1 in 40 gay Vancouver men unaware they're HIV-positive: ManCount
HIV/AIDS / 'We think it's what's driving the epidemic,' researcher says
Nathaniel Christopher / Vancouver / Thursday, November 25, 2010
Share |

One in 40 gay men in Vancouver are HIV-positive but don't know it, says a new report scheduled for release on Nov 26.

The ManCount report also confirms earlier estimates that one in five gay men in Vancouver are HIV-positive overall.

"That's a number you can visualize in a gay bar," says Dr Terry Trussler, who helped prepare the report.

"If there are 100 guys in a gay bar, at least two of them won't know they are HIV-positive," he says.

"That still means that one in five are HIV-positive," he adds. "It just means that in a group of 40, one of them is positive but doesn't know."

ManCount is not the first survey of gay men's health in Vancouver. The Community Based Research Centre's Sex Now surveys asked men who have sex with men to disclose their HIV status on anonymous questionnaires between 2002 and 2008. The results parallel ManCount's findings: 16 percent of respondents know they're HIV-positive.

But ManCount took the extra, unprecedented step of asking respondents for a blood sample as well. The results: 18.1 percent of the study's 1,139 respondents were HIV-positive.

That means 2.5 percent of the men surveyed are positive but don't know it.

This is an enormous concern, says Trussler. "We think it's what's driving the epidemic."

"We did an analysis in the survey and we're pretty sure that these guys think they are negative -- and are serosorting with other negative guys on the false assumption that they think they are negative," says Dr Rick Marchand, who also worked on the study.

In other words, guys are hooking up based on a mistaken belief that they're both HIV-negative and choosing to use or not use condoms accordingly, the researchers explain.

And the guys who don't know they're positive are likely to be newly infected and therefore more likely to transmit the virus. "We know that the fresh infections in the first months or so are very infectious to other people," says Trussler. "There's a lot more virus, there's a huge viral load, so the chances of infecting somebody who has not protected themselves is very high."

Unaware they're positive, not on treatment and serosorting as if they're negative -- "It's creating a continuing infection of new men," Trussler says.

According to ManCount, 150-190 gay men in Vancouver are newly diagnosed with HIV each year.

Add these cases to a fairly fixed population size and the percentage of HIV-positive men in Vancouver's gay male community continues to increase every year, Trussler says.

"The whole nature of being in a closed situation where one in five men are infected increases the chances that others will be infected," he says.

Dr Mark Gilbert, a physician epidemiologist in the sexually transmitted infections/HIV division of the BC Centre for Disease Control, says the study emphasizes the need for gay men to know their serostatus.

"When you think about these men who think they are negative but are positive, it gets you thinking: how do you know that you're negative?

"I think it's important for people to get tested to be aware of their own status," says Gilbert, who also worked on the study. "Making decisions about other people's status means knowing what your own status is and what the other person's status is as well."

Marchand agrees that regular testing is essential.

Gay men need to know their status, he says. If they're going to serosort as a prevention measure, they need to get tested more often.

Wayne Robert, executive director of the Health Initiative for Men, says the 2.5 percent result may not be as dire as it seems.

"Half of the 2.5 percent were in between tests," he points out. "They were regular testers, routinely tested, so if they were getting tested every year they hadn't come up to their regular test yet. So they would have eventually been caught. So you're looking at about one in 80 who are unaware they were infected and not regularly tested."

The report shows that HIV rates among gay men in Vancouver are dramatically higher than the overall population. A 2006 report, "HIV/AIDS in Vancouver, British Columbia: A Growing Epidemic," estimated that approximately 1.21 percent of people in Vancouver are HIV-positive.

ManCount shows that 18.1 percent of gay men in Vancouver are HIV-positive.

Robert wants to launch an information campaign urging people to be more aware of their HIV status. He plans to target younger gay men in particular who, according to ManCount, are less likely to get tested.

