Write a Comment
3 Comments
This is interesting not many people have voiced a position about the money needed in this effort. Many have expressed the need to move forward and m forward wisely. However when the meat of the debate is on the table, PREP is stalled, on a list of priorities of our culture in funding and allotment of importance to the masses and PREP is not important, clearly at this time, not on the radar. My thinking is it is just another protocol in the Great Experiment called AIDS. Rx sample or coupon, hum
You should also have said that the figure of $360,000 per infection averted is in fact a net cost of zero. As the researchers say "A threshold of $360,000 per infection averted was selected as cost-saving [i.e. net cost of zero] as the downstream medical costs averted from preventing a new infection would offset the programmatic costs of preventing that infection" [i.e. one HIV infection costs $360,000 per lifetime].
Directphoto.org
So the problem here, then is the price of the drug and not the treatment, known as PrEP. What the study does not say is that in 2017, these figures will not be valid due to the fact that Truvada will be available as a much cheaper generic drug. And that the cost of treating an HIV positive person with tri-therapy ARVs, today, costs $70,000.00/year for life. (x 50,000 more cases/yr. So avoiding that, plus the hidden costs of being HIV positive, too many to mention, are not taken into account
October 20, 2014 • Paris, France