Jump to content

9 posts in this topic

Posted

Michael Lucas has been taking Truvada, the HIV prevention pill, for about a year now. And the 42-year-old adult film director and gay porn performer readily admits that the decision wasn't all that hard to make

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

helps reduce infection rates by more than 90 percent.


To be fair, it's been proven to reduce infection rates by 50-60%. Mathematical models suggest that it could reduce it by more than 90% but this hasn't been tested or proved in clinical trials yet.

So people should still take appropriate precautions, and not rely completely on this drug. That said, a 50-60% reduction rate is still pretty dam good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To be fair, it's been proven to reduce infection rates by 50-60%. Mathematical models suggest that it could reduce it by more than 90% but this hasn't been tested or proved in clinical trials yet.

So people should still take appropriate precautions, and not rely completely on this drug. That said, a 50-60% reduction rate is still pretty dam good.

 

Even 50-60% reduction rate is amazing.  Why isn't this making the news?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

^ I suspect, because of the $13,000 pricetag. ;)
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Just have to watch out for super aids now.

 

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIfhklhZ7OI[/media]

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Covered by insurers?  Why should this be covered by insurance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Covered by insurers?  Why should this be covered by insurance?

I'm wondering the same thing... A much better and cheaper prevention is a condom which protects against more than just HIV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Covered by insurers?  Why should this be covered by insurance?

 

 

I'm wondering the same thing... A much better and cheaper prevention is a condom which protects against more than just HIV.

 

 

 

Why shouldn't it be covered? Viagra is covered. And condoms are not 100% effective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Because Viagra is actually fixing a medical condition. This is just to enable someone to have pleasure without as much risk.  So it's 13,000 per year and there's only a good chance you wont get sick.  That's a terrible risk and burden on the people who pay insurance.  If they get sick, and 40% will, then its all wasted money.  Then you are paying for a much more expensive medical care until they die.  Its like russian roulette.  Beyond that you are guaranteed to get more people sick with this medicine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.