With 6,000 People on PrEP, SF is the PrEPpiest City in the World

[+ Lance_Navarro]

In this article in the BAR talks about Strut, the Castro-based clinic where I volunteer. I have watched it go from a program with folders taking up just 2 rows (yes, we still haven't gone digital), to now almost 2 columns. We have had zero new infections amongst those taking it at least 4 times a week. The Kaiser program (which my partner is on) has the highest number of people on PrEP. Check out the article and share your thoughts. I hope that other cities & towns can recognize the value of PrEP in putting an ending to new HIV infections.

[+ glennnn]

In this article in the BAR talks about Strut, the Castro-based clinic where I volunteer. I have watched it go from a program with folders taking up just 2 rows (yes, we still haven't gone digital), to now almost 2 columns. We have had zero new infections amongst those taking it at least 4 times a week. The Kaiser program (which my partner is on) has the highest number of people on PrEP. Check out the article and share your thoughts. I hope that other cities & towns can recognize the value of PrEP in putting an ending to new HIV infections.

 

You are so right, my friend and it is activists like you who will help us all to recognize the value of PrEP to everyone. It is not just gay men who are at risk. Thousands world wide need protection, too. Thank you for being you!

[LivingnLA]

Thanks for sharing. PrEP is certainly a useful tool in the safer sex toolbox, but it isn't a long-term solution. While rare, there have already been documented examples of resistant strains. As PrEP is adopted more widely, there will be a tipping point in the environment that evolutionarily favors those resistant strains. When that happens, PrEP will become largely ineffective and so will the other treatments based on the same drugs as those resistant strains spread.

 

The long term solution is still a broad-spectrum HIV vaccine and for as many people as possible to avoid HIV exposure before such a vaccine exists.

[+ dutchmuch]

Oh Boy, someone's bowels are in a uproar in San Antone...

[Rudynate]

Thanks for sharing. PrEP is certainly a useful tool in the safer sex toolbox, but it isn't a long-term solution. While rare, there have already been documented examples of resistant strains. As PrEP is adopted more widely, there will be a tipping point in the environment that evolutionarily favors those resistant strains. When that happens, PrEP will become largely ineffective and so will the other treatments based on the same drugs as those resistant strains spread.

 

The long term solution is still a broad-spectrum HIV vaccine and for as many people as possible to avoid HIV exposure before such a vaccine exists.

 

At the moment, there is only one PrEP agent available. That is expected to change quickly.

[LivingnLA]

At the moment, there is only one PrEP agent available. That is expected to change quickly.

 

I know, but that doesn't change the reality that resistant strains will continue to evolve. It's a game of cat and mouse. A vaccine still needs to be a priority long-term. Of course, it's in the drug company's interests not to develop a vaccine, since PrEP and HIV treatments all create lifelong customers paying many thousands for drugs every year for multiple decades, while a vaccine would only be needed a few times in a person's life (innoculation + boosters).

[Rudynate]

I know, but that doesn't change the reality that resistant strains will continue to evolve. It's a game of cat and mouse. A vaccine still needs to be a priority long-term. Of course, it's in the drug company's interests not to develop a vaccine, since PrEP and HIV treatments all create lifelong customers paying many thousands for drugs every year for multiple decades, while a vaccine would only be needed a few times in a person's life (innoculation + boosters).

 

A vaccine and/or a cure will have to be heavily-subsidized by the government because the profit incentive for big pharma is otherwise so weak.

[LivingnLA]

A vaccine and/or a cure will have to be heavily-subsidized by the government because the profit incentive for big pharma is otherwise so weak.

 

Absolutely and government won't act without enough public demand, which is why PrEP is so dangerous if it weakens civic demand for critical government funded research.

[TruthBTold]

As we have recently seen, antbiotics are in a similar situation. However it seems that the true fight toward developing new drugs only comes when the public becomes involved and demands that the government put pressure on pharma companies to develop new antibiotics and the government gives its own agencies more resources to do the same. I see the same happening with anti-HIV drugs. There will always be meager resources given to develop something better (for the drug companies, why put resources into something new while you are making so much money on the established?). Then new seemingly resistant cases will crop up and all sorts of money will be found to fight them and develop new drugs. Who cares that people die in the interim? It is the same old story. As far as PReP goes, it is fairly new and statistics are still being compiled as to its long-range efficacy. So far the statistics demonstrate good prevention rates with few bad side effects. Of course, the scientific community is very upfront about failure to fight other STDs. Every person has to weigh those risks and benefits for themselves.

[mike carey]

The dynamics of drug treatment versus vaccine development differ in countries with single-payer systems or even those with a substantial part of the health system publicly funded. The central transaction becomes one between the pharma and a large health system (and purchasing power) rather than between the pharma and an individual patient. Health 'sysetems' tend to look at the cost over time rather than the immediate transaction costs (although sometimes we doubt that here). It could not be expected to have an immediate effect, and the size of the US health industry as a proportion of the overall advanced Western countries' systems doesn't help.

 

I would not underestimate the power of larger entities (like HMOs) to influence the development of longer term treatments that potentially reduce their costs. My recollection is that when the ebola epidemic occurred and the costs of management and treatment hit the CDC and major US hospitals, vaccines that had been on the back burner suddenly became urgent.