The Rock at the heart of University of Michigan, painted by Results, Student Globial AIDS Campaign and others from the Ann Arbor area. The rock was painted in preperation of the Campaign to END AIDS arrival on Monday night,
Sunday, October 30, 2005
The ROCK
The Rock at the heart of University of Michigan, painted by Results, Student Globial AIDS Campaign and others from the Ann Arbor area. The rock was painted in preperation of the Campaign to END AIDS arrival on Monday night,
Friday, October 28, 2005
Honor the fallen
Neighbors and travelers (and we are all travelers in one form or another, neighbors too.)
Today marks the beginning of a journey that has taken many months to ripen and whose fruit has taken many hands to nurture to sweetness. We have been told by many that we labor in vain and that our harvest will be barren. Rich voices from the dark corners tell us that The Big Brothers will take care of all and too many of 1.1 million voices
believe, and stay silent. How will you answer the darkness, the world is waiting.
The dieing tears of gentle souls wet the Ryan White Care Act. The sweat and labor by thousands of PWA's and loved ones have guided the Act through the years, as many others have tried to unknot this important safety net. How can any stay silent after a generation sacrificed themselves on a bureaucratic alter of apathy?
What will your response be in a time where your people (your community,) need you so badly? As I experienced The Quilt in
Washington D.C. (actually the only time I could bear to see it,) from the Lincoln Memorial someone read from Dillon Thomas, Chaka Khan sang Amazing grace and the candles of our dead lined the way to the White House. When our history is written will you be absent?
The Campaign to End AIDS needs you.
Christopher E. Posler
Co-Chair- Diva Express
C2EA.com
Link to personal page:
http://www.campaigntoendaids.org/siteapps/personalpage/ShowPage.aspx?c=fnJMKLNmFmG&b=929341&sid=quI4JaNLJjL0K7PWH
Dylan Thomas - Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on that sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Today marks the beginning of a journey that has taken many months to ripen and whose fruit has taken many hands to nurture to sweetness. We have been told by many that we labor in vain and that our harvest will be barren. Rich voices from the dark corners tell us that The Big Brothers will take care of all and too many of 1.1 million voices
believe, and stay silent. How will you answer the darkness, the world is waiting.
The dieing tears of gentle souls wet the Ryan White Care Act. The sweat and labor by thousands of PWA's and loved ones have guided the Act through the years, as many others have tried to unknot this important safety net. How can any stay silent after a generation sacrificed themselves on a bureaucratic alter of apathy?
What will your response be in a time where your people (your community,) need you so badly? As I experienced The Quilt in
Washington D.C. (actually the only time I could bear to see it,) from the Lincoln Memorial someone read from Dillon Thomas, Chaka Khan sang Amazing grace and the candles of our dead lined the way to the White House. When our history is written will you be absent?
The Campaign to End AIDS needs you.
Christopher E. Posler
Co-Chair- Diva Express
C2EA.com
Link to personal page:
http://www.campaigntoendaids.org/siteapps/personalpage/ShowPage.aspx?c=fnJMKLNmFmG&b=929341&sid=quI4JaNLJjL0K7PWH
Dylan Thomas - Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on that sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
1 Million
MSNBC.com
More than a million Americans living with HIV
Government estimate reflects failure of prevention, critics say
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:05 p.m. ET June 13, 2005
ATLANTA - For the first time since the height of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s, more than a million Americans are believed to be living with the virus that causes AIDS, the government said Monday.
The latest estimate is both good and bad news — reflecting the success of drugs that keep more people alive and the failure of the government to “break the back” of the AIDS epidemic by its stated goal of 2005.
Critics say the new estimate reflects a failure of prevention, and it comes in the year that the government had set as its deadline to “break the back” of the AIDS epidemic.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that between 1,039,000 and 1,185,000 people in the United States were living with HIV in December 2003. The previous estimate — released in 2002 — showed that between 850,000 and 950,000 people had the AIDS virus.
The jump reflects the role of medicines that have allowed people infected with the virus to live longer, said Dr. Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention.
“While treatment advances have been an obvious godsend to those living with the disease, it presents new challenges for prevention,” Valdiserri said.
60,000 new cases a year?
The challenges include overcoming a failure by the government to meet its 2005 goal of cutting in half the estimated 40,000 new HIV infections that have occurred every year since the 1990s. Then, Dr. Robert Janssen of the CDC pledged the government campaign would “break the back” of the epidemic.
CDC officials previously have said the country’s HIV infection rate has been “relatively stable” and without change. As the National HIV Prevention Conference was set to begin this week, Valdiserri said no new infection data will be available until next year.
However, recent outbreaks of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases in major cities around the country offer a hint that new infections may be as high as 60,000 cases a year, rather than the government estimate of 40,000, said Dr. Carlos del Rio, an Emory University professor of medicine.
“The U.S. has had a clear failure in HIV prevention — I think the increase in prevalence is a reflection of that, of the poor job we do in HIV prevention,” del Rio said.
He added that the higher number is not as surprising as why the country has not been able to curb new infections. He said the CDC hasn’t been given adequate resources to tackle HIV prevention and that experts have focused too much on whether it’s better to promote abstinence or condom use to stop the spread of the virus.
“We’re debating too much what to do and are not doing enough,” he said.
At the same time, reaching the 1 million mark is “a sign of both victory and failure,” said Terje Anderson, executive director of the National Association of People Living With AIDS.
“Part of the reason the number is so big is we’re not dying as before,” he said. “But the other problem is we have not made a significant dent in new infections.”
47 percent are black
Estimating the number of Americans with HIV has always been a difficult task for health officials, but this year’s figures are believed to be the most accurate ever thanks to wider case reporting.
Estimating the number of Americans with HIV has always been a difficult task for health officials. In the 1990s, the CDC and other agencies generally agreed that between 600,000 and 900,000 people had the virus, according to the University of California-San Francisco’s Center for HIV Information.
Previous estimates — as high as 1.5 million people — from the 1980s were later determined to be too high. For example, the CDC estimated in 1986 that between 1 million and 1.5 million people had HIV. In 1987, that was revised to 945,000 to 1.4 million and was refined in 1990 to 800,000 to 1.2 million.
Since the CDC’s previous HIV estimates didn’t include demographic information — age, gender, race, sexual orientation — for all 50 states, it’s impossible to determine what groups of people account for the increase in the latest estimate of people living with HIV.
However, the CDC estimates that blacks account for 47 percent of HIV cases; gay and bisexual men make up 45 percent of those living with the virus that causes AIDS, the health agency believes.
The CDC also warned those demographics may soon change because heterosexual blacks, women and others infected after having high-risk sex (such as with someone with HIV, an injection-drug user or a man who has sex with other men) now account for a larger proportion of those living with HIV than those who are living with full-blown AIDS.
© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8203052/
More than a million Americans living with HIV
Government estimate reflects failure of prevention, critics say
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:05 p.m. ET June 13, 2005
ATLANTA - For the first time since the height of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s, more than a million Americans are believed to be living with the virus that causes AIDS, the government said Monday.
The latest estimate is both good and bad news — reflecting the success of drugs that keep more people alive and the failure of the government to “break the back” of the AIDS epidemic by its stated goal of 2005.
Critics say the new estimate reflects a failure of prevention, and it comes in the year that the government had set as its deadline to “break the back” of the AIDS epidemic.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that between 1,039,000 and 1,185,000 people in the United States were living with HIV in December 2003. The previous estimate — released in 2002 — showed that between 850,000 and 950,000 people had the AIDS virus.
The jump reflects the role of medicines that have allowed people infected with the virus to live longer, said Dr. Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention.
“While treatment advances have been an obvious godsend to those living with the disease, it presents new challenges for prevention,” Valdiserri said.
60,000 new cases a year?
The challenges include overcoming a failure by the government to meet its 2005 goal of cutting in half the estimated 40,000 new HIV infections that have occurred every year since the 1990s. Then, Dr. Robert Janssen of the CDC pledged the government campaign would “break the back” of the epidemic.
CDC officials previously have said the country’s HIV infection rate has been “relatively stable” and without change. As the National HIV Prevention Conference was set to begin this week, Valdiserri said no new infection data will be available until next year.
However, recent outbreaks of HIV and sexually transmitted diseases in major cities around the country offer a hint that new infections may be as high as 60,000 cases a year, rather than the government estimate of 40,000, said Dr. Carlos del Rio, an Emory University professor of medicine.
“The U.S. has had a clear failure in HIV prevention — I think the increase in prevalence is a reflection of that, of the poor job we do in HIV prevention,” del Rio said.
He added that the higher number is not as surprising as why the country has not been able to curb new infections. He said the CDC hasn’t been given adequate resources to tackle HIV prevention and that experts have focused too much on whether it’s better to promote abstinence or condom use to stop the spread of the virus.
“We’re debating too much what to do and are not doing enough,” he said.
At the same time, reaching the 1 million mark is “a sign of both victory and failure,” said Terje Anderson, executive director of the National Association of People Living With AIDS.
“Part of the reason the number is so big is we’re not dying as before,” he said. “But the other problem is we have not made a significant dent in new infections.”
47 percent are black
Estimating the number of Americans with HIV has always been a difficult task for health officials, but this year’s figures are believed to be the most accurate ever thanks to wider case reporting.
Estimating the number of Americans with HIV has always been a difficult task for health officials. In the 1990s, the CDC and other agencies generally agreed that between 600,000 and 900,000 people had the virus, according to the University of California-San Francisco’s Center for HIV Information.
Previous estimates — as high as 1.5 million people — from the 1980s were later determined to be too high. For example, the CDC estimated in 1986 that between 1 million and 1.5 million people had HIV. In 1987, that was revised to 945,000 to 1.4 million and was refined in 1990 to 800,000 to 1.2 million.
Since the CDC’s previous HIV estimates didn’t include demographic information — age, gender, race, sexual orientation — for all 50 states, it’s impossible to determine what groups of people account for the increase in the latest estimate of people living with HIV.
However, the CDC estimates that blacks account for 47 percent of HIV cases; gay and bisexual men make up 45 percent of those living with the virus that causes AIDS, the health agency believes.
The CDC also warned those demographics may soon change because heterosexual blacks, women and others infected after having high-risk sex (such as with someone with HIV, an injection-drug user or a man who has sex with other men) now account for a larger proportion of those living with HIV than those who are living with full-blown AIDS.
© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8203052/
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
C2EA
If you haven’t heard of C2EA:
WE HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT AIDS. SO HOW CAN WE LET IT BEAT US?
You may have heard: AIDS isn't over. Not only that-it's poised for a major comeback. While the epidemic's devastation in the developing world has embroiled activists in a desperate fight for the funds and political will to turn around the global crisis, the epidemic has quietly made inroads into vulnerable communities right here at home. A carefree new generation of young gay men, women who never thought that their boyfriends or husbands could be infected, and African Americans, many of who have so many other challenges they're not even diagnosed until they're sick. Yet while the epidemic has been establishing deadly new roots, our leaders have repeatedly failed to fully fund the programs we need to keep people with HIV/AIDS alive and well and the science-based prevention methods to keep those most at risk from contracting the virus.
THAT'S WHERE WE COME IN: THE CAMPAIGN TO END AIDS
We're a diverse, new coalition of people living with HIVAIDS (PLWHAs) and the advocates, organizations and loved ones who stand behind them. After years of watching our friends and family die, we're ecstatic that we finally have the tools to stop the epidemic-treatments that works, however imperfect, and prevention methods like abstinence and condoms, as well as needle-exchange programs, which keep injection-drug users HIV-free. But we're infuriated that some of our most powerful leaders, including our president, have withheld these tools from those who need them most. That's why we're organizing on the local, state and national level to demand that those in power:
Fully fund high-quality treatment and support services for all people living with HIV everywhere in the world.
Ramp up HIV prevention at home and abroad guided by the best science.
Increase research to find a cure, more effective treatments and better prevention tools.
Fight AIDS stigma and protect the civil rights of all people with HIV and AIDS everywhere.
HOW WILL WE MAKE THIS HAPPEN?
In lots of fun, exciting ways. We're building strong local, state and regional networks of people with HIVAIDS and the groups that serve them. We're mobilizing the veterans of legendary activist groups like ACT UP, which played a major role in securing PLWHAs their first wave of treatment and legislation, to train a feisty new generation of fighters. And from October 8-12, 2005, we're bringing it all home-to the nation's capital, that is, where caravans from around the nation will converge for five lively days of meetings, prayer groups and lawmaker visits. It all culminates with a massive march that will show the world we're united, strong and ready to make a mighty ruckus until our leaders do the right thing to halt the epidemic.
HOW CAN YOU BE A PART OF IT ALL?
In so many ways! You can do everything from getting involved in your area to joining a national C2EA workgroup to joining a caravan traveling to D.C.! Roam around the site for more information and to see what's going down in your state. But real participation starts with signing up for our weekly update and, if you choose, telling us a bit about yourself.
C2Ea.org
WE HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT AIDS. SO HOW CAN WE LET IT BEAT US?
You may have heard: AIDS isn't over. Not only that-it's poised for a major comeback. While the epidemic's devastation in the developing world has embroiled activists in a desperate fight for the funds and political will to turn around the global crisis, the epidemic has quietly made inroads into vulnerable communities right here at home. A carefree new generation of young gay men, women who never thought that their boyfriends or husbands could be infected, and African Americans, many of who have so many other challenges they're not even diagnosed until they're sick. Yet while the epidemic has been establishing deadly new roots, our leaders have repeatedly failed to fully fund the programs we need to keep people with HIV/AIDS alive and well and the science-based prevention methods to keep those most at risk from contracting the virus.
THAT'S WHERE WE COME IN: THE CAMPAIGN TO END AIDS
We're a diverse, new coalition of people living with HIVAIDS (PLWHAs) and the advocates, organizations and loved ones who stand behind them. After years of watching our friends and family die, we're ecstatic that we finally have the tools to stop the epidemic-treatments that works, however imperfect, and prevention methods like abstinence and condoms, as well as needle-exchange programs, which keep injection-drug users HIV-free. But we're infuriated that some of our most powerful leaders, including our president, have withheld these tools from those who need them most. That's why we're organizing on the local, state and national level to demand that those in power:
Fully fund high-quality treatment and support services for all people living with HIV everywhere in the world.
Ramp up HIV prevention at home and abroad guided by the best science.
Increase research to find a cure, more effective treatments and better prevention tools.
Fight AIDS stigma and protect the civil rights of all people with HIV and AIDS everywhere.
HOW WILL WE MAKE THIS HAPPEN?
In lots of fun, exciting ways. We're building strong local, state and regional networks of people with HIVAIDS and the groups that serve them. We're mobilizing the veterans of legendary activist groups like ACT UP, which played a major role in securing PLWHAs their first wave of treatment and legislation, to train a feisty new generation of fighters. And from October 8-12, 2005, we're bringing it all home-to the nation's capital, that is, where caravans from around the nation will converge for five lively days of meetings, prayer groups and lawmaker visits. It all culminates with a massive march that will show the world we're united, strong and ready to make a mighty ruckus until our leaders do the right thing to halt the epidemic.
HOW CAN YOU BE A PART OF IT ALL?
In so many ways! You can do everything from getting involved in your area to joining a national C2EA workgroup to joining a caravan traveling to D.C.! Roam around the site for more information and to see what's going down in your state. But real participation starts with signing up for our weekly update and, if you choose, telling us a bit about yourself.
C2Ea.org
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Action Alert
From: robert weissman
Gold Industry Blocking Debt Cancellation Plan
Call on Newmont Mining to Reverse Opposition to IMF Gold Sales;
Lives are at Stake!
International debt payments are draining poor countries of resources desperately needed to address health, education and many other pressing needs. After years of offering nothing more than half-hearted measures and worse, the rich countries have agreed to cancel the debts of the poorest nations to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. But
they continue to differ over how to do it. It is now clear a compromise agreement among the rich countries over cancellation of IMF debt can only be reached if sale of IMF gold is a component of the financing package for debt cancellation. But a decision to sell some of the IMF's stock of gold is being blocked by the gold industry, led by the world's largest gold producing corporation, Newmont Mining Co. Newmont and the industry say that IMF gold sales will lower the world gold price, but they ignore a proposal from the IMF itself that would ensure IMF gold sales have no net impact on the world gold market. Newmont's misguided opposition is on the brink of sabotaging IMF debt cancellation -- thus ensuring millions of poor people will be deprived
the benefit of IMF debt cancellation. This is a life-and-death matter.
TAKE ACTION: Call and fax Newmont's office and Board Members, demanding they reverse their position and publicly state and communicate to Congress and the White House their revised position.
KEY TALKING POINTS:
€ Ensuring debt cancellation is a humanitarian imperative;
€ There's no reason for Newmont to oppose IMF gold sales, since they can be accomplished with no impact on the world gold price;
€ Newmont must retract its opposition to IMF gold sales, and publicly state that it is open to IMF gold sales;
€ Action now is imperative, before the G8 (the rich countries) meet in July;
€ Newmont's failure to retract its opposition to IMF gold sales will mean poor countries waste billions of dollars on debt payments to the IMF, and will consign millions of people to needless suffering, as they are deprived of health, education, clean drinking water and other
services that could be made available with debt cancellation.
SEND A FREE FAX VIA GLOBAL EXCHANGE:
http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/wbimf/goldindustryaction.html
CONTACT: Newmont Mining Corporation, 1700 Lincoln Street, Denver,
Colorado, USA 80203. FAX (303) 837-6034. Investor Relations Contacts:
Randy Engel, Telephone: (303) 837-6033 Email: randy.engel@newmont.com
Wendy Yang Telephone: (303) 837-6141 Email: wendy.yang@newmont.com
Contact Board Members, listed here:
http://www.newmont.com/en/investor/governance/board.asp
Gold Industry Blocking Debt Cancellation Plan
Call on Newmont Mining to Reverse Opposition to IMF Gold Sales;
Lives are at Stake!
