Task force call for all adults to get HIV test
WASHINGTON (AP) - There's a new push to make testing for the AIDS virus as common as cholesterol checks.
Americans ages 15 to 64 should get an HIV test at least once - not just people considered at high risk for the virus, an independent panel that sets screening guidelines proposed Monday.
The draft guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force are the latest recommendations that aim to make HIV screening simply a routine part of a check-up, something a doctor can order with as little fuss as a cholesterol test or a mammogram. Since 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also has pushed for widespread, routine HIV screening.
Yet not nearly enough people have heeded that call: Of the more than 1.1 million Americans living with HIV, nearly 1 in 5 - almost 240,000 people - don't know it. Not only is their own health at risk without treatment, they could unwittingly be spreading the virus to others.
The updated guidelines will bring this long-simmering issue before doctors and their patients again - emphasizing that public health experts agree on how important it is to test even people who don't think they're at risk, because they could be.
"It allows you to say, 'This is a recommended test that we believe everybody should have. We're not singling you out in any way,'" said task force member Dr. Douglas Owens of Stanford University and the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System.
And if finalized, the task force guidelines could extend the number of people eligible for an HIV screening without a copay in their doctor's office, as part of free preventive care under the Obama administration's health care law. Under the task force's previous guidelines, only people at increased risk for HIV - which includes gay and bisexual men and injecting drug users - were eligible for that no-copay screening.
There are a number of ways to get tested. If you're having blood drawn for other exams, the doctor can merely add HIV to the list, no extra pokes or swabs needed. Today's rapid tests can cost less than $20 and require just rubbing a swab over the gums, with results ready in as little as 20 minutes. Last summer, the government approved a do-it-yourself at-home version that's selling for about $40.
Free testing is available through various community programs around the country, including a CDC pilot program in drugstores in 24 cities and rural sites.
Monday's proposal also recommends:
-Testing people older and younger than 15-64 if they are at increased risk of HIV infection,
-People at very high risk for HIV infection should be tested at least annually.
-It's not clear how often to retest people at somewhat increased risk, but perhaps every three to five years.
-Women should be tested during each pregnancy, something the task force has long recommended.
The draft guidelines are open for public comment through Dec. 17.
Most of the 50,000 new HIV infections in the U.S. every year are among gay and bisexual men, followed by heterosexual black women.
"We are not doing as well in America with HIV testing as we would like," Dr. Jonathan Mermin, CDC's HIV prevention chief, said Monday.
The CDC recommends at least one routine test for everyone ages 13 to 64, starting two years younger than the task force recommended. That small difference aside, CDC data suggests fewer than half of adults under 65 have been tested.
"It can sometimes be awkward to ask your doctor for an HIV test," Mermin said - the reason that making it routine during any health care encounter could help.
But even though nearly three-fourths of gay and bisexual men with undiagnosed HIV had visited some sort of health provider in the previous year, 48 percent weren't tested for HIV, a recent CDC survey found. Emergency rooms are considered a good spot to catch the undiagnosed, after their illnesses and injuries have been treated, but Mermin said only about 2 percent of ER patients known to be at increased risk were tested while there.
Mermin calls that "a tragedy. It's a missed opportunity."
Americans ages 15 to 64 should get an HIV test at least once - not just people considered at high risk for the virus, an independent panel that sets screening guidelines proposed Monday.
The draft guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force are the latest recommendations that aim to make HIV screening simply a routine part of a check-up, something a doctor can order with as little fuss as a cholesterol test or a mammogram. Since 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also has pushed for widespread, routine HIV screening.
Yet not nearly enough people have heeded that call: Of the more than 1.1 million Americans living with HIV, nearly 1 in 5 - almost 240,000 people - don't know it. Not only is their own health at risk without treatment, they could unwittingly be spreading the virus to others.
The updated guidelines will bring this long-simmering issue before doctors and their patients again - emphasizing that public health experts agree on how important it is to test even people who don't think they're at risk, because they could be.
"It allows you to say, 'This is a recommended test that we believe everybody should have. We're not singling you out in any way,'" said task force member Dr. Douglas Owens of Stanford University and the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System.
