I must admit that i'm quite irritated by a few of your statements. The last one was textually: So, with today's well tested and effective regimens, I wouldn't be waiting for something that isn't in clinical trials at all. I should remind you that the actual therapies are far from being perfect and that the majority of patients do not have access to them. We are not cured, we need to disclose and we can still pass the virus to others. So please don't come with those phrases like the cited one above.

Thank you!

Thanks for posting.

Sorry that you're irritated.

Let me say that I actually agree with all of your words: (1) People are not cured with treatment, (2) people do indeed transmit the virus to others, (3) treatments aren't perfect and (4) the majority of people who need treatment don't have access to them.

Having said that, I think you may be misinterpreting my words. The question was about the results of a molecule tested in the petri dish and not yet in a single human clinical trials- the very studies that determine their safety and effectiveness (the "perfection" or lack thereof) in living people rather than cells in the laboratory. The writer asked if he or she should forego current HIV treatment (it sounded like the writer had access to treatment) whilst waiting for this particular in vitro strategy to reach clinical and regulatory approval. My response was aimed at this limited question.

So, we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree- I'll continue to recommend (as does the 2012 US Department of Health and Human Services HIV treatment guidelines) HIV medications for nearly all people living with HIV. Medications, appropriately selected and monitored, can improve or maintain health and prevent transmission of HIV to others.

BY