Major Physiological Effects on Black African Living In London - Literature review Example

Table of Content Introduction 1 Progress and Development of the disease since it first started 2 Mentality of people: Stigma and discrimination as a challenge………..1.3 The difference: Black Africans vs. White Brits………………………..1.4 What the government is doing………………………………………….1.5 Criminalization of HIV transmission…………………………………...1.6 Conclusion………………………………………………………………1.7 Recommendation……………………………………………………….1.8 Bibliography…………………………………………………………….1.9 HIV in Black African community in London: Literature Review 1.1 Introduction HIV/AIDS is a subject which has been prominently researched and discussed because of its’ impact on humans. According to (United Nations, 2003), ever since this HIV/AIDS virus was discovered, people have been attempting to find means of educating the others regarding this virus. Many concerned agencies together with the UK governments have put in place many campaigns and people have been informed of the countless effects of this virus. This paper recognizes that the virus has not only psychological effects, but also major physiological effects on Black African living in London (Grundy-bowers & Davies, 2007, p. 247). Therefore, this paper will emphasis on the progress and development of this disease ever since it started some years ago and how people acted by then and now and what has changed since. The paper will also explore mentality of people about this disease and examine the difference between White British and Black African people regarding the way they receive support from family and friends. Again, an attempt to explain whether the Black African with HIV in London are accepted in their community will be made in this paper. Infected Black Africans living in London are normally in fear since they require adjusting to a completely new lifestyle. It`s not easy to believe that you are infected and therefore shock and disbelief, causing denial, is a regular initial reaction. According to (David & Lishman, 2009, p. 68), there are emotional reactions which are symptoms of a psycho- logical effect which people, including Black African in London, have when infected with HIV/AIDS. The infected Black African may be provoked to reconsider their sexual identity as well as behavioral options they make to support that identity (SUSSER, 2011, p. 361). Whenever one links HIV with what the society has customarily considered immoral, these infected Black Africans then have to work through their feelings so as to reaffirm their sexual identity in a way which will allow them feeling good about themselves. 1.2 Progress and Development of the disease since it first started Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome that caused by HIV virus was first acknowledged as a new infection in the year 1981 when the rising statistics of young homosexual males succumbed to the uncommon opportunistic infections and unusual malignancies. According to (Desport, 2010, p. 159), a retrovirus, currently called HIV-1 (human immunodeficiency virus type 1), was consequently confirmed as a causative agent of this devastating infectious diseases which have emerged in human history. HIV-1 spreads through sexual intercourse, percutaneous, and perinatal routes. Nonetheless, 80% of HIV-1 acquired by adults results from exposure at mucosal surfaces, thus, AIDS is predominantly a sexually transmitted infection. Ever since its first identification nearly three decades ago, the HIV-1 form, also known as the dominant (M) group, has actually infected over 60 million individuals and caused over 25 million deaths (Evian, 2006, p. 172). Most people of Black origin have experienced the highest HIV infection and consequently greatest morbidity and mortality resulting from HIV-related cases has been recorded among Black African population in London as opposed to their White counterparts. Though antiretroviral treatment has cut down the toll of HIV-related deaths, accessibility of therapy is never widespread, and the projections of effective vaccine and curative treatments are uncertain (Adler, 2012, p. 295). Therefore, HIV will remain a substantial public health risk for decades to come. It`s important to note that since HIV-1 was discovered, the causes for its unexpected emergence, unique pathogenicity, and epidemic spread have been a topic of intense study. The first clue came to light in 1986; a morphologically alike but antigenically different virus was discovered to cause AIDS among patients within western Africa (Voevodin & Marx, 2009, p. 326). Inquisitively, Voevodin & Marx suggest that the new virus, dubbed HIV-2 (human immunodeficiency virus type 2), was merely distantly linked to HIV-1 and closely linked to a simian virus which caused immunodeficiency in the captive macaques (Thebault, 2006, p. 298). Soon afterward, additional viruses, jointly named SIVs (simian