Connect with us

Living

Gay, bi men remain key to HIV epidemic

After 30 years of AIDS, many breakthroughs but infection rates on the rise

Published

on

On June 5, 1981, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published an article in its authoritative journal Morbidity and Mortality Weekly report that experts now consider the first signal that an unprecedented worldwide epidemic had begun.

“In the period of October 1980-May 1981, 5 young men, all active homosexuals, were treated for biopsy-confirmed Pneumocystis carini pneumonia at 3 different hospitals in Los Angeles, California. Two of the patients died,” the MMWR article stated.

“Pneumocystis pneumonia in the United States is almost exclusively limited to severely immunosuppressed patients,” said the article. “The occurrence of pneumocytosis in these 5 previously healthy individuals without a clinically apparent underlying immunodeficiency is unusual.”

It would take another few years before scientists named the condition detected in the men discussed in that MMWR article as Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome or AIDS. The name AIDS followed an earlier term used by some researchers and the media – Gay Related Immune Disorder or GRID.

In reflecting on the tumultuous developments surrounding AIDS over the past 30 years, leaders of AIDS advocacy organizations and LGBT activists in the U.S. who lived through the early years of the epidemic say that, to some extent, the MMWR article of June 1981 still has considerable resonance for gay men.

They acknowledge that so much has changed for the better over the past 30 years, including breakthroughs in biomedical research resulting in highly effective drugs that transformed AIDS from a death sentence into a manageable, chronic illness like diabetes.

But AIDS activists also point out that HIV and AIDS continue to disproportionately impact gay men or men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States and other countries.

And although the perception of AIDS as a “gay disease” has largely receded from the minds of most Americans, AIDS activists say they find themselves in the ironic position of having to remind Congress and state and local governments that more resources and funding are needed for HIV prevention programs targeting gay and bisexual men.

“MSM is the only group for whom, according to the CDC, new infections are still increasing,” said Ronald Johnson, vice president for policy and advocacy for AIDS United, a national group formerly known as AIDS Action.

“So there continues to be a concern that there is not enough targeted prevention resources to MSM, particularly MSM of color and young MSM of all races and ethnicities,” Johnson said.

According to the CDC, while MSM account for about 2 percent of the U.S. population, more than half of all new HIV infections in the U.S. each year (53 percent) occur among MSM. CDC data also show that MSM make up nearly half of all people living with HIV in the U.S. – 48 percent.

CDC figures show that white MSM “account for the largest number of annual new HIV infections of any group in the U.S., followed closely by black MSM,” according to a CDC fact sheet released last month.

“There are more new HIV infections among young black MSM (aged 13-29) than among any other age and racial group of MSM,” the fact sheet says.

The Obama administration, with input from AIDS advocacy organizations, released a National HIV/AIDS Strategy document in July 2010 that, among other things, calls for an aggressive effort to develop better HIV prevention programs targeting MSM.

Johnson and Carl Schmid, deputy executive director of the AIDS Institute, a national advocacy group, praised the administration for developing the strategy document, which they say covers most of the bases needed for addressing HIV prevention programs for MSM.

But the two said the proposals in the strategy document have yet to be fully implemented. They note that delays in its implementation are due, in part, to the U.S. economic situation that has prevented needed increases in federal AIDS funds and severe cutbacks in state and local funding for AIDS-related programs.

Phill Wilson, president and CEO of the Black AIDS Institute, said in a commentary last week in the Washington Informer, a black community newspaper, that he fears the horrors of the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s, when friends and family members watched loved ones die due to a lack of effective medical treatment, could return to some degree in the next few years.

According to Wilson, if the federal government fails to boost funding for the federal-state AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), low income people who rely on the program to provide them the medications they need keep the AIDS virus in check could become casualties just as their predecessors became casualties years earlier. But this time, he said, an inability to gain access to medicine due to funding shortfalls would be responsible for their fate at a time when effective medicine is readily available.

He called such an outcome “immoral.”

The ADAP program was created under the Ryan White AIDS Care Act to provide life-sustaining drugs for low-income people with HIV and AIDS who are under insured or don’t have any health insurance to help pay for the drugs.

ADAP funding cuts by states and a large increase in the number of people applying for ADAP assistance has resulted in nearly 8,000 people being placed on state waiting lists for the AIDS drugs they need to remain healthy.

The health insurance reform law that President Obama proposed and Congress passed two years ago was expected to relieve the ADAP funding pressure on states when it takes effect in 2014. However, some states that oppose the law have filed lawsuits seeking to prevent its provision requiring all citizens to buy some form of health insurance from going into effect, making its outcome uncertain.

