Talk:HIV/AIDS in the United States

message: ..you can email him now for your own healing too on his email:   He is always able to help you get your heart desire granted................  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tubyd21 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I have sympathy towards those suffering from AIDS, the above infomercial   is misplaced here, which is supposed to be about improving the article. I thus  deleted it save for a small portion as a reference of what I am referring to.Grace and peace thru the Lord Jesus (talk) 13:02, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: "AIDS continues to be a problem with illegal sex workers"

message: The article says that black women are 19 times as likely as white women to become infected with HIV. I think that it should read "HIV infection is 19 times as prevalent among black women than among white women." The way it is currently written makes it sound as though a black woman who has sex with Mr. A, an HIV positive man, is 19 times as likely to become HIV positive than her white friend would be if she had sex with Mr. A. Although I am not a medical professional, my gut feeling is that skin pigmentation doesn't affect one's HIV vulnerability.
Now, to the extent that most people who engage in high-risk behavior tend to do so with members of their own ethnic group - that would be the reason why different ethnic groups have different HIV infection rates. Blood transfusions would be an obvious exception, and a great example of where race doesn't affect one's chances of becoming infected with the virus. (Most people don't choose sexual partners completely at random with regards to ethnicity, whereas race is irrelevant in blood transfusions. (Only blood type / rh compatibility matters, not ethnicity or gender or whatever.)) 208.105.23.214 (talk) 15:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  "my gut feeling is that skin pigmentation doesn't affect one's HIV vulnerability." I am certainly not in a position to judge, but this may not be the case. See African-Americans Genetically Prone to HIV, AIDS. Mateat (talk) 04:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think "19 times as likely as white women" vs. "19 times as prevalent among black women than among white women" is basically a difference without a distinction. Adding "due to perceived differences in culture" might do what you want to fix, if properly referenced.Grace and peace thru the Lord Jesus (talk) 13:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification Needed

message: I see that the last comment in talk on this page is almost a year ago. Nobody is talking any more. This article is abandoned, not in conflict, ignored, or what? The comcepts here cry out for discussion, as in the main AIDS article, but it seems to be ignored. --Dumarest 21:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nobody's talking any more

message: Replaced this assertionGay activists opposed the GRID name from the outset, as having homosexuals identified as being disease carriers was at odds with the political goals of gaining acceptance for homosexuality.  Their protests, combined with early evidence that the disease was not specific to gay men, resulting in the CDC renaming the syndrome AIDS, for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, in 1982.  I don't know of any evidence that "gay activists" had anything to do with the name change (and it certainly does not square with my recollection of that history): in fact, the name was changed when it became apparent it was incorrect, and that the disease was not restricted to gay men.  (And how logical would it have been to object to replacing "Gay Cancer" with "GRID" in the first place?) -- Someone else 07:28 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)
You still should have left the full acronym and the year of change in the text. I replaced them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.150.28.34 (talk) 07:56, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  GRID 

message: Fro some reason this article ends with Magic Johnson catching AIDS and the Ryan White foundation. Is there nothing to add about the last ten or twenty years? Did part of the article get cut off by accident? -Willmcw 08:48, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Last two decades

message: I don't see any reason to have this article in that category so I'm removing it. 80.203.115.12 05:00, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:African-American history]] 

message: Google give 24 hits for 'LaRouche "Prevent AIDS Now Initiative Committee"', doesn't seem to be notable at all. 80.203.115.12 05:07, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  LaRouche and "PANIC" 

message: Cut from the article:
:This had an effect of boosting homophobia and adding stigma to homosexuality in the general public, particulaly since it seemed that unprotected anal intercourse seemed to be the prevalent way of spreading the disease.
The term homophobia implies irrational fear. I'm not sure Wikipedia is in a position to say that it is "irrational" to fear the transmission of a usually fatal disease. Whether we can assert that it is normal or rational to fear anything may also be up for grabs.
Better to say that certain advocates objected to the linking of AIDS with homosexuality, and to described their objections. (If all they ever said was Associating AIDS with homoxuality boosts homophobia then we can quote them as saying just that, but I'm fairly sure that a quick googling session will uncover their actual reasoning.)
I'd like to put back part of this passage right away, though, because it's a relatively unchallenged fact that anal intercourse is a major factor in transmitting AIDS. There is the directly related question about "unprotected" anal sex: i.e., how useful are condoms? Do they break, slip off, contain tiny holes? Do men forget to use them? (And if so, what does this say for the effectiveness of condom use as a disease-prevention strategy? (like seatbelts vs. airbags) There is also the related furor over whether HIV really does cause AIDS or not. Uncle Ed 22:51, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
The broad brush charge of  "homophobia" towards  anyone who objects to homosexual relations or or fails to support  efforts of the homosexual movement is   basically a political  psychological tactic   and is often economically (at least)  harmful to those who are labeled such,  and should have no place in a encyclopedia except as describing the opinion certain persons. But to suggest that a segment of society   actually believes that any who oppose them are fearful of them, or of being one of them is to suggest  a irrational  psychological condition on the part of those who believe this.Grace and peace thru the Lord Jesus (talk) 13:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Myth: AIDS is a gay disease. Fact: Although the majority of people infected with HIV in the United States are gay, AIDS affects everyone. In other countries, it effects equal numbers of males and females, most presumably heterosexual, and their children. The highest increase in recent years in this country has been among infecting drug users, many of whom are heterosexual. 
That is true, though it is fundamentally misleading as well as intellectually dishonest. but it is indisuptable that the highest rates of infection occur among homosexual men- therefore homosexuality IS an influential infection vector for HIV, if we're to give the CDC's data credence. I would tend to give the CDC preferential treatment as an authority on the subject matter, due to their extensive medical qualifications which surpass that of the citation example you referenced there. 66.90.153.184 (talk) 04:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[Homophobia]]" 

