Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would you cry and think is all over? Most people know that with antiretroviral medication, you can live for decades, but is impossible to know for how long you will live. Reality is that nobody wants this virus regardless of how good medication can be at keeping you alive.
This is true for anyone who is alive.
I've made plans for dinner tonight, but there is NO WAY for me to know for certain that I will be there.
I work in a hospital and have treated pts. with HIV, AIDS and have seen many of them year after year. many for 20yrs. It is very possible to live with this disease and live well, if you take care of yourself, take meds. etc.
Honestly... if I needed to chose between cancer and HIV... HIV winds hands down.
I work in a hospital and have treated pts. with HIV, AIDS and have seen many of them year after year. many for 20yrs. It is very possible to live with this disease and live well, if you take care of yourself, take meds. etc.
Honestly... if I needed to chose between cancer and HIV... HIV winds hands down.
That's what I said, you can live decades with ART, but many health professionals make it seem as if is not big deal. It is a big deal and nobody wants this virus regardless of how good retroviral therapy is at keeping you alive. Who would choose having to take ART meds with side effects and possibly only live another 30 to 40 years over not having the virus and live to old age with none of this stuff to worry about.
That's what I said, you can live decades with ART, but many health professionals make it seem as if is not big deal. It is a big deal and nobody wants this virus regardless of how good retroviral therapy is at keeping you alive. Who would choose having to take ART meds with side effects and possibly only live another 30 to 40 years over not having the virus and live to old age with none of this stuff to worry about.
Do you have an actual point to make with your continued fascination regarding HIV??
"Who would choose having to take ART meds with side effects and possibly only live another 30-40 years over not having the virus"?
Is this supposed to be a trick question? Why is it a question???
Do people choose to have cancer, diabetes, ALS, cardiomyopathy, genetic defects??? Do people choose to get hit by a car and die???
No one "chooses"....that's life and last I checked no one gets out alive....
Antiretroviral therapy is a pharmacologic miracle that allows people with HIV to live essentially "normal" lifespans compared to those without HIV.....if you remove IV drug abusers with HIV from comparisons there is little to no difference in average lifespans...
Is it ideal to have to take medications for the rest of your life?? No....but it beats the alternative just like it does for diabetics
The idea of adding "choice" to this equation is bizarre and nonsensical.....
I work in a hospital and have treated pts. with HIV, AIDS and have seen many of them year after year. many for 20yrs. It is very possible to live with this disease and live well, if you take care of yourself, take meds. etc.
Honestly... if I needed to chose between cancer and HIV... HIV winds hands down.
This. I lived in San Francisco for 18 years starting in 1985 and I have several friends (not all gay men) who have lived for 25 years with HIV and are healthy enough to work full time without any problems. If treated properly, it isn't a death sentence. Why *wouldn't* you take a medicine that keeps you alive? Don't diabetics take insulin every day? I don't see the problem.
Do you have an actual point to make with your continued fascination regarding HIV??
"Who would choose having to take ART meds with side effects and possibly only live another 30-40 years over not having the virus"?
Is this supposed to be a trick question? Why is it a question???
Do people choose to have cancer, diabetes, ALS, cardiomyopathy, genetic defects??? Do people choose to get hit by a car and die???
No one "chooses"....that's life and last I checked no one gets out alive....
Antiretroviral therapy is a pharmacologic miracle that allows people with HIV to live essentially "normal" lifespans compared to those without HIV.....if you remove IV drug abusers with HIV from comparisons there is little to no difference in average lifespans...
Is it ideal to have to take medications for the rest of your life?? No....but it beats the alternative just like it does for diabetics
The idea of adding "choice" to this equation is bizarre and nonsensical.....
Do you really think the immune system of a person in his 60+ will be the same as when he was 20 years old? Not to mention ...
Quote:
A person's CD4 count at the start of treatment remains one of the strongest indicators of life expectancy. Starting treatment when the CD4 count is below 200 can cut as much as 15 years from a person's life
HIV destroys millions and millions of these cells a day. Every day that passes, cells are being destroyed, which you very likely will never get back.