Nearly all AIDS advocacy groups support the law, saying it would strengthen medical care for large numbers of people with HIV/AIDS.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, an arm of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, has been the leading federal government official monitoring the AIDS epidemic and directing AIDS-related research since the disease burst on the scene in 1981.

In a speech commemorating the 30th anniversary of AIDS at NIH headquarters in Rockville, Md., on Tuesday, Fauci said he’s optimistic that an AIDS vaccine can be developed in the near future.

“We have scientific evidence that a safe and effective HIV vaccine is possible,” he said in a statement released on May 18.

“In 2009, a clinical trial in Thailand involving 16,000 people demonstrated for the first time that a vaccine could safely prevent HIV infection in a modest proportion of study participants,” he said. “Many of the best minds in HIV vaccine science are examining blood samples and data from the Thai trial to learn how the vaccine candidate prevented HIV infections and to consider how it could be modified to be more effective.”

Fauci said NIAID is also optimistic about development within the next few years of effective vaginal and rectal microbicides that can be used to prevent the transmission of HIV during sexual contact.

Fauci and other researchers have also pointed to studies showing the effectiveness to a certain degree of prescribing HIV drugs for use by non-infected people believed to be at high risk for HIV infection, such as men who have sex with men.

Known as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, the use of this prevention measure is said to have the drawback of being less effective if people fail to take the drug as required. Some also have expressed concern that people using this prevention method are subject to potential side effects of the drugs and may be discouraged from using condoms, which experts say is one of the most effective methods of HIV prevention.

Events and developments in the early years of AIDS

• 1981: The CDC reports in its June 1981 edition of MMWR and subsequent editions that year that an estimated 170 gay men had succumbed to Pneumocystis carini pneumonia and Kaposi’s sarcoma, a rare skin cancer, over the preceding two years. The CDC studies of these cases cited a serious malfunctioning of the body’s immune system in those who contracted the conditions.

• 1982: Gay Related Immune Disorder, or GRID, became the first name to describe what is now known as AIDS. Cases reached epidemic proportions in the U.S., moving beyond clusters of gay men in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles and into groups with no obvious risk factors.

• 1983: Gay leaders, independent medical researchers and health and social services agency officials testify before a congressional committee that the federal response to AIDS was highly inadequate. They issue a plea for the federal government and the Reagan administration to increase federal funding and federal initiatives to fight AIDS.

• 1985: In late July, actor Rock Hudson stunned the nation when he issued a statement saying he had AIDS and was receiving treatment in Paris that he said he couldn’t get in the U.S. He died three months later at age 59. His announcement and death drew massive mainstream media attention to AIDS. His death prompted his close friend, actress Elizabeth Taylor, to help found the American Foundation for AIDS Research to raise funds for AIDS causes.

• 1988: The NAMES Project AIDS Memorial Quilt makes its second trip to Washington in the spring, where it’s displayed on the Ellipse near the White House. Later that year, about 1,100 AIDS activists staged a protest at the headquarters of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in suburban Maryland outside D.C., denouncing the FDA for taking too long to approve new drugs for people with AIDS. Police arrested at least 176 of the protesters after they blocked access to the FDA building’s main entrance.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Real Estate

Unconventional homes becoming more popular

HGTV show shines spotlight on alternatives to cookie cutter

Published

on

Shipping container homes have gained popularity in recent years. (Photo by Suchat Siriboot/Bigstock)

While stuck in the house surrounded by snow and ice, I developed a new guilty pleasure: watching “Ugliest House in America” on HGTV. For several hours a day, I looked at other people’s unfortunate houses. Some were victims of multiple additions, some took on the worst décor of the ‘70s, and one was even built in the shape of a boat.

In today’s world, the idea of what a house should look like has shifted dramatically. Gone are the days of cookie-cutter suburban homes with white picket fences. Instead, a new wave of architects, designers, and homeowners are pushing the boundaries of traditional housing to create unconventional and innovative spaces that challenge our perceptions of what a home can be.

One of the most popular forms of alternative housing is the tiny house. These pint-sized dwellings are typically fewer than 500 square feet and often are set on trailers to allow for mobility. Vans and buses can also be reconfigured as tiny homes for the vagabonds among us.

These small wonders offer an affordable and sustainable living option for those wishing to downsize and minimize their environmental footprint. With clever storage solutions, multipurpose furniture, and innovative design features, tiny homes have become a creative and functional housing solution for many, although my dogs draw the line at climbing Jacob’s Ladder-type steps.

Another unusual type of housing gaining popularity is the shipping container home. Made from repurposed shipping containers, these homes offer a cost-effective and environmentally friendly way to create modern and sleek living spaces. With their industrial aesthetic and modular design, shipping container homes are a versatile option for those contemplating building a unique and often multi-level home.

