“There are still very real problems due to people who are not testing until they have become unwell as a result of undiagnosed HIV infection. This means that treatment that is now widely available may not work as effectively.”#
Of course this is all well and good, but the reality is, certainly in the case of London hospitals at least, that treatment is not started anyway until people actually become sick, despite very strong evidence that patients would be better served by starting treatment earlier, rather than when their CD4 count plummets or they pick up some life threatening opportunistic infection.
I’m all for early identification of the illness, but once identified patients should be provided with the facts and given the ability to make an informed decisions about the risks and benefits of medication, rather than simply being told its not necessary to start treatment.
They’s have this 20 minute test in the Netherlands for a few years. It is so much better than having to wait a week for results.
As for when newly diagnosed patients start treatment. Well I’m Type 1 diabetic since early childhood and I’d recommend that if you are newly diagnosed with HIV or any other illness you do your own research and not take your doctor’s opinion as law. I’m a big fan of patients taking personal responsibility for their own health and if they wish to start meds before their doctor approves of it then go find a doctor who agrees with you. Doctors aren’t all-seeing and all-knowing. You need to give them a kick every now and then.
Any idea on the pricedifference between the two types of tests? I’m trying to get this used in Sweden and if it’s less costly then that can be used as a powerful incentive for hospitals and politicians.
These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous please click "Report" or email us. Terms and Conditions · Privacy Policy
A good step, now you only have to crap yourself for half an hour…
That is, based on the premise that most people are either too apathetic, or too terrified to bother.
H-O-T
Dating Networking Site
__S e e k B i—-C oM__
Helps you find your ideal lover
“There are still very real problems due to people who are not testing until they have become unwell as a result of undiagnosed HIV infection. This means that treatment that is now widely available may not work as effectively.”#
Of course this is all well and good, but the reality is, certainly in the case of London hospitals at least, that treatment is not started anyway until people actually become sick, despite very strong evidence that patients would be better served by starting treatment earlier, rather than when their CD4 count plummets or they pick up some life threatening opportunistic infection.
I’m all for early identification of the illness, but once identified patients should be provided with the facts and given the ability to make an informed decisions about the risks and benefits of medication, rather than simply being told its not necessary to start treatment.
They’s have this 20 minute test in the Netherlands for a few years. It is so much better than having to wait a week for results.
As for when newly diagnosed patients start treatment. Well I’m Type 1 diabetic since early childhood and I’d recommend that if you are newly diagnosed with HIV or any other illness you do your own research and not take your doctor’s opinion as law. I’m a big fan of patients taking personal responsibility for their own health and if they wish to start meds before their doctor approves of it then go find a doctor who agrees with you. Doctors aren’t all-seeing and all-knowing. You need to give them a kick every now and then.
Any idea on the pricedifference between the two types of tests? I’m trying to get this used in Sweden and if it’s less costly then that can be used as a powerful incentive for hospitals and politicians.