immunodeficiency viruses); the “s” suffix denoting their origin species, were discovered in numerous different primates hailing from sub-Saharan Africa. They included African green monkeys, mandrills, chimpanzees, sooty mangabeys, and others as (Paul & Beatrice, 2011) illustrates in the picture below. Astonishingly, these viruses seemed to be fundamentally nonpathogenic in their respective natural hosts, despite bunching together with the simian and human AIDS viruses in a solitary phylogenetic lineage in the radiation of the lentiviruses as (Paul & Beatrice, 2011) illustrates in the picture below. A serological proof of SIV infection has since been reported for nearly 40 primate species. Of the numerous primate lentiviruses which have been recognized, SIVcpz has always been of a particular interest since it`s has a close genetic relationship with HIV-1 as show in the picture above. Fascinatingly, close simian lineages of the HIV-2 and HIV-1 virus were also found in sooty mangabeys and chimpanzees respectively. These relationships offered the first proof that AIDS had developed from both macaques and humans as a consequence of the cross-species infections with the lentiviruses from various primate species. Undeniably, subsequent studies reinforce the fact that SIVmac was never an ordinary pathogen of the macaques, Asian primates, but was generated unintentionally in the US primate centers through inoculation of different species of the macaques with the tissues and/or blood from naturally infected sooty mangabeys. Likewise, it was now clear that the HIV-1 and HIV-2 were nothing more than the outcome of zoonotic transfers of the viruses infecting existing primates in Africa. Nevertheless, things assumed a drastic twist when the perceived notion that link HIV-1 to be of a chimpanzee origin was until recently, discredited due to the lack of chimpanzee reservoir. This left the origin of HIV-1 open to discussion. Nonetheless, these suspicions have since been fixed by the noninvasive testing of the wild-living ape populations. It was identified that HIV-1 is not simply one virus, but consist of four separate lineages, named groups P, O, N, and M, each of which originated from an independent event of cross-species transmission. The first group to be discovered was group M and it represented the disease form of HIV-1. The M group has infected over 60 million people globally and it`s virtually found in every human habitat in the globe, including London (Pribram, 2011, p. 82). Group O came to light in 1990, but is much less dominant than group M; It merely represents 1% of the global HIV-1 infections. Group N was acknowledged in 1998. It`s less dominant than group O and only 13 cases of infections from this group have been, so far, documented. Finally, group P was recently discovered in Cameroonian woman in 2009. Although members of each of the groups are can cause AIDs and CD4+ T-cell depletion, they clearly differ immensely in their prevalence within the human population (Sharma, 2006, p. 57). Among the Black Africans living in London, HIV-1 of group M is the only causative agent of AIDs. In previous decades, it claimed so many lives of these Black Africans prior to the discovery of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs (Henderson & Macdonald, 2007, p. 214). Nonetheless, Black Africans currently living with HIV/AIDS can now live a longer and a healthier live thanks to the greater accessibility of the antiretroviral (ARV) treatment. Moreover, where these ARV treatments are readily available declining HIV/AIDS morbidity has since been paralleled by the swelling HIV/AIDS infection cases signifying that prevention programmes that simply targeting HIV-negative Black African may be insufficient to curtail the HIV epidemics (Squire, 2013, p. 139). Additionally, the urgent inclusion of behavioral change strategies, for the HIV infected Black Africans, into the public health system has become inevitable as far as curbing further spread of the pandemic and preventing reinfection is concerned. The behavioral change strategies that are tailored to the particular needs of HIV infected Black Africans living in London may be termed as positive prevention. In UK, positive prevention is currently the HIV prevention standard and most of the intervention models which have shown effectiveness in curbing unsafe behavior are being simulated in London (Squire, 2009, p. 78). The city is presently estimated to host the highest number of HIV infected Blacks living UK. Addressing the HIV prevention measure on these Black Africans becomes even of more priority as studies illustrates that a substantial minority of HIV infected Blacks Africans in London are still attracted to risky behavior (Maḥmūd, 2004, p. 48 ). Therefore, public health regulations are created to handle HIV risk reduction needs of Black Africans. 