In article <[log in to unmask]>, Bill Wheeldin <[log in to unmask]> writes >Ross Anderson wrote: >> >> new in-home HIV test that is accurate, fast, and anonymous. Not available in UK (except perhaps via internet). Last time we asked the DoH they weren't quite sure whether or not home sampling kits for HIV testing would be legal under UK law which says testing must be done under medical direction. > >> Anonymous? Not at all!!! And here's why. >> >> Whenever you call a 1-800 number, your phone number is captured and >> forwarded to the company for billing purposes. It is also available to the >> PBX in the form of ANI which can the be sent to the automated phone system >> that processes the request. In the HIV test scenario, the company that is >> called has a record of the calling phone number (ANI), > >I get your point Ross but what about phone boxes - no need to ring from >home? > More to the point, the main reason why we currently oppose home sampling/home testing for HIV is because we see the purpose of the test as being mainly to bring people with HIV into contact with services that can help them. Thus not much point in having it done without such contact. To be fair, if someone tests positive in the system now on sale in the USA, the person they speak to on the phone strongly encourages them to seek appropriate health care. But if they follow this advice, they then get caught by legislation which in many states requires compulsory reporting of people with HIV/AIDS to a (??confidential) registry. So even if they use a phone box and the test itself is anonymous, what follows may not be. Home testing is controversial and there are important differences between the UK and USA scenes. So far we've opposed it, but some HIV activist groups clearly want it. Any views welcomed. -- Hilary Curtis Executive Director, BMA Foundation for AIDS BMA House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9JP, UK http://www.bmaids.demon.co.uk Tel: 0171 383 6315 Fax: 0171 388 2544 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%