Few U.S. Youths Have HIV Under Control After Diagnosis

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2015 12:07 AM GMT
    Just 7 percent of American youths recently diagnosed with HIV achieved an undetectable viral load during a two-year study,

    http://www.aidsmeds.com/articles/youth_viral_suppression_1667_27562.shtml
  • metta

    Posts: 54509

    Jul 30, 2015 5:58 AM GMT
    Wow....we have a lot of work to do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 30, 2015 3:14 PM GMT
    yep, and with all the barebacking going on with bisexual kids, this is where the real epidemic rears it's ugly head
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 22737

    Jul 30, 2015 10:22 PM GMT
    Barebacking is irresponsible, stupid, and downright dangerous. What the goddamned hell is the matter with some of the young ones todayicon_question.gif Do they realize how deadly and devastating HIV really is or are they acting like it will never happen to them that they have all the good luck in the world. These young guys better wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late or another major epidemic might be coming our way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 31, 2015 9:22 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidBarebacking is irresponsible, stupid, and downright dangerous. What the goddamned hell is the matter with some of the young ones todayicon_question.gif Do they realize how deadly and devastating HIV really is or are they acting like it will never happen to them that they have all the good luck in the world. These young guys better wake up and smell the coffee before it is too late or another major epidemic might be coming our way.


    Young men feel immortal. "Young, Dumb and Full of Cum". They are smart enough to know that HIV isn't a death sentence anymore.....they can read a headline, but don't read the details. So of course it applies to them, NOW.

    If they feel well, look well, they are well....or so they think. Sex, especially condomless sex, is as natural as sex itself. Guilt and condescension will never work....you might as well as say "stop fucking!"


    There has to be a carrot. Something to look forward to....and it has to be expedient. There needs to be more education, in schools and it needs to be mandatory starting at 13.

    It can't be the BS of abstinence and condoms only....they already know that. And that neither work. It has to be a 'sex affirmative' attitude, not guilt and fear.

    If I had a sex ed class I'd say "I don't know how many of you are having sex. Probably 70% of you. That means some of you have an STD and/or HIV. It doesn't matter who, how or why. You are all going to get tested. Now. Today."

    There would be a quick test van on location. Every student would get tested. Each student would be brought back for counseling regardless of test results. Those that are positive for either would go on immediate treatment and specific education. Any result would be confidential. Follow up would be off site, so students wouldn't be outed, even to parents.

    "All 50 states and the District of Columbia explicitly allow minors to consent to STI services, although 11 states require that a minor be of a certain age (generally 12 or 14) before being allowed to consent.

    31 states explicitly include HIV testing and treatment in the package of STI services to which minors may consent.

    18 states allow physicians to inform a minor’s parents that he or she is seeking or receiving STI
    services; however, with the exception of 1 state that requires parental notification in the case of a positive HIV test, no state requires that physicians notify parents about services."

    http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_MASS.pdf

    This would be repeated by the end of the year, 2x a year through graduation.

    "Only 22% of sexually experienced students have ever been tested for HIV.

    Nearly 10,000 young people (aged 13-24) were diagnosed with HIV infection in the United States in 2013.

    Nearly half of the 20 million new STDs each year were among young people, between the ages of 15 to 24.*

    http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/sexualbehaviors/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 12, 2019 11:18 AM GMT
    Does sound concerning, question is though, if any of these people are under the legal age, the vrial DNA could be used to take action against the infecting person. Viral DNA was used to justify why despite several sero-conversions occuring during the trials to establish the effectiveness of a HIV Positive person with an Undectable Viral Load (UVL). Viral DNA Testing, was conducted to establish that those who participated in the trials, who did aquire HIV, had done so from sexual contact outside of the participants primary relationship. So it established having an UVL is 100% protection against transmission as being fact. But why limit the use of that testing technology, particularly as we are talking about vulnerable young people being infected, it would both provide a chance to treat the infecter, the infected and if it occured as a result of sexual penetration of a minor, their is the chance to take a peodophile of the streets and prevent other youngsters from being infected. I realise some young people may infect other young people, however, its statistically much more likely infection stems from preditory sexual behaviour from someone older who should know better