New topic
Printablenvm too personal  [Edited 7/11/07 11:36am] | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: Rhondab said: I know this...BUT nonetheless let the testing first start in Europe and the US. I don't trust any experimentation in Africa. We have more laws for research and clinical trials. and CONGRATSSSSS on the tcells.....hows your viral load? Viral load has been zero for a couple years. the tcells though kept falling. and more importantly my precentage of tcells to other WBC which has always been high has gone up even more. Africa is giong to get the focus. This adminstration and many people in this country don't think HIV is an American problem anymore. My concern with Africa is the lack of regulations. I don't want them to "test" on them. and you're welcome AndGCM  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rhondab said: ehuffnsd said: Viral load has been zero for a couple years. the tcells though kept falling. and more importantly my precentage of tcells to other WBC which has always been high has gone up even more. Africa is giong to get the focus. This adminstration and many people in this country don't think HIV is an American problem anymore. My concern with Africa is the lack of regulations. I don't want them to "test" on them. and you're welcome AndGCM | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rhondab said: ehuffnsd said: Viral load has been zero for a couple years. the tcells though kept falling. and more importantly my precentage of tcells to other WBC which has always been high has gone up even more. Africa is giong to get the focus. This adminstration and many people in this country don't think HIV is an American problem anymore. My concern with Africa is the lack of regulations. I don't want them to "test" on them. and you're welcome AndGCM Totally understandable concerns that you're expressing. Just to play devil's advocate, though. . . when it comes to really assessing efficacy, Africa is a better place to do it, because the infection rate is so much higher. A working vaccine making it to market in, say, a year, vs two years, would save SO many lives. Yes, trials would need to happen ethically. Always. But. . . to just make a blanket statement of "not in Africa first" could, in practice, harm a lot of Africans.  oh noes, prince is gonna soo me!!1! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HereToRockYourWorld said: Rhondab said: My concern with Africa is the lack of regulations. I don't want them to "test" on them. and you're welcome AndGCM Totally understandable concerns that you're expressing. Just to play devil's advocate, though. . . when it comes to really assessing efficacy, Africa is a better place to do it, because the infection rate is so much higher. A working vaccine making it to market in, say, a year, vs two years, would save SO many lives. Yes, trials would need to happen ethically. Always. But. . . to just make a blanket statement of "not in Africa first" could, in practice, harm a lot of Africans. I hear you but I disagree. The protection of the patient/client during clincial trials and research is vital. I completely question the healthcare system in the various countries of Africa to be able monitor research on this level effectively. Whereever the trials would take place would benefit the patient/client who is HIV positive. Saving a life is saving a life be it in Harlem, South Africa, Kenya, south east Asia. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rhondab said: HereToRockYourWorld said: Totally understandable concerns that you're expressing. Just to play devil's advocate, though. . . when it comes to really assessing efficacy, Africa is a better place to do it, because the infection rate is so much higher. A working vaccine making it to market in, say, a year, vs two years, would save SO many lives. Yes, trials would need to happen ethically. Always. But. . . to just make a blanket statement of "not in Africa first" could, in practice, harm a lot of Africans. I hear you but I disagree. The protection of the patient/client during clincial trials and research is vital. I completely question the healthcare system in the various countries of Africa to be able monitor research on this level effectively. Whereever the trials would take place would benefit the patient/client who is HIV positive. Saving a life is saving a life be it in Harlem, South Africa, Kenya, south east Asia. Their protection IS vital, and it's never ok to put them in danger. I'm not saying that poorly conducted trials would be ok under any circumstances. But if trials could be conducted more rapidly in Africa (d/t a higher infection rate providing solid numbers more quickly), it would benefit everybody FASTER, thus saving additional lives. That's my only point.  oh noes, prince is gonna soo me!!1! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HereToRockYourWorld said: Rhondab said: I hear you but I disagree. The protection of the patient/client during clincial trials and research is vital. I completely question the healthcare system in the various countries of Africa to be able monitor research on this level effectively. Whereever the trials would take place would benefit the patient/client who is HIV positive. Saving a life is saving a life be it in Harlem, South Africa, Kenya, south east Asia. Their protection IS vital, and it's never ok to put them in danger. I'm not saying that poorly conducted trials would be ok under any circumstances. But if trials could be conducted more rapidly in Africa (d/t a higher infection rate providing solid numbers more quickly), it would benefit everybody FASTER, thus saving additional lives. That's my only point. i have to disagree. HIV/AIDS still carries a weighty stigma in Africa... much more than here, it would be at a disadvantage finding willing patients. You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: HereToRockYourWorld said: Their protection IS vital, and it's never ok to put them in danger. I'm not saying that poorly conducted trials would be ok under any circumstances. But if trials could be conducted more rapidly in Africa (d/t a higher infection rate providing solid numbers more quickly), it would benefit everybody FASTER, thus saving additional lives. That's my only point. i have to disagree. HIV/AIDS still carries a weighty stigma in Africa... much more than here, it would be at a disadvantage finding willing patients. IF!  IF trials COULD be conducted more quickly, and still be done properly. I'm not saying that they could. I don't know.
I'm really objecting to the blanket "not in Africa" statement. I think this is too complicated and important for that kind of sweeping statement. [Edited 7/12/07 10:47am] oh noes, prince is gonna soo me!!1! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HereToRockYourWorld said: ehuffnsd said: i have to disagree. HIV/AIDS still carries a weighty stigma in Africa... much more than here, it would be at a disadvantage finding willing patients. IF! IF trials COULD be conducted more quickly, and still be done properly. I'm not saying that they could. I don't know.
I'm really objecting to the blanket "not in Africa" statement. I think this is too complicated and important for that kind of sweeping statement. [Edited 7/12/07 10:47am] i think the trials would be handled better in some place outside of Africa simply because of the stigma. I highly recommend this months issue of Poz Magazine's look at life in Republic of Congo http://www.poz.com/archiv...2023.shtml You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HereToRockYourWorld said: ehuffnsd said: i have to disagree. HIV/AIDS still carries a weighty stigma in Africa... much more than here, it would be at a disadvantage finding willing patients. IF! IF trials COULD be conducted more quickly, and still be done properly. I'm not saying that they could. I don't know.
I'm really objecting to the blanket "not in Africa" statement. I think this is too complicated and important for that kind of sweeping statement. [Edited 7/12/07 10:47am] And I don't think this is important?  I think I've explain my point of view and I really don't find my statement so sweeping. I've worked in the HIV arena along time so I'm not just throwing out any old comment.
Africa has very complicated issues, gov't, stigma, access to basic care....it would be VERY hard to conduct clincial trial there and make sure that the patient is receiving adequate treatment. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rhondab said: HereToRockYourWorld said: IF! IF trials COULD be conducted more quickly, and still be done properly. I'm not saying that they could. I don't know.
I'm really objecting to the blanket "not in Africa" statement. I think this is too complicated and important for that kind of sweeping statement. [Edited 7/12/07 10:47am] And I don't think this is important? I think I've explain my point of view and I really don't find my statement so sweeping. I've worked in the HIV arena along time so I'm not just throwing out any old comment.
Africa has very complicated issues, gov't, stigma, access to basic care....it would be VERY hard to conduct clincial trial there and make sure that the patient is receiving adequate treatment. Oh my GAWD, I didn't say that you don't think it's important! I'm voicing a (very slightly) different perspective! I'm basically advocating keeping an open mind. :backs slowly from the room: oh noes, prince is gonna soo me!!1! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |