The good fight: Minnesota lawmakers go for ‘expedited partner therapy’ to stanch rising STD rates
Wednesday, June 25, 2008 at 11:57 am
- 19 Comments
The increasing incidence of STD diagnoses in Minnesota is prompting lawmakers and public health departments to come up with strategies to address the emerging epidemic. A new and somewhat controversial approach to treating sexually transmitted infections was signed into law this year, exemplifying a rare instance of cooperation between the DFL and Republicans on an important issue.
Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) for chlamydia and gonorrhea was signed into law by Gov. Tim Pawlenty last month. It will allow physicians to dispense prescriptions for the partners of patients who have tested positive for either disease without the physician ever seeing the partner for an evaluation. Minnesota is one of a dozen states that implement patient-delivered partner therapy for the treatment of gonorrhea and chlamydia. Another dozen have outlawed the practice.
"This law makes good common sense from both a public policy and a public health perspective," Kathi Di Nicola, director of media relations for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota told Minnesota Independent. "Planned Parenthood has protocol in place to ensure that our patients and their partners receive treatment for sexually transmitted infections, with a strong emphasis on education, safer sex and encouraging partners to be tested."
Before the change in law, it would have been illegal to dispense a prescription for someone who was not a patient.
When circumstances prevent the partner of someone infected with an STI from getting tested and treated at a clinic, it often leaves that partner contagious and able to continue to infect others. "If partner testing is not an option in confirmed patient cases of chlamydia or gonorrhea, after a medical consultation, we can now send medications home with the patient to his or her treat partner," says Di Nicola.
The rate of chlamydia infection among Minnesotans has more than doubled in the past 10 years, and has affected mainly young women of color. Despite this, little has been done by the legislature or the governor to fight an epidemic that can lead to sterility in both men and women. The governor successfully blocked legislation for comprehensive sex education and budgets for prevention programs and community education continue to shrink as issues like transportation, housing, and budget shortfalls dominate lists of funding priorities.
Originally introduced by Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, the PDPT bill did not make it out of committee, but was added to a bill amending existing prescription drug statutes. That bill had the bipartisan sponsorship of Reps. Steve Gottwalt, R-St. Cloud; Thomas Huntley, DFL-Duluth; Jim Abeler, R-Anoka; Bob Dettmer, R-Forest Lake; Matt Dean, R-Dellwood; Bob Gunther, R-Fairmont; Kathy Tingelstad, R-Andover; Rep. Dan Severson, R-Sauk Rapids; and Sondra Erickson, R-Princeton, in the House. A Senate version was offered by Marty and Sen. Tarryl Clark, DFL-St. Cloud.
Chlamydia is caused by a bacteria that invades the cells lining the reproductive tract. If left untreated, it can cause pelvic inflammatory disease in women and seriously damage the uterus and ovaries. In men, is can infect the testicles and lead to sterility.
The Centers for Disease Control is actively advocating the protocol. Dr. Douglas Dr. John M. Douglas Jr., director of the CDC’s Division of STD Prevention told the Washington Times, "Men who may not have a physician or who may be reluctant to seek health care because they themselves don’t have symptoms, can get treated without having to visit a doctor themselves."
"We hope that this will have some impact on stemming the rising rates of STIs in Minnesota," says Di Nicola.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter19 Comments
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 6:07 pm
Honestly swiftee, how is that information important to the story? There are 22-pages of research and protocol for PDPT. Should I just reprint the whole thing so you can find ways to disagree with what I wrote? We will never agree on these issues. Mostly because acting like a bigot is something you’ve made into a cause in life. Yet you come back every few weeks to read my stuff.
It makes me uncomfortable to think that you actually interact with other human beings with the amount of rage and bile you spew at everyone you disagree with. You are not a good person swiftee. That’s what makes me uncomfortable.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
“No, that information was not included in the story because it wasn
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 4:13 pm
Oh I see. No, that information was not included in the story because it wasn’t relevant. It’s part of the CDC protocol for PDPT and it by statute governs how the process is implemented.
It’s only relevant when people who despise gay men look for a way to bash them, as you do so frequently. But you do raise a good point: why are the feds, and by extension Minnesota, discriminating against gay and bisexual men by not supporting PDPT for those communities? Perhaps we should encourage federal studies so that a similarly effective program can be implemented for those communities. What do you say swiftee?
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
I meant “In addition, the PDPT is only allowed for people who disclosed heterosexual risk, not for homosexual or other populations per CDC guidelines.”
But you knew that, of course.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 1:42 pm
Yes, I clearly state that this bill targets infections of chlamydia and gonorrhea, which excludes syphilis and all other STIs. “Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) for chlamydia and gonorrhea was signed into law by Gov. Tim Pawlenty last month.”
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
“nearly 70 percent occurred in teens and young adults ages 15 to 24″
I stand corrected. I stand by my hope that teens (12-17) are not going to be part of this.
“This bill has nothing to do with syphilis for which prescriptions cannot be used. In addition, the PDPT is only allowed for people who disclosed heterosexual risk, not for homosexual or other populations per CDC guidelines.”
To make sure I don’t make another error, I re-read your post. Did you put that in small print somewhere?
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 1:05 pm
From the link I posted that you reference. “Health officials noted that among the 13,412-chlamydia cases, nearly 70 percent occurred in teens and young adults ages 15 to 24.” 15 to 24 is quite a bit different than 12-15 years old, wouldn’t you say?
This bill has nothing to do with syphilis for which prescriptions cannot be used. In addition, the PDPT is only allowed for people who disclosed heterosexual risk, not for homosexual or other populations per CDC guidelines. Practical research has not been done outside heterosexual populations.
Do you still stand by your comment? Or is that sand in your sandwich swiftee?
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
You logic and ability to interpret statistics again amazes me swiftee, “In 2007 the incidence rate of gonorrhea increased by 5% from 67 to 70 per 100,000 persons. As with chlamydia, gonorrhea rates were highest among females (78 per 100,000), Blacks (851 per 100,000), and 20-24 year-olds (333 per 100,000).”
That would mean that the overwhelming percentage of gonorrhea could not have been among gay men, as women constituted the majority of the cases.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 12:49 pm
That T-Paw signed this is bad enough, but leave it to you to cheer-lead a public health disaster, Birkey.
According to your link, 70% of new chlamydia cases are ocurring in kids 12-15 years old. Surely this new law will not allow a pharmicist to dispense meds to children for re-distribution, but with morons like you on the job one can never be sure.
Meanwhile, although you intentionally left out this crucial bit of information, the overwhelming percentage of new cases of gonorrhea and syphilis are ocurring among male homosexuals (imagine our surprise). By allowing re-distribution of meds within this group, we are allowing 50% of each new highly possible-probable cases of HIV to go untested.
We can’t wait for the inevitable outcry from the “sand is food” crowd when a new epidemic breaks out.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 7:49 am
That T-Paw signed this is bad enough, but leave it to you to cheer-lead a public health disaster, Birkey.
According to your link, 70% of new chlamydia cases are ocurring in kids 12-15 years old. Surely this new law will not allow a pharmicist to dispense meds to children for re-distribution, but with morons like you on the job one can never be sure.
Meanwhile, although you intentionally left out this crucial bit of information, the overwhelming percentage of new cases of gonorrhea and syphilis are ocurring among male homosexuals (imagine our surprise). By allowing re-distribution of meds within this group, we are allowing 50% of each new highly possible-probable cases of HIV to go untested.
We can't wait for the inevitable outcry from the “sand is food” crowd when a new epidemic breaks out.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 7:58 am
You logic and ability to interpret statistics again amazes me swiftee, “In 2007 the incidence rate of gonorrhea increased by 5% from 67 to 70 per 100,000 persons. As with chlamydia, gonorrhea rates were highest among females (78 per 100,000), Blacks (851 per 100,000), and 20-24 year-olds (333 per 100,000).”
That would mean that the overwhelming percentage of gonorrhea could not have been among gay men, as women constituted the majority of the cases.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 8:05 am
From the link I posted that you reference. “Health officials noted that among the 13,412-chlamydia cases, nearly 70 percent occurred in teens and young adults ages 15 to 24.” 15 to 24 is quite a bit different than 12-15 years old, wouldn't you say?
This bill has nothing to do with syphilis for which prescriptions cannot be used. In addition, the PDPT is only allowed for people who disclosed heterosexual risk, not for homosexual or other populations per CDC guidelines. Practical research has not been done outside heterosexual populations.
Do you still stand by your comment? Or is that sand in your sandwich swiftee?
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 8:29 am
“nearly 70 percent occurred in teens and young adults ages 15 to 24″
I stand corrected. I stand by my hope that teens (12-17) are not going to be part of this.
“This bill has nothing to do with syphilis for which prescriptions cannot be used. In addition, the PDPT is only allowed for people who disclosed heterosexual risk, not for homosexual or other populations per CDC guidelines.”
To make sure I don't make another error, I re-read your post. Did you put that in small print somewhere?
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 8:42 am
Yes, I clearly state that this bill targets infections of chlamydia and gonorrhea, which excludes syphilis and all other STIs. “Patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) for chlamydia and gonorrhea was signed into law by Gov. Tim Pawlenty last month.”
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 10:08 am
I meant “In addition, the PDPT is only allowed for people who disclosed heterosexual risk, not for homosexual or other populations per CDC guidelines.”
But you knew that, of course.
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 11:13 am
Oh I see. No, that information was not included in the story because it wasn't relevant. It's part of the CDC protocol for PDPT and it by statute governs how the process is implemented.
It's only relevant when people who despise gay men look for a way to bash them, as you do so frequently. But you do raise a good point: why are the feds, and by extension Minnesota, discriminating against gay and bisexual men by not supporting PDPT for those communities? Perhaps we should encourage federal studies so that a similarly effective program can be implemented for those communities. What do you say swiftee?
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 12:47 pm
“No, that information was not included in the story because it wasn
Comment posted June 25, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
Honestly swiftee, how is that information important to the story? There are 22-pages of research and protocol for PDPT. Should I just reprint the whole thing so you can find ways to disagree with what I wrote? We will never agree on these issues. Mostly because acting like a bigot is something you've made into a cause in life. Yet you come back every few weeks to read my stuff.
It makes me uncomfortable to think that you actually interact with other human beings with the amount of rage and bile you spew at everyone you disagree with. You are not a good person swiftee. That's what makes me uncomfortable.
Comment posted November 5, 2008 @ 7:28 pm
I was wondering where online I could find stipulations that health care providers need to abide by when implementing this with their patients.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
