HIV and Syphilis in Chinese Internal Migrants
Thérèse Hesketh,Li Lu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aids.0000180784.25800.97
IF: 4.632
2005-01-01
AIDS
Abstract:We read the review by Tucker et al. [1] about HIV in China with great interest. We agree that surplus men represent a potential threat for the increased sexual transmission of HIV in the future. However, the question of the role of internal migrants is more complicated. Assumptions of their high risk have been based mainly on their huge numbers and evidence from studies of migrant workers elsewhere, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, where the overwhelming majority of migrants are men [2]. The evidence that Chinese migrant workers are actually at greater risk is very tenuous, not least because nearly half of all internal migrants are women. In 2000, official figures stated that 47% were women [3]. Because of the potential importance of migrant workers for the Chinese epidemic, we recently carried out a study to determine the prevalence of HIV and syphilis, together with related knowledge and attitudes among Chinese internal migrant workers. This was a cross-sectional survey of 4148 migrants and 2197 urban workers in two districts of Hangzhou, the capital of Zhejiang Province and one of the boom cities of eastern China. The workers were engaged in a range of occupations, including construction, manufacturing, hotels and bars, the retail sector and domestic service. Testing for HIV and syphilis was offered on an anonymous or a named basis, with full informed consent and with free treatment offered for all test-positive individuals. All but 15 chose named testing. Respondents also completed a questionnaire about knowledge and attitudes towards HIV. Testing for antibodies to HIV-1 and syphilis was carried out on dried blood spots using a gelatin particle agglutination technique. Results showed that the migrant workers were younger, less well educated (P < 0.001) and were more likely to be single than urban workers (P < 0.001). No HIV infections were detected in either the migrant or urban populations, strongly suggesting that HIV is not currently spreading among migrant workers in this part of eastern China. Syphilis was detected, but the prevalence was not significantly different between urban workers [0.68%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35, 1.02] and migrant workers (0.48%, 95% CI 0.26–0.66, P = 0.07), suggesting that syphilis is a problem in urban and migrant workers, not specifically in migrants. Although important as a public health issue in its own right, this may also be a warning sign for an increase in HIV in the near future. Urban workers were consistently more knowledgeable than migrants about HIV, but knowledge of the major modes of transmission was good in both groups. Most misinformation related to over-assuming modes of transmission, such as through mosquitoes or kissing. There was also considerable ignorance about the protective effects of condoms: only 28% of migrants and 56% of urban workers knew that condoms protect against HIV transmission. Data obtained from the questionnaire survey give some indication about why HIV is not yet spreading on this population: 46% of our migrant sample were women and over one third (36%) were accompanied by a partner (34% of the men, 40% of the women), with 6.2% of the men and 7.5% of the women also accompanied by children. The mixed sex character of the migrating population probably reduces casual sexual encounters, but may also alter the sexual culture, so that single men are less likely to seek out casual or commercial sex partners. The apparently low use of sex workers lends support to this theory. Over 90% of both groups (urban and migrant) said they thought their workmates never went to sex workers, with less than 1% saying ‘a lot’ of their workmates went to sex workers, and 88% of the male migrants said that the use of sex workers would be ‘a waste of money’. These findings are in contrast to those of the migrant workers studied in sub-Saharan Africa, and they emphasize the importance of not making assumptions based on other populations. We would also like to point out that the papers about migrants referred to by Tucker et al. [4] are actually non-specific in their findings, although we are led to believe otherwise. Parish's important paper on chlamydial infection is quoted by Tucker et al. [4] as saying that migrants had ‘increased sexual risk-taking’. In fact the sample for this study included only 5% migrants, and they were not statistically different to non-migrants in terms of sexual risk taking. Futhermore, three papers are of historical interest, although this is not made clear, and one dates from 1933! [5–7].