Nation - Government AIDS success (great if true)

Thai AIDS death toll down sharply in 2005
Published on Jan 02 , 2006

The number of deaths from AIDS last year fell sharply because of much wider access to anti-retroviral drugs in Thailand, the public health ministry said Monday.

Some 1,478 people died from AIDS between January and November last year compared to 6,593 for the same period in 2004, the ministry said.

"The sharp drop is because of widespread access to anti-retroviral drugs which resulted in improvements to the lives of people living with AIDS and HIV," Thawat Suntrajarn, the Disease Control Department director said in a statement.

"The ministry has targetted a reduction in new AIDS/HIV cases to not more than16,000 in 2006," or a cut of about 10 percent, Thawat said.

There were an estimated 18,000 new AIDS/HIV cases reported in 2005, mostly among homosexuals and teenagers, he added.

Health authorities will increase their anti-AIDS campaigns for teenagers, particularly in tourist cities such as Pattaya and Phuket, stocking some 24 million condoms in 4,575 vending machines nationwide, Thawat said.

The ministry also aims to drastically reduce babies born HIV-positive. Last year, some 2,400 were born HIV-positive but this year the target is several hundred such infections.

Thailand made low-cost anti-retroviral drugs available on its national health scheme from October for the more than half a million people here living with HIV/AIDS.

The drugs, produced in Thailand, were available as part of a health scheme which allows the poor to receive hospital treatment for 30 baht (75 cents) per visit.

/Agence France-Presse

This is great news and heartening to hear that the drugs are reaching those who need them and in sufficient quantities to make significant inroads into the numbers of fatalities.

To be spending significant sums of money treating those who have caught this disease is wonderful. What is sad is that they have slashed the educational budget drastically. Increases have been noted amongst young people and homosexuals and there is now a rise in the numbers of new cases after a long period of static numbers.

http://www.avert.org/aidsthai.htm

Might be a bit controversial on my first post to this new forum but, could someone please explain to me how the powerful antiretrovirals, which cause sickness in healthy patients, are actually meant to improve the long term health of those whom are already considered to have a weakened immune system, and general health below the healthy baseline at time of treatment?

Salt in the wound?

"It is the main type of treatment for HIV or AIDS. It is not a cure, but it can stop people from becoming ill for many years. The treatment consists of drugs that have to be taken every day for the rest of someone's life.

HIV is a virus and when it is in a cell in the body it produces new copies of itself. With these new copies, HIV can go and infect other previously healthy cells. So HIV can quickly spread through the billions of cells in the body, if it is not stopped from reproducing or producing new copies of itself. Antiretroviral treatment (ART) for HIV infection consists of drugs which work by slowing down the reproduction of HIV in the body.

The drugs are often referred as:

antiretrovirals
anti-HIV drugs
HIV antiviral drugs." http://www.avert.org/aidstreatment.htm

I don't know the answer but I do know that they work and I do know how to Google where 470,000 sites await your investigations.

I don't know the answer but I do know that they work and I do know how to Google where 470,000 sites await your investigations.

How could you know they work? I could eat an apple a day, and not catch a cold thereafter. Doesn't mean the apples prevent me getting sicker, nor that they maintain my health. Same goes for antiretrovirals.

Google, being a search engine, provides resources ordered by popularity; it provides popular opinion. Popular opinion surrounding HIV comes down to “have faith in the medication" which is your viewpoint too.

I guess I just don't comprehend how a substance that makes a healthy person sicker in the long run, could possibly make a sick person better in the long run. No website I have visited seems to address this fully. Antiretrovirals seem to work in mysterious ways.

[Geezer]

Objective, we can see how concerned you are about this subject. I assume you have done considerable investigation before posting.

How do YOU suggest the HIV/AIDS problem be dealt with?

[bkkguy]

How do YOU suggest the HIV/AIDS problem be dealt with?

some Chinese herb that his family sells on the Internet?

bkkguy

objective read my rant so no need to let it linger.

Sorry to be harsh but you asked for it. I will not be seeing any reply that you make. This Ignore button is a great feature.

I asked a question, and the response now is “don't question it, unless you have something better.” If we all took that line of thought, nobody would ever question the effectiveness of anything. How else can we learn if we do not question that which is not understood?

