A survey was carried out by personal interview to assess the awareness of basic food hygiene and food safety amongst 77 HIV-positive individuals attending a single hospital. There was some confusion and lack of knowledge about aspects of food storage and despite the fact that 74% of subjects had modified their diet since learning their HIV status (mainly for nutritional reasons) only 25% reported receiving information on food safety. Of the subjects interviewed 96%, 66% and 23% were aware of the risks of infection from Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes and Cryptosporidium, respectively; although most were not aware of the UK Government's advice on the consumption of eggs, soft cheese, pâté and cook-chill foods. Over 40% of those interviewed reported that they did not drink tap water (most drank bottled water instead), but few were aware of infections potentially transmitted through water. Although pets represent a potential source of a wide variety of infectious agents, there was a high level of awareness of this problem. This study highlights the need for improving the availability of information on food hygiene and infections acquired through food and water to HIV-positive individuals.
BackgroundThe landscape of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) research has changed drastically over the past three decades. With the remarkable success of antiretroviral treatment (ART) in decreasing AIDS-related mortality, some researchers have shifted their HIV research focus from treatment to cure research. The HIV cure research community often uses the term eradication to describe the science, and talks about eradicating the virus from the body. In public discourse, the term eradication could be conflated with disease eradication at the population level. In this paper, we call for a reframing of HIV cure research as control, as it is a more accurate descriptor and achievable goal in the foreseeable future.DiscussionThe properties of HIV are discordant with eradicability standards at both the individual level (as a clinical concept), and at the population level (as a public health concept). At the individual level, true eradication would necessitate absolute elimination of all latent HIV reservoirs from the body. Current HIV cure-related research strategies have proven unsuccessful at accurately quantifying, let alone eliminating these reservoirs. At the population level, eradication implies the permanent global reduction of HIV to zero new cases and to zero risk for future cases. Given the absence of an efficacious HIV vaccine and the impracticality and unethicality of eliminating animal reservoirs, global eradication of HIV is highly implausible. From a public health perspective, HIV eradication remains an elusive goal.ConclusionThe term ‘eradication’ is a misleading description of current HIV cure-related research. Instead, we call for the use of more realistic expressions such as ‘sustained virologic HIV suppression (or control)’ or ‘management of HIV persistence’ to describe HIV cure-related research. Using these terms reorients what HIV cure science can potentially achieve in the near future and avoids creating unrealistic expectations, particularly among the millions of people globally who live with HIV.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.