Promising AIDS Drug for Prevention

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rockthecasbah, Mar 27, 2006.

  1. rockthecasbah macrumors 68020

    rockthecasbah

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Location:
    Moorestown, NJ
    #1
    linkity

    It's still in early testing on monkeys, but this new pill form of 2 medications already in use is showing a lot of promise for creating a preventative measure against HIV/AIDS. Here's an interesting thing about the drug however, they would only be giving out with counciling and condoms.
    So what are you thoughts guys and dolls? The point was brought up in the article that this may give an excuse to promote unsafe sex, but i disagree. It's very expensive, and doesn't prevent against other STDs and pregnancy. It's like a better guard in my opinion, and would be more beneficial to the rest of the world ravaged by HIV/AIDS than it would cause issues.

    Thanks only me talking :)
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
  3. OutThere macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #3
    If they can pull it off, it could do wonders in Africa. Hopefully something will come of this.
     
  4. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #4
    Perhaps I am being stupid here, but what efficacy do these drugs have? If they are intended as a preventative measure for non-infected individuals, how is that different from a vaccine? How are they supposed to work exactly?

    Also, with the cost of these drugs being so high, how effective is this going to be to the millions of poor who are statistically-prone to be vectors of transmission?

    I am pretty confused and a little suspect with regards to the strategy. Will many pay hand-over-fist for this "protection", w/o ever knowing if they were at risk? Wierd dynamics...
     
  5. rockthecasbah thread starter macrumors 68020

    rockthecasbah

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Location:
    Moorestown, NJ
    #5
    well i think it is seen to some as more effective to pay a larger 1 time fee and definitely save a life than pay less AFTER they get teh disease to help with treatment and such. The truth is there will be a huge funding gap, but it might be less "wasteful" spending if you will to conquer the problem. And, if the disease is successfully contained, the spread and cost for future generations will be less.

    good point though.
     

Share This Page