5 Things to Know About the First Drug to Prevent HIV

[merithyn]

The false dichotomy is between the inconvenience of receiving a vaccine (a moment's pinprick), versus wearing a helmet 24/7.

A pin-prick every few years for the rest of your life. A pin-prick that has its own concerns, as it can cause whomever gets it to end up with a mild case of the disease. And what happens if someone doesn't go get that pin-prick in a timely fashion?

I agree that this vaccine has value - for those who are at serious risk for problems with chicken pox. It seems, however, to be something that should not be forced on the population at large. I have no problem that the vaccine is available. I do, however, take issue that it is required.

[Berkut]

The false dichotomy is between the inconvenience of receiving a vaccine (a moment's pinprick), versus wearing a helmet 24/7.

A pin-prick every few years for the rest of your life. A pin-prick that has its own concerns, as it can cause whomever gets it to end up with a mild case of the disease. And what happens if someone doesn't go get that pin-prick in a timely fashion?

I agree that this vaccine has value - for those who are at serious risk for problems with chicken pox. It seems, however, to be something that should not be forced on the population at large. I have no problem that the vaccine is available. I do, however, take issue that it is required.

It is a false dochotmoy because it compares to things that are not alike, declares them alike, then demands that we make a choice that in fact we do not need to make at all.

We can certainly evaluate the pro and cons of chicken pox vaccines and decide that after careful consideration everyone should be vaccinated for chicken pox, and do so in a completely rational and reasoned manner, while also considering the dangers of bumping your head, and decide that despite the danger involved, forcing people to wear helmets 24/7 is not a reasonable of practical solution to the problem, and hence should not be codified.

[merithyn]

It is a false dochotmoy because it compares to things that are not alike, declares them alike, then demands that we make a choice that in fact we do not need to make at all.

We can certainly evaluate the pro and cons of chicken pox vaccines and decide that after careful consideration everyone should be vaccinated for chicken pox, and do so in a completely rational and reasoned manner, while also considering the dangers of bumping your head, and decide that despite the danger involved, forcing people to wear helmets 24/7 is not a reasonable of practical solution to the problem, and hence should not be codified.

It was hyperbole to show how small the danger of chickenpox is to society. Poorly done, yet no less true.

Yes, chickenpox can kill, though extremely rarely. And yes, the vaccine has value - to some. The only problem I have is with the requirement that all get the vaccine regardless of personal preference regarding how best to handle the disease.

There are two equally viable options: get the vaccine and ensuing boosters for the rest of your life, or opt to get the disease with the minute chance that you may end up in the hospital. That should definitely be a personal choice, since regardless, whomever is vaccinated will have to have the boosters whether everyone is vaccinated or not so long as the disease is in existence. Given that the US is one of the few countries that requires the vaccination, that will be for a very, very long time.

[grumbler]

To the libertarians in the thread:

Accuotane can cause birth defects if taken during pregnancy. The FDA mandates usage of birth control if women of child bearing age wish to use it. If pregnant, women cannot be prescribed Accuotane. Women are also subjected to mandatory pregnancy tests while using Accuotane.(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPLEDGE for more details).

Are these requirements justifiable or are they also invasions of privacy/liberty?

To the authoritarians in the thread;  what does this have to do with the discussion?

[grumbler]

It was hyperbole to show how small the danger of chickenpox is to society. Poorly done, yet no less true.

Yes, chickenpox can kill, though extremely rarely. And yes, the vaccine has value - to some. The only problem I have is with the requirement that all get the vaccine regardless of personal preference regarding how best to handle the disease.

There are two equally viable options: get the vaccine and ensuing boosters for the rest of your life, or opt to get the disease with the minute chance that you may end up in the hospital. That should definitely be a personal choice, since regardless, whomever is vaccinated will have to have the boosters whether everyone is vaccinated or not so long as the disease is in existence. Given that the US is one of the few countries that requires the vaccination, that will be for a very, very long time.

Poor analogy, since chicken pox is a contagious disease, and the decision to get it may be the decision to spread it to others who didn't get a chance to make the decision.

I have no dog in the fight over the vaccine itself, but I do have a dog in the fight to stop inapt analogies.

[Razgovory]

And Berkut outright tells use that he knows better then most people what liberty means and that he knows better then CdM.

Okay, so they were both condescending. Yippee?

Yes, but Raz is only ideologically opposed to one of them. 

No, I'm also opposed to them for very practical purposes. 

[The Brain]

You only need to wear your helmet from shortly before the impact to just afterwards.

[viper37]

We've a shingles vaccine too though.

Sure, and if adults went in every four years to get it, they'd be fine.

Or, we could let nature take its course, allow children to get the disease once in their lives - with a minimal chance at complications* - and no one would need any follow-up shots ever.



*Yes, minimal. 25 times more people die from a bumped head every year than from chickenpox prior to the vaccine. Are we now going to require that people wear helmets 24/7?



EDIT: Bah, typo. It's 25 times, not 250 times.

some people will get scars if the disease is not treated.  So what do most parents do?  They go to the hospital with their kids to get prescription for some type of cream, especially for younger kids, to avoid them scratching it.

Cost of vaccination: 5$
Cost of a visit to the doctor + cream: above 100$.

Wich is more effective in reducing health care costs for everyone (even under private insurance, as global health care costs rises, so does your premium)?

With massive vaccination, diseases tend to be eradicated.  And it alleviates pressure on our healthcare systems.
So, vaccines are generally a good thing.
And this one last for life in most cases.  So, no issues there.

[viper37]

The false dichotomy is between the inconvenience of receiving a vaccine (a moment's pinprick), versus wearing a helmet 24/7.

A pin-prick every few years for the rest of your life.

between 6 (the lowest) and 30 years (the highest so far).  I wouldn't call it bad.

[garbon]

Absurd. People were not born to get shots every few years.

[dps]

To the libertarians in the thread:

Accuotane can cause birth defects if taken during pregnancy. The FDA mandates usage of birth control if women of child bearing age wish to use it. If pregnant, women cannot be prescribed Accuotane. Women are also subjected to mandatory pregnancy tests while using Accuotane.(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPLEDGE for more details).

Are these requirements justifiable or are they also invasions of privacy/liberty?

To the authoritarians in the thread;  what does this have to do with the discussion?

Heh-heh.  I don't consider myself a libertarian, though I certainly have some libertarian leanings.  But if the choice is between authoritarianism and libertarianism, I'll go with libertarianism.

[viper37]

Absurd. People were not born to get shots every few years.

were people born to be sick every few years?  Or were they born to take pills every days?

I don't know enough about the duration of the vaccine, I have only Wikipedia as a source.  But it seems that in most cases, it lasts for life.  So, why not?  It contributes to the eradication of the diseases and lower health care costs.  Enough for me.

[viper37]

Anyway, about the subject at hand, it seems there are risk at distributing the drugs as prehemptive measure against aids.  Until such time as more studies are completed, I would refrain from giving it to the general population.  Especially at 14 000$ a dose.  It seems not only to create a false sense of security, but also runs the risk of creating a drug resistant HIV wich would throw us back 20 years in the r&d field for the disease.  In other words, it ain't worth the risk for now.  Tests should continue, though.

[Razgovory]

To the libertarians in the thread:

Accuotane can cause birth defects if taken during pregnancy. The FDA mandates usage of birth control if women of child bearing age wish to use it. If pregnant, women cannot be prescribed Accuotane. Women are also subjected to mandatory pregnancy tests while using Accuotane.(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPLEDGE for more details).

Are these requirements justifiable or are they also invasions of privacy/liberty?

To the authoritarians in the thread;  what does this have to do with the discussion?

Heh-heh.  I don't consider myself a libertarian, though I certainly have some libertarian leanings.  But if the choice is between authoritarianism and libertarianism, I'll go with libertarianism.

Fortunately that isn't the choice.

[garbon]

Absurd. People were not born to get shots every few years.

were people born to be sick every few years?  Or were they born to take pills every days?

I don't know enough about the duration of the vaccine, I have only Wikipedia as a source.  But it seems that in most cases, it lasts for life.  So, why not?  It contributes to the eradication of the diseases and lower health care costs.  Enough for me.

Yes getting sick is natural.