Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues…

The HIV/AIDS Epidemic in the United States: The Basics

Key Facts

  • The first cases of what would later become known as AIDS were reported in the United States in June of 1981.1 Today, there are more than 1.2 million people living with HIV and more than 700,000 people with AIDS have died since the beginning of the epidemic.2,3,4
  • HIV continues to have a disproportionate impact on certain populations, particularly racial and ethnic minorities and gay and bisexual men and other men who have sex with men.5,6,7
  • HIV testing is important for both treatment and prevention efforts. Yet, 13% of those infected with HIV are unaware they are infected.8
  • Antiretroviral therapy has substantially reduced AIDS-related morbidity and mortality and improved long-term outcomes for people with HIV. Treatment guidelines recommend initiating treatment as soon as one is diagnosed with HIV.9 Also, studies have shown that for those on ART with undetectable viral loads, the risk of transmitting the virus is “negligible”.10 Still, many people with HIV are not in care, on treatment, or have their virus under control.11
  • Numerous federal and local government departments and agencies are involved in the domestic HIV/AIDS response, which together provide disease surveillance, prevention, care, support services, and health insurance coverage. Additionally, the private sector and community based organizations, provide services for people with HIV and those at risk for HIV.
Table 1: Key Snapshot of the U.S. Epidemic Today
·  Number of new HIV diagnoses, 2015: 40,040
·  Number of people living with HIV: 1.2+ million
·  Percent of people infected with HIV who don’t know it: 13%
·  Percent of people diagnosed with HIV who are virally suppressed: 55%

Overview

  • As people are living longer with the disease, new infections continue to occur, and diagnoses surpass deaths each year, more people are living with HIV than ever before.12,13
  • There have been some promising trends, as the number of HIV diagnoses declined 19% between 2005 and 2014.14 Still, more than 40,000 people were diagnosed with HIV in the U.S., including U.S. dependent areas, in 2015, and diagnoses have increased among some populations in recent years.15,16
  • HIV-related mortality rates, which rose steadily through the 1980s and peaked in 1995, have declined significantly; the age-adjusted HIV death rate has dropped by more than 80% since its peak.17 This is largely due to ART, but also to decreasing HIV incidence after the 1980s. While HIV is not a leading cause of death for Americans overall, it remains a leading cause of death for certain age groups – in 2014, HIV was the 8th leading cause of death for those ages 25-34, and the 9th for those ages 35-44.18
  • HIV transmission patterns have shifted over time. In 2015, most cases of HIV occurred through male-to-male sexual contact (67%).19 An additional 3% of diagnoses occurred among gay and bisexual men with a history of injection drug use.20 Diagnoses attributable to injection drug use alone have declined significantly over time, decreasing 63% between 2005 and 2014, and accounted for 6% of new diagnoses in 2015.21,22 Transmission through heterosexual sex now accounts for more cases than at the beginning of the epidemic – 24% of new diagnoses in 2015 – but diagnoses attributable to heterosexual sex have declined 35% between 2005 and 2014.23,24
  • HIV testing is important for both treatment and prevention efforts and rapid testing is now much more widely available. Yet, 13% of those infected with HIV are unaware they are infected.25 Routine HIV testing is recommended for all people ages 13-64,26 and several recent policies have expanded health insurance coverage of HIV testing.27
  • Current U.S. HIV treatment guidelines recommend initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) as soon as one is diagnosed with HIV,28 and new research (including the Strategic Timing of AntiRetroviral Treatment study or START) has underscored the importance of starting treatment early.29 Further, research has shown the prevention benefits of treatment, including that when an individual living with HIV is on antiretroviral therapy and the level of HIV in their body is “durably suppressed”, the risk of sexual transmission can be “negligible.” 30,31
  • However, looking across the spectrum from HIV diagnosis to viral suppression reveals missed opportunities for addressing the epidemic. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), while many people with HIV are diagnosed (87%), far fewer are retained in medical care (56.5% of those diagnosed) and fewer still are virally suppressed (55% of those diagnosed).32 Viral suppression is greater among those who are in medical car33

Impact Across the Country

  • Although HIV has been reported in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. dependencies, the impact of the epidemic is not uniformly distributed.
Table 2: Top Ten States/Areas by Number and Rate of New HIV Diagnoses (Adults and Adolescents), 2015
State New HIV Diagnoses, Number (%) State/Area New HIV Diagnoses, per 100,000
Florida 4,849 (12%) District of Columbia 66.1
California 4,720 (12%) Louisiana 29.2
Texas 4,476 (11%) Georgia 28.3
New York 3,123 (8%) Florida 27.9
Georgia 2,381 (6%) Maryland 26.7
Illinois 1,472 (4%) Mississippi 20.6
Maryland 1,347 (3%) Texas 20.1
North Carolina 1,335 (3%) Nevada 20.1
New Jersey 1,190 (3%) New York 18.6
Pennsylvania 1,170 (3%) Puerto Rico 17.1
Subtotal 26,063 (65%)
U.S. Total 39,920 (100%) U.S. Rate 14.7
  • Ten states accounted for about two-thirds (65%) of HIV diagnoses among adults and adolescents in 2015 (Table 2).34,35,36 Regionally, the South accounted for half (51%) of HIV diagnoses in 2015.37
  • Rates of HIV diagnoses per 100,000 provide a different measure of the epidemic’s impact, since they reflect the concentration of diagnoses after accounting for differences in population size across states. The District of Columbia has the highest rate in the nation, compared to states, more than 4 times the national rate (Table 2).38 Seven of the top 10 states by rate are in the South.39
  • New HIV diagnoses are concentrated primarily in large U.S. metropolitan areas (81% in 2015), with Miami, Baton Rouge, and New Orleans topping the list of the areas most heavily burdened.40

Impact on Racial and Ethnic Minorities

  • Racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS since the beginning of the epidemic, and represent the majority of new HIV diagnoses, people living with HIV disease, and deaths among people with HIV.41,42
  • Blacks and Latinos account for a disproportionate share of new HIV diagnoses, relative to their size in the U.S. population (see Figure 1).43,44 Blacks also account for more people living with HIV than any other racial group – an estimated 498,400 of the more than 1.2 million people living with HIV in the U.S. are black.45
  • Blacks also have the highest rate of new HIV diagnoses, followed by Latinos – in 2015, the rate of new HIV diagnoses per 100,000 for Blacks (44.3) was about 8 times that of whites (5.3); Latinos (16.4) had a rate 3 times that of white46
  • Blacks accounted for close to half (44%) of deaths among people with an HIV diagnosis in 2014.47
  • Survival after an AIDS diagnosis is lower for Blacks than for most other racial/ethnic groups, and Blacks have had the highest age-adjusted death rate due to HIV disease throughout most of the 48,49 HIV ranks higher as a cause of death for Blacks and Latinos, compared with whites, particularly among those 20-54.50 Further, HIV was the 4th leading cause of death for Black women ages 35-44 in 2014.51
Figure 1: New HIV Diagnoses & U.S. Population, by Race/Ethnicity, 2015

Figure 1: New HIV Diagnoses & U.S. Population, by Race/Ethnicity, 2015

Impact on Women

  • More than 287,000 women are living with HIV in the U.S. today.52
  • Between 2005 and 2014, new HIV diagnoses among women decreased 40%.53
  • Women of color are particularly affected, and in 2015, Black women accounted for 6 in 10 (60%) of new HIV diagnoses among women; white women accounted for 19% and Latinas accounted for 16%.54 Although there is a disproportionate impact on Black women, new diagnoses among Black women decreased 42% between 2005 and 2014.55

Impact on Young People

  • Teens and young adults continue to be at risk, with those under 35 accounting for 55% of new HIV diagnoses in 2015 (those ages 13-24 accounted for 22% and those ages 25-34 accounted for 33%).56 Most young people are infected sexually.57
  • Among young people, gay and bisexual men and minorities have been particularly affected.58
  • Perinatal HIV transmission, from an HIV-infected mother to her baby, has declined significantly in the U.S., largely due to increased testing efforts among pregnant women and ART which can prevent mother-to-child transmission.59,60,61

Impact on Gay and Bisexual Men

  • While estimates show that gay and bisexual men comprise only about 2% of the U.S. population,62 male-to-male sexual contact accounts for most new HIV diagnoses (67% in 2015, with an additional 3% occurring in gay and bisexual men with a history of injection drug use) and most people living with HIV (55% in 2013, with an additional 5% occurring in gay and bisexual men with a history of injection drug use).63,64
  • Blacks accounted for the largest number of new diagnoses (10,318) among gay and bisexual men in 2015, followed by whites (7,572).65 Additionally, according to a recent study, Black gay and bisexual men were found to be at a much higher risk of being diagnosed with HIV during their lifetimes compared with Latino and white gay and bisexual men.66
  • Younger gay and bisexual men, especially those of color, are at particular risk. For instance, among Black gay and bisexual men, those ages 20-29 accounted for 54% of new diagnoses.67
  • A study in 20 major U.S. cities found that about 1 in 5 (22%) men who have sex with men is living with HIV, and, of those, 1 in 4 are unaware of their infection.68 Prevalence among Blacks was higher (36%) and awareness of infection was lower (67%), compared with men who have sex with men in the study overall.69

The U.S. Government Response

  • In FY 2016, U.S. federal funding to combat HIV totaled $33.0 billion, of which $26.4 billion (80%) was for domestic HIV efforts; of the funds dedicated to the domestic epidemic, the largest share ($19.7 billion) was for care, $3.0 for cash and housing assistance, $2.7 billion for research, and $0.9 for prevention.70
  • Numerous federal departments and agencies are involved in the domestic HIV/AIDS response and key government programs that provide health insurance coverage, care, and support to people with HIV in the U.S. include Medicaid, Medicare, the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, and the Housing Opportunities for Persons with HIV/AIDS Program (HOPWA). Social Security’s income programs for those who are disabled (SSI and SSDI) are important sources of support. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) leads U.S. surveillance and prevention activities, which are carried out in conjunction with state and local health departments. In addition to government efforts, a wide range of community and other organizations provide services for people with HIV and those at risk for HIV.
  • The passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in March 2010 provided new opportunities for expanding health care access, prevention, and treatment services for millions of people in the U.S., including many people with or at risk for HIV. Importantly, for people living with HIV, there also new protections in the law that make access to health coverage more equitable including the expansion of Medicaid (in states that have elected to expand their programs) and, in the private market, the creation of health insurance marketplaces with subsidies available to those on low and moderate incomes. The law also included non-discrimination policies, including a prohibition on rate setting tied to health status, elimination of preexisting condition exclusions, and an end to lifetime and annual caps. 71,72 If the ACA is repealed or repealed and replaced – a policy option currently on the table – it will have significant implications for the health coverage of people with HIV and the impact will need to be closely monitored.
  • In July 2015, the U.S. government released an update to the July 2010 National HIV/AIDS Strategy, which was the first comprehensive plan for addressing the epidemic in the U.S.73,74 The update reiterates the original strategy goals: to reduce new HIV infections; increase access to care and improve health outcomes; reduce HIV-related health disparities; and achieve a more coordinated national HIV/AIDS response. The update also reflects new scientific developments since the original strategy, including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the role of antiretrovirals as part of the national prevention strategy, and addresses the changing healthcare landscape as the ACA has been further implemented.75 Further, the update revises the key indicators that will help to monitor progress in addressing the epidemic and focuses on communities at risk for or heavily burdened by the epidemic, such as men who have sex with men, black men and women, and youth between 13 and 24.76
Endnotes
  1. CDC. MMWR, Vol. 30, No. 21; June 1981.

    ← Return to text

  2. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  3. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  4. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  5. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  6. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  7. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  8. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  9. DHHS. Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected Adults and Adolescents; updated July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  10. CDC. Prevention Benefits of HIV Treatment; updated January 2017.

    ← Return to text

  11. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  12. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  13. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  14. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  15. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  16. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  17. CDC. NCHS. Health, United States, 2015; May 2016.

    ← Return to text

  18. CDC. NCHS. Deaths: Leading Causes for 2014; June 2016.

    ← Return to text

  19. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  20. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  21. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  22. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  23. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  24. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  25. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  26. CDC. MMWR, Vol. 55, No. RR14; September 2006.

    ← Return to text

  27. KFF. HIV Testing in the United States; June 2016.

    ← Return to text

  28. DHHS. Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected Adults and Adolescents; updated July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  29. AIDSinfo, Statement by the HHS Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents Regarding Results from the START and TEMPRANO Trials; July 2015.

