Changing From Atripla to Stribild

Changing From Atripla to Stribild

In June 6, 2011 I was diagnosed with HIV. I knew that I immediately wanted to go on medications and I was immediately enrolled into a drug study that was open label. I end up on the Atripla arm. Initially I tolerated the Atripla very well. Life was great. Within 5-6 months I was undetectable and life returned to "normal" whatever that is. 

I had been warned about the "Atripla dreams" and to be honest it never bothered me, initially. I found that the key to Atripla is low-fat diet. The sustiva component in Atripla interacts with fat which is what causes the dreams to be worse. For the first year life was great and I was extremely happy. If it wasn't for the activism and advocacy that I did, it would have been extremely easy to forget that I was living with HIV. I think that this says a lot about what life is like for a patient today. 

Before I knew it, my 52 weeks study was coming to an end and I faced the decision of what I wanted to do next. One one hand I could stick with Atripla which I was tolerating well or I could switch to Stribild. I had read articles weighing in on atripla and damage to neurons and this was particularity-worrisome. After many conversations with my doctor, I made the decision to enter into a second study but if side effects worsened I would break study and come off. I was hoping that I would be randomized into a different drug however I was placed into another Atripla arm which would last for 52 weeks. 

There were things that I had to consider when making the decision, namely financial. At that time I had insurance however I was waiting for the "pre-exisiting period" to end so HIV would be covered. I was aware that stribild costs around $2900 a month as well as quarterly lab work is about $1500. 

A few months after I started the second study I noticed that the systems were really becoming more pronounced. I tell everyone that for the entire time that I was on Atripla I dreamed and that gets extremely tiring. It is almost as if your brain never gets to shut off. For a majority of the time that I was on Atripla I have had to take sleep-aides such as Ambien in order to get any meaningful sleep. 

Every time that I would have a doctor's appointment, which when you first start a study is Day 0, 2 Weeks, 4 Weeks, 12 weeks out to 52 weeks. Each study is different though, but for this particular study that was how it worked. In October/November of 2013 I had a trip to Washington, DC for a leadership meeting with the AIDS Clinical Trials Group. While in DC I had a horrible dream where in the dream I progressed to end-stage AIDS which required me to go on hospice. 

The unique thing about Atripla dreams is that everything is real. You can recall taste, sound, smell and everything in between. When I returned back to St. Louis I spoke with my Doctor however I still wanted to continue. The good thing about Atripla is the penetration of the "Blood/Brain barrier". From my work with the ACTG I have come to understand that a person living with HIV can have different levels of HIV in their system i.e. spinal fluid, semen, blood, breast milk, vaginal fluid. It was becuase of this that my general practitioner who is also an infectious disease physician decided to continue on with Atripla. 

The last 2-3 months however that I was on Atripla the sleep interruptions became more than I could handle. Every night I would wake up around 3-330am. It did not matter what my diet was or that I was taking ambien. Also concerntration really became and issue that could not be ignored any longer. Over the last few months I have spoken with several physicians and advocates that all encouraged me to change my medications. I explained that I was concerned about developing a resistance if I change medications. I also have always heard that a person should stay on their current regimen until it fails. I was lucky when I tested positive in that I was sensitive to all medications and I did not have a variant strain of HIV. One of the doctors made the following statement to me that made me think. He said, "Aaron, if you are having side effects from Atripla, why not switch to stribild? You have options and you should not be miserable due to the medications." This really made me think as well as be thankful that I do have options. 

Two weeks ago I made an appointment with my doctor's office with whom I have been with for close to ten years and I anxiously awaited the appointment. January 7, 2014 at 1215 was my appointment. The day came and I went to see my doctor. While the nurse was screening me she asked what the reason of my visit was and I proudly proclaimed, "I need to reconsider my HIV regimen." When the doctor came in he already knew what I wanted to do since we had talked about it multiple times during the previous 6-8 months. We talked about what I could expect with Stribild, how long atripla would stay in my system (about a week) and then we talked about insurance issues. With that the appointment came to and end and I waited for the pharmacy to fill the order. 

I am fortunate that I have a Walgreens specialty pharmacy right in the doctor's office where I go (Southhampton Healthcare). The staff worked with the insurance company to get the prior authorization and then explained that I am going to now be using mail order. My pharmacist explained that I would need to take stribild with medication as well as the potential side-effects. 

That evening I decided that I was going to take the medication at 6pm since I have to take it with food. I do not always eat breakfast and lunch is never during a regularly-set time. The clock clicked closer to 6pm and I went into the kitchen and made half a sandwich and then I popped the big, green pill. The rest as the say is waiting. Ask I sat and read over side-effects an stuff, I started to get panicky. I mean, for the last 2 1/2 years I have been on a medication that I have taken every night right before bet. No matter what I was doing I did this same routine and now I was changing it. In some ways I felt like I was abandoning a friend that had been with me sine those early days. When I as first diagnosed my viral load was over a million and my CD4 was 678. Now though I was changing everything. 

For a split second I thought that this was a huge mistake. Was I feeling something? Was this new medication going to give me fatigue or make m e nausea? I guess after 2 1/2 years of perfect health, having mild nausea depending on things I had eaten, sleep interruptions and so on, I had gotten use to atripla. All medications have side effects but we sometimes fail to remember that because the medications have improved so much. 

I finished the night out while watching television and then went to bed. I woke up the next morning and the first thing that I did was look at the clock and I was thrilled to see that it read "550am". For the first time in almost 2 1/2 years I had slept through the night. While I did have dreams they were nothing like while I was on atripla. Those two things alone already tell me that I made the right choice in switching to stribild.

