We know that when someone is presumed to have contacted the Hiv virus,there is a post exporsure prophylaxes that is given to the victim to take for some time.Why can't it be that when a patient is diagnosed to be hiv possitive he start his treatment at once?Why must he start the ARV treament only when his Cd4 count is down to a certain number? Is this a strategie to kill millions of others,because i myself know that this drugs are so strong that when given when the immune system is down the patient can easily die.This ARV have help to send some of this victims to their early graves as well as helping others. Please i will like if you can contact me through +2375192368 to tell me the truth if you have one. And why is that the WHO is refusing that there is no cure when i know of people who have been cured from this virus.Remember life is a secret we all need to discover.My people die because of lack of Knowledge.
Information is Knowledge and Knowledge is Power. Think about it. Thanks
Answer:
Post exposure prophylaxes are experimental and misguided life-altering chemicals, called AIDS drugs, or HAART, or ARVs. There is a general hypnosis (concensus) in the world today where people are wide eyed and readily accepting the "HIV care" that is heaped upon them by way of cartons of pills. The problem is these pills aren't the fun ones like Xanax, or Valium and despite how HIV %26 AIDS devotees wrap research results around a core predetermined belief in support of all AIDS drugs, the facts will speak for themselves.
Hi there,First of all PEP treatment is for people who can get to a health care center or their doctor within 72 hours post possible exposure. It's often used in health care centres where doctors and nurses may accidentally poke themselves with a needle after it has been used with an known HIV+ patient. After 72 hours PEP will not be given out as a treatment option. There is a "window period" which is the time it takes the body to produce antibodies after HIV infection has begun. For the vast majority of those who will test positive, antibodies to HIV will develop within 4-6 weeks after exposure. Some will take a little longer to develop antibodies. To make certain that you receive a reliable test result, it's necessary to wait at least three months (13 weeks) after your last possible exposure to the virus before being tested. Basically, PEP is given out as a hope that HIV will not develop. Presently doctors do not know if PEP is a successful treatment since doctors have no way of knowing for certain whether the PEP candidate was infected or not and by the time that they do know, PEP would no longer be an option. If after a month of PEP, and the patient, after waiting 13 weeks for testing, discovers that they are not HIV+ there is no way to make sure that it's becasue of PEp and not becuase they simply were not infected in the first place. PEP is a mental bandaid to help with the immediate shock of a possible exposure.As to when should an HIV+ patient start treatment we now know that HIV cannot be cured, or "eradicated," using the anti-HIV drugs that are currently available. However, we do know that therapy should be started 鈥?and continued 鈥?before HIV has had a chance to cause serious damage to the immune system. In this sense, it is always best to start therapy before symptoms of AIDS occur (ie. the development of an Opporetunistic Infection -OI).There is still some debate though on just how early treatment should start. Some experts think patients should "hit hard and hit early," while other experts think that "rushing is ridiculous." Here is a brief listing of the arguments each school of thought puts forward:"Hit Hard and Hit Early" Arguments 1) Preserving Immune Function - Starting therapy early can help preserve the functioning of the immune system. 2) Delaying Drug Resistance - Starting therapy early can help delay drug resistance. The longer HIV is allowed to reproduce, the more the virus is likely to mutate and become resistant to drugs once they are started. 3) Help the Immune System Fight HIV - Starting therapy early, while the immune system is healthy, might help maintain and/or correct the ability of the immune system to control HIV.4) Eradication - Starting therapy early, especially while the viral load is low, can speed up the time it takes to get rid of, or eradicate the virus from the body.5) Side Effects - Starting therapy early, while people are still healthy and have strong immune systems, can reduce the chance of experiencing side effects such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, neuropathy, and bone marrow problems.6) Compliance - Starting therapy early generally means fewer drugs to take. Not having to take drugs to prevent AIDS-related infections (prophylaxis) on top of anti-HIV drugs translates into a regimen that is easier to take."Rushing is Ridiculous Arguments"1) Preserving Immune Function - The immune