3% Risk factor for Blood transfusion sounds low on the historical data on patients with chronic infection from past decades but with improved HCV screening practices in blood donations, is it a lower risk factor now these days?
Re: 10% on sexual activity, I think these numbers comes from wider range of studies in different contexts (multiple partner, sex workers, MSM, std coinfections,...etc) since sexual activity is a broader subject.
I believe the risk of transmission between long term partners should be much much lower.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"
>Sexual exposures account for about 15 percent of cases of Hepatitis C. Although the risk for >transmitting HCV infection through sexual intercourse is low, sex is a common behavior in the general population, a substantial proportion of the adult population has had unprotected sex with multiple partners, and there are a large number of persons with HCV infection. While other types of exposures are more likely to transmit HCV (e.g., transfusion from an infected donor), they account for a smaller proportion of infections because of the relatively small proportion of the population in whom these exposures have occurred.
"
http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/HCV/Strategy/NatHepCPrevStrategy.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"
>Sexual Activity. Case-control studies have reported an association between exposure to a sex >contact with a history of hepatitis or exposure to multiple sex partners and acquiring hepatitis C (40,41). In addition, 15%-20% of patients with acute hepatitis C who have been reported to CDC's sentinel counties surveillance system, have a history of sexual exposure in the absence of other risk factors. Two thirds of these have an anti-HCV-positive sex partner, and one third reported greater than 2 partners in the 6 months before illness (2).
In contrast, a low prevalence of HCV infection has been reported by studies of long-term spouses of patients with chronic HCV infection who had no other risk factors for infection. Five of these studies have been conducted in the United States, involving 30-85 partners each, in which average prevalence of HCV infection was 1.5% (range: 0% to 4.4%) (56,82-85).
"
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00055154.htm
yeah - scary - no dentist - do not have manicures/pedicures - do have eyebrows waxed occasionally and that tetanus shot - that's it.
It certainly has been an eye opener for me, my family and friends.
And I know it is not simply a drug addicts disease - my best friends are RN'S and they always feel as though they are dodging a bullet
That IS too scary - you didn't go to the dentist in the last year or anything like that? A manicure or pedicure? What else is there that we can think of ........ not too much. I agree with meakea the public just has no idea how many of them could be infected thinking "oh that is a drug addict disease" when most certainly it's not just that at all.
I absolutely agree ! Not even not an obvious source - no source unless it was that tetanus shot. I cannot even imagine how many people may have it and not know.
If I have it - ANYONE can. Truly - if you knew my lifestyle, you would liken this to the immaculate conception ! lol I know it is rare to be able to pinpoint a time frame and the only reason I can is the blood giving - O neg so I try to often.
But it goes to show that maybe we don't know as much as we think we know about hep c
Everyone should be tested
Wow, Anne, that's pretty scary that you recently got Hep C without having any obvious source. You are continued proof that Hep C is out there and further proof that the published risk factors and odds of contracting Hep C are pure BS! I get irritated every time I read "odds" BS being put out there because it gives the general public a false sense of security.
also - I have LFT's every year since I am on thyroid medication - ALT and AST are always below 10 - this time they were very high