OACTUP@OBERLIN (06/15/89)
White, affluent sections and overeporting in minorities. Other studies I have
seen show the opposite.
In one poster presented at Montreal (poster T.A.P.61) entitled
Undereporting of AIDS Cases in South Carolina, researchers found that of 163
patients in the period of 1/1/86 to 6/30/87 that were determined by their
symptoms to be AIDS, only 91 (59.5%) were reported.
"Patients were significantly more likely to be reported as AIDS cases if they
were white than black and white than non-white."
"The selective underreporting of minority and female patients is of particular
concern, since these populations are currently percieved as being of increased
risk for AIDS than there white and male counterparts."
"If underreporting of the degree observed in this study is widespread
throughout the United States, current estimates regarding the extent of the
epidemic should be taken with caution. It is unclear if the present findings
apply to other states, though it seems reasonable to assume that similar
underreporting may exist elswhere."
Reported Not reported Total
White 48 19 67
Black 43 38 81
Other 0 5 5
Male 82 49 131
Female 9 13 22
Total 91 62 153
A researcher from the west coast (Santa Cruz? I don't remember off
hand) said that they found the same results in his city.
Obviosly the implications of this are quite dramatic. While more
effective reporting methods are being used, the potential of only 60% of AIDS
cases tobe reported means it is possable that the US currently has closer to
160,000 cases of full blown AIDS than the current 100,000 approx, and that
racial minorities are much harder hit than is being reported.
(Any who want a reprint of this poster, let me know. As soon as I
blow up the photo I can send you a photocopy. Just give me your US Snail
address, and don't expect me to get to it tomarrow. It may take a while.)
John Chapman
sjc9582@oberlin