Reader comments · Comment: We have the power to halt the spread of HIV within a generation · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Comment: We have the power to halt the spread of HIV within a generation

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “It is also me, and my friend Michael, and your ex-boyfriend, and his new boyfriend, and the barman you had a bit of banter with last Friday night, and the bears at Tonker, and the boys at G-A-Y, and the poor sod who flashes up on Grindr when you’re on a train speeding through the wilds of Northumberland”

    WOW, talk about a London-centric approach Will! The likelihood is that some of those 8000 people will be those “poor sods” who don’t live in Zone 1 and drink their lattes on the way to their snazzy offices inventing campaigns which probably won’t even be seen by them, as they don’t visit the Soho gay bar where this poster will be displayed, nor pick up the London gay mag where it will be printed (at exorbitant cost to the taxpayer).

    1. Northern Gayer 25 Apr 2013, 12:10pm

      Just got of the phone to Tom Doyle at Yorkshire MESMAC, They are looking after the North for HIV Prevention England. He was not pleased at all with this article. I suggest you call him to register your views 0113 2444209

      1. Agreed.

        This article just shows how hopelessly out of touch and out of time the trendy London-based HIV sector luvvies are.

        They think all gay life in the UK resides twixt Grays Inn Road to the north of London to Effra Road in the south, and no doubt think all gay men have lifetime memberships to Hard On and are surgically attached to their iPhones rotating on a continuous loop between Grindr, Scruff and Manhunt apps.

        That may be how they live their lives, but they damn the rest of us with their narrow perspective and inability to grasp the needs of those who live in the real world.

      2. A very sensible thing to do Northern, encourage the worried well of PN (who make up the majority of the commentators here) to call a service & take up valuable time & resources complaining about this article – very helpful NOT!

        1. Don’t feed the troll.

        2. I think many here were prepared to give you another chance to see if you could be trusted to properly and intelligently debate without resort to your default mode:- namely to bait, agitate and antagonise.

          You do yourself absolutely no favours, W6.

          Now for the last time, kindly cease hijacking these boards for your own ends and kindly go off and exchange platitudes and felicitations with Lisa Power on your Twitter feed instead…

  2. Gosh. I was about to post in precisely the terms that RJ has.

    An otherwise excellent article is very badly damaged by the revelation of the author’s prejudices and, I hate to say it, arrogance. You risk missing your target if your message is aimed like this. THT does a great job. Handle With Care.

  3. The only good thing in this article is the invitation to get an HIV test-kit in the post, as that may get more HIV+ people onto meds and stop them spreading HIV.

    Otherwise, as I’ve said elsewhere, this “campaign” is so depressing! When I saw the headlines, I thought “Great! They’ve devised some new and really effective strategy!”

    But, no! We are simply informed of a simple truth that has always been the case, that “Gay and bisexual men in England have the power to halt the spread of HIV in their community within a generation”!

    Bloody hell! Is the Dept of Health staffed by morons? We KNOW that gay and bisexual HAVE THE POWER to halt the spread of HIV!

    The problem is: how can we get gay and bisexual men to ALWAYS EXERCISE THAT POWER, and that means acknowledging the role that drink and drugs play in robbing gay and bisexual men of their best intentions!!!!!!!!

    How depressing! “A major new campaign!” Apart from test-kit plan, it’s amounts to nothing new!

  4. Nick Weeks 24 Apr 2013, 1:40pm

    The piece seemed exclusively concerned with urban gays living a scene gay lifestyle, which is rather off-putting. The website it links to is – not to put to fine a point on it – dreadful, and almost unusable on a netbook. And, worst of all, the “quiz” seems to have been knocked up in half an hour, and not to take account of answers to previous questions in its recommendations, which seriously undermines its credibility, as does the lack of any attempt to deal with the (large and growing) number of us who are the neg partners in sero-discordant LTR’s.

    Was reactions sought from any kind of sample of representative gay men (ie not just in a bar in London or Manchester) before release? It doesn’t seem that way. A pity – in my view, a wasted opportunity.

  5. It’s important to note, Eddy, that this wasn’t “produced” by the Department of Health. They gave THT £8m for 3 years to produce this campaign and other work. What you see here is the work of THT, not civil servants. For some reason – perhaps to deflect criticism? – they’ve not chosen to reflect that fact accurately.

    1. Exactly, so now we know that Sir Nick’s weasel words when winning the contract – that HIV must be tackled head-on this timr and that there was no time to lose – was not worth the breath it was uttered on.