Simply quoting popular opinion over and over, doesn't help to answer an otherwise simple question.

I choose to stick to my guns and maintain my questioning of a approach that doesn't appear to make sense. Perhaps that is too much to ask, without facing angry political backlash.

[Geezer]

"I asked a question, and the response now is тАЬdon't question it, unless you have something better.тАЭ"

You obviously can't read, soooo... You are ignored. Troll on.

What angry people I have encountered. Ignoring things they can't cope with. I wonder if they treat lots of their problems like that.

Anti-virals saved my boyfriends life, it's as simple as that. Once his condition was stabilised the doses and types of Anti-virals had to be adjusted to minimise side-effects etc but he now tolerates them well and has put on weight and is getting stronger all the time.

The treatment he's received has been excellent which coupled with his own determination to survive has meant the improvement in his health has been remarkable.

How could you know they work? I could eat an apple a day, and not catch a cold thereafter. Doesn't mean the apples prevent me getting sicker, nor that they maintain my health. Same goes for prescribed.

I am HIV+ my CD4 count went down to 17 (HIV- people are between 600-1,200) and my HIV viral load was at 780,000 copies. I was admitted to hospital with pneumonia and very nearly died. Thanks to modern medication for PCP (this is the pneumonia that killed most HIV+ people in the '80's early '90's) I recovered and was then put on ARV's after 12 months of monitored medication my CD4 count went to above 300 and my HIV load is now undetectable.
If you sir, become HIV + with your attitude that questions the hard worked medical and pharmaceutical profession, without whom many more, including myself, would have died. I suggest you eat two or three apples a day instead of one!
I now counsel newly diagnosed HIV cases and help them come to terms with what without the ARV drugs would be a fatal virus. I might also add that taking the prescribed medication as indicated has led to positive people being able to lead fit active lives, some of whom were diagnosed as long as 20 years ago.

Kun Jon, you say he put weight back on. Please pardon my question, but why did he lose weight in the first place? As far as I know, HIV is not known to cause wasting, HAART on the other hand, is well known to cause atrophy. Perhaps moving onto weaker drugs, allowed him to gain weight back.

Sanook, the viral loads you refer to are indirectly measured using PCR testing which intentionally creates inflated results which need interpretation. PCR tests are not designed for the purposes of HIV treatments or diagnosis. The other method, bDNA testing which uses light, always provides inconsistent results with a PCR test. This makes me question what is actually being measured.

As for your CD4+ count, if it really was 17 (in presence of a confirmed HIV+ result) then that satisfies the medical criteria for a full blown aids diagnosis. If you have been able to get it from 17 back up to 1000, then you no longer fit the criteria for aids. Congratulations. You have been cured of aids. If this is the case, please share the cure with the rest of the world, there are many people who would be interested.

CD4+ test results can be influenced by things as simple as the time of day, general state of health, other drugs, if the sample is shaken about prior to testing and even the temperature of the sample. There is a wide scope for error here, and medical staff aren't exactly perfect. I would go to three separate clinics before I contemplated accepting any CD4+ result, but that's just me.

I know it's a sensitive subject, and I know plenty of farang get crazy about the political element surrounding gay health, especially English speakers, but I have a genuine issue with some of what happens about all this HIV stuff that nobody has a clear answer for. I am not condemning anything, I am questioning it with an open mind.

You suggest that HIV+ is always dangerous, yet there are plenty of people diagnosed in the 80's, who with no treatment at all, medical or otherwise, continuing to lead healthy lives. Can you explain that? No doctor seems to be able to.

"As for your CD4+ count, if it really was 17 (in presence of a confirmed HIV+ result) then that satisfies the medical criteria for a full blown aids diagnosis. If you have been able to get it from 17 back up to 1000, then you no longer fit the criteria for aids".

Who mentioned a CD4 of 1,000? My last comment to you is; "yes the world is flat, and I do hope an apple a day keeps you well and healthy!"











