Advertisement
<< Back To Article
Evaluating the Costs of Earlier HIV Treatment

Write a Comment

I have read and agree to the terms and conditions in the Posting Rules*

6 Comments

Marc R

This is a question I've always had -- Why would anyone allow HIV to chew through a huge percentage of their immune system (cells down to 350 or 200), before starting treatment? Waiting makes no sense unless tolerance is the issue. I believe, start treatment as early as possible and preserve your immune system!! I hear all the issues regarding cost, toxicity, etc., but I have and will continue to jump through hoops to procure the meds that allow me to live as healthy as I am.

November 26, 2008 New York

Dimitrios

I found out i was Positive Feb.2007 I had a CD4 counts of 4, Viral Load of over 100,000. Im on ARVs since. Now i have CD4 count of 179 and undectable viral load. I am recovering from Graves Disease now, but at a faster rate than my doctor has seen.

November 26, 2008 Charlotte

Patrick Dutoit

Who would most certainly benefit the most, if you start treating at CD4 counts of 500 , most certainly the pharmaceutical companies. A longterm survivor Patrick Dutoit

November 20, 2008 Fort Lauderdale

mph

Cost. Not everyone is on ADAP or will qualify. Some don't have health ins bu make to much to get on ADAP or private policy, I have private health ins and I see the cost of the drugs. It will break my coverage policy limits and I will have nothing. The cost are out of this world. I'm not neutral on the subject but peole on ADAP or other programs do not, I repeat do not know the cost of even old drugs like AZT or zerit. To not consider this a consideration is absurd.

November 20, 2008 saint Petersburg fl

gotstronger

it is a discussion that must be taken with an expert and depends on variables as viral load and prescence of symptoms or not not. in absolute values consult with an expert. in ase of doubt look for a second opinion. remember its a long road andson's life expectancy is in the middle of if.

November 19, 2008 san juan

Tad

For all the discussion of adherence, side-effects and economy, where's the discussion of public health impact? There must be a benefit to agressively treating newly infected patients to reduce their viral load and minimize the chance of further transmission. A lower number of new cases means a lower future treatement cost. Stop stalling the discussion of the third rail of HIV treatment -- public health impact.

November 19, 2008 San Francisco

Advertisement

Hot topics


POZ uses cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience, analyze our traffic and personalize ads. Our Privacy Policy

Manage

POZ uses cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience, analyze our traffic and personalize ads. By remaining on our website, you indicate your consent to our Privacy Policy and our Cookie Usage.