I baptize you "Eclipsotherapy "
By Charles-Edouard!
Ameli publishes every year a detail of the health expenses. 1.27 Billion (billion!!!) Eu. are spent on HIV/AIDS drugs. That is about 12.000 Euros per patient... For standard treatments, it is more like 8.000 Eu/year. This is still enormous and hardly bearable by a faltering economy.
We change the terminology
There are 2 types of lightening: the cycle or the reduction of molecules. The cycle works (Faucy, FOTO, etc.), the reduction did not work (Katlama, Delfraissy, Pialloux, Rouzioux: Trilège...) quite well. Historically, the only reduction that worked was the Cycle. The rest was left out. Lightening or cycle was synonymous, and
lightening spoke to patients. With DTG,
which counts as 2... the reduction from 3 to 2 (or even 1) makes sense again, and, lightening by
molecule reduction has surfed on the nascent success of the Cycle, phagocytizing its success and its appeal to patients. To clarify, I no longer use the word alleviation to refer to short-cycle alleviation. I prefer Intermittence, a term that can unfortunately be confused with CD4 guided intermittence, which will have been a failure,
when done poorly... I like Dynamic Remission better. Again, this can lead to confusion...
The name ICCARRE was based on an interesting idea: to create a brand. The word play is not convincing, and, except for advertising the 'brand', the attention is quickly diverted.
Eclipsotherapy
This term is inspired by serotherapy (therapeutic use of blood serum). Since we use the properties of Eclipse, we circumscribe to this property only. It is easily anglicized...
What I like is that there is then no
no confusion with the products and techniques put forward by the Labs and their henchmen. They won't be able to lump us in with SMART, TRILEGE, MONO-IP or other strategies that don't interest us here.
Eclipsotherapy and medical corporatism
One topic that tickles my readers is the following:
The Eclipse is, on average, about, say, 2 to 3 weeks.
On average... So there are people who are at less, others who are at more. On one side of the space defined by this bell curve, there are patients at 7d. (there are almost none below) and patients at 45 days. For some it is
detrimental to do the 1/15, for others it is
detrimental not to do. And since the median is around 15-21, to put it simply, let's say that
50% of patients would be wrong to aim for 1/15, while 50% would be wrong not to.
Having written the
4/7 Practical Guide, back in 2014, which has not been denied since, I note this: in 4/7, there is no question about medication choice. The only question to eventually ask a doc is: am I eligible? To which 99.95% of the doctors answered no, when the
correct answer was yes! So 99,5% were bad advice: we must not forget it.
In fact, everyone is eligible, a priori. Young people (Breather), veterans, pregnant women (FASEB-2). You just have to follow the right rhythm, leave yourself some time before starting, take according to the planning, make your CVs well
(at the beginning...), and progress gradually. If someone wants to demonstrate that the doctor is useful, go ahead and argue. On this subject, there is no real debate, in the absence of arguments and... doctors.
My doctor declared himself incompetent. Duly noted.
It's honest, at least.
Some people fear that if they start a race to the bottom, they will fail, others don't care. Those who lived through the difficult years are on one side, those who dealt early, with a zenith of 5000 copies, are on the other. And what is desirable is to manage the risk well, something to which, if you know someone competent, or allegedly, you tell us: we will send him the readers. For the moment, there is no one, Leibo has left us, and, the entourage has lost the focus.
Eclipsotherapy and pharmaceutical choice
The opportunity exists, for about 50% of patients, and the risk exists, for about 50%. But if you're interested in 1/15, you have to be able to assess your risk and manage it,
without a doctor, of course. But it's possible, and it's not that complicated. It requires a little expertise,
expertise that is not the exclusive domain of doctors. Expertise is not the exclusive domain of anyone, it's like Chinese...
You have to study your case carefullyAnd having a diploma for having learned a medicine that is now outdated, does not help.
Writing the algorithm for calculating the risk: it's possible, it's done,
I did it. To write a method of risk minimization, it is possible, it is done,
I have done it, I have put it on paper. And I keep it to myself, because in practice, people do as they please. I did the Practical Guide for 4/7, 3/7, 2/7 and... the 1/15, where the questions are addressed:
Am I eligible, am I on the right medication, how to manage my schedule and how to deal with a possible failure?.
In Eclipsotherapy, if you ask the question about meds, there will be no one to answer you. The only two known 1/15s are, one on DTG/3TC, the other on Dodeca, and the vast majority of patients are on 1/7, possibly to be extended to 1/15, with a triple therapy that is neither DTG/3TC nor Dodeca. I do Dodeca specifically to avoid the question of choice of medication. If you try 1/15 in DTG/3TC and it goes off, you don't know if it's because of the 1/15 or the drug. No one is going to want to do Dodeca and no one is going to go with DTG/3TC. Me first... I'm not going to do 1/15 DTG/3TC when I jumped,
and admirably caught up, on 1/7 DTG (150 mg).
Eclipsotherapy: To each his own
It's simple isn't it???
In fact, we don't really have any alternatives to leaving ICCARRE or the one-fit-all cycles. Why not? Because the time to rebound has become longer, on average, and so has the standard deviation. So a protocolized rhythm, limited by the shortest Eclipses, does not make sense anymore. There are too many people with long eclipses to be neglected. And it will be even worse with Islatravir, which is coming...
Well... By chance, an interesting topic has appeared in our discussions... Go ahead! We will take time to think about it, as this blog is not a medical advice
We'll see the rest next time ...
In the news
- of Peronne an interview in 3 parts, very instructive,
#1- medicine is going seriously off the rails. followed by :
#2- screwed up study for toxic medication. And finally:
#3- It seems that some people don't want the epidemic to stop.
- the google searches that got us the most clicks were:
nathan peiffer-smadja gilead and
nathan peiffer-smadja conflict of interest. Google says so, so it's true... It's funny, since it's off topic.
Bichat is BigPharma's honeypot, and that's in all specialties.
It is obvious that we are not going...
- Again, a very interesting topic. It's in a famous show, at 2:33
Pr PERRONNE throws everything and... It is very interesting because it puts the molecule at the disposal of the poorest... You will note, while Quatuor is published and we are nearing the end of the long term follow-up, Perronne, under whose aegis ICCARRE-1 and & 2 was published, not once has he mentioned HIV.
That is to say that another battle is looming and that he avoids polution. Will it last???
The French genius
The fun never ends... After the distressing phase, here is the entertaining phase, where we see the rotten virology sinking further. A very instructive portrait of Raoult is published here:
Didier Raoult, rebel professor, against all odds. This chapter of scientific history is not closed and it is very instructive: it allows us to identify new potential allies, and that, obviously, is important...
A person with a little bit of gumption would start asking the question: why Sanofi, producer, asked Mrs Buzyn, in October 2019, to classify HCQ as a dangerous product after having allowed us to swallow it for 50 years without a prescription...
Feel free to
comment, like, share and use
good weekend, good stuffing and not too many meds ... Huh?
