Aa
question
can you catch hepatitis if your boyfriend has it and you r having unprotected sex with him?
I'm not really sure what question you are asking. Anyway, I will say that humor is an affirmation of dignity. A declaration of man's superiority to all that befalls him.
Do ya REALLY need an answer?
To start with...did that comment about sophomoric stuff really bother you? Well, comments like that don't bother me at all. I really care little about what the prudish or priestly think.
I would have said what I did irreguardless of whether she made a 90 Mph comment or not.
I say a lot of things just for the laughs. I do always give information but I try to put it into a bit of humor too. The information still gets accross but the fun is important too.
Its hard for anyone who has not done tx to understand and I kind of ignore any blasts I may get from them. The valus of laughter and positive thinking to tx cannot be charted but is "Invaluable" all the same. It boosts the immune system...according to ALL the information availiable.
This is NOT just a simple "information" site. It is a "Patient to Patient" SUPPORT site. Laughter has a BIG place in support when we are on the meds. Those that do not understand this are not on the meds and probably never have been.
Besides...I kind of LIKE bein a sophomore......I had LOTS of fun in College.
Now tell me...who EVER would accuse YOU of havin a "Friskey Factor"???? Oh yeah....never mind..........
To start with...did that comment about sophomoric stuff really bother you? Well, comments like that don't bother me at all. I really care little about what the prudish or priestly think.
I would have said what I did irreguardless of whether she made a 90 Mph comment or not.
I say a lot of things just for the laughs. I do always give information but I try to put it into a bit of humor too. The information still gets accross but the fun is important too.
Its hard for anyone who has not done tx to understand and I kind of ignore any blasts I may get from them. The valus of laughter and positive thinking to tx cannot be charted but is "Invaluable" all the same. It boosts the immune system...according to ALL the information availiable.
This is NOT just a simple "information" site. It is a "Patient to Patient" SUPPORT site. Laughter has a BIG place in support when we are on the meds. Those that do not understand this are not on the meds and probably never have been.
Besides...I kind of LIKE bein a sophomore......I had LOTS of fun in College.
Now tell me...who EVER would accuse YOU of havin a "Friskey Factor"???? Oh yeah....never mind..........
I might not have gotten all that numeric input, but It still made more sense than the CDC's data. TY SO MUCH.
Indy your numbers were easy to understand! lol...
Indy your numbers were easy to understand! lol...
does the hcv partner study break down the 20 infected partners by gender? I would like to know the % for males in this study.
I think there ought to be an algorythmic "tree" or point scale for sexual transmission risk that takes into account behaviours, time, gender, age, # of partners, viral load, etc for an assessment of personal risk.
No one has done this, so all the numbers are lumped together as though the risk is static over all categories, behaviors, both sexes, etc. If you are interested in developing something like this, let me know and I will work on it with you and publish it on the website.
The risk rises and it lower depending on a number of factors, and many of those factors are now known.
thanbey
No one has done this, so all the numbers are lumped together as though the risk is static over all categories, behaviors, both sexes, etc. If you are interested in developing something like this, let me know and I will work on it with you and publish it on the website.
The risk rises and it lower depending on a number of factors, and many of those factors are now known.
thanbey
It is 2:18 am and I can not sleep, wonder what you guys where up to. You guys are out of control.
Chevy/Indiana you guys crack me up. I needed that, going back to bed,hope I have no nightmares about a viral load coming at me at 90 with chevy driving.
Chevy/Indiana you guys crack me up. I needed that, going back to bed,hope I have no nightmares about a viral load coming at me at 90 with chevy driving.
A woman post menopause or who has inadequate lubrication can have microlesions that leave her vulnerable to infection of many kinds and descriptions, including hepatitis C. I wouldn't suggest taking anything for granted. Blood is not visible in minute amounts. Women who have recently given birth are vulnerable. Women with undiagnosed chlamydia, herpes or another undiagnosed STD's are vulnerable. This would especially include very young women and women who have "normal" sexual relations with multiple partners. Not everyone is married and monogamous. Dictating what type of sexual behavior one should participate in does not constitute a realistic prevention message.
