HIV Diagnoses Rise Among Young Gay Men as Total U.S. Cases Drop

[xchrom]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-19/hiv-diagnoses-rise-among-young-gay-men-as-total-u-s-cases-drop.html


Better screening and prevention has driven the HIV decline among women and people ages..

While the number of people diagnosed with HIV in the U.S. dropped 33 percent in the last decade, new cases among young homosexual and bisexual men doubled, according to researchers who said prevention programs need to be expanded.

Better screening and prevention has driven the decline among women and people ages 35 to 44 years, a study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found. The two-fold increase was seen among young bisexual and homosexual men age 13 to 24 years, according to the study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The findings, being released today to coincide with the International AIDS Conference in Melbourne, Australia, are the first to use data from all 50 U.S. states to examine long-term trends in diagnosis, said study author Amy Lansky. Though strides are being made to cut HIV, prevention and screening efforts aren’t adequately reaching a younger group, she said.

“There’s a new generation that comes up and many don’t have first-hand experience with the devastation we saw in the earlier years,” said Lansky, the CDC’s deputy director for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Science in the Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention in Atlanta, in a telephone interview.

[Fearless]

1. Unfortunately not surprising.

Too many people think that it's no longer fatal.

[LuvNewcastle]

2. I think that the WHO might be right about educating gay men

about HIV. I didn't know that these new drugs were so effective at preventing the disease. I'm 44, but I'm going to ask my doctor about it at my next appointment.

[Fearless]

6. It's always good to get informed!

My only concern with these type drugs is two-fold... that young people may want to use them in place of condoms and expose themselves to other STI's they don't need, particularly a few antibiotic resistant strains that have popped up in the past decade or two. And two, what are the long term affects on the body for taking these types of preventative drugs? I can't imagine they don't have some type of affect on the body after many years of taking them. Most medicines do have some type of side effects particularly after long exposure to them.

[LuvNewcastle]

7. Yes, there are a lot of other bugs out there besides HIV.

A lot of people forget that and then they get Hep C or herpes. Education is fundamental. I also will take your advice about side effects. I'm already on some other medications and I would hate to have some terrible side effect from the drug. I'll have to discuss that with my doctor, too. Thanks for the reply.

[TeeYiYi]

3. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"...

...or, those too young to remember and too arrogant to learn from the generation of lgbts that experienced, first hand, the sheer horror of a new and contagious "gay cancer" epidemic, wreaking havoc and death at every turn; are condemned to repeat it.

TYY

[Amimnoch]

4. Wasn't there also a recent article stating that young gay men get tested much more than other

Demographics?

I'll dig for it later when I have a bit more time, but there was definitely a recent article that showed that with the exception of gay adults (which had an increase in testing rate), the percentages of people getting tested was low, and decreasing.

It leads me to wonder if this article just uses the total numbers, or scales it appropriately? After all, if more gays opt for testing, and fewer heterosexuals opt for testing, then there would also be a logical conclusion on why the number of diagnoses for one group goes up while the number of diagnoses for the other goes down. After all, if the number of people in any demographic is increasing the rate of testing, then the number of diagnoses would logically likewise increase and if the number of people in any demographic decrease the rate of testing, then the number of diagnoses would logically decrease.

[closeupready]

5. That is a good point - since current treatments have dramatically improved

quality of life for HIV+ patients, young gay men at risk for infection don't consider an HIV diagnosis as pessimistically as they once did (warranted change of view, or not).

In the 80's, I dated a guy who explained his views quite rationally as to why he refused to get tested - an HIV diagnosis was essentially a death sentence then, no effective treatments existed, and thus, there was very little upside to getting tested.

Now that there are drugs that can help suppress the virus and to help boost T-cells, there is a very real benefit to learning of your status if you are HIV+.

[pinto]

8. At least 2 or more factors may be in play here.

HIV testing has become more focused, geared for those at most risk. In earlier days, testing was encouraged for any and all who were sexually active. Over time, with declining resources ($) and that stubborn 20% datum (20% of those infected w/HIV may be unaware of their status) testing approaches changed. Outreach moved out of the wide, general public sphere to individuals and communities seen as most likely to be at risk for infection.

And, as noted, advances in HIV treatment has garnered the "chronic, manageable" view of HIV. Much of that is very true and a real success for those in the research and pharmaceutical development fields. And a real success for those living with HIV today.

Yet, many younger men who have sex with men, their female partners and injection drug users remain at risk. Some may discount that risk to an extent. So one part of the picture may be a simple decision to not test.

Early treatment works best, though, and that can only happen via testing and access to health care.