Thanks to Alayne for alerting us to this article (Nov 03) reviewing U of
California material from the J of AIDS and to Tom Painter for the original
reference (Oct 27) to the same special issue (J of AIDS). I look forward to
reading this material.
Some comments came to mind. The idea of HIV as a minimal problem among migrant
workers is based on bi-coastal differences between selected samples from the
eastern United States showing high levels of infection and samples from the
western United States that show low (or "non-existent") levels of infection -
until recently. The situation was never one of no infection but minimal levels
of infection in the West. I heard a colleague comment in a presentation at the
East Coast Forum on how puzzling this was, since migrant farm workers on both
coasts were engaging in and exposed to similar risk behaviors/factors.
A review of death certificates over a two-decade period in one southwestern
state (not CA), for example, found a number of persons dying of AIDS-defining
illnesses with occupation listed as “agricultural worker” (but low percentage
overall) and others listed as “construction worker” that may have included off-
season or former farm workers.
Several states and even cities have higher proportions of Latinos among those
counted in AIDS statistics than proportions of Latinos in the general state
population. This also is true of some southern states where African Americans
(who continue to perform farm labor in several areas of the South) appear in
higher proportions in AIDS statistics than their proportion within the general
state population. This disproportion is not new news.
There still is much to be done.

Keith V Bletzer
Medical Anthropologist