YESTERDAY, March 10, was National HIV/AIDS Women and Girls Awareness Day. Come AIDS 2012 International Conference in Washington, D.C., the world will witness a huge youth engagement. These events are no pandering to youth. And I do not want to get into platitudinous remarks that the youth are the leaders of tomorrow; the youth are the future, etc. Everyone is part of the future; the future is always with all of us. What, however, I do want to say is that when it comes to HIV/AIDS, engaging youngsters is serious business. This youth engagement at yesterday’s National HIV/AIDS Women and Girls Awareness Day in the U.S. and the coming 2012 AIDS Conference are no gimmicks.

You see youth worldwide have become a massive part of the infection statistics of HIV/AIDS, possibly representing a paradigm shift, where these youngsters are becoming increasingly susceptible to contracting HIV. For some time now, there has been the known fact that as many people were becoming afflicted with AIDS during their 20s, then, given the average time it takes from becoming HIV-infected to advancing to full-blown AIDS status, many of these persons with AIDS, would have contracted HIV in their adolescent years. This story has been told in many parts of the world. Nevertheless, today, it is more than a story; it is a clinical reality, and has been a clinical verity for some time now.
In the U.S. in 2009, 39% of new HIV infections were among the 13-29 age group; and internationally, 3,300 persons within the 15-24 age group contract HIV every day. In Guyana in 2010, 17.5% (182) of persons within the 20-24 age group and 6.8% (71) aged 15-19 contracted HIV. In fact in 2010, about a quarter of the HIV-infected in Guyana falls within the 15-24 age group.
And in Guyana, if there is high knowledge of HIV/AIDS among the 15-24 age group, as reported by the authorities, then it is confounding to see that about a quarter of Guyana’s HIV-infected are in this age group, and that rate apparently is growing. Or, does HIV/AIDS knowledge have little impact on reducing HIV infection?
Perhaps, there is need to analyze cautiously the different forms of HIV-related education, their consequences and impact,  and identifying specific effectiveness in education generally and HIV education principally pertaining to precise outcomes (Aggleton, Yankah, & Crewe, 2011); and they added, that education methods and systems may have to start thinking quicker than the HIV epidemic.
In addition, it is important that surveys of people’s HIV/AIDS knowledge comprehensively tap these areas, among others: impact of HIV/AIDS; symptoms of HIV/AIDS; myths and misconceptions of HIV transmission; clinical modes of HIV transmission; HIV testing; blood donation; preventative measures. Excluding any of these or other pertinent areas in surveys will reduce the validity of findings on whether a particular age group has high, moderate, or low HIV/AIDS knowledge.
Notwithstanding these grim statistical reminders, there are popular cultural environments, well equipped with their own rules and resources, which induce young people to believe that HIV/AIDS cannot touch them; and for this reason, they become trapped in these populous settings that sustain their high-risk behaviours. Nonetheless, this belief may be valid only for those who practise abstinence; in which case, they may not be on a convergence path with HIV. Indeed, there are many others in such settings where practising abstinence may not be on their radar, thereby placing them at risk of becoming HIV-infected.
Nevertheless, it is probable that persons may change their behaviours if they consider their health to be at risk and that their current activities may produce devastating consequences; and also, they must believe that they have the capacity to carry out the desired behaviour changes. At any rate, the increasing incidence of HIV among the 15-24 age group internationally is a significant marker for a renewed and comprehensive focus on young people, in order to achieve an AIDS-free generation.