nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Pill that may be able to prevent HIV

leonidas83

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/scientists-founded-pill-appears-safe-effective-prevention-hiv-works-a-daily-basis-stresses-scientists-article-1.1074505

Daily HIV pill Truvada can help healthy people avoid contracting the virus that causes AIDS

FDA to decide if the pill should be approved for people who are at high risk of contracting disease

Federal drug regulators on Tuesday affirmed landmark study results showing that a popular HIV-fighting pill can also help healthy people avoid contracting the virus that causes AIDS in the first place. While the pill appears safe and effective for prevention, scientists stressed that it only works when taken on a daily basis.

The Food and Drug Administration will hold a meeting Thursday to discuss whether Truvada should be approved for people who are at risks of contracting HIV through sexual intercourse. The agency's positive review posted Tuesday suggests the daily pill will become the first drug approved to prevent HIV infection in high-risk patients.
FDA reviewers conclude that taking Truvada pre-emptively could spare patients "infection with a serious and life-threatening illness that requires lifelong treatment."
Despite the positive results, reviewers said that patients must be diligent about taking the pill every day. Adherence to the medication was less than perfect in clinical trials, and reviewers said that patients in the real world may forget to take their medication even more than those in clinical studies.
First announced in 2010, Truvada's preventive ability was hailed as a breakthrough in the 30-year campaign against the AIDS epidemic. A three-year study found that daily doses cut the risk of infection in healthy gay and bisexual men by 44 percent, when accompanied by condoms and counseling. Another study found that Truvada reduced infection by 75 percent in heterosexual couples in which one partner was HIV infected and the other was not.

Sounds great on paper, hopefully this pill will become a realistic option for people at high risk from HIV. Getting it up the sh** pipe need not to be a worry anymore for peeps

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Augmerson

Who'd take it? Actors in the porn industry?

galwayrush

Cyanide would be pretty effective as well..

Bluesphere

yes! €5 ride off a junkie here i come!

hatrickpatrick

In before "NO!!! We will NOT STAND for this! You're interfering in God's will to punish sodomites and unmarried fornicators!!!!!" -- The Catholic Church

bnt

And, of course, the people who need it the most - such as women in sub-Saharan Africa - won't be able to afford the $30+ per day that it costs. The article also suggests that women may need a higher dosage for it to work on them.

seamus

Chris Rock was right!

Pushtrak

Considering

1) How many people currently have HIV.
2) How many people are really going to take a daily dose, with the costs associated for something the majority will assume they'd never contract.

I'd rather see more in the treatment camp than this. I know, there is that whole prevention is better than cure, but in this form... You just know these drugs will be very expensive, and I really can't see people en masse taking this as if it were some vitamin.

Still, though, not to be a naysayer, any progress towards finding cures (treatments) are good things. In fact, my naysayer attitude may be actually excessively naysayer. It may be that such constant treatments are about as good as we are likely to get. I say this because I'd actually like to hear opinions on the subject.

Jester252

10% of anglo saxon men are immune to HIV
rooster teeth

The Irish Riddler

44% less likely when used in conjunction with condoms

special k helps lose weight in conjunction with a healthy balanced diet

pr1cks

Stinicker

HIV/Aids is not a worry once you have a bit of sense and practice safe sex and use condoms. Herpes and Warts now they are two dirty doses that I'd like to see science get working on ASAP. HIV is killing millions in the developing world and actually doing humanity a favour if you want to take a very dim darwinist type view on it.

Overthrow

Stinicker wrote: »

HIV/Aids is not a worry once you have a bit of sense and practice safe sex and use condoms. Herpes and Warts now they are two dirty doses that I'd like to see science get working on ASAP. HIV is killing millions in the developing world and actually doing humanity a favour if you want to take a very dim darwinist type view on it.

Herpes isn't a big deal at all. 25% of adults have it.

Chuck Stone

It's weird.

Surely it would be cheaper to give high risk people free condoms and/or clean needles if they taking drugs intravenously?

I don't get it.

Chamone MF

Stinicker wrote: »

HIV/Aids is not a worry once you have a bit of sense and practice safe sex and use condoms. Herpes and Warts now they are two dirty doses that I'd like to see science get working on ASAP. HIV is killing millions in the developing world and actually doing humanity a favour if you want to take a very dim darwinist type view on it.

Thats the ironic tragedy about it, life is damn cruel sometimes.
Africa is a fked up continent and thats also where aids is at its worst.
Finding a cure would just mean more children living a life in squalid poverty and THEN dying rather than just not surviving birth.
And population would shoot up in barely civilized countries.

1ZRed

44% less likely when used in conjunction with condoms/Quote]

Just 44%. I'm going to be wrapping it up regardless so why would I care to pay €30 a day?
44% would not entice me to bareback!
Dat butt secs be whay too riskay girrr!:p

Giselle

Pushtrak wrote: »

I'd rather see more in the treatment camp than this.

Treatment for HIV is excellent. Very few Westerners with access to the correct meds will go on to develop Aids, and most will have a near-normal life expectancy.

The poor sods in the developing world face a much, much, grimmer future though.

The treatment is there, its the cost of that treatment thats the major issue.