system functions fine until the T-cell count goes below 200.2) Delaying Drug Resistance - Resistances will likely occur no matter when therapy is started. Even if therapy keeps viral load undetectable, the virus continues to reproduce in the body and, quite possible, become resistant to the drugs. Plus, starting therapy early might mean developing drug resistances early - before the drugs are absolutely needed.3) Help the Immune System Fight HIV - Unless therapy is started within the first few days of infection, the immune system quickly loses much of its ability to fight off HIV by itself. Besides, if drug therapy succeeds in driving HIV to undetectable levels, there might not be enough HIV in the blood to keep the immune system "aware" of the presence of the virus.4) Eradication - There is no evidence to suggest that HIV can be eradicated, regardless of viral load or when therapy is started.5) Side Effects - Starting therapy early might lead to long-term side effects such as metabolic problems and organ damage.6) Compliance - With no hard evidence that starting late actually prolongs a patient's life, then starting early just means many more years of sticking to a challenging drug regimen.With all that in mind, the latest guidelines recommend for when to start therapy, as of October 2006:1) Sever symptoms related to AIDS or an AIDS-definng illness (OI): regardless of T4 Cell count or Viral load, the patient should be on treatment.2) Asymptomatic: T4 Cells %26lt; 200, regardless of viral load, the patient should be on treatment3) Asymptomatic: T4 Cells between 200-350, regardless of viral load, treatment should be offered to the patient and the pros and cons of starting treatment need to be evaluated basically to determine if the person is ready to start treatment.4) Asymptomatic: T4 Cells %26gt; 350, Viral load %26gt; 100,000, there are no clear recommendations. Most experts recommend holding off therapy, but some recommend starting because of the high viral load.5) Asymptomatic, T4 Cells %26gt;350, Viral Load %26lt; 100,000, it is recommended to hold off therapy.I know this is a HUGE mouthfull I hope it helps.Cheers.
Hi.
Post Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) is only given to individuals who have been exposed to the HIV virus with in the last 72 hours. PEP is not given to someone after 72 hours from HIV exposure. It is also important to note that all individuals who recieve PEP are tested first and if they are HIV+, they will not recieve the PEP.
Individuals who have recieved PEP will continue to be tested after 3 months and at 6 months and then at 12 months to rule out HIV infection. If the perosn tested HIV+ at any of these times, then he would be re-evaluated treatment options would have to be considered but the PEP would be stopped.NOW FOR THE ISSUE OF WHEN TO TREATThere has been a lot of debate and research on when is the optimal time to initiate HAART.
Here are some of the conclusions from the different research that has been done so far.1. Early initiation of HAART during chronic, asymptomatic HIV infection does have a statistically significant clinical benefit in comparison to a deferred beginning, but the quantitative risk of clinical progression without HAART is relatively small and must be carefully weighed against the long-term toxicity and inconvenience of the currently available HAART regimens.
A special group of patients in whom treatment initiation should be considered more aggressively has recently been defined and consists of those with a rapid decrease of CD4 cell counts - a subgroup which has been shown to have a higher risk of subsequent clinical progression.
2. HAART is costly, demanding for both the patient and the health care provider, and leads to frequent adverse events. The clinical benefit of treatment must therefore be counter-weighed against the pill burden for the patients and the adverse events.
If you are really inerested, here are a couple of research papers that were done on the subject. There are a few intresting observations. (This is from a Johns Hopkins study.
[[[[The risk of clinical disease progression did not differ between
group 1 and group 2 (figure 1; Pp.21, log-rank test); the
number of AIDS-defining events was low in both groups (20
and 23, respectively; table 2), and there was no difference between
the risk for group 1 and for those patients for whom
initiation of therapy was delayed or who did not receiveHAART
(Pp.24). When death alone was used as the clinical end point,
there was no difference in the risk of disease progression between
groups 1 and 2 (Pp.10, log-rank test). There was also
no difference in the risk for disease progression between groups
1 and 2 when follow-up was considered to begin with the initial
clinic visit (Pp.17) or when patients who received non-
HAART regimens were excluded from group 2 (Pp.10).]]]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment