Slashdot Mirror

White males are dying at a 40% higher rate than Hispanics (age adjusted of course.)

Citation required.

Wasn't it linked in TFS?
Here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/produ...

See the second graph.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/image...

White males are dying at a 40% higher rate than Hispanics (age adjusted of course.)

Citation required.

Wasn't it linked in TFS?
Here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/produ...

See the second graph.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/image...

"White men and women fared the worst"

Woah, you cant say that!

And it is a stupid comment, given that the year-to-year changes are very small, a tiny fraction of the persistent differences by race and gender:

See page 2: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/...

Black males are more than twice as likely to die, as Hispanic females of the same age.
Which makes the overall death rate increase of 0.4% from last year, or 0.13% fall in life expectancy, look trivial.

Ae aegypti carry yellow fever virus, dengue virus chikungunya virus and Zika viruses. Interestingly Ae aegypti are considered invasive species originally native to Asia. So eradicating them, really shouldn't impact the environment.

So eradicating them, really shouldn't impact the environment.

If they carry all those diseases, and we eradicate them, then it will impact the human population. The human population impacts the environment. Ergo, eradicating them will impact the environment.

While I understand and agree that we need to be very careful with exterminating species, I think the Slashdot crowd may be living in a bit of a first world bubble in this case. This species is the primary vector for malaria, West Nile, Zika, and any number of other life threatening or debilitating illnesses. It's one thing when we're talking about wiping out species so we can build more strips malls, but literally hundreds of thousands of people are dying every year due to bites delivered by this species, so the stakes are considerably higher. Vaccines and medicine help treat specific diseases, but new diseases are constantly appearing, at which point mosquitos reassume their role in helping disease spread.

The benefit of the suggested approach is that it has no risk of spreading beyond the immediately obvious impact (i.e. the extinction of a species). We wouldn't be introducing anything new into the ecosystem that could disrupt it further (e.g. predatory species, infectious disease, toxins, mutations, etc.), and from what I've heard, alternative food sources exist for all known predators of mosquitoes in all regions where they eat mosquitoes. Taken on the balance against hundreds of thousands of human lives lost every year, we must be willing to risk more, but we're thankfully in a position where we need not do so since the risk with this approach is by all accounts minimal. When the stakes are this high and we've done our due diligence to determine that the risks are so low, why wouldn't we take what we believe to be a low-risk action to save so many lives? Anything less is either irrational or a gross devaluing of human life.

For the record, they're targeting Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, not Anopheles which is the species which carries malaria. Ae aegypti carry yellow fever virus, dengue virus chikungunya virus and Zika viruses. Interestingly Ae aegypti are considered invasive species originally native to Asia. So eradicating them, really shouldn't impact the environment.

For the record, they're targeting Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, not Anopheles which is the species which carries malaria. Ae aegypti carry yellow fever virus, dengue virus chikungunya virus and Zika viruses. Interestingly Ae aegypti are considered invasive species originally native to Asia. So eradicating them, really shouldn't impact the environment.

https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adh...

Fuck off.

Dammit! I've been trying to get (hold of) the bubonic plague for some time. Where are you avoiding it so I can get me some (lemme know in the comments' section).

CAP === 'parlor'

Over 80% of United States plague cases have been bubonic plague: https://www.cdc.gov/plague/map... ... now have fun with it.

Undeveloped countries don't have the infrastructure to monitor these types of things because they are undeveloped.

... and when it is measured it is sky high. Childhood diarrhea in poor countries is one of the world's leading causes of death, killing more than AIDS, malaria, and measles combined.

32 sick people wouldn't make the news in Africa or India because it is insignificant compared to the thousands of kids dying everyday.

It's fake news. And to all those saying the CDC is the source, not CNN/MSNBC, can you say "Deep state"?

Can you say "conspiracy-stoking idiot troll?"

> [CDC] isn't usually so sweeping in its statements, but with a holiday coming...

Seriously? If (like me) you were wondering whether that clanger came from the CDC itself or the vapid press (Wired in this case), it's the latter.

No, Wired did not make it up. The alert really is from the CDC.

Well, until they patent this https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/da... out of reality, well, sitting down will still be preferable for extended gameplay by the majority. Why skates do not work, running, jumping, fast turns, skipping, jump swivel et al. Sure you maybe might be able to alter the view but not the person keeping the balance, the slightest glitch and down they do with every right to sue the crap out of the manufacturer because staying upright would be difficult and falling down pretty regular.

To VR you need an exoskeleton to fully support the player in mid air and provide the full motion phsyical feed back. Now this has function not only in game play but remote robotics. Fucking roller skates, what a fucking joke, but I'll bet Google piece of shit lawyers have figured out a way to stretch that roller skate patent to cover an exoskeleton as a HID human interface device, with full motion feed back and even sensor suite, with feed back, the sort of thing that would do really well in gyms.

Nationwide, ~2.5 million per year, and that figure is from a while ago, quite a few more people are legally carrying concealed, while ~27% of the population isn't allowed to. Broken down by state, you'd need to see if that was one of the states the CDC included in their Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 1996, 1997, and 1998 surveys which recently came to light, or see if one of the others breaks it down by state.

Why bother banning things like the typical American Puritan? There's a better way. Figure out what they cost the healthcare system, then tax them accordingly. If the government is paying for healthcare, it can also tax things to recoup the costs seamlessly.

Motorcycles and cars? Bake it into the registration fee.
Alcohol/drugs? Sales taxes.
Extreme sports? Tax the equipment.

Sports? Not clear that the costs outweigh the health benefits.

To pick an example: motorcycles.

The Government Accountability Office pegs the cost of motorcycle accidents at a minimum of 16 billion USD per year.

According to google, through the motley fool, 8.4 million motorcycles are registered.

Therefore the registration fee to recoup losses to a national healthcare system must necessarily be a minimum of $1,905 per year higher than the current rate.

Another: conveniently the CDC has already done the research on alcohol and concluded a cost of $2.05 per drink. Want that six pack of low-quality beer? That will be $18 please. A single decent beer at a brewery will start at $10-12.

How is that much different than a ban?

People and kids are obese because our food supply has become contaminated with huge amounts of sugar and carbs. A huge number of American's are now diabetic as a result. The drug, foods, and medical corporations are all in cahoots on this. That there is no outcry from the government is in my opinion, because the corps are running the show.. https://www.cdc.gov/media/rele...

I wondered if there was something like kids in rural areas are more likely to play outside than those in urban environments.

Obesity is higher in rural areas.

Perhaps rural kids are LESS likely to play outside, since an urban park full of other kids is a nicer place to play than a rural cornfield.

*or* they could just change when school starts.

As studies show they should - and as I hope they would if a DST became permanent. But that would in turn cause problems for parents getting their kids ready for school before they have to go to work. So change working hours? Point being, I can see why some people are in favor of keeping things as they are, as their lives would be considerably more disrupted than mine is having to deal with a clock change twice a year.

Us. Human civilisation is harmed. So are a lot of animal and plant species. If you want a full list of the main ways in which things on the Earth are harmed (and occasionally benefited) by greenhouse gases, see here.

Nitric oxide is present in human blood at concentrations of around 2 ppm - but exposure above 25 ppm is considered dangerous, and above 100 ppm will harm you in minutes. Also undesirable is how contact with water forms nitric acid, i.e. acid rain. And particulates are just as bad. Air pollution in general is still responsible for nearly a third of lung cancers and other respiratory diseases - we have a lot more improving to do.

Haiti is a shithole. Cuba is a shithole with universal healthcare and higher standards of living. Suck it up princess.

Cuba is a *drastically better* place to live than Haiti. Do the research yourself.

This is just one piece of a very big picture to get you started. Highlights:

"Please note that U.S. Embassy staff may only visit downtown Port-au-Prince in armored vehicles and must observe a midnight-to-5 a.m. curfew. "

"Travel by road is difficult and dangerous in Haiti. The situation on the roads can be described as chaotic. Drivers in Haiti must use extreme caution. Poor road conditions and the absence of traffic rules lead to unpredictable and dangerous driving behavior."

Haiti has no sanitation or public health to speak of. What the previous page doesn't delve into is the long list of vaccinations you need to receive (4-6 weeks) before setting foot on Haitian soil.

That's just the beginning. Really you have no idea how bad it is in Haiti or any other black-goverened nation. They simply cannot effectively manage anything larger than a clan or tribe.

Educating girls does reduce birthrates, and it's been know for decades..
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/press...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
http://www.earth-policy.org/da...

The US had a different batch of vaccines, dipshit, with no adjuvant added. From that lil' old group the CDC, asshole:

Link

Uh oh, someone actually read those articles.

In response to the events in Europe, CDC reviewed data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and found no indication of any association between U.S.-licensed H1N1 or seasonal influenza vaccine and narcolepsy.

In 2014, CDC published a study on the association between 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines, 2010/2011 seasonal influenza vaccines, and narcolepsy. The analysis included more than 650,000 people who received the pandemic flu vaccine in 2009 and over 870,000 people who received the seasonal flu vaccine in 2010/2011. The study found that vaccination was not associated with an increased risk for narcolepsy.

CDC recommends influenza vaccination as the best way to protect from influenza disease and its complications. See CDC influenza vaccine

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesaf...

From that lil' old group known as the Center for Disease Control. But what do they know?

DDT was only banned for agricultural use. It is still available for use in mosquito control in countries that need it.

The problem is that overuse of DDT allowed mosquitoes to develop a strong resistance to it. Here's a nice study on that topic, but since you won't bother reading it I will quote "We conducted standard insecticide susceptibility testing across western Kenya and found that the Anopheles gambiae mosquito has acquired high resistance to pyrethroids and DDT"

Put simply, DDT doesn't work well for controlling malaria carrying mosquitoes anymore, and that was not caused by media induced panics about DDT. If anything, the media exposure that lead to banning DDT for all other uses probably prolonged it's usefulness for controlling mosquitoes.

Not necessarily: https://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/gene...

Or to consult a site that actually discusses genuine epidemiology, you find that there is no evidence of an elevated risk of death from the vaccine at all. As in - not even a tiny bit.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesaf...

The anti-vax site the Coward links to simply cites raw reports. People die sometimes, lots of reasons. Lots of people get vaccinated. They also do lots of other things for the first time. Some of these people will later die, lots of reasons. That does not mean the vaccination, of any of the other first time things they did, contributed to their death. You do controlled studies to tell the difference.

but there are a ton of folks who can't afford the vaccine.

They don't need to be able to afford it. There are programs set up for exactly this issue. Cost is not an obstacle.

[T]he vaccine is of zero benefit to him because he has no cervix

Well ... perhaps not zero benefit. He does have a throat I take it.

Which is in no way to disagree with your actual point, that this, and imo many other vaccines, ought to be freely available, where your argument should be irresistible.

Just have like everyone in China jump up and down at the same time for a while. If the wobble gets worse, have everyone in North America jump up and down for a longer period of time.

With about 40% of the US population being overweight, I'm pretty sure we won't need to "jump up and down for a longer period of time." We might want to instead jump only once.

EFFECTS OF CHRONIC OR REPEATED EXPOSURE: Nicotine is a teratogen (capable of causing birth defects). Other developmental toxicity or reproductive toxicity risks are unknown. The information about nicotine as a carcinogen is inconclusive.

- https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ersh...

In other words, nicotine is not a carcinogen. Idiot.

