Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) (10/09/89)
This is difficult for me even under a pseudonym but it is important for
everyone to realize. Unless you obtain an HIV test you could go for years
without knowing that you are HIV positive and unwittingly infecting others.
I conciously decided to abstain from intimate sexual contact sometime in 1984.
This decision was made after learning what HIV was and that it was killing
people. My physician at that time refused to allow me to be tested as he stated
it could ruin my life (insurance, job descrimination, etc). Between 1984 and
early in 1989 (5 years) I had absolutely no unusual symptoms. As far as I was
concerned I was as "healthy as a horse" . During March of 1989 I spent 19 days
on IV Pentam fighting PCP. I almost died from it. I KNOW I was not infected
after 1984. I don't know how long before that it occured. I have been told it
can remain dormant up to 10 years.
YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET A CONFIDENTIAL
TEST. The life you save may be your best friend!
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!135!38!Wounded.Bird
Internet: Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.orgWounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) (10/09/89)
This is difficult for me even under a pseudonym but it is important for
everyone to realize. Unless you obtain an HIV test you could go for years
without knowing that you are HIV positive and unwittingly infecting others.
I conciously decided to abstain from intimate sexual contact sometime in 1984.
This decision was made after learning what HIV was and that it was killing
people. My physician at that time refused to allow me to be tested as he stated
it could ruin my life (insurance, job descrimination, etc). Between 1984 and
early in 1989 (5 years) I had absolutely no unusual symptoms. As far as I was
concerned I was as "healthy as a horse" . During March of 1989 I spent 19 days
on IV Pentam fighting PCP. I almost died from it. I KNOW I was not infected
after 1984. I don't know how long before that it occured. I have been told it
can remain dormant up to 10 years.
YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET A CONFIDENTIAL
TEST. The life you save may be your best friend!
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!135!38!Wounded.Bird
Internet: Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.orgjay@banzai.PCC.COM (Jay Schuster) (10/11/89)
Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) writes: >YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET >A CONFIDENTIAL TEST. The life you save may be your best friend! Better yet, don't get tested, and change your behavior as if you had tested positive. Quoting the October 2nd (I think) Newsweek article on the advent of using Private Investigators to search up on potential partner's sex histories: ``I've even gotten the results of ten people's AIDS tests'' -- A Private Investigator in Dearborn, Michigan. Being paranoid does not mean that they aren't out to get you. -- Jay Schuster <jay@pcc.COM> uunet!uvm-gen!banzai!jay, attmail!banzai!jay The People's Computer Company `Revolutionary Programming'
duhon@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (joey.c.duhon) (10/12/89)
> >YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET > >A CONFIDENTIAL TEST. The life you save may be your best friend! > Better yet, don't get tested, and change your behavior as if you > had tested positive. Better yet, get an ANONYMOUS test, if it is available to you. Then no one else needs to know your status, and you can make inteligent decisions about your health, including "preventive" medical practices. If you are infected with the virus, it makes sense to change your behavior, but it's too late to prevent the virus from entering your system. Also, if you haven't been exposed to the virus, it makes sense to prevent exposure. In other words, I agree that everyone should assume they have been exposed, and be "safe," but I don't agree that knowing your status is of no value. To me it's like cutting yourself and saying "I'll try not to cut myself again," and letting infection take its toll, and ignoring proper care for the cut in the first place. The test is necessary to determine that "you've cut yourself." joey att!ihlpf!duhon
seth@PacBell.COM (Seth Miller) (10/12/89)
In article <27972@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> uvm-gen!jay@banzai.PCC.COM (Jay Schuster) writes: >Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) writes: >>YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET >>A CONFIDENTIAL TEST. The life you save may be your best friend! > >Better yet, don't get tested, and change your behavior as if you >had tested positive. I used to believe this myself. I can't even count the number of arguments I had with my mother on this point and how many flame wars I participated in here on the net a advocating this same idea. I feel very differently now. Anyone who is considered "at risk" should go get tested. With all the new evidence and new medications that are being tested and released it is to your own advantage to know your status. Isn't it better to know your status early when you may be able to do something to increase the length and quality of your life than to wait until you get that first (and sometimes lethal) opportunistic infection. I watched several of my friends fight against testing only to have their immune systems so ravaged that they died from their first illness. If they had been tested early they might (note: the operative word here is might) have been able to strengthen their immune systems so that they would have survived that first illness and might still be alive today. Early Intervention. That's the new buzz word around here. Get tested and take control of you life. Find out what's available. There are hundreds of research experiments going on all the time and they are not hard to get in to (plus you get free blood work and free medicine). Every day we are getting closer to having the answer. Seth
brianl@uunet.uu.net (Brian Larsen) (10/13/89)
