National Library of New Zealand
Harvested by the National Library of New Zealand on: Oct 10 2015 at 17:11:55 GMT
Search boxes and external links may not function. Having trouble viewing this page? Click here
Close Minimize Help
Wayback Machine

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10
31
General Forum Area / Hormone treatment in prisons for transexuals
« Last post by Vortex on 04 Apr 15, 02:54:pm »
Just curious and can't find an answer to my question online.
I've been on hrt for nearly six years. I've had had a surgery as well.
If I go to prison will I be allowed to keep taking my hrt or will they take it away from me?
32
General HIV/AIDS Discussion / Re: Anyone tested at Body Positive Inc?
« Last post by kk8mo on 30 Mar 15, 02:09:pm »
Hi KK8MO,

All of the testing at Body positive is using standard rapid testing procedures that provide universal safety for the client and the staff. The rapid test kit used would have been opened before you and can only be used once. You would have seen your blood sample go into the testing kit and then Bruce read the result which stated that you are negative. Its very similar to a home pregnancy test.  Once the test is used it is disposed of.

The fact that Bruce is positive would have no bearing on your safety - he brings a wealth of knowledge to the testing process and has been performing this test for many years. You have no need to be concerned from the testing process.

Body Positive is a Community Organization and as such may not look like your average doctors clinic. You can access HIV Testing through your GP but this would not be a rapid test.

Mark Fisher
Body Positive

Hi Mark, thanks for your reply, I know you are the current CEO of BP.
I just got my result from labtests a week later after BP' rapid HIV test. I hope it fully confirms my "-" status.
Bruce was a really nice person, it was just my own nerves got me worried too much
33
General HIV/AIDS Discussion / Re: Anyone tested at Body Positive Inc?
« Last post by MarkF on 30 Mar 15, 01:54:pm »
Hi KK8MO,

All of the testing at Body positive is using standard rapid testing procedures that provide universal safety for the client and the staff. The rapid test kit used would have been opened before you and can only be used once. You would have seen your blood sample go into the testing kit and then Bruce read the result which stated that you are negative. Its very similar to a home pregnancy test.  Once the test is used it is disposed of.

The fact that Bruce is positive would have no bearing on your safety - he brings a wealth of knowledge to the testing process and has been performing this test for many years. You have no need to be concerned from the testing process.

Body Positive is a Community Organization and as such may not look like your average doctors clinic. You can access HIV Testing through your GP but this would not be a rapid test.

Mark Fisher
Body Positive
34
General HIV/AIDS Discussion / Anyone tested at Body Positive Inc?
« Last post by kk8mo on 30 Mar 15, 11:44:am »
 ;D
Anyone know about this orgnasation?
are they standard?
I did my rapid HIV test there, but the whole facility was just a small buliding, more like a two floors' flat.
Also their CEO Mr Bruce conducted the test for me, no offense, but since most of the ppl working there including himself are HIV+, I inevitably got worried afterwards.
Would there be any uncleaned testing kit etc. ...
I was so panic and nervous , so I did not pay attention to where and how Bruce took the testing kit,
BTW, my result was "-" , but I started to have minor problems on my body ever since, and it has been more than 3 months since my last sexual behavior. I am worried to get infected from that orgnisation ..- -!
Anyone has been there before and can comfort my over-tensed nerve-wrecking mind?
35
The Forum may be slow these days but GayNZ.com is still useful as a news source - I still follow its Facebook posts and click in to catch up on the latest happenings :-) x

https://www.facebook.com/gaynz
36
Oh look never say never...I'm sure there are heaps of guys who check this site for the news and to see if they recognise any favorites in the scene pics but who don't actually post...and hey, there's always that chance that some enchanted evening out of the blue when the pickins seem slim...you might just meet that stranger across an uncrowded website that make the logging in against the odds worthwhile, lol.
37
Seems this website is officially dead. Of course this is not the first time I feel so, thus old members can save explaination e.g. people use more facebook nowadays etc.

I wonder will this website close in the future?
38
Daily News Comment / Re: Condoms optional: Promoting the PrEP philosophy
« Last post by xau on 17 Mar 15, 09:51:pm »
PREP has a place in the mix certainly - but not a lead strategy. Good guide on access from ACON here... http://endinghiv.org.au/nsw/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PrEP_Access_Options_Paper1.pdf#page=2
39
Policing the PrEP orthodoxy
Criticising America seldom goes down well, but the last time I checked NZ was still an independent sovereign nation (at least until the TPPA is signed). This weekend's mudslinging over bareback porn actors, PrEP and "trusting" anonymous partners does make you wonder who we’ve p*ssed off.

NZAF isn’t opposing PrEP. That would be irrational given the study results. It’s arguing for considered deployment to the most at risk individuals, and a local pilot. Possibly in sexual health clinics so that men can be closely monitored for STIs, drug adherence and drug resistance; supported to use condoms as far as possible; and linked into mental health and addiction services where needed.

I conduct HIV behavioural and epidemiological research among gay and bisexual men at the University of Auckland and need to insert some perspective.

Contrary to various comments in other forums, NZAF is already promoting multiple clinical responses (regular STI and HIV screening, rapid testing, quicker access to ARVs). Like everywhere there is much, much more to do. Improving linkage into HIV care is a top priority (though NZ could hardly do worse than the US, with an estimated 35% of those HIV diagnosed virally suppressed vs estimated 50-60% in NZ).

Reforming epidemic-genic cultures
NZ’s prevention vision is and always has been much broader than a formula of educating, testing and treating. Like other effective NGOs born out of communities, NZAF has a transformative agenda to change cultures, not simply accommodate them.

This agenda includes full legal equality, social inclusion (both for gay men and between us), access to relevant sex education and health services including vaccination and ubiquitous free condoms, sex-affirmative approaches (especially for anal sex), anti-stigma, and cultures of mutual care and consent.

There’s widespread agreement that these are the bases of effective HIV and STI prevention for gay men, and pathways to the normalisation of condom use for anal sex, which in all heterocentric societies (i.e. all of them) faces considerable resistance given we’re 2% of the population.

To get the best results of out of PrEP at a collective level condom use needs to be maintained. I’d be surprised if many (any?) epidemiologists disagree. Frankly, it’s NGO’s like NZAF that have the experience figuring out how to do this in a practical and sustainable way.

Punching above our weight
That approach has achieved considerable success for NZ relative to many countries. After more than 30 years of HIV circulating locally:

- annual per capita HIV diagnoses among MSM are a fraction of the US and UK
- no sustained rise in new HIV diagnoses among MSM for 10 years
- rapid HIV testing since 2006
- rising STI threats among MSM but not of the magnitude seen elsewhere, especially among HIV+ MSM
- high uptake of condoms (over 80% surveyed anonymously by self-report in community settings use them always or almost always for casual sex) and broad (but not universal) gay community support for condom use
- scale-up of condom social marketing that is remarkable and award winning
- sustained bipartisan political support of community based HIV prevention
- equal age of consent (1986); needle exchange programmes (1987); discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or HIV status illegal including in the defence force (1993); decriminalisation of sex work (2003); civil unions (2004) and marriage equality (2013) (most before other countries).
- out gay and trans Members of Parliament; visible police, health and defence services participation in pride events
- lowest HIV prevalence internationally among people who inject drugs
- no HIV epidemic among sex workers

These combined efforts increase our communities' resilience against present and emerging HIV and STI threats. The protection pervading our sexual networks - i.e. collectively - offers more robust defences by closing down transmission opportunities.

Recognising what's working and what isn't
Unfortunately, rather than having these achievements recognised for what they arguably are - *ahead of the game* - like other smaller countries NZ is used to being patronised and positioned as backward and unfashionable.

Moreover the experience of being lectured at by bigger countries with substantially *worse* records on health and human rights and social progress will be familiar to many NZers.

It would be one thing if commentators scolding NZAF could demonstrate that the UK and the US had finally solved HIV and STI prevention among gay men. That would be fantastic and welcome news.

The epidemiological data indicate the opposite. In London and New York, gay men’s health is in crisis.

In England the spend on HIV prevention in 2014/15 is a mere 70p/$US1 per person whereas funding for HIV treatment was 55 times that. That level of underinvestment in community-based HIV prevention doesn’t mean it “doesn’t work”; it doesn’t have a chance to.

The US has a poor record in public health, spending more but experiencing worse life expectancy than almost all other high income countries. Fortunately not all societies run public health the way the US does and many do it with considerably more success.

These are not compelling platforms from which to belittle nonconformist programmes like NZ’s.

Arguments that all western countries have had these same HIV prevention histories among gay men and it hasn’t worked anywhere reflect lazy UK/US-centric assumptions. NZ hasn’t done the same things – it’s often done more, it’s often done it better, it’s done it to scale, and it hasn’t stopped. It’s still underfunded here, and the imbalance is still stark, but they make it go a long way.

The irony of NZ being bullied into adopting responses to HIV and STI prevention from the US and UK that are associated with objectively some of the worst outcomes for gay and bisexual men in the West isn’t lost.

Strength in diversity
Instead, critiques offered by NGOs like NZAF need to be taken seriously because of their objectively better record. Interventions like PrEP will be stronger for it. More gay men will benefit.

NGOs like NZAF who work in the practical space of community-based HIV prevention know a few things about delivering on promises. They know that interventions can’t always be compared on an equal footing (there is no contemporary randomised trial of condom use to compare to the PrEP studies because it would be unethical).  That multiple interventions ought to have additive effects not simply zero-sum. That you have to pay rigorous attention to unintended secondary effects (“dark logic”). And that even encouraging trial results won’t fulfil their promise if implementation isn’t executed properly.

After more than 30 years, HIV control strategies around the world are now heterogeneous, have evolved to suit local circumstances even in the US, UK, Aus and NZ, and have enjoyed different successes. All can be improved, including NZAF’s.

But travelling to NZ and telling the colonials to fall in line isn’t the way to do it. It’s arrogant, imperialist and obstructive.

Dr Peter Saxton, Gay Men’s Sexual Health research group, University of Auckland

Disclosures: Research funding received from NZ Ministry of Health, Health Research Council of NZ, NZAF, University of Otago and University of Auckland. Prior to this I worked in public policy and community research at NZAF.
40
Daily News Comment / Condoms optional: Promoting the PrEP philosophy
« Last post by xau on 15 Mar 15, 10:35:am »
"Blue Bailey" star of video "Butt Stuffers",  "Viral Loads" "Suck Dick/Save the World (3 & 4)", "Butt Snack", "Drunk on Cum 6" & "Fucktards" (thanks IMDB) is a leading expert in what exactly? He only makes a good representative of selfish idiots who don't care about the costs of their actions on other individuals or our heath system (&/or can't do maths) & want to justify their own choices.

Some facts:

(% effective refers to risk reduction e.g. if someone with untreated HIV cums in you ass you have an average 1 in 70 change of getting HIV. Using condoms (75-85% risk reduction) reduce this to 1 in 280 (75% effective) to 1 in 1400 (95% effective) risk. http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-risk-levels-for-the-insertive-and-receptive-partner-in-different-types-of-sexual-intercourse/page/1443490/

In NZ around 6% of us gay men are living with the HIV virus. Mostly this is down to the NZAF's condoms focus & betting the safe sex message out in the 80's before the virus really took hold in NZ (there's advantages in being behind some trends)
Truvada (the PREP pill) costs between US$1370 & US$1695 per 30 (NZD $1,870 to $2,310 l- prob the lower end or a bit less if PHARMAC is doing it's job so estimate $1000)
Atripla (the prevailing treatment for people living with HIV)  costs between US$2263 & US$2316 per 30 (NZD $3,085 to $3,156 but I'm told PHARMAC pays around NZ$1200)

Condoms if used 100% properly are 99% effective but in the real world reduce HIV transmission 75-85% & other STD's as well  (& since not having other STD's like herpes also makes HIV transmission less likely there's a double benefit). Side effects are limited to a blocked loo of you're dumb enough to flush them!
Net cost to heath service per gay man per year for free condoms maybe $20? Presuming 30,000 sexually active gay men in NZ cost 0.6 million per year.

PREP is used 100% properly is 85% effective but in the real world possible much lower. (why take it if not planning sex?) Negative side effects same as same drugs used for HIV+ people (most ppl little of no effect, some moderate, a few severe, long term effects unknown), lower condom use. Positive side effects (beyond lowering HIV transmission risk) - none
Cost per gay man per year $12,000 ($1000/month) Presuming 30,000 sexually active gay men in NZ to be treated cost 360 million per year.

Treatment as prevention. 90-95% effective in achieving & maintaining "undetectable" viral loads (note definition of "undetectable" has changed as viral load tests become more accurate used to mean under a couple of hundred copies/ml now means nothing detectable).  Undetectable viral loads reduce transmission min 85% (conservative - in studies NO observed transmission so probably nearer 95-100%) Negative side effects same as same drugs used for HIV+ people (most ppl little of no effect, some moderate, a few severe, long term effects unknown). Positive side effects (beyond lowering HIV transmission risk) - gay men don't die of AIDS, lower heath care costs (no AIDS hospitalisation) & gay men continue in workforce paying taxes.
Cost per gay man per year $12,000 ($1200/month). Presuming 2,000 HIV+ gay men in NZ to be treated cost 28 million per year less cost of not treating (AIDS treatment costs avoided) prob 100 million plus & taxes paid because men are working = net benefit NOT cost.


So what do you think NZAF & the health dept should be doing?

A: What they're doing very successfully for years i.e. condom based safe sex message (that gives NZ our low 6% MSM HIV+ rate) AND ramping up testing & treatment with the objective of 100% treatment = min 85% & (potentially) 100% reduced HIV transmissions.

B: Trying to convince the govt to spend nearly half a billion health dollars to prescribe PREP to all HIV- gay men when IF taken regularly the risk reduction net benefit (given a drop in condom use) will be small (if our visiting gay porn star is correct)


Even if B were possible (and it's not) there's the risk of finding out what AIDS meds long term complications are. The AIDS meds used for PREP may be safe (certainly of you're living with HIV any unknown risks are nothing given the option is AIDS) but the list of chemicals we've called "safe" to find out they're not is long & growing. What calls for use of PREP as an HIV strategy in NZ amount to is a wish for a massive, ridiculously expensive experiment on gay men.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10