Aa
Hep C from paper cuts
Hello,
I would like to ask about the possibility of getting infected from a paper cut.
My case is rather specific:
I have been working at a factory and used an object that gave me a number of paper cuts (a plastic wrapper). a number of other people had been using these wrappers and i suppose that more people could have had paper cuts from this object even in the same day.
I didnt feel significant pain on my cuts but the cuts are red and there had been blood involved.
I am interested to know not if Hep C infection is just possible but a far fetched senario, but if it is possible enough to get me for a test, because I am a hypochondriac and I am trying to stay away from unneeded tests!
I would like to ask about the possibility of getting infected from a paper cut.
My case is rather specific:
I have been working at a factory and used an object that gave me a number of paper cuts (a plastic wrapper). a number of other people had been using these wrappers and i suppose that more people could have had paper cuts from this object even in the same day.
I didnt feel significant pain on my cuts but the cuts are red and there had been blood involved.
I am interested to know not if Hep C infection is just possible but a far fetched senario, but if it is possible enough to get me for a test, because I am a hypochondriac and I am trying to stay away from unneeded tests!
This thread is now closed.
Have a great day everyone.
Emily
********************************** CLOSED THREAD ****************************
NO MORE POSTS, PLEASE
Have a great day everyone.
Emily
********************************** CLOSED THREAD ****************************
NO MORE POSTS, PLEASE
You have asked many questions on many forums on this site (The Depression forum ,The Anal cancer forum and the HIV forum and now ours) including many discussions with doctors here. and seems you do not stop asking even when you are given numerous helpful answers by the good people here. It is evident you only stop asking when no-one responds further. You have been given all the answers you need regarding HCV and if you need further clarification it needs to be from your doctor. There is nothing more we could help you with and I believe this site below is were your help may come from.
Thx, for dropping in....
http://www.medhelp.org/forums/Obsessive-Compulsive-Disorder-OCD-/show/231
Thx, for dropping in....
http://www.medhelp.org/forums/Obsessive-Compulsive-Disorder-OCD-/show/231
Hi again,
I am happy that the discussion finally became more interesting and maybe educational.
Just one clarification: it was my first day at work at this place.
One day, some to many non so painful -so maybe superficial?- paper cuts(or however I should call them) and I am wondering, is this enough to get me to wait for 3 or 6 months from a test while in the meantime being very cautious in my life and my relationship etc?
Or can I consider it as a very remote risk which is maybe magnified by my psychological stress and move on ... with protective gloves?
I am happy that the discussion finally became more interesting and maybe educational.
Just one clarification: it was my first day at work at this place.
One day, some to many non so painful -so maybe superficial?- paper cuts(or however I should call them) and I am wondering, is this enough to get me to wait for 3 or 6 months from a test while in the meantime being very cautious in my life and my relationship etc?
Or can I consider it as a very remote risk which is maybe magnified by my psychological stress and move on ... with protective gloves?
Aren't the numbers arrived at by looking at known needle stick injuries from known HCV positive sources?
If so, why would the total numbers be meaningful in assessing risk?
If so, why would the total numbers be meaningful in assessing risk?
Thanks for weighing in Pooh and Suezee. I am exposed to paper cuts at work too (previously from a certain type of poorly made folder), though not to that extreme. I know more now about blood than I ever imagined (LOL). But it is helpful to have these visual scenarios.
I do agree with others, in that, the ultimate best answer to Loud's question is.....to go get tested. There are major risks and low percentage risks. I have NO idea how I got this. Since this is something Loud encounters on a regular basis (not just a random thing), I see the reason for the question. Just my 2 cents....
I do agree with others, in that, the ultimate best answer to Loud's question is.....to go get tested. There are major risks and low percentage risks. I have NO idea how I got this. Since this is something Loud encounters on a regular basis (not just a random thing), I see the reason for the question. Just my 2 cents....
I know you did not say it was not a risk and I did not mean to imply that. However, the CDC has no clue how many health care workers have Hep C because they are not being tested. Therefore, there is no way to gage how efficient the means of transmission actually is. If they tested every health care worker, especially those of us who worked before the CDC belatedly issued blood and body fluid precautions, they would find many more people with Hep C who are now not counted. No one, and I do mean no one, used gloves or protective equipment until 1987 when the CDC finally issued the guidelines.(Yes, the gloves were used if the patient was to be protected such as in sterile procedures or surgery, but nothing was worn to protect the health care workers. In fact, it was frowned upon by administration.) Most of us health care workers who are infected either still don't know it or we found out about it when our liver enzymes became elevated (30-40 years down the road), and only then if the doctor knew enough to test for it (which many do not). I just think they need to screen everyone at some point so they can get a true gage of the scope of the problem. And then they need to treat them before they develop major problems.
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/diseases/needlestick_injuries.html
"Hepatitis C
Needlestick injuries may also transmit hepatitis C. The risk factors for hepatitis C virus transmission in occupational settings is 1.8% (range 0% to 7%)."
"Hepatitis C
Needlestick injuries may also transmit hepatitis C. The risk factors for hepatitis C virus transmission in occupational settings is 1.8% (range 0% to 7%)."
I didn't say it wasn't a risk. I said it isn't an efficient means of transmission.
"I read some crazy number with respect to needle sticks in a health care setting. 6% or something like that, so that isn't really an efficient way to transmit the virus, either."
Actually, there are many, many health care workers infected every single year from occupational exposure. I have read the numbers but I don't recall the exact numbers right now. However, the risk is very real. If you think about the number of health care workers in the country and the number of years they work, most get needle sticks, eye splashes, and sharps cuts at some time in their career. No matter how careful one is, the needle can slip, the patient can move or jerk, the patient can have projectile bloody vomiting, the blood can spurt, the sharps can be in a place it cannot be seen, etc., etc., etc. The bloodier the area, the sicker the patients, the higher the risk (ICU, ER, transplant unit) the more likely one is to experience an occupational exposure. I am a health care worker. I knew many coworkers who contracted Hepatitis from sharps and needle sticks and blood exposure. I knew two who died of fulminating Hep B, one in the ICU in which In worked ICU. The risk is real.
As far as numbers go (how many people really have Hep C and how they got it), I personally don't think any one really knows. Most people are not being screened and many with Hep C are never diagnosed. The CDC is missing a lot of people with Hep C by not making Hep C a part of routine screening (like Pap smears, mammograms, colonoscopy, etc.) and by not being agreesive about finding those with Hep C and treating them. The CDC is not even making a concerted effort to screen all of those who they know are at risk. I think the numbers would be much higher if they were screening everyone. Makes one wonder why they are not. You don't hear a word about Hep C. It is invisible and the CDC and the governement are mute on it. Personally, I think it is a crime the way they are NOT handling Hep C. They wait until people are symptomatic before anyone tests for it (30 years down the road from infection). For some that is too late and for others they already have liver damage. To me, this is criminal or, at the very least, negligence. (Now I will get off my soap box, LOL, but the way Hep C is not talked about and not screened for really makes me upset.)
Actually, there are many, many health care workers infected every single year from occupational exposure. I have read the numbers but I don't recall the exact numbers right now. However, the risk is very real. If you think about the number of health care workers in the country and the number of years they work, most get needle sticks, eye splashes, and sharps cuts at some time in their career. No matter how careful one is, the needle can slip, the patient can move or jerk, the patient can have projectile bloody vomiting, the blood can spurt, the sharps can be in a place it cannot be seen, etc., etc., etc. The bloodier the area, the sicker the patients, the higher the risk (ICU, ER, transplant unit) the more likely one is to experience an occupational exposure. I am a health care worker. I knew many coworkers who contracted Hepatitis from sharps and needle sticks and blood exposure. I knew two who died of fulminating Hep B, one in the ICU in which In worked ICU. The risk is real.
As far as numbers go (how many people really have Hep C and how they got it), I personally don't think any one really knows. Most people are not being screened and many with Hep C are never diagnosed. The CDC is missing a lot of people with Hep C by not making Hep C a part of routine screening (like Pap smears, mammograms, colonoscopy, etc.) and by not being agreesive about finding those with Hep C and treating them. The CDC is not even making a concerted effort to screen all of those who they know are at risk. I think the numbers would be much higher if they were screening everyone. Makes one wonder why they are not. You don't hear a word about Hep C. It is invisible and the CDC and the governement are mute on it. Personally, I think it is a crime the way they are NOT handling Hep C. They wait until people are symptomatic before anyone tests for it (30 years down the road from infection). For some that is too late and for others they already have liver damage. To me, this is criminal or, at the very least, negligence. (Now I will get off my soap box, LOL, but the way Hep C is not talked about and not screened for really makes me upset.)
I agree.
Many dentist got HCV before they started using gloves and wearing masks routinely.
People need to protect themselves.
Many dentist got HCV before they started using gloves and wearing masks routinely.
People need to protect themselves.
I do agree that the possibility of transmission via a paper cut is possible but I do think it is a low risk. Hep C virus can live outside the body for up to 4 days. Depending on how many people are Hep C positive, and how many of them recieve paper cuts from an object, and how many others are using the same object and also receiving cuts, the possibility is there. The virus on the object could get into the second person via the cut. I still think the risk is relatively low for this type of incident to transmit Hep C. There has to be a person with Hep C who gets a cut and bleeds onto the equipment and then another person has to use that equipment and get a cut and get the virus inside of him/her. It could happen but not as often as in some other circumstances.
I put the paper cuts in the same category as the shared nail clippers and razors, at least those shared with only a couple people or one person. I think the risk is higher if the place is a commercial barber shop or nail parlor simply because there are more people involved (thus more possible Hep C positive users) and the possibility of a cut is higher due to volume. (Anyway, many of the nail places do not practice sanitary guidelines.) The same can be said of dental equipment. If the dental person uses unsanitary practices and reuses the same equipment on more than one person, that is a possible transmission source. I think high volume adds to the risk because the more people using the same piece of equipment, the higher the possibility one of them is infected. I do think tattoos, ear piecings, injections, etc. using contaminated equipment carries an increased risk ( as compared to paper cuts) because the needles do pierce the skin and penetrate into the skin.
I think that if Hep C can be transmitted via cocaine equipment for snorting cocaine, it could be transmitted via cuts, etc.
40% of people do not know how they got Hep C. They got it some where.
I still think the best prevention in a work situation such as described in this thread is to wear protective equipment so no one gets cuts.
I put the paper cuts in the same category as the shared nail clippers and razors, at least those shared with only a couple people or one person. I think the risk is higher if the place is a commercial barber shop or nail parlor simply because there are more people involved (thus more possible Hep C positive users) and the possibility of a cut is higher due to volume. (Anyway, many of the nail places do not practice sanitary guidelines.) The same can be said of dental equipment. If the dental person uses unsanitary practices and reuses the same equipment on more than one person, that is a possible transmission source. I think high volume adds to the risk because the more people using the same piece of equipment, the higher the possibility one of them is infected. I do think tattoos, ear piecings, injections, etc. using contaminated equipment carries an increased risk ( as compared to paper cuts) because the needles do pierce the skin and penetrate into the skin.
I think that if Hep C can be transmitted via cocaine equipment for snorting cocaine, it could be transmitted via cuts, etc.
40% of people do not know how they got Hep C. They got it some where.
I still think the best prevention in a work situation such as described in this thread is to wear protective equipment so no one gets cuts.
I'm really not worried about manicures. If I was, I'd never get one again after the UND report. ;) But I have.
I read some crazy number with respect to needle sticks in a health care setting. 6% or something like that, so that isn't really an efficient way to transmit the virus, either. A needlestick would go into you... A nail file will not.
I read some crazy number with respect to needle sticks in a health care setting. 6% or something like that, so that isn't really an efficient way to transmit the virus, either. A needlestick would go into you... A nail file will not.
Personally, I think there could be a very slight risk. The main difference with tattoos, is you have a needle . Manicurist also go into the quick.
Jet guns spread hcv during vaccinations in the Vietnam era.
But blood from a paper cut? Possible but not very likely.
If anyone is worried they may have been infected, getting tested will reassure them.
Jet guns spread hcv during vaccinations in the Vietnam era.
But blood from a paper cut? Possible but not very likely.
If anyone is worried they may have been infected, getting tested will reassure them.
This is a TOTAL guess...
I get my nails done. If the file catches my skin and causes it to bleed, the blood comes *out*. No blood goes *in*.
Not so with a tattoo. I was tattooed in the early 80s and I can assure you that the tattoo needle goes *in*. And in and in and in. It breaks the skin and digs around in there for extended periods of time. If the ink was contaminated, the needle would be reinfected every time the artist went back to the well for more ink - and deposit it deep into your skin.
I get my nails done. If the file catches my skin and causes it to bleed, the blood comes *out*. No blood goes *in*.
Not so with a tattoo. I was tattooed in the early 80s and I can assure you that the tattoo needle goes *in*. And in and in and in. It breaks the skin and digs around in there for extended periods of time. If the ink was contaminated, the needle would be reinfected every time the artist went back to the well for more ink - and deposit it deep into your skin.
Your question intrigues me. Here is what I found for you:
Formerly called non-A, non-B hepatitis, hepatitis C is transmitted primarily by direct blood contact - via blood transfusion or and contaminated needles. Less common ways are through sexual contact or from mother to child at birth.
The incubation period is five to 10 weeks. Twenty-five percent of the hepatitis C cases are considered acute, while the other 75 percent are considered chronic, which may result in cirrhosis. Note: a person is at greater risk of contracting hepatitis C if they had a blood transfusion prior to 1991, experimented with IV drugs or intranasal cocaine, have been a long-term hemodialysis patient, work in health care, or have been exposed to unsterile equipment used for body piercing, tattooing, manicures/pedicures or acupuncture.
---------------------------------
So honestly, I do understand why you asked, since you said several other people come into contact with the same item.
Alright guys......I have to wonder.....isn't this similar to manicure/pedicure concerns?? A machine gets constant use, gets blood on it from possibly more than one source. Why is there no risk like that if there is for tattoos and mani/pedis?? Take the hypochondriac out of the equation. I still am curious about this question.
Formerly called non-A, non-B hepatitis, hepatitis C is transmitted primarily by direct blood contact - via blood transfusion or and contaminated needles. Less common ways are through sexual contact or from mother to child at birth.
The incubation period is five to 10 weeks. Twenty-five percent of the hepatitis C cases are considered acute, while the other 75 percent are considered chronic, which may result in cirrhosis. Note: a person is at greater risk of contracting hepatitis C if they had a blood transfusion prior to 1991, experimented with IV drugs or intranasal cocaine, have been a long-term hemodialysis patient, work in health care, or have been exposed to unsterile equipment used for body piercing, tattooing, manicures/pedicures or acupuncture.
---------------------------------
So honestly, I do understand why you asked, since you said several other people come into contact with the same item.
Alright guys......I have to wonder.....isn't this similar to manicure/pedicure concerns?? A machine gets constant use, gets blood on it from possibly more than one source. Why is there no risk like that if there is for tattoos and mani/pedis?? Take the hypochondriac out of the equation. I still am curious about this question.
I could be wrong about the time element. I thought it was 6-8 weeks but I may have misinterpreted the data.
"Persons newly infected with HCV typically are either asymptomatic or have a mild clinical illness. HCV RNA can be detected in blood within 1–3 weeks after exposure. The average time from exposure to antibody to HCV (anti-HCV) seroconversion is 8–9 weeks, and anti-HCV can be detected in >97% of persons by 6 months after exposure."
http://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment/2006/hepatitis-c.htm
____________________________________
How soon after exposure to HCV can anti-HCV be detected?
HCV infection can be detected by anti-HCV screening tests (enzyme immunoassay) 4–10 weeks after infection. Anti-HCV can be detected in >97% of persons by 6 months after exposure.
How soon after exposure to HCV can HCV RNA be detected by PCR?
HCV RNA appears in blood and can be detected as early as 2–3 weeks after infection.
http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/hcvfaq.htm#-
Hope that helps.
"Persons newly infected with HCV typically are either asymptomatic or have a mild clinical illness. HCV RNA can be detected in blood within 1–3 weeks after exposure. The average time from exposure to antibody to HCV (anti-HCV) seroconversion is 8–9 weeks, and anti-HCV can be detected in >97% of persons by 6 months after exposure."
http://www.cdc.gov/std/treatment/2006/hepatitis-c.htm
____________________________________
How soon after exposure to HCV can anti-HCV be detected?
HCV infection can be detected by anti-HCV screening tests (enzyme immunoassay) 4–10 weeks after infection. Anti-HCV can be detected in >97% of persons by 6 months after exposure.
How soon after exposure to HCV can HCV RNA be detected by PCR?
HCV RNA appears in blood and can be detected as early as 2–3 weeks after infection.
http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/hcv/hcvfaq.htm#-
Hope that helps.
I will start wearing gloves ASAP, and thank you for your answer.
