Comments on: ACON CEO: Efforts to lower HIV rates being “stymied at a federal level”

By: Rod Bruem

Rod Bruem — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 09:38:21 +0000

The Star has portrayed this in a way that gets a political response which is unfair. ACON has had tremendous support from NSW Governments past and present. Canberra has dragged the chain on important reforms for a long time. The bureaucracy seems intransigent

By: Caleb John Lane

Caleb John Lane — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 08:15:52 +0000

In reply to Mark Bowman. Cheaper than $4600 a month for anti-retrovirals

By: Rex Ducat

Rex Ducat — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 05:34:43 +0000

Not surprised, look at the leaders we have.

By: David Polson

David Polson — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 05:21:26 +0000

Note how many liberal MPs wore red ribbons yesterday! The Prime Minister certainly didn’t lead by example. No wonder there are blockages!

By: Sandy Bliim

Sandy Bliim — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 04:15:49 +0000

Blockages or block heads?

By: Byron Sullivan

Byron Sullivan — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 00:26:25 +0000

In reply to Mark Bowman. Monogamy doesn't really deal with rape cases either, or the number of people who aren't tested so don't know their status, or the fact that there are monogamous relationships between pos and neg guys.

By: Felix Kellett

Felix Kellett — Tue, 02 Dec 2014 00:12:49 +0000

In reply to Mark Bowman. Could have pointed out condoms but no go for the slut shaming route Mark Bowman, it's only prejudice & counter to the evidence on STI prevention.

By: Anthony Smith

Anthony Smith — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 22:23:29 +0000

In reply to Mark Bowman. Yeah because abstinence works so well in combating these things... PrEP has the potential to wipe out HIV transmission in one generation...

By: Mark Bowman

Mark Bowman — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 21:52:34 +0000

At $800 a month for Prep, it’s not surprising, a similar out come can be achieved with curtailed partner numbers, I don’t see monogamous relationships on ACON’s list of combatting the “epidemic”

By: Michael Gray

Michael Gray — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 17:44:29 +0000

What do you expect with “Done Nuttin Dutton” as health minister!

By: Mark Stoove

Mark Stoove — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 11:07:38 +0000

In reply to Garrett Prestage.

Garrett is spot on. We need to ensure we focus on the right measures success. Not simply the number of people diagnosed with HIV. If we focus on the targets that will reduce risk – the numbers of people at risk who are testing frequently, the numbers of undiagnosed infections, the number accessing care or treatment, the number of people reporting protecting themselves and their partners (whether through condoms or negotiated safety) – then the transmission outcomes will take care of themselves.

But we also have to acknowledge that there will always be people unaware of their status, there will always be people who, for whatever reason, engage in risk, and thankfully, there is also a growing number of healthy, socially engaged and sexually active people living with HIV in Australia. This means, for the foreseeable future, there will be HIV risk.

What we need to ensure is that we give people choices to reduce their risk. Allowing home-based testing for those who want it or providing opportunities to access PrEP for people feel this is the best way to protect themselves are just two choices people don’t currently have – unless they go online or happen to be involved in a trial. It really is time the Australian regulatory system caught up with 21st century HIV prevention!

By: Garrett Prestage

Garrett Prestage — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 09:37:40 +0000

HIV infection rates are actually quite complicated. Over the past 15+ years the number of gay men living with HIV in Australia has grown every year because the drugs have saved people’s lives. Before the treatments, about as many people with HIV used to die each year as were infected. Thankfully, now they continue to live and so the number grows every year. So, if nothing else changed then there would have to be more infections each year. And there has been, but what we’ve actually seen over the past decade is a reduction in the transmission rate. In 2002 the number of new infections was over 6 for every 100 people with HIV, but by 2013 that figure had fallen to just over 4.5. So, given the growth in HIV in the community (due to treatments), the rate of HIV transmission has actually fallen by about 25%. So, it appears individuals may actually be reducing the possibility of infection, even though the raw numbers have increased.

If we want to bring down the actual number of infections, then we need to better understand how infections occur. It seems a disproportionate number of infections are due to guys who don’t realise they have HIV. Getting guys who might be at risk to test much more easily, and taking PrEP before they get infected would be a great development. And yes, PrEP is expensive, because the drug companies take enormous profits while they control the patents. But there are alternatives. Patents eventually expire, and in the meantime there are trials, and generic versions are available online at a fraction of the price (just so long as people make sure they choose a reputable supplier).

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 08:21:10 +0000

gay men have not consistently shown they are good public health advocates or contained the infection; HIV rates have increased by almost 80 percent in the past decade. People – gay and straight – know the risks of unsafe sex. It is not the responsibility of the government to subsidize the expensive PrEP treatment; it is the responsibility of the individual to be more cautious. For the amount PrEP would cost to subsidize, how many other more important drugs could be put on the PBS where people are sick not because of any decision they made (or didn’t make)?