Sunday, August 5, 2012

CDC Data in Graph and Quotes

 

 

“From 2007 through 2010, in the 46 states and 5 U.S. dependent areas with long-term confidential name-based HIV infection reporting, the largest estimated numbers of diagnoses of HIV infection were seen among MSM aged 25-34 years and 35–44 years. The number of diagnoses among MSM aged 25–34 increased 14% from 2007 through 2010, and surpassed the decreasing number of diagnoses among MSM aged 35–44 for the first time in 2008. MSM aged 13–24 had the greatest percentage increase (44%) in diagnoses of HIV infection from 2007 through 2010 and exceeded the number of diagnoses among those aged 35–44 by 2010.

The following 46 states have had laws or regulations requiring confidential name-based HIV infection reporting since at least January 2007 (and reporting to CDC since at least June 2007): Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. The 5 U.S. dependent areas include American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Data include persons with a diagnosis of HIV infection regardless of stage of disease at diagnosis. All displayed data are estimates. Estimated numbers resulted from statistical adjustment that accounted for reporting delays and missing risk-factor information, but not for incomplete reporting.

Data exclude men who reported sexual contact with other men and injection drug use.”

 

 

 

What has attributed to this increase in HIV infection among 13-24 year olds?

  1. Gay-Straight clubs? Gay friendly books?
  2. Not telling the truth or not even mentioning scant condom protection with anal intercourse in Health Education in the schools? MPSC would not include this statement:

 

“The surgeon general said: “Condoms provide some protection but anal intercourse is simply too dangerous to practice.”

 

  1. False impressions touted by the gay activists that there is nothing dangerous about Sexual activity.

·       PFLAG

“mainstream medical and mental health professional associations” agree that there is nothing wrong if you are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning (LGBTQ).” [PFLAG flyer given to students in Montgomery County Public High School.MD]

“There is nothing wrong with being LGBT - in fact, there's a lot to celebrate.” [National PFLAG]

 

PFLAG is so concerned about a person’s feelings that no one wants to talk about the elephant in the room. Case in point, the new campaign from PFAG the “Care with PRIDE™ campaign, an educational, awareness, and media campaign on the harm of bullying, violence, and discrimination for all students—LGBT and otherwise.”

 

·       GLSEN is more concerned with bullying and harassment in the schools than serious health issues of LGBT students.

 

“When LGBT students are taught positive representations of LGBT people, history, and events they are half as likely to experience high levels of victimization because of their sexual orientation or gender expression and are less likely to miss school because of feeling unsafe or uncomfortable. Students in schools with an inclusive curriculum also feel a greater sense of belonging to their school compared to other students.” http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/library/record/2864.html?state=research&type=research

 

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment