www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
Highlights from OFA's National Health Care Forum
President Obama Speaks at Organizing For American on HealthCare Reform.
AUGUST 20, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Tenofovir Not Necessarily Hard on the Kidneys
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
Tenofovir Not Necessarily Hard on the Kidneys
Tenofovir (found in Viread, Truvada and Atripla) as part of a first HIV regimen isn’t necessarily harder on the kidneys than drugs such as Ziagen (abacavir), according to a study published online August 25 in AIDS. The combination of tenofovir with a Norvir (ritonavir)–boosted protease inhibitor (PI), however, did demonstrate reductions in kidney function.
Though most large clinical trials of tenofovir have not found signs of kidney dysfunction, there have been case reports of harmful effects on the kidneys, predominantly by causing dysfunction in the tube that filters out proteins in urine and the development of Fanconi syndrome, which affects the kidney’s reabsorption function.
To determine whether tenofovir could decrease kidney function, Joel Gallant, MD, MPH, and Richard Moore, MD, from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, examined the medical records of 432 HIV-positive patients from their HIV clinic who started antiretroviral therapy for the first time. Just under half started a regimen containing tenofovir, and the rest started a regimen containing a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI).
The most common NRTIs used were Retrovir (zidovudine), followed by Ziagen (abacavir) and Zerit (stavudine). Kidney function was assessed by measuring the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of the kidneys. The two study endpoints were a 25 percent or a 50 percent reduction in GFR after two years of follow-up.In all, there was no difference between tenofovir and NRTIs in the proportion reaching a 25 or 50 percent reduction in GFR.
The only factors associated with a greater likelihood of having a 25 percent reduction in GFR were older age, a CD4 count less than 200, hypertension and the combination of tenofovir with a Norvir-boosted PI. Race and diabetes were not associated with a decreased GFR.
The authors conclude that tenofovir is a safe drug used as part of an initial treatment regimen, but they recommended that older patients, those with low CD4s or hypertension and those combining tenofovir with a Norvir-boosted PI should be monitored more closely.
Search: tenofovir, Viread, Truvada, Atripla, Ziagen, abacavir, Joel Gallant, Richard Moore, kidney, GFR
Original Post~ http://www.poz.com/rssredir/articles/hiv_tenofovir_kidney_761_17163.shtml
Tenofovir Not Necessarily Hard on the Kidneys
Tenofovir (found in Viread, Truvada and Atripla) as part of a first HIV regimen isn’t necessarily harder on the kidneys than drugs such as Ziagen (abacavir), according to a study published online August 25 in AIDS. The combination of tenofovir with a Norvir (ritonavir)–boosted protease inhibitor (PI), however, did demonstrate reductions in kidney function.
Though most large clinical trials of tenofovir have not found signs of kidney dysfunction, there have been case reports of harmful effects on the kidneys, predominantly by causing dysfunction in the tube that filters out proteins in urine and the development of Fanconi syndrome, which affects the kidney’s reabsorption function.
To determine whether tenofovir could decrease kidney function, Joel Gallant, MD, MPH, and Richard Moore, MD, from Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, examined the medical records of 432 HIV-positive patients from their HIV clinic who started antiretroviral therapy for the first time. Just under half started a regimen containing tenofovir, and the rest started a regimen containing a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI).
The most common NRTIs used were Retrovir (zidovudine), followed by Ziagen (abacavir) and Zerit (stavudine). Kidney function was assessed by measuring the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of the kidneys. The two study endpoints were a 25 percent or a 50 percent reduction in GFR after two years of follow-up.In all, there was no difference between tenofovir and NRTIs in the proportion reaching a 25 or 50 percent reduction in GFR.
The only factors associated with a greater likelihood of having a 25 percent reduction in GFR were older age, a CD4 count less than 200, hypertension and the combination of tenofovir with a Norvir-boosted PI. Race and diabetes were not associated with a decreased GFR.
The authors conclude that tenofovir is a safe drug used as part of an initial treatment regimen, but they recommended that older patients, those with low CD4s or hypertension and those combining tenofovir with a Norvir-boosted PI should be monitored more closely.
Search: tenofovir, Viread, Truvada, Atripla, Ziagen, abacavir, Joel Gallant, Richard Moore, kidney, GFR
Original Post~ http://www.poz.com/rssredir/articles/hiv_tenofovir_kidney_761_17163.shtml
Stopping Swine Flu Up to You
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
Stopping Swine Flu Up to You
Before the Vaccine Arrives, It's Up to Citizens to Slow Swine Flu
By Daniel J. DeNoonWebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Aug. 26, 2009 -- Who's on the front line of this fall's flu fight? You are, say HHS and CDC officials.
Until Thanksgiving, at the earliest, it's going to be up to you to try not to catch the flu. And if you do catch the flu, it's going to be up to you to try not to infect anyone else.
Swine Flu Outbreak: Get the Facts
Get the latest swine flu facts and information from WebMD, the CDC and other public health agencies.
Swine Flu Center
Video: Swine Flu Precautions
Swine Flu Symptoms
Can a Mask Prevent Swine Flu?
Swine Flu: 10 Things Not To Do
Like people, pigs can get influenza (flu), but swine flu viruses aren't the same as human flu viruses.
Why? The government is rushing to deliver H1N1 swine flu vaccine to states on or around Oct. 15. Vaccination likely will take two shots given three weeks apart.
No protection is expected until two to four weeks after the second shot -- around Thanksgiving for those who start vaccination in mid-October.
"We are not going to have vaccine before H1N1 disease gets here because the disease never went away this summer," Anne Schuchat, MD, director of the CDC's Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said this week at a pandemic flu symposium.
"Schools are now opening and cases are appearing. I would expect to see clusters popping up soon."
"I think we're going to have an interesting fall," Steven C. Redd, MD, director of the CDC's Influenza Coordination Unit, said at the symposium.
All relevant branches of the U.S. government are making full-speed-ahead efforts to prepare for a bad flu season, as the new H1N1 swine flu collides with the seasonal flu. But in the end, the government can do only so much.
The rest is up to citizens, says Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
"It is essential people make plans, because we will not have a vaccine available for a few months," Sebelius said at the CDC symposium.
What plans?
The first part of the plan is to avoid infection:
Wash your hands frequently and thoroughly. Use soap and warm water when available; use hand sanitizer between hand washings.
Avoid close contact with sick people. Close contact means getting within 6 feet of a sick person. If you must care for someone who is ill, minimize close contact.
It's not known whether face masks protect against infection. If you use one, don't slack off on hand washing or avoiding close contact with sick people. Use the face mask properly and throw it away after use.
Get your seasonal flu vaccine as soon as possible. It's safe, and it protects against the three seasonal flu bugs expected to circulate this fall and winter -- even though it won't protect against H1N1 swine flu.
The second part of the plan is to keep from spreading the swine flu virus:
Stay home if you are sick.
Observe flu etiquette. Don't cough or sneeze into your hands. Cough/sneeze into a tissue -- or, failing that, your elbow.
If you can do so comfortably, wear a face mask if you come into contact with others.
If you are an employer, do not penalize workers for staying home if sick or for caring for sick children.
© 2009 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
Make plans -- now -- for what you'd do if you or your children get sick this fall.
4 Must-See Articles
Sinus Trouble? Take the Health Check
Photos: Anatomy of a Sore Throat
Photos: Natural Cold & Flu Remedies
Photos: See What Sinus Pain Looks Like
1 2
Next Page >
Stopping Swine Flu Up to You
Before the Vaccine Arrives, It's Up to Citizens to Slow Swine Flu
By Daniel J. DeNoonWebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Aug. 26, 2009 -- Who's on the front line of this fall's flu fight? You are, say HHS and CDC officials.
Until Thanksgiving, at the earliest, it's going to be up to you to try not to catch the flu. And if you do catch the flu, it's going to be up to you to try not to infect anyone else.
Swine Flu Outbreak: Get the Facts
Get the latest swine flu facts and information from WebMD, the CDC and other public health agencies.
Swine Flu Center
Video: Swine Flu Precautions
Swine Flu Symptoms
Can a Mask Prevent Swine Flu?
Swine Flu: 10 Things Not To Do
Like people, pigs can get influenza (flu), but swine flu viruses aren't the same as human flu viruses.
Why? The government is rushing to deliver H1N1 swine flu vaccine to states on or around Oct. 15. Vaccination likely will take two shots given three weeks apart.
No protection is expected until two to four weeks after the second shot -- around Thanksgiving for those who start vaccination in mid-October.
"We are not going to have vaccine before H1N1 disease gets here because the disease never went away this summer," Anne Schuchat, MD, director of the CDC's Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said this week at a pandemic flu symposium.
"Schools are now opening and cases are appearing. I would expect to see clusters popping up soon."
"I think we're going to have an interesting fall," Steven C. Redd, MD, director of the CDC's Influenza Coordination Unit, said at the symposium.
All relevant branches of the U.S. government are making full-speed-ahead efforts to prepare for a bad flu season, as the new H1N1 swine flu collides with the seasonal flu. But in the end, the government can do only so much.
The rest is up to citizens, says Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
"It is essential people make plans, because we will not have a vaccine available for a few months," Sebelius said at the CDC symposium.
What plans?
The first part of the plan is to avoid infection:
Wash your hands frequently and thoroughly. Use soap and warm water when available; use hand sanitizer between hand washings.
Avoid close contact with sick people. Close contact means getting within 6 feet of a sick person. If you must care for someone who is ill, minimize close contact.
It's not known whether face masks protect against infection. If you use one, don't slack off on hand washing or avoiding close contact with sick people. Use the face mask properly and throw it away after use.
Get your seasonal flu vaccine as soon as possible. It's safe, and it protects against the three seasonal flu bugs expected to circulate this fall and winter -- even though it won't protect against H1N1 swine flu.
The second part of the plan is to keep from spreading the swine flu virus:
Stay home if you are sick.
Observe flu etiquette. Don't cough or sneeze into your hands. Cough/sneeze into a tissue -- or, failing that, your elbow.
If you can do so comfortably, wear a face mask if you come into contact with others.
If you are an employer, do not penalize workers for staying home if sick or for caring for sick children.
© 2009 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.
Make plans -- now -- for what you'd do if you or your children get sick this fall.
4 Must-See Articles
Sinus Trouble? Take the Health Check
Photos: Anatomy of a Sore Throat
Photos: Natural Cold & Flu Remedies
Photos: See What Sinus Pain Looks Like
1 2
Next Page >
Thursday, August 27, 2009
HealthCare Reform EVENT (FREE) AUG 30th
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
HealthCare Reform EVENT (FREE) AUG 30th @ IBEW Union Hall
OFA's Let's Get It Done Health Insurance Event!
The time for health insurance reform is now!
Host:
St. Louis Activist Hub
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Time:
7:00pm - 10:00pm
Location:
IBEW Local 1 Union Hall
Street:
5850 Elizabeth (one block east of Hampton)
City/Town:
Saint Louis, MO 63109
Description ~
The small minority of Americans who oppose health care reform have certainly made their opinion known in the St. Louis region during the Congressional August recess. Now it's time for progressives and health care reform supporters to have our say! Organizing for America and Health Care for America Now are organizing a St. Louis stop for a national Health Insurance Reform Now Bus Tour. This is the best chance we have to end the August Recess with a powerful statement that we need to change the system that is destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands of people every year.
Please sign up for the OFA event here: http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbXkuYmFyYWNrb2JhbWEuY29tL3BhZ2UvZXZlbnQvZGV0YWlsL2xldHNnZXRpdGRvbmVoZWFsdGhpbnN1cmFuY2VyZWZvcm1ub3dwdWJsaWNldmVudHMvZ3BmazM1 And please come out and add your voice to the growing call for change.
We can win this!Here's a short video of Senator Ted Kennedy speaking about his life mission, healthcare reform: http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LnlvdXR1YmUuY29tL3dhdGNoP3Y9UHJKVmJDekpINmMmZmVhdHVyZT1wbGF5ZXJfZW1iZWRkZWQ=
FYI, there is a similar facebook event here: http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZhY2Vib29rLmNvbS9ldmVudC5waHA/ZWlkPTEyMDU1MjU3NjczMQ== .
I created this one to invite members of the Activist Hub to this extremely important event.
HealthCare Reform EVENT (FREE) AUG 30th @ IBEW Union Hall
OFA's Let's Get It Done Health Insurance Event!
The time for health insurance reform is now!
Host:
St. Louis Activist Hub
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Time:
7:00pm - 10:00pm
Location:
IBEW Local 1 Union Hall
Street:
5850 Elizabeth (one block east of Hampton)
City/Town:
Saint Louis, MO 63109
Description ~
The small minority of Americans who oppose health care reform have certainly made their opinion known in the St. Louis region during the Congressional August recess. Now it's time for progressives and health care reform supporters to have our say! Organizing for America and Health Care for America Now are organizing a St. Louis stop for a national Health Insurance Reform Now Bus Tour. This is the best chance we have to end the August Recess with a powerful statement that we need to change the system that is destroying the lives of hundreds of thousands of people every year.
Please sign up for the OFA event here: http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vbXkuYmFyYWNrb2JhbWEuY29tL3BhZ2UvZXZlbnQvZGV0YWlsL2xldHNnZXRpdGRvbmVoZWFsdGhpbnN1cmFuY2VyZWZvcm1ub3dwdWJsaWNldmVudHMvZ3BmazM1 And please come out and add your voice to the growing call for change.
