Undetectable equal to negative? They always ask me that. And I understand the problem, I know it can be complicated, but that's what I think, it would be starting a relationship with a lie and, you see! Lie ... You need to start tackling your emotions and understand that having HIV does not make you unworthy, or unworthy of love.
Can a person with an undetectable viral load stop worrying about transmitting HIV?
Living with HIV can be Difficult, but it is not impossible
Does having an undetectable viral load change the way you talk about HIV serology? Do you understand that this Undetectable Equal to Negative statement is incorrect?
Getting to undetectable is not always easy to do - but once you get there, it is definitely an achievement for your health.
This is what the doctor in question says, who is the author of the text. I remember having a viral load count of over three million, and that when I saw the result, as much as they tried to calm me down, nothing, absolutely nothing, made sense to me.
And he left CRT-A, which was still on Rua Antônio Carlos, in Cerqueira César, totally desolate and, without knowing how I got there, I crossed a street without looking and “ran over a bus”!
You may not understand this and I know the phrase is strange, but the truth is that I was shocked by the side of the bus, which had just passed me (thank God) and if I was a few seconds ahead, right there my life with HIV would end.
Videx (Damned Nomenclature. But it didn't lead me to the undetectable, not to the negative or non-transferable…)
Well, I'm not going to repeat myself completely, but I faced a drug called “Videx” and the worst side effect of it would be “fulminant pancreatitis”, a rather loquacious name.
Undetectable equal to negative? No 🙄
Well, that did not happen and here I am, with you! But I kept my spartan and draconian adherence, I wanted to, and despite all my suicide attempts, what I really wanted to do was live, now I know and, I confessed, every suicide attempt of mine was a cry:
Guys, I'm here, trying to do my best, but you do not help me and it's better to die to live like this!
Well, in six months, I became undetectable. A lot of water rolled and I will not stay, not on this page, blah, blah, blah in spite of my follies, what I am trying to do is to expose that Undetectable equal to negative is not a truth. It is a misinterpretation that many “pastors” use to say that, as the pastor tried to co-opt me, it would be enough for me to contribute the modest amount of R $ 1.000,00 God, who does not have a Cash Book as I understand Him, would pass a filter, yes, that's right, a filter in my blood! My will…. Well, I realize that I am falling outside the scope of the text, but I will be back here in due time to create a link that leads to the theme briefly outlined in this stake.
And the question: Undetectable is equal to negative
Not! Undetectable equal to negative is an incorrect statement as shown in the text below, translated by me!
But, what exactly does this mean to be undetectable if this is not equal to being negative?
In your Tpersonal umblr, Joe Gallant, an HIV doctor at the Southwest Care Center in Santa Fe, New Mexico, answers questions from people living with HIV who are concerned about a number of issues, including their undetectable viral loads. Before continuing to read the text, see who talks about it and the solidity of its arguments and experiences
In January 17 2015 a anonymous user (…) asked
Hello doctor, I read in an earlier post that someone said that "the undetectable is the new negative."
You agree with this statement at least to some extent?
Dr. Gallant replied:
To some extent, yes, undetectable is equal to negative. But only up to a point.
Transmission point of view, having a viral load is undetectable close negative starting point of prognosis and life expectancy, people with undetectable viral load CD4 normal has more in common with HIV-negative people than they do with people with untreated HIV infection.
But there are still important differences between someone with well-controlled HIV and someone without HIV !!!
If there were not, we would not be looking for a cure yet. Even with well-controlled HIV, you have a chronic medical condition that is expensive to treat and that causes an increase in chronic inflammation and immune activation. You still have viral DNA integrated into your own genome.
I'm not looking to get to the point of saying that "undetectable is the new negative", he says, which continues:
Although I understand feeling, it is necessary to keep in mind the Viral blisters, which can not be predicted when they will happen, whether periodically or randomly in practically all cases of HIV infection.
Yeah. And there it is. This is the point that concerns me, the growing number of people, and people of good character, tested hard on HIV infection and by “N” shameful proposals and who never betrayed themselves in their ideals. These people, I know! They don't sell.
But I fear that they may be mistaken and in good faith because, see: There was a second case of PrEP Failure due to Drug Resistance…
No, I'm not what they say, one who likes the “fear doctrine”. I prefer to be sensible and I wonder who was the transmitting agent of a virus resistant to a certain combination of drugs and, after all, when it will be located and what volume of damage it spread without knowing it…
Yes. But how many people did he, in good faith, trusting your PrEP and your undetectability, will have been infected with HIV before this event, the rediscovery of detectability, leaving aside, so to speak, the viral blipes?
And its victims (…) innocent (…)? How many other people will they have taken “that” (from the top of 8 methadone pills a day I can call that), because this is one thing that grows in geometric progression ...
Do I remember, and remember well, this headline while speaking, in good faith, that Undetectable equals negative?
See: I can't find the “correct” image, with the message that said: There are already four victims in São Paulo!
