Hiv Test

[moldy]

The risk per contact (which as mentioned may be greater than 1/2000 in some cases) times the number of contacts = the person's risk, do the math and you'll see that a man who, for example, has unprotected sex with a prostitute about once a week for years racks up quite a risk indeed...

Surely the maths states that if the probability of contracting HIV is 1/2000 per encounter with an HIV+ partner, then, on a level playing field, each time you have unprotected intercourse, it is still 1/2000 probability: i.e. having unprotected sex 2000 times does not mean that you will definitely contract HIV? The probability of rolling a six with one die is 1/6. That does not mean that if you roll it six times, you will certainly throw a six - you might throw six sixes or none at all.

The odds on winning the UK lottery are something like 14,000,000 to 1, yet I'll wager that most of those who find the probability of female to male HIV infection a risk worth taking, also buy lottery tickets. Well, it is all a matter of luck, I suppose - on both counts.

I don't buy in to the arguments of those who rely upon quackery and contorted science to deny that HIV either exists or is the threat it is. The empirical evidence is just too great.

Can you be more specific about the empirical evidence?

Just found this quote taken direct from the packet insert on the Abbotts HIV1 test "E1A testing alone cannot be used to diagnose AIDS, even if the recommended investigation of the reactive specimen suggests a high probablity". Difficult to know what to make of that really? I haven't taken it out of context or anything. Doesn't sound like the thing is too reliable.

[Heng]

The risk per contact (which as mentioned may be greater than 1/2000 in some cases) times the number of contacts = the person's risk, do the math and you'll see that a man who, for example, has unprotected sex with a prostitute about once a week for years racks up quite a risk indeed...

Surely the maths states that if the probability of contracting HIV is 1/2000 per encounter with an HIV+ partner, then, on a level playing field, each time you have unprotected intercourse, it is still 1/2000 probability: i.e. having unprotected sex 2000 times does not mean that you will definitely contract HIV? The probability of rolling a six with one die is 1/6. That does not mean that if you roll it six times, you will certainly throw a six - you might throw six sixes or none at all.

The odds aren't static like a dice roll because the 'die' itself doesn't necessarily remained unchanged. A "roll" with a die with herpes lesions one day effects your "roll" on another day, even if the previous roll was between two non-HIV positive 'die.' One day you might have a roll with open sores, the next time open sores + lesions, the next time with open sores + lesions + bleeding gums, etc. It's potentially not a level playing field roll, especially when considering that there are conditions that are permanent that have the potential to compile with each roll.

[Bird on the Wire]

I quite agree. My point was largely pure rather than applied.

[Dakhar]

Heng, it goes beyond just herpes. If someone has chlamydia, and HIV the ability to transmit is even greater. A lot of women can have chlamydia and be asymtomatic.

It is a sad fact of life, std take the fun out of it. Adult entertainment? The suspense of catching something fatal etc is not worth the suposed fun.

[Dakhar]

Maybe my question is a little bit off-topic, but is it possible to contract HIV if you receive oral sex without a condom?

With intercourse I ALLWAYS use a condom, but not always with oral sex, because as far as I know it is impossible or nearly impossible to contract HIV this way.

Nothing is impossible. They used to think that it was impossible to transmit HIV by sharing food. Just google "HIV baby food."

Your odds are of course good for NOT contracting HIV, so the studies say, but how many studies include folks who get a BBBJ from a Thai prostitute/bargirl 2-3 times a week, year in year out? These are typically gals with poor dental hygiene... which can mean sores and bleeding gums, etc., ...oh, not to mention the 10-90+ sexual partners per month thing.

Not to mention oral transmission of herpes.... no thanks

[Heng]

Heng, it goes beyond just herpes. If someone has chlamydia, and HIV the ability to transmit is even greater. A lot of women can have chlamydia and be asymtomatic.

It is a sad fact of life, std take the fun out of it. Adult entertainment? The suspense of catching something fatal etc is not worth the suposed fun.

Thanks D. I did realize that actually, I was just making an example that is surely quite common to the population.

[moldy]

Is it my imagination or have people lost sight of the fact that you would need to have sex with an HIV positive person in order to be at risk of acquiring the alleged HIV virus.

Assuming this to be the case, and also that the virus is real and transmissable (both quite big assumptions in my opinion), then Sheryl is quite right it's no good hiding behind statistics. averages and means - risk is risk- random is random.

[Heng]

Do you think HIV wards in are hospitals real or imagined? Maybe someone should straighten these folks out and let them know they might not have HIV and are just sick from normally non-issue common colds, normally present-on-skin fungus flare ups over their entire bodies, and are developing pneumonia from walking through foggy weather for some other unknown reason?

Edited February 24, 2008 by Heng

[moldy]

OOOch - just because you got caught up in the same scare mongering without thinking . This is the danger you see, a few stats and facts go awry and suddenly there is a pandemic.

AIDS is real enough and the people who have it (not sure about the wards of people though, can you give an example in Bangkok for me to check out ?) but there are reasonable question marks over the science behind it. In my opinion we have become obsessed with looking for a quick fix, one time solution to something that is far more profound and is multi factoral. This is a toxic phenomenon too for sure. I mean just look at the poor hemophilliacs 20 years ago, according to known science they could not have been infected with the HIV virus full stop (Factor 8 is a powder). Yet they died of AIDS, there must then be more to this syndrome or the science is very wrong. Either way it's right to ask searching questions.

Can anyone with a prof. background point me to an electron microscope photograph of the virus in the human body, or a gradient test at the required density for a retro virus. I've drawn a complete blank ?.

For what it's worth Like Duesburg I think a virus must be involved somewhere along the line, but proof is needed for it to be a scientific certainty.

[Heng]

OOOch - just because you got caught up in the same scare mongering without thinking . This is the danger you see, a few stats and facts go awry and suddenly there is a pandemic.

AIDS is real enough and the people who have it (not sure about the wards of people though, can you give an example in Bangkok for me to check out ?)

Nah, I'm not caught up in anything... I still enjoy the life the way I want to, just with a few precautions, ....I do find it amusing when folks question whether AIDS and HIV have a correlation or whether HIV exists or not.

You can check out kids with AIDS at Bamratnaradura Hospital on Tivanon Rd. (you can call BUG 1113 for the number and directions). You can also find adults with AIDS at Bangrak Hospital on Sathorn (they call the section their VD Hospital, but most of the folks who are admitted are suffering from AIDS complications... there aren't folks staying overnight or longer for standard STD's). Naturally you can't just go through and gawk, you'll need to go in the "guise" of wanting to do donate clothes/adult diapers/etc.... and then you say "I'd like to see who my donations benefit." Sorted.

Of course, it might all be a scam or an elaborate hoax to sell pharmaceuticals.

[moldy]

OOOch - just because you got caught up in the same scare mongering without thinking . This is the danger you see, a few stats and facts go awry and suddenly there is a pandemic.

AIDS is real enough and the people who have it (not sure about the wards of people though, can you give an example in Bangkok for me to check out ?)

Nah, I'm not caught up in anything... I still enjoy the life the way I want to, just with a few precautions, ....I do find it amusing when folks question whether AIDS and HIV have a correlation or whether HIV exists or not.

You can check out kids with AIDS at Bamratnaradura Hospital on Tivanon Rd. (you can call BUG 1113 for the number and directions). You can also find adults with AIDS at Bangrak Hospital on Sathorn (they call the section their VD Hospital, but most of the folks who are admitted are suffering from AIDS complications... there aren't folks staying overnight or longer for standard STD's). Naturally you can't just go through and gawk, you'll need to go in the "guise" of wanting to do donate clothes/adult diapers/etc.... and then you say "I'd like to see who my donations benefit." Sorted.

Of course, it might all be a scam or an elaborate hoax to sell pharmaceuticals.

No AIDS is real enough, and sadly the effects too, but I don't see why you should be so sure about HIV as a virus the way it is stated. Thanks for the info. I'll chase it up and of course I understand what you are saying regarding discretion - I need to be a bit more giving anyway, what better cause. I missed out doing an MA when I was younger, am thinking of doing one now using AIDS as a general subject area.