We can win this!Here's a short video of Senator Ted Kennedy speaking about his life mission, healthcare reform: http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LnlvdXR1YmUuY29tL3dhdGNoP3Y9UHJKVmJDekpINmMmZmVhdHVyZT1wbGF5ZXJfZW1iZWRkZWQ=
FYI, there is a similar facebook event here: http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZhY2Vib29rLmNvbS9ldmVudC5waHA/ZWlkPTEyMDU1MjU3NjczMQ== .
I created this one to invite members of the Activist Hub to this extremely important event.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Are Antidepressants Safe During Pregnancy?
Are Antidepressants Safe During Pregnancy?
Report Offers Guidelines for Treating Depression in Pregnant WomenBy Salynn BoylesWebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Aug. 21, 2009 -- Women who take antidepressants face a difficult choice when they become pregnant, and for many the risks vs. benefits of continuing treatment are not clear, a joint report from the American Psychiatric Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists finds.
The report confirms that there are far more questions than answers about the dangers antidepressants pose to the babies born to women who take them.
It also presents guidelines to help doctors and patients identify who should and should not consider stopping drug treatment.
Pregnant women who experience psychotic episodes, have bipolar disorder, or who are suicidal or have a history of suicide attempts should not be taken off antidepressants, the report concludes.
"We know that untreated depression poses real risks to babies. That is not conjecture," Yale University School of Medicine ob-gyn Charles Lockwood, MD, tells WebMD. "We know much less about the risks associated with antidepressant use. It is clear that more study is needed."
According to one study, the rate of antidepressant use during pregnancy more than doubled between 1999 and 2003. The study found that in 2003, one in eight women took an antidepressant at some point during her pregnancy.
Greater use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants like Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft were largely responsible for the increase.
These drugs were generally considered safe for pregnant women at the time, but safety concerns soon emerged, especially regarding Paxil.
Separate studies from Sweden and the U.S. suggested an increased risk for congenital heart defects in babies born to women who took Paxil during pregnancy.
The reports led the FDA to issue an advisory in December 2005 warning about the potential risk based on early results of two studies.
But the joint panel found the evidence linking Paxil use during pregnancy to heart problems in newborns to be inconclusive.
Lockwood tells WebMD that if the risk is real, it is probably not limited to Paxil alone.
"It is very likely to be a class effect and not just this one drug," he says.
Miscarriage, Low Birth Weight, and Preterm Birth
SSRI use during pregnancy has also been linked in some studies to an increased risk for miscarriage, low birth weight, and preterm delivery.
But once again, the report found no definitive link between the use of the antidepressants and these pregnancy outcomes.
"Antidepressant use in pregnancy is well studied, but available research has not yet adequately controlled for other factors that may influence birth outcomes including maternal illness or behaviors that can adversely affect pregnancy," the joint panel writes.
The report was published in both the American Psychiatric Association journal General Hospital Psychiatry and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecology journal Obstetrics and Gynecology.
The joint panel concludes that a gradual reducing of antidepressant dosages and stopping antidepressants altogether may be appropriate for women who hope to become pregnant if they have had mild or no symptoms for six months or longer.
4 Must-See Articles
Photos: 10 Ways to Soothe Your Crying Baby
Green Poop Explained: Baby Bowel Movements
Baby's Skin: Tips to Prevent Rashes
Photos: Contagious Coughs--Know the Danger Signs
President Obama Announces New Discussions on HIV and AIDS
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
President Obama Announces New Discussions on HIV and AIDS
Saturday August 22, 2009
Beginning next week, the White House office of HIV/AIDS Policy will launch National HIV/AIDS Community Discussions, a series of public discussions on HIV and AIDS.
The discussions will provide a public venue to explore what's needed and what can be done with regards to HIV and AIDS in the US. According to the White House Office of HIV/AIDS Policy the goal of the discussions is to ultimately reduce the incidence of HIV; increase access to HIV care; and to end the disparities that exist in HIV care.
The first event in the series of discussions will be held August 25 in Atlanta.
What Would You Tell the President About the Needs of the HIV Community?
So if you had the chance to speak in one of these events or to chat with President Obama, what would you tell him?
What do you think is the most important issue facing the HIV community right now?
ORIGINAL POST & COMMENTS
President Obama Announces New Discussions on HIV and AIDS
Saturday August 22, 2009
Beginning next week, the White House office of HIV/AIDS Policy will launch National HIV/AIDS Community Discussions, a series of public discussions on HIV and AIDS.
The discussions will provide a public venue to explore what's needed and what can be done with regards to HIV and AIDS in the US. According to the White House Office of HIV/AIDS Policy the goal of the discussions is to ultimately reduce the incidence of HIV; increase access to HIV care; and to end the disparities that exist in HIV care.
The first event in the series of discussions will be held August 25 in Atlanta.
What Would You Tell the President About the Needs of the HIV Community?
So if you had the chance to speak in one of these events or to chat with President Obama, what would you tell him?
What do you think is the most important issue facing the HIV community right now?
ORIGINAL POST & COMMENTS
CDC Hints at HIV Testing...Without Consent
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
CDC Hints at HIV Testing...Without Consent
Monday August 17, 2009
In an effort to slow the spread of HIV, the CDC is suggesting HIV testing of emergency room patients without their consent. You heard right...without their consent. Many believe that informed consent actually is a barrier to getting people tested.
In the US more that 150 people per day are still becoming newly infected. By normalizing testing, meaning treating HIV testing like any other blood test, many feel it will take the stigma of testing out of the process and people will get tested.
However, others feel testing without consent means people will get results without any education as to what to do after testing positive. Advocates of informed consent feel it helps people understand their treatment options and gets them into medical care they may not get into if tested without consent.
Supporters of mandatory testing say it will help identify those people unaware of their infection. Without knowledge of their infection, people continue to engage in at-risk behavior, placing others at risk for new HIV infections.
Many states now require informed consent for HIV testing, however, one of those states, New York, now has a bill in their legislature that would eliminate the informed consent requirement. In a related story, the Veterans Administration (VA) are now offering HIV testing as part of all routine medical care and have dropped the written consent requirement.
Is there a change in the wind?
What Do You Think?
So...what do you think? Should everyone who sets foot in their local ER be tested for HIV whether they want to be tested or not? Some would say it would be for the benefit of public health. Others may see it as a 1984 - like policy. What do you think?
COMMENTS AND ORIGINAL POST
CDC Hints at HIV Testing...Without Consent
Monday August 17, 2009
In an effort to slow the spread of HIV, the CDC is suggesting HIV testing of emergency room patients without their consent. You heard right...without their consent. Many believe that informed consent actually is a barrier to getting people tested.
In the US more that 150 people per day are still becoming newly infected. By normalizing testing, meaning treating HIV testing like any other blood test, many feel it will take the stigma of testing out of the process and people will get tested.
However, others feel testing without consent means people will get results without any education as to what to do after testing positive. Advocates of informed consent feel it helps people understand their treatment options and gets them into medical care they may not get into if tested without consent.
Supporters of mandatory testing say it will help identify those people unaware of their infection. Without knowledge of their infection, people continue to engage in at-risk behavior, placing others at risk for new HIV infections.
Many states now require informed consent for HIV testing, however, one of those states, New York, now has a bill in their legislature that would eliminate the informed consent requirement. In a related story, the Veterans Administration (VA) are now offering HIV testing as part of all routine medical care and have dropped the written consent requirement.
Is there a change in the wind?
What Do You Think?
So...what do you think? Should everyone who sets foot in their local ER be tested for HIV whether they want to be tested or not? Some would say it would be for the benefit of public health. Others may see it as a 1984 - like policy. What do you think?
COMMENTS AND ORIGINAL POST
Friday, August 21, 2009
HealthCare Rally tommorow - AUG 22nd
www.HopeandHelpCenter.com
HealthCare Rally tommorow - AUG 22nd
http://www.bellevillepride.com/
Dear BellevillePride.com Supporters,
Progressives need to stick together so I am helping promote this Health Care Rally tomorrow. Nothing is more critical for LGBTQ community than supporting Health Care Reform now! Lesbian women are often discriminated and dropped from their insurance because of their higher risk of cancers. Gay/Bi men are still discriminated by health insurance companies due to HIV/AIDS testing. The LGBTQ is directly effected by this issue so lets come out and show the public what this has become, "an argument about CLASS."
There will be a big group of Progressives meeting up at Senator McCaskill's office at 5850 Delmar at the same time the St. Louis teabaggers will be there. Since it would be extra fun to have some coordinated chants and maybe some love and friendship songs for the teabaggers, please try to get there a little early to practice, say around 11:15. There's a parking lot across from Senator McCaskill's office; let's meet in that parking lot near the street. Look for the Billionaires for Wealthcare signs.
A few other things to keep in mind for the rally:
1. Please DO NOT get into any arguments or yelling matches with teabaggers. Teabaggers are billionaires' best friends since they are fighting to protect a health care system that only serves our profit motives, and they will record anything they can to make other people look bad. Which brings me to my next suggestion...
2. Bring any video cameras you can! The more we capture on camera, the better! We have sent out press advisories and think this would be a fun event for the media to cover, but nothing is ever guaranteed. But if we record our own video, we'll be able to spread our pro-billionaire message around the globe.
3. Please go here to get some sign ideas: http://billionairesforweal..thcare.com/Signage.html . At the bottom of the page, there's a link where you can download signs to print out directly. Feel free to bring other props as well such as fake cash or cigars. And please share any fun ideas you have for how we can interact with the teabaggers.
4. It's better if you can dress up! This will be really fun if we all come in outlandish outfits. If you don't have anything you could try going to Vintage Haberdashery (Morganford and Connecticut) or Johnny Brock's (4320 Hampton), but even if you don't have a costume please don't let that discourage you from attending.
5. The teabaggers will also be in costume, oddly enough. They are supposed to dress like "patriots." Make of that what you will.
Let's all show up with the primary goal of having a good time and reminding people that "Wealthcare is for the rich!"
Check out http://www.facebook.com/ev..ent.php?eid=118663195813
For specific details.
See you there,
Ed Reggi
(http://Showmenohate.blogspot.com )
HealthCare Rally tommorow - AUG 22nd
http://www.bellevillepride.com/
Dear BellevillePride.com Supporters,
Progressives need to stick together so I am helping promote this Health Care Rally tomorrow. Nothing is more critical for LGBTQ community than supporting Health Care Reform now! Lesbian women are often discriminated and dropped from their insurance because of their higher risk of cancers. Gay/Bi men are still discriminated by health insurance companies due to HIV/AIDS testing. The LGBTQ is directly effected by this issue so lets come out and show the public what this has become, "an argument about CLASS."
There will be a big group of Progressives meeting up at Senator McCaskill's office at 5850 Delmar at the same time the St. Louis teabaggers will be there. Since it would be extra fun to have some coordinated chants and maybe some love and friendship songs for the teabaggers, please try to get there a little early to practice, say around 11:15. There's a parking lot across from Senator McCaskill's office; let's meet in that parking lot near the street. Look for the Billionaires for Wealthcare signs.
A few other things to keep in mind for the rally:
1. Please DO NOT get into any arguments or yelling matches with teabaggers. Teabaggers are billionaires' best friends since they are fighting to protect a health care system that only serves our profit motives, and they will record anything they can to make other people look bad. Which brings me to my next suggestion...
2. Bring any video cameras you can! The more we capture on camera, the better! We have sent out press advisories and think this would be a fun event for the media to cover, but nothing is ever guaranteed. But if we record our own video, we'll be able to spread our pro-billionaire message around the globe.
3. Please go here to get some sign ideas: http://billionairesforweal..thcare.com/Signage.html . At the bottom of the page, there's a link where you can download signs to print out directly. Feel free to bring other props as well such as fake cash or cigars. And please share any fun ideas you have for how we can interact with the teabaggers.
4. It's better if you can dress up! This will be really fun if we all come in outlandish outfits. If you don't have anything you could try going to Vintage Haberdashery (Morganford and Connecticut) or Johnny Brock's (4320 Hampton), but even if you don't have a costume please don't let that discourage you from attending.
5. The teabaggers will also be in costume, oddly enough. They are supposed to dress like "patriots." Make of that what you will.
Let's all show up with the primary goal of having a good time and reminding people that "Wealthcare is for the rich!"
Check out http://www.facebook.com/ev..ent.php?eid=118663195813
For specific details.
See you there,
Ed Reggi
(http://Showmenohate.blogspot.com )
Free Mammagraphy Screening - SEPT 16th
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
There is free mammagraphy screening for uninsured women on 3
Wed., Sept. 16th
between 9:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.
at Isaiah 58 Ministries at
2149 S. Grand Blvd.
Appointments are required.
Call June at 314.776.1410 M-F from 10-2.
There is free mammagraphy screening for uninsured women on 3
Wed., Sept. 16th
between 9:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.
at Isaiah 58 Ministries at
2149 S. Grand Blvd.
Appointments are required.
Call June at 314.776.1410 M-F from 10-2.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
New Evidence in Debate Over Treatment as Prevention
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
August 19, 2009
New Evidence in Debate Over Treatment as Prevention
People with viral loads less than 50 copies tend to keep their virus suppressed consistently, which lends weight to the argument that such folks are unlikely to pass their infection on to their HIV-negative sex partners, according to a study published in HIV Medicine and reported by aidsmap.