I just finished taking my second dose of stribild at 6pm and as of yet I have not had any side effects. I will be sure to keep you posted. I would definitely say that if you are having side-effects from your medications that you need to talk to your healthcare provider and changing medications if it is appropriate. There is no need for you to be miserable from side effects while there are many options out there for those of us that are living with HIV. 

US: Bill to lift ban on HIV positive organ donation passes House committee

by Joseph Patrick McCormick for PinkNews.co.uk
18 July 2013, 12:21am  

   

 

A bill which could eventually allow the donation of HIV positive organs to HIV positive recipients has passed the House after having passed the US Senate back in June.
The HIV Organ Policy Equity Act (HOPE), which is sponsored by both Democrats and Republicans would allow organs from HIV positive people to be donated to HIV positive recipients, and more so would allow researchers to study the safety of such practice.

The Human Rights Campaign also commended the passage of the bill. Back in March, the HRC praised the passage of the bill in the Senate Committe, and in June it passed in the full Senate.

“The HOPE Act represents sound public health policy,” said HRC legislative director Allison Herwitt. “The action by the House Energy & Commerce Committee is a major step forward in removing an outdated barrier which impedes access to lifesaving transplants for persons living with HIV and AIDS.”
The bill was sponsored by Representative Lois Capps.

HIV-positive patients in the US have been lobbying for the right to receive HIV-infected transplant organs for some time. They argue that there are hundreds of HIV-infected organs available every year and that making the change would save lives and give more people the chance of a transplant.
There are more than 100,000 actively waiting for life-saving organs, and around 50,000 more are added annually, and lifting the ban could decrease waiting time for all.

Allowing organs from HIV positive donors to HIV positive recipients with liver or kidney failure could save up to 1,000 people each year.
The ban on HIV positive organ donation was put in place in 1988, and aruments for it being lifted come partly from the fact that the treatment of HIV and AIDS has advanced significantly since.
The Centers for Disease Control issued draft Public Health Service Guidelines in September 2011, recommending research in this area, but said that in the US, federal law blocks it from taking place.
Over 40 medical and patient advocacy groups endorse the act, including the United Network for Organ Sharing, which manages the US’s organ transplant system.

Meningitis Outbreak – Should You Protect Yourself Prior to Major Events?

 Meningitis Outbreak – Should You Protect Yourself Prior to Major Events?

By now, most of you have seen the news stories regarding meningitis outbreaks that were initially isolated to New York but have now moved to Los Angeles. If we have learned nothing else from the early days of the AIDS plague, it should be that early response trumps a reactive-scramble to matters of public-health. It is not my intent to sound the alarm over meningitis however, it is something that needs to be watched quite carefully. With several major leather events, CLAW & IML on the horizon, attendees need to be fully informed regarding what it is and how they can protect themselves.

Meningitis is inflammation of the protective membranes covering the brain and spinal cord and the most common symptoms are headache, fever, neck stiffness, confusion, vomiting and an inability to tolerate light or loud noises. Meningitis is contracted through “close contact” not simple casual contact, examples of this would be: kissing, coughing, sneezing, sharing eating utensils, glasses, food or towels. Although meningitis is not transmitted exclusively through sexual intercourse, most of the above stated activities occur during sexual contact. It is for this reason that I urge anyone attending major leather events or parties such as CLAW or IML to consider getting vaccinated. There is considerable evidence which supports the idea that the LA patient was exposed during a White Party over Easter Weekend.

The New York City Health Department has suggested that gay men in New York “who regularly have intimate contact with other men through a website, digital application, or at a bar or party” might consider getting vaccinated. This simply means that this group is at higher risk for exposure to meningitis due to the activities that they are engaged in regularly.

Getting vaccinated as a precaution poses no risk to your health. It will take approximately 2 weeks from the initial date of vaccination for the full-benefits of the vaccination to be seen. Additionally individuals who are HIV positive may require a secondary booster to be fully protected. The meningitis vaccine will prevent invasive meningococcal disease from taking root but does not treat the disease if a person is already infected.

When your dick develops a habit…

My name is Aaron and I am an addict. I will be the first to admit that I love crystal, “tina”, Adderall… I have been clean for 459 days and counting but I will be an addict for life. Crystal use in the LGBT community and specifically in the kink community is alive and well! Recently I was alarmed while in Atlanta when I logged onto Grindr to pass time; the amount of guys looking to “Party” or “PnP” was staggering.  As a community we have to be honest that when it comes to drugs and alcohol, if it was not fun initially we would never have done it. There comes a point however when the novelty wears off and we are left with a habit, a habit that our dick had helped us develop.  

No one wakes up one day and decides that they are going to become addicted to drugs; we need to be very clear about that. A habit develops over time and before a person realizes it, they have reached rock-bottom. For some people that rock-bottom is worse than others. Whether it is slamming “tina” at the bathhouse and getting slammed or simply popping a few “addys” for a night on the town, we did it because it was fun. There was a certain amount of pleasure that came from that high. No one ever tells you though that you will always be chasing that first high, which is why an addict requires higher amounts of the drugs. Anyone who tells you that drugs were not fun in the beginning is either full of shit or they do not know what they are talking about.

Amphetamines cause a hyper-sense of sexuality that initially is alluring until most people figure out that they are up all night with a limp-dick. There is nothing worse than being awake in the wee-hours of the morning, endlessly searching “fuck-sites” such as craigslist, Recon, Scruff, Grindr and so forth… There is nothing worse than the emotion wreckage that a person is left to deal with as the drugs begin to leave their body and they start to withdrawal.  

A habit develops over time, slowly what began as something that was done socially becomes something that you do alone. You isolate yourself from everyone around you. Your work performance begins to slip. You begin to lie to cover up your usage. Through it all however you say to yourself... “It is recreational, I only do it every now and then… I have it under control.” Those are the famous last words of every addict; you are no more in control than other addicts. All addicts like to think that they are somehow different. At the end of the day however, your dick has helped you develop an addiction.

If there are things that you can only do when you are high on meth… should you be doing them?  Additionally how many of us have placed ourselves in extreme risk of HIV exposure or become infected while high on crystal meth, tina, Adderall or whatever you choose to call it. I can say that I did! Regardless of what your definition of kink is, there is only one definition of addiction. To all of my brothers out there that are currently dealing with an addiction that their dick helped them develop, I would say that there is help available. Nothing in your life is beyond repair and at least worth the effort to attempt to fix.

To others that are in our community that are turning a blind-eye to those that are actively using meth… wake the fuck up. You have an obligation to call people out! Do not simply look down at people or turn your back on them. That is how we are going to overcome the war that is raging with crystal meth. 

No Place to call home: Aging with HIV/AIDS

No Place to call home: Aging with HIV/AIDS

By: Aaron M. Laxton, Blogger, Activist and HIV-Infected Queer

 

 

I remember once in a class that I was in the professor had the class address issues regarding their own mortality. For  people in their youth this can be extremely hard since this can viewed as morbid. After all, we will live forever and nothing will ever hurt us...right? Obviously as we age we begin to understand that this is not the case; life is always moving and changing. Eventually life will move on and change without us.

　

HIV risk doesn’t stop at 50. In fact, men and women over age 50 account for 17 percent of all new HIV and AIDS diagnoses in the 40 states that have long-term confidential name-based reporting.

During the plague years hospices began to form that would address the needs of those dying from AIDS. It was in these hospices where patients were not viewed as an infectious disease but rather a person who needed love and compassion. A patient covered in Karposi Sarcoma or sufferingly was severe wasting was not feared but rather embraced, held and loved. Although the end of their life was marked by the extreme pain and suffering of AIDS related complications and social stigma, the hospice provided a safe-haven in their final days.

With the advent of improved medications and our understanding of our to treat HIV the amount of people dying from AIDS slowed; as a result the hospices that we once formed to provide support for them were not needed. It is estimated that approximately 50,000 annually die from AIDS in the United States. Some of these organizations restructured to provide other services and others simple were no longer there.

In 2009, people aged 50 and older accounted for 23% of AIDS diagnoses in the United States. Yet older adults are often overlooked in the ongoing HIV/AIDS conversation. Developed for the National Aging Network and others interested in educating older adults, the U.S. Administration on Aging HIV: Know the Risks. Get the Facts. Older Adults and HIV/AIDS Toolkit contains helpful resources and materials specifically designed to inform older adults about the risks of HIV/AIDS and to encourage older adults to know their status.

Now however we have an aging population of patients living with HIV/AIDS and we must consider how to provide the best possible care for them. Anyone who works with aging populations will tell you that finding residential care facilities is a daunting task. I work as a case manager and recently had to do this for a client. This particular client did not have HIV however the task was a challenge none-the-less.

As an HIV positive patient population reaches a time where they might need a residential care facility where will they go? You might say that they can go to any residential care facility that they want. In theory you are right however the facility has the right to refuse whomever they want. Typically once an administrator determines that a patient is HIV positive they are less apt to admit that patient into their facility. This is not something that cannot be hidden since all medical records must be given to the prospective facility.

Also there is the issue of stigma within the residential care facilities. For many of these facilities is it a challenge simply being LGBT. The fear and ignorance of HIV among others residents and staff alike would make it almost impossible for a person living with HIV to live with any quality of life.

One strategy might be to develop facilities that specialize for those living with HIV but does this further perpetuate stigma and ignorance. By creating specialized facilities are we simply shuffling those living with HIV/AIDS "Out of Sight, Out of Mind". That is a slippery slope. What would be next, homes for only white people? Homes for only black people?

If we agree that specialized facilities are not the best strategy then another might be to work with policy and regulators to ensure access to services and facilities by those HIV positive patients. Creating a demand for improve transparency regarding decisions for admissions into programs? Also working with residential care facilities to help educate staff and residents about HIV/AIDS.

We have an ethical obligation to provide great care for our elders not to simply shuffle them away somewhere until they die.

Aaron M. Laxton
My HIV Journey
aaronlaxton@gmail.com

Kansas seeks to imprison HIV-infected People

Today while on Facebook, a message popped up regarding a proposal that was being made in Topeka, Kansas that sought to quarantine those infected with HIV/AIDS. While this is completely absurd, we currently have criminal statutes in 34 states that are dong this very thing.

HIV Criminal Statutes State by State Breakdown

Patients who are living with HIV are treated as second-rate citizens who seemingly have no protectin under the law. That is a fact! While everyone can see the injustice of a message calling for quarantine, there seems to be little or no outrage over current criminal statutes which are putting patients in prison. Additionally a person that is prosecuted and sentenced in one state may get a life-sentence while in another state it substantially different.

Kansas Seeks to quarantine those infect with HIV.

