TRUVADA: Why are we ALL not taking this???!!!!

[broncofan]

Robyn makes a good point also. I didn't think of that. Many other stds other than HIV. Does it prevent hepatitis? Herpes? Warts? Robyn seems to indicate it would do nothing for the latter two. So, it couldn't responsibly be used as a license to engage in more unprotected sex than one already engages in.

[Westheangelino]

Thanks, Donkey. To be clear I am not advocating anything more than giving people access and knowledge about a life saving drug. Read any article about this drug. The doctors currently dolling it out as a preventative measure live in the reality that although condoms are effective at stopping the spread of HIV, they have not been effective at radically lowering infection rates. This is just the truth that people crave intimacy and won't always wear a condom. However, pretty much no one (including myself) is advocating a return to the 70's bath house culture. While it's a fun fantasy, even a pig like myself couldn't envision getting ten loads a night in a stinking steam room with all manner of infectious material other than HIV floating about. Maybe once a month, and I think that's what leading physicians are banking on. Taking this drug requires you to get screened and requires continued testing, which arguably has been more effective at halting the spread of HIV than anything else.

[christianxxx]

A porn industry study claims 25% of actors/actresses have gonorrhea or chlamydia. The numbers are higher, I'd bet, elsewhere in the skin trade.


Why risk it, right?

thats a bullshit statistic. first of all, neither of those are incurable, so you contract it and then treat it and its gone. if you are saying 25 percent have EVER had clam or gon then ok maybe that is true. but how much higher is that then the general population?

the fact is that the adult industry is highly regulated with 14 day testing for clam, gon, hep c, syph, and hiv. it is much safer than the general population.

[christianxxx]

i have to agree 100 percent with West Angelino on this one. the FDA has approved a drug which can decrease the chances of HIV by many many fold. People should be shouting about this from the rooftops. But the US pharmaceutical industry and medical industry and the HIV lobbying arm plus the condom companies all don't want a cure for HIV, they want a managed treatment so they can continue to make money.

And let's talk about the condom. Where is it that the condom protects against anything? Show me on the condom itself where it says that? Oh that's right it doesn't bc the condom is bullshit. It protects the female against pregnancy...most of the time. syphilis, hep C those are skin to skin and render the condom worthless. Anyone who thinks the condom is 100 percent is just as retarded as thinking truvada is 100 percent.

[Tapatio]

thats a bullshit statistic.

OK. UCLA is really bad at science, and the CDC is a right wing fundamentalist sham.

[christianxxx]

no shit, one more time since you can't read....1 in 4 has EVER contracted clam or gonorrhea. Hey genius, thats for thousands and thousands of scenes over years. What does that have to do with anything? its no higher than the general population.

The only difference is that adult performers have to test every 2 weeks which gives a public record of every single positive. There is no cheating or lying. You have our EXACT statistics.

One more time, clamydia & gonorrhea are a treatable STD that goes away in less than a week. Big deal. What's your point and what does that have to do with Truvada?

[christianxxx]

BTW the UCLA study was funded by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation which is attacking the porn industry for not using condoms. And of course the AHF is funded by the condom companies. lol And the CDC has absolutely zero to do with that statistic other than being the host of the conference where UCLA talked about it. Try again.

[Tapatio]

I understand the backers- but I can't believe UCLA is making up the numbers.

Short of a rebuttal of the data, the funding means nothing.

[Tapatio]

I can see how you'd be 100% unbiased though.

And the CDC, in the interest of fairness, regularly hosts disreputable scientists. I see how that makes a difference.

Oh,yeah-


Lol, etc.

Forgot that part.

[Jericho]

And let's talk about the condom. Where is it that the condom protects against anything?

Since you asked....
http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/latex.htm

Show me on the condom itself where it says that? Oh that's right it doesn't bc the condom is bullshit. It protects the female against pregnancy...most of the time. syphilis, hep C those are skin to skin and render the condom worthless.

Hardly worthless, old chap..

Anyone who thinks the condom is 100 percent is just as retarded as thinking truvada is 100 percent.

Has anyone said the condom is 100% safe or effective?