australia/hiv-statistics-australia/ http://www.hivmediaguide.org.au/hiv-in-australia/hiv-statist... UK -> 54% of new HIV infections are MSM http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology-hiv-canada http://www.catie.ca/en/fact-sheets/epidemiology/epidemiology...
- wycs 8y ago
  Yes. This matches what I found. Jacquesm writes with such assurance and from such a high ground. It will be interesting to see if he replies.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    See above. I do have to eat every now and then :)
- jacquesm 8y ago
  It appears my facts on gay HIV are off but on drug users they are on (for the west). Globally the situation is much different and about the same number of men as women have HIV and drugs do not appear to be a big factor in to the equation. It is interesting how the data has changed over the years, for a long time gay men were not the largest group but maybe with the increased effectiveness of anti-virals combined with decreased mortality the balance has shifted substantially once again. In the beginning of the AIDS epidemic it was basically a disease afflicting predominantly gay people and only rarely heterosexuals. The two groups being somewhat socially isolated was an important factor in this. Then the balance shifted as more and more heterosexual people got infected and was made worse by people thinking that HIV would pass them by because they were not gay. So now we have come full circle. Still, 32% (at best) are pretty lousy odds so better be very careful.
influx 8y ago
Source? For new USA infections in 2015 it was 77% drug users and gay and bisexual men. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kjeetgill 8y ago
I don't want to argue the statistics, you probably know them better than I do. At least historically in the US AIDS: > found its way to the United States as early as 1960, but was first noticed after doctors discovered clusters of Kaposi's sarcoma and pneumocystis pneumonia in young gay men in Los Angeles, New York City, and San Francisco in 1981. Please don't equate being a little under-informed or less up to date with stupid thinking. EDIT: Ah, I think I mis understood your post. Your example at the end was of poor thinking but I don't the think the parent you had replied to was making that mistake either.
refurb 8y ago
That's not what the CDC says. 77% of all new infections are either homosexual men (68%) or IV drug abusers (9%).[1] [1]https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/ataglance.html