message: Here is MenStuff.org's point of view on the subject:
:Myth: AIDS is a gay disease. Fact: Although the majority of people infected with HIV in the United States are gay, AIDS affects everyone. In other countries, it effects equal numbers of males and females, most presumably heterosexual, and their children. The highest increase in recent years in this country has been among infecting drug users, many of whom are heterosexual. 
That is true, though it is fundamentally misleading as well as intellectually dishonest. but it is indisuptable that the highest rates of infection occur among homosexual men- therefore homosexuality IS an influential infection vector for HIV, if we're to give the CDC's data credence. I would tend to give the CDC preferential treatment as an authority on the subject matter, due to their extensive medical qualifications which surpass that of the citation example you referenced there. 66.90.153.184 (talk) 04:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Myth and fact

message: The reference to the boy who was retroactively diagnosed with AIDS in 1969 is from a government website. There is a sentence, un-cited, directly after it saying that it was later confirmed that he did not have AIDS. the NIH website (which has the original reference) has more than one citation for people believed to have AIDS or a similar disease prior to 1970. Should we remove the following, contradictory statement? 66.65.55.108 04:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This claim was also simultaneously inserted into Timeline of AIDS on 18 January 2007. On the talk page of that article, source was asked, none was provided. The claim was subsequently removed. Its occurrence in this article was apparently overlooked. Accordingly, I have removed the unsourced claim from here as well. 84.42.138.246 09:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AIDS in 1969 

message: This- "The pattern of the AIDS outbreak itself, has been gravely affected, and even strongly determined, by the outcomes of a program of 'planned shrinkage' directed in African-American and Hispanic communities, and implemented through systematic and continuing denial of municipal services--particularly fire extinguishment resources--essential for maintaining urban levels of population density and ensuring community stability.[2]" is an implausible conspiracy theory. As the article on Planned Shrinkage itself points out, planned shrinkage was never implemented in any urban area. It's hard to see how an unimplemented proposal could affect the epidemiology of a disease. The source cited simply provides an abstract, i.e., conclusions and no evidence. This passage should be deleted unless positive evidence of the actual implementation of planned shrinkage can be found. The following statement- "Institutionalized racism affects general health care as well as acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) health intervention and services in minority communities. The national response to the AIDS epidemic in minority communities has been slow, showing an insensitivity to ethnic diversity in prevention efforts and AIDS health services-" is another bald assertion quoted verbatim from a scholarly abstract without reference to evidence. These two assertions are extreme and controversial, and more evidence for them should be shown if they are to be included.
Spccarp 05:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conspiracy theories 

message: I was under the impression that the US has a complete ban on immigrants and visitors who have HIV/AIDS; however, this article seems to imply that it is a strong restriction and that infected people can still get in.  Does anyone know anything about this?--World's Vortex (talk) 11:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The immigration/travel policy is worthy of much expansion.  I'm considering attempting a major reorganization/rewrite of this page.  The legislative ban on travel/immigration was in effect since 1987 with changing qualifications for waivers until July 2008.  The PEPFAR reauthorization signed in 2008 lifted the legislative ban, and reverted full authority for determining "excludable diseases" to the dept of HHS.  I don't know if they have revised the list of "excludable diseases" since then.173.8.220.209 (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immigration and Visitor Policy 

message: We need new charts, these are out of date.  61.7.185.172 (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The data in general is out of date in the article.  The CDC has much more current statistics available online. Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 03:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charts out of date 

message: In this edit, an IP editor added "... blacks are more sexually egregious than other races." I'm not seeing "egregious" in either the summary source URL, or the Times story. I've tagged it as POV for the time being, and will have a full read through of the two sources and do some cleanup, but I'm planning to remove it again. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacks sexually egregious  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on HIV/AIDS in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100821072159/http://www.blackaids.org:80/image_uploads/article_575/08_left_behind.pdf to http://www.blackaids.org/image_uploads/article_575/08_left_behind.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:05, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the "Containment" section, I added a subsection on public health policies that have been brought up as a result of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. This includes President Reagan's Commission on the HIV Epidemic, President Clinton's National AIDS Strategy, and President Obama's National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States. Tbeglarian (talk) 17:45, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Containment

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Ronald Reagan#RfC. Sdkb (talk) 18:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC on whether to mention Ronald Reagan's handling of the AIDS crisis in the lead section of his bio

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :AIDS crisis and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 07:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "AIDS crisis" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by MeganTheeStallion123 (talk) 04:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: The History of Sexuality

message: — Assignment last updated by AnndySerr12 (talk) 04:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Population Health Capstone