There is no data to support that criminalization helps to reduce rates of infection. In fact these criminalization statutes only serve to further stigmatize those who are living with HIV/AIDS and to stop people from getting tested and starting treatment. Below are comments highlighted by Sean Strub who heads up the cause of modernizing HIV criminal statues with The SeroProject.

HIV Criminalization is Bad Public Health Policy
HIV criminalization statutes are terrible public health policy because they discourage persons at risk from getting tested. Those with HIV who are aware of their HIV positive status are more responsible in their sexual behaviors than those who are unaware they have HIV ; testing is a basic tool of HIV prevention as well as an essential gateway to care.

Criminalization statutes also make it more difficult for persons with HIV to disclose their HIV status. Those who know they have HIV already suffer significant discrimination and stigma. Disclosing one's HIV status can be emotionally difficult, risking rejection from family and friends, sometimes with great insult or abuse, and often jeopardizes one's employment, housing, relationships or personal safety. Criminalization of HIV legitimizes the ignorance, homophobia, racism and sexophobia that fuels inflated fears of HIV and those who have HIV.

Criminalization undermines efforts to prevent new HIV infections and provide access to care in multiple ways: Ignorance of one's HIV status is the best defense against a "failure to disclose" prosecution, which creates a powerful disincentive to getting tested and learning one's HIV status.

Young African American men who have sex with men are among those at highest risk of acquiring HIV, yet also among the most difficult to get tested. The prospect of prosecution for failing to disclose--especially since these prosecutions often boil down to a "he said, he said" or "he said, she said" situation--is a powerful and likely growing disincentive to taking an HIV test.

Most new infections are caused by sexual contact with persons who have not been tested and are unaware that they have HIV, yet only those who have taken responsibility and gotten tested are subject to prosecution.

Prosecuting the failure to disclose one's HIV status undercuts the most basic HIV and STD prevention message: that every person must take responsibility for his or her own sexual health.

Prosecuting the failure to disclose values the "right" to an illusion of safety, for those who are HIV negative or who do not know their HIV status, over the privacy rights of those who have HIV.

A legal obligation to disclose one's viral status prior to intimate contact creates a particular inequity for those who were born with HIV. If we are all born equal, why is it that this group must carry throughout their lives a legal obligation to disclose their viral status prior to engaging in intimate contact?

Examples of Prosecutions
The most publicized HIV criminalization cases are often driven by politically ambitious prosecutors and inflammatory or hysterical media coverage. These prosecutions feed into the public's ignorance and anxiety about HIV, reinforce negative stereotypes about people with HIV, and send conflicting messages about the real risks of HIV transmission in a given circumstance.

They depict people with HIV as dangerous potential infectors who must be controlled and regulated, making it more difficult to create a safe environment for people at risk to get tested and people with HIV to disclose their status.

The Iowa case provides a sobering illustration of the problem. The person with HIV who was charged with failing to disclose his status to a sexual partner was a 34-year old gay man who had been a volunteer with a local AIDS organization. He met a male partner online and went to his house. The person with HIV was on anti-retroviral therapy, had an undetectable viral load and used a condom when anally penetrating his partner. He posed little or no risk of transmitting the virus to his partner.

When the partner later heard that the man he had been intimate with had HIV, he went to the county prosecutor and pressed charges. The person with HIV was convicted under Iowa's extreme statute and sentenced to 25 years in prison. Fortunately, advocates were successful in getting the sentencing reviewed and after serving eleven months, he was released on five years' probation.

However, he still must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life, is subject to wearing an ankle monitoring bracelet and cannot leave his home county without permission from the court. He may not be around children (including his nieces and nephews) without adult supervision. He must, for the rest of his life, take lie detector tests every six months that ask intimate questions, including whether he wears women's clothing and if he is attracted to children or animals. He is prohibited from viewing any kind of pornography or even visiting social networking sites, like Facebook.

Iowa's statute is particularly broad--in theory, it could cause a person with HIV who kissed another person without disclosing their HIV positive status to be sentenced to as much as 25 years in prison--but other state's statutes and sentencing are equally as absurd.

Texas convicted Willie Campbell, an HIV positive man, for "assault with a deadly weapon" and sentenced him to 35 years in prison after he spat on a police officer who was arresting him for public intoxication.

Gregory Smith was within a year of his release from a New Jersey prison (after serving time for burglary) when he was charged with attempted murder, assault and terroristic threats following an incident in which he allegedly bit and spat on a guard at the county jail where he was held (Smith denied the charges). An additional 25 years was added to his sentence; he subsequently died of AIDS while incarcerated.

In late 2009, Michigan charged Daniel Allen, who has HIV and was involved in an altercation with a neighbor, under laws designed to combat terrorism, including "possession of a harmful biological agent". Prosecutors equated his HIV infection with "possession or use of a harmful device."

A man in Ohio is serving 40 years for failing to disclose to a girlfriend that he was HIV positive. He claims she knew he was positive and only went to a prosecutor after he stopped dating her and moved in with another woman.

An interesting note about the cases described above: none of them resulted in anyone actually acquiring HIV.

 

 

Out of Context: "cure" of infant could lead to misuse of ARV's.

Out of Context: "cure" of infant could lead to misuse of ARV's. 

By: Aaron M. Laxton, HIV-Infected Queer, Activist & Blogger

Almost immediately upon news that a child had "cleared" the virus that causes AIDS, news stories captured everyone's attention. It is captivating due to the fact that people want so badly to have a cure and the media sensationalizes anything that can get ratings and viewership. I am not saying that the media is bad however there was one thing that stood out to me when I first read the story. A 2 1/2 year old girl that was treated within 30 hours of birth and subsequently was able to clear the virus within her immune system. How long will it be before patients get the idea that they will be able to increase their antivirals and somehow get "cured". While this may sound like a crazy thought, it can also be a deadly thought since the medications that we take are highly toxic when taken in large amounts. 

My fear is that it will only be a matter of time before we see patients that deviate from the prescribed dosages of their medications and subsequently cause catastrophic damage to their renal system as well as liver damage. I hope that my fear is unfounded and that people will not take the information provided out of context. 

The greater message that needs to be relayed to the community is that 1 in 5 people who are infected with HIV are unaware of it. HIV is well managed with early detection through testing and treatment. Additionally there is no reason why in 2013 a person is not getting tested and treated for HIV or that people progress to AIDS. In the United States there are still approximately 50,000 AIDS related deaths each year and approximately 50,000 new HIV infections. 

If you are a patient that has read the stories regarding the toddler from Mississippi and you are even considering changing your medications arbitrarily please don't. While the child was given large doses of ARV's it was done under medical supervision and this is not appropriate for all patients. The child was able to clear the HIV virus due to her immune system lacking memory T Cells that develop in a mature immune system. The report will undoubtedly impact how we treat pediatrics which will greatly reduce the 330,000 mother-to-child transmissions that occur around the world annually. 

Patients need to continue their medications as prescribed with complete compliance and adherence. I will continue to preach the gospel of "test and treat". To find a testing center near you text your zip code to "knowit" and the closest testing site will be texted to your phone. 

What does a child "cured" of HIV mean for you?

What does a child "cured" of HIV mean for you?
By: Aaron M. Laxton, HIV-Infected Queer, Activist & Blogger

Today, 3/3/13, news came that a 2 1/2 year-old child has been considered "cured" of the HIV virus. As soon as the story hit the wire it began to bounce around via social media and other media outlets around the world. So what exactly does this mean for the those of us living with HIV? While this is great news that supports researchers ideas regarding HIV reservoirs it does not mean that the treatment for an adult currently living with HIV will change. 

The announcement regarding the child's clearance of HIV is important since it goes to the direct issue of a child's immune system versus the adult immune system. Additionally the child was treated with abnormally large amounts of ARV drugs and treatment began immediately, within 30 hours of birth; that indicates that she was most likely infected in utero. Most patients will not meet these same conditions however this supports the philosophy that early detection supports improved outcomes. 

The doctor treating the child gave higher-than-usual "therapeutic" doses of three powerful HIV drugs rather than the "prophylactic" doses usually given. In the months following treatment the child showed no signs of the virus. Due to the mother's living situation the child fell out of care and treatment was stopped. Once Mississippi state health authorities tracked the mother/child down they discovered that she had stopped giving the girl antiviral drugs six or seven month earlier. 

Doctors expected to find that the daughters immune system was showing signs of HIV infection however to their surprise they could detect no sign of the virus. Almost immediately the treating physician took steps to rule out specimen contamination and other considerations that could account for a negative test from the daughter. Since August of 2012 labs in San Diego, Baltimore and Bethesdahave ran ultra-sensation tests on the baby's blood. While intermittently pieces of HIV DNA and RNA have been found there is no indication that the virus is actively replicating in the child's cells.

The importance of this discovery is that it goes directly to theories that researchers have regarding HIV reservoirs. Since the child was treated approximately 30 hours after birth this effectively stopped HIV reservoirs from developing. 

While this research is a move in the right direction towards a cure there is a need for guarded optimism as well as context. For those of us living with HIV this news does not mean that we can stop medications or that we will be cured tomorrow. It does however mean that our understanding of HIV is improving. 

Arrest all men, women and children with the flu!

Arrest all men, women and children with the flu!
By: Aaron M. Laxton, HIV-Infected Queer, Activist & Blogger

Criminalization of those living with HIV has seemingly set  a new precedence for how the CDC (Center for Disease Control) chooses to address public health issues. While the tactics of arresting those with HIV/AIDS are more in keeping with Hitler's Third Reich than a democratic society; arrest, prosecution and imprisonment is an ever-present fear for the approximately 1.2 million living with HIV/AIDS in the United States. If you are living with HIV/AIDS and you are not concerned about criminalization then you are clueless.

Policy makers, politicians and law enforcement serve of the Gestapo enforcing fear through the use of imprisonment, forfeiture of civil rights and public-shaming should an HIV positive person even be accused of looking in the direction of a negative person. In many ways it is very reminiscent of the deep-south at a time when African American men would be strung up simply on the accusation of a white woman that he had done something inappropriate. In the United States you are not innocent until proven guilty... You are guilty until proven innocent. Proving your innocence is something that requires money, lots of money. Even if you ultimately are proven innocent (which doesn't happen that often), you will be financially ruined. Your reputation will forever be that of a person who "intentionally tried to infect someone with HIV" regardless of the circumstance.

Thirty -four states and two U.S. territories have criminal statutes that punish people for exposing or transmitting HIV to another individual. Punishments range from a fine to up to 30 years in prison, according to the Center for HIV Law and Policy. In some states, exposure or transmission is a felony, and convicted individuals are sometimes forced to register as sex offenders. In my home state of Missouri simply exposing another person to HIV (through ANY sexual contact) or by through saliva  is viewed by the law as a Class B punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Disclosure of your HIV status and the use of a condom is no defense. I repeat, the use of a condom is no defense according to Missouri law.