For those looking to connect with nature, treehouses are a whimsical and eccentric housing option. Nestled high up in the trees, these homes offer a sense of seclusion and tranquility that is hard to find in traditional housing. With their distinctive architecture and stunning views, treehouses can be a magical retreat for those seeking a closer connection to the natural world.

For a truly off-the-grid living experience, consider an Earthship home. These self-sustaining homes use recycled construction materials and rely on renewable energy sources like solar power and rainwater harvesting. With their passive solar design and natural ventilation systems, Earthship homes are a model of environmentally friendly living.

For those with a taste for the bizarre, consider a converted silo home. These cylindrical structures provide an atypical canvas for architects and designers to create modern and minimalist living spaces. With curved walls and soaring ceilings, silo homes offer a one-of-a-kind living experience that is sure to leave an impression.

Barn homes have gained popularity in recent years. These dwellings take the rustic charm of a traditional barn and transform it into a modern and stylish living space. With their open, flexible floor plans, lofty ceilings, and exposed wooden beams, barn homes offer a blend of traditional and contemporary design elements that create a warm and inviting atmosphere, while being tailored to the needs and preferences of the homeowner.

In addition to their unique character, barn homes also offer a sense of history and charm that is hard to find in traditional housing. Many of them have a rich and storied past, with some dating back decades or even centuries.

If you relish life on the high seas (or at a marina on the bay), consider a floating home. These aquatic abodes differ from houseboats in that they remain on the dock rather than traverse the waterways. While most popular on the West Coast (remember “Sleepless in Seattle”?), you sometimes see them in Florida, with a few rentals available in Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and infrequent sales at our own D.C. Wharf. Along with the sense of community found in marinas, floating homes offer a peaceful retreat from the hustle and bustle of city life.

From tiny homes on wheels to treehouses in the sky or homes that float, these distinctive dwellings offer a fresh perspective on how we live and modify traditional thoughts on what a house should be. Sadly, most of these homes rely on appropriate zoning for building and placement, which can limit their use in urban or suburban areas. 

Nonetheless, whether you’re looking for a sustainable and eco-friendly living option or a whimsical retreat, there is sure to be an unconventional housing option that speaks to your sense of adventure and creativity. So, why settle for a run-of-the-mill ranch or a typical townhouse when you can live in a unique and intriguing space that reflects your personality and lifestyle?


Valerie M. Blake is a licensed Associate Broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her at [email protected] or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.

Continue Reading

Real Estate

Convert rent check into an automatic investment, Marjorie!

Basic math shows benefits of owning vs. renting

Published

on

Knowledgeable lenders can discuss useful down payment assistance programs to help a buyer ‘find the money.’ (

Suppose people go out for dinner and everyone is talking about how they are investing their money. Some are having fun with a few new apps they downloaded – where one can round up purchases and then bundle that money into a weekly or monthly investment that grows over time, which is a smart thing to do. The more automatic one can make the investments, the less is required to “think about it” and the more it just happens. It becomes a habit and a habit becomes a reward over time.  

Another habit one can get into is just making that rent check an investment. One must live somewhere, correct? And in many larger U.S. cities like New York, Chicago, D.C., Los Angeles, Miami, Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas, Nashville, Austin, or even most mid-market cities, rents can creep up towards $2,000 a month (or more) with ease.  

Well, do the math. At $2,000 per month over one year, that’s $24,000. If someone stays in that apartment (with no rent increases) for even three years, that amount triples to $72,000.  According to Rentcafe.com, the average rent in the United States at the end of 2025 was around $1,700 a month. Even that amount of rent can total between $60,000 and $80,000 over 3-4 years.  

What if that money was going into an investment each month? Now, yes, the argument is that most mortgage payments, in the early years, are more toward the interest than the principal.  However, at least a portion of each payment is going toward the principal.  

What about closing costs and then selling costs? If a home is owned for three years, and then one pays out of pocket to close on that home (usually around 2-3% of the sales price), does owning it for even three years make it worth it? It could be argued that owning that home for only three years is not enough time to recoup the costs of mostly paying the interest plus paying the closing costs.

Let’s look at some math:

A $300,000 condo – at 3% is $9,000 for closing costs.

One can also put as little as 3 or 3.5% down on a home – so that is also around $9,000. 

If a buyer uses D.C. Opens Doors or a similar program – a down payment can be provided and paid back later when the property is sold so that takes care of some of the upfront costs. Knowledgeable lenders can often discuss other useful down payment assistance programs to help a buyer “find the money.”  