Contrary to what you might have heard... you won't get addicted to opioids easily. It's needs a sustained exposure over a fairly long period to get chemically addicted

Which describes a lot of people who take various opioids like OxyContin for chronic pain or accidents with substantial recovery times. So, the very people most likely to get opioids as treatment are also the ones like to have a sustained exposure over a fairly long period of time.
  That's a recipe for chemical addiction.

- 1% sounds closer to reality than the hysterical claims made. P.S. 1% of millions is a lot... which is why you think it's more common than it is.

By the numbers, in 2016 2.1 million had a opioid use disorder and 42,249 died of an opioid overdose. Even presuming a substantial number of those are heroine/stolen opioids, how many are those are a byproduct of an original opioid prescription leading to addiction? Do we just not count those? More than 17% of Americans had at least one opioid prescription filled, with an average of 3.4 opioid prescriptions dispensed per patient. ... The average number of days per prescription continues to increase, with an average of 18 days in 2017. So, even if we take what you say is true that only 1% leads to addiction, then clearly the biggest problem is the massive over prescription of opioids that last on average 60 days.

Of course a 'pretty bad flu" can kill you - if you are already weak/ill. Alcohol withdrawal will kill even healthy people. The point is, that, again, the hysterical claims that opioids addiction cannot be beaten... are just that... hysteria.

It's not that opioid addiction cannot be beaten. It's that when you know people are likely to have addiction or at least dependence because you're literally prescribing them a recipe for addiction, you need to actually treat that situation and try to actually manage it. You don't just say "ah, 1%, that's like 0%, so let's just cut them off when treatment is done and walk away". But you don't get very far if you just blame the victim of your actions and say they were unlucky 1%, fuck 'em.

And by "very far", I mean, you encourage people to become heroine addicts. Then you get to receive money for dealing with their overdoses because heroine is cheap, but unregulated so people tend to get incorrect dosage. If only they had more will power, they'd not be that 1%. I mean, that's how addiction works, right? And it's not easy, so they must have worked for it, so they have it coming to them.

Can I drip the sarcasm any harder?

You seem to know more about this than me so you are probably right. Windy just has a habit of making shit up, often outrageously absurd claims. So I question him.

Isn't the seasonal flu vaccine based on the prevalent strains from the previous 6 months. Norther hemisphere given to the Southern and vice versa. That would tend to imply 6 months is enough time for some large level of vaccination to be done. But obviously not enough for everyone as not everyone takes it now.

3 million people visited America from China in 2016. So 8000+ a day, probably a similar level comming back home from a trip to China. If it was at all widespread in China routine CDC flu monitoring would have picked it up by now. But yes, too late for America.
Best bet is to move to Australia or New Zealand and be rich enough to be at the head of the queue when the vaccine is ready. Hope they enjoy their (short) time as leaders of the free world.

This is why we should be investing more in modernizing flu vaccine manufacturing. If the next super flu is also highly infectious to chickens, they will be culled and burned.

We already have that.... One of them is a recombinant protein-based technique approved in 2013. As I understand it, the protein-based techniques are supposed to create a more consistent vaccine batch than eggs (due to the intermingling of egg DNA). Plus, some people are allergic to chicken eggs and are unable to take the flue vaccine created using the egg based techniques.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protec...

The mortality rate is 39%. Luckily, human-to-human transmission so far is rare, it's usually poultry-to-human, but this could change as the virus evolves.

• 258.9 per 100,000 - Heart disease
• 185.4 per 100,000 - Malignant neoplasms (cancer)
• 48.2 per 100,000 - Chronic lower respiratory diseases
• 45.6 per 100,000 - Accidents (unintentional injuries)
  Breaks down to 14.8 for poison and drug overdoses, 11.7 for motor vehicle accidents, 10.4 for falls
• 43.7 per 100,000 - Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)
• 34.4 per 100,000 - Alzheimerâ(TM)s disease
• 24.7 per 100,000 - Diabetes mellitus (diabetes)
• 17.8 per 100,000 - Influenza and pneumonia
• 15.5 per 100,000 - Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease)
• 13.7 per 100,000 - Intentional self-harm (suicide)
• 12.7 per 100,000 - Septicemia
• 12.5 per 100,000 - Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis
  Breaks down to 6.5 for alcoholic liver disease
• 10.0 per 100,000 - Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal disease(hypertension)
• 8.7 per 100,000 - Parkinsonâ(TM)s disease
• 6.2 per 100,000 - Pneumonitis due to solids and liquids
• 5.5 per 100,00 - Assault (homicide)
  Breaks down to 4.0 for homicide by gun

