Dean's World

"A Single Dose of Nevirapine"

Dean

Celia Farber notes at least one horror story.

But the drugs, they're always the better response. Right?

What if it turned out that HIV suppressed the immune system, but with good nutrition, exercise, regular sleep, monogamy, and other non-chemical interventions, it turned out to be possible to have a relatively drug-free life? Or to live 10-20 years before needing chemotherapy?

Just curious.

Posted by Dean | Permalink | Technorati Trackbacks

(link)

Dave (mail):

Now Dean, you're baiting :P

You know expecting anyone to be monogamous (with or without a marriage certificate) is just cultural imperialism, and christianist, and anti-science, and...

/snark

There's a lot of things people treat with drugs nowadays that, if they bothered to work at it, they could conquer without a pill they take for the rest of their lives.

There's others, that at least working at treating your body right and not inviting problems, will keep you from losing your health as quickly.

10.9.2006 12:08pm

(link)

Heather (mail) (www):

I admit I haven't done much research into how HIV and AIDS got started on the African continent, or even here, for that matter. I do know (who doesn't?) the apparent connection between HIV and sexual contact and needles.

Without seeming like a prude, I must say that I have often wondered how much the cry for a cure from the gay/lesbian community is so they don't have to alter promiscuous behavior. Now please, I don't mean that in any but the most literal sense. I have personally known several gay couples who were faithfully monogamous in long-term relationships who, as far as I'm concerned, were in absolutely no more danger of contracting aids than any similar heterosexual couple.

I also don't understand the wheeze about behaviors never changing so we must make sure there are protections and cures and whatever else in place to protect us from our own bad behavior. Why? I have known and heard about many teens who are more than willing to abstain rather than run the risk of contracting any STD.

I am a firm believer in consequences and having to deal with them. This is something that I did my best to pound into my own children, figuratively speaking. My daughter didn't always pay attention and to this day is, I believe, dealing with the consequences of regrettable and/or untimely actions. My son had done better, but that could be because he had the benefit of seeing some of the consequences his older sister had to deal with.

Sorry to rant like this, but "behavioral" issues (and I consider the US version of the epidemic to be that) are a sore spot with me. I'm really tired of people trying to rationalize and excuse bad/inappropriate/unhealthy behaviors so they don't have to accept responsibility for and deal with the consequences of their own actions.

10.9.2006 1:05pm

(link)

jonny (mail):

Dean, you know I share these questions and echo the first commenter's statement above that any number of diseases might be better treated by lifestyle changes than by medicine. That said, whenever you enumerate your alternative treatment list, which includes good nutrition and a full night's rest, you include "monogamy," but rarely "safe sex." Why? If one uses condoms regularly and properly, one can enjoy really good sex with an array of talented partners while avoiding STDs--and by extension, the immune-killing antibiotics used to treat them. Let's please not use AIDS, as the second commenter does above, as a pretext for shoring up antediluvian values. How wonderful, Heather, that you know monogamous gay couples. It warms my heart. But many queers, and straights, don't wish to live by those terms and inside your institutions. To consign them to a life of bad health and psychological torment (not knowing your daughter, I can't easily contest your anecdote, but I can't help but wonder if her issues might owe as much to your judgmental prudishness as to her bad behavior) is naive and--yes, I'll use the word, emphatically--homophobic.

10.9.2006 8:09pm

(link)

Dean Esmay:

Condoms break, Jonny, so the only real way to be sure is to be monogamous.

But yes, if you can't hack monogomy, then, by all means use every protection available. STDs are bad.

10.9.2006 8:15pm

(link)

jonny (mail):

Monogamous partners cheat, too, Dean. And when they do, surreptitiously, they don't often reintroduce condoms into the relationships. Which means...an STD free-for-all.

10.10.2006 11:07am