You assumption is based on that every person with HIV begins treatment early and this is just not the case. Millions of people who have HIV and don't know it. People who have had it for months, if not years, without presenting any real symptom. If they start late, how could they live as long and as healthy as someone who doesn't have the virus.
Quote:
Race and longevity are integrally linked to HIV. According to research from the Bloomberg Public School of Health, African Americans with HIV live an average of 8.5 years less than their white counterparts.
A person without HIV (excluding other possible diseases) will live longer than someone with HIV on antiretroviral medication.
Is there any real proof or study that shows a person who started treatment in his early 20s and managed to live healthy to 80 years old? Where is it? I don't think such thing even exist. Where is the proof of their claims?
The point of this thread is that the severity of HIV on a person's health and life expectancy is hugely downplayed by the media and health professionals. They want to make it seem as is no big deal to have HIV because we have these medication. That's because antiretroviral medication is a multimillionaire business.
They will want everyone to believe that these meds can give you a healthy and normal lifespan. You will be on these drugs for the rest of your life. Of course, they will pormote them as a wonderful miracle pill. Both the healthcare professionals and companies who manufacture these medication, benefit from YOU having HIV.
Of course, they will exaggerate how many years you can actually live and DOWNPLAY the nasty side effects from these drugs.
And this is one of the many reasons, why a cure may never exist. Imagine, the millions and millions of dollars and jobs that would be lost if a real cure were to emerge? You, the HIV patients, are the bread and butter of the healthcare professionals and antiretroviral manufacturing companies. You will be filling up their pockets for the rest of your life. Of course, they will want you believe these drugs can give you a normal lifetime.
And yet, HIV remains a very stigmatized condition that everyone is very afraid of and is still seen as a death sentence. If antiretroviral meds are so efficient at keeping you alive, as if you didn't have the virus at all, why is the general public still afraid of this virus? People would blame it on "ignorance", but everyone knows you can take medication to "stay alive" for decades. This is common knowledge that even kids know. We are not in the 70-80s where everyone was ignorant about HIV.
That's because deep down, everyone knows that whatever life these meds can give you, it would never compare to the quality of life, of NOT having this virus in the first place. Therefore, it is a big deal and nobody would choose to have this virus.
Last edited by NasalPolyps; 12-09-2018 at 09:47 AM..
No one gets out of this deal alive anyway. I would go to the doctor, get treated, be consistent with meds, live a health(ier) lifestyle, and be sure to either be abstinent or have sex with another infected individual.
Do you really think the immune system of a person in his 60+ will be the same as when he was 20 years old? Not to mention ...
HIV destroys millions and millions of these cells a day. Every day that passes, cells are being destroyed, which you very likely will never get back.
You assumption is based on that every person with HIV begins treatment early and this is just not the case. Millions of people who have HIV and don't know it. People who have had it for months, if not years, without presenting any real symptom. If they start late, how could they live as long and as healthy as someone who doesn't have the virus.
A person without HIV (excluding other possible diseases) will live longer than someone with HIV on antiretroviral medication.
Is there any real proof or study that shows a person who started treatment in his early 20s and managed to live healthy to 80 years old? Where is it? I don't think such thing even exist. Where is the proof of their claims?
The point of this thread is that the severity of HIV on a person's health and life expectancy is hugely downplayed by the media and health professionals. They want to make it seem as is no big deal to have HIV because we have these medication. That's because antiretroviral medication is a multimillionaire business.
They will want everyone to believe that these meds can give you a healthy and normal lifespan. You will be on these drugs for the rest of your life. Of course, they will pormote them as a wonderful miracle pill. Both the healthcare professionals and companies who manufacture these medication, benefit from YOU having HIV.
Of course, they will exaggerate how many years you can actually live and DOWNPLAY the nasty side effects from these drugs.
