POZ Community Forums
Meds, Mind, Body & Benefits => Research News & Studies => Topic started by: oksikoko on August 01, 2013, 04:54:15 pm
-
I don't know why, but I'm having trouble finding a source for the numbers on the graph on this page called "AIDS Deaths Since 1987". I'd like to have something a little more definitive than "some image I found online". Does anyone know where there's a table with this info, compiled by one agency using the same methodology for all the years?
http://www.thebody.com/content/art13838.html
It should be easy to find, but for some reason, I'm just not finding it.
Thanks,
Lee
-
although I totally HATE the site change for the Kaiser Family Foundation site (kff.org), they have been collecting state data since, well probably since the beginning of the epidemic.
Number of AIDS deaths since beginning of epidemic: 658,992, including more than 16,000 in 2010
kff.org/hivaids/fact-sheet/the-hivaids-epidemic-in-the-united-states/
and of course, the CDC has got a ton of information
cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/aids-hiv.htm
or there's always wiki
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_in_the_United_States#Mortality_and_morbidity
The cumulative number of deaths in the U.S. due to causes related to AIDS is estimated to be more than 650,000. The cumulative number of estimated AIDS cases in the U.S. is estimated to be 1.8 million. Over 1.1 million people are estimated to be currently living with HIV in the U.S
sorry for the truncated URLs. this site is still having issues. ARGH!
-
of course, simply following the legend on the graphic at the body ("national center for health statistics") led me to the CDC site and this information
"In 2010, the estimated number of deaths of persons ever receiving a diagnosis of AIDS in the United States was 15,529.
The cumulative estimated number of deaths of persons with an AIDS diagnosis in the United States, through 2010, was 636,048."
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/index.html
-
Thanks. I'm looking for the figures for each individual year, though, not the cumulative total. Everything I find is already cumulative or manipulated in some way when I just want the actual numbers. :)
-
Its still not what your asking for but has some good info .
http://www.avert.org/worldstats.htm
-
Ha, thanks for looking! Isn't it funny that that's not readily available? Actually, I'm sure it is, but I'm just not looking in the right spot, and I'm a little sleep deprived. I'll poke around when I have some time.
I just need to recreate that same graph in a different format, and I'd like to have updated figures and a better citation while I'm at it. I suppose I could just find the figure for each year from the CDC report from that year, but it'd be nice to find them in one table, especially if the way the total was calculated changed. Someone would have already accounted for that.
If worse comes to worst, I can still make the point I want to make just by copying these numbers.
-
Some stats seem hard to find. I've always wondered how many people in the US survived after getting infected in the 80's. I guess poor record keeping and the fact that there was no test available until 1985 are problematic.
If you find out what you are looking for I hope you provide a link for us. Interested myself.
-
Thanks. I'm looking for the figures for each individual year, though, not the cumulative total. Everything I find is already cumulative or manipulated in some way when I just want the actual numbers. :)
Ha, thanks for looking! Isn't it funny that that's not readily available? Actually, I'm sure it is, but I'm just not looking in the right spot, and I'm a little sleep deprived. I'll poke around when I have some time.
I just need to recreate that same graph in a different format, and I'd like to have updated figures and a better citation while I'm at it. I suppose I could just find the figure for each year from the CDC report from that year, but it'd be nice to find them in one table, especially if the way the total was calculated changed. Someone would have already accounted for that.
If worse comes to worst, I can still make the point I want to make just by copying these numbers.
the CDC has been tracking this stuff for 30 years and publishing the "HIV Surveillance Report" for public consumption every year. This data is gleaned from the yearly reports that all 50 states have published themselves. The information on the state level is available through each dpt of health website. This information is sent to the CDC which compiles it into the year Surveillance Reports.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/surveillance/pastIssues.html
goodness knows I've created many a fact sheet or talking point sheet through these reports over the years ;)
to be able to access this all in one database to get a simple table like you described probably takes being an employee of the CDC with the right credentials. Otherwise us peons have to do it the old fashioned hard way of collating the data by hand. When you consider how computers were circa 1985-1995, it's not too hard to understand why this data isn't as easily accessible to us today as say the data from 2010 is.
