Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered • Hacker News Board

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#191

Post by hcurtiss » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 5:08 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #161

hcurtiss wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a snide reply. Is it necessary to be a doctor to have an opinion on healthcare policy?

They were speaking of medicine rather than policy, and getting it wrong. PReP is not the same course as treatment, and prophylaxis is always a thing given to healthy people rather than sick ones. The side effects are considered manageable: you watch for signs of liver problems and you don't give the drug to people prone to them. I'm not a doctor but I can read the prescribing information[1], which they don't seem to…

Arguing the facts is totally good. And you may very well be right (I don't know anything about the subject). But attacking the commenter's position because he/she is not a doctor (like you are not a doctor), struck me as poor form.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#192

Post by rabbitonrails » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 5:10 PM UTC

WillDaSilva wrote: post #122

andy_ppp wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoting like this makes it impossible to read on mobile. Not your fault but “speech marks” are fine.

Are you using an app such as Materialistic or Hews, or just using your browser? For what it's worth I don't recall any problems reading quote blocks on Materialistic.

Like most people, I am reading on a mobile browser and cannot read this quote.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#193

Post by celdon25 » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:08 PM UTC

nerdjon wrote: post #138

wtdata wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How about we just don't fucking shame people for not wanting to use a condom as long as both (or all) parties agree. Especially when there is a drug like prep. That depends if it's those people bearing the full cost of buying PrEP, or if they expect the state/insurance companies to do it for them.

Why not, in most not ass backwards places you can get free condoms. Maybe it should not cost $1300 a month for no good reason in the US.

Who the heck is going through $1300 worth of condoms in one month?

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#194

Post by nabnob » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

cultus wrote: post #154

wtdata wrote: post #129

PrEP has negative side effects (besides being quite expensive for the state), condoms on the other side, don't have side effects, and are cheap. It's a matter of having some sense of personal responsibility really.

Wow, you're a homophobic bigot, and you also have no idea what you're talking about.

So much blatant homophobia in this thread wrapped up as concern for side effects.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#195

Post by cultus » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:23 PM UTC

nabnob wrote: post #194

cultus wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, you're a homophobic bigot, and you also have no idea what you're talking about.

So much blatant homophobia in this thread wrapped up as concern for side effects.

Yeah, this dog-whistling act is getting pretty tiring.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#196

Post by cultus » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:24 PM UTC

growlist wrote: post #181

wtdata wrote: post #129

PrEP has negative side effects (besides being quite expensive for the state), condoms on the other side, don't have side effects, and are cheap. It's a matter of having some sense of personal responsibility really.

Sad that you're downvoted for stating the truth.

No, he's being downvoted for dog-whistle homophobia.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#197

Post by shawnz » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:26 PM UTC

hcurtiss wrote: post #190

shawnz wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you feel comfortable as a layman arguing with people who have been studying the topic for a decade about the tradeoffs involved?

Of course. In many circumstances, the experts don't even agree. It's incumbent on me to inform myself, and I can lean on those very experts, but I'm not at all comfortable ceding how to weigh those tradeoffs to the people who identified them scientifically.

I'm not necessarily saying you ought to cede to the experts, I'm saying you ought to do the research they have already done if you expect them to take you seriously about changing the way they do their jobs.

Obviously it's not breaking any laws to post an uninformed opinion on the internet, but what is going to be accomplished by it?

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#198

Post by jfengel » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

hcurtiss wrote: post #191

jfengel wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were speaking of medicine rather than policy, and getting it wrong. PReP is not the same course as treatment, and prophylaxis is always a thing given to healthy people rather than sick ones. The side effects are considered manageable: you watch for signs of liver problems and you don't give the drug to people prone to them. I'm not a doctor but I can read the prescribing information[1], which they don't seem to…

Arguing the facts is totally good. And you may very well be right (I don't know anything about the subject). But attacking the commenter's position because he/she is not a doctor (like you are not a doctor), struck me as poor form.

You're correct about that. I apologize.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#199

Post by notyourday » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #156

notyourday wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not about who the drug is being intended for -- it is about who the drug is being marketed to. For example there's a massive campaign targeting both men and women engaging in any sort of sexual activity that includes fluid exchange promoting usage of PrEP. One can see it in a subway and on local commercials on TV.

Where?

NYC.

Re: Alarming surge in drug-resistant HIV uncovered

#200

Post by notyourday » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

nness wrote: post #179

notyourday wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not about who the drug is being intended for -- it is about who the drug is being marketed to. For example there's a massive campaign targeting both men and women engaging in any sort of sexual activity that includes fluid exchange promoting usage of PrEP. One can see it in a subway and on local commercials on TV.

Assuming in the US? (can't think of another market where prescription drug marketing is unrestricted)

Yes. NYC, specifically. It dropped off a bit during the summer, but it was all over the subway/local TV channels in the spring.

There's some new campaign now which unfortunately i don't quite recall but it is highly bizarre. It something along the lines of "equality. make hiv undetectable. Truvada for PrEP." or something like that.