New Anti-HIV Gel For Women Cuts AIDS Virus Transmission Chances in Half, Study Says

This is great news. Interestingly, science can't beat the current leader in AIDS prevention: monogamy.

That's a great comment. Interestingly, you added nothing to the discussion and sound like an ignorant idealist!

Perhaps I dont understand what is happening here. Are there women out there that decided "hey, im going to be infected with HIV FOR SCIENCE!!!?" what? I really hope its some fake HIV virus that is 100% curable, or non infectious at all. Someone explain?

@SLNuke87: Why criticize? 1) He's right, 2) Your comment didn't add much either. So at best, it's hypocritical.

To say that I added nothing to the discussion is merely dismissive. I chimed in that while this is great news for high risk individuals, a 100% prevention method for sexually transmitted HIV just can't be beat. 50% reduced transmission rates are great, but to pass it off as a cure-all would be wrong (this article doesn't do that, but it could easily happen)-- that is how condoms are often portrayed, to the dismay of those who bought in to it and had one break. People come to believe such garbage, and AIDS continues to spread. Condoms do break. This gel does not work all the time. Reread my earlier post. I never said that this was bad, and in fact scientists should continue to work on new prevention methods because, well, people are people and HIV is a terrible disease. At the same time, educate people that the only way to ensure each of them will not get HIV is to be in a relationship with only one sexual partner. This goes for men and women. To say that an individual can't choose to only have one partner is to take away the personal responsibility from that person-- say it enough and pretty soon people start to believe it.

So yes, maybe I'm an idealist, thinking that maybe people can make choices to prevent contracting HIV, just like people can make choices to reduce the chances of contracting lung cancer (not smoking), cirrhosis of the liver (moderation in alcohol), and heart disease (smart eating and adequate exercise). But people can't make choices unless they are aware of the options, so it is important with any advance in the battle with HIV/AIDS to remind people that their best shot at prevention comes from abstaining from sexual relations with infected people-- in practice this boils down to monogamy.

"Of the 444 women who received a placebo gel, 60 became infected with HIV..."

Whoa whoa whoa whoa. These women are now infected with HIV because they were given a PLACEBO? I'm all for progress, but this sounds unethical. Are they supposed to be happy that they're martyrs for a treatment that's only 50% effective?

@Sierra 34

They would have been infected anyways. (Probably) The rate of infection is very high, and the researchers didn't infect them personally. I haven't read the report, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't go tell them to have lots of sex for science.
Something like this:
Use this gel before and after you have sex, but continue your life like normal! They only had a 60% application rate anyways for people who HAD THE GEL. I dont' think they were told exactly what it did.

@SirSpectre

I was thinking the same thing, lol. It would suck to get this news.

"We gave you a placebo, so you weren't protected at all. Oh yeah, and you have HIV now."

I can Just see The Nurse or Doctor now.

N/D: Are You infected with HIV, AIDS?

Patient: No.

N/D: Do you Have a high risk of infection?

Patient: Yes, My husband has the Disease.

N/D: Well we are Doing Clinical Studies on Prevention of HIV AIDS. By applying this gel before intercorse, We believe that infection can be prevented from an infected partner.

Patient: Oh Thank You (N/D) I will use it Diligently.
(She Hasn't Touched her husband Since she learned of His Wasting Away Disease)

(She then Goes home. Has intercorse with her husband, thinking all the while that she is protected. When in fact she was given a PLACIBO!!!!)(Don't Forget She Probably lives in a third world Country, with not only a language barrier between the (N/D), but is also uneducated.)

Look I know the Scientific Method. I know There must Be a Control Group, But When Someones Life is hanging in the balance. It just Sounds So wrong...Using a PLACIBO in this study is just so Wrong!!! We Know that In Drug test such as for Pain. A PLACIBO can be given, and in some cases a patient think's the PLACIBO took their pain away, when It In fact Did Nothing.(That Is the Power of the mind, that is the Power Of Belief.)

But In this Study, You can't (Fool your Body Into believing, That it wasn't infected By HIV AIDS.)

In this Study All the Women should have been given the Real Thing.

yeah that is f'd up to give a placebo in this type of study.
but i do think that this gel should be a coating for rubbers bc HIV can go through the rubbers, so why not have the gel inside and out? all the more reason to use a rubber, amirite?
pretty sure the people in the study were already in a relationship with HIV infected partners though. i don't think scientific studies get that immoral.. "here, you take this gel, and go have sex with that guy, and we'll pay you for this clinical trial" really don't think they rounded up a bunch of HIV infected men and compensated random women to have sex with them... but i could be wrong. that would definitely fit my definition of immorality.

US Patent 5676977 You will be surprised! I promise...