long latency period vs. non-progressor? confusing stuff

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

ml34b@hotmail.com - 17 Apr 2005 00:20 GMT

how long does a hiv+ person need to be aids
free before they are considered "non-progressors".
and if they are "non progressors" do they get the
ok from doctors to not have to take any drugs?

and what is a person finds out they are hiv+
but they are absolutely sure they caught it
over 10 or 15 years ago? if they are not sick
do they have to take aids drugs?

how do you convince a "healthy" person who has been hix+
for 15 years to start taking drugs?

and then if a healthy person who has had hiv for,
lets say, 20 years, like some say the latency period is now,
starts to take drugs and they get sick, how does anyone
know if it was the drugs that caused the sickness or the hiv?

this is all very confusing can anyone clear this up?
thanks,
mike

Reply to this Message

GMCarter - 17 Apr 2005 11:24 GMT

>how long does a hiv+ person need to be aids
>free before they are considered "non-progressors".

Interesting question--usually more than 10 years tho.

>and if they are "non progressors" do they get the
>ok from doctors to not have to take any drugs?

Doesn't matter. One of the BIG differences that the AIDS activist
movement engendered is the notion that your doctor is your PARTNER,
not your boss. The doctor is there to facilitate access to
medications, to provide care, support and diagnoses.

If a person's CD4 count remains above 500, there is no particular need
to go on antiretroviral therapy. Some physicians might argue you
should. Many others won't. In the end, it is a personal decision.

>and what is a person finds out they are hiv+
>but they are absolutely sure they caught it
>over 10 or 15 years ago? if they are not sick
>do they have to take aids drugs?

Not "sick" is ill-defined. Better to look at the CD4 count. If it is
below 200, one can be clinically healthy and seem well. But it is
likely the CD4 count will continue to drop and that an opportunistic
infection may develop that can be lethal.

>how do you convince a "healthy" person who has been hix+
>for 15 years to start taking drugs?

See above.

>and then if a healthy person who has had hiv for,
>lets say, 20 years, like some say the latency period is now,
>starts to take drugs and they get sick, how does anyone
>know if it was the drugs that caused the sickness or the hiv?

Again, the use of the term "healthy" is vague. If after 20 years a
person's CD4 count finally dropped to a low level, ARV would be a good
idea.

ARV drugs have specific and well-characterized toxicities that can
generally be teased out from HIV-related ones.

>this is all very confusing can anyone clear this up?

Hope that helps.

George M. Carter

Reply to this Message