A declaration by Swiss researchers sent a shockwave through the HIV community in January 2008, when they claimed that certain heterosexual people with HIV simply couldn’t pass the virus on to their HIV-negative partners, even in the absence of condom use or other barrier methods. There were some qualifiers: Both partners needed to be sexually monogamous, and neither could have a sexually transmitted infection. Also, the HIV-positive partner needed to be adherent to his or her medication and have had an undetectable viral load for at least six months before engaging in unprotected sexual activity.
A number of studies have, in fact, demonstrated that people with HIV are far less likely to transmit the virus if they have an undetectable viral load, but the Swiss declaration was the first to claim that the risk is essentially nil. One counter-argument raised by critics: People with HIV adhering to antiretroviral (ARV) therapy may experience viral blips, where their virus goes up temporarily. This could, theoretically, increase the risk of transmission if condoms are not being used.
To examine the likelihood of blips, Christophe Combescure, PhD, from the University Hospital Geneva, in Switzerland, and his colleagues from the Swiss HIV Cohort examined data on 6,168 patients who were on ARV therapy and had successive viral load tests between 2003 and 2007. Though the frequency of visits varied, most people had viral load tested once every three months.
Combescure’s team found that when people claimed to have missed no doses of their ARVs in the previous four weeks, they had an 85 percent chance of having their HIV levels remain under 50 copies consistently. Most viral load blips were transient. In people whose virus jumped to between 200 and 1,000 copies—detectable but still associated with a very low risk of HIV transmission—66 percent went back to undetectable at the next test.
This was less true for people whose virus had jumped to more than 1,000 copies—when transmission may be more likely to occur, the authors explain. Just 30 percent of them went back to undetectable. This occurred rarely however. The overall chance that a person would go from undetectable to more than 1,000 copies was just 2 percent, and if a person was on a potent three-drug regimen this dropped to 1 percent.
In the final analysis, poor adherence or an inferior regimen explained most of the viral load increases to more than 1,000 copies. The authors concede, however, that the “data leave open the possibility that unexplained rises in viral load above 1,000 copies/ml, although rare, may occur.”
These data also do not explore the possibility that viral load in the genital compartment may be much higher than in blood, and the impact that may have on infectiousness.
Search: Swiss declaration, viral load, treatment as prevention, consistent viral load
http://www.poz.com/rssredir/articles/hiv_prevention_transmission_761_17126.shtml
August 19, 2009
New Evidence in Debate Over Treatment as Prevention
People with viral loads less than 50 copies tend to keep their virus suppressed consistently, which lends weight to the argument that such folks are unlikely to pass their infection on to their HIV-negative sex partners, according to a study published in HIV Medicine and reported by aidsmap.
A declaration by Swiss researchers sent a shockwave through the HIV community in January 2008, when they claimed that certain heterosexual people with HIV simply couldn’t pass the virus on to their HIV-negative partners, even in the absence of condom use or other barrier methods. There were some qualifiers: Both partners needed to be sexually monogamous, and neither could have a sexually transmitted infection. Also, the HIV-positive partner needed to be adherent to his or her medication and have had an undetectable viral load for at least six months before engaging in unprotected sexual activity.
A number of studies have, in fact, demonstrated that people with HIV are far less likely to transmit the virus if they have an undetectable viral load, but the Swiss declaration was the first to claim that the risk is essentially nil. One counter-argument raised by critics: People with HIV adhering to antiretroviral (ARV) therapy may experience viral blips, where their virus goes up temporarily. This could, theoretically, increase the risk of transmission if condoms are not being used.
To examine the likelihood of blips, Christophe Combescure, PhD, from the University Hospital Geneva, in Switzerland, and his colleagues from the Swiss HIV Cohort examined data on 6,168 patients who were on ARV therapy and had successive viral load tests between 2003 and 2007. Though the frequency of visits varied, most people had viral load tested once every three months.
Combescure’s team found that when people claimed to have missed no doses of their ARVs in the previous four weeks, they had an 85 percent chance of having their HIV levels remain under 50 copies consistently. Most viral load blips were transient. In people whose virus jumped to between 200 and 1,000 copies—detectable but still associated with a very low risk of HIV transmission—66 percent went back to undetectable at the next test.
This was less true for people whose virus had jumped to more than 1,000 copies—when transmission may be more likely to occur, the authors explain. Just 30 percent of them went back to undetectable. This occurred rarely however. The overall chance that a person would go from undetectable to more than 1,000 copies was just 2 percent, and if a person was on a potent three-drug regimen this dropped to 1 percent.
In the final analysis, poor adherence or an inferior regimen explained most of the viral load increases to more than 1,000 copies. The authors concede, however, that the “data leave open the possibility that unexplained rises in viral load above 1,000 copies/ml, although rare, may occur.”
These data also do not explore the possibility that viral load in the genital compartment may be much higher than in blood, and the impact that may have on infectiousness.
Search: Swiss declaration, viral load, treatment as prevention, consistent viral load
http://www.poz.com/rssredir/articles/hiv_prevention_transmission_761_17126.shtml
What H1N1 (Swine) Flu Means for HIV-Positive People
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
An Update on What H1N1 (Swine) Flu Means for HIV-Positive People
HIV Expert Joel Gallant, M.D., M.P.H., Provides the Details
By Myles Helfand
("For most people with HIV, the swine flu is pretty much the same as it would be with somebody without HIV.")
August 11, 2009
This interview with Joel Gallant, M.D., M.P.H., is our second update with Dr. Gallant this year on what the swine flu pandemic means for people with HIV. We first spoke with Dr. Gallant in spring 2009, shortly after the global swine flu outbreak had begun.
You and I last spoke at the end of April, when swine flu was still known as "swine flu" instead of "novel influenza H1N1." You felt it probably was going to end up being a pretty big deal, in terms of the sheer number of people who actually were affected by the flu, but not so much in terms of the dangerousness of the actual virus. How have things panned out in the three months since then?
Joel E. Gallant,
M.D., M.P.H.
That prediction turned out to be true for the epidemic we've seen so far. It has been a big epidemic, to the point that the WHO [World Health Organization] has classified it at the highest level of pandemic classification. Keep in mind that those levels don't reflect severity of the disease; they only reflect the scope of the epidemic.
It's been a big pandemic, but it has not been a big killer so far, and things have quieted down a little bit in the summer up in the northern part of the globe, as we would expect it to. The real unknown is what's going to happen in the fall, when we expect to see a resurgence of the epidemic.
As we enter the latter part of the summer here in the Northern Hemisphere, the Southern Hemisphere is going through the latter part of its winter. How have things panned out down there, as far as you know?
