Study finds high rate of STDs in Alaska, but few cases of HIV
Published Monday, June 16, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Alaska sexual health runs the gamut, according to bulletins released by the Division of Public Health.
The state continues to rank first or second nationally in the number of chlamydia cases, a ranking it has held since 2000. In 2006, the last year data was available from the Center for Disease control, Alaska ranked 25th in rates of gonorrhea and 28th in syphilis.
But Alaska had a small amount of cases of the most serious sexually transmitted diseases, HIV.
“We have a low prevelancy rate in the state and we would like to stay that way,” said Mollie Rosier, Alaska section of epidemiology’s HIV/STD program manager.
Rosier said the most common method of transmission was men having sex with men, the method was also the most common among earlier HIV cases.
The Centers for Disease Control define five categories for methods of transmission of HIV: men having sex with men; heterosexual contact with a partner known to have HIV; injection drug use; a combination of men having sex with men and injection drug use; other/unspecified; people who don’t know how they contracted the disease, didn’t disclose the source or were lost for follow-up.
Rosier said the statistics were divided into two time periods, from 1982-2002 and 2003-2007 because there weren’t enough cases for a year-to-year analysis.
There were 1,206 known HIV cases in Alaska from 1982 to 2007. Thirty-seven first-known HIV diagnosis cases occurred in 2007. Of the cases reported, 81 percent of people with the disease were males and 58 percent were white.
Although the chlamydia bulletin said the disease “plays a role in facilitating HIV transmission,” Rosier said that with such a high rate of chlamydia and such a low rate of HIV, it was impossible to tell if chlamydia played a role in contraction of HIV in Alaska.
The bulletin states 4,911 cases of chlamydia were reported in Alaska during 2007, an 8 percent increase over the number of cases in 2006. That is part of a significant increase on chlamydia cases in Alaska since 1996 at a rate of 49 cases per 100,000 people on average.
HIV/STD program’s Donna Cerere prepared the chlamydia and gonorrhea bulletins and said there is no easy or simple answer to why Alaska has such a high rate of the diseases. Cerere said the rise in numbers could also be a byproduct of a more sensitive test that could better detect the disease.
Gonorrhea rates in Alaska actually decreased by 8 percent in 2007 from the previous year.
Cerere said it is not uncommon for different groups to have the highest rates of infection because the diseases are not usually associated with each other.
Chlamydia and gonorrhea can be treated with antibiotics, but Cerere said the more times a woman contracts the disease, the higher the risk of infertility.
Cerere said statistics are kept on chlamydia and gonorrhea because they are the most frequent bacterial infections. Syphilis is not studied because it is rare in the state. Herpes cases are also not tracked because herpes is a viral disease and the cases do not have to be reported.
Contact staff writer Christi Hang at 459-7590.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
"The Centers for Disease Control define five categories for methods of transmission of HIV: men having sex with men; heterosexual contact with a partner known to have HIV...."
Or, to paraphrase: If a *heterosexual* person is going to catch HIV, it must be from another person with HIV -- but for gay men to catch it, it's enough that they be having sex with each other, regardless of their HIV status.
At least, that's how the quoted sentence reads to me.
Isn't that an offensive insinuation? Not to mention, just plain wrong?
Truth hurts, don't it....
Paul, you read too much into it. It isn't offensive or wrong. It just so happens that "men having sex with men" provides a much better opportunity for the virus to spread because of the method.
Heterosexual contact transmission rate is very, very low (somewhere around .3% per incident according to a recent Utah State study) and therefore the CDC breaks it out into heterosexual contact with a known HIV carrier. Those that contract it by having heterosexual contact with an unkown carrier would fall under people who don't know how they contracted it, most likely.
The point is the CDC breaks it out like so because "men having sex with men" is a very high risk category and it is simply implied that one partner must have HIV.
As a quick follow up:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/resour...
For the link lazy:
In the United States, HIV infection and AIDS have had a tremendous effect on men who have sex with men (MSM). MSM accounted for 71% of all HIV infections among male adults and adolescents in 2005 (based on data from 33 states with long-term, confidential name-based HIV reporting), even though only about 5% to 7% of male adults and adolescents in the United States identify themselves as MSM.
In other words, 7% of the population is responsible for 71% of the HIV infections in adult males and adolescents. Is it less offensive and wrong to you now?
Thank you Paul...That should not be mentioned at all..Gay, Bi, hetero ect..is truely irrelevent..it is a contagious disease and can be transmited by having sex, period! I tell my kids a child is the least of what you can "catch" from having unprotected sex with any partner you don't really know. It is russian roulette out there folks!
ecray: "Is it less offensive and wrong to you now?"
In fact, it is, though more because of your first post, where you point out that they're talking about MSM as a "risk category". The sentence itself didn't mention these as risk categories, just as distinct methods of transmission. But if the CDC have identified these as categories of statistically risky behaviors, I have no quarrel.
You're right, I was reading too much into it. Thanks for steering me right.
One persons choice to engage in risky behavior can ruin your entire life.
why don't we blame the government for not finding a cure and solution for those who have acquired HIV through their own decisions and behavior, either through IV drug use or same sex relations, or even just the other nonlethal viruses that come from straight or nonstraight sex? not only should people be able to do what they want to do all of the time, but they should also be freed from any possible consequences.
*beware! above typed with extreme sarcasm!*
It is my belief that the author of this article mis-interpretted Donna Cecere's information regarding syphillis. Alaska does track syphillis cases, as do all states in the USA. Syphillis is a reportable disease, and an epidemiological investigation is done with all positive cases in this state. It is alive and well in AK. Also, this article did not mention that there is a high probability that there are many positive HIV cases out there which have never been diagnosed. NativeAlaskan is right on target with the risk of unprotected sex.
This article would be better read if the author listed the "methods of transmission for HIV" to be semenal fluid, vaginal fluid, blood or breast milk. This is something my children could tell you, and for their own protection. Are you educating your children? If you are not, someone else will do it for you.
NativeAlaskan: "That should not be mentioned at all..Gay, Bi, hetero ect..is truely irrelevent.."
No, it is not irrelevent. It is a fact the homosexual men are in a very high risk group. It has nothing to do with being a sinner, or it being wrong, or god hating them, or anything else religious or political. It has to do with the way HIV is transmitted and the way that group, eh, practices.
nmg60: Why should the article list methods of transmission? I think we all know them, except for the children, who I don't think the News-Miner should be educating anyway. This article was about STD/HIV numbers, not about how it is transmitted.
Excuse me ecray...HIV is transfered from person to person via those avenues mentioned. In addition, there is cross contamination.
No one said the DNM was here for educational purposes. You may be surprised, many people know little about HIV and/or its modes of transmission.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.