-
Some stats seem hard to find. I've always wondered how many people in the US survived after getting infected in the 80's. I guess poor record keeping and the fact that there was no test available until 1985 are problematic.
little reporting by diagnosis-year has been documented through the years because that becomes quite individualized data and really overwhelms a lot of record keeping.
While my ASO may know a client's diagnosis year and be able to say how many clients are alive who were infected pre 1900, on the state level individualized tracking data is not kept to know when a person was diagnosed and when that person died. They just have a generic number of how many people were diagnosed in a given year and how many died in a given year.
For example I was counted as an AIDS diagnosis (and an HIV diagnosis) in 1992. Every year since I have shown up as just one number of the amount of PLWHA. When I die I will probably tally up as an AIDS death that year; but there will be no data tracking that I lived with HIV 20+ years when I died.
I would imagine however that there is a way to get an estimate out from the data; but probably no hard fact number.
-
While my ASO may know a client's diagnosis year and be able to say how many clients are alive who were infected pre 1900
Um, I should hope so! Zero. ;D
I would imagine however that there is a way to get an estimate out from the data; but probably no hard fact number.
I'd settle for an estimate. :)
Sorry for my sidetrack Lee.
-
I'd also assert that any accurate reports would indeed be inaccurate. I knew way too many young men who died early in this pandemic and only 1 had his official cause of death listed as AIDS. I read many obits where it indicated they died after a brief struggle with cancer...etc. The other Greg insisted that his obit be correct against the wishes of his family.
We had many discussions on this topic and he didn't want his life or death to be a lie. I guess he was a little more progressive than most at the time.
The fear and stigma was much worse and people feared the shame their families would endure.
Wolfie
-
Um, I should hope so! Zero. ;D
ROLMAO ;D
pre-1990. that extra 9 should changed that thought, huh? LOL
or better yet pre-1995 (the PHLTS group)
-
Data from 1981-2004
After 2004 no data is available?
http://www.amfar.org/thirty-years-of-hiv/aids-snapshots-of-an-epidemic/ (http://www.amfar.org/thirty-years-of-hiv/aids-snapshots-of-an-epidemic/)
-
Data from 1981-2004
After 2004 no data is available?
http://www.amfar.org/thirty-years-of-hiv/aids-snapshots-of-an-epidemic/ (http://www.amfar.org/thirty-years-of-hiv/aids-snapshots-of-an-epidemic/)
Thank you! This will be perfect. :D
-
http://www.amfar.org/thirty-years-of-hiv/aids-snapshots-of-an-epidemic/ (http://www.amfar.org/thirty-years-of-hiv/aids-snapshots-of-an-epidemic/)
1984
"U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler predicts an AIDS vaccine will be ready for testing within two years."
This may shed some light on why some here get weary of the often irrational exuberance in some of the threads in "Research and News"
-
1984
"U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler predicts an AIDS vaccine will be ready for testing within two years."
This may shed some light on why some here get weary of the often irrational exuberance in some of the threads in "Research and News"
*Like*
-
Hmmm, something seems not quite right here in this draft, but I'm hoping I just mis-carried a three somewhere. Unless something extraordinary happened in 2002-3...
(http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b632/oksikoko/ScreenShot2013-08-05at74428AM_zps3e728977.png)
-
Your math seems fine based on the figures given but ya, I'm not so sure what could have possibly happened in 02 and 03. It doesn't make sense to me.
-
One possible (probable?) explaination - in the early 2000s, there were many people who had run out of treatment options due to resistance issues from the ineffectual pre-HAART drugs and also the post-HAART compliance problems that arose due to the severe side-effects many experienced.
Fuzeon (the first in a whole new class of meds) was approved in March 2003 and saved many people who were out of treatment options.
(Miss P was one of them.)