International debt payments are draining poor countries of resources desperately needed to address health, education and many other pressing needs. After years of offering nothing more than half-hearted measures and worse, the rich countries have agreed to cancel the debts of the poorest nations to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. But
they continue to differ over how to do it. It is now clear a compromise agreement among the rich countries over cancellation of IMF debt can only be reached if sale of IMF gold is a component of the financing package for debt cancellation. But a decision to sell some of the IMF's stock of gold is being blocked by the gold industry, led by the world's largest gold producing corporation, Newmont Mining Co. Newmont and the industry say that IMF gold sales will lower the world gold price, but they ignore a proposal from the IMF itself that would ensure IMF gold sales have no net impact on the world gold market. Newmont's misguided opposition is on the brink of sabotaging IMF debt cancellation -- thus ensuring millions of poor people will be deprived
the benefit of IMF debt cancellation. This is a life-and-death matter.
TAKE ACTION: Call and fax Newmont's office and Board Members, demanding they reverse their position and publicly state and communicate to Congress and the White House their revised position.
KEY TALKING POINTS:
€ Ensuring debt cancellation is a humanitarian imperative;
€ There's no reason for Newmont to oppose IMF gold sales, since they can be accomplished with no impact on the world gold price;
€ Newmont must retract its opposition to IMF gold sales, and publicly state that it is open to IMF gold sales;
€ Action now is imperative, before the G8 (the rich countries) meet in July;
€ Newmont's failure to retract its opposition to IMF gold sales will mean poor countries waste billions of dollars on debt payments to the IMF, and will consign millions of people to needless suffering, as they are deprived of health, education, clean drinking water and other
services that could be made available with debt cancellation.
SEND A FREE FAX VIA GLOBAL EXCHANGE:
http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/wbimf/goldindustryaction.html
CONTACT: Newmont Mining Corporation, 1700 Lincoln Street, Denver,
Colorado, USA 80203. FAX (303) 837-6034. Investor Relations Contacts:
Randy Engel, Telephone: (303) 837-6033 Email: randy.engel@newmont.com
Wendy Yang Telephone: (303) 837-6141 Email: wendy.yang@newmont.com
Contact Board Members, listed here:
http://www.newmont.com/en/investor/governance/board.asp
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Hate Crimes Bill
From: PFLAG Dayton [mailto:daytonpflag@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005
Subject: Hate Crimes Legislation in Congress Today!
Urge Your Representative to Co-Sponsor the Transgender Inclusive Hate Crimes Bill!
Write, Call, Email Your Senators Today - Urgent Action Required
This morning Representatives Barney Frank (D-MA), IIeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), John Conyers (D-MI); Christopher Shays (R-CT), and Tammy Baldwin (D- WI) will introduce a hate crimes bill in the House of Representatives that explicitly includes transgender protections. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005 extends existing hate crimes laws that already cover crimes motivated by race, color, national origin and religion to include crimes based on actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, disability and gender identity (including gender-related characteristics). PFLAG has consistently advocated for hate crimes legislation that includes gay, lesbian, and bisexuality persons as well as the transgender community and is pleased to support legislation that includes ALL of our loved ones. Documented hate crimes based on sexual orientation are on the rise according to FBI statistics. Unfortunately, the FBI data does not report separately on crimes against those who are targeted for non-traditional gender expression. We know that 75% of anti-GLBT hate crimes are unreported and that only twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia have hate crimes laws inclusive of sexual orientation while only five of those and the District of Columbia are expressly transgender inclusive. Contact your Representative today and urge him/her to become a cosponsor of this important piece of legislation that will ensure that the entire GLBT community is protected.
Take Action NOW on Hate Crimes Legislation
Your representatives need to hear from you! Call, Email, Fax or Write and Urge him/her to cosponsor the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005! To locate your representative's contact information please go to http://www.vote-smart.org/. For talking points on Hate Crimes legislation please see PFLAG's 2005
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005
Subject: Hate Crimes Legislation in Congress Today!
Urge Your Representative to Co-Sponsor the Transgender Inclusive Hate Crimes Bill!
Write, Call, Email Your Senators Today - Urgent Action Required
This morning Representatives Barney Frank (D-MA), IIeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), John Conyers (D-MI); Christopher Shays (R-CT), and Tammy Baldwin (D- WI) will introduce a hate crimes bill in the House of Representatives that explicitly includes transgender protections. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005 extends existing hate crimes laws that already cover crimes motivated by race, color, national origin and religion to include crimes based on actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, disability and gender identity (including gender-related characteristics). PFLAG has consistently advocated for hate crimes legislation that includes gay, lesbian, and bisexuality persons as well as the transgender community and is pleased to support legislation that includes ALL of our loved ones. Documented hate crimes based on sexual orientation are on the rise according to FBI statistics. Unfortunately, the FBI data does not report separately on crimes against those who are targeted for non-traditional gender expression. We know that 75% of anti-GLBT hate crimes are unreported and that only twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia have hate crimes laws inclusive of sexual orientation while only five of those and the District of Columbia are expressly transgender inclusive. Contact your Representative today and urge him/her to become a cosponsor of this important piece of legislation that will ensure that the entire GLBT community is protected.
Take Action NOW on Hate Crimes Legislation
Your representatives need to hear from you! Call, Email, Fax or Write and Urge him/her to cosponsor the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005! To locate your representative's contact information please go to http://www.vote-smart.org/. For talking points on Hate Crimes legislation please see PFLAG's 2005
CAFTA
Boston Globe
CAFTA will hurt people with HIV
By Rahul Rajkumar May 26, 2005
IF CONGRESS wants to get serious about promoting a culture of life, its members might start by saving 275,000 lives in Central America. That's the number of people infected with HIV in the countries party to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA. The agreement,
which may be ratified by the end of the month, will force its signatories to strengthen rotections on patents owned by multinational pharmaceutical companies, thus preventing the manufacture and importation of many cheap generic drugs. In the countries bound by the agreement -- Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador -- generic
competition has allowed for widespread access to life-saving medicines. In Guatemala, some AIDS drugs are as much as 98 percent cheaper than their name-brand alternatives. The antiretroviral cocktail that costs $4,818 per year when marketed by GlaxoSmithKline as Combivir can be purchased by Guatemalans for $216 in generic form. Given the financial strain many Americans experience when purchasing drugs like Combivir, it's not difficult to imagine how devastating similarly elevated prices would be for the farmers and impoverished
city dwellers who make up the bulk of AIDS cases in Central America. In addition to increases in patent protection, CAFTA mandates that these governments protect regulatory data on medicines -- an unprecedented step that could effectively extend patents by a decade without any form of reprieve, even in a public health emergency. Data protection for medicines means that if a drug is not patented, or if a country can somehow maneuver around the patent, generic manufacturers would still be prohibited from selling the medicine unless they repeat costly
clinical trials. Since few generic manufacturers in Central America have the resources to conduct clinical trials, data protection will function as another obstacle to generic competition.
The theory behind patents is straightforward. By allowing pharmaceutical companies to recoup development costs along with a sizeable profit, they provide an incentive for future innovation. The problem is that innovation, as an end in itself, can be a hollow accomplishment. Drugs
must also be within reach of the people who need them most. Without cheap access to the fruits of innovation, many poor patients will die unnecessarily.
The nations of the World Trade Organization recognized this dilemma, when, as part of the 2001 Doha Declaration, they unanimously resolved that public health emergencies like HIV/AIDS may require circumventing patent rules. CAFTA flouts this global consensus and is widely
understood to be part of the Bush administration's larger systematic effort to undermine the WTO process -- that is, to use bilateral trade agreements to bully small developing countries into waiving their rights under the WTO's intellectual property rules. The WTO's rules allow
developing countries to implement patent laws that meet their individual needs.
The office of the US trade representative maintains that nothing in the agreement prevents governments from producing generic drugs and that it will result in increased access to life-saving drugs as stringent patent protection encourages innovation in drug development.
The first of these claims is, unfortunately, false. CAFTA's protection for drug test data ensures that while countries may be able to produce generic drugs, they won't be able to use them. The second statement is partially true but so disingenuous that it verges on outright deception.
Increased protection for patent rights will certainly give drug companies larger profits, and this could theoretically lead to more innovation. However, the pharmaceutical market in Central America is so small that any increase in earnings will be negligible relative to the overall profits of the pharmaceutical giants. Patients in Central America will most likely end up getting nothing in return for the higher prices.
Congress will decide whether CAFTA goes into effect when it votes to ratify the agreement. Many lives ride on the outcome of this vote. Most of the 275,000 HIV-positive people in Central America will die needlessly without access to cheap antiretroviral drugs. Congress can
save these lives by voting down CAFTA and telling the Bush administration to renegotiate the agreement's intellectual-property provisions. Could there be any better way to demonstrate our
dedication to the culture of life?
Rahul Rajkumar is a member of Universities Allied for Essential
Medicines.