1.3 Mentality of people: Stigma and discrimination as a challenge There has been misinformed and unpleasant way of thinking towards the HIV infected Black Africans, which can simply be described as stigmatization. The word refers to any attribute which marks a person as being unacceptably dissimilar to other people (Smedley, Stith & Nelson, 2003, p. 287). It attitudes contrast those of the people are ‘normal’ with people who are considered ‘deviant’ or ‘abnormal’: they can thus be considered as part of a social control process. Within black African communities living in London, judgmental understandings of the few people with HIV among them are often associated to perceptions of their promiscuous, homosexual, and prostituting sexual behavior. Most people think and fear that the disease is readily transmissible. Furthermore, HIV infection used to be seen as a ‘death sentence’, because of the previous experiences in most countries when its “treatment” was not readily available. Stigmatization of HIV infected Black Africans in London resulted from HIV being professed as an issue which affects other people; family, friends, and job colleagues, which makes informed conversation on the topic a difficult task (Beck, Mays, Whiteside & Zuniga, 2006, p. 285). As such, it stigmatization contributes to low rates of testing among black Africans the results of which is progressive transmission of HIV across communities. Stigmatized way of thinking about the disease needs to be abolished as it affects the life of Blacks Africans with diagnosed HIV and causes more transmissions of the disease. There are several various ways of describing and classifying stigma. One method categorizes as follows: Anticipated stigma: the fear of such kind of discrimination that might lead to concealment. Enacted stigma: real experience of the discriminatory acts. Internalized stigma or self-stigma: the individual admits that the negative social attitudes are valid. In a sequence of qualitative research, Black-African Brits with HIV have recorded cases of enacted stigma just when others people have grasped they have HIV or after they have revealed their HIV status. At times they have compelled to leave their shared accommodation by housemates or by relatives. Others have realized that due to unreasonable fears of contamination, they avoided any physical contact with them, were worried about collective use of bathrooms, prevented kids from playing with them, and kept items like cutlery and cups separate. Awareness of an individual’s HIV status might lead others to question sexual morality of the individual, which threatens their responsibility in the family as well as the wider community. These Black-African Brits may be shielded from their partner or sent away from their kids. If the information reached blood relatives ‘back home’ in Africa, their relationship also got profoundly altered, occasionally affecting major sources of social support (Essex, 2002, p. 76). Faith groups as well as leaders, typically a very significant source of support, have occasionally asked people (Black African) with HIV to quit a congregation (Loue, 2013, p. 92). Loue claims, in his book, that they have expressed aggression to antiretroviral treatments. Even though much of enacted stigma hails from within the wider society, it also comes from the black African communities living in London. In employment, Black-African Brits might be discriminated against due to their HIV status or experience infringement of confidentiality. In prenatal or other healthcare settings, these Blacks have recorded distressing treatment or overwhelming ignorance concerning infection control methods from some staff. Furthermore, press coverage that depicts black Africans in UK (London) as bringing the disease into the country, thus, burdening the NHS is frequently experienced as stigmatizing. Likewise, press coverage of the criminal prosecutions for the HIV transmission has also been stigmatizing. Stigma can also be ‘anticipated’ as the Black Africans with HIV are worried about stigmatization which might happen, or are afraid of it. As such, they do never reveal their HIV status to avoid instances where stigma might be encountered. These tactics greatly lessen the experience of an enacted stigma. Nevertheless, sometimes these Blacks might foresee stigma as being worse than it really would be in actuality. A research with black-African Brit women revealed that for most of them, controlling information regarding their HIV status epitomized the single most significant challenge in their daily experiences. The fear of unknown reactions attached to disclosure of this information as well as worries concerning losing control regarding how far this news would reach have been broadly reported in several studies. Additionally, their HIV status regularly leads to dwindling of key relationships, isolation, preventing these victims from getting social support, and depletion of their social