Another useful tactic many agents use is to ask for a credit from the seller. If a property has sat on the market for weeks, the seller may be willing to give a closing cost credit. That amount can vary. New construction sellers may also offer these closing cost credits as well.  

And that, Marjorie, just so you will know, and your children will someday know, is THE NIGHT THE RENT CHECK WENT INTO AN INVESTMENT ACCOUNT ON GEORGIA AVENUE!


Joseph Hudson is a referral agent with Metro Referrals. Reach him at 703-587-0597 or [email protected].

Continue Reading

Autos

Hot rod heaven: Chevy Corvette, Dodge Charger

Two muscle cars strut their stuff

Published

on

Chevrolet Corvette

Some vehicles age quietly — but not muscle cars. 

For 2026, the Chevrolet Corvette tightens its focus, fixes one glaring flaw (the previously dowdy interior) and flaunts a futuristic design. The Dodge Charger, on the other hand, is loud and proud, daring you to ignore its presence at your peril. 

CHEVROLET CORVETTE

$73,000-$92,000

MPG: 16 city/25 highway

0 to 60 mph: 2.8 seconds

Cargo space: 13 cu. ft.

PROS: Awesome acceleration. Race-car feel. Snazzy cabin. 

CONS: No manual transmission. No rear seat. Tight storage. 

Finally, the Chevrolet Corvette feels as good inside as it looks flying past you on the freeway. That’s thanks to the classy, completely redesigned cabin. Gone is the old, polarizing wall of buttons in favor of a sleeker, three-screen cockpit. There’s a large digital gauge cluster, a wide infotainment screen angled toward the driver, and a marvy new auxiliary display. Everything is modern and a bit glitzy — but in a good way.  

Fit and finish are higher quality than before, and the controls are more intuitive. Chevy’s Performance App is now standard across trims, offering real-time data for drivers who enjoy metrics as much as momentum. And the new interior color schemes, including slick asymmetrical options, let you express yourself without screaming for attention—confidence, not obnoxious bluster. 

As for handling, the steering is quick and sure, body control is exceptional, and acceleration is blazingly fast. A mid-engine layout also delivers sublime balance. 

Three trim options, including the V8-powered Stingray, the E-Ray (also with a V8 but paired with electric all-wheel drive), and the Z06 and ZR1 variants for racing devotees. 

(Note to self: For a truly mind-blowing experience, there’s the new 1,250-horsepower ZR1X all-electric supercar that goes from 0 to 60 mph in less that 2 seconds and is priced starting at $208,000.)

Yes, the ride in any of these Corvettes can be firm. And visibility is, well, rather compromised. But this supercar is a total Dom, not a timid sub. Think Alexander Skarsgard in “Pillion,” and you get the picture. 

DODGE CHARGER

$52,000-$65,000

MPG: 16 city/26 highway

0 to 60 mph: 3.9 seconds

Cargo capacity: 22.75 cu. ft.

PROS: Choice of gas or EV power. Modern tech. Spacious cabin. 

CONS: No V8 engine (yet). Soft steering. Less-than-lithe cornering.

Everything old is new again for the Dodge Charger. The automaker initially was phasing out gas-powered models in a shift to electric vehicles but then quickly pivoted back to include gas engines after yo-yo regulatory changes this year from, well, the yo-yos in the White House. 

Powerful twin-turbo engines in the R/T and Scat Pack trims produce up to 550 horsepower. These models come standard with all-wheel drive but can be switched to rear-wheel drive for classic muscle-car antics when the mood strikes you.

At the same time, Dodge still offers the electric Charger Daytona, delivering up to 670 horsepower and ferocious straight-line acceleration. 

The Charger’s aggressive design, massive digital displays and practical hatchback layout carry over, reinforcing its ability to be both a performance diva and everyday companion. With the larger-than-expected storage space, I appreciated being able to fit a boatload of groceries in the trunk during a Costco run. 

New wheel designs, paint choices and trim variations help you visually distinguish between gas and electric Chargers. But no matter the model, each one feels decisive and deliberate on the road. Commuting in stop-and-go traffic during rush hour is fine, but this street machine excels at high-speed cruising on the freeway. 

The turbo six-cylinder engine delivers muscular torque with less drama than the old V8s, but still with plenty of urgency. The electric Daytona version is a different kind of thrill, with its instant, silent thrust that feels like it could almost launch you to the moon. 

Steering is stable but not exactly crisp, and the Charger’s weight makes it less lithe—and lively—than other muscle cars, especially when navigating tight corners. 

But that’s just fine with me. Like Bea Arthur as Dorothy in “The Golden Girls,” this no-nonsense muscle car is proud to be big, bold and brassy. 

Continue Reading

Popular