[/b]

As for your CD4+ count, if it really was 17 (in presence of a confirmed HIV+ result) then that satisfies the medical criteria for a full blown aids diagnosis. If you have been able to get it from 17 back up to 1000, then you no longer fit the criteria for aids. Congratulations. You have been cured of aids. If this is the case, please share the cure with the rest of the world, there are many people who would be interested.

Objective, your smarmy challenge for sanook to share the cure with the world is inappropriate given your gross ignorance of the subject. A person has AIDS if he is HIV+ and meets any number of other criteria (e.g., ever having an AIDS-defining condition, or OI, such as KS, PCP, etc.), independent of his CD4 count. CD4 count going higher does not mean AIDS is cured. But clearly your message is "There are so many unanswered questions about HIV that we must question whether or not it even is the cause of AIDS." To most objective persons, that question has long since been answered. If you personally choose to ignore HIV infection as the cause of AIDS, then good luck to you in the future; but attempting to spread that message under the guise of "questioning" the science is nothing more than TROLLING. :roll:

Objective wrote:


Kun Jon, you say he put weight back on. Please pardon my question, but why did he lose weight in the first place? As far as I know, HIV is not known to cause wasting

From the FDA:


AIDS wasting syndrome involves major weight loss, chronic diarrhea or weakness, and constant or intermittent fever

My boyfriend went down to around 80 pounds. Following being started on Anti-virals he gradually improved and his weight continues to increase, he's now 120 pounds. Are you seriously suggesting that every time this happens it's some sort of co-incidence?

[marc11864-old]

I am thrilled that you guys are having this discourse. Even more-so that there is more than just blind faith that these ARs work. You either know people who've taken the ARs or some may have even taken them yourselves.

Objective, I thank you for your initial post on the matter. You've helped spur important dialog on the subjects and it is that alone that will end this disease more than anything.

I can speak as someone who is currently on the "cocktail". I take Kaletra (a PI or Protease Inhibitor) and Truvada (an NRTI or Nucleoside analog Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitor). It should be noted here that Kaletra is made up of lopinavir/ritonavir and Truvada is made up of emtricitabine/tenofovir DF. Thus, these meds are considered combination drugs.

A short history about me...

I was infected approximately November of 2004, sero-converted approximately January of 2005, and nosedived to 170 T-cells and 89,000 viral load by July of 2005. I refused to start taking anything then as I wanted at least a second set of numbers for comparison as well as having feared the side-effects especially but not limited to lipodystrophy or "wasting/fat redistribution" (I can be a vain bitch!). I received my second set of numbers toward the end of the month of November and T-cells had dropped to 150 while surprisingly, my viral load actually went down some (about 20,000 units to 67,000). Still, I decided it was time to go onto the meds. At approximately the same time the decision was made, Abbott who makes Kaletra altered the formula of encapsulation to pill formation thus cutting drastically many side-effects such as severe diarrhea and nausea, malaise, etc... brought on NOT so much by the medications themselves but instead by the neutrals used to keep the combined drugs in each capsule separate for proper regulated ingestion. In short Castor oil, etc..., allowed the capsules to dissolve in a more time-released manor and it is the oils which caused many side-effects (though not all).

I've been on them for a little over a month now and can honestly say that I've tolerated them rather well! In about another month or so I will receive some new numbers and would be happy to share the information here.

It should be noted that we've come a loooong way from the AZT drugs and the like that we initially had available to us which were quite toxic. I can speak from experience on those also as I was given Combivir (AZT/3TC) on three different occasions as a prophylaxis to negate becoming HIV positive. These all occurred at least 2 or more years before my actual infection. On two occasions, I knew the person that I had been with was in fact HIV + and yet on all three I tested negative "long-term" post exposure.

Ultimately, as to the question how do we know that the anti-retrovirals work... it has been shown to work in study after study by person after person that they do work. I've had friends on them from a few years to well over 25 and they are in good condition and going strong still. Are they (the medications) working? Who can say? Who can say, anymore than if the AZT/3TC really did stop me from earlier becoming positive previously in the first place. It was and is however something that I feel the benefits by far outweigh the disadvantages.

Wowpow was most articulate in his statement that, "It is the main type of treatment for HIV or AIDS. It is not a cure, but it can stop people from becoming ill for many years. The treatment consists of drugs that have to be taken every day for the rest of someone's life."

Finally, I'd like to ask how readily available to common Thais are these medications made. One thing I find disconcerting is that it appears that gay men specifically seem to be placed lowest on the rung so to speak for prevention and medication after the fact. This does not appear to be in keeping with Buddhist tradition and instead seems to be taking on a more "Western Christian ideal" which I find shameful. Perhaps it is a bargain that had been struck in order to get these meds in the first place?

Finally, I'd like to ask how readily available to common Thais are these medications made. One thing I find disconcerting is that it appears that gay men specifically seem to be placed lowest on the rung so to speak for prevention and medication after the fact. This does not appear to be in keeping with Buddhist tradition and instead seems to be taking on a more "Western Christian ideal" which I find shameful. Perhaps it is a bargain that had been struck in order to get these meds in the first place?

My Thai boyfriend is openly gay and although he has to queue for ages in a very crowded hospital the treatment has been very good and drugs he needed were made available at little cost. I have paid for extra treatment for him but the basic care was OK. The doctors he sees every month now is himself HIV+ and he's a really understanding man who does his best with so many patients to care for.

[marc11864-old]

Very glad to hear all of this. My pcp (primary care physician) also is hiv positive and has experienced at least some of the related med issues. still he was quite enthusiastic about me going on meds and strongly recommended them as a course of action for me and I accept more that he says to me since he's dealing with the same issues.

My partner who is currently living there in BKK is terribly worried that I won't have an acceptable level of treatment if I move there with him after we each finish school. I told him, I'll deal with it. If I may ask, how long has your bf been positive?

Kun Jon, you cite the FDA: “wasting syndrome involves major weight loss.” So? Just because wasting is common to aids patients, does not mean that the aids condition, or the HIV virus is a cause. Makes more sense that opportunistic diseases cause diminished diet, and the HAART causes fat redistribution.

Marc11864, I am stunned beyond words to hear you say you took Combivir (AZT/3TC) on three different occasions as a HIV prophylaxis. Did I read you correctly?? I cannot comprehend how healthy people would take drugs which damage the immune system, muscles and internal organs, as clearly stated on the drug labels.

You then go on to say that your 'viral load' decreased, while your CD4+ count decreased too. Doesn't that sound like a conflict of data to you? Didn't you at least query the validity of the data?

And unfortunately, we have not come a long way from AZT. It is perfectly legal to prescribe, and it is still highly toxic. You took it!!

I do hear and respect what you say about HIV+ people living long and healthy lives on drug regimens. I just don't understand how these drugs 'keep people from getting ill,' when there are examples of HIV+ men that never get ill anyway.

Thank you for your serious reply and I wish you all the best with your treatments.

If I may ask, how long has your bf been positive?

My boyfriend was diagnosed HIV+ in June last year when after a long period of various illnesses he developed tuberculosis and then meningitis. Up to that point he had refused to be tested.

Good luck to both you and your b/f Kun Jon and also to you and yours marc11864.
I thought I might add that where I live (United Kingdom) the medical specialists still consider Combivar (lamivudine/zidovudine) along with Sustiva (efavirenz) the most successful of the available drug regimens, depending of course on how well one manages the side effects. I was one of the lucky ones who experienced hardly any side effects at all so continue with this treatment.
I would also be most interested Kun Jon to know what drugs the Thais administer, and do they have access to different combinations if any resistance is shown. Here in the U.K. when diagnosed as being positive a resistance check is carried out before starting medication to see if the virus that you are carrying is resistant to any of the ARV's. This (resistance to a drug) is normally the case where infection came from someone already taking HIV medication.
Again, I thank you both for your intelligent posts to what we know as a frightening but manageable virus, thanks to the available medications.

I just don't understand how these drugs 'keep people from getting ill,' when there are examples of HIV+ men that never get ill anyway.

Viral loads decrease immunity and ARVs keep viral loads down. Some immunities are stronger than others. Some are affected adversely by ARVs more than others. Newer ARVs with less adverse effects are always in the pipeline.

Viral loads decrease immunity and ARVs keep viral loads down. Some immunities are stronger than others. Some are affected adversely by ARVs more than others. Newer ARVs with less adverse effects are always in the pipeline.