-
Something seems to be wrong with the amFar numbers. The CDC graph looks totally different: a sharp and steady decrease after 1995:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_2002_HIV_Surveillance_Report_vol_14.pdf (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_2002_HIV_Surveillance_Report_vol_14.pdf)
BTW I got the feeling that Google delivers much better results in 30 sec. in Europe, where Americans get no results :)
Maybe its part of the whole NSA scandal- it is number 1 topic all around clock here. You can't imagine how BIG BIG it is here:)
There will be a lot of trouble in the future. But that's another topic.
Please back to the numbers...
-
there's that graph starting off the 2002 report
(http://i918.photobucket.com/albums/ad21/leathermanmikie/am_photos/deathchart_zpsfb2bb120.jpg)
and then from the 2003 report
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_2003_HIV_Surveillance_Report_vol_15.pdf there are same similar numbers to amfar but not that out-of-place 03 count
1999-18,491
2000-17,741
2001-18,524
2002-17,557
2003-18,017
-
there's that graph starting off the 2002 report
(http://i918.photobucket.com/albums/ad21/leathermanmikie/am_photos/deathchart_zpsfb2bb120.jpg)
and then from the 2003 report
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics_2003_HIV_Surveillance_Report_vol_15.pdf there are same similar numbers to amfar but not that out-of-place 03 count
1999-18,491
2000-17,741
2001-18,524
2002-17,557
2003-18,017
I started simply pulling numbers from the surveillance reports too, but unfortunately, they each seem to cover about five years at a time, and they're not consistent - the numbers are continually revised so change from report to report. I'd like one complete set of numbers from any given point in time as long as the methodology was the same for each and as long as they're reasonably accurate. The point of the chart is to show that dropoff after 1996. The actual numbers don't matter, but I do want them to reflect reality.
I might just pick one of the surveillance reports that centers on 96 to show the shift. I think there's something powerful in seeing those lines grow, though, all the way from a few hundred to 50,000, then just as suddenly start dropping after the arrival of HAART. It loses something when you zoom in.
Haha, this was supposed to be a quick aside. Thanks for all the searching you've all done for my silly little chart.
-
(http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/images/HivFactSheets/Todaysepidemic_graphic4-HighRes.jpg)
http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/HIVFactSheets/Epidemic/Care.htm
-
(http://www.drugabuse.gov/sites/default/files/imagecache/content_image_landscape/images/colorbox/drugfactshiv2.jpg)
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/hivaids-drug-abuse-intertwined-epidemics
-
If only these had tables published alongside. I need the actual numbers, and you can only get rough estimates from those pre-fab charts.
(By the by, isn't a line graph totally inappropriate for non-continuous data or am I being persnickety? I'm surprised so many went that route.)
-
Haha, this was supposed to be a quick aside. Thanks for all the searching you've all done for my silly little chart.
it's good to see this though.
If you've experienced some sort of Lazarus effect, this kind of information is deeply internalized; but for those who never got very sick, who never came close to death, seeing a chart like this with such a drastic shift should really show how well meds have worked.
So often we get newbies (sorry but that's who has this issue) worried about meds. taking meds, side effects, dosing, etc. But numbers and charts like these show what anybody really needs to know about the meds - they work! Untreated HIV will kill you, and treated HIV keeps you alive.
-
(By the by, isn't a line graph totally inappropriate for non-continuous data or am I being persnickety? I'm surprised so many went that route.)
showing year to year to year data often makes a good line chart.
as nice as your bar graph is ;) (and it is nice! especially with the #s spelled out, so to speak), you could have just as easily drawn a line connecting all the tops and shown the same information. LOL
-
So often we get newbies (sorry but that's who has this issue) worried about meds. taking meds, side effects, dosing, etc. But numbers and charts like these show what anybody really needs to know about the meds - they work! Untreated HIV will kill you, and treated HIV keeps you alive.
Exactly. That's why I'm trying to put this chart in my little side project as backup for the claim that HIV is not an automatic death sentence. It's a very powerful visualization.
