*huffs*
Now, if you saw the Associated Press headline HIV no longer fatal disease, what would you think?
Oh, wow, they've found a cure?
The virus has changed, or they've found a way to change it, so it's no longer as deadly?
What the article is actually talking about is a study that found that patients who live in high-income countries, who get put on anti-retrovirial medication relatively soon after infection, and respond well to treatment, live thirteen years longer than they used to.
Well, duh.
I think the fact that patients are only getting a reprieve of thirteen years, and generally dying from some AIDS related complication like non-Hodgkins lymphoma, tells me HIV IS STILL FATAL.
Never mind that the vast majority of people with HIV are in Africa and Asia, with little to no access to anti-retrovirial medication, and are dying faster than Westerners ever did because of the lack of any kind of health services, and the scourge of poverty on top of that.
It's that kind of irresponsible, blanket headline that reflects the attitude that led to an increase in infection rates in Sydney a couple of years back for the first time in two decades. Because people think that the existence of anti-retrovirial medication means getting HIV doesn't matter any more, that it's just 'taking a pill' and the rest of your life is 'as normal'.
Well, as someone who's worked with people living with HIV, that's a bloody joke.
Some people go for years, or never find a combination of drugs that work for them without hideous side effects. People become extremely vulnerable to certain rare cancers. If people already have or acquire an additional infection, like Hepatitis C, their health problems can get much, much worse. People's general health can go up and down like a rollercoaster. One month, they might be fine. The next, they might be completely worn out, losing weight, and vulnerable to every bug and sniffle that goes through their place of employment. Because they're unreliable, they might get sacked, have to drop back to part time work, or go on disability benefits. A drug combination that works successfully for years at maintaining their health for years might suddenly become ineffective, beginning a search for yet another combination. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
The thing that gets me, is that most people browsing the news site or the papers won't read more than the headline. All they'll absorb is 'HIV no longer fatal disease'. When someone takes pills for thirteen years to control their blood pressure, then dies of a heart attack, it was still the underlying condition that killed them. HIV is still the horrific condition it was in the eighties; just look at Africa, where some southern countries have infection rates of around 30% of the total population. People in the Western world still die from HIV related conditions, but they're hidden under the secondary labels of cancer, heart attack, pneumonia.
The press has power. People who write and edit news sources have a responsibility to make their headlines give an impression that is interesting, but not misleading. Just look at how Reuters handled the same story.
Drugs add 13 years to life of HIV patients
Now that is accurate, and reflects the situation in such a way that doesn't mislead, even if you only read that headline. HIV drugs give you approximately 13 years longer than they used to. So, based on that study, if I got infected today, I'd live to see my sixtieth birthday, as opposed to a non-infected person, who lives to around eighty. If I was lucky.
Think about it.
Oh, wow, they've found a cure?
The virus has changed, or they've found a way to change it, so it's no longer as deadly?
What the article is actually talking about is a study that found that patients who live in high-income countries, who get put on anti-retrovirial medication relatively soon after infection, and respond well to treatment, live thirteen years longer than they used to.
Well, duh.
I think the fact that patients are only getting a reprieve of thirteen years, and generally dying from some AIDS related complication like non-Hodgkins lymphoma, tells me HIV IS STILL FATAL.
Never mind that the vast majority of people with HIV are in Africa and Asia, with little to no access to anti-retrovirial medication, and are dying faster than Westerners ever did because of the lack of any kind of health services, and the scourge of poverty on top of that.
It's that kind of irresponsible, blanket headline that reflects the attitude that led to an increase in infection rates in Sydney a couple of years back for the first time in two decades. Because people think that the existence of anti-retrovirial medication means getting HIV doesn't matter any more, that it's just 'taking a pill' and the rest of your life is 'as normal'.
Well, as someone who's worked with people living with HIV, that's a bloody joke.
Some people go for years, or never find a combination of drugs that work for them without hideous side effects. People become extremely vulnerable to certain rare cancers. If people already have or acquire an additional infection, like Hepatitis C, their health problems can get much, much worse. People's general health can go up and down like a rollercoaster. One month, they might be fine. The next, they might be completely worn out, losing weight, and vulnerable to every bug and sniffle that goes through their place of employment. Because they're unreliable, they might get sacked, have to drop back to part time work, or go on disability benefits. A drug combination that works successfully for years at maintaining their health for years might suddenly become ineffective, beginning a search for yet another combination. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
The thing that gets me, is that most people browsing the news site or the papers won't read more than the headline. All they'll absorb is 'HIV no longer fatal disease'. When someone takes pills for thirteen years to control their blood pressure, then dies of a heart attack, it was still the underlying condition that killed them. HIV is still the horrific condition it was in the eighties; just look at Africa, where some southern countries have infection rates of around 30% of the total population. People in the Western world still die from HIV related conditions, but they're hidden under the secondary labels of cancer, heart attack, pneumonia.
The press has power. People who write and edit news sources have a responsibility to make their headlines give an impression that is interesting, but not misleading. Just look at how Reuters handled the same story.
Drugs add 13 years to life of HIV patients
Now that is accurate, and reflects the situation in such a way that doesn't mislead, even if you only read that headline. HIV drugs give you approximately 13 years longer than they used to. So, based on that study, if I got infected today, I'd live to see my sixtieth birthday, as opposed to a non-infected person, who lives to around eighty. If I was lucky.
Think about it.