T.rex

February 24th, 2009, 02:09 AM

i think one of the most over-looked facets regarding the 'meds or no meds' debate is the question, 'does CD4 and Tcell count really matter?'

I've seen many studies on the web (here is one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18989232) which basically say that people with good numbers and bad numbers on HART have the same chance of reaching immune failure.

Lets not kid ourselves. The ENTIRE reason that Western medicine tells hiv pozzers to get on meds is to reach an undetectable hiv level, thus decreasing our chances of reaching immune failure. This contention, however, doesn't hold water, when it turns out those with bad numbers have just as much success.

Doctors point to 1996, when triple cocktails came into vogue, to show that mortality went down, thus proving the meds work. Though correlation does not equal causation. My own theory is that the mortality went down in 1996, simply because the triple cocktails REPLACED the much more potent AZT. Basically, we substituted one major posion for a more tolerable triple cocktail of weaker poision... thus we didn't die as fast.

I've posted on The Body, asking the Doc has a study ever shown the mortality rates of HART patients after 1996, verses non-HART patients. Of course the answer was 'No'. The 2 groups have never been studied next to each other, the doctor citing that it would be 'unethical' to deny one control group the meds. What a crock.

I've seen many studies on the web (here is one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18989232) which basically say that people with good numbers and bad numbers on HART have the same chance of reaching immune failure.

Lets not kid ourselves. The ENTIRE reason that Western medicine tells hiv pozzers to get on meds is to reach an undetectable hiv level, thus decreasing our chances of reaching immune failure. This contention, however, doesn't hold water, when it turns out those with bad numbers have just as much success.

Doctors point to 1996, when triple cocktails came into vogue, to show that mortality went down, thus proving the meds work. Though correlation does not equal causation. My own theory is that the mortality went down in 1996, simply because the triple cocktails REPLACED the much more potent AZT. Basically, we substituted one major posion for a more tolerable triple cocktail of weaker poision... thus we didn't die as fast.

I've posted on The Body, asking the Doc has a study ever shown the mortality rates of HART patients after 1996, verses non-HART patients. Of course the answer was 'No'. The 2 groups have never been studied next to each other, the doctor citing that it would be 'unethical' to deny one control group the meds. What a crock.