(c) Copyright
2005 The New York Times Company
------ End of Forwarded Message
CAFTA will hurt people with HIV
By Rahul Rajkumar May 26, 2005
IF CONGRESS wants to get serious about promoting a culture of life, its members might start by saving 275,000 lives in Central America. That's the number of people infected with HIV in the countries party to the Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA. The agreement,
which may be ratified by the end of the month, will force its signatories to strengthen rotections on patents owned by multinational pharmaceutical companies, thus preventing the manufacture and importation of many cheap generic drugs. In the countries bound by the agreement -- Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador -- generic
competition has allowed for widespread access to life-saving medicines. In Guatemala, some AIDS drugs are as much as 98 percent cheaper than their name-brand alternatives. The antiretroviral cocktail that costs $4,818 per year when marketed by GlaxoSmithKline as Combivir can be purchased by Guatemalans for $216 in generic form. Given the financial strain many Americans experience when purchasing drugs like Combivir, it's not difficult to imagine how devastating similarly elevated prices would be for the farmers and impoverished
city dwellers who make up the bulk of AIDS cases in Central America. In addition to increases in patent protection, CAFTA mandates that these governments protect regulatory data on medicines -- an unprecedented step that could effectively extend patents by a decade without any form of reprieve, even in a public health emergency. Data protection for medicines means that if a drug is not patented, or if a country can somehow maneuver around the patent, generic manufacturers would still be prohibited from selling the medicine unless they repeat costly
clinical trials. Since few generic manufacturers in Central America have the resources to conduct clinical trials, data protection will function as another obstacle to generic competition.
The theory behind patents is straightforward. By allowing pharmaceutical companies to recoup development costs along with a sizeable profit, they provide an incentive for future innovation. The problem is that innovation, as an end in itself, can be a hollow accomplishment. Drugs
must also be within reach of the people who need them most. Without cheap access to the fruits of innovation, many poor patients will die unnecessarily.
The nations of the World Trade Organization recognized this dilemma, when, as part of the 2001 Doha Declaration, they unanimously resolved that public health emergencies like HIV/AIDS may require circumventing patent rules. CAFTA flouts this global consensus and is widely
understood to be part of the Bush administration's larger systematic effort to undermine the WTO process -- that is, to use bilateral trade agreements to bully small developing countries into waiving their rights under the WTO's intellectual property rules. The WTO's rules allow
developing countries to implement patent laws that meet their individual needs.
The office of the US trade representative maintains that nothing in the agreement prevents governments from producing generic drugs and that it will result in increased access to life-saving drugs as stringent patent protection encourages innovation in drug development.
The first of these claims is, unfortunately, false. CAFTA's protection for drug test data ensures that while countries may be able to produce generic drugs, they won't be able to use them. The second statement is partially true but so disingenuous that it verges on outright deception.
Increased protection for patent rights will certainly give drug companies larger profits, and this could theoretically lead to more innovation. However, the pharmaceutical market in Central America is so small that any increase in earnings will be negligible relative to the overall profits of the pharmaceutical giants. Patients in Central America will most likely end up getting nothing in return for the higher prices.
Congress will decide whether CAFTA goes into effect when it votes to ratify the agreement. Many lives ride on the outcome of this vote. Most of the 275,000 HIV-positive people in Central America will die needlessly without access to cheap antiretroviral drugs. Congress can
save these lives by voting down CAFTA and telling the Bush administration to renegotiate the agreement's intellectual-property provisions. Could there be any better way to demonstrate our
dedication to the culture of life?
Rahul Rajkumar is a member of Universities Allied for Essential
Medicines.
(c)
2005 The New York Times Company
------ End of Forwarded Message
A good article on Foster Kids (One point of view.)
Defend Incarnation Children's Center and Access to HIV TreatmentFor the last year and a half, a small skilled nursing facility in Washington Heights for children with AIDS called Incarnation Children's Center (ICC) has been under increasingly intense attack by HIV denialists, a dangerously deluded group of people who believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, and that people with HIV should not be given antiretroviral drugs. On May 5, the New York City Council General Welfare Committee held a bizarre hearing endorsing the HIV denialists' claims. It's possible that the outcome will be that children with AIDS in foster care will again be denied access to state of the art care.
HIV denialists have been around for years, annoying activists, clinicians and service providers who regard them as crackpots whose antics shouldn't be allowed to distract us from our urgent work. We can no longer ignore them. In a world increasingly hostile to science, the lies spread by the denialists are having an effect, impeding access to HIV medication to people of color in U.S. cities and in Africa. We must respond. We must defend HIV/AIDS prevention workers and clinical and service providers like ICC. We must fight back with the truth: HIV causes AIDS. Antiretroviral treatments save lives.
The attacks on ICC began with a sensationalist story written by Liam Scheff, a self-described "AIDS dissent journalist," and circulated on the Internet. The New York Post picked up the story in March 2004, eliciting a spasm of misinformed grandstanding from a few City Council members. But the claims that children at ICC were "guinea pigs" who were being "tortured" in hideous medical experiments by a cabal of plotters including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Catholic Archdiocese, GlaxoSmithKline, Columbia University and the city's Administration of Children's Services (ACS) weren't taken too seriously until the BBC2 aired a version of the story in November 2004.
We must fight back with the truth: HIV causes AIDS. Antiretroviral treatments save lives.Regrettably, the HIV denialists have since been joined by African-American nationalists affiliated with the December 12th Movement. Their rage is directed primarily at ACS, which placed the children at ICC. They have started organizing protests outside ICC, thus outing the residents as children with AIDS. The HIV denialists have successfully worked the independent media network; over the last six months, WBAI, NYC's Pacifica radio station, and "Democracy Now!" have repeatedly and uncritically reiterated the charges against ICC. They've been joined by the extremist right: on May 6, theTraditional Values Coalition urged U.S. attorney general and torture theorist Alberto Gonzales to launch a criminal investigation into the NIH for supporting foster children's inclusion in clinical trials, "as well as [into] anyone who looked the other way or financed these atrocities.
"What is the truth? When ICC was founded in 1988, children with HIV/AIDS who were in foster care in New York City were not allowed to participate in clinical trials. As new medications were developed--including those for AIDS-defining opportunistic infections and, eventually, antiretroviral drugs--they were tested on, and approved for, adult populations first, and only then considered for children. HIV-positive children lucky enough to live with their birthparents could be enrolled in clinical trials and get the best available care. But those in the foster care system, who were overwhelmingly black and Latino, could not. These children were denied access to life-saving drugs simply because they were in foster care.
ICC and other advocates for children with HIV successfully fought to have the policy that discriminated against foster kids changed. Almost all of the children from the ICC clinical trials period, children who would otherwise have died, are alive and well today because of what ICC and other advocates for children accomplished. Those children were not "guinea pigs." They were children with a deadly infection receiving state-of-the-art medical care and life-saving drugs already proven to be effective in adults.
The denialists emphasize the sometimes serious side effects of antiretroviral medications. Are these difficult drugs to live with? Yes, but the side effects are greatly outweighed by the benefits of treatment. And the children at ICC had the advantage of living in a structured, supportive setting that ensured that they could adhere to complex regimens with stringent dietary requirements, and on-site health care that enabled rapid identification of, and response to, any side effects.
The HIV denialists say that the young children at ICC could not refuse the drugs or fight off the "researchers" who gave them their medications. Should children of three, six or even 12 years get to decide if they will or will not take their medicine? Of course not, particularly when irregular dosing may result in multiply drug-resistant HIV. All responsible parents and caregivers understand that children can't make crucial life-and-death decisions for themselves, and the law recognizes this fact too, such that children can neither give nor withhold medical consent. [1] Columbia University ran the clinical trials-the only way the kids could get the drugs that kept them alive. They were closely monitored by the loving, expert and compassionate staff of ICC, and by the National Institutes of Health and the ACS. The HIV denialists see a conspiracy where there were in fact multiple layers of supervision.
The HIV denialists see a conspiracy where there were in fact multiple layers of supervision.The denialists suggest that there is something evil in the cessation of the "experiments" at ICC in 2002. Why were the trials "abruptly halted?" Because, as a result of the successful treatment of children in the clinical trials, those drugs were approved as safe and effective for pediatric populations. But the denialists see even this as sinister: Now foster kids with HIV are being given anti-viral medications not just experimentally but as routine "treatment," Scheff charged on WBAI on May 10. That's true. And that's good.
Were the children at ICC stolen from their parents to be used for experiments? Absolutely not. The parents of many children at ICC had died from AIDS; others were incapacitated by illness, drugs, and homelessness and unable to care for very sick children. That's why the kids were in the foster care system. Until ICC was founded, orphaned and unparented HIV-positive kids at Harlem Hospital were stuck there as "boarder babies"; too sick for regular foster care, they had to live in the hospital. The denialists represent ACS as not merely neglectful but complicit in a "full-blown criminal conspiracy" when it placed HIV-positive kids in ICC. ACS is always (and often justifiably) an easy target. But what ACS did then was, for once, really wonderful: It put kids with HIV/AIDS who had no other home into a cozy, first-rate specialized care facility where they had access to state-of-the-art combination anti-viral therapy under the expert supervision of a brilliant and compassionate staff. That's not a scandal to be investigated; it's an incredible accomplishment to be celebrated.
Thanks to other clinical trials proving the efficacy of nevirapine in preventing perinatal transmission of HIV, and in particular to the amazing community education and care provided to pregnant women by Harlem Hospital, the incidence of perinatal HIV transmission in Washington Heights and Harlem has fallen dramatically. Almost no new HIV-infected babies are born in northern Manhattan now, and the AIDS babies of ICC are nearing adulthood.
