Talk:Gay-related immune deficiency

Article title
Shouldn't it be Gay-related immune deficiency? Nurg 22:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

This page is about the name, rather than the deficiency−is there a wikipedia standard for distinguishin use/mention? perhaps the titel sshould be in quotes?

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.195.115.17 (talk) 17:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Politics and slogans
How is this related to the contention that AIDS (or HIV?) is/was a "gay disease"? We don't even have an article on the term gay disease. --Uncle Ed (talk) 16:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Known scope of the syndrome

 * founded to combat what appeared to be a homosexual-only disease

The sources our article is citing indicated that less than 100% of the patients were homosexual. For example, the NY Times reported on May 11, 1982 that the syndrome "has developed among some heterosexual women and bisexual and heterosexual men." 

We need a better phrase than "homosexual-only disease". It appeared, rather, to be affecting primarily homosexuals.

"Original name for AIDS" ???
The opening line is: "Gay-related immune deficiency (GRID) was the original name for a disease currently known as AIDS". Is this really accurate? I mean, AIDS was probably known as something else in the context of the African continent. So it seems more like it was the name given to the presences of HIV/AIDS in the United States, so it needs to reflect that. In doing so, the article should probably note the fact that HIV/AIDS has been around a lot longer than it's presence in gay men in the U.S. If anybody has some better knowledge/history/sources on the term that would be appreciated. --Sxologist (talk) 08:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Notability
The sources in this article aren't really enough to establish the notability of this name, and I haven't been able to find any better sources. There's a somewhat substantial article in the Encyclopedia of AIDS, but otherwise just lots of brief mentions. As such, I think it should be redirected to History of HIV/AIDS, but interested to know what others think. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Very good point Arms & Hearts. I will support such a merge. Thank you - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 19:34, 14 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I mean yeah, it can easily fit in the history of HIV/AIDS. Also the article calls it the "original name for AIDS", which is not really accurate since it was spreading through africa and beyond in the 1960's. It was only the original name in context of the United States. Sxologist (talk) 02:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Excellent point Sxologist. I had not thought of that. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 15:24, 15 September 2020 (UTC)