|
|
|||||||
| Sexual Health Issues If you need medical advice regarding your sexual health, ask Dr Tan. We are honored to have an In House Doctor who is here to help. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#16
14-05-2002, 10:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The following I just downloaded from Wired.com. Docs: 'Nonoxynol-9 Doesn't Work' By Jordan Lite 8:55 a.m. May 13, 2002 PDT ANTWERP, Belgium -- A contraceptive many hoped would protect against sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS, offers no such benefits, according to a review of studies on the issue presented Monday. The first-ever meta-analysis of studies on the protective benefits of nonoxynol-9 against HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases found that the spermicide offered no significant protection against any such infections, said David Wilkinson, a professor of rural health at the University of South Australia in Adelaide who conducted the analysis. "Nonoxynol-9 doesn't work. It doesn't prevent HIV," said Wilkinson, one of 650 scientists attending a conference this week on microbicides -- gels and creams that many researchers believe could significantly enhance AIDS-prevention efforts. Researchers had hoped that nonoxynol-9, which is said to increase the effectiveness of condoms but is considered a poor contraceptive when used alone, would be the first effective microbicide against HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. "The story is over. Nonoxynol-9 is over as a microbicide," Wilkinson said. "That's the bottom line." The analysis confirmed the results of a widely reported 2000 study that showed that nonoxynol-9, the most commonly used spermicide in the world, offered no protection against HIV. But it differed from that study in one important respect: The 2000 study said that nonoxynol-9 increased the risk of HIV, while the new analysis on all available studies suggested the product doesn't increase risk of HIV infection. Willard Cates, president of the research organization Family Health International, said the study "is not even the nail in the coffin. This is putting the tombstone in. "The field has moved far beyond N-9," he added. Nonoxynol-9, which condom manufacturers say is contained in 45 percent of condoms sold commercially, does increase risk of genital lesions, according to the analysis, which reviewed 27 studies of a total of 5,096 women. Such lesions have been associated with increased risk of AIDS. The study also found that nonoxynol-9 seemed to increase risk of Trichomonas, parasites that are frequently sexually transmitted, and of bacterial vaginosis, a common vaginal infection. "The data on genital ulcerations is worrying," Wilkinson said. "That we see increased genital ulcerations is not good news, but it doesn't seem to increase risk" of HIV. But Wilkinson added that because most of the women in the studies were commercial sex workers who used nonoxynol-9 multiple times daily, the risk of lesions was likely much lower for women who use it twice a day or less often. The implications of the analysis on use of nonoxynol-9 for contraceptive purposes are unclear, but within the next few weeks the World Health Organization will issue recommendations on the topic, said Timothy Farley, who is coordinating the agency's response. Wilkinson implied that health officials are concerned about nonoxynol-9's effectiveness as a contraceptive. "As for pregnancy, it doesn't do a whole lot against that, either," Wilkinson said. 
|
|
#17
14-05-2002, 10:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
A new beginning...in 2007???
Hi bro JaguarLuv,
Below is another--more hopeful report. New, with microbicides, but supposed to only come out in...2007!!!??? Yup, I agree KNN CCB lah! And I only find out all this about nonoxynol-9 in the last 2 days???!!! What next, I wonder--even HJs can get STDs???!!! OK bro. Let us ponder a while... Hope for New AIDS Weapon By Jordan Lite 2:00 a.m. May 13, 2002 PDT ANTWERP, Belgium -- AIDS researchers looking for ways to prevent more HIV infections have their sights set on a range of gels and creams that many believe will eventually offer uninfected people the best possible defense against the virus, short of a vaccine. These microbicides could also take the form of a film or tablet similar to those used as contraceptives. But while some microbicides might be formulated to protect against pregnancy, their primary purpose would be to attack HIV, offering potentially life-saving protection to any sexually active person who uses them. Since microbicides would not require the cooperation of both partners to work effectively, they would be of particular benefit to women and gay men, the two populations epidemiologists say are at greatest risk of infection. Although condom-promotion campaigns in the industrialized world helped to reduce HIV transmission rates in the early 1990s, condoms are still snubbed by men in much of the developing world, and epidemiologists are alarmed by a new increase in unprotected sex among gay men in the United States. "It’s going to be a big thing, there's no doubt about it," said Dr. Alan Stone, director of London-based Medical Scientific Advisory Services, one of 500 scientists and public health experts scheduled to attend a four-day conference on microbicides beginning here Sunday. An effective microbicide could reach the market as early as 2007, according to the Reproductive Technologies Project, a Washington nonprofit that works to advance reproductive health for women. That's far sooner than the potential debut for either a preventive or therapeutic vaccine, which is a decade or more away, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infections Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. Still, while 55 microbicide products are in development, only 11 have reached clinical testing stages, according to the Alliance for Microbicide Development. Just three are in or near Phase III testing, one of the last stages involved in the U.S. regulatory approval process. Microbicides could work in several ways: They could kill or immobilize the HIV pathogen on contact, block infection by creating a barrier between the virus and the vagina or rectum, or prevent an infection from taking hold by strengthening the body's natural immune defenses. Some might protect against pregnancy as well as AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. And in theory, a microbicide would be "bi-directional," meaning that infected people could apply it to their own body to protect their partner during intercourse. Those attending this week's conference -- this is only the third year of the event, reflecting the discipline's newness -- will be paying close attention to the scientific, social and regulatory hurdles to creating an effective product. Many scientists were surprised and disappointed two years ago when researchers announced that nonoxynol-9, the spermicide commonly used alone or with condoms, not only fails to protect against HIV, but seems to increase risk of transmission. An update on that research is expected Monday. An ideal microbicide should have two features, says Polly Harrison, director of the Alliance for Microbicide Development: It should be bio-adhesive -- that is, it should stay where it's supposed to -- and it must be comfortable. "It should feel good. It should smell good," Harrison says. "It's common sense: If you have a product that's difficult to use or unpleasant, you're not going to use it." A key obstacle is money. A February report by the Rockefeller Foundation determined that even a microbicide that is only 40 percent effective could avert 5.6 million HIV infections and save $3.2 billion in health-care costs. But "despite this enormous scientific and public health potential, microbicide research has been severely under-funded and politically marginalized," the report said. The wealthiest pharmaceutical companies, reluctant to invest in products that would bring in little revenue when they are inevitably sold over the counter and at reduced rates in poor countries, have avoided developing microbicides, says Stone, who surveyed 36 such companies beginning in 1999 and found that none had invested money in microbicide research. Instead, 39 small biotech firms, 44 nonprofits and seven public-sector agencies are currently working on microbicides worldwide, according to the Alliance for Microbicide Development. Wendy Wertheimer, the spokeswoman for the National Institutes of Health's Office of AIDS Research, did not return calls seeking comment. But U.S. Sen. Jon Corzine, a Democrat from New Jersey who in November introduced legislation that would expand the NIH's microbicide research, says that the agency's current budget for microbicide research and development is just $34.6 million, less than 2 percent of its total AIDS budget. "A dollar doesn't equal a dollar when you put it in prevention versus treatment versus vaccine research (terms)," says Jeff Smith, director of clinical research at the American Foundation for AIDS Research. "There hasn't been a great emphasis on prevention, so we're farther behind and it will take more dollars to catch up."
|
|
#18
15-05-2002, 12:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Tks bro perrymason32. This is very informative.
First of all, is.. NB LAH! So how effective are condoms against HIV and pregnancies now??!! Why the KNN report dun state?!! That Wilkinson do things do half fuck! Second thing, keep calm... Lastly, go for a blood test 6 mths later... ... *sigh*
__________________
aww... I love pussy cats
|
|
#19
15-05-2002, 02:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
And as to how effective condoms are...no more than before lor. I think the report doesn't say because the dumb-assed overpaid so-called asshole researchers and doctors don't dare to commit--because they don't know. And yup, just have to wait to take that blood test 6 months later...from the our last fuck. But NB, I was hoping to cheong this weekend lah. And the only option is DIY until find a steady sex partner...WTF, man! * sigh * sheesh!!! aiya, never mind lah. let's not think about it for now until the next test...
|
| Advert Space Available |
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