There is certainly plenty of flu going around, but we have not seen a huge spike, which is what we're worried about in North America and the northern part of the globe.
Do we know how much of that might be due to poor reporting in the Southern Hemisphere, as opposed to the virus actually not being that dangerous?
It's certainly possible, although we have to remember that there has been reporting of the flu from all over the world. In many parts of the world, this is perhaps the best-reported epidemic we've seen for this kind of thing. So I don't think it would be just that.
It's so well-reported that the WHO recently told everybody to stop reporting new cases, because they have gotten so many reports -- basically every corner of the world now has documented infections. The last time I checked, almost 140,000 people had been officially diagnosed around the world, about 40,000 of those in the U.S.
As of about a month ago the U.S. was at 33,000, with 170 deaths. Worldwide, I think it was around 90,000 people infected. And that was the beginning of July.
It's probably reasonable to assume that many, many more people have gotten infected, and maybe even have died from it. Officially, I think 800 have died worldwide.
Of course, we have to remember that we would expect much more death with the normal seasonal flu. A lot was made in the U.S. about the fact that we had 36,000 deaths from seasonal flu -- a typical winter flu -- versus 170 from H1N1. Yet, the 170 deaths certainly got a lot more attention than the 36,000 annual deaths from seasonal flu.
But there is a big difference, in terms of who is at risk for death, with this flu versus seasonal flu. There are a lot of very important differences.
What are those differences?
Seasonal flu typically affects people at extremes of age -- older people or very young people and infants -- or people with chronic medical conditions. What's different about H1N1 is that -- in a way, like the 1918 flu pandemic -- it tends to affect young adults more severely. In fact, people who were born before 1957, if they're healthy, are generally somewhat protected. The further out they are from 1957, the greater their risk. This is not the typical pattern you would see with seasonal flu, where it's mostly going to be older people.
Other risk factors for severe disease with this flu would be:
diabetes
chronic lung disease, such as asthma
obesity (interestingly enough)
pregnancy
immunodeficiency, which could include HIV-related immunodeficiency, or AIDS
Do we have any numbers in terms of how many of the people who were officially infected with H1N1, or those who have officially died, had HIV?
I haven't seen numbers like that. I would imagine that it's not a huge percentage, in part because we can treat the immunodeficiency of HIV. If people are on treatment and have a decent CD4 count, they are probably not at significantly greater risk, in comparison with somebody who has a chronic immunodeficiency that is not treatable.
So you would still feel that the precautions that you gave a few months ago are accurate for people who have HIV and might be concerned about swine flu?
Yes. I think it's something we all have to be concerned about. For the average person with HIV in this country, who is on antiretroviral therapy and is doing fine, I don't think their concern should be much greater than it would be for the general population. But I don't want to downplay the potential severity of this, if we see a resurgence in the epidemic in the fall -- as we expect to see.
For me, as a journalist, this is a tough balance to strike. Because I, on one hand, want to inform people responsibly, and I want to provide the full story and explain exactly what's going on, in well-measured terms. But at the same time, the Government Accountability Office recently issued a report to Congress saying we are not ready if there is a major outbreak of swine flu this fall. There seems to be a great deal of uncertainty about what we can expect, what we should be afraid of and what we should be prepared for.
Well, that's right: This is completely unpredictable. I think there's no question that we're going to have an increase in the number of cases in the fall. Everybody knows that that's going to happen. The question is, will it be a disastrous pandemic like 1918? Or will it be a more moderate pandemic like we've seen in some other years since then?
We are absolutely not prepared for a 1918-type flu pandemic. Whether we're prepared for a more moderate epidemic is unclear. I would say that a lot of people are a little bit pessimistic about that, as well.
Wow. So where does that leave us? Should we panic?
Yeah. Panic is a good thing. [Laughs.] No, no. We shouldn't panic, in part because there's really not much the individual can do.
There are certainly flu vaccines in development. Usually a flu vaccine takes about six months to be developed, and we're hoping that we will have it in October or November. Of course, the question of supply is important: Will we have enough? If not, who will get the vaccine?
Another difference between 1918 and 2009 is that, in addition to -- hopefully -- a vaccine, we also have drugs that can treat this flu. So far, the flu drugs that we use are still effective. That could change, but for now, they're quite effective.
You're speaking about Tamiflu [generic name: oseltamivir] and Relenza [generic name: zanamivir]?
Yes, Tamiflu and Relenza. Those two drugs are active against this flu virus. In 1918, we had neither a vaccine nor treatment, and we didn't have antibiotics for people who developed bacterial complications. So there really was virtually nothing we could do about the flu back then. That's no longer the case.
Those are really important points. In terms of the strains themselves, there is some rough similarity between the 1918 and 2009 viruses -- they are both forms of H1N1, right?
Right.
But the environment is so utterly different this time around that, almost regardless, we would probably be better off?
Yes. I certainly think we will be better off. Of course, there's a potential for more rapid spread, just because the world is a much smaller place than it was in 1918. But even in 1918, there wasn't much that could be done to prevent global spread, and that's certainly the case now.
So then, when it comes down to the practical nuts and bolts for people who are living with HIV, what can people do to make themselves safe? Who should be most concerned about keeping themselves safe?
I think that the people who should be most concerned are people with very low CD4 counts. People with higher CD4 counts should probably have the same level of concern that anyone else would have.
What can you do? There's not a whole lot you can do. Obviously, you would probably want to avoid traveling into a place that was in the middle of a big outbreak. But as we saw with this pandemic, things may have started out in Mexico, but they quickly spread beyond that. So, restricting travel is probably of limited benefit.
I think people who actually are sick have a bit more control over the spread of flu than people who aren't sick. People who are sick need to stay home for at least seven days, or 24 hours after they recover [whichever comes first]. They need to cover their sneezes. They need to wash their hands a lot, and try to avoid spreading it to other people.
But if you're a person who doesn't have the flu and you're out in the world, in the company of others, I'm not sure there's a whole lot you can really do to prevent infection, other than just hand washing and the usual precautions.
So you wouldn't recommend, maybe, wrapping yourself in Saran Wrap, not shaking anyone's hands and putting a face mask on? OK, that's a bit over the top. But would you consider recommending that people shouldn't shake other people's hands?
I almost feel that shaking hands is going out of fashion, in general, anyway. But, yes; in the middle of a flu epidemic, I suppose that would be one thing. Certainly, we know that hand shaking is a good way to spread flu. It doesn't have to be from a sneeze or from a cough. Washing hands is a great way to limit any damage that's done from touching.
Masks are more helpful for people who have the flu than they are for people who don't. A very simple surgical mask put on somebody who has got the flu will help to prevent spraying the flu virus into the air. But if you're wearing a mask to try to avoid the flu, the typical masks aren't quite as effective. They need to be a more expensive, well-fitting, respirator-type mask, which is not as widely available as the surgical masks.
