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

Forum Jump: 
Thread Tools
#1 of 2 Old 06-07-2006, 09:20 AM - Thread Starter
polarbear's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Please check my numbers on this:

Everything is based on CDC numbers at:

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-The (unpublished, un-peer-reviewed) report of a 60% reduction in HIV transmission in Africa is a realistic value.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.

Please comment.
polarbear is offline  
#2 of 2 Old 06-07-2006, 01:38 PM
Revamp's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(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  

Quick Reply
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off