Articles filed under 'HIV & AIDS'
Results of recent studies have revived the controversy over circumcision in infants. The U.S. leads the way in holding to this practice, although in the past decade or so, the surgical procedure has declined. A 1999 survey of hospital records found circumcision rates varying widely by region — 81% in the Midwest, 66% in the Northeast, 64% in the South and 37% in the West.
In Europe, Asia, and Latin America, baby boys are not routinely circumcised, however Jewish and Muslim faiths traditionally subscribe to circumcision. Recent international studies have cast new light on the subject. Two trials held in Africa involving more than 7,500 men were stopped early because results showed that circumcised adult males had a 51% to 60% lower rate of contracting HIV, the AIDS virus, than their uncircumcised counterparts.
Researchers believe that the warm, moist area under foreskins of uncircumcised men can breed infections. Lifestyle and personal cleaning habits may have more impact on health, however, than the surgical removal of foreskin. In some areas of the world, clean water and soap may not be widely available, and in these areas, circumcision may make sense.
Doctors in the U.S. are split in their opinions on the potential benefits of circumcision. Those opposed believe that circumcision does unnecessary violence to the infant’s genitals, and that the decision should be left to the male in adulthood. Furthermore, they believe that removing a baby boy’s foreskin might diminish his sexual pleasure when he becomes sexually active.
Doctors who favor the procedure point out that studies over the years have shown circumcised males to have lower rates of urinary tract infections, penile cancer (a rare condition), and a variety of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Circumcised baby boys have fewer urinary tract infections and possibly other problems, but these can be treated with antibiotics or other strategies if needed.
Tradition, religion and philosophical beliefs will continue to be factors involved in the emotional choice involving circumcision. In the final analysis, it is up to the parents, guided by information from their baby’s doctor, to make the decision.
Whatever parents decide for their newborn sons will probably be fine, as there appear to be advantages and disadvantages either way. When in doubt, why not leave the penis intact and let the individual decide as an adult?
Source: MSNBC
March 5th, 2007
HIV testing may become routine for Americans between the ages of 13 to 64. Nearly half of HIV infections are found in patients who are unaware they have the virus.
About 250,000 Americans have AIDS but don’t know it. These individuals need prompt medical care in order to control the virus and to help prevent its spread to others. Life-extending therapies now available are most effective when treatment is begun early in the disease.
The Center for Disease Control is recommending that HIV testing become part of a routine physical. This recommendation is not binding legally, and all doctors and health insurers may not embrace this policy.
If implemented, more expense would be involved for testing, counseling, and revising consent procedures. Standard tests vary between $2.50 and $8 a test. The new rapid test costs about $15, but follow-up tests to confirm the diagnosis could cost another $50 or more. In this country, treatment for HIV can cost more than $10,000 a year.
It might be difficult to carry out recommended routine testing for these age groups. The most sensible strategy would be to test for the AIDS virus when doing blood work for other conditions or during Emergency visits. The CDC suggests that everyone be tested at least once, and that an annual test should be given to persons in high-risk groups.
If this policy is fully implemented, testing could be administered to between 100 to 200 million Americans. The American Medical Association endorses the proposal and urges doctors to comply.
Patients could decline the testing. Physicians are urged to offer their patients the opportunity to have anonymous testing and allow them to choose the site where they want to be tested.
If the recommendation becomes public policy, an added burden will be placed on public health programs that pay for this type of care. Additional funding would be needed. The benefits of getting early care for HIV or AIDS and helping to control its spread should justify the increased cost.
Source: CNN.com
Technorati Tags: AIDS, STD, HIV
October 27th, 2006
New research indicates that persons diagnosed with the AIDS virus are better off taking powerful medicines before their symptoms appear. So called “drug cocktails” combining three or more strong medications can be hard on the body. Researchers discovered in a new study that patients who started the drugs early and took them continuously developed 28 percent fewer cases of serious complications. These include kidney failure and peripheral neuropathy (numbness in hands and feet caused by nerve damage).
A surprising finding was that if you didn’t develop toxicity in the first six to twelve months, the risks of complications went down rather than up. Researchers examined medical records of 2,304 patients with HIV in eight cities in the U.S. Patients were placed in five groups, depending on their white-blood-cell counts – an index of the degree of their illness. Risks of kidney failure and neuropathy were studied for all five groups.
Reduced side effects were seen in 28 percent of patients who started treatment early, before their cell counts dropped. These findings were presented in February at a scientific conference in Denver, Colorado. Scientists were encouraged to find that in one quarter of patients, the harsh side-effects could be avoided or minimized, regardless of length of time on the drugs. The key was to start on drug cocktails early.
San Francisco Chronicle, based on article by health writer Sabin Russell, (2/12/06)
March 22nd, 2006