ICC is but one example of the reach of the HIV denialists. On the same day as the City Council hearing against ICC earlier this month, South Africa's Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang sang the praises of lemon, garlic and beet root as treatments for people with HIV/AIDS and said her government would not be pressured into meeting antiretroviral treatment targets set by the U.N. The next day, the Matthias Rath Foundation, headed by a German vitamin magnate, ran full-page ads in the New York Times and International Herald Tribune claiming that antiretroviral drugs are toxic and AIDS should be treated with vitamins.
We need to turn around this tide of misinformation. The protesters outside Incarnation Children's Center are vowing "No more Tuskegee Experiments." We need to remind everyone that the essence of the Tuskegee atrocity was that poor people of color known by doctors to have a devastating, probably fatal infection were lied to and denied lifesaving medication that was available to others. That is precisely what the HIV denialists are doing in Washington Heights and in South Africa. Let's expose their lies as we continue the struggle for HIV prevention and treatment.
HIV denialists have been around for years, annoying activists, clinicians and service providers who regard them as crackpots whose antics shouldn't be allowed to distract us from our urgent work. We can no longer ignore them. In a world increasingly hostile to science, the lies spread by the denialists are having an effect, impeding access to HIV medication to people of color in U.S. cities and in Africa. We must respond. We must defend HIV/AIDS prevention workers and clinical and service providers like ICC. We must fight back with the truth: HIV causes AIDS. Antiretroviral treatments save lives.
The attacks on ICC began with a sensationalist story written by Liam Scheff, a self-described "AIDS dissent journalist," and circulated on the Internet. The New York Post picked up the story in March 2004, eliciting a spasm of misinformed grandstanding from a few City Council members. But the claims that children at ICC were "guinea pigs" who were being "tortured" in hideous medical experiments by a cabal of plotters including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Catholic Archdiocese, GlaxoSmithKline, Columbia University and the city's Administration of Children's Services (ACS) weren't taken too seriously until the BBC2 aired a version of the story in November 2004.
We must fight back with the truth: HIV causes AIDS. Antiretroviral treatments save lives.Regrettably, the HIV denialists have since been joined by African-American nationalists affiliated with the December 12th Movement. Their rage is directed primarily at ACS, which placed the children at ICC. They have started organizing protests outside ICC, thus outing the residents as children with AIDS. The HIV denialists have successfully worked the independent media network; over the last six months, WBAI, NYC's Pacifica radio station, and "Democracy Now!" have repeatedly and uncritically reiterated the charges against ICC. They've been joined by the extremist right: on May 6, theTraditional Values Coalition urged U.S. attorney general and torture theorist Alberto Gonzales to launch a criminal investigation into the NIH for supporting foster children's inclusion in clinical trials, "as well as [into] anyone who looked the other way or financed these atrocities.
"What is the truth? When ICC was founded in 1988, children with HIV/AIDS who were in foster care in New York City were not allowed to participate in clinical trials. As new medications were developed--including those for AIDS-defining opportunistic infections and, eventually, antiretroviral drugs--they were tested on, and approved for, adult populations first, and only then considered for children. HIV-positive children lucky enough to live with their birthparents could be enrolled in clinical trials and get the best available care. But those in the foster care system, who were overwhelmingly black and Latino, could not. These children were denied access to life-saving drugs simply because they were in foster care.
ICC and other advocates for children with HIV successfully fought to have the policy that discriminated against foster kids changed. Almost all of the children from the ICC clinical trials period, children who would otherwise have died, are alive and well today because of what ICC and other advocates for children accomplished. Those children were not "guinea pigs." They were children with a deadly infection receiving state-of-the-art medical care and life-saving drugs already proven to be effective in adults.
The denialists emphasize the sometimes serious side effects of antiretroviral medications. Are these difficult drugs to live with? Yes, but the side effects are greatly outweighed by the benefits of treatment. And the children at ICC had the advantage of living in a structured, supportive setting that ensured that they could adhere to complex regimens with stringent dietary requirements, and on-site health care that enabled rapid identification of, and response to, any side effects.
The HIV denialists say that the young children at ICC could not refuse the drugs or fight off the "researchers" who gave them their medications. Should children of three, six or even 12 years get to decide if they will or will not take their medicine? Of course not, particularly when irregular dosing may result in multiply drug-resistant HIV. All responsible parents and caregivers understand that children can't make crucial life-and-death decisions for themselves, and the law recognizes this fact too, such that children can neither give nor withhold medical consent. [1] Columbia University ran the clinical trials-the only way the kids could get the drugs that kept them alive. They were closely monitored by the loving, expert and compassionate staff of ICC, and by the National Institutes of Health and the ACS. The HIV denialists see a conspiracy where there were in fact multiple layers of supervision.
The HIV denialists see a conspiracy where there were in fact multiple layers of supervision.The denialists suggest that there is something evil in the cessation of the "experiments" at ICC in 2002. Why were the trials "abruptly halted?" Because, as a result of the successful treatment of children in the clinical trials, those drugs were approved as safe and effective for pediatric populations. But the denialists see even this as sinister: Now foster kids with HIV are being given anti-viral medications not just experimentally but as routine "treatment," Scheff charged on WBAI on May 10. That's true. And that's good.
Were the children at ICC stolen from their parents to be used for experiments? Absolutely not. The parents of many children at ICC had died from AIDS; others were incapacitated by illness, drugs, and homelessness and unable to care for very sick children. That's why the kids were in the foster care system. Until ICC was founded, orphaned and unparented HIV-positive kids at Harlem Hospital were stuck there as "boarder babies"; too sick for regular foster care, they had to live in the hospital. The denialists represent ACS as not merely neglectful but complicit in a "full-blown criminal conspiracy" when it placed HIV-positive kids in ICC. ACS is always (and often justifiably) an easy target. But what ACS did then was, for once, really wonderful: It put kids with HIV/AIDS who had no other home into a cozy, first-rate specialized care facility where they had access to state-of-the-art combination anti-viral therapy under the expert supervision of a brilliant and compassionate staff. That's not a scandal to be investigated; it's an incredible accomplishment to be celebrated.
Thanks to other clinical trials proving the efficacy of nevirapine in preventing perinatal transmission of HIV, and in particular to the amazing community education and care provided to pregnant women by Harlem Hospital, the incidence of perinatal HIV transmission in Washington Heights and Harlem has fallen dramatically. Almost no new HIV-infected babies are born in northern Manhattan now, and the AIDS babies of ICC are nearing adulthood.
ICC is but one example of the reach of the HIV denialists. On the same day as the City Council hearing against ICC earlier this month, South Africa's Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang sang the praises of lemon, garlic and beet root as treatments for people with HIV/AIDS and said her government would not be pressured into meeting antiretroviral treatment targets set by the U.N. The next day, the Matthias Rath Foundation, headed by a German vitamin magnate, ran full-page ads in the New York Times and International Herald Tribune claiming that antiretroviral drugs are toxic and AIDS should be treated with vitamins.
We need to turn around this tide of misinformation. The protesters outside Incarnation Children's Center are vowing "No more Tuskegee Experiments." We need to remind everyone that the essence of the Tuskegee atrocity was that poor people of color known by doctors to have a devastating, probably fatal infection were lied to and denied lifesaving medication that was available to others. That is precisely what the HIV denialists are doing in Washington Heights and in South Africa. Let's expose their lies as we continue the struggle for HIV prevention and treatment.
Thursday, April 14, 2005
APATHY
"AIDS Fighters Face a Resistant Form of Apathy"
New York Times (04.03.05)::Andrew Jacobs
The disappearance of condoms and HIV prevention literature from gay
bars is a telling sign of how much momentum has been lost in the US fight
against AIDS. Public health officials and AIDS advocates say many gay men
have adopted a laissez-faire attitude about safe sex, and they cite as
examples the continued popularity of crystal methamphetamine, a rise in
barebacking, and widespread apathy in which HIV is seen more as a nuisance
than a life-threatening disease. The reality that gay men continue to have
unprotected sex has vexed health experts for 20 years, though the struggle
became more pronounced with the introduction of HAART in the mid-1990s,
which sharply reduced AIDS death rates but fed the misconception that HIV is
an easily managed disease.
"Just because folks are well informed doesn't mean they'll necessarily
make the wisest choices in terms of their health," said Dr. Ronald
Valdiserri, director of AIDS prevention at CDC. "This is true of all
humanity, not just gay men."
The only hope for changing behavior, say public health experts and
psychologists, is to recognize and address the underlying factors that cause
men to take risks, such as loneliness, self-hatred, and alienation.
Perry Halkitis, a New York University psychologist who studies the
relationship between drugs and sex, said many gay men who take risks are
grappling with profound mental health issues. "They do it because the sexual
risk fulfills a need, or somehow makes them feel better about themselves,"
said Halkitis.
Other advocates say that approach is naïve and call for more personal
responsibility. Crystal meth needs to be demonized, unprotected sex must be
stigmatized, and people need to be reminded that living with HIV can be
grueling, they argue. A key first step, they say, would be for
pharmaceutical firms to stop running ads that portray life with AIDS as
carefree.
