HIV+ Celebrities

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

So very true Rawdad4sons. I don't see the US culture on sex changing anytime soon either. If anything, it seems to be regressing, along with other elements that many of us thought were "done" on social progress issues.

[wood]

That being said, there is a great deal of conflicting data on the effectiveness of PrEP. I agree that it has the POTENTIAL to be a game-changer but there is still a long way to go for it to reach its potential. I'm sure you can agree that a major hurdle to clear is gaining the buy-in from all insurance companies. After gaining that buy-in so it's covered, the even bigger hurdle to clear is to produce an effective public relations and advertising campaign that alters the mindset of the public so they will recognize the benefits of using such a supplement and, more importantly, the need to be diligent about making it a part of their life every day.

Thats where you are wrong, The data is actually very conclusive, which is why the FDA green lit for PrEP usage. You may be confusing the Truvada PrEP studies with the earlier tenofovir only PrEP studies. In those studies there actually was a quite a bit of variance in the outcomes. The Truvada iprex studies were exactly the opposite, it was shown to be in the 96-99% effectiveness range with proper adherence.

Adherence is the BIGGEST factor with PrEP. It MUST be taken everyday, and you should try to take it at the same time everyday.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

Thats where you are wrong, The data is actually very conclusive, which is why the FDA green lit for PrEP usage. You may be confusing the Truvada PrEP studies with the earlier tenofovir only PrEP studies. In those studies there actually was a quite a bit of variance in the outcomes. The Truvada iprex studies were exactly the opposite, it was shown to be in the 96-99% effectiveness range with proper adherence.

Adherence is the BIGGEST factor with PrEP. It MUST be taken everyday, and you should try to take it at the same time everyday.

And of course just like an STI can change a poz guy on meds from undetectable to detectable; and STI can interfere with effectiveness of PrEP.

[Scandbro]

I'm not arguing about the effectiveness of PrEP here. If I want to do so I would go to a PrEP thread and discuss that there. I am only speaking about public awareness, and celebrities coming out as POZ. I have HIV, so personally I don't really care how effective PrEP is, relatively speaking. My only point about it is that I think if a celeb came out and said they were taking PrEP as part of their prevention strategy, that would be more effective in reducing stereotypes and changing the conversation and demystifying HIV than a gay celeb coming out as being POZ.

I'd encourage you to do some deeper research into PrEP; studies have demonstrated that it is not the be all end all that it is purported to be. It also requires the individual to diligently take the medication in order to be effective and insurance covering it is not a given in many cases. You'll find that a lot of media reports the same statistics from one study while ignoring the meat of that study and every other dissenting study of the effectiveness of PrEP-- read the studies, not just the media reports and learn the whole story.

[Scandbro]

It's gay birth control. Women do it all the time, and yes, there are still occurrences of women getting pregnant, often because they do not adhere to the strict regimen of taking the pill(s) every day.

Total agreement here: I read a number of studies as part of my voluntary work and they way facts are cherry-picked.

Absolute adherence to the prescription is vital: no "I've got flu and won't be getting laid for the next week so why bother?" It's difficult enough for those of us on HAART to adhere to the prescription. I can't imagine how much more difficult it must be to take it "just in case".

[Scandbro]

Who here is relying on one impressive statistic? No one in this thread is using only one statistic. I'm not evening basing what I have to say on statistics, but rather what Angelina Jolie did with breasts. I am drawing a comparison as a part of my argument.

I'm not writing that PrEP is completely ineffective, I am highlighting the fact that the results of studies analyzing the effectiveness of PrEP vary significantly. If one is considering PrEP they should read and analyze the actual studies themselves and not just rely on one impressive statistic from one study. The fact that human nature demonstrates someone is less likely to strictly adhere to taking a preventative supplement must be considered. Also, the coverage of PrEP by insurance companies is not universal.

