Talk:Timeline of AIDS

First AIDS death in New York

There is contradicting information regarding the first death from AIDS in new york. The first entry under 1981 and the last entry under 1980 are both regarding the first death, but offer different points of view. Note: no source is given for the 1980 entry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.193.230.26 (talk) 14:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

St Louis Boy

This was removed. It was proven in the early 90s that boy never had HIV or AIDS. That was all due to contamination of samples. As was the 1959 sailor. It was later shown the samples were contaminated in the lab. Subsequent tests on the samples came back negative for HIV.

You have a source for that? Uucp 12:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

celebrity AIDS deaths

I have removed the celebrity AIDS deaths. They may be more relvant at List of HIV-positive individuals Sci guy 16:04, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I added Rock Hudson, as his death had significant political and cultural implications. Uucp 20:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

In the list the discovery of the HIV virus by the Americans is mentioned. But didn't the French discovered the virus before, in 1983??

I have added it. Uucp 20:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Arthur Ashe

If Magic Johnson is mentioned, would it not make sense to mention Arthur Ashe as well. He also (in the words of his wikipedia article) "did much to call attention to AIDS sufferers worldwide". I'm not insisting he is mentioned, just pointing out the situation. LINK3 (talk) 01:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Definitely. -- Banjeboi 05:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

AIDS wins?

I agree that AIDS is more widely used and recognised than Aids and is consistent with SARS, PCP, CMV, etc. CDC uses HIV/AIDS as does WHO and UNAIDS. I also note that acquired immune deficiency syndrome and human immunodeficiency virus do not usually have capitals. CD4 cell count appears to be the standard.

Further discusison is welcome. Sci guy 16:00, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Four comments

• "New guidelines from the World Health Organization and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services defer antiretroviral medications for a person with no symptoms who has a CD4 cell count above 350 and viral load under 100,000". Two problems with this. Firstly, the WHO guidelines were published in 2002, not 2004 (take a look at the report). Secondly, it appears that the DHHS criteria for treatment in the 2004 guidelines were the same as in the previous guidelines, as demonstrated by the quotation given for September 2002.

• ACT-UP Golden Gate is an insignificant organization that doesn't merit any mention in this timeline, let alone the three mentions added by Voyager640.

• "There is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood." This is not an historical event.

• The "Treatment Guidelines 2005" section (added by Sci guy) is irrelevant.

Trezatium 11:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Misleading presentation of 2 cases

1. The presentation of the "1958 25-year-old printer from England named David Carr" case is misleading - any reader skimming will assume wrongly that he was the first AIDS death. The MISTAKE warning needs to be at the start of the case.

2. Does the current presentation, of the "1959/New York City, a 49-year-old American shipping clerk" case, sufficiently alert the reader to the unproven nature of this case.

Hooper in 1999 describes the case, "the pathologist, Gordon Hennigar, was mystified as to why he could find no underlying disease that might explain why the Pneumocystis infection had taken hold and proved so remorseless. The case was sufficiently unusual to be written up in two medical journals, and although one of the papers pointed out that the white blood cell count had sometimes been high (which might suggest a leukemoid reaction), its conclusion was that Ardouin represented "the first reported instance of unassociated [Pneumocystis carinii] disease in an adult." Dr. Hennigar, meanwhile, decided to pickle Ardouin's lungs for posterity." http://www.ofspirit.com/tw-theriver.htm

Have the preserved tissues been tested for HIV since? The sources we cite was written some 21 years ago. Hooper wrote 9 years ago. Potentially the first AIDS death in the USA and no medical/science/epidemiological article can be found to cite - seems unlikely. For the English printer we state "The source reference for this item has been removed from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) website." This implies that the, "1959/New York City, a 49-year-old American shipping clerk" case is accepted by CDC. Is this the case? Anyone got online journal access? 124.169.141.63 (talk) 15:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge timelines

Timeline of early AIDS cases seems to be a sub-set of this article (Timeline_of_AIDS)that could be best merged into this article. Comments? 124.169.22.60 (talk) 02:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

• Opposed I think they are better in this article. Some notable touchstones could be added to the timeline article if it is added in context of 1. the incident and 2. how it is viewed in the larger context. Like many pandemics the earliest cases ar sometimes discovered years and even decades later. In context this information works better here but some cases may fit thre as well. -- Banjeboi 21:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

• Support a merge into this article or into Origin of AIDS#History of known cases and spread. I actually prefer the latter, as most of the information in the Timeline of early AIDS cases is redundant with that section, and the article is pretty flimsy on its own. Fences and windows (talk) 18:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Opposed I agree with Benjiboi. 38.109.88.196 (talk) 06:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

removed

“

Death data on 949 hemophiliacs from the United States for the years 1968-1979 have been analyzed.There was no evidence of new diseases caused by the more intensive therapy during this time interval. The leading infectious disease was hepatitis, accounting for eight deaths. Only one acute hepatitis death was listed after 1974, when sensitive tests for hepatitis B antigen screening of plasma were implemented. Cirrhosis was a primary or associated cause of death in 76 cases (8%) and pneumonia was a primary or associated cause of death in 62 deaths (6.5%). The types of malignancies in hemophiliacs were similar to those in the male US population with no evidence of excessive retrovirus malignancies prior to infection with HIV-1.

”

I've removed the above as being rather convoluted. We aren't a medical journal and as such we should try to be clear on what we are presenting. Is this saying something? I'm not sure what but we should clarify so it's clear to all. -- Banjeboi 11:49, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

leading cause of death for males 22-44?

I removed this entry for 1992:

"In the US, AIDS becomes the leading cause of death for 24 to 44 year old men"

This is a direct quote from this new scientist timeline. The concept of a "leading cause of death" is pretty arbitrary (you can juggle categories to get any value you want) but given sites like [1] and CDC's health data interactive (gopheresque and hard to link, start here [2]), it's clearly not even close today.

I'm having trouble finding data for 1992 online, if it turns out it was true at some peak in AIDS deaths it's very misleading to include without indicating that it went back down shortly after.

BCoates (talk) 06:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Arvid Noe

I have always found the sourcing of the case of Arvid Noe to be rather thin. The article about Noe himself includes only cites for Hooper and one cite for a source that I would deem to be reputable, The Lancet medical journal. What makes the Noe case even less credible is that its article mentions an allegedly famous German violinist by name who is apparently not widely known beyond his association with Noe. I bring this up here because I'm looking for thoughts and opinions on the relevance and credibility of references to Noe's case and this article is followed by a bit larger group than the Noe article itself. Should it stay in the timeline? --Sephiroth9611 (talk) 17:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hooper references a 1997 article in Virology about Noe, as well as the Lancet piece about the violinist that you mention. He is discussed at very great length in the Hooper article, and Hooper included him again in his 2005 catalog of important figures in the history of the disease at http://www.aidsorigins.com/content/view/24/31/#N. Noe is mentioned again in a letter to Nature from 1998 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v391/n6667/full/391594a0.html). Do you think Noe may be fictional? The evidence seems adequate to me that he is what Hooper described him to be. Uucp (talk) 23:30, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I will take your word for it if you deem Hooper's account of Noe to be credible. I know about Hooper only through reading about him here at Wikipedia, so I'll refrain from making further judgments about his reputation. My only goal was asking for a reevaluation of the subject, which you've provided, so I'm satisfied. Thanks. --Sephiroth9611 (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The Lancet is a top publication, and David Ho was one of the co-authors of the 1998 letter. Noe's story seems legitimate to me. Uucp (talk) 15:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Lancet is highly reputable...and the story of Arvid Noe is well-reported in AIDS history. 38.109.88.196 (talk) 06:26, 25 February 2010 (UTC)