News: NHS cuts funding for diseases, has to provide PrEP instead

highwayuni

Quote:

The fight in the courts over who should pay for drugs to protect against HIV infection has taken an unedifying turn. There have been allegations that gay men will become more promiscuous if NHS England pays for the pills as a result of the high court ruling and that children with cystic fibrosis will be deprived of a drug that could help them breathe.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...nedifying-turn

Quote:

Plans to fund nine life-changing medical treatments have been put on hold by the NHS after it was ordered to consider providing a controversial HIV treatment.

Officials had been poised to announce approval this week for a range of new devices and breakthrough drugs which would benefit children as young as two.

Toddlers with cystic fibrosis, children born deaf, adults who have lost their legs, and patients with cancer were among those who would have learned that they could receive the treatments for the first time.

But officials have been forced to scrap their plans, at least temporarily, after the High Court ruled on Tuesday that the NHS is responsible for providing a daily pill to prevent HIV infection among 10,000 gay men.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ents-gone.html

C SLAYCLAIR

Quote:

Originally posted by highwayuni

Gays are a mess

I work with Cystic Fibrosis people a lot and it's disgusting that they have to pay the price because people want to **** without condoms.

AND YOU'RE A MESS FOR BEING UNDEDUCATED

it's not only gay men

TheEdgeOfGaga

Really ignorant for you thinking that HIV affects only gay men. It doesn't have to be via sex that you can get HIV from. Then again, what do we expect from the Daily Mail.If you're not a straight, rich white male you're scum of the earth to them.

DILF $

The backfire

But yeah, you'd be surprise by the amount of people that thinks only gay men get HIV

J a y

We need to call out retrograde attitudes towards LGBT people and HIV

Reading some of the coverage around the high court decision on PrEP felt like going back to the dark old days of the 1980s, where any and all coverage of gay and bi men was negative, scrutinising and alienating. In the two decades Stonewall has spent campaigning for lesbian, gay, bi and trans equality, we have seen bans lifted on openly gay and bi people serving in the military, protection from discrimination, same-sex adoption has been legalised and, most recently, same-sex marriage introduced.

But the fact that the Daily Mail still feels able to report the high court ruling like it did on Wednesday shows just how much more we need to do before LGBT people are fully accepted. “Lifestyle drug” were the words chosen by the Daily Mail to describe PrEP on its front page. Contracting HIV is not a “lifestyle choice”. Nor is being gay or bi. But choosing to dredge up stereotypes from the past to ostracise a group of people who have been oppressed, mocked, and attacked by society like this in the past certainly was a choice the Daily Mail made.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-80s-lgbt-hiv

I couldn't agree more.

C SLAYCLAIR

Quote:

Originally posted by J a y

Reading some of the coverage around the high court decision on PrEP felt like going back to the dark old days of the 1980s, where any and all coverage of gay and bi men was negative, scrutinising and alienating. In the two decades Stonewall has spent campaigning for lesbian, gay, bi and trans equality, we have seen bans lifted on openly gay and bi people serving in the military, protection from discrimination, same-sex adoption has been legalised and, most recently, same-sex marriage introduced.

But the fact that the Daily Mail still feels able to report the high court ruling like it did on Wednesday shows just how much more we need to do before LGBT people are fully accepted. “Lifestyle drug” were the words chosen by the Daily Mail to describe PrEP on its front page. Contracting HIV is not a “lifestyle choice”. Nor is being gay or bi. But choosing to dredge up stereotypes from the past to ostracise a group of people who have been oppressed, mocked, and attacked by society like this in the past certainly was a choice the Daily Mail made.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-80s-lgbt-hiv

I couldn't agree more.

The Guardian of the gays

Lights and Waves

Op, you're ignorant as **** and embarrassing. Delete your account.

RihannasVeryOwn

this really sucks that saving people with HIV means children with cystic fibrosis have to suffer

if only we could pay for both and all other diseases too

J a y

How offensive can they be?

This is a NATIONAL newspaper in local shops

Jacketh

The flaw in the argument that no one is mentioning that because of this, they can cut treatment for HIV (maybe not immediately, but certainly over the long term)

Its actually likely they'd save money, because less people would have HIV as a result, which obv can lead to AIDS, and both of them are a lot more costly to treat than this prevention drug.

Quote:

Toddlers with cystic fibrosis, children born deaf, adults who have lost their legs, and patients with cancer were among those who would have learned that they could receive the treatments for the first time.

But officials have been forced to scrap their plans, at least temporarily, after the High Court ruled on Tuesday that the NHS is responsible for providing a daily pill to prevent HIV infection among 10,000 gay men.

This really sounds like just an excuse. We've been making cuts to the NHS. Blame that - not this new preventative drug.

Also: If you're reading and using the Daily Mail as a source, seek help.

Thanks.

geo

This government is obsessed with cutting funding to public services no matter the cost. The NHS should be able to afford to help everyone, picking and choosing shouldn't be a reality.

KasioKas

Quote:

Originally posted by Vision

Ignorant as **** for you and that article to single out gay men as the only victims of HIV and ignorant as **** for you and them to say it's only through sex.

!!!!!

keshaspearsxo

Welp this thread

Marla Singer

They would've blamed it on immigrants instead of gays if the UK had voted against Brexit.

Communion

The British being ignorant?

How shocking.

Maybe the can funnel money they use trying to oust immigrants into making sure all health needs are met.

Desert Rain

The way they're trying to frame this as a gays vs everyone else thing is sick.

bluth

Quote:

Originally posted by J a y

How offensive can they be?

This is a NATIONAL newspaper in local shops

this is sickening.

not sure if i'm more disgusted at the fact that the underfunded nhs is forced to make these choices and yet whenever trident becomes the topic of conversation we always manage to find some extra money down the back of the ****ing sofa.

Harly

It's all about money to the NHS.

Kim Kardashian

Don't blame gay people (who aren't the only people who can get HIV anyway...), blame the ****ing right-wing twats who DO NOT PAY THEIR TAXES and the government who lets them get away with it.

Blame the pharmaceutical companies who literally charge the highest price they can for these potentially life-saving drugs.