No. None of it's true.
All this means is that once again the serological tests for HIV (ELISA or Western Blot) have been used to diagnose the prescence of HIV. But these tests haven't been calibrated against the HIV virus itself.
This means that the false-positive rate for these tests when applied to people with any kind of non-caucasian blood protein profile is completely unknown.
Until the tests are calibrated (and its been 20 years now, what's the hold up?) HIV epidemic stories carry the same weight as the weekly Global Warming SUV scares.
I guess spring break in Asia is out. Looks like Cancun again.
Just a couple of thoughts, without even reading 'till the end of the article.
1) If the transmission route here is
brothel-->hustband-->wife
as indicated elsewhere in the article, how can women have higher rates of infection than men?
That is, how can the husband pass on HIV (be a carrier) without having the virus himself?
In which case, men should have slightly more HIV than women, due to the time lag between husband's becoming HIV-positive and then infecting his wife.
This then leads me to the suspicion that there may be other combinations:
a) Innocent husband, wife cheating with someone else infected, wife gets it herself, husband (due to harder time picking up HIV from vaginal sex) remains 'clean'.
b) Cheating husband (possibly including prostitutes), brings HIV to wife, who ALREADY has it, due to her cheatin'...heart.
Only way that works is, marry as a virgin, marry a virgin, remain faithful.
Or else 'outercourse' yourself into a bucket of bleach.
Bottom line: HIV is ALWAYS spread by someone's misbehavior.
This is not a new trend. This has been going on for ages. Only the disease is relatively new.