1). HAART was not in wide spread use until at least 1998. The decline
started in 1992 but was disguised by a change in the definition of 'AIDs'
by the CDC.
2). 'Infections' also declined. This could hardly be attributed to HAART
as who takes 'AIDS' meds BEFORE being diagonesed with so called AIDS.
3). Latest figures show that HAART 'side effects' are now INCREASING the
mortality rate of users beyond pre 1992 figures.
IN SHORT. HAART IS HARRTLESS.
Don't believe GM Carter's drug company lies.
Differences in Prescription of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Persist
in 1999.
A. McNaghten, D. Hanson, and M. Dworkin.
CDC, Atlanta, GA.
Background:Differences in prescription of highly active antiretroviral
therapy (HAART) by sex, race/ethnicity, and risk group have been reported.
The objective of this analysis was to determine if gaps in HAART
prescription have changed over time by characteristics of patient
population.
Methods:We analyzed data from the Adult/Adolescent Spectrum of HIV Disease
project, observing 16,989 patients in 11 US cities eligible for HAART,
from January 1996 through June 1999. Using a logistic regression model of
prescribed HAART, race and risk by sex were compared in 1996 and during
the most recent year data were available, July 1998 through June 1999, to
determine the magnitude of the gap between the two periods by race and
risk by sex. The model included CD4+
project site, race, and risk by sex.
Results:The proportion of patients prescribed HAART increased from 19%
during the first half of 1996 to 68% in the first half of 1999. During
1996, injection drug-using (IDU) males (odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95%
confidence interval [CI], 0.41—0.57), IDU females (OR, 0.46; 95% CI,
0.38—0.56), heterosexual males (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.54—1.00) and
heterosexual females (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64—0.88) were less likely to
receive HAART than men who have sex with men (MSM). Blacks (OR, 0.48; 95%
CI, 0.43—0.53), Hispanics (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66—0.87), and Native
Americans (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22—0.77) were less likely to receive HAART
than whites. During July 1998 to June 1999, only IDU males (OR, 0.69; 95%
CI, 0.60—0.81) and IDU females (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50—0.71) were less
likely to receive HAART than MSM, and blacks (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.74—
0.92) were less likely than whites.
Conclusions:We found an increasing proportion of eligible patients
prescribed HAART from 1996 to 1999. Although we lacked insurance data
during this period, increased drug assistance programs may have
contributed to the increased proportion prescribed HAART. However, in
1999, blacks were less likely than whites, and IDUs were less likely than
MSM, to be prescribed HAART. Differences between individual racial/ethnic
groups and risk groups by sex changed over time among all groups except
IDUs. Continued monitoring of differences in HAART prescription by gender,
race/ethnicity, risk behaviors and other factors is needed to improve
efforts to identify populations needing assistance in receiving care and
treatment.
© 8th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections