Real good news

[Gob]

Young people on the latest HIV drugs now have near-normal life expectancy because of improvements in treatments, a study in The Lancet suggests.

Twenty-year-olds who started antiretroviral therapy in 2010 are projected to live 10 years longer than those first using it in 1996, it found.

Doctors say that starting treatment early is crucial to achieve a long and healthy life.

Charities say there are still too many people unaware they have the virus.

The study authors, from the University of Bristol, said the extraordinary success of HIV treatments was a result of newer drugs having fewer side effects and being better at preventing the virus from replicating in the body.

It is also more difficult for the virus to build up a resistance to the most recent drugs.

Improved screening and prevention programmes and better treatment of health problems caused by HIV are thought to have helped, too.

But many people with HIV still do not live as long as expected, especially those infected through injecting drugs.

Antiretroviral therapy involves a combination of three or more drugs which block the normal progress of HIV (human immunodeficiency virus).

They have been called "one of the greatest public health success stories of the past 40 years".


http://www.bbc.com/news/health-39872530

[Lord Jim]

Gee, that really IS good news...

And here I was expecting when I opened this post, (Given the track record of the author of the OP when he employs phrases like "good news" "great news" or "important news" in his subject line) some obscure cricket thing, like an article about the Buggerham Snoozers defeating the Snootyshire Somnambulists 5,317 to 2,612, with 6 and a half unders and 42 whackits...

[oldr_n_wsr]

don't forget it took two weeks to complete the "test".

[Gob]

Gee, that really IS good news...

And here I was expecting when I opened this post, (Given the track record of the author of the OP when he employs phrases like "good news" "great news" or "important news" in his subject line) some obscure cricket thing, like an article about the Buggerham Snoozers defeating the Snootyshire Somnambulists 5,317 to 2,612, with 6 and a half unders and 42 whackits...

I'll start a new thread on that one.

[Bicycle Bill]

And here I was expecting when I opened this post, (Given the track record of the author of the OP when he employs phrases like "good news" "great news" or "important news" in his subject line) some obscure cricket thing, like an article about the Buggerham Snoozers defeating the Snootyshire Somnambulists 5,317 to 2,612, with 6 and a half unders and 42 whackits...

There are several scholars who have reached the conclusion that cricket was something originally something created for a work of fiction¹ in much the same way that J.K. Rowling 'invented' the game of Quidditch or the staff of Mad Magazine came up with 43-man Squamish, and was never meant to be played.

However, given the proclivities of mad dogs and Englishmen, someone decided to try to play the game according to the (now deleted) passage in the book, to the utter consternation and confusion of the players, the officials, and the half-dozen idle layabouts who observed the first match.  Even then it would have probably been lost to the mists of history until someone came up with the positively brilliant idea to claim that the quintessential American pastime of baseball was in fact a derivation of cricket.  As a result, what started out as a piece of satire has become as British as fog, tea, Bobbies, and bumbershoots — and the fact that it is still utterly incomprehensible to their American cousins is just one small bit of sweetness to offset the still-bitter taste of the loss of the colonies in 1776.
———————————
¹ — Research has found that early drafts of Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver's Travels" contain a reference to a stick-and-ball game called 'Krickkitt', played by the Yahoos in the land of the Houyhnhnms.  However, marginal notes left by the author himself (or more likely his editor/publisher) indicated that he had second thoughts and that this was too far beyond the pale to be included, even in a work of satire.

-"BB"-

[Gob]

Cricket Explained to a Foreigner

You have two sides, one out in the field and one in.
Each man that’s in the side that’s in the field goes out and when he’s out comes in and the next man goes in until he’s out.
When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in.
When they are all out, the side that’s out comes in and the side that’s been in goes out and tries to get those coming in out.
Sometimes there are men still in and not out.
There are men called umpires who stay out all the time, and they decide when the men who are in are out.
Depending on the weather and the light, the umpires can also send everybody in, no matter whether they’re in or out.
When both sides have been in and all the men are out (including those who are not out), then the game is finished.

[Joe Guy]

Oh... Now I get it. Cricket is like Chinese fire drill...

[oldr_n_wsr]

Not really.
There is some "action" in a chinese fire drill.

[rubato]

Great news for drug companies who orgasm every time there is a chronic disease which they will treat, for a price, but can never be cured.

yrs,
rubato

[Scooter]

There are scientists who are working on promising avenues for a cure. In the meantime, I would venture that it is also great news for those who can look forward to a normal and relatively healthy life expectancy.

Actually there is an irony in that a successfully treated HIV+ person may in fact live longer than his/her HIV- counterpart, simply because the increased medical monitoring to which he/she is subjected will pick up emerging conditions of normal aging sooner, in order to treat them before they become serious problems.

[Gob]

Actually there is an irony in that a successfully treated HIV+ person may in fact live longer than his/her HIV- counterpart, simply because the increased medical monitoring to which he/she is subjected will pick up emerging conditions of normal aging sooner, in order to treat them before they become serious problems.

"In a civilised country" you mean?

[Big RR]

There are scientists who are working on promising avenues for a cure. In the meantime, I would venture that it is also great news for those who can look forward to a normal and relatively healthy life expectancy.

Indeed. While, no doubt, diabetics would like a "cure", the treatment medications available and their effect on disease progress and their liftetimes are also "great news". While I am certain the pharma companies prefer longterm treatment of chronic diseases to a quick cure, Both are good news from those who are suffering from the diseases.