Yet more ARV's?? What about the vaccine? Vaccines were announced in the 80's, never happened. Years later, the excuse was “the virus mutates too fast.” The problem here is, the purpose of a vaccine is to deliberately introduce or stimulate antibodies to protect the host. Yet, in this instance, antibodies are interpreted as a sign of incurable infection! You can't win either way. I question this.

You say viral loads are an indicator of Aids progression. However, viral loads go up and down, irrespective of medication. Also, a zero viral load is interpreted as “still diseased.” This goes against what you say about progression.

Actually, viral load testing done by the PCR method are incredibly sensitive, which can give rise to false-positive results, this may be because PCR was not designed as an HIV progression indicator, despite being used as such.

Sanook wrote:


I would also be most interested Kun Jon to know what drugs the Thais administer, and do they have access to different combinations if any resistance is shown.

It's very difficult when I'm not in Thailand to get a clear idea of my boyfriend's current treatment. When I was last with him in October he was taking Lamivudine, Stavudine and Efavirenz. This is not the same combination that he started with but I don't know exactly how the treatment changed. He is actually taking nine drugs altogether. I know one is for the meningitis which I can recognise but some of the others are only labeled in Thai and are for tuberculosis and for bacterial infections. Things are further complicated as he has a congenital heart condition that has nothing to do with his HIV status.

He's intelligent but totally uneducated and has little understanding of the different conditions he has. He groups everything together under one phrase ie "I sick". I doubt that he has ever known any blood count figures and they would mean nothing to him. He does have regular blood tests though but he merely reports to me a general statement from his doctor like "Doctor say I better, little bit." He also tells me his weight and is very proud that he has gained so much recently.

His doctor does not speak English but has sent me Text Messages with simple diagnosis so I knew about the Tuberculosis and then the Meningitis.

I would emphasise that my boyfriend is being treated within the Thai health system which is very different from any that a Westerner would be likely to encounter. A small clinic in Ratchaburi Province with no specialist HIV facilities is not a place I would recommend visiting. However the doctors do their best under very difficult conditions.

When he was thought to be dying he was transferred to a charity hospital in Bangkok that dealt only with AIDS patients. He was given very little chance of survival and that was before he developed meningitis. It is a huge tribute to their care that he is back home and getting stronger every day.

I speak to him every couple of days on the telephone and to hear him laugh is the most joyous sound I know. His determination to recover must also have played a part and his bravery has been amazing.

I'm looking forward to seeing him again in less than two weeks.

[marc11864-old]

sanook: Thank you for your kind thoughts. Incidentally, they also suggest a resistance check here in the states though I suspect it came about more from the recent "mutant strain" scare which turned out to be strongly discredited anyway. Still, I personally believe it is better to know as much as possible before starting treatment and this is just one more tool to that end.

objective: You did read correctly regarding my use of combivir. It was at the time approved as a choice for post needle-stick, unsafe encounter, etc... prophylaxis (preventative). I was actually in a trial for it before it had become one of the standards. As to the contradiction regarding my counts, there are additional mitigating circumstances to which I politely plead the fifth on. As an aside, years ago I also allowed an anti-asthma agent to be administered to me for pay in the hope of allowing others to manage their health.

But the facts regarding ARs have been made quite clear to me through my own experience with this disease which paralleled my coming out process back in the early 80's. Additionally, after having taken them 3 times earlier I can certainly assure you going on these meds was never taken likely by me.

Perhaps it is time that you speak with your doctor as opposed to say we who have the disease. The way you lead your line of questioning, smacks of conspiracy theories and seems far to obsessive for answers than I believe most people here have the time, patience, knowledge or inclination to answer to your satisfaction. An endless dialog about things that have been proven to our own satisfaction serves no purpose save that of adding unhealthy stress to an already compromised immune system. I would agree that you should continue to question governments, the medical industry and others on the findings for these issues thereby keeping faith to a minimum in the realm of science. But, I sincerely doubt the answers to the questions you are asking will come from within the pages of this forum.

My question for you is; what is your agenda that you so diligently pursue these questions and more importantly, why are you so voraciously attempting to spread disinformation and doubt?

