home
RSS
July 19th, 2010
07:11 PM ET

Heterosexual poor at higher risk for AIDS

Two percent of heterosexuals living in poor, urban cities are infected with HIV, the virus that cause AIDS, according to a new report by the Center for Disease Control.

The United Nations considers an overall HIV prevalence of more than 1 percent a "generalized epidemic."

"This analysis points to an urgent need to prioritize HIV prevention efforts in disadvantaged communities, " said Jonathan Mermin, M.D., director of the CDC's Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, in a statement.

While the majority of the the HIV epidemic in the United States is concentrated among gay and bisexual men and injection drug users, this new research suggests heterosexuals who live in low-income urban cities are affected as well. "What this new data indicates, in certain geographical areas, we seem to have a generalized epidemic among heterosexuals," says Mermin.

Researchers found, poverty was the most important demographic factor associated with HIV infection, in inner-city heterosexuals. The lower the socioeconomic status, the higher the number of HIV cases. "For people in these areas, people whose household income was less than $10,000  per year were seven times more likely to have HIV than those whose household incomes were greater than $50,000 per year," says Mermin.

Race or ethnicity didn't significantly determine the prevalence of HIV, according to the research. Mermin says low household income, lack of employment, homelessness, and low levels of education, were all associated with HIV infection in these communities. The study excluded men who have sex with men, drug users, and those in the sex industry.According to the CDC, people infected with HIV through heterosexual contact account for 31 percent of new cases each year and 28 percent of people living with HIV. African Americans account for 46 percent of people living with HIV in the U.S., and 45 percent of new infections each year.

The study looked at more than 9,000 heterosexual adults in high-poverty areas in 23 cities, where 20 percent of residents have household incomes below the poverty line.

The study was presented Monday at the 18th International AIDS Conference in Vienna, Austria.

Post by:
Filed under: HIV/AIDS • Sex

soundoff (80 Responses)
  1. matejoh

    Let's be clear: being heterosexual and poor doesn't increase risk of contracting a disease like HIV. Sex with people who have a disease is THE ONLY risk factor. Stupid lies by stupid people to a stupid public. "Being rich and gay, by contrast, provide superior protection to diseases like HIV."

    July 19, 2010 at 20:24 | Report abuse | Reply
    • EyeC

      I think you misunderstand the study: The researchers do not argue that being poor "causes" HIV–they argue that living in a low-income urban area is associated with a higher risk of contracting HIV. Perhaps this higher risk is due in part to higher rates of very risky behavior (e.g., multiple partners; IV drug use) in these areas, which in some cases may be responses to poverty (e.g., prostitution to survive). Regardless of whether you engage in these behaviors, your chance of sexually contracting the disease may be higher in a low-income area than an affluent area because there is a higher incidence of disease in the area–your potential partners are more likely to have HIV. Imagine making a bet–your chances of winning are higher if you bet on the toss of a coin (50/50) than on the number on a dice. The coin doesn't "cause" your wallet to get fatter. It's a question of probability, not causation.

      July 19, 2010 at 20:57 | Report abuse |
    • matejoh

      It's not that I misunderstand, its that the article assumes a low standard of behavior of the general poor and heterosexual population. The tone of the article is dishonest, the last paragraph says that the study did not include "men who have sex with other men, drug users, and those in the sex industry." How can it then go on to declare – honestly – that the heterosexual poor have higher incidence of HIV if homosexuals were excluded from the study? It is dishonest to present selective set of data in this way.

      July 19, 2010 at 21:21 | Report abuse |
    • BCBuddy

      Heh Matejoh....but being poor, in itself, shows a lack of good judgement. Wearing a condom is good judgement when boinking a strange piece.

      July 20, 2010 at 01:21 | Report abuse |
    • Some guy

      @ BCBuddy: While I agree about the condom part, obviously, hat about children born into poor families/areas? Does their lack of choice all of a sudden turn into poor judgment?

      July 20, 2010 at 01:47 | Report abuse |
    • Name: Required

      Of course we must immediately begin to provide these poor 'at-risk' people with the large bales of cash they obviously need to stave off infection. If we give each one of these vulnerable citizen $40,000 to sit on they will be impervious to contamination.

      Problem solved.

      July 20, 2010 at 02:11 | Report abuse |
    • Christopher

      Actually, EyeC, those 'risky sexual behaviors' aren't risky as long as you keep track of whom you are having sex with, don't get drunk before having sex, etc.
      I know people who have been VERY sexually active with dozens or hundreds of people in their lives, and yet they don't have HIV because they do those simple things.

