Death notification forms data from Stats SA:

(number of dn forms - percentage increase)

1997 318,287
1998 367,689 +15.5%
1999 381,902 +03.8%
2000 413,969 +08.3%
2001 451,936 +09.1%
2002 499,268 +10.4%
2003 ---


Notice how annual increases in the number of registered deaths
hovers around an increase of about 10% per year. (1)

Wait a minute... The population of South Africa ALSO
increases at about 10% per year. (2)

Coincidence?? I don't think so. And this is TAC's huge
increase in deaths?

Alex


1) Data from Appendix E of Stats SA's report on
death notification forms, which can be found here:
http://www.statssa.gov.za/Publicatio...t&PM=&PY=&PS=1

2) The population of South Africa was 40.6 million in
1996, and 40.8 million in 2001. That is an annual population
growth of (44.8/40.6 ^ 1/5) 1.10345 or 10.3% per year.
http://www.statssa.gov.za/census01/html/default.asp

"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:42407daf$0$31549$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl...
I have been following your posts with interest and amazement. Are you really
being serious in denying
that hiv/aids is not an issue here in ZA.

Also, The media was awash with reports 2 weeks back about how incredibly
inaccurate STATSA is.

Just my tuppence worth

J.

STATS SA ?- you have to be joking!!

Bart

"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:42407daf$0$31549$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl...

In article <42407daf$0$31549$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
Alex <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
44.8/40.6 = 1.10345
44.8/40.6 ^ 1/5 = 1.01988

That's 2% per year, not 10% per year.

If statistics were dynamite you'd blow off your hands.

--
David Canzi

"David Canzi -- non-mailable" <dmcanzi@remulak.ads.uwaterloo.ca> schreef in bericht
news:d1q8b1$bfc$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca...
Ok, I screwed up with that one. However, even you will
have to admit, that for the year 2002, 500,000 deaths is
pretty low for a population of 47 million.

500,000/47,000,000 = 0.016 or 1.06%.

That's the South African mortality rate, and in no way does
it point to massive deaths from HIV. The USA mortality rate
is 0.9%.

Alex

"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:42407daf$0$31549$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl...


That's a population growth of 0.49% over 5 years or 0,09%
per year which is 114 times lower than the figure you quoted.
Not only do you quote an unreliable source to back up your
stupid argument you don't know how to do simple arithmetic.
Alex your argument is not only unfounded and totally erroneous
you don't even do a satisfactory job of juggling simple figures
to back it up. You are sir a plonker from the top draw go debate
with Steve Hayes.
Prat.
Richard

"Alex" <bannie2020@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4240caff$0$4580$dbd4f001@news.wanadoo.nl...
Ok AIDS on the Brain Alex, what are the correct figures then?
Or, are we all just imagining that there's an AIDS problem in South Africa
when in actual fact there is no AIDS in South Africa at all - like Mbeki
that's doesn't know anyone that died of AIDS (he didn't know Mandela's son).

William A. Bong (my own name)

"JaY" <jAy@jou_ma_se_huis> wrote in message
And the population is increasing at 10% per year? That would mean
one in every five females was producing a baby every year. Baby
females, child females, fertile females, infertile females,
menopausal females, elderly females would all have to be having
children. Alternatively every single woman of child bearing age
would have to have a child every year. Not happening. Not even in
places like Swaziland where the birthrate at 6 live births per woman
is the highest in the world.

It would also mean that the population would double exponentially in
less than ten years. This is not happening.

STATSA talks rubbish some of the time. Alex talks rubbish all the
time.

Moira, the Faerie Godmother

"Bong" <william.a.bong@mweb.co.uk> wrote in message


He made that statement before Mandela's son died. But even then it
was not plausible.

Moira, the Faerie Godmother

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 02:46:56 +0100, "Alex"
<avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:

snip

Really? Depends. If a substantial proportion are young adults of
child-bearing and working age--and when doctors, teachers, miners,
parents, farmers, nurses, politicians, soldiers, truckers, sex workers
and others are dying, it's more than a tragedy. It is a threat to
global security.

It is fiscally, ethically and geopolitically imperative that all
further efforts and extreme urgency be applied to eliminating usurious
debts, bolstering infrastructure, raising healthcare worker wages,
making condoms available with plenty of information/skits/plays,
assuring access to good generic medications as well as multivitamins
and nutrition and clean water and otherwise doing every good and
needful thing to slow the spread and treat people with HIV/AIDS.

The effect in the west of such comprehensive programs has been to save
millions of years of life.

George M. Carter

**
Session 35 Oral Abstracts
Infectious Complications: Prevention and Treatment
Friday, 10 am - 12:30 pm
Presentation Time: 11:45 am
Ballroom A


143LB
2 Million Years of Life Saved: The Survival Benefits of AIDS Therapy
in the United States
Rochelle P. Walensky*1,2, A Paltiel3, E Losina4, L Mercincavage4, B
Schackman5, P Sax2, M Weinstein6, and K Freedberg6
1Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA, USA; 2Brigham and Women's Hospital,
Boston, MA, USA; 3Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; 4Boston
Univ, MA, USA; 5Weill Med Coll, Cornell Univ, New York, NY, USA; and
6Harvard Sch of Publ Hlth, Boston, MA, USA

Background: Our objective was to estimate the cumulative clinical
benefit of AIDS-related opportunistic infection prophylaxis and highly
active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in the United States.

Methods: We used published estimates to derive the number of newly
diagnosed adult AIDS patients receiving care in the United States from
l989 to 2002. We considered 5 life-prolonging interventions and the
years each was recommended as standard of care: PCP and MAC
prophylaxis (1989 and 1993), HAART (1996), HAART-2 (2 sequential
effective regimens, 1998), and HAART-3 (3 sequential effective
regimens, 2000). To ensure conservative estimates, we included only
newly diagnosed AIDS patients in care and assumed they received only
the care that was standard in the year of diagnosis. Per person
survival benefits of each intervention were estimated using the
cost-effectiveness of preventing AIDS complications (CEPAC) model, a
widely published computer simulation of HIV disease. Sensitivity
analyses included varying the number of AIDS patients in care (63% in
the base case), adding the benefits of zidovudine (AZT) for the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission (1994), and varying HAART
efficacy.

Results:
[see
http://www.retroconference.org/2005/...acts/25729.htm
for table]

AZT for prevention of mother-to-child transmission averted
approximately 2860 infant infections, adding another 186,790 years of
life. Had all pregnant women received AZT, the survival benefit would
have increased to 277,150 years. Had all diagnosed AIDS patients been
in care, total survival benefits would have increased to 2,828,930
years. Improving viral load suppression rates of all HAART regimens
to 90% at 48 weeks would have increased total survival benefits to
2,830,460 years.

Conclusions: Progress in HIV care has saved nearly 2 million years of
life in the United States since 1989. The per person benefits far
exceed those conferred by treatment of other chronic diseases and
highlight the importance of HIV diagnosis, linkage to effective care,
and continued research in HIV therapeutics.

"Moira de Swardt" <moira.deswardt@wol.co.za> schreef in bericht
news:FvKdnf_M5_M3v9zfRVn-tA@is.co.za...
Yeah, you got that one.

But please explain to me how a mortality of 500,000 in
the year 2002 is such a terrible thing in a population of
47,000,000. (That is a mortality rate of 1.06%, versus
the US mortality rate of 0.9%.)

Alex

"Alex" <avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message

Many South Africans have told you that STATSA is not highly
regarded.

The reality is we are seeing many young adults dying. We are
saddened by this fact. We would like this reality to go away, but
manipulating facts is not doing the trick.

Moira, the Faerie Godmother

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:39:27 +0100, "Alex"
<avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:

snip...
Really? Depends. If a substantial proportion are young adults of
child-bearing and working age--and when doctors, teachers, miners,
parents, farmers, nurses, politicians, soldiers, truckers, sex workers
and others are dying, it's more than a tragedy. It is a threat to
global security.

It is fiscally, ethically and geopolitically imperative that all
further efforts and extreme urgency be applied to eliminating usurious
debts, bolstering infrastructure, raising healthcare worker wages,
making condoms available with plenty of information/skits/plays,
assuring access to good generic medications as well as multivitamins
and nutrition and clean water and otherwise doing every good and
needful thing to slow the spread and treat people with HIV/AIDS.

The effect in the west of such comprehensive programs has been to save
millions of years of life.

George M. Carter

**
Session 35 Oral Abstracts
Infectious Complications: Prevention and Treatment
Friday, 10 am - 12:30 pm
Presentation Time: 11:45 am
Ballroom A


143LB
2 Million Years of Life Saved: The Survival Benefits of AIDS Therapy
in the United States
Rochelle P. Walensky*1,2, A Paltiel3, E Losina4, L Mercincavage4, B
Schackman5, P Sax2, M Weinstein6, and K Freedberg6
1Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA, USA; 2Brigham and Women's Hospital,
Boston, MA, USA; 3Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; 4Boston
Univ, MA, USA; 5Weill Med Coll, Cornell Univ, New York, NY, USA; and
6Harvard Sch of Publ Hlth, Boston, MA, USA

Background: Our objective was to estimate the cumulative clinical
benefit of AIDS-related opportunistic infection prophylaxis and highly
active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in the United States.

Methods: We used published estimates to derive the number of newly
diagnosed adult AIDS patients receiving care in the United States from
l989 to 2002. We considered 5 life-prolonging interventions and the
years each was recommended as standard of care: PCP and MAC
prophylaxis (1989 and 1993), HAART (1996), HAART-2 (2 sequential
effective regimens, 1998), and HAART-3 (3 sequential effective
regimens, 2000). To ensure conservative estimates, we included only
newly diagnosed AIDS patients in care and assumed they received only
the care that was standard in the year of diagnosis. Per person
survival benefits of each intervention were estimated using the
cost-effectiveness of preventing AIDS complications (CEPAC) model, a
widely published computer simulation of HIV disease. Sensitivity
analyses included varying the number of AIDS patients in care (63% in
the base case), adding the benefits of zidovudine (AZT) for the
prevention of mother-to-child transmission (1994), and varying HAART
efficacy.

Results:
[see
http://www.retroconference.org/2005/...acts/25729.htm
for table]

AZT for prevention of mother-to-child transmission averted
approximately 2860 infant infections, adding another 186,790 years of
life. Had all pregnant women received AZT, the survival benefit would
have increased to 277,150 years. Had all diagnosed AIDS patients been
in care, total survival benefits would have increased to 2,828,930
years. Improving viral load suppression rates of all HAART regimens
to 90% at 48 weeks would have increased total survival benefits to
2,830,460 years.

Conclusions: Progress in HIV care has saved nearly 2 million years of
life in the United States since 1989. The per person benefits far
exceed those conferred by treatment of other chronic diseases and
highlight the importance of HIV diagnosis, linkage to effective care,
and continued research in HIV therapeutics.

"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> schreef in bericht news:476541591ks1bnf4m4e9f5kpup18m37i0d@4ax.com...
Hardly. IF is the big qualifyer, but here is why this isn't so.

Who is taking care of the 2.61% of annual population
growth among the African population of South Africa?

If people of reproductive age were dying, not only would
you see no huge population growth, you would see a
decline in population.

http://www.statssa.gov.za/census01/html/RSAPrimary.pdf

From Tables A and C, the Black population of South Africa:

1996 Census: 31 127 631
2001 Census: 35 416 166

That is an increase of (1.13772611) 13.77% in 5 years.
That's an annual increase of (1.13772611 ^ 1/5) 2.61%.

So if some disease was wiping out the reproductive
section of society, how come there is an annual population
growth of 2.61%?



Well I agree with that.

I don't see how people can claim there is a massive HIV epidemic
in South Africa and that healthcare resources have to be re-routed
from other healthcare just to treat HIV infection, but at the same
time, say please pay us 1 billion per year (or how much SA owes
the IMF and World Bank).
If it really was an international emergency, they would say: stop
paying international debt, until you have sorted this out. Or just
forever - much of South Africa's debt is odious anyway, because
it was built up under Apartheid.

Alex

"AIDS Alex" <bannie2020@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4242c0b5$0$97218$dbd4b001@news.wanadoo.nl...
Arsehole Injected Death Sentence (AIDS) Alex,

So you're determined to show that you also know fuckall about monetary
affairs as well as stats.

William A. Bong (my own name)

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:25:58 +0100, "Alex"
<avdeelen.REMOFE@wanadoo.nl> wrote:

It is so....and your explanation is really pathetic.

Presuming for the moment this is correct, HIV infection doesn't mean
sterility nor does it preclude having children.

The efforts now are to a) prevent infections; b) prevent
mother-to-child transmission; c) help mothers and fathers stay alive
and well to raise their children.

The numbers of orphans from deaths due to AIDS are a horrific problem
throughout Africa.

But you don't care. It's all just a big old game for you.

George M. Carter

"Moira de Swardt" <moira.deswardt@wol.co.za> wrote in message
news:idedneUbOoAart7fRVn-3g@is.co.za...
It would appear that Alex believes that all deaths in South Africa are
registered. This is not the case and even if STATSA figures were correct, in
so far as recorded births and deaths are concerned, the overall population
figure is based on a very flawed census.

Mark Richardson

"Mark Richardson" <mwmarho@iafrica.com> wrote in message
Alex seems to have some axe to grind, proving to himself, if no-one
else, that there is no such thing as HIV and if there is that it
doesn't harm humans.

Moira, the Faerie Godmother

"Mark Richardson" <mwmarho@iafrica.com> schreef in bericht
newsKKdnfegsItPldnfRVn-uA@is.co.za...
I wouldn't say that for any country, but I do believe that they
are coming closer and closer to complete coverage every year.

Do you have evidence otherwise?

Alex

"Moira de Swardt" <moira.deswardt@wol.co.za> schreef in bericht
news:9-Sdnbukms8BvdnfRVn-uQ@is.co.za...

Oh, horsepukey. I've never said any such thing. Not that I object
to anyone saying that of course, that's their own opinion.
I'm not a microbiologist or a virologist, so anything about that
is pretty much over my head right now.

However, it doesn't take a whole lot to see that this so-called
HIV epidemic makes no sense statistically. Or that the extent
of this "epidemic" is very easy to overstate. Or that misdiagnosis
is very, very easy.

Alex