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

Westtheangelo.
This is a genuine question and not a dig.

If you were given the choice to take a vaccine which needed to be a pill taken daily, which would allow you to have unprotected sex, with as many people as you wish and never catch an STD - but the trade off was that it would end your life earlier.
What would the trade be?
5 yrs or less?
10 yrs?
20 yrs?

(let's assume you'd be living an average lifespan and normal healthy life)

I figure my generation (current 20 to 35 yr olds) will live to at least 80. So, I think 10 years would be fair.

PLEASE NOTE: there is no evidence to suggest that Truvada will shorten your lifespan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

I figure my generation (current 20 to 35 yr olds) will live to at least 80. So, I think 10 years would be fair.

PLEASE NOTE: there is no evidence to suggest that Truvada will shorten your lifespan.

---

Thanks.
No evidence it won't either :-)

It would be interesting to ask again at 70 ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GroobySteven

Thanks.
No evidence it won't either :-)

It would be interesting to ask again at 70 ...

---

Actually, a mountain of evidence that it won't shorten your life span. You know what does though? Being HIV positive. You know what prevents that? A little blue miracle pill called Truvada. Take a screenshot of this thread. Let's see where the discussion is in 2020.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

Actually, a mountain of evidence that it won't shorten your life span. You know what does though? Being HIV positive. You know what prevents that? A little blue miracle pill called Truvada. Take a screenshot of this thread. Let's see where the discussion is in 2020.

---

I haven't read the scientific evidence on it, and I've no interest in doing so. Something I would assume though, that it hasn't had 10-20 yr trials. I'm not wanting to get into an argument with you, just wondering what your trade-off would have been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GroobySteven

Thanks.
No evidence it won't either :-)

It would be interesting to ask again at 70 ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GroobySteven

I haven't read the scientific evidence on it, and I've no interest in doing so. Something I would assume though, that it hasn't had 10-20 yr trials. I'm not wanting to get into an argument with you, just wondering what your trade-off would have been.

---

I love a good hypothetical, but people are going to die because of the opinions of people who want to "wait and see" or worse yet, plant the seed in people's brains that this drug is somehow harmful or ineffective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

I love a good hypothetical, but people are going to die because of the opinions of people who want to "wait and see" or worse yet, plant the seed in people's brains that this drug is somehow harmful or ineffective.

---

Or people will die because they're take this drug not knowing the future side-effects.

Thalidomide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rofecoxib - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is why people aren't taking you seriously, you're EVANGELISTIC about this drug. I'm not saying it's bad - but history shows that taking any drug daily over a long period of time MAY have future repercussions.

It's a personal choice ... I choose to drink probably a bit more than I should and smoke cigars knowing that there is potential of what they can do to my health, down the line. I also choose to eat as little processed food, dairy and no fast food if at all possible, while taking good meats and lots of fruit veg. as based on the evidence these are better. That's my personal choice on how to live my life and I'm prepared to accept that balance.

Your personal choice may be to take a drug which allows you to get poked in the arse with as many cocks as humanely possible while not having to worry about HIV. You simply don't know the downside to that drug yet - but you need to be realistic that it could be there - and that's your choice.

^ People have been taking this drug in megadoses for 12 years now! The dose needed for HIV prevention is much much lower. I will agree with you completely that I am evangelistic. I don't want one more person to die from HIV simply because they didn't know this existed or thought it wouldn't work. Please, understand that I'm speaking out in a world where there AIDS Healthcare Foundation (with it's nearly billion dollar a year operating budget) tried to stop the CDC from endorsing this drug for HIV prevention.

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but here goes...

So if one has had BB sex with someone who is HIV Pos, the virus does get into the body and stays there. Taking Truvada will suppress the virus from activating /spreading but it still needs to be taken every day?

Is this correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tao1kiku

Forgive my ignorance on the subject, but here goes...

So if one has had BB sex with someone who is HIV Pos, the virus does get into the body and stays there. Taking Truvada will suppress the virus from activating /spreading but it still needs to be taken every day?

Is this correct?

---

Google and ye shall find.

But short answer: HIV enters your body but cannot attach to your cells and replicate. Thus is never gains a foothold and is flushed out with all the other viruses and bacteria we are exposed to on the daily. It does not lie dormant waiting for you to skip a pill as someone else has suggested. Please also keep in mind that if you've gone to the trouble to take Truvada, I'm pretty sure your POZ partner is informed enough to be on HIV medication, which includes Truvada to suppress already present HIV. These medications, in most cases, lower their viral load (the amount of HIV present in their body) to undetectable or near undetectable amounts, which means they are relatively non infectious.