Marc, you suggest I spread disinformation, but you fail to state what disinformation I am spreading. Your words appear very harsh towards me, highly accusatory, but enough about that.

To answer you, I have spoken to my local GP (primary care physician) and a genitourinary sexual health clinic doctor in person although it was only in passing, and a short conversation in busy practices. It goes without saying, only ask a doctor a question, if you want to hear the popular opinion of the medical community. It is a scripted answer. If you ask “why” several times, then you'll be told because that's what he is was told. They are practitioners, are not investigators. They read the manual, they don't write it.

It's hard to find people to discuss this matter with, as most gay men either have 100% faith in modern medicine, are politically sensitive, or are too loyal to the well meaning aims of charities and NGO's to examine the technical detail in any depth.

It's not even a technical question though, I just fail to understand how a substance, harmful to the healthy, can hope to be healthy to the sick. Many of the side effects of ARV's, appear to be identical to symptoms of aids itself. Ask for some evidence of what I just said, and you'll get it, if you're interested.

Many of the side effects of ARV's, appear to be identical to symptoms of aids itself.

Quite possibly because many of the "side effects" wrongly attributed, often by the spread of misinformation, to ARV medicines are, in fact, cause by the HIV itself, or should I say by the decrease in immunity caused by the HIV. That's not to claim, however, that there are no side effects (like liver problems) caused by long term use of ARVs.

However you define it, as technically measured or just in concept, decreased 'viral loads' increase natural immunity and save lives.

Except maybe in the early, unenlightened days of HIV awareness no cure has been promised. It is widely held that a cure is a long ways off.

All of this is well known. You might visit the office of an HIV clinic. They can probably provide you with simplified explanations in pamphlets and be happy to assist you.

Quite possibly because many of the "side effects" wrongly attributed, often by the spread of misinformation

I am not making idle speculation. I am referring to details stated on product labels of stronger ARVs, and nothing else. I do not see the product labels as misinformation.

HIV pamphlets I have seen to date have a lot in common with the responses I have had so far; they reinforce the existing medical position in plain English language. They do not answer my question though.

"I am not making idle speculation"

I would have thought that the President of South Africa had been well informed too as he also refused to listen to the advice from the World Health Org., and to acknowledge that HIV led to AIDS and so refused support for drugs for positive pregnant women which contributed to babies being born positive. Now that "the light" has been shown to him by those who are far more in the know than you Mr Objective (fitting name sic) then the number of babies now contracting HIV from the mother has dramatically been reduced.
This is my last comment to Objectives posts to which I consider a rather uninformed (and possible innocent) lack of information from the medical profession involved in HIV treatment and research (who greatly outnumber the medical and non-medical 'No's') I also get the feeling that he is actually implying that those of us who are educated and HIV + have been hoodwinked into taking a health threatening drug combination rather than a life saving one. The drop in recorded deaths for AIDs related illnesses in the western world since ARV's became available speak far more for the pro's than the 'flat earth' society.
Kun Jon I admire you for standing by your guy, and if you need any support or added information that may help your Thai boyfriend then you are welcome to send me a private message. Whatever I wish you both luck.

Objective.....
From reading your various posts you seem to be looking for simplistic black and white answers to a subject that is overwhelmingly complicated even to the medical community.

Viral loads are a direct measure of the activity and progression of the disease. The higher the viral the load the more compromised the immune system, the more likely you will suffer from the opportunistic diseases that ultimately make up the definition of AIDS. The current preferred and only effective way of keeping the disease from progressing is to keep the viral load down. This is largely achieved now with combination anti-viral drugs.

The only way currently to measure viral loads is using PCR techniques. PCR is not and was not designed to diagnose or measure any specific disease or medical condition. It is a technique that can measure either RNA or DNA, even when in minute quantities. It does this by amplifying either the RNA or DNA is a biological sample, which in turn makes it easier to identify and quantify. The theory and practice of PCR is far to complicated for me to go into here but it is the current "gold standard" for measuring at the molecular level and highly specific and sensitive. To suggest otherwise is completely wrong. You either have a poor understanding of the process or have interpreted what you have read about it incorrectly.

As for Anti-virals, you are correct in stating that they can cause side effects and one does not go on them lightly. However the anti-viral effects of the drugs and their ability to keep viral loads down, thus preventing progression of the disease, far out weigh the negative side effects. In fact, before the introduction of anti-virals HIV was pretty much a death sentence. Anti-virals, where given have reduced mortality significantly.

The fact that some people infected with HIV do not ever develop the disease has been proven to be because these individuals have a genetic mutation where they do not have the necessary receptor sights on their T cells, which prevents the T cells being infected by the virus, thus preventing an active infection. The incidence of this mutation is rather rare though.

The production of a vaccine has proven to be extremely difficult because, as you say, the virus mutates quickly. That is only part of the answer however. Another factor is that the virus attacks the immune system directly, the system which is designed to provide immunity against the virus in the first place. Also HIV is a retro virus, which makes vaccine production also highly complicated. Other successful vaccines have not been against retro viruses. Most experts think a workable vaccine is still 10 years away. However there has been some success with a vaccine against SIV (the monkey version of HIV) so perhaps progress will be faster.

There is nothing black and white with HIV, but the preponderance of practice and evidence clearly shows that the only effect way of keeping HIV from developing to AIDS is with anti-viral therapy. Until new and better drugs come along or until a vaccine is developed it is all there is. If you are HIV positive you need to find a doctor specializing in the treatment of HIV and together determine when is the best time for you to get on the cocktail.

Sanook wrote:


if you need any support or added information that may help your Thai boyfriend then you are welcome to send me a private message. Whatever I wish you both luck.

Thanks for that. I will be in a better situation to judge my boyfriend's condition in a little over a week. I spoke to him a few hours ago and he was not sounding as bright as he has recently so the quicker I can see him for myself the better. I'll certainly be in touch if I think you could provide any useful information.

Thanks again

Jon

[marc11864-old]

This appears to be a pretty well informed board regarding AIDS and HIV.

Does anyone know how much of this information is actually being disseminated to native Thais?

My Thai boyfriend was always aware of the safe sex advice to wear a condom but also had some very quaint and dangerous misconceptions.

The worst of these was that it was safe to have sex with a man without a condom if you loved each other.

It's difficult for a Westerner to fully understand the power of such beliefs among rural Thais. The power of love is a reality to him in a way that any number of blood count statistics just aren't.

I will never know how my boyfriend became HIV+ but he has a very low tolerance to alcohol and after a evening at the disco I've no doubt that he would have become very careless. When he first arrived in Bangkok he would have been very vunerable but he had had Safe Sex education in the school attached to the temple in his home village.

Sanook :“so [the african president] refused support for drugs for positive pregnant women which contributed to babies being born positive.”

You said you would not comment further, but for the benefit of others, here is an except from a powerful ARV product label:

https://www.gsk.ca/en/products/prescrip ... vir_pm.pdf (https://www.gsk.ca/en/products/prescription/retrovir_pm.pdf)

“A positive test for HIV-antibody in children under 15 months of age may represent passively acquired maternal antibodies, rather than an active antibody response to infection in the infant. Thus, the presence of HIV-antibody in a child less than 15 months of age must be interpreted with caution, especially in the asymptomatic infant. Auxiliary diagnostic tests may be required to confirm infection in such children.”

If according to the drug producers, a child can be identified HIV+, yet not have any actual viral infection, that does that say about HIV testing? Why are you all so confident with these tests? Blind faith? I fear for children and adults who are pumped full of powerful toxic drugs which weaken immune systems.

'Once in a long while', you claim that “Viral loads are a direct measure of the activity and progression of the disease.” Yet viral illnesses like the flu and immunizations like the flu shot can cause your viral load to increase up to six weeks after the illness or the immunization. What do you think the viral load measures exactly? It is not as precise as you have been led to believe. And you are incorrect to state that a PCR was created as a measuring technique. It was created by Kary Mullis, a nobel prize winner, as a gene replication technique. It is for creating massive number of copies of a gene. It is not meant as a measure of anything.

There are just too many questions about this subject, to rely on faith alone. Indeed there is nothing black or white about HIV, because there appear to be no concrete answers for common sense questions that require detail, as opposed to mere trust.