"One of the things that happens when we have these kind of surveys is that we are able to make stronger cases to government for intervention and programs that address this," Robert says. "This survey represented the coming together of a number of agencies, including Vancouver Coastal Health and the BC Centre for Disease Control. Now those groups are going to be able to get together and determine what steps to take based on the hard information from these studies."

 



Share |


Reader Comments


 
What's driving...
I have no doubt that men who don't know they are positive are contributing to the growth of new infections, but for Dr. Trussler to say that these people are "driving the epidemic" seems a little too conclusive a statement for my liking. I have not done any scientific studies, but since I've been around a little (ie: I'm what I would call an "ethical slut"), I feel somewhat qualified to express an opinion. I believe that the average man who is negative assumes that if his partner were positive he would say so, and I believe that the average man who is positive - and knows it - assumes that if his partner were negative he would request a condom. Hence, there's a lot of uninformed, assumption-based fucking going on - in other words, driving new infections. This is probably true of all age groups, but especially so with younger men who, in my experience, tend to be less comfortable initiating conversations about sex and HIV, and of course, men who are making sexual health decisions while using alcohol and drugs. I've been fucking men for over twenty years (some unknown hundreds in total) and I have always operated under the assumption that they are ALL positive and have therefore adopted appropriate safety measures. If one is going to assume anything, this seems the only responsible assumption. It has served me well. I have had sex with countless positive men, but I am still negative myself (I am tested twice annually). I am negative because I do not make ill-informed assumptions. Encouraging men who fuck men to be tested for HIV is an important part of any infection reduction effort. However, unless evey single man is going to be tested after every single sexual encounter, it's not going to solve the problem. Negative men must assume that everyone new man that they fuck is positive, at least until proved otherwise, and use the safety equipment and procedures that are freely available. Assume that no one is going to look after you but you
Edward, Vancouver BC
11/25/10 7:13 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
View from a poz man 26 years HIV+
I agree with Edwards comments 100% because tops and bottoms (poz/neg) are not having the sexual health chats they should be having. My experience has been since testing poz in 1985 that I play with both poz and neg men, wear a safe when I need to, and have never infected another gay man. For the first 10 years of the epidemic I also had no sex until all the hype settled down. Now days, most poz men are on HAART, have undetectable viral loads and high t-cell counts. The meds are working, HIV has been been put at bay, we're not capable of giving anyone else HIV because there isn't any left to transmit. HIV negative men in Vancouver warrant serious targeted further study by Dr. Trussler and his team to look at how negative gay men decide how to have sex (serosorting) and with who when they are cocked and loaded in the heat of passion before fucking. I would like to see further studies on serosorting done in a qualitatitive format using grounded theory because poz men on meds have long adopted condoms when needed and cannot spread HIV. My lived experience has been that HIV neg men will reject a man like me because the law requires I disclose my status, then they will move onto an HIV negative gay man who he's more than happy to take it up the ass bareback cuz he was told the top is negative. I agree with Edward in that there are many out there who are ill-informed and ill equipped to negotiate talking about raw man fucking skin on skin. Dr Trussler's study in Man Count also could have explained better men who know their status, get tested regularly and behave safely and responsibly, ethically. Edward is one honest gay man who is negative and is an ethical slut. I am poz and also an ethical slut but HIV neg men continue to make wrong assumptions about poz men barebacking all the time when in actual fact we are not. We are almost 30 years into this epidemic and new infections can and should be prevented but the reality is its not. Clearly we have a problem in Vancouver.
MVL, Vancouver BC
11/27/10 4:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Responsiblity
I also agree with Edward. And I am not surprised by these numbers at all. Gay men seem to be acting more and more irresponsible these days. For some reason it many can barely hold a job, pay their rent and its all about the party only to suffer the consequences later. Its very sad, so many live like they are on some reality show, yet are not very interesting. Men have be responsible for their actions. Just because we have the healthcare there too doesn't mean we have to hammer away at it because you haven't taken care of your own health. Seven minutes in heaven can leave you living the rest of your life in a segment of hell boys!
HS, Vancouver BC
11/27/10 6:51 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Flaws of the study?
I was one of the participants and I have issues with the findings in this study. First, the study (where I did mine) was administered at a bar on a Friday night. People were paid $10 to fill out the form and have their blood taken. Ok here I'm going to make a HUGE assumption and MANY people would disagree with me: Men who frequent bars are more likely to be single and more likely to partake in high risk activities. So naturally, my conclusion would be that there would be a higher rate of HIV infection compare to the "non-scene" gays. As well, besides bars, was this study done at bath houses where HIV rates are highly prevalent? My second point is that people who fill out these forms do not answer everything correctly. Some people, knowing that it's an anonymous questionnaire would answer half blindly just to get their $10. Others might feel that somehow the blood can be traced back to them could just make up answers that are not true. The third point is that there are some people (and I do know one) who know they are HIV positive but are in denial. I'm sure this population is small but 1 in 40 is quite plausible.
Howard, Vancouver BC
11/28/10 10:23 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Barebackers are after risk, not statistics
This article makes naive, bullshit assumptions - namely that the "one in 40 gay guys in Vancouver [who] don't know they're HIV+" would avoid having unprotected sex if they new their status. Barebackers fetishize risking not only their own health, but that of their partners. Also, re: "If they're going to serosort as a prevention measure, they need to get tested more often". The fuck? GAY MEN DO NOT NEED TO BE ENCOURAGED TO HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX WITH ANONYMOUS PARTNERS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEIR ALLEGEDLY SEROCONCORDANT PARTNERS ARE TELLING THE TRUTH. That includes HIV+ men who bareback men who allege that they are also HIV+. We need to assume that whoever we're fucking is a liar. And that isn't defeatism, it's self-preservation. Finally, I'm not necessarily speaking out against barebackers - I'm not anti-barebacking, I'm anti-stupid. It's stupid to trust strangers with your life.
Ghassan, Vancouver BC
12/03/10 4:16 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Sampling Bias
Fact is-- Mancount is NOT a random sampling and has little merit to be making these outrageous headline grabbing claims. Mancount sets up booths at circuit events... who goes to circuit events but mostly the VERY sexually active "party type" gay crowd. What is clear is that this crowd, by far, does NOT represent vast swaths of the community and/or those not in "the community." This story sounds to me like a huge sampling bias and putting it on the front page of the paper just adds fuel to religious nutjobs AIDS = god's gay retribution quackfuckery. Unimpressed.
Jeremy Felix D., Vancouver BC
12/03/10 4:00 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Yeah!
Agree Ghassen! Cause God knows gay men never ever lie about their clothes, age, name, money, work, background so why oh why would they ever lie about their status? "let me just stick it in a little" Self preserve! The community sure isn't. Why pay for it today, when you can pay for it tomorrow? But he loves me! Whatever.
Ken McCall, Vancouver BC
12/04/10 7:15 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Sampling Biases
I agree completely with the commenters Jeremy Felix and Howard about sampling biases. Not only did they do the surveys at bars but also at bathhouses, as well as "businesses and events." I could name any number of my gay friends who have no idea what the inside of a "bathhouse" (euphemistic for sex club) looks like, and not coincidentally they are mostly the same people who are at either no risk at all or very low risk. And as far as bars go, I know that for the five years that I have been in a long-term monogamous relationship, I've gone out to bars at approximately one-tenth the frequency that I did when I was single and NOT monogamous. I don't know what kind of "businesses and events" were targeted, but regardless, it's not going to balance out to be a realistic cross-section. The survey is the equivalent of going into Starbucks and Blenz for several evenings to do a survey to find out what percentage of the population is addicted to caffeine, or standing outside of the Polish Community Centre and Polish weddings to find out what percentage of Vancouverites are Polish. There's also the fact that 2/3 of those approached didn't do the survey. Could many of them be afraid they are positive and scared to know? Or could they be completely not at any risk and feel it would be a waste of resoutces (and a sore arm) to get tested? Either way, those 2/3 can easily skew the results even more.
GV, Vancouver BC
12/04/10 7:05 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.