In NYC, New HIV Infections 3 Times National Rate

[ottorocket]

In NYC, New HIV Infections 3 Times National Rate
NEW YORK (AP) ― New data indicate New York City residents are contracting the virus that causes AIDS at three times the national rate.

The city health department said Wednesday that almost 4,800 New Yorkers were infected with HIV in 2006. The number represents 72 in every 100,000 residents, compared to a national rate of 23 per 100,000.

The figures are the first to pinpoint when people became infected, not just when they were diagnosed. Better blood tests have helped make that possible.

Health officials attribute the city's relatively high rate of new infections to its large populations of gay men, blacks and other groups on whom HIV has traditionally taken a heavy toll.

Assistant health commissioner Dr. Monica Sweeney says the figures underscore the continued need to promote HIV testing and prevention.

(© 2008 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material m

[peggygee]

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- There are more new cases of Americans infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, than previously believed, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Saturday.

About 56,000 people became infected with HIV in the past year, which translates to about 40 percent more cases than officials had estimated, said Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of the CDC's National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention.

Previous CDC estimates suggested about 40,000 new people were infected each year. But those estimates used "limited data and less precise methods," said the center, which is now using technology capable of determining when someone was infected.

The new method can indicate whether someone has been infected with HIV during the previous five months, rather than relying on statistical models.

[slinky]

People are so funny when it comes to statistics. There's an average. It's not homogeneous: some places are above average and some are below average. Where would one think would be the places that were above average? Duluth, Montana? Palm Springs, California? I'll bet if I picked the zipcodes within NYC that I thought were above and below that NYC average, I'd be correct a huge portion of the time.

What would be more interesting is to be able to compare these rates for the same places with earlier or later times. Note these are 2006 numbers. Of much more interest is the CDC disclosure posted by Peggy. however, it is just as likely that what it points out is that the models the CDC was using were inadequate as that the actually incidence of new infection has risen.