You're one for one so far in terms of predicting how the swine flu epidemic is going to unfold. Would you care to go for two for two?
All right. I'm going to try to be an optimist, and I'm going to say that we are going to see a moderately big epidemic in the fall, but that we'll have a fairly low fatality rate, in comparison with both the 1918 flu pandemic and seasonal flu outbreaks. I'll predict that we will not see the kind of disastrous 1918-type pandemic that is so famous now, and that is so dreaded.
The nightmare scenario is a genetic reassortment between the H1N1 and H5N1 viruses, which could result in a highly lethal, highly contagious pandemic. I think that's unlikely. If I were betting money, I would bet against it. But I can't let this talk go without at least mentioning the nightmare scenario.
[Laughs.] I appreciate that. I suppose what it comes down to is that there is a limit to what we, as individuals, have control over with respect to what's going to happen. But there are some common-sense precautions that we can take -- whether we have HIV or not, whether we have low CD4 counts or not -- to keep ourselves as protected as possible, and keep other people protected.
Yes, that's absolutely right. Common-sense precautions. In the end, my motto is: Don't worry about things you can't control. Easier said than done.
If only. But this is a good start. Dr. Gallant, thank you so much.
This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was provided by The Body.
http://www.thebody.com/content/art51548.html
An Update on What H1N1 (Swine) Flu Means for HIV-Positive People
HIV Expert Joel Gallant, M.D., M.P.H., Provides the Details
By Myles Helfand
("For most people with HIV, the swine flu is pretty much the same as it would be with somebody without HIV.")
August 11, 2009
This interview with Joel Gallant, M.D., M.P.H., is our second update with Dr. Gallant this year on what the swine flu pandemic means for people with HIV. We first spoke with Dr. Gallant in spring 2009, shortly after the global swine flu outbreak had begun.
You and I last spoke at the end of April, when swine flu was still known as "swine flu" instead of "novel influenza H1N1." You felt it probably was going to end up being a pretty big deal, in terms of the sheer number of people who actually were affected by the flu, but not so much in terms of the dangerousness of the actual virus. How have things panned out in the three months since then?
Joel E. Gallant,
M.D., M.P.H.
That prediction turned out to be true for the epidemic we've seen so far. It has been a big epidemic, to the point that the WHO [World Health Organization] has classified it at the highest level of pandemic classification. Keep in mind that those levels don't reflect severity of the disease; they only reflect the scope of the epidemic.
It's been a big pandemic, but it has not been a big killer so far, and things have quieted down a little bit in the summer up in the northern part of the globe, as we would expect it to. The real unknown is what's going to happen in the fall, when we expect to see a resurgence of the epidemic.
As we enter the latter part of the summer here in the Northern Hemisphere, the Southern Hemisphere is going through the latter part of its winter. How have things panned out down there, as far as you know?
There is certainly plenty of flu going around, but we have not seen a huge spike, which is what we're worried about in North America and the northern part of the globe.
Do we know how much of that might be due to poor reporting in the Southern Hemisphere, as opposed to the virus actually not being that dangerous?
It's certainly possible, although we have to remember that there has been reporting of the flu from all over the world. In many parts of the world, this is perhaps the best-reported epidemic we've seen for this kind of thing. So I don't think it would be just that.
It's so well-reported that the WHO recently told everybody to stop reporting new cases, because they have gotten so many reports -- basically every corner of the world now has documented infections. The last time I checked, almost 140,000 people had been officially diagnosed around the world, about 40,000 of those in the U.S.
As of about a month ago the U.S. was at 33,000, with 170 deaths. Worldwide, I think it was around 90,000 people infected. And that was the beginning of July.
It's probably reasonable to assume that many, many more people have gotten infected, and maybe even have died from it. Officially, I think 800 have died worldwide.
Of course, we have to remember that we would expect much more death with the normal seasonal flu. A lot was made in the U.S. about the fact that we had 36,000 deaths from seasonal flu -- a typical winter flu -- versus 170 from H1N1. Yet, the 170 deaths certainly got a lot more attention than the 36,000 annual deaths from seasonal flu.
But there is a big difference, in terms of who is at risk for death, with this flu versus seasonal flu. There are a lot of very important differences.
What are those differences?
Seasonal flu typically affects people at extremes of age -- older people or very young people and infants -- or people with chronic medical conditions. What's different about H1N1 is that -- in a way, like the 1918 flu pandemic -- it tends to affect young adults more severely. In fact, people who were born before 1957, if they're healthy, are generally somewhat protected. The further out they are from 1957, the greater their risk. This is not the typical pattern you would see with seasonal flu, where it's mostly going to be older people.
Other risk factors for severe disease with this flu would be:
diabetes
chronic lung disease, such as asthma
obesity (interestingly enough)
pregnancy
immunodeficiency, which could include HIV-related immunodeficiency, or AIDS
Do we have any numbers in terms of how many of the people who were officially infected with H1N1, or those who have officially died, had HIV?
I haven't seen numbers like that. I would imagine that it's not a huge percentage, in part because we can treat the immunodeficiency of HIV. If people are on treatment and have a decent CD4 count, they are probably not at significantly greater risk, in comparison with somebody who has a chronic immunodeficiency that is not treatable.
So you would still feel that the precautions that you gave a few months ago are accurate for people who have HIV and might be concerned about swine flu?
Yes. I think it's something we all have to be concerned about. For the average person with HIV in this country, who is on antiretroviral therapy and is doing fine, I don't think their concern should be much greater than it would be for the general population. But I don't want to downplay the potential severity of this, if we see a resurgence in the epidemic in the fall -- as we expect to see.
For me, as a journalist, this is a tough balance to strike. Because I, on one hand, want to inform people responsibly, and I want to provide the full story and explain exactly what's going on, in well-measured terms. But at the same time, the Government Accountability Office recently issued a report to Congress saying we are not ready if there is a major outbreak of swine flu this fall. There seems to be a great deal of uncertainty about what we can expect, what we should be afraid of and what we should be prepared for.
Well, that's right: This is completely unpredictable. I think there's no question that we're going to have an increase in the number of cases in the fall. Everybody knows that that's going to happen. The question is, will it be a disastrous pandemic like 1918? Or will it be a more moderate pandemic like we've seen in some other years since then?
We are absolutely not prepared for a 1918-type flu pandemic. Whether we're prepared for a more moderate epidemic is unclear. I would say that a lot of people are a little bit pessimistic about that, as well.
Wow. So where does that leave us? Should we panic?
Yeah. Panic is a good thing. [Laughs.] No, no. We shouldn't panic, in part because there's really not much the individual can do.