      July 20, 2010 at 02:57 | Report abuse |
    • JLS639

      They excluded homosexuals from the data set presumably because they wanted to look at heterosexual risk. If I wanted to know, say, diabetes rates among women, why would I include men in the data set?

      I am afraid I accidentally hit "report abuse" instead of "reply," so any admins that look at this: that was a mistake and I did not mean to report any abuse.

      July 20, 2010 at 07:55 | Report abuse |
    • tyrexden

      read the article, matejoh. Its not about what demographics get HIV, its about what demographics get AIDS. If you are unaware there is a difference between the 2, then maybe you shouldn't be posting here. Its common sense that those who are poor, living in squalor, no clean drinking water, and maltutrition will get AIDS at a higher rate than HIV+ living in good conditions.

      July 26, 2010 at 15:17 | Report abuse |
  2. matejoh

    Sorry, sharing needles with infected people is another risk factor, and so is being a vampire.

    July 19, 2010 at 20:35 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Mike

      Right...and who is more likely to SHARE needles with infected people? The POOR!

      July 19, 2010 at 22:40 | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      HIV is the virus, HIV positive means you are fetncied with it. AIDS is a syndrome caused by HIV but it takes an average of 8-10 years for an HIV infection to develop into AIDS.AIDS is defined by a serious decline in your immune system (specifically, your CD4 positive T cells) and leaves you vulnerable to a wide variety of infections that people with healthy immune systems fight off easily.Other effects of being fetncied with HIV (and NOT caused by opportunistic infections) include dementia (cognitive decline), sensory neuropathy (losing your sense of touch), and glomerulonephropathy (which can lead to kidney failure and the need for dialysis).

      April 8, 2012 at 13:15 | Report abuse |
  3. HS Health Teach

    EyeC, couldn't have said it better myself!?!

    July 19, 2010 at 21:22 | Report abuse | Reply
  4. Zac

    I have a lot of old friends now who use IV drugs they are all poor and live in urban areas. Not a single one of them shares needles. Its like $3 for 10 so even a junkie can afford them. They spread disease because none of them ever use condoms and make poor decisions about sexual partners. Education is the most important factor here.

    July 19, 2010 at 22:54 | Report abuse | Reply
  5. Truth

    You see, rich gay men can afford to have their catamites medically screened first.

    July 19, 2010 at 22:55 | Report abuse | Reply
  6. Clark1b

    could it be that these people that participate in such activities are not blessed ... and so become poor.... Rather than because they are poor ... they participate in these kind of activities.

    July 19, 2010 at 23:07 | Report abuse | Reply
    • JJinCVCA

      @Clark1b, so you mean to suggest that there's some religious rationale for why people are poor and why these people who are poor may go on to contract HIV? You're not very good at the critical thinking skills department, are you now...

      July 20, 2010 at 04:09 | Report abuse |
    • Pirogi

      *crickets*

      July 20, 2010 at 13:14 | Report abuse |
    • blxbrg

      Calvinism is so 16th century. And not socially or medically useful, especially in the context of pandemics.

      November 23, 2010 at 16:44 | Report abuse |
  7. RSS

    And this is supposed to make people feel better? So what is being done to educate this segment of the population? Probably nothing since they are poor and considered by many to be expendable. Richard Nixon knew about the dangers of HIV, but did nothing because it only affected gays, blacks, and drug users who were considered the dregs of society. It wasn't until AIDS hit buffy and muffy that people became concerned.

    July 19, 2010 at 23:09 | Report abuse | Reply
  8. Crazy Waiter

    RSS you moron HIV was not around when Nixon was President.

    July 19, 2010 at 23:23 | Report abuse | Reply
    • JJinCVCA

      You mean to say that HIV/AIDS hadn't been entirely discovered, named, categorized, observed or even recognized when Richard Nixon was president of the US, so in that sense you're correct. However, there's evidence that points to the possibility that the virus we recognize as HIV today may have been around in certain parts of the world within human beings since the early part of the 20th century, but hadn't been as widespread/prevelent until the early 1980s.

      July 20, 2010 at 04:16 | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      Well, apparently the actual virus, which got the name "HIV" in 1983, was first transmitted from ape to man somewhere around 1900, I believe. But yea, the whole comment about Nixon and government invennting it, that was pretty moronic.

      July 27, 2010 at 01:36 | Report abuse |
  9. Crazy Waiter

    Clark1B WTF?? Not blessed? You are one wacky delusional Christian ahole.

    July 19, 2010 at 23:24 | Report abuse | Reply
  10. Eric Tweedle

    50% of HIV/AIDS cases are confined to the gay population. The rest are blacks. So, the study is really about those two groups, not white population (unless you are IV drug addict).

    Only the gays and blacks (primarily the down-lows and their circle of sexual partners) need to be concerned with HIV/AIDS as a practical approach to defeating the disease.

    July 20, 2010 at 00:02 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Chad

      100% true. I have worked in a hospital for over 10 years and I have never seen anyone HIV+ that isn't black, gay or a IV druggie.

      July 20, 2010 at 03:40 | Report abuse |
    • Molly

      Well Chad, then you must work in a hospital that serves a more affluent neighborhood, because I've worked in three hospitals and I've seen multiple cases of white heterosexual AIDS patients who did not contract the disease through drug use.

      July 20, 2010 at 07:39 | Report abuse |
    • Waterfalls

      Wrong, a lot of heterosexual "whites" have it, too.

      July 20, 2010 at 11:51 | Report abuse |
    • Pirogi

      Does that mean I don't have to suse a condom anymore? Wheeee!

      (Idiot.)

      July 20, 2010 at 13:17 | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      Wrong. And quite mean spirited and ignorant, I don't mean to call names, but you're oversimplifying the issue. We all are. Too much.

      July 27, 2010 at 01:31 | Report abuse |
    • blxbrg

      This comment needs to be deleted, if only because it spreads dangerous lies.

      November 23, 2010 at 16:41 | Report abuse |
  11. V4E

    Living in poor cities = usually a result of bad life choices
    Being HIV positive = usually a result of bad life choices

    No surprise that there's a large overlap between the two

    July 20, 2010 at 00:07 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Waterfalls

      Why is living in a poor city a result of bad choices? The children born there made bad choices? The people who live there to be close to family, to attend more affordable colleges, or because they like it there are making bad choices? Everyone should have to prefer a big wealthy city, or there is something wrong with their character????
      HIV is usually the result of bad choices? What about all of the people born with it, who contracted it through transfusions, who contracted it through rape, a cheating partner/spouse, etc. Even those who "made a bad choice" are no worse than you (or I, or anyone,) because we have all made a mistake in our lives.
      No one should have to live with this disease.

      July 20, 2010 at 11:36 | Report abuse |
  12. Outloud

    I am sorry, does anyone find it at all "ironic" that this finding coincides with "a possible cure/vaccine"? I personally belong to the school that believes AIDS/HIV/GRID call it what you will....was unleashed upon minority populations by the government of the Cold War 70's (likely under Nixon).

    July 20, 2010 at 00:16 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Chad

      Too bad it's not working any better. We should hurry up and think of something else.

      July 20, 2010 at 03:42 | Report abuse |
    • Waterfalls

      I disagree.
      This virus evolved in nature, just as every other virus evolved (including other retroviruses), and then it unfortunately "hit" the human population, because we are a part of Nature.

      July 20, 2010 at 11:39 | Report abuse |
    • Pirogi

      Except H1N1. That virus was man-made (man-tweaked?) and released by the government to prove vaccine manufacturing capability.

      July 20, 2010 at 13:18 | Report abuse |
    • Jess

      I agrree.

      July 22, 2010 at 15:41 | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      No. That is silly and ignores many historical facts. One need only to take a serious, unbiased look at a well-documented historical record to see that it's merely ideaologically driven propaganda (the belief that gov't created HIV). It's an emotionally potent oversimplification, and it's just plain wrong. It does nothing to help the situation, it only deepens a profoundly ignorant cultural myth. We need to support the search for a cure, that's all we can do, and try to live our lives better and smarter. We do nothing to help the world by spreading cynicism, sir.

      July 27, 2010 at 01:16 | Report abuse |
  13. Outloud

    Uh-Oh Heterosexuals are at risk now....better start selling the cure we have had stashed away this whole time.....

    July 20, 2010 at 00:17 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jess

      Water, I feel that you are correct, the government wanted to kill off the minority population, HIV didn't happen from nature as someone suggested.

      July 22, 2010 at 15:43 | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      Heterosexuals have always been at risk. Read the article! Heterosexuals make up over 30 percent of new cases. There is such a terrible stigma attached to this disease. We need to speak more maturely about this. And more often, I'm afraid. Much more so. I'm glad to see CNN cover this.

      July 27, 2010 at 01:18 | Report abuse |
  14. indy

    get educated ! get tested ! thats all everyone needs to know

    July 20, 2010 at 00:23 | Report abuse | Reply
  15. MORNINGWOODY

    Those that post that being poor and or heterosexual makes one not any more susceptible are incorrect. The poor have no money to buy a bag before they shag and most heter's are idiotic when it come to sex anyhows.

    July 20, 2010 at 00:41 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jamie

      We need to learn to act like adults. Such childish debate people..

      July 27, 2010 at 01:19 | Report abuse |
  16. Rubens

    People. Please read a basic biologic description of HIV. It is a biological entity that unlike humans, it does not discriminate against ethnic or socioeconomic statuses. The only thing that can protect you if you are exposed to it is your genetic make up.

    July 20, 2010 at 02:03 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Waterfalls

      Note: No one should "count on" possibly being "immune." Natural immunity is rare.

      July 20, 2010 at 11:41 | Report abuse |
    • Jess

      People are not stupid just because they don't agree with you Rubens. You don't know anymore than anyone else, if you knew you would have a cure right?

      July 22, 2010 at 15:44 | Report abuse |
    • Jamie

      Absolutely right. People (more and more nowadays, it seems like) are unable to look past ideaological biases and prejudices it seems like, or am I making too much of what might just be flippant and thoughtless remarks made online? It's troubling, either way. People should know by now that a LOT of straight people contract HIV, it's a fact.

      July 27, 2010 at 01:21 | Report abuse |
  17. DickeGreeneleef

    Truthfully, lower income = more boredom, which in turn = more sex and more unprotected sex to escape reality... Simple.

    July 20, 2010 at 02:40 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jamie

      That made no sense at all. We need to restrict comments to people who can have discussions without acting like middle schoolers, no offense.

      July 27, 2010 at 01:23 | Report abuse |
  18. integral1architecture

    Maybe they'll stop letting poor people donate blood. "Yes, I'd like to try the '09 Rockefeller Type O please, I've heard it's divine, a very good year for Rockefeller blood".

    July 20, 2010 at 02:46 | Report abuse | Reply
  19. RontheGeek

    Homosexuals, poor, and blacks disproportionally represent all HIV cases. The question should be what are the obscure links between these. I think "making bad choices" is simply too broad of a comment to make. Going on a hunch, I found that ….“released inmates comprise roughly one in five of those groups' [black and Hispanic] total HIV-infected persons” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19907649
    It’s no wonder that blacks and Hispanic heterosexuals have a higher rate of HIV infection than whites because of the higher incarceration rates. Though the vast majority are heterosexual, the prison environment creates a climate encouraging them to engage in sexual behavior that they would not otherwise engage in.

    July 20, 2010 at 03:16 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jamie

      Very thoughtful comments there. We need to be very careful, however, of boxing in groups of people based on labels that may not be very telling of the whole story. If that made sense..

      July 27, 2010 at 01:25 | Report abuse |
  20. Heather

    IV drug users tend to be poor because they have keeping jobs and they spend what money they can get on drugs. Poor people have sex with people that they know. People that they know, who have sex with poor people that they know, who have sex with other poor people that they know. Each person only has to have sex with 2 people and only 1 of all the people needs to have HIV given enough time. Many people in a IV drug using environment assume they already have it. So no, care is not taken. Even if you test negative, you may still have it. So no, they don't test or take care. They would rather assume they are dying then know for sure and you are talking about a group of people that is not going to safe or provided for when they are elderly so they may prefer to assume they will not make it that far.

    July 20, 2010 at 03:47 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jamie

      I'm sorry but your comments reek of ignorance and condescention. You speak about "poor people" in such a mean spirited and 10,000 feet above type of attitude, I'm sorry but it's awful. You don't seem to know what it's like, in any way, to be "poor."

      July 27, 2010 at 01:27 | Report abuse |
  21. '_'

    This study is pretty accurate. Homosexuals are mostly affluent, educated, not to say you don't find that poorer economic communities, but I think mainly why its striking heterosexual hispanics/latino's especially is cultural much like the gang problem are really a cultural problem.

    Make that the foundation and sprinkle the lack of education and the level of ignorance and old beliefs and stigma that surrounds safe sex discussion, precaution and or homosexuality, bi-sexual discussion.

    You see, when someone in the hispanic/latino community say suddenly get's sick with AIDS or dies suddenly of AIDS, the hispanic/latino community does not talk about it. There is a serious stigma surrounding a male or even female, but especially male, its the most frustrating thing. Absolutely NO discussion, no open debate or awareness happens after it happens. If the male was known to be heterosexual its looked at with some stigma of homosexuality.

