MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2961067942 · doi:10.1353/bhm.2019.0039

Patient Zero and the Making of the AIDS Epidemic by Richard A. McKay

2019· article· en· W2961067942 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gerald M. Oppenheimer

Notice bibliographique

RevueBulletin of the history of medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueHistory of Science and Medicine
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBiographyHistoryMedicineGerontologyDemographySociologyArt history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Patient Zero and the Making of the AIDS Epidemic by Richard A. McKay Gerald M. Oppenheimer Richard A. McKay. Patient Zero and the Making of the AIDS Epidemic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017. xiv + 432 pp. Ill. $35.00 (978-0-226-06395-9). Randy Shilts’s And the Band Played On (1987), the first history of the AIDS epidemic, introduced the American public to Gaëtan Dugas, the infamous Patient Zero, who supposedly seeded the U.S. epidemic from coast to coast and, worse, may have been the vector who imported AIDS to North America. Most dramatically, influenced by several medical sources, Shilts portrayed Dugas, an Air Canada steward, as a psychopathic carrier who purposely infected other gay men. Shilts’s account was rapidly amplified by the popular media so that Dugas became for several years the human face of the epidemic in North America. As Richard McKay demonstrates in his meticulously researched book, much of what we know of Dugas is a fiction, the transformation of an early AIDS patient into a demon. McKay’s project may in part be described as the biography of a false fact. Dugas, an exceedingly attractive young French Canadian with a highly active sex life in multiple cities, was diagnosed with Kaposi’s sarcoma (KS) in spring 1980, a year before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published its first reports of pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) and KS in previously healthy gay men. He came to the attention of the CDC when it constructed a cluster study of early KS/PCP cases in Southern California, later extending it to ten U.S. cities. The CDC’s cluster consisted of the self-reported sexual contacts of the selected gay men. Erroneously assuming that the incubation period of this new disorder was approximately a year, the CDC inferred that the cluster demonstrated that AIDS was a transmissible disease and that infected individuals within the cluster, Dugas among them, had possibly passed the virus on seriatim. But the CDC provided no data plotting the temporal transmission of the disease from one man (with possibly scores of previous partners) to the next, so that the direction of supposed transmission remained obscure. As McKay shows, Dugas’s importance within the cluster was unduly magnified in two unfortunate ways. While the other men in the study could identify only a few of their multiple partners, Dugas maintained an address book of his sexual contacts, information he shared with the CDC, ensuring that a higher proportion of the cluster’s members would be associated with him. Likewise, unlike most others, he could specify sexual partners on both coasts, boosting his image as a cross-country vector. In addition, while other cases were identified by city and sequence of diagnosis, Dugas, as the only outlier in the initial cluster of men living in Southern California, was tagged with the letter O, denoting “outside-of-California.” At some point, accidentally, the letter was transposed into the number zero, inadvertently marking him as the putative “ur-case.” Graphic displays of the cluster also distorted the data to Dugas’s detriment, presenting him (patient O) at the center of the network’s spokes, visually indicting him as the index case. As McKay demonstrates, Shilts’s characterization of O as the demonic carrier, Patient Zero, required highly selective and biased research by this San Francisco Chronicle journalist. Why Shilts, himself gay, would choose to blame critical elements of the epidemic on a gay man is a subject that McKay analyzes in forensic detail, drawing from his assiduous archival work, interviews, and secondary [End Page 294] sources. His two chapters on Shilts and Band offer an elegant and persuasive case for Shilts’s motives and the circumstances under which his ideas consciously and unconsciously formed. Shilts’s depiction of Dugas as a villainous Typhoid Mary was capitalized on by his editor, also gay, desperate to publicize a work that he feared reviewers and opinion makers were set to overlook. Once planted in the press, the Dugas story diffused rapidly through newspapers, magazines, and TV programs in the United States and Canada. (McKay, a Canadian, integrates his story into the parallel...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,996
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,073

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,014
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,003
Communication savante0,0060,009
Science ouverte0,0020,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,016
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0220,011

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,202
Écart entre enseignants0,183 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBulletin of the history of medicineMême sujetHistory of Science and MedicineTravaux en français237 207