And if finalized, the task force guidelines could extend the number of people eligible for an HIV screening without a copay in their doctor's office, as part of free preventive care under the Obama administration's health care law. Under the task force's previous guidelines, only people at increased risk for HIV - which includes gay and bisexual men and injecting drug users - were eligible for that no-copay screening.
There are a number of ways to get tested. If you're having blood drawn for other exams, the doctor can merely add HIV to the list, no extra pokes or swabs needed. Today's rapid tests can cost less than $20 and require just rubbing a swab over the gums, with results ready in as little as 20 minutes. Last summer, the government approved a do-it-yourself at-home version that's selling for about $40.
Free testing is available through various community programs around the country, including a CDC pilot program in drugstores in 24 cities and rural sites.
Monday's proposal also recommends:
-Testing people older and younger than 15-64 if they are at increased risk of HIV infection,
-People at very high risk for HIV infection should be tested at least annually.
-It's not clear how often to retest people at somewhat increased risk, but perhaps every three to five years.
-Women should be tested during each pregnancy, something the task force has long recommended.
The draft guidelines are open for public comment through Dec. 17.
Most of the 50,000 new HIV infections in the U.S. every year are among gay and bisexual men, followed by heterosexual black women.
"We are not doing as well in America with HIV testing as we would like," Dr. Jonathan Mermin, CDC's HIV prevention chief, said Monday.
The CDC recommends at least one routine test for everyone ages 13 to 64, starting two years younger than the task force recommended. That small difference aside, CDC data suggests fewer than half of adults under 65 have been tested.
"It can sometimes be awkward to ask your doctor for an HIV test," Mermin said - the reason that making it routine during any health care encounter could help.
But even though nearly three-fourths of gay and bisexual men with undiagnosed HIV had visited some sort of health provider in the previous year, 48 percent weren't tested for HIV, a recent CDC survey found. Emergency rooms are considered a good spot to catch the undiagnosed, after their illnesses and injuries have been treated, but Mermin said only about 2 percent of ER patients known to be at increased risk were tested while there.
Mermin calls that "a tragedy. It's a missed opportunity."
Nice one government. DNA from all the minions
Why take the test if your risk is zero? I'll refuse the test. That is unless doctors have used contaminated needles I don't know about.Â
Â
Now if you are forcing people to get tested, what are you really trying to "collect" in the age of  Obama care?
@John Gault - ah the crazy man theory that all these 'tests' get mysteriously collected by the goverment so that they have 'secret databases on you.
Â
Unless you have never, ever had sex of any kind with anyone who's ever had sex before, never kissed anyone who has had sex with other people, or you and the one other-wise virginal person you've had sex with have never had a blood transfusion, been given a shot, etc. etc., then you are not at zero risk.
Â
Not being at risk has never stopped us from testing people for other diseases, nor from vaccinations against common and/or deadly diseases.
Â
My Aunt 'wasn't at risk' of catching Ruebella (german measles) when I was a young kid, so she didn't get vaccinated. Dammed if she didn't get it while pregnant. My cousin was born deaf because my Aunt was a moron about that one vaccine.
Â
I'm not at risk either. But I have no problems getting tested. I want at some point in the future for my children / thier children to never have to worry about possibly catching it - even if they are in the 'low risk' category.  I don't beleive in stupid conspiracies either.
Â
We absolutely must stop treating the AIDS epidemic like a political hot potato because 'it's a gay disease', we need to man up and start dealing with it honestly instead of playing conspiracy cards.
Â
Â
As the standard protocol is to test several times, especially if one shows positive on one type of test, this just isn't reality. Â The tests just aren't accurate, so much, in some places and institutions, unless you test positive on all their types of tests over a period of several visits, you aren't positive. Â Hell, sometimes just being pregnant creates a false positive. Â Let's make sure this "so easy, anyone can test once" is well explained as not so easy and testing positive isn't death. Â Test again. Â And again. Â The most studied virus in history, and our tests are no better than the multiple types it comes back positive? Â No thanks.
If they offered the test free I would take it, but not being at risk I would not want to have to pay for it. Those who are "at risk" would probably avoid taking it just so they would not have to know they have it. The only possible way to get everyone to take the test is to make it a law. Otherwise many will just avoid taking it out of fear, worries about their life style, or afraid of catching it from a dirty needle or something.
Nobody is going to stand for someone forcing them to be tested. If one is tested and comes back positive, their life is down the tube. Besides that, medical treatment or testing should not be forced on everyone. People should realize the danger involved in promiscuous sex and refrain, but being as stupid as they are, they would rather have fun than keep from endangering others.
@Common-Tater -- Wow. it's amazing how foolish that statement is.
If stringent quarantine isolation procedures had been immediately put into place back in the early 1980's when this disease was still relatively localized, we wouldn't be in this fix today.
Â
Because we were told then that we must be politically correct and thereby forced to respect the "rights" of a small number of the diseased and allow them to continue spreading the contagion, now thirty years and billions of dollars later the infections and deaths have exponentially spread and we are ALL being told to relinquish our rights today.Â
Â
Another brilliant result of p.c.brainwashing.
@TheTruncheon -- sorry, the 'cat' was already out of the bag back then.
Â
And it was international by the time scientists had figured it out. People travel so much that you'd be introducing new cases constantly.Â
Â
...and to enforce a quarantine on something that doesn't exhibit symptoms would have required forced testing for massive quantities of people.Â
Â
So 'quarantine' wouldn't have done a thing.Â
The question is....how many people do you know that have died from hiv? NOT how many people have you HEARD died from someone else. Bingo. As usual, the people freaking out are not the "average" person. I am 53 and know zero who have died from this "disease". I dont even know anyone who HAS this. When I was twenty...there was the AIDS scare !!!!! OMG !!!!! In fact this isnt even a scare at all. Its typical government bs. I do one thing when I read this crap....I yawn....OH and get your flu shots too you scared crybabies. WAH.
@kingkurtis - so just because 'you' don't know anyone that's died from AIDS more of less means that it's not really a problem.
Â
So because you don't know anyone who died in WWII means that it wasn't a big deal either eh?
Â
Denial dude. Denial.
 @kingkurtis Well, it's not like people with AIDS go around telling people that they have it.  The best that we can do is to prevent them from spreading it to others.
Last month it was Hep C everyone needs to be checked this month Hiv who benefits most??? the medical establishment they make lots and lots off of tests that most peole will be negative for.Â
 @iwantthis name False positives are a problem too, for AIDS and many other diseases. Who is going to pay? The medical establishment is not going to do the test and evaluation for free. Consider this the cost of gay marriage.
Everyone really should. It doesn't matter if you've never slept around, even the person you trust, are married to, have been with since high school could have had contact with someone before you were together. Anyone who has been sexually active since the 1970s is at risk.
 @quidproquo So, HIV is the only STD we should be concerned about or test for? Hepatitis is another equally deadly disease, but should we mandate testing for that too? Where do we draw the line? Forced medical treatment is a very NAZI thing as far as I am concerned. Test yourself if you are so concerned, then tell everyone your results even if its positive.
 @Common-Tater My dad got Hep C from shots from the army btw.  So trust me when I say JUST GET TESTED.
 @Common-Tater Obviously you should test for every STD but people tend to get all weird about HIV.
Step two: force all positive people to wear a bright orange bracelet that signifies there status. Line up at your deisgnated district health clinic per government assinged date and time.
 @riteye Yeah, a big scarlet letter for them folks! While we're at it, how about Star of David armbands if you're a Jew? Really!?! Seriously, it's not the HIV+ folks who know their status that are the concern. It's the HIV+ folks who don't know their status. Ditto for all the other STDs. That said, if you're not abdicating your own responsibility and protecting yourself during an intimate encounter, at least HIV isn't a concern at that point and you're reducing the risk of transmission of others, such as herpes.
Start on Capitol hill, then go from there.
