hiv question

[micheal021]

Ok how is it that dr hook has agreed he has never seen hiv transmitted from a single unprotective vagiinal intercousrse

[Teak]

Use condoms correctly and consistently and don't share works and you won't have a risk of contracting HIV.

[nomore11]

I believe it has alot to do when the person is infected, if someone has recently been infected and they are in their window period then the virus can easily be transmitted, its often known that the virus is mostly infectious during this time. Which is why i believe the virus is easily spread because most may not know they are even infected about 30% will not feel symptoms and id they do some may easily ignore the symptoms, especially if its someone that contniously engage in high risk acts, they may not know the difference.

[mememe2010947]

It takes a single act for transmission. But that act depends on how much virus was received, and a number of other known and unknown factors. Even if you get exposed, it's believed that there's a threshold/minimum amount of virus before someone is infected and where the virus can multiply.

As an example of something else, think of e coli. A single bacteria will most eaten will most likely not infect you. You have to eat a lot of the bacteria to get infected.

That's why the number for HIV is 1 in several thousand. And that depends on the other person's state of infection. The risk is highest when the viral load is highest, and that is when people are first infected, near AIDS, or untreated with medium/high viral load. That risk become much, much higher. Combined with treated people with undetectable viral loads, people with low amounts of virus, etc, then the average is 1 in several thousand. Also, HIV-2 has a lower rate of infection, but I don't know if that is averaged into HIV.

[nomore11]

Finding a definitive answers to your questions seems to be a challenging process when it comes to HIV. I feel like there is alot more to be done about this virus. When you actually look at some real cases of how some people became infected there is many who are actually being infected once. Even looking at the highly publicized  porn industry case, all transmission happened per act, the guy got it from somewhere and then transmitted to 3 other people. that makes me wondering when you do look at numbers such as 1-1000 or 1-2000.

[mememe2010947]

The statistics for the risk of transmission is mostly reliable. There is no penalty or reward for telling the truth or a lie. This information is confidential and reported to the CDC for policy purposes, so it's not like there is a real reason to lie. The ones who don't state the risk go into the unknown category, which usually is about 10%.  

[Aseeking]

Yeah that was what I was told here, but managed to get an STD. And got my penis cut/irritated by masturbation with fluids. But I was told no risk.

But the interesting thing about syringes is that I never understood how HIV could live there. I understand the whole no oxygen thing, but I also heard that changes in temperature fracture the shell making in unable to infect. If the syringe is made of metal wouldn't that attract temperature change?

[PBF410]

Yes I agree, with the exception of syringes. HIV is a fragile virus and can't live outside the body for long.

[Aseeking]

Well that you need to have unprotected vaginal or anal sex in order to have a risk. That HIV dies very very very quickly outside the body. That is why you do not get it through mutual masturbation even if you have cuts in penis.

[PBF410]

I'm not sure what you mean...

[Aseeking]

Hey how many of you buy into that "HIV is not transmitted outside its host?"

[PBF410]

I'm not saying you shouldn't be safe or that transmission can't occur from a single exposure. I'm just saying that different activities carry different risks, which I think is beneficial for people to understand.

[mememe2010947]

Yeah, I agree with you.

There are NGOs that accept donations to address the condom and testing availability parts, and that can make a difference. And ART is subsidized/cross licensed in developing countries (ie India and South Africa). Health care systems are usually government rather than private (unlike the US). So their equivalents are about 1/3 to 1/2 as expensive in these developing countries. But the real supply is very limited.

[Andyburns]

That just tells me that he doesnt come across many patients, if you play with fire you will get burned. That statistic is not exact science because a lot of these numbers come from peoples mouths and people lie. His words should not be taken as an endorsement for unsafe sex, and his counter part dr. hook says he has seen people get it after one occurance.  if you've got hiv they could say whatever they want it isnt gonna help you, and they have the legal permission to say things and not be held accountable if they are wrong.

[PBF410]

Yes, you are correct. Heterosexual sex is the most common form of HIV transmission in developing countries, while homosexual sex or intravenous drug use is the most common in industrialized nations. The reason for the higher prevalence of heterosexual transmission in developing countries is due to a variety of factors including, but not limited to, a higher proportion of men who are uncirmusized, a higher prevalance of HSV-2 and other STD's that could facilitate the transmission of HIV, lack of access to HAART, which in turn means a higher viral load and faster progression to AIDS, a greater number of sexual parterns (at least in certain parts of the world), and less access to condoms. When you add all of these factors up, it can make a significant difference. Also, keep in mind that heterosexual transmission also includes anal receptive sex for females, which we know carries a high risk.

[nomore11]

HIV is just as worse in some parts of the US as in some worse parts of Africa. However we are more aware of those epidemics outside. Places like DC, New York City and many other major cities in US are heavily hit by this epidemics. while M2M have the highest rate, you cannot count out that some of those mans will also have sex with woman who will have sex with man. And 20 percent of the estimated 1 million HIV-positive Americans are unaware of their status, and this percent maybe growing. So It’s time to admit that HIV is still a major threat in the US. If i had been this aware i wouldnt have even think twice about any risk.

[mememe2010947]

HIV statistics in major US cities/states are available via their public health departments, if you search for them. About 85% of new cases are in major metro areas. For example,

NYC: http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/ah/hivtables.shtml

SF: http://www.sfdph.org/dph/files/reports/default.asp

LA:  http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/reports/rptspubdisplay.cfm?unit=hiv&ou=ph&prog=hae

Miami: http://www.dadehealth.org/discontrol/DISCONTROLmonthlyrep.asp

Seattle: http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthservices/health/communicable/hiv/epi/reports.aspx

Texas: http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/hivstd/reports/default.shtm

Worldwide, 80% of HIV transmission is heterosexual. But US statistics show a reverse trend, where about 70% of transmissions is homosexual. So US has prevention campaigns targeted mainly on homosexual and IDU transmissions. No matter how you dice the statistics, they show it doesn't matter what orientation you are.

[PBF410]

I would not call HIV an epidemic in the US.  While the number of people infected with HIV in the US may be going up (which is in large part due to improved prognosis due to HAART), the number of AIDS cases and deaths is going down. In addition, I am not aware of any studies showing a sharp increase in HIV prevalence among heterosexual, non-injection drug users. Heterosexual transmission obviously remains a probability but certain risk factors, such as having other STD's, are often associated with this. In addition, females are at a higher risk than males in heterosexual activities. I doubt you could find very many HIV+ males in the US who are heterosexual, do not inject drugs, and have not had any accompanying STD's such as syphillis that could have made infection easier.

[nomore11]

I thought the same way too. being a heterosexual male that the risk is very low. Now im in the same predicament going crazy and worrying about the next test. despite all those stats, i cant bare the fact that this is also an epidemic. Now, If you think about the habits of people who sleep around, many usually have 1 or few encounter with that same partner  and in most cases people use condom but the virus is still spreading rapidly in many places in the US.

[NickOne7]

A risk is a risk, Dont gamble with your health USE CONDOMS

[PBF410]

Well, the risk of acquiring HIV from a single act of unprotected vaginal sex with a partner confirmed to be HIV+ is about 1 in 1000 for the female and 1 in 2000 for the male. Couple that with the fact that roughly 0.36% of the US population is HIV+, and that includes men who have sex with men. Therefore, I am guessing that heterosexual prevalence is at the most 0.05%, or 1 in 5,000, for heterosexuals in the US. So if you combine these two statisics, the risk of a heterosexual acquiring HIV from a single act of vaginal sex is about 1 in 5 million for women and 1 in 10 million for men.