In an era where sometimes difficult, science-based decisions are routinely required of both positive and negative individuals− think when to start treatment, or the relative benefits of PrEP vs condoms− are we doing enough to steer people away from bad decisions?
First we need to acknowledge that even in a non-judgmental environment such as ours, some decisions just aren’t wise. Charlie Sheen and the allure of the goat’s milk cure proved that quite publicly. So did this Facebook commenter opining recently when to start treatment: “It’s best to wait until there is a patch, a spray or a cure.” In fact I suspect there is a fairly large faction (I call them “treatment denialists” ) who aren’t persuaded by START that early treatment works best. Or by PARTNER that it can all but eliminate the risk of transmission.
Over the past year, advocates or elected officials in Montreal, Ottawa, Victoria, Baltimore, New York City, Ithaca (NY), Seattle, San Francisco, Glasgow and four cities in Ireland have called for the implementation of supervised injection services. More recently, Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health Dr. David McKeown recommended that the Board of Health start a community consultation process toward establishing supervised injection services within three existing facilities in the city. The Board voted unanimously in favour. As the lead investigators of the TOSCA study (the Toronto and Ottawa Supervised Consumption Assessment), we support Dr. McKeown’s proposal and look forward to the opening of these services in Toronto.
My daughter has a smartphone cover that says: “We’re all mad here”. It’s from Alice in Wonderland. I like it; and when it comes to hepatitis C treatment and pricing, it’s quite on point.
In 2014, Canada and the rest of the world turned a miraculous corner – a cure for viral hepatitis C was on the market. Wonderful and amazing. Why? Well, viral hepatitis C is the only chronic viral infection that now has a cure – that is, a cure for virtually everyone, with a cure rate of 95 per cent.
One of the most memorable moments in my 20 years working in the HIV field happened in a standing-room-only meeting hall in Vienna at the International AIDS Conference in 2010. This was the moment that the clinical trial CAPRISA 004 announced proof-of-concept for prevention of HIV among women using a vaginal microbicide (1% tenofivir gel). The entire room broke out in a standing ovation and tears of joy. Finally! A prevention tool that could allow a woman to protect herself in sexual encounters, regardless of the desires and wishes of her sexual partner. Five years later, microbicides have not yet come to fruition. But pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) holds the same great promise.
Apparu aux Etats-Unis il y a 20 ans, le barebacking a fait beaucoup parler de lui. Au départ, le terme a été utilisé par des hommes gais séropositifs pour évoquer leur choix d’avoir des pratiques sexuelles sans condom. Mais très vite, le barebacking devient l’enjeu de débats virulents sur la responsabilité et les prises de risque dans la communauté gaie. Mais parler de barebacking a-t-il encore un sens à l’heure du traitement comme prévention?
Hepatitis C is curable, reads the script; time and time again I hear this said, have read it, and say it myself. This is great news and a reality for more people than ever before.
Does this mean that the job is done? I suppose it depends on one’s perspective. As I listened to members of the science research community speak recently, it is “done and dusted.” “Problem solved,” the headlines will read. Okay, maybe no headlines but a mention on page 4 with a minor piece in the late evening news, even though this may be the biggest news in medical science in decades.
Le Blogue de CATIE présente des perspectives et opinions des personnes et organismes qui travaillent ou collaborent bénévolement à la réponse du Canada au VIH et à l’hépatite C.