    What fuels this? Ignorance, old world hispanic/latino values and especially beliefs. What fuels or encourages these beliefs? Ignorant, old world, stifling, ultra conservative and fear mongering religious views. Churches in these poor communities are to blame, the superstition and religious beliefs so well ingrained into the minds of hispanic/latino's in poor communities.

    Also, gossiping in communities at the stigma that goes along with that also contributes to more infections. But even more alarming is the male hispanic, non-english, non-USA educated hispanic/latino that has strong macho attitudes. Most hispanic males are drinker's, alcoholics, they have "mañas" or put themselves in high risk sexual disease situations. Some are tricked by fake women, some are just so drunk in bars that they do things with prostitutes, who knows. Then they don't check themselves, then the infect their unassuming partners and are surprised when their partners suddenly die of AIDS related disease.

    Its a very sad situation that much like the gang problems may have to do with belief systems so ingrained into their culture that it may almost be too difficult to change. Unless they truly are brave to release themselves from so many closed ways of thinking brought about by religion and ignorance and lack of world exposure, education and so on.

    Very sad situation. poverty does go hand in hand with some level of ignorance more likely than not. But in the hispanic communities, which I don't think you know much about and from my point of view, religion and churches do more to stifle open discussion and not change any issues of suspicion of homosexuality in males or looseness in females that are thought of when someone does get HIV in those communities. You have to look at the culture, the CULTURE of whom is getting affected and start from there OUTWARD chipping away at ignorance and timidness, suspicion, gossip and close mindedness. These issues exist in poverty stricken communities which then contribute to them having HIV tied to them.

    July 20, 2010 at 04:04 | Report abuse | Reply
  22. '_'

    ^ Sorry about the grammar, I simply don't have time to make an essay or compete with pro-writers, I just need to get the ideas out and if I misspell a few words, could of written a better sentence, omitted a word, I apologize.

    July 20, 2010 at 04:06 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jamie

      Thanks for putting thought into it and adding value to a debate that needs thoughtfulness

      July 27, 2010 at 01:34 | Report abuse |
  23. BralenX

    Silly breeders, AIDS was spread by poor African hetero scum first.

    July 20, 2010 at 04:50 | Report abuse | Reply
    • med

      those silly breeders spawned you. ignorance from any side is unacceptable. yet it breeds fatser than silly breeders. go be happy everyone ,because we all face ignorance in some form or another, so be happy and be safe.

      May 10, 2011 at 15:43 | Report abuse |
  24. roteili

    Living in a poor area, means a heterosexual woman has a higher chance of having sex with a man who was in jail, and had sex with another man; the woman might never find out, but chances of this happening are greater that it happening in the suburbs. Chances of someone having sex with an IV drug user are higher as welll. In these cases the people will describe themselves as non IV drug user heterosexuals, but their chance of contact with infected people are higher.

    July 20, 2010 at 05:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  25. paulette

    The Aids epedimic, was put into the BLack Commmunity. Why, it's simple, because hey want to kills us off.

    July 20, 2010 at 05:29 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Waterfalls

      Wrong, this affects every community. We are "all in this together."

      July 20, 2010 at 11:50 | Report abuse |
  26. RB

    Poverty does not cause AIDS – stupidity does. It isn't that "high risk behavior is associated with being poor." It's more like "stupidity causes risky behavior, as well as most poverty."

    July 20, 2010 at 06:44 | Report abuse | Reply
  27. Dave

    This is a continuation of any number of "studies" that try to show an "epidemic" of AIDS in the heterosexual community. The clowns who are behind this "study" are desperate to try to prove that this disease is not by and large prevalent among homosexuals and iv drug users.

    July 20, 2010 at 07:40 | Report abuse | Reply
    • matejoh

      Well, the last main paragraph states that gays, drug users, and sex workers not included in the study, so this is called a selective data set. They then go on to say that they only performed the study in high-poverty areas. This also is a selective data set. So, amazingly, they find that within these study parameters that hetero poor people have higher incidence of HIV than . . . Who? It doesn't tell you until a few paragraphs down this is a localized epidemic in certain geographical locations among heteros. A few more paragraphs down it mentions the fact stated in my opening line. In the field that I work in (health and medicine) we call this kind of study and method of presentation BS.

      July 20, 2010 at 13:01 | Report abuse |
  28. frenchbugger

    Maybe all of the NAACP will come down with full-blowed AIDS! We'll git rid of 'em one way or the other!!!