[Scandbro]

YAY! although I think the JizzDump dude is just trying to make sure to defend his point of view too!!

dshanebb, please don't ASSUME that is what I did... Effectiveness varies in a not unsurprising way. If one is inconsistent it doesn't work. Really nothing new there. At the moment there isn't a "morning after" version; so if one chooses PrEP they are either in it all the way, or no point in using it at all. PrEP is not a "supplement". PrEP is 2/3 of Atrypla The effectiveness variation is nearly identical to the effect on "undetectible" for HIV meds. Catch an STI and effectiveness will drop. But otherwise, compliance results in typically excellent outcomes.

What isn't getting mentioned here, and should, is how PrEP is a definite game changer. I fear YOU are not recognizing that. PrEP is in fact altering the HIV conversation from blame to personal responsibility. And for this reason, rather than looking for movie stars to change the conversation; is what we should collectively be seeking.

I agree with Scandbro that we would do well to have a celeb on PrEP. And as far as effectiveness, it will continue to improve as research continues along this path.

We're not "done". PrEP will continue to evolve. And IMO we should be celebrating the new direction from just treating HIV, to solutions that allow all of use who strongly prefer skin on skin sex to give prevention options to those not yet poz.

[Scandbro]

I think you are already saying what we are saying. But it already is game changer. As I said to bearbandit, its gay birthcontrol and women have gotten used to taking theirs regularly. Maybe they will even come out with an IUD for the butthole when insurance companies buy in. SO, more to your point, of course there is room to grow, there is always room to grow! Thats part of life! It would be SOOO boring if everything were perfect already. We are very fortunate to be having this conversation too I might add, I love getting together with the elder gays and listening to stories about running with drug cartels in Mexico to bring HIV meds back to America while Regan was being a douchebag and insurance companies were not paying for meds for the sick and dying. Now-a-days we get to talk about ad campaigns to raise awareness, or celebs like NPH having 'the POZ look'... Not to minimize our continued struggles and continuing to fight for what we deserve, but just put some perspective on where we have been and how far we have come already.

I apologize if you perceived my words to be solely directed at you or to be making any sort of assumption about you; that was not my intention. Frankly it was not aimed at you because it was clear to me that you definitely did your research before choosing PrEP and that you understand the importance of diligently taking the supplement; which is awesome.

That being said, there is a great deal of conflicting data on the effectiveness of PrEP. I agree that it has the POTENTIAL to be a game-changer but there is still a long way to go for it to reach its potential. I'm sure you can agree that a major hurdle to clear is gaining the buy-in from all insurance companies. After gaining that buy-in so it's covered, the even bigger hurdle to clear is to produce an effective public relations and advertising campaign that alters the mindset of the public so they will recognize the benefits of using such a supplement and, more importantly, the need to be diligent about making it a part of their life every day.

Edited September 28, 2013 by Scandbro
Added an extra quote, didn't need it.

[Scandbro]

I love your perspective. I was laughing at the end!

most of us live in a culture/society which is Puritan in nature and "sex " is evil and anything to do with sex is dirty....Unfortunately the only celebrities/ public figures who are going to step forward are in the adult entertainment field. HIV is just one of many STI's out there but it being the newest kid on the block (outside of HPV, which has been around for a long time but we just started talking more about it) has been stigmatized and beaten up, demonized because of the community in which it first surfaced, I am sure it was around long before it was "discovered" in a less lethal mutation and people died of complications of compromised immune systems long before the "gay cancer" began occurring. My main point here is discussion like this are a necessary evil that needs to be taken outside into a larger circle but it is highly unlikely we will begin to see anyone (public figure) stepping forth to admit they have sex, i mean look at the backlash with Miley Cyrus at the MTV awards and she just wiggled her ass. on a lighter note, not only did George Washington grow Hemp, (rumors have he smoked it too) but he also lost all his teeth ( why he had wooden ones) and suffered heart problems due to syphilis and gono. We can only guess what diseases he passed onto his wife and kids

[genericuser]

For the portion of population who are thinking people, we're already there. Even time won't cure the Tea Party of their delusions.

That made me laugh.

I think often it takes a medical issue being personalized/hitting home for some of the most closed minded dolts to look at something from a different perspective...

I'm sure you agree that a dramatic increase in the number of people being tested for HIV and other STDs (NOT calling for government mandated testing), the shocking increase in the number of people infected would certainly personalize it for so many closed minded people who likely would personally know a loved one or friend with the medical issue.

