LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Valerie W. McClain" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 9 Mar 2005 05:35:25 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
Naomi,
The following website is a WHO/UNAIDS website with most recent stats in the 
world.  I believe you would find stats on Africa there.  I think it vitally 
important when reporting these stats that writers make sure that they include the 
fact that these stats are "provisional,"  "estimates;" and if they are 
similiar to US CDC stats, they are "cumulative."  (meaning that if you had 10 cases 
last year and you had two more this year the number would be 12 not 2--thus 
one would assume that hiv/aids was on the increase when actually it was on the 
decline).  In fact this website states that one should not use current 
estimates in comparisons of past years or future years.  

There is a massive difficulty in obtaining accurate statistics from countries 
in which basic things that we take for granted don't exist-such as dependable 
electricity.  Many countries are dependent on generators--electricity being 
intermittant.  Generators are dependent on gasoline (after the hurricanes here 
in Florida I know about this quite well).  Gasoline in some nations is of 
limited supply and expensive.  Thus there is a level of chaos that makes number 
taking difficult.

I just finished a first reading  of a paper by David T. Dunn called "A review 
of statistical methods for estimating the risk of vertical human 
immunodeficiency virus transmission."   It was his numbers in 1992 that established the 
risk of breastfeeding, 14%, that we still treat as written in stone.   In this 
1998 paper written in the International Journal of Epidemiological he states, 
"The standard method for estimating HIV vertical transmission risk is biased 
and inefficient."    At one point he states that maternal antibodies in infants 
have been detected up to age 24 months and most studies have used the 15 month 
to 18 month threshold.  Thus in my mind research and the basis of our current 
policies on transmission of hiv from mother to child  is thrown into 
question.   Estimates are just educated guesses and I believe it is necessary when 
relaying this information to the general public to emphasis that the numbers may 
not reflect reality.  In fact they may be very deceptive.
Valerie W. McClain  

http://www.unaids.org/was/2004/EPlupdate2004_html_en/epi04_00_en.htm
"The UNAIDS/WHO estimates in this document are based on the most recent 
available data on the spread of HIV in countries around the world. They are 
provisional. UNAIDS and WHO, together with experts from national AIDS programmes and 
research institutions, regularly review and update the estimates as improved 
knowledge about the epidemic becomes available, while also drawing on advances 
made in the methods for deriving estimates. Because of these and future 
advances, the current estimates cannot be compared directly with estimates from 
previous years, nor with those that may be published subsequently."

             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2