HIV 'Protection' of Only 7%? (Please Check My Numbers) - Mothering Forums

Old 06-07-2006, 09:20 AM - Thread Starter

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Please check my numbers on this:

Everything is based on CDC numbers at: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/fac...t-A-Glance.htm

Males diagnosed (2004): 28143
Male-to-male: 65%
Heterosexual: 16%
Injected drug: 14%
M2M / Injected drug: 5%
Other: <1%

Females diagnosed (2004): 10410
Heterosexual: 78%
Injected drug: 20%
Other: 2%

My assumptions:
-Male to male sexual contact will include anal and oral contact where there is no benefit to circumcision of the ‘receiver’
-Male to male sexual contact will have both men equally receiving, negating any benefit of circumcision for homosexual men.
-Circumcision has no affect on HIV transmission through injection drug use.
-Circumcision has no affect on HIV transmission to females.
-Sexual orientation was reported correctly.
-The (unpublished, un-peer-reviewed) report of a 60% reduction in HIV transmission in Africa is a realistic value.
-The African report can be directly related to North American culture and health practices.
-All males in the calculation are circumcised.

Calculation 1) If 73% of HIV diagnoses are male, if 16% of those are heterosexual, and if there is a possible 60% reduction in transmission of HIV in this group, then there is an overall reduction of 7.01% in HIV transmission.

73% x 0.16 (hetero men) = 11.68 men x 0.60 (HIV reduction) = 7.01 men or 7.01 / 100 diagnoses.

Calculation 2) If 16% of the 27143 men diagnosed are heterosexual, if 100% of the women are not in a male-to-male relationship, and if there is a possible 60% reduction in transmission of HIV in the male group, then there is an overall reduction of 18.1% in HIV transmission for heterosexuals as a group.

28143 men x 0.16 (hetero men) = 4502 men x 0.60 (HIV reduction) = 2701 HIV ‘protected’ men.

2701 HIV ‘protected’ men / (10410 women + 4502 hetero men) = 18.1% Protection factor for heterosexuals as a group.

polarbear is offline

Old 06-07-2006, 01:38 PM

Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I suppose there is some room for discrepancy thanks to bisexuals but apart from that it seems sound.

Of course it relies upon the 60% statistic being accurate, which it is not and there have been no accurate studies on the effect of circumcision on HIV in heterosexual women either which is a pity.

Great work overall, maths seems watertight as far as I can see.
Revamp is offline