So being killed (murdered) by gun is pretty far down the list. 4.0 per 100,000 works out to a 1 in 25,000 chance of being murdered by gun in any given year Any of the above causes are more likely to kill you.

Actual statistics are radically different, and actually prove that "mesothelioma deaths decreased among persons aged 35–44, 45–54, and 55–64 years". It's really a concern for a tiny sub-population over the age of 75 who tended to work with raw asbestos insulation before its dangers were well known.

Well, considering we know how to vaccinate against malaria NOW (not to mention mosquito eradication) and it's not being done...

Um, not according to the CDC, at https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/ma...

"Although progress has been made in the last 10 years toward developing malaria vaccines, there is currently no effective malaria vaccine on the market."

While that page was from 2015, there's still no vaccine.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/...

pointless because you ignore hard facts. pointless because you link nonsense article about absurd age of 145 years.

I have hard facts and data on my side.

You have willful ignorance

Check out the CDC: "Because colds and flu share many symptoms, it can be difficult (or even impossible) to tell the difference between them based on symptoms alone. Special tests that usually must be done within the first few days of illness can tell if a person has the flu." https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/...

So yes, flu is usually more severe than a cold but not always. Again, the easiest way to tell the difference between flu and a severe cold is the time it takes to take on full effect after the first symptoms appear.

Other things they could study is if there is a difference injecting someone with mercury(aka thimerosal) or formaldehyde and how it affects the immune system or overall body. If you look at the list of ingredients in the pdf below most of the influenza vaccines have one or the other or both. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/p...

Yes, indeed, lets not muddy the waters. If any law only shifts murder from one instrumentality to another it is largely pointless. Dead is dead. Or do you think that being killed by a gun uniquely effects ones afterlife?

The Sandy Hook shootings were in 2012.

Murders in Connecticut*:
2005 107
2014 100
2015 124
2016 88

Homicide Mortality by State

Not original AC, but, like, facts?
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/produ... (2014, males represent 78% of US suicides)
https://afsp.org/about-suicide... (WHITE males represent 70% of US suicides in 2016)
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/healt... (2016, males represent 78% of US suicides)

Given that men kill themselves ~3.5x as much as women, with a *vast* majority being white men, phrasing this as a "mens issue" isn't particularly out of line.

Bullshit. With this past week Anthony Bourdain, not a poor guy by any stretch and Kate Spade, also not the least bit poor hung themselves this week. So any argument about income equality is a load of crap. I won't even mention others like Robin Williams and a slew more not poor folk committing suicide.

Quit thinking in black and white terms. Stop think in strict cause/effect terms. Start thinking contributing factors, start thinking in terms of many shares grey rather than black and white.

You have mentioned 3 famous people in the span of about 4 years. Just in 2015 according to the CDC there were about 44,193 suicides https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fasta...

I'm sorry, your spouting of 4 or so famous people over the course of 4 years when compared to the 44,193 in just 2015. Your argument with income equality not being a cause (again, your B&W thinking style) and think of it as a potential contributing factor. If income equality is a contributing factor, I would argue that higher income could be insulating factor... not a cause, but a contributing or insulating factor.

The fact of the matter is, suicide is happening far too often. It's time we look at what the contributing factors are playing a role in these trends. It is time to take a look at our society and see what changes over the past couple decades could be contributing to these events. I would hypothesize that income equality plays a larger contributing factor that you will be willing to admit. But, I also know there are more contributing factors out there which haven't been discussed.