[genericuser]

And of course just like an STI can change a poz guy on meds from undetectable to detectable; and STI can interfere with effectiveness of PrEP.

Absolutely.

Look, I tend to think that quite often guys will claim to be "undetectable" because in today's society "undetectable" is appealing to the largest possible population of potential hookups (while I would never imagine that a guy would tell a tall tale about his status in order to get laid...) and a large group of HIV- guys view "undetectable" like a guy with a bad cold that is not contagious-- they believe that a guy who says he's "undetectable" = a guy who "is unable to infect me".

I mention this for an important reason and that is the need for more HIV awareness, HIV understanding and self-examination (of one's own health)-- this is absolutely critical for several reasons. Frankly, those with a strong HIV understanding knows specific questions to ask to determine if a guy who claims he is "undetectable" is being honest (and he knows not to ask such questions online as it allows time to Google the answers). A guy who makes self-examination (as in one's own health) a priority knows that true status is more often "unknown" than "HIV-". A guy with HIV awareness knows that so many of his peers are ignorant to the facts and unaware of the importance to put in writing (an IM or whatever) if they are HIV+ with a hookup because it could make the difference between being prosecuted and not having to deal with that bullshit.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

YAY! although I think the JizzDump dude is just trying to make sure to defend his point of view too!!

... so you were expecting me to defend your POV???

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

That made me laugh.

I think often it takes a medical issue being personalized/hitting home for some of the most closed minded dolts to look at something from a different perspective...

I'm sure you agree that a dramatic increase in the number of people being tested for HIV and other STDs (NOT calling for government mandated testing), the shocking increase in the number of people infected would certainly personalize it for so many closed minded people who likely would personally know a loved one or friend with the medical issue.

I do agree that would make clear what we suspect. But now we have Oraquik so a lot of hiv testing has gone underground...

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

Absolutely.

Look, I tend to think that quite often guys will claim to be "undetectable" because in today's society "undetectable" is appealing to the largest possible population of potential hookups (while I would never imagine that a guy would tell a tall tale about his status in order to get laid...) and a large group of HIV- guys view "undetectable" like a guy with a bad cold that is not contagious-- they believe that a guy who says he's "undetectable" = a guy who "is unable to infect me".

I mention this for an important reason and that is the need for more HIV awareness, HIV understanding and self-examination (of one's own health)-- this is absolutely critical for several reasons. Frankly, those with a strong HIV understanding knows specific questions to ask to determine if a guy who claims he is "undetectable" is being honest (and he knows not to ask such questions online as it allows time to Google the answers). A guy who makes self-examination (as in one's own health) a priority knows that true status is more often "unknown" than "HIV-". A guy with HIV awareness knows that so many of his peers are ignorant to the facts and unaware of the importance to put in writing (an IM or whatever) if they are HIV+ with a hookup because it could make the difference between being prosecuted and not having to deal with that bullshit.

YES! On this site though it is either sensationalized (poz me poz me poz me) or information is readily ignored. So many don't want to get into the weeds of HIV.

To the thread point, we need a more frank public discussion about how HIV (and other STIs) work. A public figure be it Magic, or a brave younger person would be a boost to the cause. For reasons given previously I would be surprized (but pleased) if such a figure came forth.

[genericuser]

YES! On this site though it is either sensationalized (poz me poz me poz me) or information is readily ignored. So many don't want to get into the weeds of HIV.

To the thread point, we need a more frank public discussion about how HIV (and other STIs) work. A public figure be it Magic, or a brave younger person would be a boost to the cause. For reasons given previously I would be surprized (but pleased) if such a figure came forth.

On a site like this, I'd say the discussion is more honest because people make it known what they want and how they want to get it (if that makes sense)...

You are right that a lot of HIV testing has gone underground and HIV isn't in the spotlight the way it deserves to be... as we discussed earlier in this thread, people don't understand the period an HIV test covers and what that means... Yes a celebrity public advocate could be the catalyst to change that but I'm not holding my breath for it to happen either.