3 ms·

This prevalence is true in the US (and most Western countries I think, though not as certain), is definitely not true in Sub-Saharan Africa (where 75% of the wo

This prevalence is true in the US (and most Western countries I think, though not as certain), is definitely not true in Sub-Saharan Africa (where 75% of the world's HIV+ population lives). Women and girls are more likely to have it in Sub-Saharan Africa. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10126805/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10126805/ estimates that over 60% of all new infections in SSA are in women. Parts of that region the HIV+ prevalence rate is above 5%. That is why they are focused on testing that population in that region, they are the most at risk.

ZoomerCretin 2y ago
60% of new infections are women, yet they had a completely women-only trial?
- muffinman26 2y ago
  For the existing HIV-preventing medications we have, such as PrEP, the treatments are much more effective in men than women. It can easily take a month for PrEP to be effective in Assigned Female At Birth folks, but I saw studies during the COVID era that a few days were plenty for Assigned Male At Birth folks. There's some logic to focusing on the cohort that usually has the lowest success rate with these kinds of medication. The difference in efficacy has to do with the way the body is designed to absorb fluids, and its one of the few areas where hormones and surgery don't make a difference. (A trans guy on HRT with a full set of surgeries generally has male chances of cardiovascular issues, male levels of calorie consumption/muscle-building, etc.)