    July 20, 2010 at 08:12 | Report abuse | Reply
  29. Waterfalls

    Why don't you want them to find a cure? What if you, your children, or your relative is someday raped or has an infected partner (maybe the partner cheated and lied) and contracts it? That wouldn't make you or your relative "scum." You'd be glad for the medication then. Think before you type.

    July 20, 2010 at 11:47 | Report abuse | Reply
  30. zaccman james

    I think been poor & jobless is one of the major reason when ur poor u can't think straight and the environment can influence ur life style whether black or white Hiv is we a cure it does.nt matter who has it.

    July 20, 2010 at 12:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  31. Kati

    I think some of you misunderstood. The study purposely EXCLUDED those who "engaged in risky behaviors" like prostitution and drug use. Clearly there's more to this than poor behavior. For example, if the poor are more likely to have been in jail or have had sex with a male who has been in prison, then that may account for a huge amount of this trend (previous studies have found that even fully heterosexual men often engage in male-with-male sex in prison).

    July 20, 2010 at 22:15 | Report abuse | Reply
    • matejoh

      I think my main concern is the title says "Poor Heterosexuals at Higher Risk of HIV" rather than something like "HIV Among Poor Heterosexuals Rising due to Risky Behaviors". The first appears to identify being poor and hetero contribute to the risk rather than the risky behavior itself. Some of the people who read CNN headlines won't read the entire article, draw the wrong conclusion from a vague headline, and go bump uglies without protection b/c they don't fall in the "risky" category. This is a stupid example, but so are many people who contract STD's. I know some have it forced upon them (rape, parent-to-child, etc) but MOST have it b/c they won't (not can't) keep their pants on.

      July 21, 2010 at 14:18 | Report abuse |
  32. Jess

    GOD has nothing to do with aids, and you don't even know who or what god is or you wouldn't be talking your crap on here. Let god judge you because it;s YOUR god not mine. If your god is judgemental and would poison other humans by giving them a virus then you are certainly not going to be exempt from the same cruelty my friend. When will people start loving each other instead of hating in the name of god?

    July 22, 2010 at 15:49 | Report abuse | Reply
  33. damon

    Wow. I think that this is a really live debate. But I definitely want to set the record straight... I think the spread of HIV and AIDS is so widespread because many 'down-low' WHITE AND BLACK men cannot live their lives as they truly feel. I've been in social circles and have heard the term "that's gay"... and it just takes me back to the point where people feel that they must live their lives in the shadows. I live in Atlanta and there have been recent attacks on gay males here... who can live freely in a society that will fire someone without asking questions first (Shirley Sharrod). But anway, I am definitely not blaming the dissemination of the disease on gay people. We are an oversexualized and hypersexualized society that believes 1 date is enough to begin engaging in sexual activities with someone.

    I hope that, and I believe this was stated earlier, we begin just becoming more educated about the choices we make in soceity. We can defeat this desease by making better choices about what we do, whether straight or gay, black or white, poor or rich, urban or suburban..... PERIOD. Get tested and know for sure who you are messing with before you lay down with them.

    July 23, 2010 at 15:39 | Report abuse | Reply
  34. Jamie

    We need to stop letting conversations like these break down into mean spirited and ugly ideaological/political food fights.....like aperson said in another comment, we're all humans and we need to work together. Lets grow up people.

    July 27, 2010 at 01:29 | Report abuse | Reply
  35. Jamie

    we need to push Obama to act with more urgency with this issue.

    July 27, 2010 at 01:39 | Report abuse | Reply
  36. Uncle Romulus

    One theory has it that AIDS started as a byproduct of an unnatural affair between Idi Amin and a chimpanzee.

    November 19, 2010 at 20:53 | Report abuse | Reply
  37. Maricel

    U Thein Hlaing,You insult akaarn natioalist party with a little political consciousness.You don't know the general cause of the Rakhine people. You are the follower of a Burmese Party which do not represent interests of the Rakhine oppressed. There are so many many many opportunists in Rakhine state NLD. Rakhine nationalists are more brave than the followers just like you. Sacrifice for your Rakhine Land. Are you a Rakhine or Burmar?

    April 9, 2012 at 01:45 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. Alberto

    No, but why even have anal sex if you have an open wound down there? Condom or not. Condoms break, leak and at times, fall off during reintcourse. Granted the sex feels better without that layer of rubber but it just isn't wise to even think of doing it if an open wound is present. But, it's your body do what you will. Just think about the other person though.

    April 14, 2012 at 16:47 | Report abuse | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Advertisement
About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.