I did read it and I didn't say anything to the point of it being the first-ever HIV trial. Why would you assume I didn't? The point of the article is to show how/why people in Africa feel about being tested on and this was an example and duly noted by the people doing the trail. I don't need a dissertation about what I read as if I'm too incompetent to understand it. We haven't misinterpreted anything, you and a few others just choose to dismiss our feelings, even worse try to tell us why our feelings are wrong and how we should think and now, add how to interpret studies. That's problematic in itself. Black people don't "fear science, research, and vaccines" for the hell of it, there's a solid foundation why it's looked at very closely by us but please continue to explain away why we're wrong in our feelings and experiences. Medical trials not being dramatic to YOU doesn't mean it's OK to project that on to others who have valid reasons for being skittish about them.
As for the Gardisil, that's your sister and I'm sure she didn't have pediatricians forcing it on her children, almost to the point of borderline harassment like a used car salesman.
*sigh* I'm seeing the theme here. You can't/won't/don't understand because it's not applicable to YOU! You're dismissive because "so and so wasn't my experience and I know ABC person who does such and such and did this and that". That's the disconnect. Instead of actually listening, you appear to read something and think of a way to dispute it based on your personal experience. People have different experiences and different ways of viewing things, and despite what some ( not you per se) want to believe, some of those things are race based.
I don't think you mean any harm, I just think there's a disconnect because you read things and relate them to what you've experienced or people you know. That may be legit in other medical situations but as far as trials and whatnot, some black people tend to feel a certain way and it's backed by history.