New York Times (04.03.05)::Andrew Jacobs
The disappearance of condoms and HIV prevention literature from gay
bars is a telling sign of how much momentum has been lost in the US fight
against AIDS. Public health officials and AIDS advocates say many gay men
have adopted a laissez-faire attitude about safe sex, and they cite as
examples the continued popularity of crystal methamphetamine, a rise in
barebacking, and widespread apathy in which HIV is seen more as a nuisance
than a life-threatening disease. The reality that gay men continue to have
unprotected sex has vexed health experts for 20 years, though the struggle
became more pronounced with the introduction of HAART in the mid-1990s,
which sharply reduced AIDS death rates but fed the misconception that HIV is
an easily managed disease.
"Just because folks are well informed doesn't mean they'll necessarily
make the wisest choices in terms of their health," said Dr. Ronald
Valdiserri, director of AIDS prevention at CDC. "This is true of all
humanity, not just gay men."
The only hope for changing behavior, say public health experts and
psychologists, is to recognize and address the underlying factors that cause
men to take risks, such as loneliness, self-hatred, and alienation.
Perry Halkitis, a New York University psychologist who studies the
relationship between drugs and sex, said many gay men who take risks are
grappling with profound mental health issues. "They do it because the sexual
risk fulfills a need, or somehow makes them feel better about themselves,"
said Halkitis.
Other advocates say that approach is naïve and call for more personal
responsibility. Crystal meth needs to be demonized, unprotected sex must be
stigmatized, and people need to be reminded that living with HIV can be
grueling, they argue. A key first step, they say, would be for
pharmaceutical firms to stop running ads that portray life with AIDS as
carefree.
Congrats MI-POZ
MI-POZ receives $10,000 grant from Ben & Jerry's Foundation
FERNDALE - The Ben & Jerry's Foundation, the charitable organization established by the ice cream manufacturer, has made a $10,000 grant to the Michigan Positive Action Coalition to support its efforts to build effective grassroots leadership among people living with HIV and AIDS. The one-year grant will fund legislative education training sessions for people affected by HIV and AIDS in addition to legislative education activities in Washington, D.C. and a bi-monthly newsletter to inform the community about public policy issues that impact HIV care and prevention. "We're really excited about this grant," said Mark Peterson, director of MI-POZ. "The Ben & Jerry's Foundation has a long history of supporting projects that are working for systemic social change across the United States. We felt this was a perfect match." Currently operating under the umbrella of the Midwest AIDS Prevention Project, MI-POZ is the only project of its kind in Michigan that teaches people living with HIV/AIDS how to advocate for themselves and educate their elected representatives. MI-POZ received its first financial support in March 2004, a grant from the Michigan AIDS Fund. With the MAF grant, MI-POZ trained 15 people and organized meetings with state senators in Lansing to discuss pending legislation on HIV issues. MI-POZ expects to hold its next training seminar in June, and is making a special effort to recruit participants from HIV-affected African-American communities in the Detroit metro area. The training seminars are led by MI-POZ Legislative Director Rick Otterbein, who has been actively involved in legislative education activities for nearly a decade. The training workshop provides participants with basic information about state and federally-funded HIV care and prevention programs and the advocate's role in that process, including information about how government works, methods for individuals to affect change within their communities, specific strategies to impact policy decisions, and communication techniques. The training has proven successful in preparing its participants to discuss HIV issues with their elected officials, said Otterbein. "HIV-affected persons are more likely to participate in public policy development when they feel they have some degree of power over the outcome, and advocacy training workshops are effective in instilling these feelings of empowerment," said Otterbein. Anyone interested in attending a free MI-POZ training is encouraged to call Mark Peterson at 248-545-1435.
FERNDALE - The Ben & Jerry's Foundation, the charitable organization established by the ice cream manufacturer, has made a $10,000 grant to the Michigan Positive Action Coalition to support its efforts to build effective grassroots leadership among people living with HIV and AIDS. The one-year grant will fund legislative education training sessions for people affected by HIV and AIDS in addition to legislative education activities in Washington, D.C. and a bi-monthly newsletter to inform the community about public policy issues that impact HIV care and prevention. "We're really excited about this grant," said Mark Peterson, director of MI-POZ. "The Ben & Jerry's Foundation has a long history of supporting projects that are working for systemic social change across the United States. We felt this was a perfect match." Currently operating under the umbrella of the Midwest AIDS Prevention Project, MI-POZ is the only project of its kind in Michigan that teaches people living with HIV/AIDS how to advocate for themselves and educate their elected representatives. MI-POZ received its first financial support in March 2004, a grant from the Michigan AIDS Fund. With the MAF grant, MI-POZ trained 15 people and organized meetings with state senators in Lansing to discuss pending legislation on HIV issues. MI-POZ expects to hold its next training seminar in June, and is making a special effort to recruit participants from HIV-affected African-American communities in the Detroit metro area. The training seminars are led by MI-POZ Legislative Director Rick Otterbein, who has been actively involved in legislative education activities for nearly a decade. The training workshop provides participants with basic information about state and federally-funded HIV care and prevention programs and the advocate's role in that process, including information about how government works, methods for individuals to affect change within their communities, specific strategies to impact policy decisions, and communication techniques. The training has proven successful in preparing its participants to discuss HIV issues with their elected officials, said Otterbein. "HIV-affected persons are more likely to participate in public policy development when they feel they have some degree of power over the outcome, and advocacy training workshops are effective in instilling these feelings of empowerment," said Otterbein. Anyone interested in attending a free MI-POZ training is encouraged to call Mark Peterson at 248-545-1435.
2005 PWA Guide
PWH/A Pocket Reference Guide for Spring 2005
The Spring 2005 issue of the PWH/A Pocket Reference Guide is in the final editing process. I ask that each of you look at your entry for any changes needed, please E-mail those changes to info@friendsalliance.org. Our projected timeline is to have the editing process completed VERY SOON, so that printing and distribution will occur in April. So far, I have heard from only 17 agencies on changes to be made so far. Has your agency moved in the past year? Telephone numbers changed? Services added or discontinued? Added a website or E-mail? Please send your changes now, we are going to press in just a few weeks! If you do not have a Guide handy, E-mail me or leave a message at (248)544-3320 and we will rush a copy out to you!
The Spring 2005 issue of the PWH/A Pocket Reference Guide is in the final editing process. I ask that each of you look at your entry for any changes needed, please E-mail those changes to info@friendsalliance.org. Our projected timeline is to have the editing process completed VERY SOON, so that printing and distribution will occur in April. So far, I have heard from only 17 agencies on changes to be made so far. Has your agency moved in the past year? Telephone numbers changed? Services added or discontinued? Added a website or E-mail? Please send your changes now, we are going to press in just a few weeks! If you do not have a Guide handy, E-mail me or leave a message at (248)544-3320 and we will rush a copy out to you!
New POPE
Seeking a new Catholic lead on condoms
By Justin Pearce BBC News website, Johannesburg
Campaigners against Aids in South Africa are hoping that the election of a new Pope could lead to a liberalisation of the Vatican's stance on the use of condoms to prevent HIV transmission.
During his lifetime, Pope John Paul II drew criticism for refusing to moderate the Catholic Church's anti-condom stance in the face of the Aids epidemic. But some Catholics say that the Church does not ban condoms outright, and is concerned with sexual morality as well as preventing HIV transmission.
An estimated 5.3 million out of South Africa's 45 million people are living with HIV - only India has more people infected with the virus. South Africa's largest non-governmental Aids prevention programme is run by the Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference (SACBC).
"One cannot talk about human rights without promoting reproductive rights - it's a package," Said Luyanda Ngonyama, a Catholic who previously worked for the SACBC HIV-Aids programme, and who now co-ordinates the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) in Gauteng province.
"The Pope's teaching was limited. One understands the constraints on him, but he was the one person who had the opportunity to make a change. He lacked the will to make that change."
'Misunderstood'
Mr Ngonyama argues that the church's approach makes it difficult to take an "integrated approach" to preventing the spread of HIV.
"If one is talking about an integrated approach, one must talk about condoms: One can say that those who want to abstain can do so, but that those who wish to use condoms because of their lifestyle must be allowed to do so."
But one SACBC Aids programme staff member - who preferred to remain anonymous - said Catholic teaching on condom use was often misunderstood. The church does, for example, condone the use of condoms between a married couple where one partner is HIV-positive.
"The teaching is not against the use of condoms, but against the casualisation of sex," the SACBC worker said.
Although the arrival of a new pope was unlikely to bring about a major change, "there may be some slight shift in the recognition that some people are not able to live in monogamous relationships - some bishops already recognise that.
"The late Pope has been criticised for not coming out more clearly on the recognition that conscience plays a role [in deciding whether to use condoms] - the church's teaching is that informed conscience must be the basis for a decision."
Although the SACBC HIV programme does not distribute condoms, it does provide education and counselling on HIV prevention. "A responsible way of doing counselling is to give people all the facts they need to know how to protect themselves," the SACBC staff member said.
TAC's national spokesman Nathan Geffen said he hoped that whoever is elected to succeed John Paul "would be more liberal on social issues, and would consider changing the Catholic Church's position on reproductive choice and on the use of condoms".
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/4417521.stm
By Justin Pearce BBC News website, Johannesburg
Campaigners against Aids in South Africa are hoping that the election of a new Pope could lead to a liberalisation of the Vatican's stance on the use of condoms to prevent HIV transmission.