    ← Return to text

  30. CDC. Prevention Benefits of HIV Treatment; updated January 2017.

    ← Return to text

  31. NIH. NIH Statement on World AIDS Day 2016; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  32. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  33. Bradley H et al. Increased HIV viral suppression among US adults receiving medical care, 2009-2013, Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI), Boston, abstract 53; 2016.

    ← Return to text

  34. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  35. Table includes data on HIV diagnoses among adults and adolescents and reflects data from U.S. dependent areas.

    ← Return to text

  36. CDC. Atlas Plus. See: https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/nchhstpatlas/main.html.

    ← Return to text

  37. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  38. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  39. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  40. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  41. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  42. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  43. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  44. KFF. State Health Facts; accessed January 2017.

    ← Return to text

  45. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  46. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  47. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  48. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  49. CDC. NCHS. Health, United States, 2015; May 2016.

    ← Return to text

  50. CDC. NCHS. Deaths: Leading Causes for 2014; June 2016.

    ← Return to text

  51. CDC. NCHS. Deaths: Leading Causes for 2014; June 2016.

    ← Return to text

  52. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  53. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  54. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  55. CDC. HIV in the United States: At a Glance; December 2016.

    ← Return to text

  56. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  57. CDC. Slide Set: HIV Surveillance – Adolescents and Young Adults (through 2015).

    ← Return to text

  58. CDC. Slide Set: HIV Surveillance – Adolescents and Young Adults (through 2015).

    ← Return to text

  59. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  60. Nesheim S et al. “A Framework for Elimination of Perinatal Transmission of HIV in the United States.” Pediatrics, Vol. 130, No. 4; September 2012.

    ← Return to text

  61. Whitmore SK et al. “Correlates of Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV in the United States and Puerto Rico.” Pediatrics, Vol. 129, No. 1; January 2012.

    ← Return to text

  62. KFF analysis of CDC data.

    ← Return to text

  63. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  64. CDC. HIV Surveillance Supplemental Report, Monitoring Selected National HIV Prevention and Care Objectives by Using HIV Surveillance Data, Vol. 21, No. 4; July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  65. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  66. CDC. Lifetime Risk of HIV Diagnosis; February 2016.

    ← Return to text

  67. CDC. HIV Surveillance Report, Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2015, Vol. 27; November 2016. HIV diagnosis data are estimates from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 6 U.S. dependent areas. Estimates for 2015 are preliminary and are not included in trend calculations.

    ← Return to text

  68. CDC. HIV Surveillance Special Report, HIV Infection Risk, Prevention, and Testing Behaviors among Men Who Have Sex With Men. National HIV Behavioral Surveillance, 20 U.S. Cities, 2014, No. 15; January 2016.

    ← Return to text

  69. CDC. HIV Surveillance Special Report, HIV Infection Risk, Prevention, and Testing Behaviors among Men Who Have Sex With Men. National HIV Behavioral Surveillance, 20 U.S. Cities, 2014, No. 15; January 2016.

    ← Return to text

  70. KFF. U.S. Federal Funding for HIV/AIDS: Trends Over Time; June 2016.

    ← Return to text

  71. KFF. The Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court, and HIV: What Are the Implications? September 2012.

    ← Return to text

  72. KFF. The ACA and People with HIV: An Update; May 2016.

    ← Return to text

  73. The White House. The National HIV/AIDS Strategy: Updated to 2020; July 2015.

    ← Return to text

  74. The White House. National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States; July 2010.

    ← Return to text

  75. The White House. The National HIV/AIDS Strategy: Updated to 2020; July 2015.

    ← Return to text

  76. The White House. The National HIV/AIDS Strategy: Updated to 2020; July 2015.

    ← Return to text

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation Headquarters: 2400 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 | Phone 650-854-9400
Washington Offices and Barbara Jordan Conference Center: 1330 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 | Phone 202-347-5270

www.kff.org | Email Alerts: kff.org/email | facebook.com/KaiserFamilyFoundation | twitter.com/KaiserFamFound

Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues, the Kaiser Family Foundation is a nonprofit organization based in Menlo Park, California.