楼主:
uka123ily (NUNCA MAS)
2018-09-17 10:11:06离题一下，U=U 的部份，The Lancet HIV 今年六月的CORRESPONDENCE非常有趣。
首先Bob Leahy针对Jens Lundgren 与 Andrew Phillips 评论提出质疑，对于文章中，
病毒量测不到的感染者经由性行为传染他人的风险非常低“Very low”描述感到困惑，
而这种说法可能让感染者陷入法律困境。
It perpetuates myths that exist even within the ranks of medical practitioners.
Thus, the article cries out for further commentary, given the potential to
mislead, to confuse, and even to create legal problems for those living with
HIV.
然后Jens Lundgren 与 Andrew Phillips后续则回应:
We thank Bob Leahy for bringing the wording we used on the risks of
transmission in people with suppressed plasma viral load to the attention
of the readership. We agree with Anthony Fauci's interpretation that people
“who take ART daily as prescribed and achieve and maintain an undetectable
viral load have effectively no risk of sexually transmitting the virus to an
HIV-negative partner”, and we agree that this better conveys the risk to a
broad audience than the wording we used in the article.
以上是科学期刊的讨论，不是同运的网罗喔
1. Prevention of HIV transmission by antiretroviral therapy
http://bit.ly/andrewlancet
2. Language used to convey HIV infection risk is important
http://bit.ly/boblancet
3. Language used to convey HIV infection risk is important – Authors' reply
http://bit.ly/jenslancet
PS.
1. 去年国际爱滋病学会的IAS2017会议就已经谈U=U，还做了附Logo的图。
U=U taking off in 2017
http://bit.ly/UUtakeoff
2. 今年的话，U=U 几乎就是AIDS 2018 热门场，如果不早点抢位子是进不去的喔。
3. U=U 只有针对性行为传染，不过目前也有讨论U=U 下女性感染者是否可以喂母乳。