RichieC

Does it bring Freddie back? no. complete bollocks.

Giselle

RichieC wrote: »

Does it bring Freddie back? no. complete bollocks.

Freddie wouldn't be coming back no matter what he died from.

RichieC

Giselle wrote: »

Freddie wouldn't be coming back no matter what he died from.

:mad:

The Irish Riddler

The best form of protection is absintince.

Being pale and ginger is helpful also.

1ZRed

The Irish Riddler wrote: »

The best form of protection is absintince.

Not entirely sure about that...

smellslikeshoes

I guess maybe the implication of this is less about what this pill can do currently to prevent it and more about what going in this direction could possibly do in the future. Maybe in 10 years they will have improved on percentage chance of infection, maybe in 20 they will have made a dose once every year possible etc.

Giselle

1ZRed wrote: »

Not entirely sure about that...
http://www.google.ie/search?tbm=isch&source=mog&hl=en&gl=ie&client=safari&tab=wi&q=abstinence%2099.9%20effective&sa=N&biw=320&bih=416#i=5

The Virgin Mary was HIV+?

So thats two big cover ups the Church is responsible for.

RichieC

The Irish Riddler wrote: »

The best form of protection is absintince.

Being pale and ginger is helpful also.

Yea, and starvation is the best protection against food poisoning.

LH Pathe

Please, no there'll be an outbreak of scatmunchers god gave us aids for a reason.. well; gave you lot aids.

Jesus Wept

bnt wrote: »

And, of course, the people who need it the most - such as women in sub-Saharan Africa - won't be able to afford the $30+ per day that it costs. The article also suggests that women may need a higher dosage for it to work on them.

They need education mostly, a lot of them just don't wear condoms because they think condoms give you aids.

Christ on a bike.

mickgotsick

Andy Carroll wrote: »

They need education mostly, a lot of them just don't wear condoms because they think condoms give you aids.

Christ on a bike.

I thought it was more Christ on his bike going around telling them not to use condoms?

Cianos

Chamone MF wrote: »

Thats the ironic tragedy about it, life is damn cruel sometimes.
Africa is a fked up continent and thats also where aids is at its worst.
Finding a cure would just mean more children living a life in squalid poverty and THEN dying rather than just not surviving birth.
And population would shoot up in barely civilized countries.

This isn't true. Poverty, disease and population (over)growth are all interlinked. Removing one does not mean the others will continue along the same trajectory they were going in beforehand. Poverty stricken people tend to have more children, people are poorer where disease is rampant. If the population was healthier, education would shoot up in value, peoples overall quality of life and prospects would improve, the population growth would slow down, not speed up.

edit: To follow, people shouldn't be reluctant towards 3rd world aid because of the idea of the population exploding if it were healthier. Many people seem to actually view it this way and it's very simplistic. Africa is very capable of being a food surplus continent with correct infrastructure etc.

[Deleted User]

Pushtrak wrote: »

1) How many people currently have HIV.
2) How many people are really going to take a daily dose, with the costs associated for something the majority will assume they'd never contract.

I'd rather see more in the treatment camp than this. I know, there is that whole prevention is better than cure, but in this form... You just know these drugs will be very expensive, and I really can't see people en masse taking this as if it were some vitamin.

Well as it's already been said there is more in the treatment camp than this (in fact meds aside I heard about a possible cure - there was an example of a HIV+ person getting a bone marrow transplant from a HIV immune person and they were cured completely - obviously this isn't a viable cure though, and even if it was, it's hardly suitable for clinical trials).

It's true, this is hardly going to become commonplace in developing countries, but consider a situation in the developed world where one person in a couple was HIV+ and the other was clear, I'm sure they'd be willing to pay the expense and be as vigilant as possible taking it. Or what about the possibilities for pregnant women who are HIV positive, it must have some applications there.

bnt

Cianos wrote: »

edit: To follow, people shouldn't be reluctant towards 3rd world aid because of the idea of the population exploding if it were healthier. Many people seem to actually view it this way and it's very simplistic. Africa is very capable of being a food surplus continent with correct infrastructure etc.

For more on this idea, folks should read a bit about Demographic Transition theory: the way improvements in people's economic status have been correlated* with lower birth rates. Different parts of the world are at different stages. The theory is evolving to include recent birth rate increases in Ireland and some European countries, and there are exceptions such as France, which never had the kind of population boom Ireland had before the Famine.

One reason I mentioned women in sub-Saharan Africa is that, in many cases, they are genuine victims in the HIV crisis. They might want to practice safe sex with condoms, but it's often the men who refuse to cooperate and use force to get what they want. There's also a lot of superstition and wishful thinking on the topic e.g. some bright male spark came up with the idea that having unprotected sex with a virgin would cure his AIDS. Result: two people with HIV instead of one.

When I read about the pill, that's the first thing I thought of, since women could take the pills without risk or reprisals. However, the cost means that, even if they were given out, they would be sold rather than taken.

* remember: correlation is not causation.

Nothingbetter2d

Augmerson wrote: »

Who'd take it? Actors in the porn industry?

Porn stars

Junkies using needles

Blood Transfusion / Organ Recipient Patients

Staff in Prisons/Hospitals

Aid Workers in High Risk countries