It’s Friday, which often means postings are more frivolous. I don’t have anything like that today, but I thought it would be fun to offer some good news.



In my day job I have come across some very heartening information about treatment for HIV/AIDS. One of the top HIV researchers in the world (and someone who has been in the front lines of this research since the early 1980s) recently summarized some of the tremendous advances and breakthroughs that have been achieved after 25 years of research and treatment. That article isn’t available for linking, but many of the details are generally available in the published research, and I’d like to share some of these here.



My purpose isn’t just to share the good news about what is happening in this particular area, but also as an “antidote” to so much of what appears in the media today that focuses on “impossible” situations, worst case scenarios and “it’ll never happen” doom and gloom (whether for political gain or out of sheer ignorance).



Anyone who has paid attention to HIV treatment over the last 25 years is probably familiar with some of the treatment challenges that originally arose: most treatments were only marginally effective; many treatments had debilitating side-effects nearly as devastating as the disease; and treatment regimens were complex and depended on perfect timing. Additionally, the cost and complexity of the drug regimens raised the possibility that patients who began but couldn’t maintain the schedule would lead to further mutations of the virus resistant to the drugs. Here’s what is happening now:

• Effectiveness: An HIV patient that starts therapy today has a nearly 100% chance of suppressing the virus and restoring immune function (this does not mean eliminating the virus, however). HIV therapy today can almost always restore a patient’s T-cell count (the key measure of the strength of the immune system) to normal levels. This has dramatically reduced the occurence of common infections such as pneumonia, retinitis and cryptococcal meningitis, and Kaposi’s sarcoma (a once trademark affliction of HIV-infected) is now rare, as are the cancers that HIV patients were susceptible to. HIV infection today is now more predictably responsive to treatment than common diseases such as hypertension or diabetes.






• The cure doesn’t kill: Many of the early drug treatments and their applications were toxic and often disfiguring for the people who received them. Nausea, anemia, diarrhea, confusion, kidney stones and the loss of fatty tissue in the face and extremities were common. Today the drugs have been improved and the dosages refined so that side-effects, while still present, are less common and much less severe.






• Treatment is less complicated: Earlier treatment required handfuls of pills that had to be taken according to complex schedules. Some medications had to be taken on an empty stomach, others had to be taken on a full stomach. Today most treatment (antiretroviral) regimens are combined into just one or two pills, taken as little as once a day. It’s not only easier buy less expensive for patients because the combined pills reduce the amount of their co-pays. This also makes it easier to stick to the treatment plan, which in turn reduces the possibility of flare ups or the virus developing a resistance to the medication.






• Growing availability: Advances in treating HIV in the U.S. gives hope to other countries that have much higher infection rates. The developments already described here make treatment in other countries more practical and realistic. Additionally a miraculous combination of political will, philanthropy and social pressure are making treatment available in places where, until recently, it was thought to be impossible. HIV medicines are being provided mainly through two efforts: the U.S.-based President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and the Geneva-based Global Fund for HIV, TB and Malaria. These programs are supported by deeply discounted or generic antiretroviral drugs and are being used to treat hundreds of thousands of people in Africa, the Caribbean and Asia. That’s still just a small percentage of the global need, but it is significant progress.

With so much bad news reported (and celebrated) these days, I find it encouraging and inspiring that progress and breakthroughs can and do happen — even when a situation is said to be impossible and hopeless. Nothing happens overnight, but vision, integrity and focus — even by those “evil” pharmaceutical companies — are still making a better world. Happy Friday!

bookmark to:

Ahhh, yes. I made it to Keegan’s this evening in time for the first round of short-bus trivia. By the end of the first round our team (“Why can’t Marty bowl”) consisted of me, my daddy, Benny-Wenny, and Buddha Patriot. It was a close one, we tied for second with 20 points.
After that, Buddha Patriot teamed up with Andy.

Our second round as the “Knnn-iggits!” did not go so well; so to make everyone feel better, I did a magic trick. Yes, I can turn an ordinary pencil into -dun dun DUN- rubber. They were all amazed, and I was told that I was “so darn cute”! Thanks, BP.

bookmark to:

St. Paul at Fraters Libertas had a thought-provoking review of the movie “Children of Men” yesterday. Some of those thoughts were responded to by Doug at Bogus Gold. Both people got something different out of the movie and both posts are well worth reading.

I haven’t seen the movie myself yet, but when I first read St. Paul’s reaction I moved the film onto my Netflix queue (it has not been released as on DVD yet). The story is set in the future and the premise is that for some unknown reason humans had become sterile some 18 years earlier. When a pregnant woman is discovered a desperate, secret mission is arranged to escort her through a violent, dystopic land to an island sanctuary where the hope for the future could be nurtured and raised. While I agree with Doug and St. Paul’s takes on the film, my imagination was turned more to thoughts of what life in such a society and world would be like.

From time to time my pastor has said that God hasn’t given up on mankind because He keeps sending babies. We all have ingrained in us a sense that time is going to continue and the future is ever before us and babies are a normal and accepted part of our existence and an intrinsic part of our frame of reference. Even though some individuals can fall into hopelessness, and certain segments of society can become nihilistic, the babies keep coming and — though it isn’t always obvious — the whole world is shaped by that awareness. What if, however, there were suddenly no more babies for anyone regardless of who you were, where you lived and how much money you made? How would our attitudes and cultures change?

Without the hope of children, what would happen to our notions of marriage, family stability and long-term relationships? What would we, as individuals and as societies, invest in? What would happen to schools and universities, real estate prices, farming, social networks and infrastructure as the population steadily ages and diminishes? What, despite Nancy Pelosi’s recent opportunistic and deep-as-a-dog-dish twaddle, would happen to our governments if everyone knew human existence was going to end within the next 75 years? What would our priorities become? How depressing would this be if you were 50 years old — or if you were 18?

It’s a pretty grim scenario and fortunately not a real one at this time, though the reproduction rate of much of the West is below the two children per couple replacement rate (which suggests that in terms of world domination the main difference between a radical Islamist and a moderate one simply may be a degree of patience) and business leaders are already having serious concerns about how they will replace their aging workforce over the next 20 years (a real problem that sheds some light on certain attitudes toward open immigration).

But what if zero — strike that, negative — population growth was the reality? The cultural changes would be dramatic and many would say even horrific — yet many of our actions individually and politically already suggest that we act as if there is no future. Many of us give up our rights and opportunities for self-determination in favor of selfish pursuits, trusting that future generations or the nanny state will bail us out. We max out our credit cards while our elected officials, regardless of party, spend more and more without even trying to seriously address the long-term needs of present generations (e.g. social security reform) while officially sanctioning the killing of future generations.

It’s not a new phenomenon; human history is a series of selfish, short-term decisions and actions miraculously overshadowed and overcome by the succession of generations who in turn got to make their own mistakes — whether you think it all happened by chance or by divine direction. What if it all was cut off at the spigot?

How much of what we do today suggests that we think there really is no tomorrow?

bookmark to:

We’re all used to the drill now when celebrities or prominent people screw up: they drop out of sight for a couple of days and then call a press conference where they remorsefully confess what everyone already knows, reference a supposedly mitigating circumstance from their past, plead for understanding and forgiveness and usually mention they are entering rehab. There’s probably even a website somewhere with form-letter speeches where you simply fill in the blanks based on your indiscretions (and wouldn’t this make a great “Mad Libs” parlor game?).



I’ve just read a report that follows this now tried and true format — but for a brand new and unexpected offense. It wasn’t one of your typical “I’m sorry if anyone was offended by my drunken rantings/vehicular homicide/botched joke/lack of underwear error in judgment” spiels, but for a new heinous offense on the social radar: smoking.



As reported here earlier, last year Scotland instituted a nation-wide smoking ban in public places, including pubs and offices. Recently a Scottish government official was caught smoking at his desk, having puffed three coffin nails during a magazine interview. Jim McCabe, leader of North Lanarkshire Council, then had to apologize for the incident and vow that it would not happen again.

McCabe told the BBC: “I have been a smoker since my mid-teens and, as smokers across the country will understand, it is an extremely difficult habit to give up, even with the wealth of support that is available.



“As I have been unable, so far, to give up the habit, I do as a matter of practice leave the council building when having a cigarette.



“I am currently attending a smoking cessation clinic, and I hope this will have the desired results.”



He added: “I accept that I was in the wrong on this occasion and I apologise.”

The story didn’t mention whether or not the owner of the council building where the violation occurred would, like Scottish pub owners, face a large fine for allowing someone to flout the law on the premises.



How long do you think it will be before some celebrity tearfully appears on television confessing to, in a moment of weakness, eating a Big Mac?

bookmark to:

I work for a corporate giant with operations around the world, including offices throughout the United States. Our intranet this morning had news that our offices in Portland, OR and Austin, TX were closed due to weather conditions today. Another time our Atlanta office was shut down by a two-inch “snowstorm”.

I’d love it if our offices here in Minneapolis would be closed due to weather; I think the first clear, sunny day above 70 degrees would be ideal. Lord knows, it’s certainly a lot harder to make it in to the office on a day like that in Minnesota than it is when there’s eight inches of snow on the ground.

bookmark to:

My blogging buddy Jeff Kouba is in the wind. He formerly blogged at Peace Like a River before joining a group at Security Watchtower where his interests and reporting on foreign political developments were a great contribution. The Security Watchtower domain name lapsed, however (it was under the control of the blog’s founder, who has offered no explanation) and was quickly appropriated by what appears to be a religious-themed marketing aggregator.

I know Jeff is a busy man with a lot of interests (including his young family), but here’s hoping he’s back on the blogging radar soon.

One thing’s for certain, he won’t be re-starting Peace Like a River because another blogger is now using that name. What is funny is that I discovered that blog when I was looking for Jeff’s old URL and Google took me to the new PLR where the first post I saw featured a picture of a tee-shirt that my daughter the Mall Diva owns. The shirt is lettered with the words, “Nobody cares about your blog.” What a hoot! MD has worn that shirt a couple of times to blog-gatherings at Keegan’s and no one has seemed to be offended (as if anyone could stay mad at her).

Oh well, disregard the tee-shirt, Jeff. We miss you.

bookmark to: