HI everyone, it’s been a pretty busy week here for me, and I
thought this as good of a time as any to check in with you all. As I write
this, we are currently making our dissent into Atlanta, Georgia. Aaron and I
were selected to be part of a photo shoot for the CDC in regards to compliance
with HIV medications. While this is not directly addressing PrEP, adherence to
medication is a vital part of my prevention life. Both my adherence to PrEP and
my partner’s compliance with his Anti-retroviral regimen are important factors
in my ability to remaining HIV negative. So I’m very excited to lend my voice
and my face to this campaign. I also got a new job with a promotion company,
which is very exciting and welcome news in my world.
Another important part of this past week was an event I went
to that addressed Missouri’s HIV criminalization laws. It seems absurd to me
that technically, in spite of any safety measures we might take, by his being
with me, my partner is in Missouri a criminal for exposing me to HIV. These
laws are clearly antiquated and really do need to be addressed. It’s not just
Missouri that has laws like this criminalizing and basically forcing people
with HIV into an abstinent life, there are more than half of the states in this
country that have laws like that. DUMB.
Speaking of DUMB, I am brought to my final and perhaps most
pressing topic of discussion. There was an article in today’s USA Today that
talks about the debate that exists about PrEP. Now the fact that there is still
a debate about whether PrEP is an effective tool in preventing new HIV
infections is asinine in my opinion. Now the debate about whether PrEP is an
effective prevention tool for EVERYONE, that seems to be more appropriate. No,
I don’t think PrEP is right for everybody. But there was one comment in this
article that really blew me away. Michael Weinstein, the head of AHF (AIDS
Healthcare Foundation) made the comment “If something comes along that’s better
than condoms, I’m all for it, but Truvada is not that. Let’s be honest: It’s a
party drug.” So, there are SO MANY issues I take with this, especially as
someone who takes Truvada as PrEP.
First of all, I have no idea what kinds of parties Mr.
Weinstein is going to, but Truvada resembles nothing to any other party drugs I
know about. In fact, it takes a few days for the Truvada to build up in your
system. It’s not something you can just pop and go. In fact Truvada as PrEP
helps promote a healthy lifestyle. It requires an HIV test every three months
in order to obtain the prescription. But even more than attacking the drug, he
just alienated anyone who takes Truvada and shames them for wanting to stay
safe while having an intimate physical relationship. Yes, there are still risks
related with unprotected sex, even while on PrEP, any other STDs are not
prevented by PrEP and that is something to consider. HOWEVER, if condom only
prevention were an effective tool, we wouldn’t still be getting new infections.
But we are, and the people who are choosing to take Truvada are doing so
because we want an extra layer of protection. We are not the ignorant party
boys that Mr. Weinstein makes us out to be, but people who are taking their
health into their own hands, if we are smart enough to assess the risk of HIV
we are smart enough to asses the risk of other STDs as well, and if we
determine there is a risk, I’m sure just as taking Truvada supplements our prevention
regimen in the case of HIV, a condom will help supplement our protection
regimen from those. But I think we deserve a little more credit.
That’s all I have for you right now. As always please share
this with anyone who might appreciate it and any questions or comments are
always welcome. Thanks for reading and have a GREAT day.
Truvada isn't perfect. Anyone relying just on that is still susceptible to STDs. But party drug?? Weinstein makes himself look stupid (but it's attention, and he obviously needs a lot of that) and could potentially do harm by turning people away from something that could keep them safe.
ReplyDeleteThank you Phil for such an informed reaction to such an ignorant statement. Look, Weinstein and AHF failed at preventing PrEP every step of the way. He argued the science of it wasn't valid. When that failed, he argued about accessibility. When it was covered by all insurances he argued adherence. When it was demonstrated that over 50% of PrEP users had more than 90% protection he went after side effects. When there turned out to be only a .5% chance of having side effects, he went after the "party" angle. It indicates that not only is desperately running out of options, but he has obviously never been to a party.
ReplyDelete