Nasal Secretions(snot-mucus) and Hiv

[ziyaretci]

Doc.Hunter hello ,

I read your question-answer dialogue in the forum yesterday about nasal secretions and hiv.

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/Nasal-secretion--toddler-exposed/show/1164850

I had a similar event 2 days ago and make some research in web about nasal secretions and hiv.But i can only find your reply to a question.And as we see you said that there is too low risk in this situation.I'm living in Turkey and we generally learn that saliva,tears,snot etc not a danger for hiv.But as you said in the post this is a too low risk.I'm a little confused about this subject.Isn't there a laboratory searches about nasal secretions(snot-mucus) and hiv? And nasal secretions are too low danger or no danger? You said have no data about nasal secretions.How can we learn the best and right information about nasal secretions and hiv?

[Edward W Hook, MD]

At 2 hours it is unlikely that there was live virus present.  As I said before and will now emphasize that you have  provided more detail this is really not something for you to be worried about.  EWH

[ziyaretci]

Thx doctor.Last question : The person's nasal secrection came to my deep cut on my lip, after 2 hours.So he blow his nose and after 2 hours his snot/mucus/nasal secretions came on my deep cut.After 2 hours viruses die or live? (you may say nasal secretions non-infectious i only want to learn hiv viruse's living time)

Thx very much for everything.

[Edward W Hook, MD]

You should consider nasal secretions to be no danger.  when Dr. Handsfield and I say words like very low, that is about the same as no risk.  For nasal secretions, you should not worry.  EWH

[ziyaretci]

Thanks doctor for your reply.As you said this isn't completely answer my question but helped me a little.We can read tears , saliva etc. is not dangerous for hiv but as i understood we can't find information about nasal secretion.My English is not so good sorry sometimes i can stress you. So can we think that nasal secrections is the same with saliva or tears? So why Doc Hunter always says saliva or tears etc. non-infectious , but says about nasal secretions there is a low risk...My mind confused there...I found an information in thebody.com and doctor says nasal secretions are not dangerous...But i trust your knowledge very much so wanted to ask you again.

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Current/Q202282.html

Before reading Doc.Hunters reply i was thinking like Doc.Bob.  But when i saw HHH's reply i scared and confused.Because of my bad english i can understand your reply not totally i only want to know nasal secretions is no danger(like saliva or tears) or a low danger.

Thx Doc.

[Edward W Hook, MD]

Welcome to the Forum.  It appears that you are anxious about an exposure that may or may not have occurred.  In reading you comments, I am not sure whether or not you may have mis-read Dr. Handsfield’s earlier comment.  To be clear, his statement is that the risk is to too low (i.e. so low it cannot be accurately measured) for concern.  I completely agree with his comments and will add a few of my own.

In considering the risk of whatever exposure may have occurred, it is important to remember that HIV is a fragile virus that does not live well outside of the human body.  Thus exposure to air, to drying, and to temperatures lower than body temperature all make it likely that the virus would have died if it had been outside of a 0perrson's body for any period of time.

The second thing I will point out that there are now very clear data that he risk fo HIV transmission is strongly related to the amount of virus present in infectious material.  This is important because the amount of virus present in oral secretions is far lower than the amount of virus present in blood or genital secretions.  Nasal secretions are closely related to oral secretions and I suspect the amount of virus present in them is also low.

Finally, I would point out that the reason that there are no studies of nasal secretions and HIV risk is likely because the risk is so very low.  If there were credible evidence that this were a concern, I suspect scientists would have chosen to study it.

I realize this doesn't completely answer your question but in some situations where there are no data, it is best to acknowledge this is the case.  EWH