We have this week yet another story of PrEP failure. As always the gay ill health sector are putting on a brave face and spinning that, in reality, it’s good news and that thousands of gay men are being “protected” from HIV by taking PrEP. As always the message is they don’t care if you use PrEP and abandon condom use and that unprotected sex should not be, the magic buzzword, stigmatised.
Again PrEP is promoted as more effective in preventing HIV than condoms. Bareback agenda revealed. The message that the victim who then took medication became undetectable and couldn’t transmit HIV then couldn’t “pass it on” slogan again pushed. He simply took his “PrEP works” tshirt off and put on a “U=U” tshirt on at Sydney’s Mardi Gras as a marketing exercise. How superficial; trivialising a life changing event. So is PrEP a “game changer”?
If you have a critical mind and don’t fall for the marketing spin, things don’t add up and some serious questions need to be asked. The gay community deserves the truth rather than the PrEP promoting bareback propaganda of the gay ill health sector.
The victim used the “on demand” regime. Which meant he took 2 tablets before his intended “risk” (condomless sex) and then a further tablet for a couple of days. So 4 tablets in all. So the big question is, did this regime strategy fail him, as he didn’t have enough of the meds in his system for it to prevent transmission? Or was it a resistant HIV strain which PrEP would not have protected him against anyway?
We have written several articles and shared videos by HIV specialists, the real experts, on prescribing regimes. They are contradictory and make no sense.
The daily PrEP regime is that you take PrEP daily and it takes a week for the drug to build up enough “protection” to fight off HIV when you are infected with it. Then you take it for a further 28 days after the risk, if you want to come off the drug. Or just continue taking it, if you are constantly having unprotected condomless sex.
However the “on demand” regime contradicts this advice and guidance entirely. To get an insight into how this regime conclusion was come to, watch Dr Massimo Giola from New Zealand (16mins in). He states that participants in the “on demand” trial were having so much unprotected sex that they weren’t taking it “on demand” but were in fact taking the drug 4 times a week. Which he states he wouldn’t recommend as there wouldn’t be enough of the drug in the system to “work”.
The gay ill health sector are pushing the “on demand” regime strategy. Why? It has become clear to them that there are many trial drop outs, probably due to the toxicity of the meds and side effects. Taking PrEP daily is difficult and users ask themselves if it is worth it, as getting a bareback shag is difficult due to the “stigma”. If PrEP users stuggled with wearing a condom, they probably struggle with taking a pill on a daily basis. Therefore the “on demand” strategy would “work” for these patients.
What needs to be examined is whether this “on demand” regime may cause a resistant strain of HIV to the PrEP meds. With the patient intermittently taking the drug and being infected while not taking enough of it to “work” and whether this has the consequence of a resistant strain, knocking out the whole classification of the drugs in PrEP. Complete PrEP failure, a health crisis “disaster” as Dr Massimo Giola states.
Remember trials are there for a reason, they have unknowns. You sign a consent form. PrEP is not a vaccine and it’s not like the contraceptive pill. Whether it will continue to work in the future no one really knows. However we do know that the condom barrier method does work very well.
Be very cautious about what you are told by gay ill health “experts” with their undermining of the effectiveness of condoms and their bareback agenda. Their message has tragic consequences for individuals who may put on a brave face and tshirts with marketing slogans.