It may not be rocket science, Einstein, but CDC stats still confusing

Tracking Changes

[via Housing Works]

The recent CDC studies on new infections confused everyone—and showed, once again, the lack of reliable incidence data

The 2006 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week caused confusion and frantic press releases. It's no wonder: The report stated that newly reported infections in the U.S. rose dramatically from 35,537 in 2005 to 52,878 in 2006.

The rise was cause for concern—and not. On the one hand, the numbers rose because California, Delaware, Illinois, Maine and Washington switched over to a names-based reporting system—the only system the CDC tracks. On the other hand, in the 33 states and five territories that have used the CDC-approved confidential names-based reporting system since at least 2003, newly diagnosed infections have remained relatively stable, though there has been a slight increase in certain subgroups.

Technically, the new numbers don't indicate a rise in newly reported infections or diagnoses, as the Director of the Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention for the CDC Robert Janssen, M.D. said in a statement and Dear Colleague letter issued on March 28 and meant to address the confusion. But then again, this report blows apart the widely cited CDC figure of 40,000 new infections per year, a statistic that hasn't been updated since 2001, and was derived using an indirect method based on now outdated surveillance data.

Read the rest.