> Ryan got her start during the AIDS outbreak when lies, deceit, and industry gains prevailed all while homosexual men often died from toxic drugs.
What?
If you are talking about the early dosages of AZT often being too high, well, yes. This is the sort of thing that can happen when you are trying to use a new class of drug to treat a hitherto-unstoppable disease. We now have much better treatments descending from the insights of AZT.
AZT was hardly new. It was developed in the '60s against cancer but never approved because it did not work. It was repurposed for AIDS but had tragic consequences. Neviraprine came after - also harmful. And look what came after -more drugs that lead to more harm.
AZT was used only because it was the only drug in the Western drug libraries that showed any signs of working against HIV. It was imperfect from the very start, and yes, quite likely the profound uncertainty over how much of the drug to use could have resulted in deaths. This is not surprising, not does it invalidate anti-HIV treatment. Should we say that anti-cancer chemotherapy as a concept is a bad idea because the first of these treatments were crude and plausibly caused great harm?
The current generation of anti-HIV medicine is much more effective, besides bearing many fewer negative consequences than earlier generations. This is not a surprise. The ability to not only treat but prevent HIV infection is a huge achievement of medicine, right up there with COVlD-19 vaccines, and I am surprised you do not appreciate this.
They actually used the acronym FAP? These people are truly sick.
Wishing you and all your family a joyous Thanksgiving. So happy your daughter has returned to the family that truly loves her.
I am thankful for your deep research and writing.
Thanks, Lila! Thanks also for your curated news pieces.
My love and sisterhood to you and your family may healing and regenerating continue in your lives. I am truly happy for you.
Thank you, Jean.
> Ryan got her start during the AIDS outbreak when lies, deceit, and industry gains prevailed all while homosexual men often died from toxic drugs.
What?
If you are talking about the early dosages of AZT often being too high, well, yes. This is the sort of thing that can happen when you are trying to use a new class of drug to treat a hitherto-unstoppable disease. We now have much better treatments descending from the insights of AZT.
This is normal.
AZT was hardly new. It was developed in the '60s against cancer but never approved because it did not work. It was repurposed for AIDS but had tragic consequences. Neviraprine came after - also harmful. And look what came after -more drugs that lead to more harm.
https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/truvada-lawsuit.html
The only thing normal is that the sad truth is this is the way modern medicine works.
AZT was used only because it was the only drug in the Western drug libraries that showed any signs of working against HIV. It was imperfect from the very start, and yes, quite likely the profound uncertainty over how much of the drug to use could have resulted in deaths. This is not surprising, not does it invalidate anti-HIV treatment. Should we say that anti-cancer chemotherapy as a concept is a bad idea because the first of these treatments were crude and plausibly caused great harm?
The current generation of anti-HIV medicine is much more effective, besides bearing many fewer negative consequences than earlier generations. This is not a surprise. The ability to not only treat but prevent HIV infection is a huge achievement of medicine, right up there with COVlD-19 vaccines, and I am surprised you do not appreciate this.