NHS not funding HIV preventing drug (now ordered to fund drug by court decision)

You could always move to another country? You'd probably fit in quite well in Saudi Arabia with your enlightened views.

So...you think society should pay for people to make bad, potentially fatal decisions? Not just to themselves but to others?
 
You wouldn't. And what this ruling has done is give a group of people a carte blanche to pass their decisions and the consequences on to the state.

People make bad decisions all the time, people act stupidly all the time - it won't stop, whether the prevent drug costs £4 a month or £4000 a month, people will still do stupid things - and regret it.

Is it really fair to abandon somebody, simply because they got carried away or made a mistake? Shouldn't we try to help them? - do you not think that maybe one of the reasons we have such a high standard of living in this country, is because we don't abandon - we help, and do the best we can, wherever possible - no matter how stupid someone has been, or the cost.
 
If that'll reduce the hiv spreading in population then I think that'll be good.

It'll make the risk of hiv infection much lower for people who doesn't take pill
 
As I've already said, it's very easy not to get it. Don't stick your wick in someone. It is that simple.
I can safely say in 15 years of having sex I've never had one break or malfunction on me. The chances of it happening must be tiny!
However in the situation that it breaks...well that's a crappy situation to be in and what drugs like this are for. However the system is entirely open to abuse. We're just going to see morons who are too stupid or lazy to attempt to use protection relying on the rest of us to keep them alive

People are going to have sex, no matter what you tell them, the human body is rather clever at getting you to disregard rational thought when you've got the 'horn' :D Simply saying don't do it is hardly a solution.

Although I agree you shouldn't have unprotected sex with someone unless you really know them.

Also, condoms break all the time, you must have a really boring sex life :p

Another thing, aren't there already drugs you can take that can massively reduce your chance of catching hiv if exposed? I used to work with blood in a hospital, sometimes we'd be dealing with contaminated blood.

A woman I know was accidently cut with something contaminated with hiv blood, she was quickly given medication and she got the all clear.
 
Last edited:
So if that happens you'll just say to the GP "nah mate, please don't treat me, I wouldn't want to be a burden on my fellow taxpayers."

Utter nonsense.

Actually, i would.

I knew the risks, i smoked for 25 odd years despite the warnings.
 
Aren't the chances of contracting hiv from one nightstands remarkably low

It depends. Females or homosexuals are more likely to contract it given that the tissue where the infected semen is can absorb the virus.
However if a male has intercourse with an infected female, unless there are any cuts on the penis, the chances of contracting the virus are far lower.
 
People make bad decisions all the time, people act stupidly all the time - it won't stop, whether the prevent drug costs £4 a month or £4000 a month, people will still do stupid things - and regret it.

Is it really fair to abandon somebody, simply because they got carried away or made a mistake? Shouldn't we try to help them? - do you not think that maybe one of the reasons we have such a high standard of living in this country, is because we don't abandon - we help, and do the best we can, wherever possible - no matter how stupid someone has been, or the cost.

It's not about abandoning. It's about prevention.
 
If that'll reduce the hiv spreading in population then I think that'll be good.

We don't know this is the case - it could legitimise risky behaviour and therefore increase the cost both financially and to the individuals concerned. Let's not forget that HIV infection is not the only risk from such practices.

What other STDs does this drug protect against I wonder ... Hep? Syphillis? Gonorrhea?

This is another case of a powerful group with powerful lobbyists backed by financial support getting to impose their will on everyone else.

I frankly don't care what these people get up to in their private lives - that is their choice but I don't want to actively pay for their choices.

Moreover, equating this to football injuries - oh dear leave it, that's such a daft comparison it does not even dignify a response.
 
You gotta hand it to the NHS though

I mean selling something twenty times more expensive, and around 10% less effective than what's already available is a master stroke of lunacy

It's almost as bad as the time they spent billions on a failed IT project (buying dell pcs for £1,500 when they were £600 online)

They have to be trolling at this point, of that I am certain
 
Sleep around unprotected you take the risk. You won't do it again. The countries moral compass has gone haywire.

Take responsibility instead of being helped to avoid being a dick.......
 
It's not about abandoning. It's about prevention.

But then it turns into a cyclic argument (as always in GD)

You can't prevent people from going bareback, as much as the entire world would love everybody, having sex with someone of an unknown status, to be using condoms, it's never ever going to happen - there will always be people who make mistakes, are careless or are drunk or whatever, because that's what human beings are like.

If these people had access to the drug, at least it would reduce the chances of infection, it would also reduce the overall cost in the long run - because getting infected means a lifelong regime of expensive HAART treatment, which is not cheap.

As a side point, if everybody gets access to this drug - it could be a goldmine of information and evidence for the medical industry, on how to improve the drug further and end up with an actual cure for the disease.
 
But then it turns into a cyclic argument (as always in GD)

You can't prevent people from going bareback, as much as the entire world would love everybody, having sex with someone of an unknown status, to be using condoms, it's never ever going to happen - there will always be people who make mistakes, are careless or are drunk or whatever, because that's what human beings are like.

If these people had access to the drug, at least it would reduce the chances of infection, it would also reduce the overall cost in the long run - because getting infected means a lifelong regime of expensive HAART treatment, which is not cheap.

As a side point, if everybody gets access to this drug - it could be a goldmine of information and evidence for the medical industry, on how to improve the drug further and end up with an actual cure for the disease.

Hang on, if they forget to wear a condom, what's to say they'll forget to take their pills :confused:

:edit: Got it!! Assign all patients a nurse who does home visits. Sorted!

or a nurse who fits the condom for you? Much better idea
 
Last edited:
You can't prevent people from going bareback, as much as the entire world would love everybody, having sex with someone of an unknown status, to be using condoms, it's never ever going to happen - there will always be people who make mistakes, are careless or are drunk or whatever, because that's what human beings are like.

But we aren't talking about the odd mistake here are we ... we are talking about sanctioning a pattern of behaviour.

This has gone from sensible and safe-family planning to dishing out the morning after pill daily.

If people are that irresponsible they don't make sensible decisions when truly informed of the consequences then I am not totally sure that society has a need for or an obligation towards such people.
 
Does anyone know how much it costs the NHS to do a home visit?

I'm struggling with an impending migraine so can't google (need to take a break from the PC)
 
I heard a guy on radio 5 live this morning talking about this, he said, he lives in an area of London and the odds of having HIV are 1 in 7 for gay men in that area.

Someone said to him on the show, why not just use a condom? His answer, it is not always practical and not everyone carries them around.

I was driving and didn't take it all in but i am pretty sure he said he buys it direct from India for £45 a month, i could be wrong though, but he also did say that it wasn't fair he had to risk buying from a source outside his own country.

I herd the same interview, there was at lot of talk of preventing infection with this drug ie person A giving it to person B , but nothing on Person A using condoms (which are not full proof but are proven to be effective 95%+ of the time) to prevent the infection or STD in the first place. Annoyed me some what. its relay not hard to carry a condom and some of them are so thin now it feels like nothing.

Gay and straight people need to take more responsibility for there own health really.

As my mother used to say to me from my early teens "if you cant be good be careful" :D
 
Back
Top Bottom