Be brutally honest with yourself. You know darn well whether or not there are risk factors in your current or past behavior (you can lie to everyone else, but it's dangerous to lie to yourself).
Â
If there are, you need to have a bluntly honest discussion with a licensed health care provider (who is bound by several layers of federal and state privacy regulations) to determine if you should be tested.
Â
If you're worried about your health insurance even if you test negative after all, don't use it for this visit.
Â
If you're avoiding the test because you fear the results or are in denial, then you most likely really need it.Â
Â
Not every individual in this age range needs testing (that's just overkill), but I bet the segment for whom it would be a good idea is larger than we'd all like to believe.
 @Purrl Gurrl Like the federal government cares about your privacy.
@Purrl Gurrl... HUSHÂ your Purri Gurri self. You slut.
If you go to your Doctor & ask for a HIV test, later on when you try to get life insurance or medical insurance you can be turned down because you are considered high risk for asking. I have donated blood & they will let you know if there is a problem & you need to see a doctor.
If you are at high risk you should be getting tested for HIV and Hep C.   I found out I was at high risk because I had a blood transfusion in 1980...before donated blood was being screened. As soon as I found that out I got tested, luckily negative.  Better to find out and take steps for your health and to hopefully prevent you spreading these diseases just because you didn't know you have them.
So whoever made the test wants our money. You shouldn't have to get a test, unless you have symptoms. Here is a way to avoid aids, stop having sex with everyone.
 @justsayin:Â
There are MANY people who are asymptomatic - they will show none of the "obvious" signs of having a disease, and this applies to HIV as well. Are you really so miserly that you think it's worth the risk? If you get tested, you are negative, all is well - but what if you are one who is asymptomatic?
 @LocalLady  @justsayin: Hopefully you are wealthy enough to afford the few drugs that might help because if you are not, you are DEAD.
 @justsayin Bingo! Follow the money. This will just drive insurance costs up. Most doctors probably won't tell you what they are testing for at the time as well.
I've had three and I found/find no shame in it at all. First one was a nurse, while taking my blood, poked herself and my doc asked me if I would agree to take an HIV test. One because the man I was with told me he was "feeling strange" and was getting an HIV test and the last one to follow up on that one. Thankfully he and I were both clean and I have since (long story) upgraded my stadards.
 @lisaraintree The only safety is not to have sex. If you are brave enough to be tested three times, do you have the courage to abstain fro the sake of others?
Especially in a city like Seattle!
@Harry reems Maybe you want to substantiate that with some reason why "especially in a city like Seattle!"?
This comment has been deleted
@EASTSIDE 1 - it's absolutely pathetic how people refuse to accept that both gay marriage is here to stay and that heterosexuals get AIDS just as easily as gays.Â
Â
If AIDS were a disease that sprung from something NOT connected to gays, a large majority of Americans would be demanding that this epidemic be treated like all previous epidemics.
Â
Unlike so many of the epidemics of the past, you cant tell from external symptoms that a person is infected (unlike whooping cough, polio, rubella, etc.).Â
Â
So, if it were any other disease, we would already be testing everyone so that we can slow down the spread by treating those who are infected. Yet because so many damm fools still think this is a 'gay disease', they refuse to think it should be treated like any other disease.
Â
If you think that only 'gays' catch it - you're an idiot.
If you think that only 'backdoor' sex is how it's transmitted - you're an idiot.
If you think that if you and your opposite sex partner 'can never catch it even though you have sex with others who you "know" are straight' -Â you're an idiot.
Â
AIDS is a -usually- sexually transmitted disease that worldwide is transmitted more by heterosexual contact than it is by any other means.
Â
Yes, it was originally discovered in gay men. Yes, in some geographical areas it's transmitted more between gay/bisexuals than between heterosexuals. HOWEVER - that doesn't mean that heterosexuals don't get it any less frequently than gays.
Â
Just like with any other epidemic, we need to get rid of the patheticly bigoted baggage and deal with it.
Â
@FormerMarineSgt Epidemic? ONLY in the gay "community". YOU are different. YOU like hiney sex. Grossy.
@kingkurtis - and I guess that it's ok for otherwise mature people to act like immature children and play games instead of dealing with reality.
Â
Go check the numbers 'wise man'. There are more heteros getting this disease than gay people world wide.
Â
And all you need to do is sleep with a person -once- who has it and your chance of having it is pretty high. And there are many, many women who have it. Yes, even in America.
Â
So while your pathetic attack on me is not only unacceptably wrong (factually wrong too - I'm a married straight man), you can't even discuss the issue without acting a fool.Â
Â
I hope you don't have it. For the sake of anyone who has sex with you.
@FormerMarineSgt Very well stated.
Â
 @FormerMarineSgt  @EASTSIDE FormerMarinSgt, sometimes, I think I love you...great post. I was just on the CDC website. I remember they said heterosexual women were the fastest growing demographic with HIV not too long ago, that was world wide I believe.
Â
Â
@Yeah_and @FormerMarineSgt @EASTSIDE 1Â
People want to make this a gays only disease regardless of facts because they have an extremely negative bias against gays (be it religious beliefs, personal morals, just wanting to be an a hole, whatever). It's a tragic and fascinating psychological need to scapegoat another group for stuff.  It's too bad that it's not based in reality.
I thought they checked everytime they took your blood anyway.
@DDG:Â
That is only the case if you are donating blood - if it is a simple blood draw for lab work, they would only draw for the tests that the doctor orders.Â
@DDG Its not unless you ask for it specifically.
@DDG - Sorry - this is a politically charged deadly disease. the general attitude is 'how dare you think you can think I'm gay and want to check me for it'.  Ok - a bit dramatic, but that's more or less how the rules are defined for this disease - but it's done in a far less dramatic framework. It's still pathetic that they would rather allow this politics and 'anti-gay bigotry' to block the science and the medical response to an epidemic, but hey - the same idiots who treat AIDS as if only gays can possibly catch it are the ones who think that because a girl gets a vaccination against cervical cancer (HPV) that they'll be sexually promiscious BECAUSE OF THE VACCINE when they become teenagers.... These folks live in a liars alternate reality.
Â
 @FormerMarineSgt  @DDG I have had it added to my normal blood tests for years. I have always been asked "do you think you are at risk?" and I pushed for the test.  You have to ask for any specific test when you get blood tests done.Â
 @FormerMarineSgt  @DDG Boys can get the HPV vaccine also. My daughter and I just found that out when she had her first shot. She was wondering why it was only "marketed" to young girls on commercials. She's 14, we had a long political conversation after that. Her doctor is great. No, she won't be promiscuous. She figured since the shot itself hurt so bad, "I can't imagine what giving birth or having a disease would feel like." We laughed, but she's right! Two more shots to go. Some of my family members were not happy with me at all. It was her choice. We talk about everything. I just shut up and looked at them. Can't fight with stupid..some of my family members are really getting on my nerves.
@Yeah_and @DDG - and it's really doubly ironic in that the research so far has shown that there is no increase in promiscuity in the girls who received the HPV shot vs. those that didn't.Â
As an added bonus, they will probably store your and everyone else dna on file forever. Sounds like the best thing they could come up with the try and profile the entire country at once. And they can also find out who is gay or not at the same time, since if you tell them are, then you get the test for free. Its that like reverse discrimination anyway ?
Â
And 50,000 a year get infected, just look at smoking, it causes almost 500,000 deaths per year in the US. They need to get priorities set.
Â
Â
Of the more than 1.1 million Americans living with HIV, nearly 1 in 5 - almost 240,000 people - don't know it.
Â
OK.... how do they come up with this number? 1.1 million have it but 240k don't know they have it, yet somehow they get added into the tally?
 @thebronze:Â
Possible that they have been identified as a "contact" by someone who has tested positive - making them at a higher risk for having caught it.
Â
It's the same as when they say a certain percentage of people have heart disease or diabetes that has not been treated - it's the law of averages.
 @TheBronze Probably tested a representative large sample of people, asked each one if they knew they had HIV. 20% who said "no" actually did have it. Maybe some adjustment for people who lied about not knowing.