Maps of the Week: Sexually transmitted disease

Our series on communicable disease begins this week with five sexually transmitted diseases.

As explained earlier, the data comes from reports sent to medical officers of health in Toronto, Peel, Halton, York and Durham sent to the Ministry of Health in 2008. The Ministry released a spreadsheet in response to an FOI request with the reported disease, the region that the report came from, and the first three characters of the postal code of the patient, which was available in most cases.

---

Chlamydia (map)

Chlamydia appears in two strong pockets in the GTA. One is in the central city, strongest in areas east of Yonge and the neighbourhood centred on Spadina and Dundas, and then spreading out at a lower level along the waterfront neghbourhoods from Parkdale to Ashbridge's Bay. A second pocket is centred on the 400 and 401, spreading south to Keele and Eglinton and north to Jane and Steeles. At a lower level, the pocket spreads west into north Etobicoke and east into York University. In Peel, chlamydia is centred in Brampton in a corridor along Queen Street.

Only one residential postal code in the entire GTA had no cases - low-population L4V, east of Pearson, with only 1,012 people.

13% of cases had no postal code available, and do not appear on the map.

---

Gonorrhoea (map)

Gonorrhoea shows a similar pattern, with the east downtown and areas roughly along Jane St. strongly represented, and nearby areas also affected. A third area covering much of mid-south Scarborough and Malvern also appears, but at lower levels.

13% of cases had no postal code available, and do not appear on the map.

---

HIV (map)

is strongly concentrated in the city's east downtown, with a suburban pocket east and southwest of Jane and Sheppard. South Riverdale and Harbourfront also have higher rates.

34% of cases had no postal code available, and do not appear on the map.

---

Infectious syphilis (map)

This map covers much of the older part of the central city, with a centre more or less at Yonge and Dundas.

16% of cases had no postal code available, and do not appear on the map.

---

Other syphilis (map)

This map shows a roughly similar pattern to chlamydia and gonorrhoea, with the east downtown and a corridor roughly centred between Jane and Keele represented, and less-affected areas spreading out from there.

Low-population L0H appears on the map with its one case. With a population of 713, one case of anything can make L0H stand out, depending on the subject.

10% of cases had no postal code available, and do not appear on the map.

Comments

[Muskokaphotog]

Once again, it is difficult to assess what this map intends to show without any other comparison. If you have high density of population, then you would expect higher density of everything else. Either the map should be adjust to give each area equal space relative to population density or overlay this data with pop density data.

[Jason Northway-Frank]

What a remarkably gauche thing to do! Why are we still pointing fingers at the poor and fabulous? We've now known for decades that characterizing STIs, (in particular HIV), as endemic of niche communities only helps to bring such diseases into the population at large. "Oh, it's not in my community, so I don't need to protect myself." This map is nothing more than a graphic representation of that sentiment.

[Dorothy G]

Your map should show cases per thousand - not total cases. If you have only total cases, your map will only indicate the density of population.
I love the maps, but please make them useful.

[greg panke]

The map does show cases per thousand according to the colour codes on the right side of the map. In many areas having one or two cases makes the numbers quite inconsiderable on a societal basis, although unfortunate for those involved. I would like to see similar infor on communicable diseases that can not be easily avoided like TB. I wonder what the numbers are like in other "advanced" cities around the world.

[John Houston]

This map astounds me. How on earth do you expect anyone to use this information? If I only have sex with people from Whitchurch-Stouffille can I safely forgoe the use of a condom? They only seem to have 'other' (non-infectious?) syphilis there. Or perhaps health educators should assume people in 'low incidence' areas don't require any information to help them protect themselves. I've come to expect more thoughtful reporting from the Star.

[Val]

Perhaps these places happen to have more clinics and doctors offices than other areas. Some folks live in Markham and go downtown to see their doctors. This research is useless to me.

[DoGGy]

"Either the map should be adjust to give each area equal space relative to population density or overlay this data with pop density data."

It does!!! Learn how to read a map. Click an area and it will show you the rate per 1000 people! Thats density!

"Some folks live in Markham and go downtown to see their doctors."

Than there postal code would not be M5 or M4, it would be M1!

[Deb]

where is the map?

[Itchy]

Your attempted map of virus' actually LOOKS like a virus...

[Toronto]

wow Jane Street is serious

[d]

I've been looking for this information for a while. Thank you for presenting it in an easy to navigate way.

[HSC]

The mappings are an interesting idea and look rather attractive overall, one might even say artistic. I think that they would have the highest impact and be best displayed in the "entertainment' section.

[sarahhh]

People who are making a big fuss about, "does this mean i won't need to wear a condom in such and such area/stop labeling the poor". I mean in general we all understand the main method of transmitting and getting a STI is through unprotected sex. So why question that, unless you want to play the risk factor? Just because someone says they're clean, doesn't always mean they're clean. We've been taught "no glove no love". So for all of you crying afoul that this map is stigmatizing people, just stop. It's a choice if we want to make associations that "oh, the neighbourhood is poor, therefore they have a high prevalence of STIs, makes sense", why bother with these ignorant people.

The map should be used as a wake up call, especially to our youths that there ARE STIs, and just look at the high prevalence of it. Learn to use a condom and protect yourself, why gamble with the risk of getting one? If anything, all the areas should consider doing something more to prevent it.

How is it fair that we can make maps like Gross Per Capita, Food Consumption per Capita, and so forth, but when it comes to a simple STI map, people are throwing their arms up in the air?