Lies, damned lies, and AIDS infections

Mark Twain had it right. Lies, damned lies, and statistics. All the more so as statisticians have begun to employ more esoteric calculations to derive results far removed from actual data collection. Controversy surrounding historical global temperatures is due to this.

But I don't understand why today we are having Reuters saying that CDC is not yet saying whether their AIDS infection rate figures will rise, while "activist groups" think there are explosive numbers, "almost 50% higher," that are being held back. The actual numbers are 55K vs 40K, which is 37.5%, but who's counting.

CDC wants to take a long look before releasing the results, since they may have policy impacts. However, those who already know what policy impacts they desire can't wait to see if science supports them. "We hope that this is not yet another instance of the Bush administration's suppression of information that could be damaging to their image, especially in light of the fact that the spike in new infections is, at least in part, likely due to failed policies of the administration, including the promotion of 'abstinence-only' prevention messages and the failure to promote condom use," said Michael Weinstein, president of AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

This comes under the "have you stopped beating your wife" category. CDC is under attack for not releasing numbers early, and Weinstein already knows not only that the spike is taking place but what is causing it. He weasels in that he hopes it is not so, but clearly his mind is made up.

"Abstinence only" is a policy designed for teenagers. Teenagers are substantially more likely to die in auto accidents than from AIDS and if they are infected, it's extremely unlikely that it's the result of heterosexual sex with peers. When some high school boy and his girl decide to lose their virginity before the prom, it may get her pregnant but it won't give her AIDS. Bush should give up on abstinence only, but for reasons that have nothing to do with AIDS.