      This fetid, half-baked, London-centric campaign is yet more funds squandered and more lives disregarded because it will not be noticed in the obvious places it will be posted and its message so lacking in impact and devoid of a deterrent to unsafe sex that it wont even make a dent on the upward trajectory of infections.

      So THT has proven right those who heaved a collective sigh that ts securing of millions more pounds of HIV prevention funding over the next 3 years would signal business as usual, and boy how right they were.

      Who will now hold THT and the DoH to account for this blatant continued squandering of taxpayer funds at a time when austerity – and the ever ongoing sleazification of gay culture – demanded an impactful, non-negotiable approach?

    2. I think it is quite right that the DoH should be mentioned as they have commissioned this work & they should monitor & evaluate the contract & make future decisions based on outcomes. Ultimately the DoH is responsible for this initiative & must hold HIV Prevention England to account it the contract does not meet the final outcomes specified.

      The lack of investment clearly shows in the scale & remit of this particular campaign; it is all too easy to lay the blame at the consortium of service providers (of which, THT is the main contract holder) but what many fail to realise is that THT as a service provider that has to work within the remit / constraints set by the client, who in this case is the DoH.

      THT might be better to remove itself from the clutches with the DoH & focus on prevention where it matters; which is working at local level, with other agencies (mental health, drug & alcohol) to tackle the wider issues within the Gay Community where HIV is a symptom of deeper problems.

      1. Spanner1960 24 Apr 2013, 4:22pm

        It’s a symptom of men being unable to keep their dicks in their pants.
        I’m afraid the only cure for that is the one that has been decimating gay men for years.

      2. Not in a ChrisW state of mind today, W6?

    3. factsandfigures 24 Apr 2013, 5:57pm

      The figure awarded to THT was £6.7m over 3 years, £1.13m was contracted to the FPA, I refer

      I should also include with the restructure and redundies at THT, did this happen, THT was still able to receive and spent the same as the previous trading year (+/1 £1m), I refer

  6. “England” – I know it was a government decision, but THT fell for it: proof that Hadrian’s Wall and Offa’s Dyke worked.

    1. Spanner1960 24 Apr 2013, 4:20pm

      THT has nothing to do with dykes.

      1. In that case why is its policy around gay men’s sexual health needs being driven by one?!

  7. When the DoH commissioned this work last year it has not taken into account the setting up of Public Health England, whereby Local Councils are now responsible for the prevention of HIV / STI’s & Sexual Health.

    If the DoH is really serious about tackling HIV / STI’s then it needs to focus on a properly funded, over arching National campaign that targets the whole population, which is backed up with TV / Radio / large media advertising.

    This current campaign makes a decent regional campaign in high HIV prevalence areas, but is not executed on a large enough scale to be effective.

    The third sector HIV service providers would be much better working with local Councils to really target those most at risk – the current campaign is only likely to target the “worried well” & does not focus on the 20% of individuals that are most at risk of contracting HIV & passing it on.

    The DoH should review this contract either beef it up or pull the plug & make the £ avail to local Authorities.

    1. Anyone infected with HIV irreparably damages their DNA. The virus permanently inserts DNA it crates from its RNA into its hosts genetic code, which can never be removed. Get over yourself. HIV is terrible and it’s us, a Gay men, that keep passing it around because of our lack of self control.

      1. The Human genome is predominantly made up of “junk DNA” much of which is not understood -as you say Sean, HIV infection results in a “foreign” genetic sequence that gets embedded in the DNA of the CD4 cells – there are many debilitating genetic disorders that are far worst than HIV – what is “terrible” is the way stigma & fear are perpetuated about HIV – it is a simple virus, a sequence of genetic code, no more no less.

        Muscular dystrophy, some cancers, Downs Syndrome, Cystic Fibrosis, Type 1 Diabetes, early onset of Altziemers are all examples of conditions that are caused by faulty DNA sequences – these conditions are far more debilitating & life threatening than HIV in the modern era of treatment. We do not see the same level of stigma attached to such conditions, quite the opposite, plenty of support & understanding towards those who are unfortunate to have such conditions.

        Gay men can be the most discriminatory & judgmental in their views towards HIV…….very sad!

  8. What right have you to lecture us on how to halt HIV’s spread, Will?

    What track record or qualification does the THT have in telling us what we should do?

    It’s had 30 years to get its act together:- do you think anyone’s still listening to its processed media spin?

    “Today in the UK, a gay man is diagnosed every three hours, often when the virus has already damaged his body beyond repair. Last year saw the highest number of HIV diagnoses among gay and bi men since the epidemic began.”

    None of what you say can be denied:- yet this grim picture is a direct consequence of the wilful failures of the THT to use the untold millions of taxpayers’ pounds it’s received on effective HIV prevention strategies:- ie. those that succeed in deterring the target audience away from HIV-facilitating behaviours.

    THT’s PC aggrandising has only influenced and incentivised gay men into the very behaviours it was funded to prevent.

    Enough with the insincere sermonising!

  9. ChrisMorley 24 Apr 2013, 3:47pm

    Not just London-centric but patronising as hell to everyone who isn’t a London resident:
    we are all dismissed as “poor sods on Grindr” … living in the “wilds of Northumberland”,
    fit only to be sneered at by gay Londoners on the train to Edinburgh.

    Thanks a bunch Will.

    1. Michael 2912 (formerly Michael) 24 Apr 2013, 7:40pm

      My sentiments exactly – as I expressed above. I hope news of this reaction reaches the guy and that he learns from it.

    2. I missed this in my first reading and I find that comment devastating…

  10. Does the THT have a practical strategy for reducing the HIV rates.

    I mean a proper structured strategy along the lines of :

    “We receive X amount of money from the government each year, and if action points a, b and c are accomplished then we will see a 30% reduction in transmission rates by 2016.”

    If not then I don’t want to be lectured by THT.

    As an organisation it has failed in its aim to reduce HIV infection rates, therefore it lacks credibility in this field.

    As for this statement:

    “Today in the UK, a gay man is diagnosed every three hours, often when the virus has already damaged his body beyond repair.”

    What exact percentage of infected people have damage beyond repair because of the virus?

    That’s a perfectly reasonable question to such a statement.

    Does the THT acknowledge that caught early a HIV diagnosis in 2013 is no more serious than a type 1 diabetes diagnosis?

    1. Type 1 diabetes diagnosis very serious. if not managed correctly can fall into coma and die. managing insulin like managing hiv meds is difficult and risky in long term, damages liver etc

      1. Spanner1960 25 Apr 2013, 9:29am

        Actually, it is a damn sight worse. HIV people only have to drop a tablet every day and have a checkup every 6 months. Type I diabetics do bloods and injections three times a day, and if you get it wrong you feel like crap – and if you get it very wrong you can wind up dead.

        1. HIV people only have to drop a tablet every day and have a checkup every 6 months?????

          sounds like you’re lucky, sounds like you may not have HIV

          “only” have to “drop a tablet”!!!!!

          WRONG! you have to take 3, or sometimes 4, tablets and at exactly the same time every day and WITHOUT FAIL for the rest of your life!!!!!!

          “and have a checkup every 6 months” WRONG!!!! most have to negotiate the getting/receiving of more meds every 3 months & every 6 months you have to undergo the needle, occasional vaccinations, urine & stool samples sometimes, discussions with doctors . . .

          and inbetween many people on the meds have to deal with side-effects of the meds or of the HIV!!!!!

          don’t be so cold and heartless!

          1. Sorry Chas I can put forward an alternative to some of the points you make (I make my comment as a +ve individual)

            1. For those of us who are stable (undetectable VL) on treatment, most clinics will be moving to 6 monthly appointments. (80% of +ve individuals fall into this “stable” category);
            2. Treatment does not have to be taken at the same time every day without fail – all modern drugs have a tolerance window of at least 2 to 3 hrs either way of the planned / ideal time of taking them;
            3. Side effects should be dealt with by the clinician & alternative meds provided to limit the problematic side effects

            As with any long term condition it is important that individuals work with their clinicians to receive the care they want. I have bloods taken twice a year, see my Doc once a year & a nurse at the 6 month point. I have my meds delivered to my home & I refuse to let HIV have a big influence on my day to day life. Some will say I am lucky, I say it is about mind set……….

          2. factsandfigures 25 Apr 2013, 12:31pm

            On point 1 “1. For those of us who are stable (undetectable VL) on treatment, most clinics will be moving to 6 monthly appointments. (80% of +ve individuals fall into this “stable” category);”

            Could you then explain why then the LSCG spent around £7m on HIV inpatant care last year, does that sound like 80% are stable to you, How did you get the figure of 80%?

          3. factsandfgiure 25 Apr 2013, 12:40pm

            Point 2 – With adherence issue already established W6, your comments do very little in support of addressing this issue?

            and on Point 3, GP, Consultants, Clinicans are never around when you need then when dealing with side effects at home or in public, it is only when you have got an appointment and seen the respected person can other treatment be issue to help relive the symptons of the side effects, I would suggest that dealing with NHS/GP…. response times would be again a better approach.

            Someone also +ve, your perspective is just one of the 31,000 accessing care in London, some care and attention to others, would be nice, that said also to Will Harris!

          4. As you will know, inpatient care is hugely expensive so it is quite possible that £7million could represent a high cost for relatively few patient numbers. The number of individuals admitted for inpatient care would represent a better measure in determining the level of complex HIV, rather than cost alone.

            I suspect a large part of inpatient care costs are as a result of late diagnosis & the many complications involved / poorer outcomes with late presentation.

            I use the Pbr model when I mention 80% are expected to be considered stable, perhaps I should have made that clear in my comment.

          5. I agree my perspective is just one of many, which I think I clearly suggested in my comment.

            Time adherence, if we are going to be critical, is far less important with modern drugs; it is the start stop approach to adherence that runs the risk of treatment failure. Daily adherence is essential, but time adherence much less so, in my view & that of my consultant & many others.

          6. Sadly many many individuals put up with side effects & get fobbed off by overbearing clinicians in my experience. How many times have individuals put up with the side effects of Efavirenz which can be extremely debilitating.

            I have put forward an alternative to the comments made by Chas, which are from both a personal perspective & one of experience of many others up & down the country.

            I make no apology for presenting an alternative point of view which I am perfectly entitled to do. The majority of people living with HIV today, who have been diagnosed in the last 15 years or so, can expect to feel well & live to a ripe old age, in my view!

          7. factsandfigures 25 Apr 2013, 1:42pm

            I can quote from the LSCG FOI request (11/12) that in 2011/12, thier was 3,660 HIV spells at a cost of £7,262,000.

            The average lenght of stay was 2 days and an average cost of £1,984.18

            The ratio is 11.81% (based upon 31,000) people

          8. W6bloke, you’re entitled to put your point of view but how incredibly arrogant and stupid of you to think that your situation is everybody else’s situation!!!!!!!! i’m glad that HIV and meds don’t hurt you. stop thinking that everyone else is so lucky!!!!!

          9. As you say Chas I am entitled to my view, but I think you are being entirely unreasonable to suggest that your experience is typical of everyone & in so berating me fir putting forward an alternative point of view. So I guess it is up to the other readers to decide where the balance of argument lies.

          10. “I make no apology for presenting an alternative point of view which I am perfectly entitled to do…”

            Yes, you are perfectly entitled to push forward your agenda on your Twitter feed and the HIV forum you run, W6, because people voluntarily visit those resources to be subjected to your views.

            You refuse to grasp that such an approach conflicts on a free and open general discussion board such as PN, wherein your unflinchingly sanctimonious, mind-made-up, PC-processed eulogising of modern day drug regimens which can do no wrong is a gross invasion of our space.

            No, W6, you never make any kind of an apology whatsoever because you are always right and the rest of us morons are eternally wrong, period.

            It is normally at this point I would chirrup in to take you on single-handedly in a slanging match to the bitter end, but seems there is no longer any shortage of other commentators who have had enough of your righteous bunkum and are coming forward to put you in your place.

          11. I wondered how long it would take you to start your usual tirade but I will not be drawn by your jibes & attempts to engage me in your usual personal onslaughts.

            I would encourage you to challenge the point being debated here rather than the individual making the point.

            Also to be very clear I do not run a forum as you suggest, I never have – I was contributing as a volunteer moderator. Many people use Twitter which I find very useful in many different ways, give it a go sometime :-)

          12. W6, did you or did you not, on a related board (well, considering you are only ever here to shill for the HIV sector and Big Pharma you would hardly be here to discuss any other topic now, would you?), declare that you would cease ambushing PN discussion threads for your own ends?

            Yes or no?

            A one word answer will suffice.

          13. Thanks for the information relating to HIV inpatient stays @ factsandfigures, it is in line with what I would expect, based on the Outpatient model of Pbr. I think you can agree that apart from my comments regarding side effects (which are very individual) 6 monthly clinic visits, nurse led consultations, home delivery, are very much standard practice in many of the HIV outpatient clinics, which are guided by the BHIVA guidelines for Adult Care in the UK.

            There are far too many myths about care & treatment of HIV, & whilst I acknowledge that not everyone remains in good health when living with HIV, the majority of uncomplicated HIV infection is well managed & with the second generation ARV’s many of the dreadful side effects have been eliminated. I am an optimist & believe the UK has the best standards of HIV care in the World.