And this is one of the many reasons, why a cure may never exist. Imagine, the millions and millions of dollars and jobs that would be lost if a real cure were to emerge? You, the HIV patients, are the bread and butter of the healthcare professionals and antiretroviral manufacturing companies. You will be filling up their pockets for the rest of your life. Of course, they will want you believe these drugs can give you a normal lifetime.
And yet, HIV remains a very stigmatized condition that everyone is very afraid of and is still seen as a death sentence. If antiretroviral meds are so efficient at keeping you alive, as if you didn't have the virus at all, why is the general public still afraid of this virus? People would blame it on "ignorance", but everyone knows you can take medication to "stay alive" for decades. This is common knowledge that even kids know. We are not in the 70-80s where everyone was ignorant about HIV.
That's because deep down, everyone knows that whatever life these meds can give you, it would never compare to the quality of life, of NOT having this virus in the first place. Therefore, it is a big deal and nobody would choose to have this virus.
Give it time! HIV wasn't even a thing known about until the early '80's....AZT came about in the mid '80's...the triple "cocktail" treatment in the mid '90's....so it has only been less than 25 years for "modern" HIV treatment. Any serious disease requires serious treatment that may have severe side effects and the threat of death without the treatment determines how much people are willing to put up with for the treatment. If YOU don't want to be treated, that is YOUR prerogative - everyone decides for themselves.
It's silly to state the obvious - of course no one wants to have any disease so why even pose the question to start with.
Give it time! HIV wasn't even a thing known about until the early '80's....AZT came about in the mid '80's...the triple "cocktail" treatment in the mid '90's....so it has only been less than 25 years for "modern" HIV treatment. Any serious disease requires serious treatment that may have severe side effects and the threat of death without the treatment determines how much people are willing to put up with for the treatment. If YOU don't want to be treated, that is YOUR prerogative - everyone decides for themselves.
It's silly to state the obvious - of course no one wants to have any disease so why even pose the question to start with.
I never posed that question. My point is that the benefits and how long the antiretroviral meds can keep you alive are exxagerated due to the fact that this is a business and they make millions of dollars. These companies make millions thanks to the fact that there isn’t a cure and you have to be on these drugs for the rest of your life, so it makes sense that they would tell you what you want to hear.
There isn’t proof of anyone yet who started treatment in early 20s and managed to stay alive to 80 years old. So, their claims are based on anything but proof. We don’t know what results of taking these drugs for 60 years would do to your system by the time you reach 80. We don’t know if these drugs would even allow you to live from 20 to 80 yrs old.
Theoretically, it should keep the viral load low until you die of old age but we don’t know yet if it will play out that way for 50-60 year of taking medicine. That’s my point.
- these financial motive behind promoting these drugs as giving you a normal lifespan
- There isn’t any proof yet of anyone reaching old age with these drugs
When we finally document a patient who started treatment in early 20s and managed to live to 80 and died of old age or a condition unrelated to immune deficiency, only then you can say these drugs can achieve this
I never posed that question. My point is that the benefits and how long the antiretroviral meds can keep you alive are exxagerated due to the fact that this is a business and they make millions of dollars. These companies make millions thanks to the fact that there isn’t a cure and you have to be on these drugs for the rest of your life, so it makes sense that they would tell you what you want to hear.
There isn’t proof of anyone yet who started treatment in early 20s and managed to stay alive to 80 years old. So, their claims are based on anything but proof. We don’t know what results of taking these drugs for 60 years would do to your system by the time you reach 80. We don’t know if these drugs would even allow you to live from 20 to 80 yrs old.
Theoretically, it should keep the viral load low until you die of old age but we don’t know yet if it will play out that way for 50-60 year of taking medicine. That’s my point.
- these financial motive behind promoting these drugs as giving you a normal lifespan
- There isn’t any proof yet of anyone reaching old age with these drugs
When we finally document a patient who started treatment in early 20s and managed to live to 80 and died of old age or a condition unrelated to immune deficiency, only then you can say these drugs can achieve this
So this is a yet another anti-pharmecuticals thread disguised as a philosophical topic, as if we don't have enough of those already. I should have known.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
