Some of the data in this map comes at no surprise. Major metro areas like New York, Chicago, SF, etc. — really any city you’d actually consider going to — show up in the red to deep-red spectrum of infections.
And then there are lots of places in between, like Farmington, NM (who knew?) that we also hope have some sort of clinic set up to deal with the downside of a frisky sex life.
From the mapmakers:
The data used here comes from the CDC for 2013, and reflects reports of syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia. (Herpes data is not collected). To normalize the data, we measured rates per 100,000 people. We chose only to show cities with a significant amount of population, so rural counties are not show on this map. The CDC makes available a wide range of statistical, anonymous data about STDs in America.
Where does your town fit in?
San Francisco surprisingly seems to have lowered its STD infection rates, and is lower than Los Angeles (per 100k people). Ironic how Bakersfield and Fresno both have higher STD rates per 100k people (not looking at just numbers, but rather rates).
C’mon get with it Queerty, they’re called STIs not STDs ð???
This is nowhere as awesome as AIDSVu.org!
Data from 2013? Really?
Looks like Linens n things has a pattern for their next Season’s sheets. Shams available, sold separately.
Many cancers have a viral component. Even those who were fortunate enough to overcome Ebola may find, years from now, a cancer cropping up. Wear your raincoats.
The Strategy. BEFORE sex get tested TOGETHER for A VARIETY OF STIs then make an INFORMED decision, google… tested together before sex
Richard Holaday commented about STI vs. STD, and the terms are synonymous, although “infections” I suppose are more accurate and less offensive than “diseases”. For those of us who are really older, it may be “venereal disease” or “social hygiene”!!
The underlying methodology of this report is terribly flawed, as it relies on local or state public health officials to report this information to the CDC. “Junk in, junk out,” or in this case, “incomplete or missing data in, flawed data and conclusions out.” Look at Chicago, IL, for example, and its adjoining neighbor to the north, Milwaukee, WI, which is less than a 1/10th the size of Chicagoland. And state law regulates which STIs/STDs are supposed to be reported, and these laws are not uniform across the country.
This is disgusting. Really makes me think about who i hook up with. I get tested in hollywood regularly and use a condom on guys. being sick is not cool, you can always tell who has a case of something i guess. its one thing most guys do to each other is check each other out and herpes of the face, or pale AIDS face is obvious so i dont know where all these sick people are hiding i just hope they get the pills soon.
@adrianjurado310: No it’s not obvious if someone’s HIV+ or even has AIDS. A pale face is not a symptom of either HIV or AIDS or a side effect of the meds. It’s best to just assume everyone who you have sex with is HIV+ or could possibly have other STDs and have safer sex.
This map could be way more infomative. Is the infection rate reported here per capita or absolute numbers? Because of course larger cities will have more infections. There are more people! Also, are the individual cells voting districts? Land plots? Some other weird metric? It’s a great visual representation, but maybe not the most useful or effective one.
@Creamsicle: Read the article. Your questions are answered.
It says “we measured rates per 100,000 people.” That means it takes out population density as a factor.
It also clearly states that the “cells” you refer to are counties.
Comments are closed.