life (GILBERT & WRIGHT, 2003, p. 89). HIV infected Black Africans in London might already feel left out from majority population due to their different ethnic background, however, HIV may also cut them off from their own community. The danger of unintentional disclosure may discourage these people from keeping their medication inside a shared accommodation or taking their medication in the presence of others or seeking HIV support and treatment services. Again, because of the fear of violence, abandonment, and verbal abuse, some Black African women do never reveal to their sexual partners their status. Likewise black African males who practice sex with men are specifically reluctant to reveal their status since they may be accused for bringing the infection upon themselves, due to their sexuality. They may also avoid revealing their individual HIV status at work, thus, making it difficult to manage times of ill-health or even other issues. The third category of stigma self-stigmatization (internalized stigma), in which Black Africans with HIV living in London, come to accept and share negative evaluation of them by others. However, others still find it difficult to move past the overwhelmingly negative understanding of their condition and of themselves. Some of them even stop being concerned about what might happen to them, experience depression or withdraw socially. Besides, it was revealed that HIV infected Black African men frequently used metaphor of ‘weakness’ to define their psychological, physical, and economic position (Gillespie, 2006, p. 65). It was hard for them to manage their individuality as a true African man along their HIV status. Experiences of this kind can be interpreted as indicators of internalized stigma. 1.4 The difference: Black Africans vs. White Brits Black Africans in UK, London face a HIV treatment in a different perspective from that witnessed by their white counterparts. They also have dissimilar use of health services. Black Africans who often test positive are recent immigrants to the country and experience uncertainties over employment and housing. Although common practitioners are largely used, the other sources of the health care are hardly accessible to them. This can mirrors a lack of information on these services and on how to access them, the evidence of which is drawn from more than 20% of the black African respondents who reported pretest worries about entitlement to healthcare and where to visit for a HIV test. The degree of concern regarding a range of practical, emotional, social issues linking to HIV testing is undoubtedly high among Black-African Brit patients. Most parents are concerned about the “penalties” of their HIV diagnosis for their own family and if they will be capable of having kids. According to (Chang & Johnson, 2008, p.236 ), the anxiety of dying articulated by two thirds of the Black Africans indicates that they understand their diagnosis in the context of African setting as opposed to their White counterparts who are positive about the diagnosis and believe there is still life after it. The considerable stigma rooted in HIV among African communities in UK, London is mirrored in the importance attached to confidentiality. Fears about confidentiality as well as the unwillingness to reveal their status to friends and family implies that HIV infected Black African in London are less probable to have informal support networks. While the use of voluntary and statutory support services is similar to white patients, the need for support might, in fact, be bigger for Black African patients. This can be specifically true of the Black African males who seem not to utilize HIV support services. The black Africans in London are not sure of the support and acceptance from their friends and family and so they prefer to suffer in silence to revealing their predicaments; heterosexual women and men who participated in a 2008 research in London, were discovered to be considerably less likely to reveal their HIV status compared to their gay White counterparts in the study. To what can we attribute these disparities to? Explanations for HIV always focus on the individual risk behaviors. Black-White disparities in HIV is viewed as resulting from the race differences in their risk behaviors associated to sex and drug use. In general, Black Africans report more risky behaviors concerning sex and drug use than their White Brit counterparts. Black Africans feel as if they are not part of the others and to be caught with this dreaded disease amidst racial and cultural concerns is just but adding more salts to a wound. The disease may jeopardize their already dwindling relationship with the Whites and as such, they fear revealing their HIV status for fear of rejection and lack of the necessary support. Among HIV patients diagnosed after 1994, African-Brits living in London were significantly (p Read More