Saturday 30 November 2013

World AIDS Day 2013

https://www.un.org/en/events/aidsday/














10 goals for 2015

  • Sexual transmission of HIV reduced by half, including among young people, men who have sex with men and transmission in the context of sex work;
  • Vertical transmission of HIV eliminated and AIDS-related maternal deaths reduced by half;
  • All new HIV infections prevented among people who use drugs;
  • Universal access to antiretroviral therapy for people living with HIV who are eligible for treatment;
  • TB deaths among people living with HIV reduced by half;
  • All people living with HIV and households affected by HIV are addressed in all national social protection strategies and have access to essential care and support;
  • Countries with punitive laws and practices around HIV transmission, sex work, drug use or homosexuality that block effective responses reduced by half;
  • HIV-related restrictions on entry, stay and residence eliminated in half of the countries that have such restrictions;
  • HIV-specific needs of women and girls are addressed in at least half of all national HIV responses;
  • Zero tolerance for gender-based violence.

New aggressive strain of HIV discovered

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/11/29/new-aggressive-strain-hiv-discovered/

FoxNews.com

HIV CDC.jpg

Researchers have discovered a new, more aggressive strain of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) that develops into AIDS much more quickly than other strains, Medical News Today reported.
In a new study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, scientists detailed the new strain as a “recombinant” virus – a hybrid of two virus strains. Called A3/02 – a cross between the 02AG and A3 viruses – the strain can develop into AIDS in just five years after first infection – one of the shortest time periods for HIV-1 types.
"Recombinants seem to be more vigorous and more aggressive than the strains from which they developed,” said first author Angelica Palm, a doctoral candidate at Lund University in Sweden.
So far, the A3/02 strain has only been seen in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa, but other studies have shown that recombinants are spreading more quickly across the globe.
"HIV is an extremely dynamic and variable virus. New subtypes and recombinant forms of HIV-1 have been introduced to our part of the world, and it is highly likely that there are a large number of circulating recombinants of which we know little or nothing,” said senior author Patrik Medstran, professor of clinical virology at Lund University. “We therefore need to be aware of how the HIV-1 epidemic changes over time."

AIDS proves stubborn in Europe as new HIV infections rise

Fox News - Fair & Balanced
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/11/27/aids-proves-stubborn-in-europe-as-new-hiv-infections-rise/

Reuters

Aidsevent.jpg

Some 131,000 people were newly infected with HIV in Europe and nearby countries in 2012, an 8 percent rise from a year earlier and a worrying reversal of a recent downward trend in AIDS cases in the West.
A report published by the World Health Organisation's (WHO) European office and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) showed a steady increase in new HIV cases over the last year, but by far the majority of cases were in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
"The high and increasing number of AIDS cases in the East is indicative of late HIV diagnosis, low treatment coverage and delayed initiation of life-saving HIV treatment," the ECDC/WHO report said.
Some 76,000 new HIV infections were reported in Russia alone, accounting for more than half the region's cases.
While reported AIDS cases had been declining steadily in western Europe - dropping 48 percent between 2006 and 2012 - in the east of the WHO's European Region, which includes many Asian former Soviet republics, the number of people newly diagnosed with AIDS increased by 113 percent.
Experts said this increase was closely linked to a lack of prevention measures for people at high risk of contracting the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) that causes AIDS.
These include clean needles and syringes for drug users, free condoms and easy access to HIV testing for sex workers and gay men, and early access to treatment with AIDS drugs - known as antiretroviral therapy (ART) - for those who test positive.
"Our data show that nearly every second person tested positive for HIV (in the region) - that's 49 percent - is diagnosed late in the course of their infection, which means they need antiretroviral therapy right away because their immune system is already starting to fail," said the ECDC's director Marc Sprenger.
Worldwide, more than 35 million people have HIV - the vast majority of them in sub-Saharan Africa where access to prevention, testing and drugs is often limited by low funds.
Cocktails and combinations of AIDS drugs can keep the virus in check for many years, allowing those who are diagnosed and treated early to live full and long lives.
Yet even in the relatively wealthy WHO European Region, only one in three people with HIV is getting the ART treatment they need, Wednesday's report said.
Michel Kazatchkine, the United Nation's HIV/AIDS Special Envoy in Eastern Europe, told Reuters in an interview this month that HIV epidemics are becoming more concentrated in marginalized groups such as sex workers, drug users and gay men, and could defy global attempts to combat AIDS if no progress is made in turning them around.
Sprenger said that to start to do that more effectively "we need to make HIV testing more available across Europe to ensure earlier diagnosis and more effective treatment and care".
Zsuzsanna Jakab, the WHO's regional director for Europe, said providing AIDS drugs earlier for those infected with HIV would allow them to live longer and healthier lives, and help reduce the risk that they transmit HIV to others.
"While we are not at the end of the HIV epidemic in Europe, our goal of halting and reversing the spread of HIV by 2015 is still achievable in many countries," she said.

Tuesday 12 November 2013

(No) Condom Culture: Why Teens Aren’t Practicing Safe Sex

http://healthland.time.com/2013/11/12/no-condom-culture-why-teens-arent-practicing-safe-sex/
By 

The percentage of young people using condoms has stalled, while STD rates are on the rise



[photo: Getty Images]

There were certain things that the 1990s just did better — including getting the word out about the dangers of unprotected sex.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the percentage of American students using condoms hit its peak at around 60% a decade ago, and has stalled since then, even declining among some demographics. A recent study released by the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada found that nearly 50% of sexually active college students aren’t using condoms. Other reports have found that while teenagers are likely to use a condom the first time they have sex, their behavior becomes inconsistent after that.
Health officials from Oregon to Georgia are ringing alarm bells about rising rates of sexually transmitted diseases, worried that kids aren’t getting the message. Sex education is more robust than it was for previous generations, but a 2012 Guttmacher Institute report revealed that while nearly 90% of high schools are teaching students about abstinence and STDs, fewer than 60% are providing lessons about contraception methods.
The CDC estimates that half of new STD infections occur among young people. Americans ages 15 to 24 contract chlamydia and gonorrhea at four times the rate of the general population, and those in their early 20s have the highest reported cases of syphilis and HIV. Young men and women are more likely than older people to report having no sex in the past year, yet those who are having sex are more likely to have multiple partners, which increases the risk of STDs.
“We need to do better as a nation,” says Laura Kann, an expert in youth risk behaviors at the CDC. “Far too many kids in this country continue to be infected with HIV and continue to be at risk.”
When condom-usage rates were on the upswing in the ’90s, America was in the midst of an AIDS epidemic that was claiming young lives daily. The fear of the disease gave heft to safe-sex campaigns. Today, public-health officials are partly a victim of their own success; contemporary teenagers grew up after the terror had subsided, thanks to antiviral drugs and those messages that helped bring infection rates down. “The young people today know HIV as a manageable, chronic disease,” Kann says. “It’s not something that can kill you in their eyes. So that leads, most likely, to an attitude that it’s not something that they have to protect themselves from.”
In Oregon’s Lane County, senior health official Patrick Luedtke is in the midst of confronting an ongoing gonorrhea outbreak, with rates jumping as much as 40% in recent years. Like Kann, he believes complacency is a large part of the problem. “People don’t have the fear of death from sex like they had 15 years ago,” he says. “For the teenagers, that fear is gone, and people are not practicing safe sex as much as they used to.”
Other research collected by the CDC shows that some schools aren’t hammering away at the safe-sex lessons like they once did. In Alabama, Alaska and Florida, for instance, fewer public schools are teaching teenagers how to obtain condoms and why it’s important to use condoms. “Schools have competing health issues that they’re asked to deal with, things like tobacco use, bullying, the obesity epidemic. It’s been hard to keep attention focused on HIV and STD prevention,” Kann says. “This complacency issue [is not] unique to just youth themselves.” Last week, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement supporting better access to condoms for teenagers, saying schools are still hesitant to provide them because of an enduring fear that access to condoms will make kids have more sex.
Public institutions beyond schools have had setbacks too. Budget cuts in Oregon meant that Luedtke’s county closed its STD clinic. “People don’t stop having sex because of the bad economy,” he says. “Where are the resources?”
Even in places where there’s money and free condoms to go around, health departments haven’t necessarily seen safe sex go viral. New York City health officials are reporting that only 1 in 3 adult residents uses protection, despite years of PSAs and prophylactic handouts under Mayor Michael Bloomberg. While condom use among young people in New York City is slightly up since 2009, that puts it on par with the stagnant nationwide average.
Kann says there are broader societal factors at work too, ones that disproportionately affect African-American youth. Compared with the population as a whole, their parents are less educated and have lower incomes, both factors that have been linked to sexually risky behaviors, including having unprotected sex. Adolescents who postpone sex have parents who are more educated. Lower incomes, meanwhile, are associated with factors like parents working multiple jobs, which can mean kids are left home alone without a watchful eye to factor into their decisionmaking.
Some research has suggested that sexually active Americans simply assume their partner is free of STDs, and an infected partner may be unaware, given that diseases like “silent” chlamydia often don’t have obvious symptoms. And there is a perception — if not a diehard belief — that using condoms makes sex less pleasurable. That’s why Bill Gates challenged designers earlier this year to create a better-feeling condom that sexually active people might be more likely to use.
While it’s hardly a sexy, revolutionary proposition like remaking the condom, Kann says the key to driving condom use higher is more education. Canada’s survey, for instance, was revealing about how relatively unimportant the students considered STDs. Those who used condoms were much more likely to cite pregnancy than STDs as their main concern; 54% said their single motivation for using protection was birth control, while just 6% cited STDs as their sole reason.
“It’s really critical for kids to know about their risk,” Kann says. “They need to know how to get tested. They need to know how to prevent infection. And we can’t do that alone here at CDC. We’re going to need action not only by this agency but also by parents, by schools and communities.”

Wednesday 23 October 2013

Police seek to ban condoms from saunas in Edinburgh

The Independent
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/police-seek-to-ban-condoms-from-saunas-in-edinburgh-8898421.html
ADAM WITHNALL
Sex worker support charities say the move will just lead to increased rates of HIV

Police are trying to get condoms banned from Edinburgh’s licensed saunas, in a move which charities say will increase HIV rates and force the city’s prostitutes out onto the street.

A meeting of the Scottish capital’s licensing committee will decide today if a number of saunas – traditionally tolerated as a safe place for sex workers to conduct their business – will be forced to close.
Police Scotland has written to the city council arguing that the five saunas should only receive licences on the condition that there is a ban on all “items of a sexual nature” on the premises.

Charities which support sex workers in the city have attacked the police’s objections as “morality-driven”, and say it would put the lives of prostitutes and their clients at risk.

The group Scot-Pep (Scottish Prostitutes Education Project) quoted a recent report from the World Health Organisation (WHO) which said that governments “should take action to end the practice” of using condoms as evidence of sex work.

The WHO said: “Condoms should never be considered to be evidence of sex work, either in official laws or through unofficial law-enforcement practices, and condoms should never be confiscated from sex workers.”

Nadine Stott, a board member for Scot-Pep, told the BBC: “This goes against all basic common sense. It also places Scotland really out of step with the rest of the world.

“We are really shocked that, in private, the police have been quite clear to us. They said that the policy (on saunas) wasn't changing.

“We think this highlights how inappropriate the police are as a regulatory body of sex workers in a criminal context.”

Today’s decision comes after police raids in March which saw six premises, almost half of Edinburgh’s 13 saunas, have their licences put up for review.

Scot-Pep said those raids hailed a shift in attitudes which will see “Edinburgh follow Glasgow's lead, and drive women out onto the street rather than let us work in discretion and safely indoors”.

They quoted one sex-worker, named only as Cat, who said: “Condoms as evidence is really scary. They’re going to perpetrate these traumatic, horrible raids, and for what? To find condoms in my purse? All women should be afraid of these developments, but sex workers especially. What if they confiscate my condoms and I still have to work that night?”

Independent MSP Margo MacDonald told the Edinburgh Evening News: “I don’t know what their intention is but the effect of this would completely destroy the safer sex message that has been delivered to the sex industry and wider community over the last 30 years.

“With a line-up of expert and unimpeachable organisations opposed to this it makes the police look isolated and rather amateurish.”

A Police Scotland spokesman told the BBC: “Police Scotland recently provided reports to the Council Regulatory Committee in respect of a number of public entertainment licence renewals.

“In cases where there was evidence of criminality or premises operating out-with the conditions of their licence, objections were made to those licences being renewed.

“Police Scotland will continue to work with partners to inspect and report on licensed premises operating within Edinburgh in order to keep people safe.

“Whenever criminal activity, or licensing contraventions are detected within these venues, officers will respond appropriately and report all offences to the relevant authority.”

Tuesday 22 October 2013

Breast Milk ‘Neutralises HIV and Holds Potential for Prevention Therapy’

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/515616/20131021/breast-milk-neutralises-hiv-prevention-therapy-protection.htm
 

Protein in breast milk protects babies from getting HIV from infected mothers, says Duke Medicine research team

Breast feeding

Breast milk has the ability to neutralise HIV and so protects babies from getting the infection from their mothers.
Researchers at Duke Medicine, North Carolina, have identified a protein in HIV that has the potential to lead to HIV prevention therapies.
The researchers found a protein in breast milk called Tenascin-C, or TNC), which has previously been identified as having healing properties, also has antimicrobial properties that kills infections such as HIV.
They say this property accounts for why not more nursing infants born to women with HIV also become infected.
Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers have identified how HNC in breast milk binds to and neutralises HIV, which appears to protect exposed infants who would otherwise have become infected from repeat exposure to the virus.
It is estimated that 330,000 children get HIV from their mothers during pregnancy, birth or breastfeeding every year. International health organisations are looking to eliminate mother-to-child transmission to babies through alternatives to antiretroviral therapy that are not affordable.
Researchers say the breast milk protein could be utilised to develop an oral prevention therapy similar to the rehydration salts routinely given to babies in developing parts of the world.
"Even though we have antiretroviral drugs that can work to prevent mother-to-child transmission, not every pregnant woman is being tested for HIV, and less than 60 percent are receiving the prevention drugs, particularly in countries with few resources," said senior author Sallie Permar.
Captures and neutralises virus
"So there is still a need for alternative strategies to prevent mother-to-child transmission, which is why this work is important."
The researchers took mature milk samples from uninfected women and looked for HIV-neutralisation activity. By separating proteins, they were able to identify the TNC protein.
Further analysis showed how TNC blocks the HIV virus engry by capturing virus particles and neutralising them.
 "TNC is a component of the extracellular matrix that is integral to how tissues hold themselves together," Permar said. "This is a protein involved during wound healing, playing a role in tissue repair. It is also known to be important in foetal development, but its reason for being a component of breast milk or its antiviral properties had never been described.
"It's likely that TNC is acting in concert with other anti-HIV factors in breast milk, and further research should explore this, but given TNC's broad-spectrum HIV-1-binding and neutralising activity, it could be developed as an HIV-prevention therapy, given orally to infants prior to breastfeeding, similar to the way oral rehydration salts are routinely administered to infants in developing regions."
She said that because TNC a naturally occurring component of breast milk, it is inherently safe and may also avoid the problem of HIV resistance to antiretroviral therapies.
Barton F Haynes, director of the Duke Human Vaccine Institute, said: "The discovery of the HIV inhibiting effect of this common protein in breast milk provides a potential explanation for why nursing infants born to HIV-infected mothers do not become infected more often than they do.
It also provides support for inducing inhibitory factors in breast milk that might be even more protective, such as antibodies, that would completely protect babies from HIV infection in this setting."
To report problems or to leave feedback about this article, e-mail:h.osborne@ibtimes.co.uk 
To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.co.uk

Sunday 15 September 2013

Why Don’t We Use Condoms for Oral Sex?

http://www.psmag.com/health/why-dont-we-wear-condoms-for-oral-sex-60632/

We really should, but the numbers show that almost no one does.


I remember my 27th birthday party better than I remember most parties, mostly because of a guy who wasn’t even there. That week’s New Yorker included a feature by Jerome Groopman, who warned of a new antibiotic-resistant strain of gonorrhea colonizing the throats of hosts from Japan to Sweden: “the harbinger of a sexually transmitted global epidemic.” Everyone was talking about it. Couples clung tighter, singles tried to shrug it off, silently praying they could pair off before this latest nastiness hit our shores. The rueful consensus was that no one in attendance—no matter their gender, race, sexual proclivities, or relationship status—regularly used condoms for oral sex.
Earlier this month Michael Douglas told the Guardian that his throat cancer was “caused by something called HPV, which actually comes about from cunnilingus.” The dangers associated with the terrifying new strain of gonorrhea are greatest for those who give oral sex to men, but the risk of HPV-related oral cancers seems higher for those who go down on women. A 2012 study published by the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 10 percent of men and 3.6 percent of women have HPV in their throats. (It should be noted that the virus’ presence is not a guarantee of cancer.) Along with these sexually-transmitted infections, pretty much everything else is transmittable through oral sex: Standard-issue gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes, hepatitis B, and chlamydia, the second easiest-to-catch STI in America after HPV.
With gossipy stories about a celebrity’s cunnilingus-induced cancer sprouting from every corner of the Internet, the time seemed ripe for a more thorough, if still completely unscientific, poll of my friends. My inquiry—“Have you ever used a condom or dental dam during oral sex?”—was met with a resounding negative. Responses ranged from “Haha, I don’t think anyone actually ever does that” to “Well, no, but it’s not so dangerous as other kinds of sex” to “Blech. Rubber.”
ACCORDING TO SCIENTISTS, MY friends aren’t necessarily a pack of deviant outliers. Unprotected oral sex is inarguably safer than unsheathed anal or vaginal sex, especially in regards to HIV, and it has no reproductive repercussions. But as Tracy Clark-Floryreported in Salon last year, we’ve become complacentbecause it’s so much less-scary than other common forms of raw carnality. Sure, even the vast majority of 9th graders admit that while oral sex is safer it still includes some risk of contracting chlamydia and HIV. (Only 14 and 13 percent, respectively, thought that there was zero chance of infection.) But while we claim to know there is danger, we’ve shown our priorities with our genitalia: Everyone from U.S. teens (70 percent) to adults (82 percent) to British teens (80 percent) forgoes condoms every time they have oral sex.
Sexual and public health organizations haven’t been particularly rigorous in focusing on the issue, either. With limited resources and facing widespread sex-ed dysfunction, it makes sense to focus on the types of intercourse with the highest potential for damage. It is the norm, in many contexts, to use condoms for penetrative sex, but in 2004 the American Social Health Association (ASHA) found that about one-fourth of single adults never use condoms during vaginal sex. Other sources are even less sanguine. The National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior only found one-fourth of vaginal intercourse protected (one-third among singles) and the numbers drop dramatically for every age bracket all the way up from 14-to-17 to 61-plus. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) shows condom use on the rise between 2002 and 2006-to-2010, both “at first sex” and among unmarried people between the ages of 15 and 44 who had sex in the last four weeks. In the latter group 68.3 percent of men and 71.6 of women still reported “never” using condoms. (These CDC numbers refer to vaginal sex; anal or oral sexual practices were not tracked.) With numbers like those, it’s no wonder I haven’t found a single organization prioritizing safer oral sex.
“We don’t have specific campaigns right now for oral sex [and] I’ve never come across any campaigns specifically designed to oral sex,” says Angel Brown, Advocates for Youth’s senior program manager for GLBTQ Health and Rights. “A lot of our work is about making sure communities know about safer sex options, integrating them into everyday life to [ensure] protection for every single sex act, every single time.”
Most public health organizations mention in passing that condoms are a good idea during oral sex, usually as part of a generalized dictum to always use condoms for everything. But some advocates think that needs to change. The antibiotic-resistant gonorrhea Groopman describes in The New Yorker is particularly prone to breeding in the throat, where symptoms are rarely noticeable, allowing it to be easily spread. Oral cancers associated with HPV are on the march, too. Although the disease is most commonly associated with infections of the cervix, the latest data reveals oral malignancies (37.3 percent) as the most common HPV-related cancer. In the male population, they account for 78.2 percent of HPV-related cancer.
“We really haven’t thought a lot about oral sex specifically, but I think that’s changing, for no other reason than the recent attention being given to HPV and oral cancers,” says Fred Wyand, director of communications at ASHA. “We’ve always been talking about safe oral sex, but how prominent do we make it? More and more we are getting evidence that we need to talk about it pretty robustly.”
Is there a way to encourage more protective sexual norms without freaking people out? After the sexual revolution, condom use declined sharply. There were cures for everything, no worries. AIDS put an end to that: fear of death and extensive educational and activist campaigns made condom use normative for anal and vaginal sex. It would be preferable to alter norms without a deadly pandemic, but what would such a campaign look like?
SEX WORKERS ARE THE only people I’ve spoken with who have regularly used condoms while providing oral pleasure. In countries and states where sex work is legal, there are often laws requiring condom use. Nevada passed such a law in 1988 and a 1998 study in the American Journal of Public Health found no unprotected sex in the brothels under review and minimal pushback from the clientele. “However, perhaps even more critical [than the law] is the ability of sex workers to transform the condom into an acceptable part of sexual activity,” the researchers conclude. (They note a variety of ways condom use was eroticized, overcoming the resistance of all but the most mulish of clients.) “Brothel workers’ techniques to achieve condom use have applicability outside of commercial sex….”
“Female-to-male oral sex, sex workers have been doing that themselves with or without a campaign for a long time,” says Norma Jean Almodovar, sex worker rights activist and executive director at COYOTE-LA. (She says female-to-female protection wasn’t seen as essential when she worked as a prostitute.)  “It can be made part of the erotic experience. You don’t just hand a condom to a guy and say, ‘Here, put this on. I don’t want a disease.’ You’ve gotta not make it clinical, you’ve gotta make it sexy and fun. It works for sex workers; it would work for women in [other] relationships.”
How can such a message be conveyed to a society as notoriously prudish as ours? It’s hard to imagine many public health agencies going in for campaigns touting the pleasures of oral sex, even if it is protected. And fear can be a more powerful motivator: Both sex workers and their clients presumably understand the risks of sex with multiple partners, which would explain why condom usage is more accepted in that setting. (The sex workers interviewed for the 1998 study tended not to use protection with their non-client partners).
Adina Nack envisions a public campaign that would establish the medical reasons for safe oral sex, paired with sexualized imagery to draw the eye. A senior research fellow for the Council on Contemporary Families, she describes a campaign featuring photos of beautiful faces with an emphasis on licking lips and come-hither smiles. The slogans beneath would warn of the toll unprotected oral sex can take on the giver and the receiver.
“Back in the ‘70s, people never thought men would be willing to wear condoms for penile-vaginal or oral intercourse,” says Nack, who is also the author of Damaged Goods? Women Living With Incurable STDs. “Due to the effective campaigning, especially around HIV … we’ve really seen condom use rise for those types of sex. If people were really educated about what they were risking by having unprotected oral sex, I have faith in the public that enough of us would find value in protecting ourselves. Then, there’s a [better] conversation to be had about making safe oral sex fun.”

Friday 6 September 2013

Missouri man exposed 300-plus to HIV, police say

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/05/justice/missouri-hiv-arrest/index.html?sr=fb090613hivarrest1130a
AnneClaire Stapleton, CNN

Watch this video

(CNN) -- Prosecutors in rural Missouri have charged a man with exposing his partner to HIV and say he may have exposed more than 300 other people to the virus that causes AIDS.

David Mangum told police he had at least that many unprotected sexual encounters with people he met online or in parks since he was diagnosed with HIV in 2003, Dexter, Missouri, detective Sgt. Corey Mills told CNN. Mills said it will be difficult to find and warn those people, since Mangum "usually only knew his partners' first names."

Mangum was arrested after his former partner told police that Mangum had lied to him about his status, a police affidavit states. He was arraigned Thursday morning in Stoddard County, about 160 miles south of St. Louis, with bail set at $250,000. The former partner has tested positive for HIV, according to police.

Mangum, 36, told police that between 50 and 60 of his partners lived in Stoddard County, according to court records.

Knowingly exposing someone to HIV without their consent is a felony under Missouri law that can bring prison terms up to 15 years. Infecting someone can bring a life term.

Sunday 1 September 2013

WHO issues new HIV recommendations calling for earlier treatment

WHO | World Health Organization
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2013/new_hiv_recommendations_20130630/en/index.html#.UdFAEX7LVPw.facebook

Earlier, safer and simpler antiretroviral therapy can push the HIV epidemic into irreversible decline

News release
 New HIV treatment guidelines by WHO recommend offering antiretroviral therapy (ART) earlier. Recent evidence indicates that earlier ART will help people with HIV to live longer, healthier lives, and substantially reduce the risk of transmitting HIV to others. The move could avert an additional 3 million deaths and prevent 3.5 million more new HIV infections between now and 2025.
The new recommendations are presented in WHO’s "Consolidated guidelines on the use of antiretroviral drugs for treating and preventing HIV infection", as new data reveal a total of 9.7 million people were taking these lifesaving drugs at the end of 2012.
“These guidelines represent another leap ahead in a trend of ever-higher goals and ever-greater achievements,” says WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan. “With nearly 10 million people now on antiretroviral therapy, we see that such prospects – unthinkable just a few years ago – can now fuel the momentum needed to push the HIV epidemic into irreversible decline.”

Call to initiate treatment at 500 CD4 cells/mm³ or less

The new recommendations encourage all countries to initiate treatment in adults living with HIV when their CD4 cell count falls to 500 cells/mm³ or less – when their immune systems are still strong. The previous WHO recommendation, set in 2010, was to offer treatment at 350 CD4 cells/mm³ or less. 90% of all countries have adopted the 2010 recommendation. A few, such as Algeria, Argentina and Brazil, are already offering treatment at 500 cells/mm3.
WHO has based its recommendation on evidence that treating people with HIV earlier, with safe, affordable, and easier-to-manage medicines can both keep them healthy and lower the amount of virus in the blood, which reduces the risk of passing it to someone else. If countries can integrate these changes within their national HIV policies, and back them up with the necessary resources, they will see significant health benefits at the public health and individual level, the report notes.

Further recommendations

The new recommendations also include providing antiretroviral therapy - irrespective of their CD4 count - to all children with HIV under 5 years of age, all pregnant and breastfeeding women with HIV, and to all HIV-positive partners where one partner in the relationship is uninfected. The Organization continues to recommend that all people with HIV with active tuberculosis or with hepatitis B disease receive antiretroviral therapy.
Another new recommendation is to offer all adults starting to take ART the same daily single fixed-dose combination pill. This combination is easier to take and safer than alternative combinations previously recommended and can be used in adults, pregnant women, adolescents and older children.
“Advances like these allow children and pregnant women to access treatment earlier and more safely, and move us closer to our goal of an AIDS-free generation,” said UNICEF Executive Director, Anthony Lake. “Now, we must accelerate our efforts, investing in innovations that allow us to test new born babies faster and giving them the appropriate treatment so that they enjoy the best possible start in life.”
The Organization is further encouraging countries to enhance the ways they deliver HIV services, for example by linking them more closely with other health services, such as those for tuberculosis, maternal and child health, sexual and reproductive health, and treatment for drug dependence.
“The new WHO guidelines are very timely in view of the rapid progress we have made in expanding programmes for prevention and treatment,” says Dr Mark Dybul, Executive Director of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. “This is an example of how the Global Fund and the WHO work together to support countries as we move towards removing HIV as a threat to public health." Since its creation in 2002, the Global Fund has supported more than 1,000 programmes in 151 countries, providing HIV treatment for 4.2 million people.

Challenges remain

Challenges still remain. Alongside the new treatment guidelines, a treatment progress update by WHO, UNAIDS, UNICEF identified areas in need of attention.
While the number of all eligible children on ART has increased by 10% between 2011 and 2012, this is still too slow compared to the 20% increase in adults. A further complication is that many key populations such as people who inject drugs, men who have sex with men, transgender people and sex workers, continue to face legal and cultural barriers that prevent them getting treatment that otherwise would be more easily available. Another factor that needs to be addressed is the significant proportion of people who, for many reasons, ‘drop out’ of treatment.

Data reinforces feasibility of recommendations

Despite this, the Global update on HIV treatment: results, impact and opportunitiescontains encouraging data that reinforces the feasibility of the new WHO recommendation on earlier ART, which would expand the global number of people eligible for antiretroviral therapy to 26 million.
Between 2011 and 2012, the largest acceleration ever of people enrolled on ART was achieved, with an extra 1.6 million people benefitting from antiretroviral therapy, increasing the total to 9.7 million people. Furthermore, increased coverage of treatment occurred in every region of the world, with Africa leading. Four out of 5 people who started treatment in 2012 were living in sub-Saharan Africa.
“Today nearly 10 million people have access to lifesaving treatment. This is a true development triumph,” says Michel Sidibé, Executive Director of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). “But we now have a new challenge - ensuring that all 26 million people eligible for treatment have access - not one person less. Any new HIV infection or AIDS-related death due to lack of access to antiretroviral therapy is unacceptable.”
Today’s recommendations were released by WHO on the opening day of the International AIDS Society 2013 conference in Kuala Lumpur. Among those endorsing the recommendations at the launch were representatives from countries, where such earlier ART intervention is already national policy, along with development agencies who are providing technical and financial support.
The International AIDS Society conference is held every two years and attracts leading scientists, clinicians, public health experts and community leaders to examine the latest developments in HIV-related research, and to explore how scientific advances can inform the global response to HIV/AIDS.

Note to editors:

The recommended treatment is now a combination of three antiretroviral drugs: tenofovir and lamivudine (or emtricitabine) and efavirenz, as a single pill, given once daily.

For more information please contact:

Mr Glenn Thomas
Communications Officer, WHO
Telephone: +41 22 791 3983
Mobile: +41 79 509 0677
E-mail: thomasg@who.int

Wednesday 3 July 2013

Post-Transplant and Off Drugs, H.I.V. Patients Are Apparently Virus-Free

New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/health/post-transplant-and-off-drugs-hiv-patients-are-apparently-virus-free.html?ref=global-home


Two H.I.V.-infected patients in Boston who had bone-marrow transplants for blood cancers have apparently been virus-free for weeks since their antiretroviral drugs were stopped, researchers at an international AIDS conference announced Wednesday.

The patients’ success echoes that ofTimothy Ray Brown, the famous “Berlin patient” who has shown no signs of resurgent virus in the five years since he got a bone-marrow transplant from a donor with a rare mutation conferring resistance to H.I.V.
The Boston cases, as with Mr. Brown’s, are of no practical use to the 34 million people in the world who have H.I.V. but neither blood cancer or access to premier cancer-treatment hospitals.
But AIDS experts still find the Boston cases exciting because they are another step in the long and so-far-fruitless search for a cure. They offer encouragement to ambitious future projects to genetically re-engineer infected patients’ cells to be infection-resistant. At least two teams are already experimenting with variants on this idea, said Dr. Steven G. Deeks, an AIDs researcher at the University of California at San Francisco Medical School.
Dr. Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, a discoverer of the virus that causes AIDS and the president of the International AIDS Society meeting now in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, called the findings about the Boston patients “very interesting and very encouraging.” The announcement about the cases was made at the society’s annual conference.
Mr. Brown is sometimes referred to as the “first H.I.V. cure.”
But there are important differences between his case and those of the Boston patients. For example, no AIDS expert, including the doctors from Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston following the two patients, is using the word “cured” to describe their status.
The technique used on them involves severely weakening the immune system before a marrow transplant. It is so dangerous that it is unethical to perform it on anyone not already at risk of dying from cancer, especially because most people with H.I.V. can live relatively normal lives by taking a daily antiretroviral cocktail.
“But we cannot speak about ‘cure,'  ” she added. “The follow-up has been very short.”
One patient stopped taking antiretroviral drugs seven weeks ago. For the other, it has been 15 weeks. No virus or antibodies to the virus have been found in their blood or other tissues since.
Normally, when a patient stops the drugs, the virus bounces back in less than a month, but each person is different.
“It could come back in a week, or in six months,” said Dr. Timothy Henrich, a doctor overseeing the two patients. “Only time will tell.”
The process the two patients underwent is risky – a third patient in the study died when his cancer returned – but somewhat less so than the procedure done on Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown had leukemia. The three Boston patients had lymphoma.
The Boston patients’ bone marrow, where new blood cells are made, was only partially destroyed by drugs before they were given new marrow from matching donors — a process that carries a 15 to 20 percent risk of death, Dr. Henrich said.
Mr. Brown’s marrow was completely obliterated by drugs and whole-body radiation, a procedure that kills 40 percent of the patients, and he had it done twice.
Mr. Brown’s new marrow came from a donor who was a close genetic match and had a rare mutation that makes a person virtually impervious to infection with H.I.V.
The mutation, known as delta 32, creates CD4 cells — the white blood cells that the virus attacks — lacking a CCR5 surface receptor, the “door” that the virus uses to enter the cell.
The donors for the Boston patients did not have the delta 32 mutation.
Unlike Mr. Brown, the Boston patients stayed on antiretroviral therapy throughout the lengthy transplant process and for years afterward. The drugs prevent the virus from replicating itself.
“The idea was to protect the new donor cells from becoming infected,” Dr. Henrich explained.
During that time, in a phenomenon known as graft-versus-host disease, the new cells were attacking their old, chemotherapy-weakened counterparts and clearing them from the body, a process that takes about nine months, Dr. Henrich said.
Because only the old cells were infected with H.I.V., the hope was that graft-versus-host disease would “mop up” all the viral reservoirs.
But runaway graft-versus-host disease can be fatal, so the two patients were intermittently on and off immunosuppressive drugs and steroids to control it.
One immunosuppressive drug, sirolimus, may also have helped kill off H.I.V., he said.
It is known to prevent retroviruses like H.I.V. from replicating.
The two patients had transplants between two and five years ago. They had months of tests on their blood and tissues to make sure no H.I.V. or antibodies to it were found, before Dr. Henrich and his research partner, Dr. Daniel Kuritzkes, proposed stopping the antiretroviral treatment.
For such tests, doctors remove immune cells and “activate” them with chemicals to make them reproduce. If any virus is hiding in the cells’ DNA, it is “spit out” and can be detected.
But doctors can never be sure that they have tested all the reservoirs where dormant virus might hide. It is relatively easy, for example, to sample rectal but not brain tissue.
Since the patients stopped taking antiretrovirals, they “feel great and are leading completely normal lives,” Dr. Henrich said.
That distinguishes them from Mr. Brown, who has survived virus-free for more than five years but still has weakness and pain from his grueling anticancer regimen.
AIDS specialists are interested in the Boston patients because they offer new insights into how the immune system can be used to attack the virus.
Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said it was “conceivable and maybe even likely” that their H.I.V. was permanently gone.
If so, he said, it would show that it is not necessary to find a matching donor who also had the delta-32 mutation.
Dr. Deeks, the AIDS researcher in California, said the cases raise the question of when to say an H.I.V. patient has been “cured.”
“Should we wait six months to see if the virus rebounds?” he asked. “Or will we have to wait up to five years, as oncologists tend to do with cancer?”
Dr. Barré-Sinoussi said she might eventually prefer to adopt the term oncologists use: “in remission.”

Monday 13 May 2013

Sudahkah kamu Test HIV?

http://www.odhaberhaksehat.org/2013/sudahkah-kamu-test-hiv/
by 




waduh.. kemarin gw habis ML sama pacar lupa pakai kondom. gimanaya..” kata Budi pada sahabatnya “emangnya setiap ML gak pakai kondom gitu?” sahabat balik bertanya
yah..enggak pernah. gw pengen ajak pasangan cek HIV deh.. gimana caranya ya?“  dengan wajah bingung budi kembali bertanya “nih, baca artikel dibawah ini yuk..”
Apa sih Test HIV Itu?
Tes HIV memberi tahu kita apakah kita terinfeksi HIV, virus penyebab AIDS. Kebanyakan tes ini mencari antibodi terhadap HIV. Antibodi adalah protein yang dibuat oleh sistem kekebalan tubuhuntuk menyerang kuman tertentu. Antibodi terhadap semua kuman berbeda, jadi bila ditemukan antibodi terhadap HIV dalam darah kita, artinya kita terinfeksi HIV. Ada juga jenis tes lain yang mencari tanda bahwa virus sendiri ada di dalam darah, tetapi tes macam ini belum tersedia di Indonesia.
Bagaimana Proses Tes HIV?
Tes yang paling lazim untuk HIV adalah tes darah. Sekarang juga ada tes yang dapat mencari antibodi dalam air seni, atau dalam cairan yang diambil dari dalam mulut (bukan air liur), digesekkan dari dalam pipi. Tes yang sering dipakai sekarang disebut tes cepat atau rapid test, yang mampu menyediakan hasil dalam 20-30 menit setelah contoh darah atau cairan lain diambil. Untuk tes darah, contoh darah kita diambil dengan jarum suntik sekali pakai, atau tetes darah diambil setelah jari kita ditusuk dengan jarum sekali pakai. Jika hasil tes pertama ‘reaktif’ (positif), hal ini menunjukkan kemungkinan kita terinfeksi HIV. Tetapi tes harus diulang sekali (jika kita mempunyai gejala penyakit HIV) atau dua kali dengan cara berbeda untuk memastikan hasilnya benar, dan dapat dinyatakan ‘positif’. Ini biasanya dilakukan oleh tempat tes tanpa kita diketahui. Hasil juga dapat dilaporkan sebagai ‘non-reaktif’ (negatif). Kadang laboratorium juga melaporkan angka non-reaktif (mis. non-reaktif, 0,34).  Angka ini tidak ada relevansi sama sekali dan sebaiknya diabaikan. Sebelum darah diambil, kita wajib diberi konseling oleh seorang konselor yang terlatih. Di antara yang lain, konseling ini akan memberi informasi dasar tentang HIV dan AIDS. Bgmn Manfaat dan kerugian kita mengetahui apakah kita terinfeksi, dan bagaimana kita akan bereaksi jika nanti hasilnya positif Setelah itu, kita diminta menyetujui sebelum darah diambil (sering disebut informed consent). Kita juga wajib diberi konseling lagi oleh konselor yang sama saat hasilnya sudah ada. Hasilnya hanya boleh diberikan pada kita, dan tidak boleh diberikan pada orang lain tanpa persetujuan kita. Tempat melaksanakan tes bertanggung jawab untuk menjamin nama kita dan hasil tes tidak diketahui orang lain. Namun, jika kita di bawah umur, orang tua atau wali kita boleh mewakili kita. Sayangnya, di Indonesia, tidak jelas berapa sebenarnya usia ‘di bawah umur’. Hasil tes tidak wajib dilaporkan ke pemerintah. Ada beberapa tempat tes yang tidak mewajibkan kita memberi nama atau identifikasi. Ini disebut tes tanpa nama atau anonim.
Bagaimana Kita Dapat Dites?
Semua rumah sakit rujukan AIDS (hampir 200 di seluruh Indonesia) dan satelitnya menyediakan layanan tes HIV. Sering kali di klinik disebut VCT (voluntary counseling and testing). Daftar rumah sakit rujukan dapat dilihat di banyak situs situswww.spiritia.or.id atau www.aidsindonesia.or.idSelain itu ada beberapa klinik lain yang menyediakan tes HIV, dan tes juga dapat dilakukan di beberapa laboratorium swasta. walau sering kali lab swasta tersebut tidak menyediakan konseling, pastikan kita mendapat informasinya. Tes HIV di RS kadang disediakan tanpa biaya, tetapi biasa harganya sesuai dgn kebijakan RS.
Siapa Sebaiknya Dites? Kita dapat terinfeksi HIV tanpa mengetahuinya. Kita mungkin tidak merasa sakit atau mempunyai keluhan. Tetapi kita tetap bisa menularkan orang lain. Siapa pun yang aktif secara seksual atau memakai jarum suntik secara bergantian sebaiknya tes HIV secara berkala.
Kapan Sebaiknya Kita Dites?
Jika kita menjadi terinfeksi HIV, biasanya sistem kekebalan tubuh baru membentuk antibodi tiga minggu hingga tiga bulan setelah kita terpajan. Masa ini disebut masa jendela. Jadi, jika kita merasa kita terpajan, atau melakukan perilaku berisiko tertular HIV, kita sebaiknya menunggu tiga bulan setelah peristiwa berisiko sebelum kita dites. Kita juga dapat langsung tes, dan mengulangi tes tiga bulan setelah peristiwa (bukan setelah tes pertama). Selama masa jendela ini, tes antibodi akan menunjukkan hasil non-reaktif (negatif), tetapi walaupun begitu, jika kita sudah terinfeksi kita dapat menularkan orang lain.Sebetulnya, selama masa awal infeksi ini, daya menular kita paling tinggi sehingga kita lebih mungkin menularkan orang lain kalau kita berperilaku berisiko. Menurut pedoman Kemenkes RI, hasil tes HIV yang non-reaktif tiga bulan atau lebih setelah peristiwa berisiko berarti kita tidak terinfeksi HIV, atau dalam kata lain, kita HIV-negatif.
Ada Tes yang Memberi Hasil Lebih Cepat? Tes viral load mencari potongan genetik HIV. Bibit ini terbentuk sebelum sistem kekebalan tubuh membentuk antibodi. Tes viral load tidak biasa dipakai untuk menentukan apakah seseorang terinfeksi, karena tes tersebut jauh lebih mahal dibandingkan tes antibodi. Selain itu, tingkat hasil yang salah lebih tinggi, sehingga tes viral load ini tidak disetujui oleh Kemenkes sebagai alat diagnosis HIV untuk orang dewasa di Indonesia.
Apa Artinya Jika Kita Positif?
Hasil positif atau reaktif berarti kita mempunyai antibodi terhadap HIV, dan itu berarti kita terinfeksi HIV. Hasil tes seharusnya disampaikan kepada kita oleh konselor, yang akan memberi tahu kita apa dampak pada kehidupan kita, dan bagaimana kita dapat memperoleh layanan dan dukungan kesehatan serta emosional. Hasil positif bukan berarti kita AIDS. Banyak orang yang positif tetap sehat untuk beberapa tahun, dan tidak tentu langsung perlu memakai obat apa pun. Penerimaan diagnosis HIV sering kali sangat sulit. Namun kita tidak sendiri, dan bertemu dengan teman senasib dapat sangat membantu pada saat itu. Di beberapa daerah, teman-teman Odha sudah membentuk kelompok dukungan sebaya (KDS) untuk memudahkan proses ini. Minta dirujuk pada KDS terdekat oleh petugas klinik VCT. Atau kami juga bisa menjadi sahabat kalian saat kalian mengetahui status HIV.
Apakah Kita Dapat Mempercayai Hasil Tes?
Hasil tes antibodi untuk HIV adalah benar untuk lebih dari 99,5% tes. Sebelum kita diberi hasil positif, tes diulang sebagai konfirmasi. Ada beberapa keadaan khusus yang dapat memberi hasil yang salah atau tidak jelas. Bayi yang dilahirkan oleh ibu yang HIV-positif dapat menunjukkan hasil positif untuk beberapa bulan karena antibodi ibu dialihkan ke bayi yang baru lahir. Walaupun bayi sebenarnya tidak terinfeksi, dia mempunyai antibodi terhadap HIV dan hasil tes dapat reaktif sampai dia berusia 18 bulan. Tes lain, misalnya tes viral load, harus dipakai jika hasil yang benar dibutuhkan lebih cepat. Orang yang baru terinfeksi dapat menunjukkan hasil negatif (non-reaktif) jika dia dites terlalu dini (dalam masa jendela) sejak terinfeksi dengan HIV. Ibu hamil mungkin menunjukkan hasil palsu atau tidak jelas akibat perubahan pada sistem kekebalan tubuhnya.
Tes HIV biasanya mencari antibodi terhadap HIV dalam darah atau cairan tubuh lain. Bila kita terinfeksi HIV, sistem kekebalan tubuh kita membuat antibodi ini untuk melawan HIV. Biasanya dibutuhkan tiga minggu hingga tiga bulan untuk membentuk antibodi tersebut. Selama masa jendela ini, tes kita tidak akan menunjukkan hasil positif walaupun kita terinfeksi. Tes HIV biasa juga tidak memberi hasil yang benar untuk bayi yang baru lahir pada ibu yang terinfeksi HIV. Hasil tes yang positif (reaktif) berarti kita terinfeksi HIV, tetapi tidak berarti kita AIDS. Jika kita memang HIV-positif, sebaiknya kita belajar tentang HIV, dan mempertimbangkan bagaimana kita dapat melindungi kesehatan kita. Sudahkah kamu cek HIV?