During his lifetime, Pope John Paul II drew criticism for refusing to moderate the Catholic Church's anti-condom stance in the face of the Aids epidemic. But some Catholics say that the Church does not ban condoms outright, and is concerned with sexual morality as well as preventing HIV transmission.
An estimated 5.3 million out of South Africa's 45 million people are living with HIV - only India has more people infected with the virus. South Africa's largest non-governmental Aids prevention programme is run by the Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference (SACBC).
"One cannot talk about human rights without promoting reproductive rights - it's a package," Said Luyanda Ngonyama, a Catholic who previously worked for the SACBC HIV-Aids programme, and who now co-ordinates the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) in Gauteng province.
"The Pope's teaching was limited. One understands the constraints on him, but he was the one person who had the opportunity to make a change. He lacked the will to make that change."
'Misunderstood'
Mr Ngonyama argues that the church's approach makes it difficult to take an "integrated approach" to preventing the spread of HIV.
"If one is talking about an integrated approach, one must talk about condoms: One can say that those who want to abstain can do so, but that those who wish to use condoms because of their lifestyle must be allowed to do so."
But one SACBC Aids programme staff member - who preferred to remain anonymous - said Catholic teaching on condom use was often misunderstood. The church does, for example, condone the use of condoms between a married couple where one partner is HIV-positive.
"The teaching is not against the use of condoms, but against the casualisation of sex," the SACBC worker said.
Although the arrival of a new pope was unlikely to bring about a major change, "there may be some slight shift in the recognition that some people are not able to live in monogamous relationships - some bishops already recognise that.
"The late Pope has been criticised for not coming out more clearly on the recognition that conscience plays a role [in deciding whether to use condoms] - the church's teaching is that informed conscience must be the basis for a decision."
Although the SACBC HIV programme does not distribute condoms, it does provide education and counselling on HIV prevention. "A responsible way of doing counselling is to give people all the facts they need to know how to protect themselves," the SACBC staff member said.
TAC's national spokesman Nathan Geffen said he hoped that whoever is elected to succeed John Paul "would be more liberal on social issues, and would consider changing the Catholic Church's position on reproductive choice and on the use of condoms".
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/africa/4417521.stm
Coke & HIV
HIV-positive cocaine users have higher rates of coronary calcification
Michael Carter, Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Infection with HIV and concurrent cocaine use may contribute to the early stages of the hardening of the heart’s arteries, according to a study conducted in the US and published in the March 28th edition of the Archives of Internal Medicine. The investigators from Baltimore found that being HIV-positive, use of cocaine, and being HIV-positive and using cocaine were significantly associated with subclinical coronary calcification. Cocaine has been shown to cause arterial damage and it has been postulated that infection with HIV can contribute to cardiovascular disease through inflammatory responses to the virus. Investigators from Baltimore wished to examine the association of HIV infection, cocaine use, and a combination of HIV infection and cocaine use with coronary calcification, a marker of subclinical atherosclerosis. A total of 224 black individuals aged between 25 and 45 were recruited to the study between Spring 2000 and Spring 2003. Both HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals were recruited to the study. Individuals were excluded if they had a diagnosis of heart disease, symptoms suggestive of heart disease, or were pregnant. Sociodemographic details and drug use information were obtained using a questionnaire. Fasting blood lipids and blood pressure were also measured and individuals underwent a computed tomographic (CT) scan to determine coronary calcium. Cocaine was used by 153 individuals (68%) and a total of 124 individuals (55%) were HIV-positive. Mean age was 38 years, however HIV-positive cocaine users were significantly younger (mean 27 years p < 0 .001). HIV-positive cocaine users were also significantly more likely to smoke, and had a significantly lower body mass index A total of 192 individuals underwent a CT scan and were included in the investigators’ analysis. The proportion of HIV-positive patients who used cocaine with coronary calcification was significantly higher than that in HIV-negative individuals with no cocaine use. The highest rate of coronary calcification was seen in HIV-positive cocaine users (38%), followed by HIV-negative cocaine users (30%), HIV-negative individuals who did not use cocaine (29%), and HIV-positive non-cocaine users (18%). However, in further analysis, the investigators also noted that amongst non-users of cocaine, HIV-positive individuals had more calcified lesions, a larger calcified area (p < 0.01), a higher calcification total volume score (p < 0.01), and a higher calcification score (p < 0.01) than HIV-negative individuals. What’s more, calcification scores were similar for HIV-positive individuals, regardless of cocaine use (p < 0.05). In multiple regression analysis, the investigators established that individuals who were HIV-positive (p = 0.05), individuals who were HIV-positive and used cocaine (p = 0.003), and HIV-negative cocaine users (p = 0.02) had higher total calcification scores. Because 75% of HIV-positive individuals were taking a protease inhibitor, a class of antiretrovirals which has been associated with accelerated atherosclerosis, the investigators conducted further analysis. This compared HIV-negative non-users of cocaine with HIV-positive non-users of cocaine who were not taking a protease inhibitor. When body mass index was accounted for, the investigators still found that being HIV-positive was significantly associated with coronary calcification (p = 0.02). “This study in young adults demonstrates a positive association of HIV infection, cocaine use, and both with coronary artery calcification. These findings suggest that HIV infection and cocaine use may be involved in the development of subclinical atherosclerosis”, write the investigators. The investigators do, however, caution that their study had a cross-sectional design “and the results from this study need to be explained with caution.” Nevetheless they conclude, “this study suggests that HIV infection, cocaine use, or both may contribute to early subclinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Studies with a larger sample size are needed to test the interaction between HIV infection and cocaine use, and clinical trials are needed to examine whether reduction in cocaine use is an effective means of preventing atherosclerosis and, thus, ameliorating the burden of coronary disease.” Reference Lai S et al. Human immunodeficiency virus 1 infection, cocaine, and coronary calcification. Arch Intern Med 165: 690 – 695, 2005.
Michael Carter, Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Infection with HIV and concurrent cocaine use may contribute to the early stages of the hardening of the heart’s arteries, according to a study conducted in the US and published in the March 28th edition of the Archives of Internal Medicine. The investigators from Baltimore found that being HIV-positive, use of cocaine, and being HIV-positive and using cocaine were significantly associated with subclinical coronary calcification. Cocaine has been shown to cause arterial damage and it has been postulated that infection with HIV can contribute to cardiovascular disease through inflammatory responses to the virus. Investigators from Baltimore wished to examine the association of HIV infection, cocaine use, and a combination of HIV infection and cocaine use with coronary calcification, a marker of subclinical atherosclerosis. A total of 224 black individuals aged between 25 and 45 were recruited to the study between Spring 2000 and Spring 2003. Both HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals were recruited to the study. Individuals were excluded if they had a diagnosis of heart disease, symptoms suggestive of heart disease, or were pregnant. Sociodemographic details and drug use information were obtained using a questionnaire. Fasting blood lipids and blood pressure were also measured and individuals underwent a computed tomographic (CT) scan to determine coronary calcium. Cocaine was used by 153 individuals (68%) and a total of 124 individuals (55%) were HIV-positive. Mean age was 38 years, however HIV-positive cocaine users were significantly younger (mean 27 years p < 0 .001). HIV-positive cocaine users were also significantly more likely to smoke, and had a significantly lower body mass index A total of 192 individuals underwent a CT scan and were included in the investigators’ analysis. The proportion of HIV-positive patients who used cocaine with coronary calcification was significantly higher than that in HIV-negative individuals with no cocaine use. The highest rate of coronary calcification was seen in HIV-positive cocaine users (38%), followed by HIV-negative cocaine users (30%), HIV-negative individuals who did not use cocaine (29%), and HIV-positive non-cocaine users (18%). However, in further analysis, the investigators also noted that amongst non-users of cocaine, HIV-positive individuals had more calcified lesions, a larger calcified area (p < 0.01), a higher calcification total volume score (p < 0.01), and a higher calcification score (p < 0.01) than HIV-negative individuals. What’s more, calcification scores were similar for HIV-positive individuals, regardless of cocaine use (p < 0.05). In multiple regression analysis, the investigators established that individuals who were HIV-positive (p = 0.05), individuals who were HIV-positive and used cocaine (p = 0.003), and HIV-negative cocaine users (p = 0.02) had higher total calcification scores. Because 75% of HIV-positive individuals were taking a protease inhibitor, a class of antiretrovirals which has been associated with accelerated atherosclerosis, the investigators conducted further analysis. This compared HIV-negative non-users of cocaine with HIV-positive non-users of cocaine who were not taking a protease inhibitor. When body mass index was accounted for, the investigators still found that being HIV-positive was significantly associated with coronary calcification (p = 0.02). “This study in young adults demonstrates a positive association of HIV infection, cocaine use, and both with coronary artery calcification. These findings suggest that HIV infection and cocaine use may be involved in the development of subclinical atherosclerosis”, write the investigators. The investigators do, however, caution that their study had a cross-sectional design “and the results from this study need to be explained with caution.” Nevetheless they conclude, “this study suggests that HIV infection, cocaine use, or both may contribute to early subclinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Studies with a larger sample size are needed to test the interaction between HIV infection and cocaine use, and clinical trials are needed to examine whether reduction in cocaine use is an effective means of preventing atherosclerosis and, thus, ameliorating the burden of coronary disease.” Reference Lai S et al. Human immunodeficiency virus 1 infection, cocaine, and coronary calcification. Arch Intern Med 165: 690 – 695, 2005.
From Test Positive Aware NetworkNovember/December 2004
The Buzz
Giraffes and HIV
Treatment Interruptions With a Twist
By Andrew Zalski, M.D.
With the recent New Year came the usual resolutions, including improving one's fitness. We're all familiar with the new crowds at the health clubs that time of year that include many people who are obviously less fit.
Wouldn't it be great if we were able to make HIV less fit, less likely to be able to replicate itself efficiently? Would having a less fit HIV virus be advantageous in managing HIV disease? Can viral fitness be measured and selected for? These are all very interesting questions, and as usual with HIV care, not all the answers to these questions are clear.
First of all, we should define some terms.
The wild type virus is essentially HIV without any significant mutations.
Mutations are changes in the viral genome. They occur as the virus replicates. Some of these mutations lead to "resistance" to HIV medications.
The viral genome is the genetic code that determines the type of virus that is produced.
Selective pressure refers to an outside force, such as an HIV medication, which pressures the virus to select for specific and characteristic mutations. With these mutations, the virus can resist or elude the effect of antiviral medicines, thus ensuring its own (viral) survival.
The classic example from evolutionary theory is the giraffe. Giraffes with longer necks were more likely to survive because they were able to eat the fruits higher up on trees, while the giraffes with shorter necks could only eat low-lying fruit. Eventually, only the giraffes with long necks would survive, although the number of giraffes would at least initially be less.
So do giraffes have anything to do with HIV management? Hardly, because if we continued the analogy, it would be better (for the fruit on the trees) to completely wipe out the population than to select for long-necked giraffes. However, these giraffes, because of their size, are not as efficient in reproducing, and thus are fewer in number. The end result is that there are fewer giraffes and more fruit. Similarly, in HIV, there might be less fit virus and more T-cells, at least for a period of time.
Replication capacity of the HIV virus can now be measured by genotypic and phenotypic testing. Replication capacity is thought to be a measure of viral fitness. A lower viral fitness may mean that the virus is weaker and less likely to replicate (make copies of itself) efficiently and less likely to cause immune system and T-cell deterioration. This would be the equivalent of selecting for the short-necked giraffe that has decreased survival capacity.
How does all this impact HIV care? The gold standard of care has been undetectable viral load and increased T-cells. There are many people with HIV who have been able to maintain undetectable (or nearly undetectable) viral load for many years.
However, some become tired of taking medications (pill fatigue), or wish to take a holiday from having to take medications, or may have developed significant side effects from the medications whereby it has direct effect on their quality of life. Some of these factors may make it medically advisable to take a treatment interruption.
Finally, on occasion where individuals have developed multiple resistance mutations, a treatment holiday is advised to encourage wild type virus to re-emerge; thus re-establishing susceptibility to antiviral medications. Would it be better for these patients to take a break from their triple medication regimen and only continue on a single (one) HIV medication which would primarily promote the selection to a less fit virus?
There is an intriguing study of patients from Italy that suggests just that. In a study designed by Antenella Castagna, M.D., patients whose virus had a M184V mutation (selected for by 3TC or FTC -- brand names Epivir or Emtriva) were randomized to two groups. The first group stopped all their HIV medications while the second group was continued on only 3TC (Epivir). After 24 weeks, the group that continued 3TC had lower viral loads and higher T-cells than the group that had stopped all HIV medications. The 3TC group continued to select (remember selective pressure) for virus that had the M184V mutation that rendered the virus "less fit."
It is important to note two facts. First, 3TC causes only a M184V mutation and no other significant mutations. Continuing an HIV medication, which selected for more than one mutation, would lead to resistance to other HIV drugs. Second, all the participants in the study already had a virus that had the M184V mutation. We would not want to select for the M184V mutation in patients whose virus does not already contain this mutation because the presence of this mutation might make the virus less susceptible to other HIV medications in the future.
Only time and further studies will let us know whether this is a useful strategy. We only have very preliminary, 24-week results which are encouraging. Further, we do not know what long-term effects may occur nor guarantee a long-term response. This may represent a reasonable strategy for those who would need, or have been medically advised to take a break from treatment and whose virus already contains the M184V mutation.
It goes without saying that this should not be attempted without discussion with your HIV care provider. In the meantime, continue to be true to your resolutions to become more fit, hope for a less fit virus, and be aware that giraffes and HIV are still quite prevalent.
Andrew Zalski, M.D., practices as an HIV specialist at Northstar Healthcare in Chicago. He is an Assistant Professor of Family Medicine at Rush University Medical Center.
The Buzz
Giraffes and HIV
Treatment Interruptions With a Twist
By Andrew Zalski, M.D.
With the recent New Year came the usual resolutions, including improving one's fitness. We're all familiar with the new crowds at the health clubs that time of year that include many people who are obviously less fit.
Wouldn't it be great if we were able to make HIV less fit, less likely to be able to replicate itself efficiently? Would having a less fit HIV virus be advantageous in managing HIV disease? Can viral fitness be measured and selected for? These are all very interesting questions, and as usual with HIV care, not all the answers to these questions are clear.
First of all, we should define some terms.
The wild type virus is essentially HIV without any significant mutations.
Mutations are changes in the viral genome. They occur as the virus replicates. Some of these mutations lead to "resistance" to HIV medications.
The viral genome is the genetic code that determines the type of virus that is produced.
Selective pressure refers to an outside force, such as an HIV medication, which pressures the virus to select for specific and characteristic mutations. With these mutations, the virus can resist or elude the effect of antiviral medicines, thus ensuring its own (viral) survival.
The classic example from evolutionary theory is the giraffe. Giraffes with longer necks were more likely to survive because they were able to eat the fruits higher up on trees, while the giraffes with shorter necks could only eat low-lying fruit. Eventually, only the giraffes with long necks would survive, although the number of giraffes would at least initially be less.
So do giraffes have anything to do with HIV management? Hardly, because if we continued the analogy, it would be better (for the fruit on the trees) to completely wipe out the population than to select for long-necked giraffes. However, these giraffes, because of their size, are not as efficient in reproducing, and thus are fewer in number. The end result is that there are fewer giraffes and more fruit. Similarly, in HIV, there might be less fit virus and more T-cells, at least for a period of time.
Replication capacity of the HIV virus can now be measured by genotypic and phenotypic testing. Replication capacity is thought to be a measure of viral fitness. A lower viral fitness may mean that the virus is weaker and less likely to replicate (make copies of itself) efficiently and less likely to cause immune system and T-cell deterioration. This would be the equivalent of selecting for the short-necked giraffe that has decreased survival capacity.
How does all this impact HIV care? The gold standard of care has been undetectable viral load and increased T-cells. There are many people with HIV who have been able to maintain undetectable (or nearly undetectable) viral load for many years.
However, some become tired of taking medications (pill fatigue), or wish to take a holiday from having to take medications, or may have developed significant side effects from the medications whereby it has direct effect on their quality of life. Some of these factors may make it medically advisable to take a treatment interruption.
Finally, on occasion where individuals have developed multiple resistance mutations, a treatment holiday is advised to encourage wild type virus to re-emerge; thus re-establishing susceptibility to antiviral medications. Would it be better for these patients to take a break from their triple medication regimen and only continue on a single (one) HIV medication which would primarily promote the selection to a less fit virus?
There is an intriguing study of patients from Italy that suggests just that. In a study designed by Antenella Castagna, M.D., patients whose virus had a M184V mutation (selected for by 3TC or FTC -- brand names Epivir or Emtriva) were randomized to two groups. The first group stopped all their HIV medications while the second group was continued on only 3TC (Epivir). After 24 weeks, the group that continued 3TC had lower viral loads and higher T-cells than the group that had stopped all HIV medications. The 3TC group continued to select (remember selective pressure) for virus that had the M184V mutation that rendered the virus "less fit."
It is important to note two facts. First, 3TC causes only a M184V mutation and no other significant mutations. Continuing an HIV medication, which selected for more than one mutation, would lead to resistance to other HIV drugs. Second, all the participants in the study already had a virus that had the M184V mutation. We would not want to select for the M184V mutation in patients whose virus does not already contain this mutation because the presence of this mutation might make the virus less susceptible to other HIV medications in the future.
Only time and further studies will let us know whether this is a useful strategy. We only have very preliminary, 24-week results which are encouraging. Further, we do not know what long-term effects may occur nor guarantee a long-term response. This may represent a reasonable strategy for those who would need, or have been medically advised to take a break from treatment and whose virus already contains the M184V mutation.
It goes without saying that this should not be attempted without discussion with your HIV care provider. In the meantime, continue to be true to your resolutions to become more fit, hope for a less fit virus, and be aware that giraffes and HIV are still quite prevalent.
Andrew Zalski, M.D., practices as an HIV specialist at Northstar Healthcare in Chicago. He is an Assistant Professor of Family Medicine at Rush University Medical Center.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