To date there has been no data that supports the idea that criminalizing HIV prevents exposure and infection. The contrary has actually been noted that criminalization practices impede getting people tested for HIV and ultimately treated. The reality is that criminal statutes that are out-dated and draconian only perpetuate fear and ignorance regarding HIV/AIDS.

Those infected with the flu should be arrested!

In 2006-2007 up to 49,000 people died in the United States as a result of complications related to influenza. If criminalizing HIV is seen as a prevention strategy then why not apply this same practice to address  influenza outbreaks? Arrest people who do not wash their hands, who cough without covering their mouth and those who place others at risk of infecting others with inluenza. Arrest children, women, the elderly... Arrest everyone since anyone can be a potential carrier of the influenza virus which could lead to death.

Obviously you can see the flaw in the previous suggestion however  criminalization is viewed as acceptable when applied to those living with HIV/AIDS?

Society has no problem quarantining marganlized populations however that must be seen as a slipper-slope that has greater implications for other groups. Today, it is criminalizing those living with HIV/AIDS but tomorrow it could be people living with Hepatitis. After that it could be criminalizing anyone who is a carrier of influenza. Ultimately where does it end? As long as we allow fear to dictate policy regarding public health, we will never acheive

You can either accept that criminalization of HIV/AIDS is the way it is, or you can fight against it. Contact you representative in Congress and urge them to sign on as a co-sponsor of the " REPEAL HIV Discrimination Act" introduced by Barabara Lee, (D) California.

Also you can learn more about efforts to end the criminalization of those with HIV by visiting The SERO Project at www.seroproject.org

Pope should be charged in International Court for HIV/AIDS policies

Pope should be charged in International Court for HIV/AIDS policies
By: Aaron M. Laxton, HIV-Infected Queer, Activist & Blogger

Child-sex abuse scandals have without doubt tarnished the Catholic church's reputation but are these cover-ups the only crimes that have been enabled by the Vatican? Recently the church's one billion faithful were shocked at the announcement of Pope Benedict XVI's abdication from power, the first in over 600 years. Although the immediate word from the Vatican was that the announcement came as a result of health issues of the Pontiff, stories after the fact paint a picture of a man, and a church, scrambling to protect against charges for crimes against humanity. It is my position however that enabling child molestors was only one of the major crimes that should be answered for. There is one other crime against humanity that has been perpetuated by the Vatican that deserves equal attention and a zeal to prosecute; the consistent misinformation regarding the use of condoms to protect against HIV/AIDS without doubt has led to countless exposures and subsequent infections not only today but during the previous thirty-two years.

Just as a leader of a country would face charges of genocide for killing his own people, so too should the Pope face charges. The Vatican, which is the worlds richiest country per capita, enjoys unprecendented luxuries as a result of the power. Additionally the deeply-rooted beliefs of the believers create a situation in which church members are placed in a no-win situation that pits faith against practical health prevention practices that are known to greatly reduce the exposure and contraction of HIV. Believers can be swayed towards or away from any particular agenda that the Catholic Church. The church and it's leadership would never place people in harmful situations that are known to cause harm such as placing child-molestor priests into parishes with children... Oh wait, that is exactly what they did!

During the plague era rather than embracing the best science that was coming to light, the Catholic church embraced a policy of "no contraceptives". Those who would choose to use condoms were not simply breaking a rule, they were placing their souls in danger of eternal damnation since the Pope speaks with a Heavenly-authority.

With great ability comes great responsibity; it is not only appropriate but also ethically responsible that the world hold the Vatican accountable? If people were murdered as a result of doctrines perpetuated  by the church then without doubt the public would decry the church's failure to protect its congregants. By condemning the use of condoms and safer-sex practices the church is guilty of murder! As such, the church as led by the Pope should be brought to face charges for crimes against humanity as a result of the needless exposure and infection to HIV/AIDS through the teaching, support and furtherance of church law and policies. The abdication of Pope Benedict XVI does nothing to change the dangerous teachings of the catholic church regarding the use of condoms unless the church as a whole demands that the doctrine is changed.

My Letter to President Obama and Congress Regarding HIV/AIDS Funding Cuts

Dear President Obama & Members of Congress,

My name is Aaron Laxton and I am one of approximately 1.2 million Americans that are living with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. I work full-time as a case manager helping homeless veterans reenter society. I pay all of my taxes, am a law abiding citizen and a veteran of the United States Army; I believe in the spirit of democracy however that spirit is breaking. It is breaking as a result of Washington politics that refuses to come together in any meaningful fashion in order to avoid sequestration. As a result of your inability and unwillingness to work together the citizens must deal with the subsequent consequences. Patients who are living with HIV/AIDS cannot and will not tolerate Washington agendas, personal egos and a general inability to work together, slowly kill us through balancing the budget on the backs of AIDS patients.

Up to 16,000 fewer patients, including me will have access to life saving HIV medications. It is these medications that we depend on to keep us alive. In my particular case, although I have insurance through my employer, HIV is considered a “Pre-existing Condition” and will not be covered until September 2013.

I was diagnosed with HIV on June 6, 2011 however if sequestration occurs approximately 650,000 fewer HIV tests could be conducted by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) State grantees, which could result of increased future HIV transmissions, deaths from HIV, and costs in health care. It is estimated that an additional 800 individuals will contract HIV due to reductions in the availability of HIV tests and prevention.  

Sequestration is tantamount to murder since withholding lifesaving medications and treatments will have reprehensible and catastrophic affects for those who are infected with HIV.  Additionally for all of the strides that we have made during the past 31 years, the potential exists that funding cuts will delay innovative treatments as well as a cure for HIV. The National Institute of Health will have to halt, crucial and life-saving research that will squander enormous scientific opportunities including the AIDS vaccine and other cure research.

Finally the FDA’s (Food and Drug Administration) Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) would face delays in translating new science and technology into regulatory policy and decision-making, resulting in delays in new drug approvals. As a consequence of the automatic budget-cuts implemented, the FDA will also be forced to reduce operational support for meeting performance goals, such as the recently negotiated user fee goals on new innovative prescription drugs and medical devices.

My life is truly in your hands and without intervention the reality exists that I will soon be forced to make choices regarding how I will the medications that will keep me healthy and alive. I urge President Obama and the Congress to work together in order to avoid sequestration. If no compromise can be reached then the blood of Americans dying as a result of AIDS will be on your hands.

Aaron M. Laxton
HIV-Infected Queer, Activist and Blogger

Sequestration: Implications for the HIV/AIDS Community

Sequestration: Implications for the HIV/AIDS Community

By: Aaron M. Laxton, HIV-Infected Queer Activist and Blogger
aaronlaxton@gmail.com

Sensationalized terms such as “Fiscal Cliff”, “Sequestration” and “Debt Ceiling” have by now become a daily phrase for most Americans. Most citizens, and economists for that matter, will tell you that they have no clear understanding of precisely what it will mean. There is one clear thing that we know however, sequestration will cause instant reductions to the National HIV/AIDS budget by an estimated $659 million in the form of automatic budget cuts.

The federal government hit the debt ceiling back in August 2011. A number of lawmakers said they would not vote to raise the debt ceiling, and instead argued that the ethical thing to do was to make deep cuts in federal spending. Failing to raise the debt ceiling, however, would have prevented the Treasury from making interest payments on the government’s accumulated debt, and thus would have forced the U.S. Treasury to default on its loans.  Lawmakers ultimately did agree to raise the debt ceiling, and that agreement came in the form of the Budget Control Act of 2011. The Budget Control Act mandated $917 billion in cuts to military and non-military discretionary spending over 10 years, and formed a 12-member committee made up of lawmakers from both parties drawn from both the House and Senate. That group of lawmakers, nicknamed the super committee, was tasked with devising a plan for at least $1.2 trillion in additional deficit reduction over the coming decade.

But the super committee did not come up with a plan for $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction. According to the Budget Control Act, its failure to do so triggers $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts – sequestration. Those cuts were originally scheduled to begin in January 2013, though they’ve been delayed until March. Under the current agreement, sequestration is now delayed until March 1 when the automatic spending cuts will occur if no further agreement is reached. This deadline will also approximately coincide with Treasury Department estimates of when the U.S. will hit the debt ceiling and slightly precede the March 27 expiration of the Continuing Resolution (CR). Below is a snap-shot of what those living with HIV/AIDS can anticipate if no deal is reached to thwart sequestration.

Treatment and Prevention

·        AIDS and HIV treatment and prevention – Cuts to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program could result in 7,400 fewer patients having access to life saving HIV medications. And approximately 424,000 fewer HIV tests could be conducted by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) State grantees, which could result in increased future HIV transmissions, deaths from HIV, and costs in health care.

·        Approximately 800 additional individuals would contract HIV due to reduction in the

availability of HIV tests and prevention. This would cost the United States $250      million,since every HIV infection costs more than $300,000 in health care costs.

 

·        More than 650,000 people would not be tested for HIV and more than 12,000 people would lose access to life-saving AIDS drugs;

 

·        Should sequestration go into effect on January 2, 2013, federally funded sex education programs would face significant challenges in addressing the critical HIV, sexually transmitted disease (STD), and pregnancy prevention needs of our nation’s youth—thus impacting the future health and wellbeing of our country.

 

·        15,708 People will lose access to crucial life-saving drugs.

 

·        $65.2 million in HIV prevention services will be cut.

 

 

Research and Innovation

“Sequestration will undermine everything we’ve done to accomplish the National HIV/AIDS Strategy (NHAS) goals of reducing HIV incidence and death,” according to Chris Collins, Vice President and Director of Public Policy at amfAR. “Budget cuts through sequestration would bring crucial life-saving research at the National Institute of Health to a halt, squandering enormous scientific opportunities including AIDS vaccine and cure research.

•         NIH research – The National Institutes of Health (NIH) would be forced to delay or halt vital scientific projects and make hundreds of fewer research awards. Since each research award supports up to seven research positions, several thousand personnel could lose their jobs. Many projects would be difficult to pursue at reduced levels and would need to be cancelled, putting prior year investments at risk. These cuts would delay progress on the prevention of debilitating chronic conditions that are costly to society and delay development of more effective treatments for common and rare diseases affecting millions of Americans.

•         460 AIDS Research grants will be eliminated

•         NSF research – The National Science Foundation (NSF) would issue nearly 1,000 fewer research grants and awards, impacting an estimated 12,000 scientists and students and curtailing critical scientific research.

•         New drug approvals – The FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) would face delays in translating new science and technology into regulatory policy and decision-making, resulting in delays in new drug approvals. The FDA would likely also need to reduce operational support for meeting review performance goals, such as the recently negotiated user fee goals on new innovative prescription drugs and medical devices.

Housing

·        5,000 households will lose housing support.

·        Campaign for Housing and Community Development Funding (August 2012)

·        CHCDF estimates that sequestration would negatively affect more than 440,000 households and an additional 1.1 million people by decreasing affordable housing opportunities and community development services. These households and individuals are low and moderate income renters and homeowners in urban, suburban, rural and tribal communities, including the elderly, people with disabilities and people experiencing homelessness. The need for affordable housing and community development services far exceeds what current funding levels can provide and sequestration would accelerate the growth in the number of households in need.

 

President Obama and the Congress are playing a game of “chicken” and it is going to be those that need services that pay the high-price.

 

I urge each of you in the very strongest way to contact your representative in Congress and place pressure on them to actually do their job and reach a deal to avoid sequestration. As of the morning of 2/18/13 members of Congress had adjourned for vacation and the President traveled to Florida to play golf. It is my opinion that the entire administration and congress should not adjourn until a deal is reached.

 

Use the links below to determine who your member of congress is and how to contact them today.

 

Contacting Congress

Congressional Directory

 

Tips On Telephoning Your Elected Representatives

To find your senators' and representative's phone numbers, you may use our searchable online congressional directory or call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202)224-3121 and ask for your senators' and/or representative's office.

Remember that telephone calls are usually taken by a staff member, not the member of Congress. Ask to speak with the aide who handles the issue about which you wish to comment.
After identifying yourself, tell the aide you would like to leave a brief message, such as: "Please tell Senator/Representative (Name) that I support/oppose (S.___/H.R.___)."
You will also want to state reasons for your support or opposition to the bill. Ask for your senators' or representative's position on the bill. You may also request a written response to your telephone call.

HIV will not kill you but your passivity and laziness will!

 

HIV will not kill you immediately but your passivity and laziness will!

By: Aaron Laxton, HIV-infected Queer activist and blogger

Last summer I had the amazing opportunity to speak at the ADAP Association Summit in Washington, DC. It was during my remarks that I posed the question, “If we simply provide medications to those living with HIV/AIDS yet we do nothing to improve their quality of life, what have we ultimately achieved?” The reality for those living with HIV is that quality of life is directly being threatened. It is being threatened and it must not be allowed to continue! Any meaningful existence for HIV/AIDS patients is directly being threatened in the form cost-containment measures with ADAP (AIDS Drug Assistance Program), reduction of HIV/AIDS program funding, increased HIV Criminalization efforts and outrageous pricing for new Anti-Retroviral Drugs in the name of research and development, just to name a few. In 2010 Gilead Sciences controlled at least 40 percent of the market share for HIV/AIDS therapies and showed profits of over $6.3 billion.

While some may call me an alarmist and radical, the fact remains that those of us living with HIV/AIDS are simply viewed as a “past-epidemic; a closed chapter- a black mark on our history marked by political-inaction, marginalization and demoralization”; take your medications and do not rock the boat is the current mentality! It is my opinion; big-pharma has bought the silence of a new generation of HIV patients thus quelling outrage over the lack of a CURE after thirty-two years. All of the advancements, therapies and medications we currently have came as a direct result of action from a generation that knew they would never be alive to see it. So please spare me the rhetoric that says, “We have never been closer to a cure as we are right now.” Where is the damn cure?

The Journal of the AIDS Society published new research that projected life-expectancies to approximately 69 years. One key challenge is that an aging population of patients living with HIV present researchers and clinicians with more questions than answers. Our understanding of AIDS-related malignancies has improving unfortunately patients that survived the earliest days of the AIDS epidemic are now staring a new insidious-challenge in directly in the face. Is it related to aging, anti-retroviral drugs, HIV/AIDS or all the above?

While aging populations of HIV/AIDS patients face significant challenges, the HIV/AIDS movement faces profound challenges which could prove fatal if not addressed. We must address philosophical questions regarding where we have been and where we are going if we are to ultimately achieve the Holy Grail, a CURE.

A previous HIV population had quite possibly the purest reason for fighting… a will to live. Today however, there is seemingly a lazy attitude among a younger HIV-community that directly translates into passivity and acceptance of the status-quo. Where is the fight?

Politicians will keep chiseling away at HIV/AIDS funding and programs until there is nothing! Twenty-five years ago, activists and AIDS Service Organizations would raise hell to stop this. Unfortunately many AIDS Service Organizations have lost their sense of direction and consequently no longer serve the populations that they were once determined to help. Those organizations which still have an interest in serving those living HIV are so afraid of advocating for specific issues lest their funding get cut.

We cannot depend on AIDS Service Organizations to place pressure on politicians on issues such as CURE Research, HIV/AIDS program funding cuts or issues such as HIV-criminalization. It is going to patients who are currently passive and lethargic to awaken from their dazed, lackadaisical-slumber and fight for their lives.  It you have ever heard me speak I always say the same thing… politicians do not change things out of the kindness of their hearts. They change because people place pressure on them and they do it out of self-preservation.

Aaron Laxton: My HIV Journey, HIV Meds And False Positives On Drug Test

Fantastic Journey

Fantastic Journey

Aaron Laxton: My HIV Journey: AIDS, Grief And Loss, Pain of being alive.

Aaron Laxton: Happy Holidays to All of You!

Aaron Laxton, My HIV Journey Day 520: A Strategy for the Holiday Season

I am Gay. I am a US Army Veteran. I am HIV Positive... I am voting for P...

HIV Is Not a Crime, 2011 Film by Sean Strub, Edit by Leo Herrera/HomoChic