This thing, to call it a gay plague, this is a scary thing that the media endorsed and for which it has not yet done the necessary Mea Culpa, the dogs ...
And it was just over three or four when this headline unspeakably absurd, between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2011, about 11.000 people died. And I was doing the math and that was, at the time, and math is the point where I am extremely vulnerable, about thirty deaths per month, which gives about three deaths a day. And in the beginning, there were only four (...).
And ... no, I'm not spreading fear. I am being realistic and objective and all I see in the undetectable viral load is that it can serve as an "extra layer" of protection or the desire to have a child.
I know, within my circle of relationships, a close friend who has always maintained and maintains unprotected sexual intercourse with her husband and he is seronegative (or unrepentant, as some euphemism lovers prefer).
But they knew each other like this, they related to each other and it was only after the first child that they were called to reality that, at that time and in synthesis, was a possible tragedy.
But they did the exams, he was considered, as some prefer, that they love the hate speech, "clean". (…).
So, I put myself in the position of those for whom all care is little and, as I learned, the hard way ... which is the following:
In doubt, do not exceed!
And I remember that fool Ronald Reagan, I believe it was him, but I'm not sure, another Trump - mentally retarded - who said that “in two years we would, for sure, have the vaccine against that“. Yeah, mané…
To this day, and there goes more than thirty years, all I see repeating itself is the stark headline:
The 1% of the cure.
It started like that. Very bad is true. But one thing was true. It started with less than half a dozen people and it is estimated that there are at least 600.000 people living with HIV in Brazil. How many PrEP failures (I hope not) will be necessary for people to understand that the risk is alpha and that PrEP should, as I see it, be used as a second layer of protection and not a green light for unprotected sex, even because hepatitis C is an STI and there are countless cases of incurable gonorrhea in the world….?
Well, we have the promise of amFar to bring healing to 2020 and see what a cute video it looks like more Marvel superhero movie ad!
What you have seen above, bordering on madness, by the resounding presentation; but from the heart, I want to be wrong. What I can say about it will not come from my hands, but from respectable scientists, in this text!
And look ...
I think that we often have only to accept life as it is, as it presents itself to us and seek to improve it with patience. Myself I do not think about healing...
I think of going to live, and my infected told me solid things, that she saw with her eyes that took me, in a moment of great happiness to write this article:
Yes ... I like to convey hope and I would like to say, for sure that undetectable is the same as non-transferable, but it is not!
I really like to spread joy! But I must be sensible and loyal to my ideas and to what I have learned in my life in voluntary service.
I have seen a sad humanitarian crisis close up and all I wish for is not a new crisis of this size or even less!
And I cut and paste what Dr. Mathew Rodriguez, from a very serious hospital wrote:
But there are still significant differences between someone with well-controlled HIV and someone without HIV - if there were not, we would not be still looking for a cure. Even with well-controlled HIV, you have a chronic medical condition which is expensive to treat and which causes an increase in chronic inflammation and immune activation. You still have viral DNA integrated into your own genome. I'm not looking to get to the point of saying that "undetectable is the new negative", although I understand the feeling it is necessary to keep in mind the Viral blisters, which can not be avoided and that it can happen, periodically or randomly in practically all cases of HIV infection.
And I, Cláudio Souza, prefer to maintain a moderate posture in relation to this, as it is as I said, since 1996, when the combined therapy was developed, where the protease inhibitor has a fundamental role in the “combined therapy”, the said cocktail and I remember seeing in a speech by DR Drausio Varela that he talked to another doctor and this doctor said:
These "new remedies" are working!
Here is a brief definition:
A drug capable of inhibiting the action of the specific viral protease enzyme essential for the formation of the infectious HIV particle. If the viral particle is not properly formed, HIV will not infect new cells. (AIDS News Agency.).
At the AIDS agency you find a vast wealth of information on this link.
Anyway, almost finished, still talking about “one percent of the cure, since 1996 I expose this:
It is this sensationalism that Dr Rodrigu seeks to avoid and that I seek, from my humble position.
In the same vein, the same “scientific magazine” places, in a big way, on the sides of all the newspaper bands, the image that turns a little lower and, before, I wanted to call the attention of “us all” that the immense The majority of people who pass through the streets of the center of a city like São Paulo, with more than ten million inhabitants, are the ones who, the citizens of my beloved city read only the headlines, as they may not have time to read, or may not have money to buy and, what they see makes them think, more or less: “Wow! Hey! We don't need a condom anymore, because they “saw this”:
Yeah ... And where can that take us.
With the word Dr Dráuzio Varella:
In my opinion ... All care is little
Mathew Rodriguez is the community editor for TheBody.com and TheBodyPro.com
Follow Mathew on Twitter: mathewrodriguez
Por Mathew Rodriguez
Copyright O 2015 Remedy health Media, LLC. All rights reserved
Translation: Márcio Catanho - Bachelor of Arts / translator and reviewer.
Contacts for translation and revision of texts: email@example.com. 085- 88797627