Tag Archives: HIV

International Research Effort Shows U.S. Lags in Interventions

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

Research published in The Lancet Global Health found that the U.S. lags behind other countries in terms of HIV and Hepatitis C (HCV) interventions in drug user populations. The study gathered and analyzed data from peer-reviewed, online, grey literature (government reports, issues papers, theses, dissertations, et cetera) databases, and disseminated data requests via social media and targeted E-mails to international experts (Larney, et al, 2017). The study found that just 93 of 179 countries with evidence of Injection Drug Use (IDU) have some form of needle or Syringe Services Programs (SSPs) available (Steptoe, 2017). This comes after previous reports indicating that the U.S. has fallen behind other first-world peers in the goal of eliminating HCV by 2030 (Kaltwasser, 2017).

Medical technician counting needles.

Photo Source: Daily Beast

SSPs are vital tools in the fight to end the spread of HCV and HIV amongst not only People Who Inject Drugs (PWID), but within the general population, as well. While HCV has been thought to be inefficiently transmitted via sexual intercourse, recent studies have shown an increased risk of sexually transmitted HCV if a patient is co-infected with another Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) or HIV, has sex with multiple partners, or has rough sex (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017). This higher transmission risk is especially pronounced among Men who have Sex with Men (MSM).

SSPs are meant to serve as intervention points for PWID, providing not only syryinge exchange services, but access to basic health services such as HIV, STD, HCV, and HBV screening, some clinical services, referrals for disease and addiction treatment, counseling, and referrals for Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) – currently the most effective method for treating opioid addiction. While many othern Western nations long ago saw the efficacy of these programs in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS, STDs, and other blood borne illnesses, the U.S. has consistently dragged its feet in implementing this effective harm reduction measure across the nation.

Opposition to SSPs in the U.S. (and elsewhere) consistently rely upon fear-based messaging that imagines droves of drug peddling heroin addicts shambling into town like zombies, leaving in their wake a wasteland of used needles just waiting to be stepped on by unsuspecting children and white suburbanites. Recent HIV outbreaks in rural and suburban areas have convinced states and counties to begin allowing government-funded SSPs to open in areas previously thought unlikely to host such facilities. These are generally operated at and by county health departments and their employees, thought there are no standardized national guidelines on what data they must collect and report.

Other intervention points do exist within various healthcare settings – at routine checkups, visits to emergent care, et cetera – but PWID are a notoriously difficult population to integrate into traditional healthcare continua. Furthermore, few, if any, states have compulsory “opt-out” HCV screening regulations that require healthcare providers to screen for the disease in every setting. These measures would allow emergent care workers (for example) to screen from HCV once overdose victims regain consciousness and are able to provide informed denial of screening. Such compulsory screening would play a vital role in helping to eradicate HCV in the U.S…should it be implemented. Realistically, it likely won’t.

References:

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

HIV/HCV Co-Infected Patients Show Similar Cure Rates As Monoinfected

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

Patients who are co-infected with both HIV and Hepatitis C (HCV) demonstrated similar cure (Sustained Virologic Response – SVR) rates as patients who were monoinfected with HCV, according to research published in Hepatology, a journal published on behalf of The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. These findings were gathered using a review of studies dated January 2004 to July 2017, and came to the conclusion that the designation of patients co-infected with HIV/HCV as a “special population” by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) should be reconsidered, given the advent and increasing use of Direct Acting Antivirals (DAAs) to treat HCV.

aasld-primary-logo

The special population designation by the FDA is designed to allow physicians and researchers to take into consideration populations who, for a variety of reasons – weight, existing disease morbidity, age, body composition, pregnancy, et cetera – may not respond in a typical fashion to standard treatment regimens. For patients living with HIV, many of the HIV-specific treatment regimens, until the past decade or so, made treating co-morbidities not HIV-related difficult, as other drugs would hamper or have their effects hampered by the medications used to treat patients’ HIV. The advent of newer, more easily tolerated, and more effective HIV medications has allowed for more flexibility.

Thus is the case with HIV/HCV co-infection. Prior to the entry of HCV DAAs to the market in 2013, interferon-based treatments were the only way to actively achieve SVR in HCV-infected patients. Notoriously difficult to tolerate and with a high treatment abandonment rate, interferon-based regimens resulted in very low SVR rates for both mono- and co-infected patients. This, along with the fact that co-infected populations experience accelerated progression of HCV-related liver disease, as well as existing barriers to care, led the FDA to designated HIV/HCV co-infected patients as a specific population with unmet medical needs.

The newer regiments, which are both easier to tolerate and exponentially more effective at achieving SVR, have produced similar SVR rates in both mono- and co-infected populations. This serves as good news to physicians and patients, alike. While these findings are welcome news, physicians must still be certain to determine if HCV regimens will have any counterindications with existing HIV therapies. Current treatment recommendations advise against stopping HIV therapy to pursue HCV treatment.

References:

  • Sikavi, C., Chen, P. H., Lee, A. D., Saab, E. G., Choi, G. & Saab, S. (2017, November 06). Hepatitis C and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Co-Infection in the Era of Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents: No Longer A Difficult to Treat Population. Hepatology. Alexandria, VA: The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Accepted Author Manuscript. doi:10.1002/hep.29642

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

amfAR Releases Opioid & Health Indicators Database

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

amfAR, The Foundation for AIDS Research, has published their latest site, “Opioid & Health Indicators Database,” which pulls together, for each state, trends over time in opioid use and related infectious disease mortality, as well as state-by-state levels of Federal funding (Melville, 2017). The site was revealed at last week’s Association of Nurses in AIDS Care (ANAC) 2017 conference by Alana Sharp, MPH, from the Foundation of AIDS Research, a private organization that focuses on the various research and databases that informs their reporting.

AmfAR logo

Photo Source: amfAR

The website pulls together various data from a variety of sources and present this data for every state in the U.S., and puts them in the context of HIV, Hepatitis C (HCV), and the opioid crisis. This unique site is one of the first to actively connect these types of data in a user-friendly manner. They also make use of the supplemental data used to compile a list of 220 counties in the U.S. most at risk of HIV and/or HCV outbreaks due to a variety of similar circumstances that include: Drug Overdose Mortality, Prescription Opioid Sales, Mental Health Services, Insurance Coverage, Urgent Care Facilities, Vehicle Availability, Education, Income, Population Density, Poverty, Race/Ethnicity, Unemployment, Urban/Rural Status, and Buprenorphine Prescription Capacity (Van Handel, et al., 2016b).

Opioids Amplifying Impacts on HIV and HCV

Photo Source: opioid.amfar.org

From the front page, users select their either the state or congressional district from one of two dropdown boxes, and receive a fresh page that provides information. For states, the first page displays information on the Most Vulnerable Counties, taken from the Van Handel report, and after a click-thru, lands on a page that lists a considerably deep level of state statistics, including demographic data, HIV and/or HCV populations, opioid use statistics, healthcare-related statistics, and treatment and prevention services information, all of which are set against national statistics (e.g. – Percentage of People without Health Insurance (2015): West Virginia – 11.5%; National – 13.0%). After the numerical presentation, you can scroll down for more in depth coverage about state opioid policies, graphs of state health trends, Federal funding from various agencies, as well as a data explorer, that provides county-by-county HIV and HCV incidence and prevalence data broken, the same data by congressional districts, and by state for comparison.

If users select their congressional district, they’re asked to provide their zip/postal code, and are provided with a district profile providing numerical data similar to the state profile, and follows with the same graphic representation of data as presented on the state level, but Congressional district-specific.

This database, one of the first of its kind, helps provide a fantastic resource for state-level advocates and policy makers for informing good policy planning and crafting. For more information, please visit amfAR’s website at the following address: http://opioid.amfar.org.

