PEP - Information We All Deserve To Know

I just learned about a new medication called PEP - post exposure prophylaxis.

It is a medication one would take (for 28 days) if they fear they had been exposed to HIV within the last 72 hours, and it can even prevent you from becoming infected if you have. The most important thing with this medication is that you must start taking it no more than 72 hours after exposure/feared exposure for it to be effective. (Kinda like the morning after pill for HIV)

Here is a website from over here with more info:

http://www.tht.org.uk/informationres...ureprophylaxi s


So, after learning all that, the first thing I am thinking is "how is it I have never heard of this before?" Well after doing some research on google, come to find out, the CDC in the US has known about it for years. PEP medication is readily available to healthcare workers that could be exposed to HIV through attacks or accidents.
So why haven't we, the common people, been told about this? In some states (California and New York) PEP is finally becoming widely available to people, but in most places (esp. our home state) it is not only not available to people, but healthcare workers have even gone so far as to deny the existence of any such medication. Here is one article I found:
http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-06-...hiv-infection/


This is extremely disturbing to me and also confirms what I was already thinking. My gut reaction is that in the US and especially Texas and other such conservative states, they would never allow such a drug to become readily available, because then that would only encourage people to be even more relaxed about promiscuity. Think about it. If you knew there was a medicine out there that could stop you from becoming HIV + wouldn't it make you not worry as much about having unprotected sex?

Well for me there is still no way I would ever have unconvered with someone new, but the fact is that the general public would be able to breath a sigh of relief, not worry about having more sex as much and in conservative type areas this totally goes against the whole christian ideals.

*sigh* It's sad really, 'cause just like the girl in the article, victims don't have a choice, it was taken from her, and all she wanted was to be able to protect and help herself as much as possible. But instead of equipping victims such as her with a chance to live a healthy life, the legislators would rather we all rot and die to make a point that sex is evil and we deserve the consequences if we should choose to engage in it.

Anyways, my point is, whether or not Texas or the US as a whole ever becomes wise to this, the medication is out there, so if you or someone you know becomes at risk, find a way to get it and make sure it is within the 72 hour time frame.

thebody.com

Do a search there. I've known about this for PEP stuff several years.

First responders and health care pros have relied on this drill for decades. From this needle-stick protocol ( http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/784812-overview ) it should be apparent there are multiple variables to consider. The general risk of HIV transmission is small, and the drug regimen may have significant side effects.

Doctors certainly should provide sufficient guidance to enable the patient to make an informed decision. One factor might help her/him focus: the cost of the 28-day regimen in America is around $1100. If that's your $1100 you probably will have seriously assessed the risk; if it's somebody else's $1100 the government stole to give to you, maybe not so much consideration would be given to real risk.

If you get bit by a rattlesnake and walk into an ER it would be irresponsible to immediately start the antivenin, which could kill you. About a third of rattlesnake bites are dry bites; all they need is a tetanus booster.

The point is that if every broke rubber leads to a month of PEP there's going to be a whole lot of wasted expense and morbidity from side effects of a probably unnecessary drug cocktail.

Oh ok, so the govt doesn't give a rat's ass about the morality of pre-marital sex, all it comes down to is whether or not it's cost effective to save peoples lives. Thanks for clearing that up!!

Btw, here in the UK, bc PEP is provided by the NHS which is funded solely by tax monies (and therefore no out of pocket expense to the patient), they are very strict with who they give to. Meaning, they asses whether or not someone is truly at risk for having contracted HIV. So, a guy coming in for the tenth time saying oh shit, the condom broke, give me some PEP is far less likely to receive treatment versus a rape victim or someone who has engaged in unconvered anal sex with a person of unknown HIV status.
So that being said, I don't see why we couldn't do the same in the US, or alternatively, if someone just wants it to feel better about themselves, if they are paying for it out of pocket, what issue is there in that?
Also, the side effects may not be plesant, but they are no more than diarreha, vomitting, etc etc.

And to what Dear John said, yes, I am sure there are others such as yourself, who have known about this for years, but my point is I really don't think the general public in the US has any idea. The thing that got me the most about the article is how when the girl called Planned Parenthood even the spokeswoman denied any existence of the medication. PP is suppose to be one of the biggest supporters of sexual health issues even catering to abortions and minors receiving confidential medical care, yet they are either ignorant of this medication being out there (doubtful) or are under instruction not to offer it/mention it to patients since they are state funded (more likely).

And by the way, it's not really necessary to insult Texas or Christians in order to ask about this issue. In today's society, information is readily available (as pointed out in above posts), so the state or churches couldn't keep us from finding out about this if they tried.

Victoria, if I had not been in this 'thing of ours', I would have never had a clue about PEP. No doubt a lot of other Americans don't know nor care about PEP because it isn't a part of their lives or one of their concerns.

I really don't see any conspiracy theories involved in the withholding of PEP information. It is there, you just need to know about it, then search.

Oh ok, so the govt doesn't give a rat's ass about the morality of pre-marital sex, all it comes down to is whether or not it's cost effective to save peoples lives. Thanks for clearing that up!! ). Originally Posted by Victoria of Houston

You're welcome, but that's not what I said. Cost is a factor to consider, especially since the overall risk is small, and nobody is more qualified to decide whether the case specific risk of infection justifies the cost than the person at risk, paying with her own moeny.

Try not to go hysterical.

Btw, here in the UK, bc PEP is provided by the NHS which is funded solely by tax monies (and therefore no out of pocket expense to the patient), they are very strict with who they give to. Meaning, they asses whether or not someone is truly at risk for having contracted HIV.). Originally Posted by Victoria of Houston

Please tell me you're not saying you trust a government functionary to make a decision in your interest more than you trust yourownself to do that. You have one very focused interest; the bureaucrat has multiple fragments of interest...some of which may not even be related to duties of the office.

And to what Dear John said, yes, I am sure there are others such as yourself, who have known about this for years, but my point is I really don't think the general public in the US has any idea. The thing that got me the most about the article is how when the girl called Planned Parenthood even the spokeswoman denied any existence of the medication. Originally Posted by Victoria of Houston

Consider the source. PP has one interest, and only one: homicide on an industrial scale, done for profit. Any other "service' is merely a feeder channel to the kill zone.

Ignorance is the most expensive commodity, as well as our national tragedy. There are no secrets. The information is available, freely, but mostly to active seekers such as yourself, not passive soakers.

Touche my friend

Now, to get things back on track, and I know I was the one who started the whole angle in the first place, but my main point (aside from personal beliefs or opinions), is that for whatever reason(s) the US govt has decided that the nation should not have open knowledge or access to this medication and I guess I just find that really f*kd up.

And yes, I do know the infomation is out there freely available to all, but if you never even had any idea that something like this exists, what would make you search for it in the first place?? If you don't know, you just don't know.

Touche my friend

Now, to get things back on track, and I know I was the one who started the whole angle in the first place, but my main point (aside from personal beliefs or opinions), is that for whatever reason(s) the US govt has decided that the nation should not have open knowledge or access to this medication and I guess I just find that really f*kd up.

And yes, I do know the infomation is out there freely available to all, but if you never even had any idea that something like this exists, what would make you search for it in the first place?? If you don't know, you just don't know. Originally Posted by Victoria of Houston

I'm not sure what failure or problem you're lamenting here... By your own admission and experience, the information is readily available. Is it the government's responsibility to knock on your door and hand you a pamphlet? Should we be including the existence of this drug in secondary health class? Should there be a full-frontal ad campaign disseminating the information?

I think the purpose of the drug treatment is to treat those who are at high risk for exposure to HIV. Even knuckleheads who regularly practice unsafe sex are at relatively low risk as compared to a healthcare professional working with drug addicts or indigents, for example. Just because a treatment is available and you are at risk (nevermind if its statistically low) doesn't necessarily mean you should pursue it, or that you are being neglected by not having received the information. By that logic, the government should have informed you of your lung cancer treatment options for your exposure to secondhand smoke...

As with most things healthcare-related, its information and a discussion that belongs in your doctor's office with someone who knows you and your healthcare needs -- not on some untrained, remote bureaucrats desk. But that's just my opinion.

I'm not sure what failure or problem you're lamenting here... By your own admission and experience, the information is readily available. Is it the government's responsibility to knock on your door and hand you a pamphlet? Should we be including the existence of this drug in secondary health class? Should there be a full-frontal ad campaign disseminating the information?

I think the purpose of the drug treatment is to treat those who are at high risk for exposure to HIV. Even knuckleheads who regularly practice unsafe sex are at relatively low risk as compared to a healthcare professional working with drug addicts or indigents, for example. Just because a treatment is available and you are at risk (nevermind if its statistically low) doesn't necessarily mean you should pursue it, or that you are being neglected by not having received the information. By that logic, the government should have informed you of your lung cancer treatment options for your exposure to secondhand smoke...

As with most things healthcare-related, its information and a discussion that belongs in your doctor's office with someone who knows you and your healthcare needs -- not on some untrained, remote bureaucrats desk. But that's just my opinion. Originally Posted by enderwiggin

Ender,
I never paid that much attention to Lord of the Rings. How many levels of elf are there on Dantooine? Shouldn't you have elevated your status by now?

Ender,
I never paid that much attention to Lord of the Rings. How many levels of elf are there on Dantooine? Shouldn't you have elevated your status by now? Originally Posted by boardman

"Maybe self-improvement isn't the answer, maybe self-destruction is the answer." Tyler Durden

Ender,
I never paid that much attention to Lord of the Rings. How many levels of elf are there on Dantooine? Shouldn't you have elevated your status by now? Originally Posted by boardman

SCREW all these comments..back to the MAIN theme of her post that is of interest...since when would she be ABLE to "...give a rat's ass.."???
I don't "give"..I RENT!!(for time and companionship only..and by agreeing to participat, you are promising---no finger crossing--that you are not LE..because this is not an ad for prostituion. And by you answering this thread/post, you would be held by the rules of providing that this would not hold up in a court of law...blah..blah..blah)

Victoria,

Thank you for a very valuable post.

This is important information that needs more exposure.

I will post it on some non-sex related sites.

Apologies for the loony threadjacking wingnuts that try to make everything political.

Apparently, there are also some wingnuts in charge at Memorial Herman.

Victoria,

Apologies for the loony threadjacking wingnuts that try to make everything political. Originally Posted by JohnnyFarangly

Fringely, there are also PEP protocols for rabies and lockjaw. I hope that's a comfort to you. You should, however, be aware that some of them involve hyper-immune horse serum that could react adversely with horse's asses. Just FYI. I'd recommend you skin test yourself first.

Victoria,

Apparently, there are also some wingnuts in charge at Memorial Herman. Originally Posted by JohnnyFarangly

What prompted this libelous assertion? Just another random and brilliant insight, apropos of nothing? Brain bubbles popping? Flashback?

Help us out here, Sherlock.