E-Mail 'Prepped for PrEP: are we ahead of ourselves?' To A Friend

* Required Field






Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.


E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

This post was published on 24/11/08 in Science.

Send this post to a friend Send this post to a friend

3 comments

You can follow the comments on this post via this RSS feed.

Tags: , , , .

  1. Comment by Roger, 24/11/08, 10:25:

    In the same line look no further than at circumcision, which roll out is currently failing and with it the protective effect at population level.

  2. Comment by Daniel Reeders, 24/11/08, 11:16:

    Great post! I think the PrEP/Pill comparison is a leetle bit unfair though, because pregnancy and HIV/AIDS are not exactly equivalent.

    Something I wanted to mention – MidWest Teen Sex Show is having a funding drive – would it be possible to use the incredible momentum you’ve built around this blog to help them along? A Digg effect for sex and drugs…

  3. Comment by Seth Kalichman, 19/12/08, 10:11:

    Lots of people are getting jazzed about the promise of PrEP. With so many biological approaches to HIV prevention not working, especially our frustration in getting an HIV vaccine, it does seem we are getting ahead of ourselves about PrEP. What especially concerns me is that unlike a vaccine or microbicide, antiretrovirals are readily available and can be misused. Until demonstrated efficacious, taking an unproven pill in place of using a condom will add little to simple wishful thinking. The false promise of not-yet proven means of prevention is attractive. Sort of like the lure of denying that HIV even causes AIDS (for more on AIDS denialism see http://denyingaids.blogspot.com/). Opening up this dialogue can help sort out what we know is true from what we hope is true.

Comments are closed at this time.