In article <27972@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> uvm-gen!jay@banzai.PCC.COM (Jay Schuster) writes: >Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) writes: >>YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET >>A CONFIDENTIAL TEST. The life you save may be your best friend! >Better yet, don't get tested, and change your behavior as if you ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >had tested positive. I think that is a very irresponsible statement to make Jay. It reminds me of myself a couple of years ago (when I didn't know my status) and IMHO it is a clear indication of denial. Everyone should get tested! There is annonymous testing available. The most important factor is that early intervention has been proven to be the key in post- poning the onset of AIDS. That is the sooner you know, and begin AZT, the longer you'll be around to take advantage of the next wave of medicine. It has also been the case, that for people who do not get tested and only find out after they fall ill, that their immune systems have been so depleted that recovery is much more difficult (if at all). A personal situation came up recently with a friend of mine, who had gone so far as to say he had been tested and was negative, when in reality he'd never been tested at all. He came down with pneumocititis (sp?) which in this day, with proper medical supervision doesn't happen (pentamidene(sp)). It has been two weeks now, we nearly lost him, he is still in the hospital. My point is after being tested you can take charge, you know where you stand. Ignorance is not "bliss" (for any party involved) --Brian Larsen > >Quoting the October 2nd (I think) Newsweek article on the advent >of using Private Investigators to search up on potential partner's >sex histories: > > ``I've even gotten the results of ten people's AIDS tests'' > -- A Private Investigator in Dearborn, Michigan. > >Being paranoid does not mean that they aren't out to get you. >-- >Jay Schuster <jay@pcc.COM> uunet!uvm-gen!banzai!jay, attmail!banzai!jay >The People's Computer Company `Revolutionary Programming'
skaron@eagle.wesleyan.edu (10/13/89)
> In article <27972@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> uvm-gen!jay@banzai.PCC.COM (Jay Schuster > writes: >>Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) writes: >>>YOU CAN BE INFECTED WITH HIV FOR MANY YEARS AND NOT KNOW IT! GET >>>A CONFIDENTIAL TEST. The life you save may be your best friend! >> >>Better yet, don't get tested, and change your behavior as if you >>had tested positive. > It seems that these two opinions are to direct. (I know in the letters each expressed part of their reasoning, but there is still more). There are many pros and cons to getting tested. Below are some reasons you may or may not want to get tested, the choice has to be an individual one depending on which reasons seem to describe you best. Possible reasons for not getting tested. 1) You would not change your sexual behavior no matter the result of the test. 2) If it came out positive, you might get depressed enough that: a) You would not be able to enjoy life as much as you want to b) You might attempt/commit suicide. 3) If your business,school found out about the test (including the idea of simply taking it regardless of the result), there might be unwanted tension and/or discrimination. 4) You wouldn't be able to talk to anyone if it came out positive. 5) If it came out positive your family would not accept you. Possible reasons for getting tested. 1) You want to know what's going on inside your body. 2) If it comes out positive, you would want to be able to: a) possibly get on an experimental treatment program. b) find out how to avoid getting opportunistic diseases. 3) A negative result would mean a new staring point of safer sex/needle use activity. Of course there are other reasons, depending on how you view the HIV virus. Also when getting tested consider CONFIDENTIAL Vs. ANONYMOUS testing. Each one has its pluses and minuses. Also make sure the test site has PRE and POSTconsuling for the test. Precons. is just as important as Postcons. and vicaversa. My suggestion for the original poster is to by one of the many AIDS books on the market that has a reasonable amount about HIV antibody testing. After all, no matter how many opinions you here, the choice has to be your own and no one elses. Hope this helps greatly, and hope you come to the decision you feel comfortable with. SKARON@eagle.wes.edu or SKARON@wesleyan.bitnet (Steven L. Karon)
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/13/89)
Not only get confidential testing, but make sure they do counseling before the test, and then again after you get the results whether they are positive or negative. This is crucial. This means: don't use a back-of-the-magazine "Tests 'R Us" service. Here in New Jersey there are a number of testing centers sponsored by the Hyathinth Foundation (is that spelled right?). They are free, confidential (they give out ID #s so they can give the results to you and only you) and they require counseling before and after. They're phone number is 1-800-433-0254. I'm not associated with them except that I have friends that have used their service and been very satisfied. Does anyone know if they exist outside of New Jersey? -Tom -- Drew University -- Tom Limoncelli C M Box 1060 -- limonce@pilot.njin.net P O Box 802 -- tlimonce@drunivac.Bitnet Madison, NJ 07940 -- 201-408-5389
chet@retix.retix.com (Chet Mazur) (10/14/89)
I have one this to change in this post.... get an ANONYMOUS test and not a CONFIDENTAIL one..... If you don't understand the difference I'll explain.... CONFIDENTAIL: Between you and you Dr. or health care profession there is personally indentifiable information (name, SSN, etc.), which could, by accident or on purpose be disclosed to an inappropraite party. ANONYMOUS: NO PERSONALLY INDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION is given.... no was for your indentity to be disclosed! I would NEVER recomend a confidential test, and ALWAYS STRONGLY recomend an anonymous test.
skaron@eagle.wesleyan.edu (10/15/89)
In article <28083@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>, skaron@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes: > There are many pros and cons to getting tested. Below are some reasons you > may or may not want to get tested, the choice has to be an individual one > depending on which reasons seem to describe you best. I know I'm writing back about this really soon, but today I went through a practice testing with a counselor in order to answer specific questions about HIV antibody testing during peer education workshops.(and no that does NOT make me an expert in anyway...just repeating what I've learned,which is not much in the grand scheme of this syndrome.) Anyway,It brought out alot of interseting revelations. One thing I realized is that even if you feel that you might test positive, your reaction if you heard that you did test positve will be very different from what you thought it might be. (I really can't describe that feeling on a computer screen.) But whether or not to get tested came out as a question to her (the counselor). Her opinion was that if you have a nagging doubt about whether or not you might be positive, then get a test to remove that doubt. See feels that no one should live a life with that kind of doubt. I know some people might disagree with that opinion, but as a note to posters, I'd like people to respond to the original poster as a person who is thinking about taking the test,and your feelings about your decision whether or not to do so(this includes reasons). In this way the person who is making the ACTUAL decision will make his own mind up and not be pressured by what was in the posts. In other words, let's be NONJUDGEMENTAL about the person asking,the people responding,or their opinions.(and I know I did that in some postings,and to those people I'm extremely sorry). -Steve Karon SKARON@eagle.wes.edu or SKARON@WESLEYAN.BITNET -Remember that you are never truly alone.
skaron@eagle.wesleyan.edu (10/15/89)
In article <28114@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>, chet@retix.retix.com (Chet Mazur) writes: > I have one this to change in this post.... get an ANONYMOUS test and > not a CONFIDENTAIL one..... If you don't understand the difference > I'll explain.... > > CONFIDENTAIL: Between you and you Dr. or health care profession there > is personally indentifiable information (name, SSN, etc.), which > could, by accident or on purpose be disclosed to an inappropraite party. > > ANONYMOUS: NO PERSONALLY INDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION is given.... no > was for your indentity to be disclosed! > > I would NEVER recomend a confidential test, and ALWAYS STRONGLY > recomend an anonymous test. NEVER is a very,strong statement...Just a couple of days ago,I would have said almost the same thing, but after going through a guided image of an anonymous test with a counselor who does anonymous testing, my opinion has changed slightly. What bothered me through the image was that I felt like I was ONLY a number, nothing more...Furthermore, in this guided image I wound up testing reactive (positive), and then not to have anyone even slightlty know me made me very upset. I felt as if I was only another statistic to the counselor. She (the counselor) said that this can be a common feeling among people getting tested. The bottom line is this: if you are really worried about an information leak (yes, it can happen,but not as often as people like to think.) then take an ANONYMOUS test (but remember, there is a way for information to leak...e.g. You telling someone,someone recognizing you at the test site,etc.). If you feel uncomfortable being only a number,and feel more comfortable if you were being counseled as an identifiable person. Then you might consider a confidential test. Also by taking a confidential test, the couselor can make sure you have proper counseling if you test reactive. In anonymous,there is more of a possibility you won't come back if you test positive. But me personally, I would probably still go the anonymous route...I'm just giving the other side of the story. -Steve Karon SKaron@eagle.wes.edu or SKARON@wesleyan.bitnet
brianl@uunet.uu.net (Brian Larsen) (10/17/89)
In article <28083@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> skaron@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes: > > There are many pros and cons to getting tested. Below are some reasons you >may or may not want to get tested, the choice has to be an individual one >depending on which reasons seem to describe you best. See my comments to your "cons" to getting tested to coin a phrase "they wouldn't hold much water" AND could ruin lives!!! > > Possible reasons for not getting tested. > 1) You would not change your sexual behavior no matter the result of the > test. This is absurd!! So your saying, if you may be positive and are really "attached"" to your unsafe sex practices, don't get tested. I guess it would ruin the whole thing for you. (what about your victim?, lets hope they have sense enough to be safe!) > > 2) If it came out positive, you might get depressed enough that: > a) You would not be able to enjoy life as much as you want to That's a given, initially. And it's also a given from the position of ignorance. (kind of living the ole "what i don't know can't hurt me") > b) You might attempt/commit suicide. You might think, you might. But that's what counselors are for, that's what support groups are for, that's about being being a responsible adult. > > 3) If your business,school found out about the test (including the idea of > simply taking it regardless of the result), there might be unwanted > tension and/or discrimination. This is resolved by taking an anonymous test. These service centers have counseling and insist on using false names. I'm feeling, Steven, as though you are looking for reasons not to be tested. I understand fear. I have experienced every facet now of this disease, except my own illness. I mean to be 26yrs old and and have friend who are HIV+, some sick, some dead and to hear people such as yourself give more reasons to not get tested than to get tested is frightening. Clearly there needs to be more death before we wake up. There are no reasons valid enough to *not* be tested. AND a negative test today doesn't necessarily mean negative 2 years from now. BE SAFE!! > > 4) You wouldn't be able to talk to anyone if it came out positive. No, initially that may seem difficult. However that is what counselors and the like are there for. And you would be amazed at just how many people you do feel compelled to tell. > > 5) If it came out positive your family would not accept you. This again is a position of fear. Is it better to fall ill and then tell your friends and fasmily that you have AIDS. Or are you holding the option of dying completely without giving your family a chance to show up in you life as a support. > > Possible reasons for getting tested. > 1) You want to know what's going on inside your body. Please, WANT to know, what's going on in your body. Don't be surprised by a pneumonia or cancer. And don't "oops" pass this on to someone else simply because I didn't want to get tested. > > 2) If it comes out positive, you would want to be able to: Aa It has been proven that using AZT as an early intervention drug postpones the onset of ARC/AIDS ailments. Thus letting one live a healthy/normal life with the optimism of being around when better drugs come on the market. > a) possibly get on an experimental treatment program. > b) find out how to avoid getting opportunistic diseases. > > 3) A negative result would mean a new staring point of safer sex/needle use > activity. GOD, SOMETIMES THESE COMMENTS REALLY PISS ME OFF! Safer sex/needle use should have begun already. Even if you have been infected with the virus you can be re-infected with numerous different strains (the virus mutates) Each infection takes new tolls on your immune system. That is why, even if two individuals get together and they are both HIV+ they still need to practice safe sex. So the time to START SAFE SEX IS NOW!! > Of course there are other reasons, depending on how you view the HIV virus. What is that supposed to mean. (Like if your considered in the "high"/gay risk group??) Steven, I hope to god you rethink your position. It is very irresponsible. We all have to look at AIDS and take responsibility for it. That means getting tested, sharing the info with past partners, using safe sex, not sharing needles or cleaning with bleach if we do. In other words, this is a disease of our community and noone is exempt from the stopping of it. Just some thoughts to create more thoughts. Brian Larsen >
marco@ozdaltx.UUCP (marco) (10/17/89)
Hi Steve. I give HIV test results at the local community-based research
clinic here in Dallas. When I walk into the room to give the client
their results (regardless if reactive or not), I always shake their
hand and tell them who I am, and immediately tell them *NOT* to tell
me their name with the warmest smile I can muster. I *ALWAYS* remind
them this is a confidential (I can SEE these people out in the bars
but would NEVER even acknowledge them in any other setting but the
Clinic) and anonymous (I don't know who they are).
Sometimes they tell me their first names anyway, and I'll remember
and address them by that name thru-out the session of post-counseling.
Hope you plan on following up your seropositive results with some
conscientious monitoring of certain blood factors (T-cells, P24 antigen,
Beta-2, etc....). If you should be one of those that have a propensity
to exhibit a decline in immune system functioning in the future, medical
intervention at the earliest stages *MAY* cause a state of remission
or (at worst) a level of maintenance not unlike someone with diabetes.
There is good reason to believe that you will live out your normal
lifetime with a minimum of medical intervention.
Be in good cheer! Send email if desired! See ya!
--
Steve Giammarco
AIDS Resource Center
Dallas TX 75219
{ames,rutgers,texsun,smu}!attctc!ozdaltx!marco jack%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK (Jack Campin) (10/17/89)
limonce@pilot.njin.net wrote in sci.med.aids: > Not only get confidential testing, but make sure they do counseling > before the test, and then again after you get the results whether they > are positive or negative. > Here in New Jersey there are a number of testing centers sponsored by > the Hyathinth Foundation [...] they require counseling before and after. ^^^^^^^ I can imagine what most of the people who need testing will think of an organization like this. "Another f***ing social work interview". Most poor people get a social worker before they get a godparent, another one around the time of their first communion, a new section of their file at marriage, and extreme unction by rubber stamp in a social worker's clipboard. They HATE the bastards, with good reason. And requiring yet another piece of ritual degradation at their hands as a precondition for testing is the most effective single way I can think of to ensure that none of them will go anywhere near a testing centre unless handcuffed in a police van. -- Jack Campin * Computing Science Department, Glasgow University, 17 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8QQ, SCOTLAND. 041 339 8855 x6045 wk 041 556 1878 ho INTERNET: jack%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk USENET: jack@glasgow.uucp JANET: jack@uk.ac.glasgow.cs PLINGnet: ...mcvax!ukc!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!jack
kpm@druco.ATT.COM (MalloyK) (10/17/89)
In article <28114@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> chet@retix.com (Chet Mazur) writes: > >CONFIDENTAIL: Between you and you Dr. or health care profession there >is personally indentifiable information (name, SSN, etc.), which >could, by accident or on purpose be disclosed to an inappropraite party. > >ANONYMOUS: NO PERSONALLY INDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION is given.... no >way for your indentity to be disclosed! > >I would NEVER recomend a confidential test, and ALWAYS STRONGLY >recomend an anonymous test. I have to definitely agree with this. The possibility for discrimination based on a positive HIV test (or even the fact that you bothered to have the test) is much to high to risk a CONFIDENTIAL test. I'll go even one step further, don't take a PSEUDONOMOUS test (i.e. under a false name). Here in Colorado, you are REQUIRED BY LAW to give a name, address, etc. when being tested (although there's no requirement for positive identification), and positive test results are REQUIRED BY LAW to be reported to the Colorado Department of Health. Why not give a false name? I've heard too many "rumors" of people going to a health clinic commonly used by gay men (VD clinic in an inner city public hospital), giving a pseudonym, then, when they go for their result, their entire medical history is on the desk in front of them. Me, I haven't been tested. I haven't been out-of-state long enough to take a test in a state where anonymous tests are available. I found a clinic in Laramie, Wyoming that gives tests anonymously, but I haven't found the time to take the 2 1/2 hour drive to go to the clinic, and I want to get tested... I think it's important to be tested, because early intervention is saving many, many lives. But, I only recommend being tested when you can do so anonymously... Kevin P.S. Colorado's HIV-infection reportability law, the first in the nation :-( sunsets next year. We're already gearing up for a fight in the state legislature. Is the net interested in what's going on with that law? P.P.S. Rumors have it that the Director of Colorado's Department of Health, Dr. Tom Vernon, is on the short list to head NIH (I think it's NIH). As much as we in Colorado would like to be rid of this man, inflicting him on the nation would be like North Carolina getting rid of Jesse Helms by having him elected Vice President. Anyone know anything about Dr. Vernon being on the short list fer sure? Kevin Malloy kpm@druco.att.com 633 E. 11th Ave. These views are mine and mine alone. Denver, CO 80203 No one else would have them! (303) 830-2937
brianl@uunet.uu.net (Brian Larsen) (10/18/89)
In the latest round of discussion re: annonymous / confidential testing one thing need to be noted; with a "confidential" test, it is only so as long as the government supports that stand. Everyone, I hope, has heard of the "quarantine" initiatives that have popped up periodically across the nation as a reaction to the AIDS epidemic, well if such legislation ever passed, a physicain may be required by law to open the records of known HIV carriers. This is the fear I had. The other, is one of your health insurance. Once ir has been recorded in a medical record, if you change companies, it can be used as a pre-existing condition. And this is not at all uncommon!! Just a few more thoughts.... --Brian Larsen
Jessie.Martin@p4.f606.n202.z1.fidonet.org (Jessie Martin) (10/22/89)
I do agree that testing must be an individual choice, but in making the
decision, I believe that we must take responsibility for every sexual partner
that we have been with.
I also believe that you have left out the most dangerous reason for not being
tested - DENIAL!
I have debated, argued, cajoled and pleaded with my brother to be tested. He
and his lover of 15 years had always patronized the Baths until the AIDS
epidemic hit. They have friends that have AIDS/ARC, yet both refuse to be
tested. Their solution is NO SEX!
I, as a Lesbian, am doing everything that I can to help, including blood
donation and home care, but with my brother, I am helpless. I live in constant
fear of losing my brother out of his denial and refusal to just be tested.
I urge each and everyone to not only help themselves, their loved ones, but our
entire race by being tested!
27/4 202/606 601 103/501
--
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!202!606.4!Jessie.Martin
Internet: Jessie.Martin@p4.f606.n202.z1.fidonet.orghenry@garp.mit.edu (Henry Mensch) (10/23/89)
brianl@sco.com (Brian Larsen) wrote:
->The other, is one of your health insurance. Once ir has been recorded
->in a medical record, if you change companies, it can be used as a
->pre-existing condition. And this is not at all uncommon!!
my hmo (harvard community health plan, which serves the
boston/cambridge area) described the pros and cons of hiv antibody
testing ... this is one of the cons they warn about. to wit, if you get
tested at hchp, it will be recorded on your record, and if you lose
your coverage because you are no longer a member of a group <i.e.,
employer-sponsored coverage> then you risk not being able to convert
your coverage to individual coverage when your group membership
expires. i do applaud their honesty, even if the policy itself is
reprehensible.
as for me? i have an appointment to have blood drawn next month (it's
*amazing* how far in advance anonymous test sites are booked ... i made
this appointment first week of october) obviously i'm not going to my
hmo :-{
# Henry Mensch / <henry@garp.mit.edu> / E40-379 MIT, Cambridge, MA
# <hmensch@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay> / <henry@tts.lth.se> / <mensch@munnari.oz.au>Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Wounded Bird) (10/23/89)
> If you should be one of those that have a propensity >to exhibit a decline in immune system functioning in the future, medical >intervention at the earliest stages *MAY* cause a state of remission >or (at worst) a level of maintenance not unlike someone with diabetes. >There is good reason to believe that you will live out your normal >lifetime with a minimum of medical intervention. Pardon me while I pick up my lower jaw from the floor. Could you please elaborate on your statement since current statistics do not seem to support your statement that HIV "at worst" can be managed not unlike someone with diabetes. Could you provide me with some hard evidence such as death rates or new, tested drugs that deal with viruses such as CMV that would support your statement. I don't think the recent AZT study would indicate sucha rosy picture and for those that cannot take AZT there is only the untested DDI. You obviously have . facts available to you that I do not have. Please share them with me and I will share them with my doctors at the University of Miami. They are positive (eg. "We are bound to come up with something.") but not quite as positive as you are. I support your main point (Get Tested) 100% ! 501 107/3 112/28 114/15 132/101 -- Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!135!38!Wounded.Bird Internet: Wounded.Bird@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org
marco@ozdaltx.UUCP (marco) (10/26/89)
Dear Wounded.Bird:
I don't know about your area of the country, but in Dallas, folks
are surviving their bouts with HIV management problems. There are
fewer deaths and fewer hospitalizations because local physicians are
beginning to understand the "balancing act" of medications, nutrition,
exercise (physical/mental), and just plain ol' positive thinking.
I don't recall stating that NO ONE DIES. Not being a physician, I
cannot repeat, with impunity, the details of each and every protocol
or therapy provided to the HIV+ folks here. I *DO* know (being associated
with the local community-based clinic as a trained/certified peer
counselor) that my HIV+/PWARC/PWA friends and associates are SURVIVING!
The quality of life here for those afflicted with this disease is
becoming much better than ever before. It's not magic... just caring!
--
Steve Giammarco
AIDS Resource Center
Dallas TX 75219
{ames,rutgers,texsun,smu}!attctc!ozdaltx!marco rogerk@decwrl.dec.com (Roger B.A. Klorese) (11/04/89)
In article <28136@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> skaron@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes: >Also by taking a confidential test, the couselor can make sure you have proper >counseling if you test reactive. In anonymous,there is more of a possibility >you won't come back if you test positive. Untrue, at least at a reasonable anonymous site. The site I use gives results only in person, but tracks the entire interaction by serial number with no associated name. -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. phone: +1 408 720-2939 928 E. Arques Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94086 rogerk@mips.COM {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!rogerk "I want to live where it's always Saturday." -- Guadalcanal Diary