 | | | | Related Healthscout Videos | |
|
Page: << Prev | 1 | 2 They said this approach "merits further mathematical modeling, research, and broad consultation."
The study was published online and in an upcoming print issue of The Lancet.
In an accompanying comment on the study, Professor Geoffrey P. Garnett of Imperial College London, U.K., wrote that this type of HIV control strategy "would reflect public health at its best and its worst."
Text Continues Below
"At its best, the strategy would prevent morbidity and mortality for the population, both through better treatment of the individual and reduced spread of HIV," Garnett wrote. "At its worst, the strategy would involve over-testing, over-treatment, side-effects, resistance, and potentially reduced autonomy of the individual in their choices of care. The individual might gain no personal benefit from testing and early treatment, but they would benefit from protecting partners -- and who could object to that, unless they were recklessly exposing others to infection?
"It is easy to see how enforced testing and treatment for the good of society would follow from such an argument. Partial success would lead to infection becoming concentrated in those with a high risk, with an increased danger of stigma and coercion," Garnett wrote.
More information
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more about HIV/AIDS.
Page: << Prev | 1 | 2
-- Robert Preidt
|
.gif)
