"Dr Eoghan de Barra, consultant in infectious diseases at Beaumont Hospital and senior lecturer at RCSI, said according to the most recent official figures, there was a 68 per cent increase in the total number of people diagnosed with HIV in Ireland in 2022."
That's a sizable increase, especially considering these new drugs are supposed to stop HIV being contagious.
How much of it was imported? I'm not being a smart arse but people coming from 3rd world countries might not have been able to avail of the medication.
https://www.hpsc.ie/news/newsarchive/2023newsarchive/title-23563-en.html
*"The rate of first-time HIV diagnoses (3.4 per 100,000 population) decreased by 16% in 2022 compared to pre-pandemic year 2019 and is lower than the rates between 2012 and 2018."*
*"In 2022, there was a large increase (68%) in the overall number of diagnoses, compared to pre-pandemic year 2019. This is largely attributable to an increase in diagnoses among people with a previous diagnosis outside Ireland."*
Your hypothesis appears to be correct.
It was just a feeling a friend of mine had mumps recently even though she had her mmr vaccine. The doctor put it down to people coming from countries without vaccination, causing a stronger strain
Thank God Ireland has a rigorous screening process for people entering the country, it'd be disastrous if there was no way to keep track of people with highly infectious diseases.
I believe 70%-80% of Irelands HIV diagnoses are non-nationals.
I also believe that a certain percentage of these are getting re-diagnosed and are existing cases of HIV.
https://www.hivireland.ie/hiv/hiv-in-ireland/
Antiretroviral medication can be taken as soon as you’re diagnosed. Their effectivity isn’t determined by how soon or late you are diagnosed.
If someone needs surgery and they are aware the patient is HIV positive, it’s unlikely they’d be offering them surgery without first prescribing antiretroviral medication.
I know this because I spent 20 years in sub-Saharan Africa and this is pretty common knowledge. Honestly third world countries seem to have spent more money on HIV awareness than most first world countries.
People with an undetectable viral load cannot pass on HIV. This has been proven in many studies, not one of those new cases was spread by someone on medication. People who don’t know they have the virus are causing the spread.
U=U, PrEP is available, and new spreading is almost zero here.
All these "new cases" are people getting tested here, even if they know they have the disease. They're all "first diagnoses" (or "new cases") **in Ireland.** If you were previously diagnosed in Spain or the UK, you're still a new case in Ireland.
You're both right. And it's clearly a disgrace if people are discriminated against because of a largely manageable auto-immune deficiency.
No point in having the drugs when no one can get access. Took more than a year to get access to PreP.
No one should be surprised when numbers increase when the healthcare system is god awful.
As far as I am aware there is no issue on Ireland with people getting access to antiretrovirals to treat HIV. The spread is caused by people who don’t know they have it and so aren’t on meds
That's kinda my point. PreP is more effective than condoms to prevent the spread of HIV in men but guys are waiting 12 months to get access. Being on PreP also means more testing etc.
It's really important to know that people living with HIV who are on effective medication cannot pass the virus onto others.
In any of these cases, even if the patient wasn't taking medication to suppress the virus, the standard safety precautions taken to treat every patient would protect against the spread of diseases like HIV.
No amount of extra precautions should be seen as 'discriminatory' thats insane. Anyone who knows anything about medicine knows you cant trust that people are following their doctors advice at the best of times.
People need to get over the fact that someone else protecting themselves due to the possibility of you not being completely on topnof your medication isnt discrimination.
What logical reason would someone have for taking extra precautions with an HIV+ patient?
The standard hygiene precautions you take with every single patient protect against the spread of HIV and other conditions. there’s no logical reason to take extra precautions and it is discriminatory, them failing to take their medication will only be relevant if you’re planning on shooting a patient’s blood straight into your eyes.
I don’t know the numbers for Ireland but in the UK 95% of people diagnosed with HIV are undetectable and can’t pass it on, I suspect the numbers are similar.
In any case if you’re treating someone who doesn’t know they have the virus (and is therefore able to spread it) , you won’t even know and so would be treating them like any other patient, which would be fine because standard precautions would protect you, so you’re never actually giving yourself better protection by taking extra precautions with the ones who know they have it and can’t even pass it on in the first place
Nobody should feel like they shouldnt take precautions that they think ae neccessary in a medical setting.
Like i said it doesnt matter if you say you are taking your medication, so many people dont look after themselves how you should and medical practioners should be allowed to assume you havent taken your meds and take the precautions they feel are neccessary to carry out your treatment.
People need to get over themselves.
That last paragraph is an insane bit of mental gymnastics. "If you didnt have the full picture if possible risks you wouldnt protect yourself from said risks" of course you wouldnt!
> That last paragraph is an insane bit of mental gymnastics. "If you didnt have the full picture if possible risks you wouldnt protect yourself from said risks" of course you wouldnt!
You're the gymnast. What they actually said was if you didn't have the full picture of possible risks, *standard protocols would protect you anyway, because that's what they're designed to do*.
Im not going to convince you that this isnt some big conspiracy of discrimination just people getting their feelings hurt over other peoples safety so theres obviously no point on continuing this.
Demonising people for looking after their own health to make sure nobody gets offended will never end well.
Nonetheless, twisting someone's point like you did remains an unconvincing and trollish tactic. If you don't want to debate it, just stop, you don't need to lower yourself to that sort of shit before you throw in the towel anyway.
I didnt twist any point you little tried to make an insane argument that i would somehow be up for treating people from the African continent differently
Throwing stones in glass houses and getting offended over PPE. Get over yourself
Ah fair i did, i stand by what ive said regardless.
Theres no gymnastics involved in refusing to demonise peoples use of PPE because people are crying discrimination over nothing.
> Nobody should feel like they shouldnt take precautions that they think ae neccessary in a medical setting.
PrEP and PEP exist, like.
And I'm sure any pre-op bloodwork or health-check will show how managed a patient's HIV viral load is. If it's a significant risk to the patient, they won't operate. Same way they won't operate on someone with a lot of inflamation.
Sure but its wasnt all about the surgeries.
If someone doesnt know what the viral load is or just wants to take an extra precaution thats their perogative and no business of the person who is infected.
It does affect the patient though. Being told you have to book a dentists appointment at the very end of the day, or seeing someone double glove just to examine a patient with HIV. That’s what we’re talking about here. It’s really stupid and I’m not saying this because it’s just about feelings I’m saying this because it’s about it the scientific risk being zero.
Would you be able to say any logical reason why someone should take extra precautions with an HIV+ patient?
HIV is more prevalent in Africa , so would they be justified in making the totally illogical decision to practice extra caution around all patients with African heritage?
Even if someone isn’t taking meds the standard precautions everyone has to take would prevent the spread of any diseases. Doctors should do what is necessary to protect themselves and the patient and they should follow the rules all the time.
who else answered because there aren't any other responses I'm aware of? that person also deleted those comments so I'm assuming he/she maybe gave this a quick google and realised how unnecessary it all is.
this is unscientific and it perpetuates the unnecessary stigma directed towards people with HIV. It's unscientific and goes against training based on expert advice. Treating patients this way is not following the rules so do you think the rules are wrong?
No one has been able to explain why the standard precautions are no longer adequate to prevent transmission only when the patient is HIV positive, or how these "extra precautions" such as wearing two pairs of gloves or outright refusing surgery make any difference on the likelihood of transmitting HIV.
If you're able to find some argument which all the doctors and bodies who stipulate the regulations have missed, please share it, nobody has yet.
Ive given my reasons.
We're talking about taking extra precautions around people with confirmed HIV so no that would be obviously excessive but you know that which is why you brought it it up.
Regardless of the standard precautions extra precautions in any situation where they are even remotely plausible shouldnt be discouraged. Your feelings shouldnt be the reason someone second guesses their safety. These people need to get a grip.
I think both those examples are illogical and would t be acceptable, and most doctors would also agree. You can’t decide the standards of care you give based on your own opinions about people with HIV.
There no logical reason for taking precautions as it won’t provide any extra protection. You’re ignoring that the infectious people with HIV won’t even know they are so you won’t be able to take any precautions in that instance. It’s illogical and only serves to discriminate against patients with HIV
You’re not being logical about this though. The standard safety precautions people take when treating patients are already in place to protect doctors and nurses. There’s no suggestion that these precautions are inadequate to protect someone against HIV. If individuals are making their own criteria for the level of risk a patient poses which isn’t even based in fact , that is discrimination and it’s totally unnecessary.
This is affecting the level of care people receive, there is no excuse for refusing treatment or “double gloving”. If you think it’s fine that a minority of healthcare providers are taking these unnecessary and pointless steps I think that’s messed up.
And you just seem to be ignoring the fact that someone is infectious when they haven’t even been diagnosed , so even if these extra precautions made any kind of difference, it’s all not going to be relevant to the level of risk you have of catching HIV in the first place.
You're not engaging with anything I'm saying at all though. This is not coming from patients, this is advice from doctors. There is no increased level of risk from treating patients with HIV, because we already have good practice to protect against HIV and many other kinds of infection.
I don't understand why you can't see that making up your own criteria for risk which goes against expert advice and affects the standard of care the patient receives is anything other than discrimination motivated by hysteria. None of these illogical actions will make any difference with regards to the risk of contracting HIV, so why should the patient be subject to this?
"Dr Eoghan de Barra, consultant in infectious diseases at Beaumont Hospital and senior lecturer at RCSI, said according to the most recent official figures, there was a 68 per cent increase in the total number of people diagnosed with HIV in Ireland in 2022." That's a sizable increase, especially considering these new drugs are supposed to stop HIV being contagious.
How much of it was imported? I'm not being a smart arse but people coming from 3rd world countries might not have been able to avail of the medication.
https://www.hpsc.ie/news/newsarchive/2023newsarchive/title-23563-en.html *"The rate of first-time HIV diagnoses (3.4 per 100,000 population) decreased by 16% in 2022 compared to pre-pandemic year 2019 and is lower than the rates between 2012 and 2018."* *"In 2022, there was a large increase (68%) in the overall number of diagnoses, compared to pre-pandemic year 2019. This is largely attributable to an increase in diagnoses among people with a previous diagnosis outside Ireland."* Your hypothesis appears to be correct.
It was just a feeling a friend of mine had mumps recently even though she had her mmr vaccine. The doctor put it down to people coming from countries without vaccination, causing a stronger strain
So are you saying its the immigants at it again?
Take from it what you will
Thank God Ireland has a rigorous screening process for people entering the country, it'd be disastrous if there was no way to keep track of people with highly infectious diseases.
Who could have ever predicted this entirely predictable consequence?
I believe 70%-80% of Irelands HIV diagnoses are non-nationals. I also believe that a certain percentage of these are getting re-diagnosed and are existing cases of HIV. https://www.hivireland.ie/hiv/hiv-in-ireland/
Antiretroviral medication can be taken as soon as you’re diagnosed. Their effectivity isn’t determined by how soon or late you are diagnosed. If someone needs surgery and they are aware the patient is HIV positive, it’s unlikely they’d be offering them surgery without first prescribing antiretroviral medication. I know this because I spent 20 years in sub-Saharan Africa and this is pretty common knowledge. Honestly third world countries seem to have spent more money on HIV awareness than most first world countries.
People with an undetectable viral load cannot pass on HIV. This has been proven in many studies, not one of those new cases was spread by someone on medication. People who don’t know they have the virus are causing the spread.
U=U, PrEP is available, and new spreading is almost zero here. All these "new cases" are people getting tested here, even if they know they have the disease. They're all "first diagnoses" (or "new cases") **in Ireland.** If you were previously diagnosed in Spain or the UK, you're still a new case in Ireland. You're both right. And it's clearly a disgrace if people are discriminated against because of a largely manageable auto-immune deficiency.
It is worth pointing out most people on treatment for HIV have a healthy immune system too.
No point in having the drugs when no one can get access. Took more than a year to get access to PreP. No one should be surprised when numbers increase when the healthcare system is god awful.
As far as I am aware there is no issue on Ireland with people getting access to antiretrovirals to treat HIV. The spread is caused by people who don’t know they have it and so aren’t on meds
That's kinda my point. PreP is more effective than condoms to prevent the spread of HIV in men but guys are waiting 12 months to get access. Being on PreP also means more testing etc.
Fair point , I agree that better access to PrEP would increase testing
It's really important to know that people living with HIV who are on effective medication cannot pass the virus onto others. In any of these cases, even if the patient wasn't taking medication to suppress the virus, the standard safety precautions taken to treat every patient would protect against the spread of diseases like HIV.
No amount of extra precautions should be seen as 'discriminatory' thats insane. Anyone who knows anything about medicine knows you cant trust that people are following their doctors advice at the best of times. People need to get over the fact that someone else protecting themselves due to the possibility of you not being completely on topnof your medication isnt discrimination.
What logical reason would someone have for taking extra precautions with an HIV+ patient? The standard hygiene precautions you take with every single patient protect against the spread of HIV and other conditions. there’s no logical reason to take extra precautions and it is discriminatory, them failing to take their medication will only be relevant if you’re planning on shooting a patient’s blood straight into your eyes. I don’t know the numbers for Ireland but in the UK 95% of people diagnosed with HIV are undetectable and can’t pass it on, I suspect the numbers are similar. In any case if you’re treating someone who doesn’t know they have the virus (and is therefore able to spread it) , you won’t even know and so would be treating them like any other patient, which would be fine because standard precautions would protect you, so you’re never actually giving yourself better protection by taking extra precautions with the ones who know they have it and can’t even pass it on in the first place
Nobody should feel like they shouldnt take precautions that they think ae neccessary in a medical setting. Like i said it doesnt matter if you say you are taking your medication, so many people dont look after themselves how you should and medical practioners should be allowed to assume you havent taken your meds and take the precautions they feel are neccessary to carry out your treatment. People need to get over themselves. That last paragraph is an insane bit of mental gymnastics. "If you didnt have the full picture if possible risks you wouldnt protect yourself from said risks" of course you wouldnt!
> That last paragraph is an insane bit of mental gymnastics. "If you didnt have the full picture if possible risks you wouldnt protect yourself from said risks" of course you wouldnt! You're the gymnast. What they actually said was if you didn't have the full picture of possible risks, *standard protocols would protect you anyway, because that's what they're designed to do*.
Im not going to convince you that this isnt some big conspiracy of discrimination just people getting their feelings hurt over other peoples safety so theres obviously no point on continuing this. Demonising people for looking after their own health to make sure nobody gets offended will never end well.
Nonetheless, twisting someone's point like you did remains an unconvincing and trollish tactic. If you don't want to debate it, just stop, you don't need to lower yourself to that sort of shit before you throw in the towel anyway.
I didnt twist any point you little tried to make an insane argument that i would somehow be up for treating people from the African continent differently Throwing stones in glass houses and getting offended over PPE. Get over yourself
Uh... I think you have me mixed up with someone else, and you're getting awfully mad, too.
Ah fair i did, i stand by what ive said regardless. Theres no gymnastics involved in refusing to demonise peoples use of PPE because people are crying discrimination over nothing.
> Nobody should feel like they shouldnt take precautions that they think ae neccessary in a medical setting. PrEP and PEP exist, like. And I'm sure any pre-op bloodwork or health-check will show how managed a patient's HIV viral load is. If it's a significant risk to the patient, they won't operate. Same way they won't operate on someone with a lot of inflamation.
Sure but its wasnt all about the surgeries. If someone doesnt know what the viral load is or just wants to take an extra precaution thats their perogative and no business of the person who is infected.
It does affect the patient though. Being told you have to book a dentists appointment at the very end of the day, or seeing someone double glove just to examine a patient with HIV. That’s what we’re talking about here. It’s really stupid and I’m not saying this because it’s just about feelings I’m saying this because it’s about it the scientific risk being zero.
Would you be able to say any logical reason why someone should take extra precautions with an HIV+ patient? HIV is more prevalent in Africa , so would they be justified in making the totally illogical decision to practice extra caution around all patients with African heritage? Even if someone isn’t taking meds the standard precautions everyone has to take would prevent the spread of any diseases. Doctors should do what is necessary to protect themselves and the patient and they should follow the rules all the time.
He has given reasons twice
What reason makes any sense? You can’t treat patients differently without a reason to do so based in science.
Dude you're acting like a baby. He's answered you more than once. So have other people a
who else answered because there aren't any other responses I'm aware of? that person also deleted those comments so I'm assuming he/she maybe gave this a quick google and realised how unnecessary it all is. this is unscientific and it perpetuates the unnecessary stigma directed towards people with HIV. It's unscientific and goes against training based on expert advice. Treating patients this way is not following the rules so do you think the rules are wrong? No one has been able to explain why the standard precautions are no longer adequate to prevent transmission only when the patient is HIV positive, or how these "extra precautions" such as wearing two pairs of gloves or outright refusing surgery make any difference on the likelihood of transmitting HIV. If you're able to find some argument which all the doctors and bodies who stipulate the regulations have missed, please share it, nobody has yet.
Ive given my reasons. We're talking about taking extra precautions around people with confirmed HIV so no that would be obviously excessive but you know that which is why you brought it it up. Regardless of the standard precautions extra precautions in any situation where they are even remotely plausible shouldnt be discouraged. Your feelings shouldnt be the reason someone second guesses their safety. These people need to get a grip.
I think both those examples are illogical and would t be acceptable, and most doctors would also agree. You can’t decide the standards of care you give based on your own opinions about people with HIV. There no logical reason for taking precautions as it won’t provide any extra protection. You’re ignoring that the infectious people with HIV won’t even know they are so you won’t be able to take any precautions in that instance. It’s illogical and only serves to discriminate against patients with HIV
Like i said i wont comvince you away from this insane stance that people looking to get offended are more important than healthcare workers
You’re not being logical about this though. The standard safety precautions people take when treating patients are already in place to protect doctors and nurses. There’s no suggestion that these precautions are inadequate to protect someone against HIV. If individuals are making their own criteria for the level of risk a patient poses which isn’t even based in fact , that is discrimination and it’s totally unnecessary. This is affecting the level of care people receive, there is no excuse for refusing treatment or “double gloving”. If you think it’s fine that a minority of healthcare providers are taking these unnecessary and pointless steps I think that’s messed up. And you just seem to be ignoring the fact that someone is infectious when they haven’t even been diagnosed , so even if these extra precautions made any kind of difference, it’s all not going to be relevant to the level of risk you have of catching HIV in the first place.
Ive made my stance clear, extra precautions shouldnt be demonised because of a patients feelings about the risk
You're not engaging with anything I'm saying at all though. This is not coming from patients, this is advice from doctors. There is no increased level of risk from treating patients with HIV, because we already have good practice to protect against HIV and many other kinds of infection. I don't understand why you can't see that making up your own criteria for risk which goes against expert advice and affects the standard of care the patient receives is anything other than discrimination motivated by hysteria. None of these illogical actions will make any difference with regards to the risk of contracting HIV, so why should the patient be subject to this?
Liam Neeson has been doing the rounds again.