References:

  • Melville, N.A. (2017, November 08). Opioid Crisis Inflaming Hep C, HIV in Hard-Hit Communities. New York, NY: Medscape, LLC: News: Conference News. Retrieved from: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/888219
  • Van Handel M.M., Rose C.E., Hallisey E.J., Kolling J.L., Zibbell J.E., Lewis B., Bohm M.K., Jones C.M., Flanagan B.E., Siddiqi A.E., Iqbal K., Dent A.L., Mermin J.H., McCray E., Ward J.W., & Brooks J.T. (2016b, November 01). County-Level Vulnerability Assessment for Rapid Dissemination of HIV or HCV Infections Among Persons Who Inject Drugs, United States. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes: November 1st, 2016 – Volume 73 – Issue 3 – p 323–331. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001098. Retrieved from: http://journals.lww.com/jaids/Citation/2016/11010/County_Level_Vulnerability_Assessment_for_Rapid.13.aspx
  • Van Handel M.M., Rose C.E., Hallisey E.J., Kolling J.L., Zibbell J.E., Lewis B., Bohm M.K., Jones C.M., Flanagan B.E., Siddiqi A.E., Iqbal K., Dent A.L., Mermin J.H., McCray E., Ward J.W., & Brooks J.T. (2016b, November 01). County-Level Vulnerability Assessment for Rapid Dissemination of HIV or HCV Infections Among Persons Who Inject Drugs, United States – Supplemental Appendix. JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes: November 1st, 2016 – Volume 73 – Issue 3 – p 323–331. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000001098. Retrieved from: http://download.lww.com/wolterskluwer_vitalstream_com/PermaLink/QAI/A/QAI_2016_06_29_VANHANDELM_QAIV16762_SDC1.pdf

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

HHS Releases New HIV Treatment Guidelines

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

The Department of Health and Human Services released updated Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in Adults and Adolescents Living with HIV in October 2017, which included updates for best practices, treatment protocols and recommendations, which drugs not to use, treatment for virologic failure, regimen switching, adherence to the continuum of care, drug interactions, and Hepatitis B (HBV) and Hepatitis C (HCV) co-infection treatment guidelines.

Because emtricitabine (FTC – Truvada, Descovy, Stribild, Genvoya, Odefsey), lamivudine (3TC – Epivir, Epivir-HBV, Combivir, Kivexa, Trizivir), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF- Viread, Atripla, Complera, Stribild, Truvada), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF – Genvoya, Odefsey, Descovy) have activity against both HIV and HBV, an Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) should include (TAF or TDF) plus (3TC of FTC) to fully suppress the viruses. Other HBV treatment regimens, including adefovir (Hepsera) alone or in combination with 3TC or FTC, are not recommended for patients co-infected with HIV/HBV.

Rx pill bottles and pills

Photo Source: HIVThrive.Com

HBV reactivation has been observed in persons with HBV infection during interferon-free HCV treatment. For that reason, all patients initiating HCV therapy should be tested for HBV. Persons with HCV/HIV coinfection and active HBV infection should receive two agents with anti-HBV activity prior to initiating HCV therapy.

For HCV, ART may slow the progression of liver disease related to HCV by preserving or restoring immune function and reducing HIV-related immune activation and inflammation. For most persons with HCV/HIV coinfection, including those with cirrhosis, the benefits of ART outweigh concerns regarding drug-induced liver injury. Therefore, ART should be initiated in all patients with HCV/HIV coinfection, regardless of CD4 T-cell count. All patients with HCV/HIV coinfection should be evaluated for HCV therapy and have their liver fibrosis stage assessed to inform the length of their therapy, ribavirin need (a concern with some regimens), and subsequent risk of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver disease complications

The document also includes an extensive list of the various drug interactions between HIV and HCV drugs, including the three newest HCV regimens, Epclusa, Vosevi, and Mavyret. HEAL Blog previously covered HCV and HIV drug interactions (Hopkins, 2016). While the document is clearly meant for medical and other healthcare professionals, if you would like more information, please check out the link below in the citation.

References:

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Iowa Prison Systems Prepare for HIV & HCV Uptick

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

Iowa’s Department of Corrections (IDOC) has put in a request for additional funding for the 2019 fiscal year (FY19) in anticipation of potential upticks in new HIV and Hepatitis C (HCV) infections within Iowa’s jails, prisons, and youth correctional facilities as a result of increased abuse of prescription opioids and heroin. Jerome Greenfield, Health Services Administrator for IDOC, has requested an addition $1 million budget increase to accommodate increased pharmaceutical costs for the treatment of HIV and HCV (Pfannenstiel, 2017).

State Seal: Iowa Department of Corrections

Photo Source: IDOC

For each year from 2010 to 2015, between 12%-14% of Iowa’s incarcerated population tested positive for HCV, though these data account only for the individuals incarcerated at any given point in time, and do not account for the movement in and out of IDOC facilities (Iowa Department of Public Health, 2017). Of those entering into the IDOC system and who warranted screening, over 91% were screened for HCV in FY14, with a 5.6% testing positive; in 2015, over 78% were screened, and 4.5% tested positive. While the number of positive tests results decreased in 2015, that may be a result of fewer inmates being screened.

The budget request comes at a time when the state is grappling with a potential $75 million budget shortfall as a result of lower-than-expected revenue returns during the last fiscal year that ended June 30th, 2017. The IDOC, itself, suffered a $5.5 million budget cut in FY17, and a $1.6 million cut for FY18, making the likelihood of this request being fulfilled dubious, at best. For its part, IDOC officials believe that, should any more cuts be implemented, they will have to reduce staffing in order to deal with those losses. This means fewer correctional employees, which can create a hostile environment, leave inmate needs and concerns unmet, and foment distrust and enmity between inmates and correctional facility staff. As we saw in Delaware, earlier this year, this type of environment can lead to prisoners protesting and/or rioting (Oh, 2017).

Iowa’s also dealing with an explosion of new HCV diagnoses, which have more than quadrupled since 2009 among people between 18 and 30 (Carver-Kimm, 2017). For those from whom data were collected, over 51% reported Injection Drug Use (IDU) as a risk factor (Iowa Department of Public Health, 2017). The state is also making considerable inroads to combating the HCV epidemic within the state with seven local health departments and one Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) that administer HCV testing and Hepatitis A and B immunizations. These agencies, known as Counseling, Testing, and Referral (CTR) sites, are located in the state’s most populous counties, test only people who have ever injected drugs, and offer free HCV screening for anyone who reports having ever injected drugs.

In 2016, former Iowa Governor, Terry Branstad, signed a bill expanding access to Naloxone, a drug that reverses or blocks the effects of opioid medications. While advocates cheer the move as an excellent tool to save the lives of People Who Inject Drugs (PWID), they are also pushing the Iowa state legislature to legalize Syringe Services Programs (SSPs – Needle/Syringe Exchanges). Research consistently shows that SSPs lead to reduced rates of HIV, HCV, and HBV infections among PWID, as well as those who are sexually involved with PWID.

References:

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

E-mail Undeliverable; HCV Patients Left in the Dark

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

It was a simple task: comb the Internet for a list of Hepatitis C (HCV) support groups in the U.S. with e-mail addresses as a point of contact, compile them into a spreadsheet, and contact each of them to invite them to access and distribute our free monthly HIV/HCV Co-Infection Watch report. Over a period of two weeks, I managed to gather information on 206 support groups with e-mail contact points, and this past week set about contacting each group with our information. Of the 206 e-mails I sent over two days, 63.1% of them were returned as “Undeliverable.” The rejected e-mails came back for a variety of reasons – closed/frozen accounts; full inboxes; hosts that no longer exist – and for each returned e-mail a problem became clearer: we have a support group problem.

E-mail undeliverable message

In collecting the data, I discovered that eleven states (DE, NE, NH, RI, SD, TN, UT, VT, WV, WI, WY) had no HCV support groups with e-mail addresses as points of contact (that I was able to locate). After compiling the data from the returned e-mails, another eleven states (AK, AR, CO, HI, ID, IL, LA, MN, NJ, OR, VA) had no HCV support groups with functioning e-mail addresses. This amounts to a total of twenty-two states without e-mail contacts for HCV support groups.

In all fairness, that doesn’t mean that there are no HCV support groups in those twenty-two states; just that there are no working e-mail addresses listed (that I could find in two weeks) for those states. Every state has at least one support group with a contact phone number, but because those were outside of the parameters of my assignment, they were not included in the data. Given that e-mail is arguably the most-used form of information gathering after searching websites, it creates a significant barrier to HCV patients gaining access to support services.

The paucity of support groups has largely been eliminated for HIV patients. After nearly forty years, many of the support systems are largely in place for patients living with HIV. This is in no small part a result of the tireless efforts of millions of people working to ensure that patients living with HIV have those support networks in place, should they choose or have the desire to use them. Typing “HIV Support Groups” into a Google search bar results in literally thousands of different options for support services; organizations by the hundreds list the various support groups for patients, family members, spouses, children, friends, neighbors, employers, employees…the list of groups is endless. This is not the case for HCV.

Beyond just support groups, lower-income HIV patients also enjoy (for lack of a better word) access to Ryan White programs that were designed to help patients living with HIV to afford the costs of medications, treatments, healthcare, and other costs of living with the disease. HCV patients, however, must rely upon manufacturer- or privately-funded Patient Assistance Programs (PAPs) that are not operated by either state or Federal agencies. Despite both the high cost of HCV medications and the efficacy of the Ryan White program in reducing the number of HIV-related deaths and increasing access and adherence to HIV treatment, there seems little appetite for either creating a similar program for, or opening up the Ryan White program to include HCV patients.

We must do better. In the modern Age of Technology, there is no good reason that HCV patients should have to muddle through incorrect or outdated contact information to access support groups. There is no reason for HCV patients to go without the types of services provided by doctor offices, hospitals, and clinics to HIV patients in accessing these support services. It is unconscionable for us, as one of the most advanced nations on the planet, to continue to fail the HCV community.

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Scott County and Indiana’s Steep Learning Curve on HIV and Hepatitis C

HEAL Blog is the recipient of the ADAP Advocacy Association’s 2015-2016 ADAP Social Media Campaign of the Year Award
By: Marcus J. Hopkins, Blogger

In early 2015, Scott County, Indiana was thrust into the global spotlight for an HIV outbreak among injection drug users abusing opioid prescription drugs and heroin (Hopkins, 2015). In a county that averaged a total of 5 new HIV infections each year, even doubling that number would’ve been a statistical anomaly. By the end of 2016, the county had 216 new HIV infections in the span of just two years, and of those, 95% were co-infected with Hepatitis C (HCV). So rare was the disease that county health department officials had never handled HIV cases, instead sending them all to the regional Sexually Transmitted Diseases Department in Clark County (May, 2016).

The outbreak in Scott County was, and still is, both instructive and reflective of several concurrent health crises faced by most of rural America. In one county, virtually every major health risk met in the middle: a prescription opioid addiction problem, the resultant heroin usage problem, and an access to comprehensive healthcare problem all walked into a bar, and out came one of the worst concentrated HIV epidemics in the U.S. in the past decade. Throw in a paucity of drug addiction, recovery, and Syringe Services Programs (SSPs), and you had the perfect case study for how outbreaks occur.

To be fair to Indiana’s legislature and then-Governor Mike Pence, the state responded intelligently to the crisis by legalizing for the first time SSPs…under certain previsions. Counties had to apply for approval, had to show that they had funding, and had to be located in a high-risk zone. Since Mike Pence’s departure from the state to swampier D.C. pastures, his replacement has actively attempted to ease those restrictions. Earlier this year, the Indiana General Assembly passed a bill allowing local governments to establish syringe or needle exchange programs without having to receive state approval (Rudavsky, 2017). His efforts have not, however, managed to convince everyone.

Map showing states with syringe exchange programs.

Source: HIV/HCV Co-Infection Watch

Madison County, for example, recently voted to remove all funding from their SSP, run by the county’s health department, and prohibited appropriations of funds for paying for both supplies and labor (Fentem, 2017). The ordinance, approved by five of the seven-person council, immediately shuttered the only operating SSP in the county, and was largely driven by stigma-based fears: discarded syringes were going to litter front lawns and public parks; drug addicts were going to wander over from neighboring counties, bringing their drug problems with them; “What about the innocent children?!” These well-worn excuses and arguments against the establishment and funding of SSPs have plagued the proven Harm Reduction measure since its inception. The fears are also unsupported by anything other than anecdotal evidence and hearsay, few assertions of which are backed up by any credible research or quantifiable proof.

Worse, still, is that the council members did nothing on their part to allay these fears. Council member Fred Reese is quoted as saying the following:

Some say if you don’t do the needle exchange, you’re going to have a spread of HIV, you’re going to have a spread of hepatitis C, but my concern is the innocents. I don’t want these needles out (Fentem).

This kind of statement on the part of an elected officials shows cowardice, rather than leadership. Part of the job of county councils is to do what’s in the best interests for everyone, rather than kowtowing to fear-based arguments that bear little resemblance to reality.

Clark County – where Scott County once sent its HIV cases for management – recently renewed their SSP for one year, after which it will be up for renewal in August 2018. About half of the program’s 150 participants have HCV, many of whom were diagnosed through the program (Beilman, 2017). Their hopes for the program include seeing a more balanced rate of return on needle collection. Of the nearly 16,000 needles distributed, the exchange collected almost 8,000 (Beilman).

In Boone County, where no SSP currently exists, Prosecutor Todd Meyer sent the following communique to county leaders:

A needle exchange program does not help in fighting the demand side, in fact, it will do the exact opposite by providing the users/addicts with the tools they need to continue to abuse illicit drugs…(Davis, 2017).

That this opinion was issued by a prosecutor should shock no one. Meyer’s position, however, is reflective of those espoused by [mostly Conservative] voters, legislators, and law enforcement officials, but again, bear little resemblance to reality. Instead, they rely upon fear and stigmatization, along with two terrifyingly short-sighted sentiments: “Not in my back yard!” and “It can’t happen here!” While Meyer contends that Boone County doesn’t have an HIV problem, now, let’s see if it has one in two years.

Back in Scott County, the SSP, run by the Scott County Health Department (SCHD), has another issue: it doesn’t keep track of HCV cases (de la Bastide & Filchak, 2017). For some reason, SCHD officials are only worried about their HIV problem. If that seems counterintuitive, that’s because it is. It was, in fact, a spike in new HCV cases that led to the discovery of the HIV epidemic. Additionally, with a 95% co-infection rate in the 216 HIV cases identified in the initial outbreak, as well as the more aggressive spread of HCV in the U.S. compared to HIV, it makes no sense, whatsoever, for the SCHD to fail to keep track of HCV.

The concurrent HIV and HCV outbreaks in Scott County, Indiana were just the beginning. Already, rural states and counties are beginning to see an uptick in new infections of both diseases as a result of Injection Drug Use (IDU). More concerning is the fact that most of those counties are deeply Conservative, which creates significant challenges for those hoping for proactive healthcare policies, rather than reactive cleanup measures. As for Scott County, there are several families with multiple generations infected with HIV, and very likely with HCV, as a result of prescription opioid and heroin abuse. Unfortunately for them, their county’s health department doesn’t see fit to track their issues.

Download the latest edition of the HIV/HCV Co-Infection Watch.

References:

__________

Disclaimer: HEAL Blogs do not necessarily reflect the views of the Community Access National Network (CANN), but rather they provide a neutral platform whereby the author serves to promote open, honest discussion about Hepatitis-related issues and updates. Please note that the content of some of the HEAL Blogs might be graphic due to the nature of the issues being addressed in it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized