Are Treatments for HCV Being Over-Promoted?
Share
Follow Us
Overdoing Hepatitis C Screenings May Be Bad for your Health
By Dianne Depra, Tech Times | January 15
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2012 recommended hepatitis C screenings for anyone born from 1945 to 1965. In 2014, the World Health Organization made the same recommendation, but a group of scientists are not convinced that mass screenings for the age group are effective or even necessary.
In a piece published in the journal BMJ, Ronald Koretz, Kenneth Lin, John Ioannidis and Jeanne Lenzer questioned the recommended screening for hepatitis C, concerned that it has no basis for clinical harm or benefit for the affected population. Those born between 1945 and 1965 are targeted because around three-quarters of hepatitis C cases occur within the Baby Boomers’ age group.
Continue reading this entire article:
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/26696/20150115/overdoing-hepatitis-c-screenings-may-be-bad-for-your-health.htm
10 Comments
I disagree with this Hepatitis C article and I question the reasoning behind the comments in the journal called ‘British Medical Journal’. Contrary to the opinion in this article and the BMJ journal, most people with Hepatitis C will definitely suffer fatigue and their quality of life will be worse, and as well, there is the added risk of transmitting the disease to others. The article says that only 20% will develop fatal symptoms, but 20% is a lot and that percentage goes up after 10 years of having the disease. This article appears to advise people not to get tested and not to get treated, and this is just wrong. As well, as the years go by, and the disease progresses, cirrhosis of the liver could begin as early as after 10 years have passed, and the percentage of people who will get cirrhosis goes up even further after 20 years. With the new drugs curing around 90% of patients, testing and treatment should be done. It’s really hard to believe that these doctors would actually advise people not to get tested and treated.
Bob is 100% correct. Why would you even put that article on this site? My insurance company has a new policy this year to urge patients to get tested. Our lab has info handouts also urging the testing for hepc. If YOU have hepc shouldn’t you know? Let people decide for themselves their path thru the pain.
I agree with Dee and Bob. The drug pricing is a function (or lack of) with the FDA. Many countries regulate the cost of drug related cures. The need for testing is very clear because Hep C is in many cases a symptom
free disease until there is unrepairable damage to one’s liver (cirrhosis or liver cancer)
The WHO estimates there are between 130 million to 150 million people infected …. 20% of those numbers are significant even if it isn’t you. the same organization estimates 300 thousand to 500 thousand people die of liver problems from this disease every year. More people die of HEP C induced liver problems than HIV in the US. yearly.
The previous “treatment” for Hep C was, in some cases, as bad or worse than the disease. There now are cures in that work in the 90+ percent (previously 25-50 percent depending on genotype and age). The treatment duration is 12 weeks used to be between 48 and 72 weeks.
Yes, let’s test for a disease that we can cure and has a very subtle variety of symptoms (it wasn’t even discovered until the late 1980’s or early 1990’s ) ………and maybe expect a little more rigor in the research of people who expound on the practices for handling the detection of the disease 🙂
t
You had a point but I will react strongly to mass testing recommendations. I am absurdly against the fact that everyone is tested, especially those who can’t afford the treatment using the new drugs. Why? This is because, once an individual is diagnose with Hep C and told you don’t need treatment until you liver damages, are we by any chance taking into consideration the physiological harms we expose them to?And this make no different one just habour the virus without any emotional concern till the signs showed up, with liver damages and then treated. In fact, majority of Hep C patients suffer most from depression more than the disease itself. Or the strategy should be, “if you can afford Hep C drugs, get tested” to safe the poor from trauma of knowing there is a remedy out there, but in accessible due to its cost. I wish Gilead and other Hep C drugs companies, know the stress they are causing by putting the cost at more than $ 1000 per pill. Anyway, this is a profit policy, and Gilead is sending a clear message, “die or buy our drugs”. This is sad, business mean being socially responsible as well, by considering the economic status of your targeted market. This pricing had put almost everyone at the mercy of Gilead. I hope you people read this and think about
John, for one, as a nurse, knowing you have the disease means you will be more likely to take precautions that will prevent its spread. Two, knowing you have the disease will help others avoid making choices such as drinking alcohol that will prevent the speedy decline of the health of their liver. Three, Gilead has a program for those who cannot afford their drugs, so not everyone who is low income is out of luck. And the truth is, Gilead right now has one of the only few drugs available. If you don’t buy their drugs, you have a almost sure fate of dying with hep c. Don’t be naive. You can’t wish away hep c. And now there is at least a cure for many that isn’t worse than the disease itself. We can argue about the pricing at a different time, but sticking your head on the sand regarding testing as a whole is stupid and can put others at risk.
Brama, you have your words though you sound insulting.
Wasn’t at all being insulting. But my arguments were very matter of fact and what I feel are common sense arguments. Ignoring a problem never helps, regardless of the problem. It doesn’t magically make hep c go away. It’s impossible to “sound” insulting through text. I meant every word in a compassionate, but firm way as an advocate for patients.
I sometimes wonder if these big Pharmaceutical companies are not just causing the problems with these drugs. Anybody do any follow up on patients cured and how they are doing now? It would be interesting to see how they are doing 5 years later.
Wendy, hundreds of thousands of people with hep C worldwide have been cured on the interferon based treatments some of them more than 10 years ago. Even more people are achieving a cure every day on new Direct Acting Anitvirals. Since 2008 Sustained Virological Response (SVR) six months after treatment has been recognised as a cure. I know many of these people and they are doing very well. We have a cure, you just need to embrace it.
Another BS test for the baby boomer generation, basically insinuating that baby boomers were drug addled losers. Ridiculous ads, along with the shingles vaccine, pneumonia vaccine and other useless medical procedures so everyone can be on the hamster wheel of medical care to make doctors and pharmaceutical companies richer. The side effects of these vaccines are worse than the diseases themselves as are the side effects for most of the useless drugs on the market. “Still depressed, here’s an additional drug to take”. Toe nail look ugly, here take this. Skin rash, here take this. Most of those are immune system suppressors, so then your open to worse diseases. They can keep them all. Leave us alone.