I am not going to follow you into the normal vs not normal territory or the convoluted descriptions of anatomy. This is too serious a topic.
We do not know who comes here for information and we really do not know for certain what the actual transmission rates are. "Normal" is irrelevant to the discussion. Never assume other people are doing what you are doing or that everyone's standard for "normal" is the same as yours.
The bottom line is that the uninfected partner has to be comfortable with ANY risk at all and is the one to decide what precautions are require. The actual risk for any sexual pair is either zero or 100%.
Are the numbers very high? The CDC says that about 20% of new cases of hepatitis C are sexually transmitted. So, while the percentage of risk is low the numbers of newly infected are high. And exposure, unlike a single needlestick, is often frequent and repeated.
Also, there have been studies showing that the risk increases over time for a monogamous pair, presumably due to increases in exposure and a possibility of increased male viral load over time. Unknown at this point whether it was an anomaly or would be duplicated with more study.
Currently hepatitis C does not rise to the level of a sexually transmitted disease, according to the CDC, so no need to over emphasize the risk.
But it should not be downplayed either. There is risk. Exactly how much is still unclear.
I am not going to follow you into the normal vs not normal territory or the convoluted descriptions of anatomy. This is too serious a topic.
We do not know who comes here for information and we really do not know for certain what the actual transmission rates are. "Normal" is irrelevant to the discussion. Never assume other people are doing what you are doing or that everyone's standard for "normal" is the same as yours.
The bottom line is that the uninfected partner has to be comfortable with ANY risk at all and is the one to decide what precautions are require. The actual risk for any sexual pair is either zero or 100%.
Are the numbers very high? The CDC says that about 20% of new cases of hepatitis C are sexually transmitted. So, while the percentage of risk is low the numbers of newly infected are high. And exposure, unlike a single needlestick, is often frequent and repeated.
Also, there have been studies showing that the risk increases over time for a monogamous pair, presumably due to increases in exposure and a possibility of increased male viral load over time. Unknown at this point whether it was an anomaly or would be duplicated with more study.
Currently hepatitis C does not rise to the level of a sexually transmitted disease, according to the CDC, so no need to over emphasize the risk.
But it should not be downplayed either. There is risk. Exactly how much is still unclear.
Hey.........As long as we're talkin "Numbers".......You're the math King around here. Take a look at THIS.....
What makes 100%?
What does it mean! to give MORE than 100%?
Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%?
We have all been to those meetings where someone wants you to give over 100%.
How about achieving 103%?
Here's a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these questions:
If:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26,
then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
and,
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%
But,
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%
And,
B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
and, look how far ass kissing will take you:
A-S-S--K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7 = 118%
So, one can then conclude with mathematical certainty that:
While Hardwork and Knowledge will get you close, and Attitude will get you there, Bullshit and Ass Kissing will put you over the top!
Whatcha think???
What makes 100%?
What does it mean! to give MORE than 100%?
Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%?
We have all been to those meetings where someone wants you to give over 100%.
How about achieving 103%?
Here's a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these questions:
If:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26,
then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
and,
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%
But,
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%
And,
B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
and, look how far ass kissing will take you:
A-S-S--K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7 = 118%
So, one can then conclude with mathematical certainty that:
While Hardwork and Knowledge will get you close, and Attitude will get you there, Bullshit and Ass Kissing will put you over the top!
Whatcha think???
OK, so I can't type, 192*12 is 2304, not 3072, and the probability of transmission per encounter climbs to 0.00001 or 1 in 100,000
that's what's great about this forum: solid proof of stuff you've suspected for years!
The CDC says many things, a lot based on what the individuals tell them. This person might swear up and down that the only risk was sex, unwilling to disclose other risky behavior. Some studies put the rate at less than 5%.
Come on Chevy.....spit it out!! hahahahahaha
Here are some links.........
