Talk:HIV/AIDS

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured articleHIV/AIDS is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good articleHIV/AIDS has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 15, 2006.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 12, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
April 8, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
May 18, 2008Featured article reviewDemoted
August 6, 2012Good article nomineeListed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 5, 2012, and June 5, 2014.
Current status: Former featured article, current good article

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2018[edit]

male circumcision has not been clinically proven to protect from HIV WRLDCTZN (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bellezzasolo Discuss 02:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

HIV/AIDS is not solely a medical concern[edit]

Doc James recently edited some additions I made to this article (diff). As is often the case, his edits made what I wrote better in terms of clarity and pithiness.

But there was one deletion that I disagree with: Removing Randy Shilts' 1987 book, And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic from Further Reading. I wanted to add a whole bunch to this article about the social, psychological, cultural, and political aspects of AIDS and HIV because as it stands the article has an almost exclusive focus on the medical aspect of HIV/AIDS. Obviously, medical aspects are crucial for any article on this horrible disease.

At the same time, we are not doing a good job giving our readers a complete understanding of HIV/AIDS without addressing how 1980s social, religious, and political beliefs, and government officials who acted in accordance with such beliefs, exacerbated the problem, harming many people with HIV and AIDS and their families, friends, and communities.

Current and future generations can, if they choose, and if the information is readily available, learn a lot about how to best respond to epidemics, e.g., look for possibly misinformed, religiously biased, anti-science, anti-public health agendas that could impede a rational public health response.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 07:13, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

The Shilts book was groundbreaking in its day and remains a seminal work today for anyone looking into the history of the AIDS pandemic, especially as it manifested itself in the United States in the 1980s. I see it's mentioned briefly in History of HIV/AIDS. It seems reasonable for it to be included here in some context, although not necessarily as part of a new "Further reading" section. RivertorchFIREWATER 16:01, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
I agree that the history and cultural aspects of HIV/AIDS are incredibly important.
We have 2,788 words out of the total of 9,523 words (about 30% of the body of the text) on historical, social and cultural aspects. We also have 9 subarticles dealing with these aspects linked from this article.
I have added the book here on the history page.[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Rivertorch and Doc James. Good points and I really appreciate your affirmation and balanced perspective. This is an emotional issue for me as I am gay man who lived through "the plague" and lost many friends to the disease. I tried to be as "objective" (to the extent that is really possible) in my remarks, and I appreciate your thoughtful, well-informed responses.   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 00:02, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

HIV/Aids[edit]

I'm not sure how Wikipedia works. "HIV/Aids" is wrong. I have friends who are HIV positive, but they don't have Aids. "HIV and Aids" is what I have read. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karl Momberg (talkcontribs) 20:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

The article is about HIV and AIDS and clearly makes the distinction that you are referring to. If you think the article would be better titled "HIV and AIDS" instead of "HIV/AIDS" you can consider making that suggestion using the process described at Wikipedia:Requested moves. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:24, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
The usage of "HIV/AIDS" to refer to HIV and AIDS together is common. "HIV/AIDS" in GS has 41 million results (as opposed to "HIV and AIDS" at 13 million.) The medline article and lots of other reputable sources uses HIV/AIDS. I don't think there's a compelling reason for the change.[1] Mvolz (talk) 12:03, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

References

HIV/AIDS pain[edit]

Do a section on the actual article describing the pain people feel while dying from final stage AIDS, assuming they are not on modern ARVs or HAART drugs. Crazycarr1971 (talk) 17:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I can't parse your comment. If you'd like to suggest that specific content be added, go right ahead, but be sure it's supported by reliable sources. Original research will not be considered. Please don't alter the time stamp after your signature. RivertorchFIREWATER 22:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


tested together before sex[edit]

The Strategy BEFORE sex test TOGETHER for A VARIETY OF STIs Sexually Transmitted Infections including HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus then make an INFORMED decision, google... tested together before sex — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theszak (talkcontribs) 18:59, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2018[edit]

Inequalities Caused by Legislation[edit]

Addressing and diminishing the HIV levels has had multiple challenges because of breaking out of the health norms is a requirement. Gender inequalities have hurt women most throughout the years due to high cost, lack and limited resources, and biases. Women are affected in both developed and developing countries continue to experience inequality in but not limited to education, employment status, industry of work, hierarchical positions, compensations, and career advancement.[1] Spending double amount per person in comparison to the next wealthiest countries, United Kingdom, and Australia is an example of cost inefficiency.[2] Women tend to have higher cost of procedures or copays because they are seen as commodity or as a “luxury.” Women and men are not paid equally or treated the same under the healthcare system. The gender norms have been established and granted by men’s control over women by preventing or limiting their freedom in sexual and reproductive health decisions.[3] Incorrect decisions have allowed for poor education of proper protection or healthcare has led to both men and women being negative affects. The problem is sexual and reproductive health norms are created with mostly men in legislature is an unequal power or reflection of those affected and general population. For example, there are 435 members in the House of Representatives: 12 are doctors with medicine degrees and 3 had doctor of medicine degrees in the Senate. The small percent of doctors with a medicine degree is not enough when creating legislation or creating changes in the healthcare system because it is not a proper representation of citizens. The government to do its job correctly need to fight for the protection of the environment, and human survival and well-being.[4] The nation’s public health system was operating without basic information about chronic disease and related potential environmental factors. Mmg023 (talk) 21:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ VOKIĆ, NINA POLOŠKI, et al. To be or not to be a women? - Highly educated womens ...The Faculty of Economics and Business Zagreb, 2017, doi: 10.3935/rsp.v24i3.1432
  2. ^ Schneider, Eric C., et al. “Mirror, Mirror 2017:International Comparison Reflects Flaws and Opportunities for Better U.S. Health Care.” Mirror, Mirror 2017: International Comparison Reflects Flaws and Opportunities for Better U.S. Health Care, Common Wealth Fund, July 2017, www.commonwealthfund.org/interactives/2017/july/mirror-mirror/.
  3. ^ Amin, Avni. "Addressing Gender Inequalities to Improve the Sexual and Reproductive Health and Wellbeing of Women Living with HIV." Journal of the International AIDS Society, vol. 18, Dec2015 Supplement 6S5. EBSCOhost, doi:10.7448/IAS.18.6.20302.
  4. ^ reser, Charles D., et al. "Healthy People 2030 and Environmental Health." Journal of Environmental Health, vol. 80, no. 5, Dec. 2017, pp. 50-51. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=126361015&site=ehost-live.

Please change X to Y

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — Newslinger talk 10:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

About a part[edit]

'prevention: male circumcision', really?!

someone should erase that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.154.20.252 (talk) 11:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed Merge with Gay-related immune deficiency[edit]

I would have just merged the GRID page into this one under the claim that it is a category 1 situation under Wikipedia:Proposed mergers#How to propose a merger, but then I saw that the GRID page had been rated of very high importance, so I thought had better propose it officially and see if there's a good reason to keep a GRID page separately from the AIDS page. - Astrophobe (talk) 08:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Never mind, I can't read apparently. This conversation has already happened - Astrophobe (talk) 08:16, 6 November 2018 (UTC)