            I present factual information; if that makes some individuals believe I am arrogant or uncaring then so be it, not much I can do about that me thinks.

          14. You are not here to comment on the veritable cornucopia of discussion points that PN serves up daily, W6

            You are only here to plug the latest HIV drugs which some could be forgiven you receive a backhander for.

            If I may respectfully suggest, yes, feel free to extol the virtues of modern day HIV meds as a get-out clause for reckless sex, but do what everyone else who has something to plug here does, and darned well ask PN editorial for their ad rate card.


          15. factsandfigures 25 Apr 2013, 6:27pm

            @W6 in your previous comment you state “represent a high cost for relatively few patient numbers” Would you say 1 in 10 is high or low? I try to dispeal facts not assumtions, one reason why I post the factsandfigures, we have to long liked in the fate of myths, time for a change and truth’s, Would you agree? At least I woulh hope or expect that this information from a long term person living with HIV?

            I should have included just 8 hospitals in London provide inaptient care, given 23 or 28 provide HIV services, just for your costings.

          16. As I say 10% is line line with expectations – it is what it is, what is the comparison? We do not know how many of those inpatient stays were as a result of late diagnosis, co-infection / co-morbidity etc. To be clear my remarks are based on uncomplicated HIV like my own. That said out of a group of 8 close friends that have HIV I would say that possibly 1 individual could be described as having HIV related complications (severe lipoatrophy) which equates to 12.5% in my sample (obviously not scientific).

            I would add that those of us who were not subjected to the early HAART regimens have much better outcomes than those who were exposed to the early NRTI’s / PI’s. Treatment, monitoring & care has improved tremendously in the last decade. Whilst I agree that is is always good to present the raw facts, we should also take a broad approach in interpreting those facts – maybe my interpretation is optimistic, I like to think people can to do well & get on with life, is that such a crime?

          17. factsandfigures 25 Apr 2013, 7:00pm

            In fact we do know “Death data has been sought from the Health Protection Agency (HPA), this is available on both a UK and regional basis. The total HIV deaths in the UK was 504 in 2011 of which 30% (169 deaths) were
            London residents. This data however cannot be attributed to sites and there is no data available that
            indicates in what setting the deaths occurred i.e. in hospital / at home” LSCG FOI response

          18. Thank god for factsandfigures to dispel the myths and outright lies W6 perpetuates and peddles on several web sites, which clearly are giving those who read them – neg and pos men alike – an misguided sense of security.

            Because W6 is so wrapped up in his own personal bubble and life experience, he fantasises that everyone has access to the same treatments and level of practitioner care and is equipped with the same encyclopeidic knowledge he has acquired about how to navigate oneself around the minefield of antivirals that he has!

            He’s either living in cloud cuckoo land or is deliberately downplaying the potentially serious consequences of ingesting toxic substances on a daily basis for ever more so that more of us will think “what the hell” and add their own burden to the taxpayer funded NHS drugs bill.

            Will W6 be accountable when the Torys announce more swinging cuts:- when top line drugs the likes W6 assume an entitlement to are suddenly placed out of reach?

            Like hell!

      2. I have a mate who is type 1 diabetic and at 40 yrs of age is far more debilitated by this than HIV. Admittedly he does not manage his condition well; he has severe peripheral neuropathy below the knee, he has some kidney failure, raised cholesterol, diabetic induced retinopathy & has in the past suffered with severe foot infections, where he has been faced with the prospect of amputation of his toes.

        As with all long term conditions they have to be well managed by both the patient & the clinicians alike – HIV is for the majority of us who have been promptly diagnosed in the past 15 years a manageable condition, but we have to be pro-active in our care to get the very outcomes.

        1. And I have a cocker spaniel with kidney stones and at 17 years of age is far more debilitated… yadda yadda… apples and oranges… tra la la dee dah…

        2. Spanner1960 26 Apr 2013, 1:44pm

          And I have a 50yo friend who is Type I diabetic and HIV+ and lives a relatively normal life, taking one tablet a day and checkups every 6 months.
          I also know he has a far bigger problem with the diabetes than he does with the HIV.
          I based my earlier comment on that experience. I am sure others have better or worse scenarios to tell, but I can only base it on the people I personally know.

    2. factsandfigures 24 Apr 2013, 6:29pm

      With the introduction by PbR, the balance sheets over the next coming years might just show a different perspective,

    3. The DoH that should have the “practical strategy for reducing HIV rates”. Organisations such as THT are no more than service providers in the new modern world of health commissioning. It is up to the DoH to set the parameters of a contract, set how the contract is to be monitored & then be able to identify if the contract has delivered. Service providers work to the contract as commissioned & get paid accordingly

      Clearly the DoH is failing, as it has either failed to get tough with the service providers when they have not delivered the desired outcomes, they have commissioned the incorrect intervention to produce the result required, or they are not monitoring said contracts at all

      Either way it is the responsibility of the Government to ensure money allocated & spent produces the desired outcomes. We should be first holding Politicians to account, rather than blame the service providers. THT et al have always been easy targets for some – we should look further up the food chain.

      1. that was a reply to the point made by SteveC, my reply somehow ended up in the wrong place

  11. Hi – I was diagnosed +ve 6yrs ago and produced medical journal evidence to start meds earlier than norm due to also being Diabetic 2 two yrs later. Im lucky in that I’ve had no side effects from meds [to date] but insist on 3 month full check ups. Undetectable viral load and now nearly 1000 CD4 due to meds, diet and exercise despite being 63. Very active sex life with many different guys despite unfounded fears of possibly infecting others.
    My worry is for younger guys – say 18-25 – most of whom Im lucky enough to have encounters with seem ignorant of the ‘safe sex’ message and the dangers of HIV [and other STI]. Sure, the sex is great for both of us but few I have encountered seem to even think about condoms or if they do, state their preference to not use them.
    A second point is there is little acknowledgement of the difficulty/fear in raising the issue of one’s status with a potential partner – rejection is the least of my many fears. Addressing that may have a greater impact.

    1. Spanner1960 26 Apr 2013, 1:48pm

      That is a very scary news. If people are that ignorant of the risks, something must be very wrong somewhere.
      I wonder if part of it is that the gay scene has rather disappeared, along with the associated free papers, literature and marketing that one was constantly exposed to?
      As people tend to pick up more now online, maybe it is the Gaydars and Grindrs of this world that need to pick up the baton and start pushing the safer sex message.

    2. Sorry to say, Clive, but it would appear to be that safer sex campaigns are no longer on the agenda for any age group, let alone the 18-25 years olds you correctly identity as being blind men stumbling around in the dark where awareness and knowledge about the potentially dire consequences of HIV infection concerned.

      No, clearly THT has jumped aboard the insane bandwagon that declares that so long as such men once infected with HIV are immediately placed on medications then their viral loads will be undetectable thereby safeguarding the health of those they wilfully and ignorantly participate in unsafe sex with.

      This is the new methodology for reducing HIV rates:- it is flawed from the outset, is doomed to failure BUT will enrich the coffers of the pharmas who no doubt influenced and bribed those with the power to dictate sexual health policy.

      A scandal and damned disgrace:- and as your post testifies dooms a whole new generation to a preventable potentially chronic disease.

    3. As has been demonstrated by this anecdotal evidence, modern ARV’s are very tolerable, with fixed dose one pill a day regimens providing a very convenient aid to good adherence. Clive, like myself has obviously taken a keen interest in his treatment & it is refreshing to hear that he was able to start treatment earlier than when the guidelines indicate & also determine the level of monitoring he requires, this is what good HIV care looks like. More individuals should feel empowered to ensure they get the level of care & monitoring that is personalised to their individual needs -this is vital with long term conditions.

      I have always acknowledged that there are always individuals whop for various reasons do not do so well on HIV treatment the vast majority do, out of 4 anecdotal accounts here on this page 3/4 suggest that treamtn works, is tolerable & allows people to get on with life – at a 75% strike rate this is more or less in line with the 80% of stable patients I refer to earlier

      1. I should add that this is in response to Clive & Spanner1960 (who it has to be said I very rarely agree with) but on this occasion both he & Clive are able to independently corroborate my personal experience & that of the many other individuals who willingly share their own experiences of treatment on the THT MyHIV forum.

  12. Surely a more appropriate header for this article would have been thus:-

    “We at THT have the power, funding and means to halt the spread of HIV, but bugger you if you think we’re gonna find the will or motivation to do just that when there is no financial incentive to do so. We do have service user targets to hit each year after all, don’tcha know…”

  13. Spanner1960 30 Apr 2013, 12:14am

    Well, who knows, this whole subject might be academic in a few years. I am surprised nobody has seen the article yet:

  14. How long is a generation? I used to think itw as about 30nyears but it seems there is no agreed definition of how long it is. Cancer has been around for nearly 4 centuries and we’re nowhere near ending ithat

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.