By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently released the data related to Viral Hepatitis (VH) surveillance in the U.S. for 2015, and the picture is…grim. While many states saw relatively stable rates of new Acute Hepatitis C (HCV) infections, two states – AL and PA – experienced 100% increases from 2014 (CDC, 2017). CDC funding for states’ respective Viral Hepatitis programs, however, tends to fall short in states where rates of infection are high relative to the population (The AIDS Institute, 2017).
Infection rates are generally calculated by taking the number of total infections, dividing that by a state’s total population, and multiplying that result by 100,000 to calculate how many people, on average, will be infected for every 100,000 residents. For example:
The state of West Virginia reported 63 new cases in 2015; the state has a population of 1,844,000, so 63/1,844,000 = 0.00003416 x 100,000 = 3.416 rate of infection.
West Virginia, despite being the 14th least populous state (including the District of Columbia), has the second highest rate of new HCV infections in the U.S., second only to Massachusetts, which has a rate of 3.7. The following chart lists the top ten states in order of highest infection rate, their respective populations, and the amount of funding in those states for VH:
The above chart seems to be indicative of two things irrespective of a state’s population: (1.) certain states make VH funding a priority, while others do not; (2.) states are simply not receiving enough funding from the Federal government and the CDC to bring their VH programs up to funding levels adequate enough to effectively combat VH.
Each of these states has a number of factors contributing to their respective rates of infection: (1.) Aging populations (Baby Boomers born between 1945-1965); (2.) High rate of Injection Drug Use related to opioid drugs, heroin, or stimulants; (3.) Sharp increase in the number of tests administered, resulting in higher rates of positive results.
What is clear is that funding for VH is woefully inadequate if the U.S. intends to eradicate HCV from the U.S. by 2030.
- AIDS Institute, The. (2017, June 26). CDC Viral Hepatitis 2016 Funding by State. Tampa, FL: The AIDS Institute. Retrieved from: http://www.theaidsinstitute.org/sites/default/files/attachments/CDC%20Viral%20Hepatitis%20Funding%20by%20State.pdf
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017, June 19). Surveillance for Viral Hepatitis – United States, 2015. Atlanta, GA: United States Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention: Division of Viral Hepatitis. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/statistics/2015surveillance/index.htm – tabs-6-1
Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.