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/news/reports/AASLD_2003-2.html#16
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/news/newsLetter/advocate0403.html#5
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/news/NewsUpdates_pdf/2.4.1_HCV_Advocate_2003/advocate0403.pdf
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/hcsp/hcsp_pdf/Donovan-1.pdf
1-4% for "normal" sex and single partner. Thats just the way it is.
Here are some links.........
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/news/reports/AASLD_2003-2.html#16
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/news/newsLetter/advocate0403.html#5
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/news/NewsUpdates_pdf/2.4.1_HCV_Advocate_2003/advocate0403.pdf
http://www.hcvadvocate.org/hcsp/hcsp_pdf/Donovan-1.pdf
1-4% for "normal" sex and single partner. Thats just the way it is.
Chevy/chevygal I knew there was too of yah, that is alot of toes to paint.
Thanbey: THank you for all that info, you are TRRRRRerific
Thanbey: THank you for all that info, you are TRRRRRerific
Thank you buddy, I need you and everyone else, things are tough for me, fighting my work to pay for my deasese it is vey hard. My doctor did write an excelent letter to them, which was faxed to the worksman comp insurance, for some of you who do not know me this whole nightmare started with an accidental needle stick at my work. Am going to be in and out of here over the weekend, going to the beach,a getaway much needed, I will be thinking about all of you, am going to try to get on line while am there, cause am gonna miss yah guys,am very greatful to this forum and to all of you, I know I say this all the time,sorry but am gonna keep on saying it. Take care kids !!
yes, prevalence is cumulative and thus greater than the risk of transmission per encounter. Those concerned should pull out their calculators before hopping into bed ( in fact, just getting out the calculator is <em>absolutely guaranteed</e> to eliminate all risk). Per the HCV Partners study we have a 4% prevalence of HCV co-infection among 500 long term(>3 years), monogamous, couples. Couples were not considered if both members were IV drug users.
Among those 20 couples, 40% did not have a common genotype so their HCV must have come elsewhere, which leaves us 12. Couples had a median of 16 years(192 months) of sexual contact. The median number of sexual contacts ranged from 0.3 to 24.4 per month, presumably across different age groups. They don't give us the overall median or average so let's say 12 which gives a whopping 3072 encounters per couple. There's no reason to assume one encounter affects another so the probability of co-infection can be approximated as the probability of having gotten it on the 1st encounter +.. the probability of having gotten in on the 3072nd encounter. If the probability of co-infection is 12/500=0.024, the probability of transmission in one encounter is 0.024/3072=0.000007. As the CDC <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/c/faq.htm">faq</a> says "Can HCV be spread by sexual activity? Yes, but this does not occur very often."
BTW the CDC <a href="ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Publications/mmwr/rr/rr4719.pdf">study</a> that attributes up to 20% of new cases to sexual contact is in fact somewhat dated (published in '98 on data gathered 83-96) and includes no attempt to verify concordant genotype.
Among those 20 couples, 40% did not have a common genotype so their HCV must have come elsewhere, which leaves us 12. Couples had a median of 16 years(192 months) of sexual contact. The median number of sexual contacts ranged from 0.3 to 24.4 per month, presumably across different age groups. They don't give us the overall median or average so let's say 12 which gives a whopping 3072 encounters per couple. There's no reason to assume one encounter affects another so the probability of co-infection can be approximated as the probability of having gotten it on the 1st encounter +.. the probability of having gotten in on the 3072nd encounter. If the probability of co-infection is 12/500=0.024, the probability of transmission in one encounter is 0.024/3072=0.000007. As the CDC <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/c/faq.htm">faq</a> says "Can HCV be spread by sexual activity? Yes, but this does not occur very often."
BTW the CDC <a href="ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Publications/mmwr/rr/rr4719.pdf">study</a> that attributes up to 20% of new cases to sexual contact is in fact somewhat dated (published in '98 on data gathered 83-96) and includes no attempt to verify concordant genotype.
raheem - you're on a roll dude! Indy's getting some <em>serious</em>competition..
thanbey:thank you for your supportive and informative posts. Personally, I would find it helpful if you included a link to the actual paper when you reference study findings as in the 20% above. The issue of sexual transmission and HCV RNA in body fluids is a recurring "hot" topic on this forum. One pattern that has emerged from arguments over conflicting studies is that more recent studies, which include more careful subject selection and, critically, RNA genotyping and sequencing, report much lower transmission rates than older studies. For example, the <a href="http://www.hivandhepatitis.com/2003icr/03_assld/docs/1029/102903_n.html">HCV Partner's Study</a>, which I believe is the most recently reported US study focused on sexual transmission, eliminated 40% of purported sexual transmissions by comparing the results of genotype tests. It's reasonable to expect further reductions once their sequencing and phylogenetic tests are completed. Clearly, a lot of "sexual transmissions" aren't. Including a link to the paper that came up with a particular estimate makes it easier to assess the credibility of that estimate.
thanbey:thank you for your supportive and informative posts. Personally, I would find it helpful if you included a link to the actual paper when you reference study findings as in the 20% above. The issue of sexual transmission and HCV RNA in body fluids is a recurring "hot" topic on this forum. One pattern that has emerged from arguments over conflicting studies is that more recent studies, which include more careful subject selection and, critically, RNA genotyping and sequencing, report much lower transmission rates than older studies. For example, the <a href="http://www.hivandhepatitis.com/2003icr/03_assld/docs/1029/102903_n.html">HCV Partner's Study</a>, which I believe is the most recently reported US study focused on sexual transmission, eliminated 40% of purported sexual transmissions by comparing the results of genotype tests. It's reasonable to expect further reductions once their sequencing and phylogenetic tests are completed. Clearly, a lot of "sexual transmissions" aren't. Including a link to the paper that came up with a particular estimate makes it easier to assess the credibility of that estimate.
Check out the CDC's website for the information on 20% of newly infected cases attributed to sexual transmission. That is not the same as a 20% risk for sexual transmission.
In fact, neither is the any of the other numbers (anywhere from 4% upwards) a risk. These are prevalences, and that is different. People commonly confuse this.
The fact is that, in any one incident (not lifetime coupling) the risk is either zero or 100%.
You may assume that there will be articles on the www.hcop.org website regarding these postings.
I am also always interested in submissions from people who have something they think should be added to the data on the website for future reference.
Thanks,
thanbey
In fact, neither is the any of the other numbers (anywhere from 4% upwards) a risk. These are prevalences, and that is different. People commonly confuse this.
The fact is that, in any one incident (not lifetime coupling) the risk is either zero or 100%.
You may assume that there will be articles on the www.hcop.org website regarding these postings.
I am also always interested in submissions from people who have something they think should be added to the data on the website for future reference.
Thanks,
thanbey
Check out the CDC's website for the information on 20% of newly infected cases attributed to sexual transmission. That is not the same as a 20% risk for sexual transmission.
In fact, neither is the any of the other numbers (anywhere from 4% upwards) a risk. These are prevalences, and that is different. People commonly confuse this.
The fact is that, in any one incident (not lifetime coupling) the risk is either zero or 100%.
You may assume that there will be articles on the www.hcop.org website regarding these postings.
I am also always interested in submissions from people who have something they think should be added to the data on the website for future reference.
Thanks,
thanbey
In fact, neither is the any of the other numbers (anywhere from 4% upwards) a risk. These are prevalences, and that is different. People commonly confuse this.
The fact is that, in any one incident (not lifetime coupling) the risk is either zero or 100%.
You may assume that there will be articles on the www.hcop.org website regarding these postings.
I am also always interested in submissions from people who have something they think should be added to the data on the website for future reference.
Thanks,
thanbey
I have always found the CDC's information to be somewhat "dated". A year after Peg/Intron was FDA approved the CDC was still stating that the "current" tx was the old 3x/week Peg. But that does not surprise me. Since it is part of the government it takes a LONG time to get anything changed.
I would rather go with the info put out by the medical community and conferences than the drug corporations or the governments.
Just personal preferences...........
GO RAHEEM!!! You are on a ROLL today!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I would rather go with the info put out by the medical community and conferences than the drug corporations or the governments.
Just personal preferences...........
GO RAHEEM!!! You are on a ROLL today!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Thanbey....Again I am impressed by your candor ...this time on the sexual issue. You seem well versed on the different "practices" and willing to talk about them. Kinda different to hear it from a woman. You GO girl!!!!
The higher load DOES make a difference in transmission. Think about it people.....the higher the "infectious" load (virus) in a drop of blood, the more risk there is. It's pretty simple there.
But the transmission is sill pretty hard to accomplish during "normal" sex. You ALL know what I mean when I say that.
The problem comes when we deviate from the "normal". I'm not gonna go to the "leather and toys" cuz Thanbey already explained that, but there ARE some other seemingly "normal" things that we need to think about.....
Oral sex is the biggie. Wether HE gets "too" hot, or she gets forgetful, if blood comes into the picture it becomes a problem. If teeth are flyin...you have a problem. If he needs a Bandaid, or she needs a dentist, afterwards...you have a problem.
That doesn't leave the reverse out either. Grazing on the "South Lawn" is not without risk either. Keep it "nice" and gentle and you're ok. If she's in her "time" or you get rowdy and draw blood, then you shouldn't be grazinf anyways. "Grazing" is ok...."attacking" is a problem. If anyone has gum problems the oral is out of the question.
The rates of sexual transmission are VERY low. You just gotta use some common sense when ya know you have this.
Put away thw whips and chains. NO blood should EVER be present...EVER.
Personal instruction is availiable at my NEW business...."Indys' sex school and videp store".
Seriously....just pretend your "married" and you'll be fine................
The higher load DOES make a difference in transmission. Think about it people.....the higher the "infectious" load (virus) in a drop of blood, the more risk there is. It's pretty simple there.
But the transmission is sill pretty hard to accomplish during "normal" sex. You ALL know what I mean when I say that.
The problem comes when we deviate from the "normal". I'm not gonna go to the "leather and toys" cuz Thanbey already explained that, but there ARE some other seemingly "normal" things that we need to think about.....
Oral sex is the biggie. Wether HE gets "too" hot, or she gets forgetful, if blood comes into the picture it becomes a problem. If teeth are flyin...you have a problem. If he needs a Bandaid, or she needs a dentist, afterwards...you have a problem.
That doesn't leave the reverse out either. Grazing on the "South Lawn" is not without risk either. Keep it "nice" and gentle and you're ok. If she's in her "time" or you get rowdy and draw blood, then you shouldn't be grazinf anyways. "Grazing" is ok...."attacking" is a problem. If anyone has gum problems the oral is out of the question.
The rates of sexual transmission are VERY low. You just gotta use some common sense when ya know you have this.
Put away thw whips and chains. NO blood should EVER be present...EVER.
Personal instruction is availiable at my NEW business...."Indys' sex school and videp store".
Seriously....just pretend your "married" and you'll be fine................
In at least one study, a high viral load in the male was associated with a greater risk of transmission to a sexual partner.
EVANG: the data regarding sexual transmission suggest that individuals with multiple sex partners are at a increased high risk, but if your monogamous, the risk is low.THe rate of transmission Hep C is much more lower then for those with hepB.Condoms are not considered essential but are an option for monogamous couples, with one parner that is infected.
My boyfriend do not use condoms, he is negative. We are more careful with not using each others tooth brush and not using the same razer, cuticle scissors and thigs of that sort.
Thanbey: am trying to understand your comment of the higher the viral load the more of a risk factor you are.
Please fill me in.
My boyfriend do not use condoms, he is negative. We are more careful with not using each others tooth brush and not using the same razer, cuticle scissors and thigs of that sort.
Thanbey: am trying to understand your comment of the higher the viral load the more of a risk factor you are.
Please fill me in.
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis C Community
Learn about this treatable virus.
Getting tested for this viral infection.
3 key steps to getting on treatment.
4 steps to getting on therapy.
What you need to know about Hep C drugs.
How the drugs might affect you.
These tips may up your chances of a cure.
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