There are certainly flu vaccines in development. Usually a flu vaccine takes about six months to be developed, and we're hoping that we will have it in October or November. Of course, the question of supply is important: Will we have enough? If not, who will get the vaccine?
Another difference between 1918 and 2009 is that, in addition to -- hopefully -- a vaccine, we also have drugs that can treat this flu. So far, the flu drugs that we use are still effective. That could change, but for now, they're quite effective.
You're speaking about Tamiflu [generic name: oseltamivir] and Relenza [generic name: zanamivir]?
Yes, Tamiflu and Relenza. Those two drugs are active against this flu virus. In 1918, we had neither a vaccine nor treatment, and we didn't have antibiotics for people who developed bacterial complications. So there really was virtually nothing we could do about the flu back then. That's no longer the case.
Those are really important points. In terms of the strains themselves, there is some rough similarity between the 1918 and 2009 viruses -- they are both forms of H1N1, right?
Right.
But the environment is so utterly different this time around that, almost regardless, we would probably be better off?
Yes. I certainly think we will be better off. Of course, there's a potential for more rapid spread, just because the world is a much smaller place than it was in 1918. But even in 1918, there wasn't much that could be done to prevent global spread, and that's certainly the case now.
So then, when it comes down to the practical nuts and bolts for people who are living with HIV, what can people do to make themselves safe? Who should be most concerned about keeping themselves safe?
I think that the people who should be most concerned are people with very low CD4 counts. People with higher CD4 counts should probably have the same level of concern that anyone else would have.
What can you do? There's not a whole lot you can do. Obviously, you would probably want to avoid traveling into a place that was in the middle of a big outbreak. But as we saw with this pandemic, things may have started out in Mexico, but they quickly spread beyond that. So, restricting travel is probably of limited benefit.
I think people who actually are sick have a bit more control over the spread of flu than people who aren't sick. People who are sick need to stay home for at least seven days, or 24 hours after they recover [whichever comes first]. They need to cover their sneezes. They need to wash their hands a lot, and try to avoid spreading it to other people.
But if you're a person who doesn't have the flu and you're out in the world, in the company of others, I'm not sure there's a whole lot you can really do to prevent infection, other than just hand washing and the usual precautions.
So you wouldn't recommend, maybe, wrapping yourself in Saran Wrap, not shaking anyone's hands and putting a face mask on? OK, that's a bit over the top. But would you consider recommending that people shouldn't shake other people's hands?
I almost feel that shaking hands is going out of fashion, in general, anyway. But, yes; in the middle of a flu epidemic, I suppose that would be one thing. Certainly, we know that hand shaking is a good way to spread flu. It doesn't have to be from a sneeze or from a cough. Washing hands is a great way to limit any damage that's done from touching.
Masks are more helpful for people who have the flu than they are for people who don't. A very simple surgical mask put on somebody who has got the flu will help to prevent spraying the flu virus into the air. But if you're wearing a mask to try to avoid the flu, the typical masks aren't quite as effective. They need to be a more expensive, well-fitting, respirator-type mask, which is not as widely available as the surgical masks.
You're one for one so far in terms of predicting how the swine flu epidemic is going to unfold. Would you care to go for two for two?
All right. I'm going to try to be an optimist, and I'm going to say that we are going to see a moderately big epidemic in the fall, but that we'll have a fairly low fatality rate, in comparison with both the 1918 flu pandemic and seasonal flu outbreaks. I'll predict that we will not see the kind of disastrous 1918-type pandemic that is so famous now, and that is so dreaded.
The nightmare scenario is a genetic reassortment between the H1N1 and H5N1 viruses, which could result in a highly lethal, highly contagious pandemic. I think that's unlikely. If I were betting money, I would bet against it. But I can't let this talk go without at least mentioning the nightmare scenario.
[Laughs.] I appreciate that. I suppose what it comes down to is that there is a limit to what we, as individuals, have control over with respect to what's going to happen. But there are some common-sense precautions that we can take -- whether we have HIV or not, whether we have low CD4 counts or not -- to keep ourselves as protected as possible, and keep other people protected.
Yes, that's absolutely right. Common-sense precautions. In the end, my motto is: Don't worry about things you can't control. Easier said than done.
If only. But this is a good start. Dr. Gallant, thank you so much.
This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was provided by The Body.
http://www.thebody.com/content/art51548.html
Near Southside Coalition - Upcoming Health Events
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
NEW HEALTH BULLETIN BOARD~ http://hopeandhelpcenter.net/healthinfo.aspx
Near Southside Coalition - Upcoming Health Events
1. There is HIV Screening sponsored by Saint Louis Efforts for AIDS and Joint Neighborhood Ministry on Wednesday, Aug. 19th from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at 2911 McNair.
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
For those unable to make it then, they can call to make an appointment at 1027 S. Vandeventer, Suite 700.
The number is 314.645.6451 and office hours are (;30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. M-F.
2. There is free mammagraphy screening for uninsured women on 3
Wed., Sept. 16th between 9:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.
at Isaiah 58 Ministries at
2149 S. Grand Blvd.
Appointments are required.
Call June at 314.776.1410 M-F from 10-2.
3. Several organizations have Christmas programs for families in need.
St. Vincent De Paul, with Grace Hill and Kingdom House, has a program.
People can contact Father Otto at St. Vincent De Paul at 314.231,9328.
Also St. John's Mercy Neighborhood Ministries has one. Contact Chery Persons at 314.865.0927.
4. There's a community meeting about the H1N1 virus at Grace Hill on Sat., Aug. 29th at 12th & Park.`
NEW HEALTH BULLETIN BOARD~ http://hopeandhelpcenter.net/healthinfo.aspx
Near Southside Coalition - Upcoming Health Events
1. There is HIV Screening sponsored by Saint Louis Efforts for AIDS and Joint Neighborhood Ministry on Wednesday, Aug. 19th from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at 2911 McNair.
www.HopeandHelpCenter.org
For those unable to make it then, they can call to make an appointment at 1027 S. Vandeventer, Suite 700.
The number is 314.645.6451 and office hours are (;30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. M-F.
2. There is free mammagraphy screening for uninsured women on 3
Wed., Sept. 16th between 9:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.
at Isaiah 58 Ministries at
2149 S. Grand Blvd.
Appointments are required.
Call June at 314.776.1410 M-F from 10-2.
3. Several organizations have Christmas programs for families in need.
St. Vincent De Paul, with Grace Hill and Kingdom House, has a program.
People can contact Father Otto at St. Vincent De Paul at 314.231,9328.
Also St. John's Mercy Neighborhood Ministries has one. Contact Chery Persons at 314.865.0927.
4. There's a community meeting about the H1N1 virus at Grace Hill on Sat., Aug. 29th at 12th & Park.`
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)