• There have been about 250 fatalities from school shootings over 18 years (excluding suicides and gang violence). That works out to (250)/(18) = 13.9 deaths per year. Since there are approximately 51 million K-12 students in the U.S., a student's odds of being killed in a school shooting in any given year are (51 million) / (13.9 per year) = 1 in 3.67 million.
• About 120 Americans are killed every year by deer. (325.7 million Americans) / (120 per year) = 1 in 2.71 million.

So a student is more likely to be killed by a deer than from a school shooting. Where are all the walk-outs and protests advocating deer population control?

For some perspective on the scope of the school shooting problem, look at the stats the CDC puts out. For 2015, the leading causes of death among the 15-19 year old demographic were:

3,919 deaths - Accidents (mostly automobile accidents and drug overdoses). 282x more than school shootings.
2.061 deaths - Suicide. 148x more.
1,587 deaths - Homicide (mostly outside school, and gang related). 114x more.
583 deaths - Malignant neoplasms (cancer). 42x more.
306 deaths - Heart disease. 22x more.
195 deaths - Birth defects. 14x more.
72 deaths - Influenza (the flu). 5.2x more.
63 deaths - Chronic lower respiratory diseases. 4.5x more.
61 deaths - Cerebrovascular diseases. 4.4x more.
52 deaths - Diabetes. 3.7x more.
41 deaths - Complications from pregnancy and childbirth. 3x more.

A protest over excessive rates of teen pregnancy could potentially save 3x more lives than a protest over school shootings. Likewise, teaching kids not to each too many sweets, to exercise, not to smoke, get the flu shot, use sunscreen, not to join gangs, to buckle their seat belt, not to use drugs, and offering them counseling for depression, would all be much more productive uses of our time and effort than worrying about or debating school shootings. For that matter, controlling deer populations to reduce the number of fatalities from striking deer could potentially save 1.35x as many students' lives as lost to school shootings.

If you want to tackle a life-threatening issue that students face, probably the best choice is suicide. It results in more than a hundred times as many student deaths as school shootings. But when's the last time you saw the media run a story about teen suicide? The only reason school shootings are even on the radar is because of the media using them to play the "think of the children!" card against guns.

. This is purely statistics.

Sort of. There is an issue of definition as well as culture that could influence infant mortality rates. That is different than X number of people with Y disease.

As an example, the US and Canada are two countries which register a much higher proportion of babies weighing less than 500g, with low odds of survival, resulting in higher reported infant mortality. Does it really mean that health care in the US is worse because we have more preterm babies and try save their life? The EU varies between 5-10% while the US has 1 in 10. Why the difference? What was the EU priority for pre-term babies before 2015 and what is causing their increased preterm births (the Born too Soon link)? That isn't a simple statistical analysis. Even if the WHO uses numbers from the country itself. This is kind of the problem whenever statistics are applied across countries. The different definitions and culture influence what those numbers mean and rarely is it ever an apples and apples comparison.

CDC can't, by law, do any research on gun violence.

That is a lie. The CDC can't spend money to "advocate or promote gun control". If they couldn't "research gun violence". How is it we know how many gun related deaths there are from the CDC year after year?

What is wrong with saying a government research agency cannot push an agenda in their research?

You shouldn't care about school shootings either. There have been about 250 deaths in school shootings over 18 years (non-gang, non-suicide), or about 14 per year. Since there are approximately 51 million K-12 students in the U.S., a student's chances of being killed in a non-gang, non-suicide school shooting in any given year are about (51 million students) / (14 deaths/year) = 1 in 3.6 million.

You're more likely to be killed by a deer. About 120 Americans are killed by deer every year. (325.7 million Americans) / (120 deaths/year) = 1 in 2.7 million chance of being killed by a deer each year. Do you wring your hands over the possibility of being killed by a deer, and hold marches to demanding the deer population be controlled?

The U.S. causes of death statistics are readily available from the CDC website. For 2015, the leading causes of death for the 15-19 year old demographic were:

3,919 deaths - Accidents (mostly automobile accidents and drug overdoses)
2.061 deaths - Suicide
1,587 deaths - Homicide (mostly outside school, and gang related)
583 deaths - Malignant neoplasms (cancer)
306 deaths - Heart disease
195 deaths - Birth defects
72 deaths - Influenza (the flu)
63 deaths - Chronic lower respiratory diseases
61 deaths - Cerebrovascular diseases
52 deaths - Diabetes
41 deaths - Complications from pregnancy and childbirth

All of these represent a greater risk to students than the 14 deaths per year from school shootings.

Too bad you've got to be at least a little bit scientific literate to understand more than just the headline. According to the paper HIV and HPV are about as related as smoking cigarettes and the common cold. Yes, one can make the other worse by facilitating an infection. But that's simply because it weakens certain parts of your body and not because they're related somehow.

Information from the American CDC states that about 79 million Americans are infected with HPV. Just to put this into perspective that ~24% of the US population.
They also have a number on HIV infections which is 1.1 million in the US, which is like .3% of the US population.
Just compare these two numbers alone and ask yourself how much linked those diseases can actually be.

Too bad you've got to be at least a little bit scientific literate to understand more than just the headline. According to the paper HIV and HPV are about as related as smoking cigarettes and the common cold. Yes, one can make the other worse by facilitating an infection. But that's simply because it weakens certain parts of your body and not because they're related somehow.

Information from the American CDC states that about 79 million Americans are infected with HPV. Just to put this into perspective that ~24% of the US population.
They also have a number on HIV infections which is 1.1 million in the US, which is like .3% of the US population.
Just compare these two numbers alone and ask yourself how much linked those diseases can actually be.

The problem is that car accidents are in general vastly under-reported by the media. Until the last couple years, the single most dangerous thing you did was to get into a car (surpassed only recently by drug overdoses). On average, about 1 in 102 people you know are fated to die in a car accident. Compare to the odds of some of the other things the media devotes a disproportionately high (or low) amount of coverage time:

Suicide: 1 in 91
Police killed on duty: 1 in 104 (1.1 million officers / (135 per year * 78 year lifespan normalization)
Homicide by gun: 1 in 285
Drowning: 1 in 1,086
Fire: 1 in 1,506
Choking: 1 in 3,138
Killed by police: 1 in 4,336 (325.7 million / (963 * 78 year lifespan)
Complications from pregnancy: 1 in 5,965 (325.7 million / (700 * 78 year normalization)
Terrorism in U.S.: 1 in 28,033 (325.7 million / (3277 * 78 year lifespan / 22 years sample))
Killed by deer: 1 in 34,797 (325.7 million / (120 * 78 year lifespan)
Gun accident: 1 in 8305
Lightning: 1 in 114,195
School shootings: 1 in 121,033 (325.7 million / (138 * 78 year lifespan normalization / 4 years sample))
Dog attack: 1 in 132,614
Plane crash: 1 in 205,552
Terrorism in U.S. excluding 9/11: 1 in 248,954
Shark attack: 1 in 3,690,101 (325.7 million / (43 * 78 year lifespan / 38 year sample)

If news reports were truly unbiased, you'd expect to see:

Roughly 3x as many reports about fatal car accidents than gun homicides.
5x as many reports of women dying from pregnancy than reports of terrorism fatalities (including 9/11, 77x without).
39x as many stories about people dying of choking on food, versus school shootings.
43x as many stories about fatal car accidents than police shootings.
91x as many reports about suicides than gun accidents.
Over 100x as many stories about people being killed by deer, than killed by sharks.

The truth is the media picks and chooses which stories they want to publicize, whether it be because of their unusual and provocative nature (e.g. Tesla crashes, plane crashes, school shootings, shark attacks), or to serve a political agenda.