-
showing year to year to year data often makes a good line chart.
as nice as your bar graph is ;) (and it is nice! especially with the #s spelled out, so to speak), you could have just as easily drawn a line connecting all the tops and shown the same information. LOL
Yes, but the line implies data between the years, though such data doesn't exist. It's technically inaccurate (I believe) to use a line graph here. :)
-
as nice as your bar graph is ;) (and it is nice! especially with the #s spelled out, so to speak), you could have just as easily drawn a line connecting all the tops and shown the same information. LOL
Oh, and in HTML/CSS, it's much more difficult to draw diagonal lines than to build boxes. :) I'd have to use the canvas or WebGL, and I preferred to avoid that. :)
-
Yes, but the line implies data between the years, though such data doesn't exist. It's technically inaccurate (I believe) to use a line graph here. :)
that data does exist! States have to regularly (monthly) report this data to the CDC. you'd probably have to comb the state reports to get that though or as I mentioned before, have access to the CDC database where all this is stored. Why this data, may even be available at the CDC site. Every time I poke around there, I find more and more. It's just that the public doesn't much care about the minutia of the data (in this case you're talking about month-to-month increases), so they publish, chart and graph the broader information yr-to-yr.
I mean I doubt anyone, especially someone that you're trying to get to understand that ART is effective, is going to care, or remember, exactly how many people died in april 1990 or june 1990, or july 1990. :D
Oh, and in HTML/CSS,
paint shop pro/photoshop
use excel for the graph, screenshot it, and create a graphic. ;) LOL
-
Hey - I was working on something tonite and it reminded me of your question of why a line graph was used instead of a bar graph.
Whoever made the graph (they may not have realized it) were doing a linear regression.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&ved=0CF0QtwIwBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DMIqyiGvrUXE&ei=zaMMUu76DOSG2wX38oGYBA&usg=AFQjCNFr0RzU8ewNV1EabGw64iSUydjlng&sig2=J5VpO9FDGlaK2AzVQVafxg&bvm=bv.50723672,d.b2I
The data was input in a database and then converted to a graph. Line graphs as you have noticed are better at showing outliers. You could also (theoretically) determine the number between the points.
In pure math the line graph is used. For visual purposes a bar graph is sleeker.
The graph could have been done on a graphing calculator or maybe on an Iphone. Microsoft Excel or Access will do both. Oracles programs can also produce the same results although the CDC and other places probably have big blue or something to perform the action.
I'm sure your graph will be sexier.
-
Not too sexy, I'm afraid. I'm not a graphic designer by any stretch. I just wanted the colors and general style to be consistent with the other graphs or I'd have just used one of the publicly available images. :)
Here's what I ended up with, using just a slice of data around the introduction of HAART instead of the whole 30+ years of the pandemic. The source info, description etc. is nearby, just not in this screenshot.
(http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b632/oksikoko/haart-and-aids-related-deaths_zpsca38d8f8.png)
-
It looks good to me as long as it coodinates with your theme. It is one time where Microsoft Office beats Apple. But why do it over. Can we say "theory of diminishing returns?"
-
1) Microsoft v Apple wut? This was built out of HTML and styled with CSS so that the data would still be parsable. I didn't use Apple or Microsoft products beyond opening a text editor on a Mac.
2) It's never a diminishing return to build something by hand. I'm as proud of my charts as my grandpa was of the whistles he would carve. ;)
3) My theme probably needs color correction. I'm colorblind so I pick a palette by numbers then stick with those numbers.
-
Generally HTML is used to build websites isn't it? How did that creme brulee you made in your bread machine come out?
-
Generally HTML is used to build websites isn't it? How did that creme brulee you made in your bread machine come out?
It's a chart from a website. So, yes. :)
Haha, are you talking about my creme brulee turtle quote? It's from a Russian cartoon.
-
It spoke to me. I don't want a job. I want marjolaine.
-
I've never heard of marjolaine, even though my ex-husband was French. But he was more of a chef than a baker.
Now I want one. A marjolaine, that is, not another husband.
Here's the cherepaxa wanting creme brulee. When I taught Russian, I carried videos and audio recordings across borders like some kind of smuggler so I would have them for students. It must be much easier to teach nowawadays, what with all this "in-ter-net". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yLZbHfH1Rs
-
I learned much of my college Italian from Wikipedia and Muzzy!