Although I'd hate to get stormed from people saying that I won't shut up, I have one final question to you:
How come you propose 2 months for a test when all I have heard is for 3-6 months? Is it because of the risk being extremely low...?
Although I'd hate to get stormed from people saying that I won't shut up, I have one final question to you:
How come you propose 2 months for a test when all I have heard is for 3-6 months? Is it because of the risk being extremely low...?
To answer your question, technically you could get Hep C IF (and this is a very big if) all of the circumstances were exactly right to transmit someone's infected blood into your paper cut. However, the probability is extremely, extremely low. Most likely you will never get Hep C via this scenario.
Personally, I think your risk is extremely low, bordering on nonexistant.
However, if you are truly concerned, then you could get tested after about 2 months of lag time. This is your job so you will have to figure out a way to avoid getting exposed (gloves or something) or you will be in this dilemma continually.
Personally, I think your risk is extremely low, bordering on nonexistant.
However, if you are truly concerned, then you could get tested after about 2 months of lag time. This is your job so you will have to figure out a way to avoid getting exposed (gloves or something) or you will be in this dilemma continually.
Rivll, with all due respect, I have been around here for a while and I have seen lots of questions that go even further-as far as I can understand, given that medhelp, even according to the experts signatures, does not serve as a doctor substitute so questions like mine are to be expected: I don't know how risky this could have been and I wouldn't like to bother a doctor with it unless I find out it was actually risky! And if many of you don't have the energy and the patience then i guess you can do something else instead of answering.
Your answer would have made sense if you were informing me of my hypochondria, of which I am aware.
Flcyclist, i know about cyberchondria, i've been there (as i said above, "I have been around here for a while"). Thankfully right now (and generally for the last 1 year) I am not taking part in wasting medical resources any more. But thank you for an interesting article!
Your answer would have made sense if you were informing me of my hypochondria, of which I am aware.
Flcyclist, i know about cyberchondria, i've been there (as i said above, "I have been around here for a while"). Thankfully right now (and generally for the last 1 year) I am not taking part in wasting medical resources any more. But thank you for an interesting article!
Hep C is spread blood to blood.
Get checked if your worried.
That's your answer.
As Rivil mentioned, questions from hypochondriacs or people with OCD, take away our ability to help people dealing with severe illness from hep c and the reality of hep C treatment.
Get checked if your worried.
That's your answer.
As Rivil mentioned, questions from hypochondriacs or people with OCD, take away our ability to help people dealing with severe illness from hep c and the reality of hep C treatment.
Willbb as much as I love your answer, could I ask you to elaborate a little bit on it? why is it "no risk"?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No risk. Really! Seriously!! But be cautious of cyberchondria!
"Hypochondriacs don't harm just themselves; they clog the whole health-care system. Although they account for only about 6% of the patients who visit doctors every year, they tend to burden their physicians with frequent visits that take up inordinate amounts of time. According to one estimate, hypochondria racks up some $20 billion in wasted medical resources in the U.S. alone. And the problem may be getting worse, thanks to the proliferation of medical information on the Internet. "They go on the Web," says Dr. Arthur Barsky, a psychiatrist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, "and learn about new diseases and new presentations of old diseases that they never even knew about before." Doctors have taken to calling this phenomenon cyberchondria."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,490690,00.html#ixzz1hmFPyrr0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No risk. Really! Seriously!! But be cautious of cyberchondria!
"Hypochondriacs don't harm just themselves; they clog the whole health-care system. Although they account for only about 6% of the patients who visit doctors every year, they tend to burden their physicians with frequent visits that take up inordinate amounts of time. According to one estimate, hypochondria racks up some $20 billion in wasted medical resources in the U.S. alone. And the problem may be getting worse, thanks to the proliferation of medical information on the Internet. "They go on the Web," says Dr. Arthur Barsky, a psychiatrist at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, "and learn about new diseases and new presentations of old diseases that they never even knew about before." Doctors have taken to calling this phenomenon cyberchondria."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,490690,00.html#ixzz1hmFPyrr0
People in this forum are fighting for their lives...Sometimes people post with questions that seem to minimize our process of educating and supporting each other. Asking the question once is fine-now you seem to be asking for attention from this forum that I think many of us don't have the energy or patience for. I am sure there is a hypochondria forum you can find support with...Good luck to you.
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.