I've drawn a complete blank on the science you see. and the so called conspiracy sights do a hel_l of a lot better at explaining things. Call me old fashioned, but it would be nice to see a little understandable evidence. Any ideas where I might find this?

[Heng]

I am only as sure as what I take to be common knowledge. I can't say I've delved any deeper that what I've seen on TV or read in textbooks and newspapers. For all I know, polio, cancer and the common cold might be myths as well if I were to require a microscopic examination of the diseases at work as proof.

Can't really help you on the last part, I was never much into science, more of a businessman.

[Sheryl]

Maybe my question is a little bit off-topic, but is it possible to contract HIV if you receive oral sex without a condom?

With intercourse I ALLWAYS use a condom, but not always with oral sex, because as far as I know it is impossible or nearly impossible to contract HIV this way.

It is posisble, but he risk is much less than from intercourse, and only a few cases have been documented.

This is what the US Centers for Disease Control has to say about it:

"There have been a few cases of HIV transmission from performing oral sex on a person infected with HIV. While no one knows exactly what the degree of risk is, evidence suggests that the risk is less than that of unprotected anal or vaginal sex.

If the person performing oral sex has HIV, blood from their mouth may enter the body of the person receiving oral sex through

the lining of the urethra (the opening at the tip of the penis);

the lining of the vagina or cervix;

the lining of the anus; or

directly into the body through small cuts or open sores.

If the person receiving oral sex has HIV, their blood, semen (cum), pre-seminal fluid (pre-cum), or vaginal fluid may contain the virus. Cells lining the mouth of the person performing oral sex may allow HIV to enter their body.

The risk of HIV transmission increases

if the person performing oral sex has cuts or sores around or in their mouth or throat;

if the person receiving oral sex ejaculates in the mouth of the person performing oral sex; or

if the person receiving oral sex has another sexually transmitted disease (STD).

Not having (abstaining from) sex is the most effective way to avoid HIV.

If you choose to perform oral sex, and your partner is male,

use a latex condom on the penis

If you choose to have oral sex, and your partner is female,

use a latex barrier (such as a natural rubber latex sheet, a dental dam or a cut-open condom that makes a square) between your mouth and the vagina. A latex barrier such as a dental dam reduces the risk of blood or vaginal fluids entering your mouth. Plastic food wrap also can be used as a barrier.

If you choose to perform oral sex with either a male or female partner and this sex includes oral contact with your partners anus (analingus or rimming),

use a latex barrier (such as a natural rubber latex sheet, a dental dam or a cut-open condom that makes a square) between your mouth and the anus. Plastic food wrap also can be used as a barrier. "

[Sheryl]

Can anyone with a prof. background point me to an electron microscope photograph of the virus in the human body, or a gradient test at the required density for a retro virus. I've drawn a complete blank ?.

Moldy,

There are many, many such photos, not only of the virus but of it attacking CD4 cells, replicating inside cells etc.

try these for starters:

http://www.avert.org/virus.htm

http://www.avert.org/photos.htm

[SanSaiExPat]

Can anyone tell me what will happen if you do test positive for HIV in Thailand. Does the Hospital and/or the doctors have to report you to the health authorities and more importantly to Immigration and if so will you be asked to leave the country and have your visa revoked? Thanks.

[Sheryl]

Can anyone tell me what will happen if you do test positive for HIV in Thailand. Does the Hospital and/or the doctors have to report you to the health authorities and more importantly to Immigration and if so will you be asked to leave the country and have your visa revoked? Thanks.

None of the above. Results are confidential and cannot be released to anyone but the patient.

in addition, Thai immigration has no policy of deporting persons who are HIV positive AFAIK.

[unlucky1]

If you do not have open pathways to your blood supply, ie. open lesions that would have come into contact with the Thai girls fluids, you are at very slight risk. If you are circumcised, you are even at less risk.

if you washed up right after exposure, your even at less risk. Since it is more than 24 hours since your exposure, immediate treatment is not possible.

Since your head is already into a test now not being completely convincing, you might as well wait until whatever information you believe in regarding the reliability of the HIV test time period has elapsed before testing.

If you washed up after you increased your chances of contracting HIV by more than 500% than if you don't wash up after.

IAS: Penile washing after sex not a substitute for circumcision printer friendly version send to friend glossary comment Michael Carter & David McLay, Wednesday, July 25, 2007 Cleaning the penis after vaginal sex does not protect a man from infection with HIV, according to a study conducted in Rakai, Uganda and presented as a ‘late breaker’ in the circumcision session at the Fourth International AIDS Society Conference in Sydney on July 25^th.

Dr Fredrick Makumbi of Makerere University Institute of Public Health, Uganda, who presented the study, said that his study team had been surprised by this finding given that genital hygiene has long been thought to be protective against sexually transmitted infection. He emphasised that men who washed using soap, or a few minutes after intercourse had the highest risk of infection with HIV.

He speculated that this could be because washing with soap and failure to dry resulted in wetness, increasing the chance of cells becoming inflamed and thus more vulnerable to infection with HIV. Dr Makumbi also suggested that washing soon after sex could remove enzymes in vaginal fluid that help neutralise HIV.

Three randomised controlled trials in Africa have shown that men who are circumcised have a lower risk of becoming infected with HIV. However, circumcision is not universally possible or acceptable, and genital hygiene has been suggested as an alternative.

Therefore, investigators from the large Rakai circumcision trial analysed data from 2,552 uncircumcised, HIV-negative men to establish if post-coital washing helped to protect men against infection with HIV.

Investigators interviewed men about their cleaning habits after they have sex. This was correlated to the incidence of HIV seroconversion during the study.

During a total of 4,378 follow-up interviews, 83.0% of men reported cleaning after each time they had sexual intercourse. The HIV incidence in this group was not significantly different to that in the group who never cleaned, 1.69 per 100 patient years versus 1.22 per 100 patient years, respectively.

When men who cleaned were asked how soon after intercourse they usually cleaned, almost half (49.2%) responded that they clean within three minutes.

In this group of men, HIV incidence was 2.32 per 100 patient years. This was significantly higher than the incidence of 0.39 per 100 patient years among men who waited at least 10 minutes after sex before cleaning. That is to say that waiting 10 minutes before cleaning decreased the HIV incidence to less than 20% of that among men who washed right away.

Differences were also noted in HIV incidence depending on what cleaning method was used. Washing only, reported in 46.9% of interviews, was associated with an incidence of 2.20 per 100 patient years. Using a cloth and washing was used in 40.6% of cases and was associated with an incidence of 1.04 per 100 patient years. And using only a dry cloth, 12.4% of cases, was associated with the lowest incidence, 0.55 per 100 patient years (p = 0.0442).

In conclusion, the authors noted that while cleaning the penis after sex is common in this rural Ugandan population, caution should be taken in promoting it as an alternative to circumcision.

The 1 in 2000 statistic is also a complete joke.

All such studies have been done on monogomous couples once the positive partner has tested positive. Once positive most peoples viral load goes right down.

If you have sex with a recently infected bar girl her viral load is through the roof and she may also have another STD, which again brings the chances down.

If you're not circumcised again the chances come down a bit and you can end up with a figure of 1 in 10.

Commonly Used HIV Infectivity Rate Misses Risks

TUESDAY, Aug. 5 (HealthDay News) — A widely used HIV infectivity rate doesn't take into account multiple risk factors, say U.S. researchers who reviewed published data.

Latest HIV News

The heterosexual infectivity of HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) is often cited as a fixed value of one transmission per 1,000 sexual contacts. However, most studies estimating this value were conducted among stable couples with a low prevalence of risk factors, which can increase the risk of HIV transmission by several to several hundred times, according to Kimberly Powers, of the University of North Carolina, and colleagues.

They reviewed published data on HIV (up to April 2008) in order to estimate the effects of transmission co-factors that can affect the risk of heterosexual HIV transmission.

They found wide variations, with estimates ranging from zero transmissions after more than 100 penile-vaginal contacts in some serodiscordant couples (one partner HIV-positive and one partner HIV-negative), to one transmission for every 3.1 episodes of heterosexual anal intercourse, which is more than 300 times the commonly-cited fixed heterosexual infectivity rate.

Other infectivity differences, expressed as number of transmissions per 1,000 contacts, were:

• 13.2 for uncircumcised susceptible males vs. 5.1 for circumcised males.
  
• 7.5 for susceptible people with genital ulcer disease vs. 1.5 for those without such disease.
  
• 3.2 for early-stage index cases, 2.6 for late stage index cases, and 0.7 for mid-stage index cases.
  

"The use of a single, 'one-size-fits-all' value for the heterosexual infectivity of HIV-1 obscures important differences associated with transmission cofactors. Perhaps more importantly, the particular value of 0001 (i.e., one infection per 1000 contacts between infected and uninfected individuals) that is commonly used seems to represent a lower bound. As such, this value substantially underestimates the infectivity of HIV-1 in many heterosexual contexts ... heterosexual infectivity can exceed 01 (one transmission per 10 contacts) for penile-vaginal contact or even 03 (one transmission per three contacts) for penile-anal contact. Claims in both the popular media and the peer-reviewed literature that HIV is very difficult to transmit heterosexually are dangerous in any context where the possibility of HIV exposure exists," the review authors wrote.

"Improved infectivity estimates — especially more detailed estimates that quantify the amplifying effects of biological cofactors — will help us to grasp the magnitude of the HIV epidemic, accurately communicate the level of risk involved in heterosexual sex, and identify the best possible intervention strategies for slowing the epidemic's spread," they concluded.

"Infectivity studies are very difficult to conduct, and that few studies exist as a result. Many of the studies producing the published estimates suffered from at least one potential bias. Therefore, while our study documents the considerable heterogeneity of the heterosexual infectivity of HIV-1 and provides some explanations for this heterogeneity, considerable uncertainty remains."

The findings were expected to be announced at the International AIDS Conference in Mexico City. The review was published online in The Lancet Infectious Diseases and was expected to be in the September print issue of the journal.

— Robert Preidt

SOURCE: The Lancet Infectious Diseases, news release, Aug. 5, 2008

[jhc]

The thought of HIV is absolutely terrifying, and I am having a hard time going about my daily routine. I read up and understand that the most general testing for HIV is done 3-6 months post exposure. I've also found information of other tests that can give accurate results with a much shorter "window period". Specifically the DNA/PCR HIV test.

My question<finally> do hospitals in Bangkok have HIV tests that I can take within 1-2 weeks post exposure that give deffinitive results? I am willing to pay a premium for an expedient peace of mind<hopefully>. I think waiting 6-12 more weeks would kill me.

Many thanks

Hello,

If I am in your shoes, I won't worry about HIV+. We have all kinds of microbes (i.e. virus, bacteria et al) in our bodies and the key is balance (Homeostasis) which is maintained automatically by our body as long we maintain our healthful living such as eating fresh raw fruits, veggies and greens in it's natural state, exercise, good sleep, sunlight, avoid stress (happy, laughter), relax, avoid toxic chemicals, clean air, clean water et al. Without those microbes, we won't exist.

Yeah, if it was more than 4 years ago I would have freaked out just like you did, but after lot of thinking and making sense, oh boy I was fooled and conned.

The whole medical industry complex (except for emergency treatment for broken bones, wounds etc) is all about money over anyone's health.

One thing I do know is that if I am closest to the nature, then I will be fine. I trust my own brain, my own instincts and Mother Nature, that is it.

AIDS is a collection of diseases that exist for long time and certainly caused by poor healthful living practices and makes it worse by drugs/medicines.

About our natural diet, check "The 80/10/10 Diet" book in Amazon, Google et al

Give it time to think for yourself and make sure you are comfortable with your decisions. Good Luck!

The closer to the nature, the better. That is all it takes!

[Sheryl]

jhc:

The post you are referring to is more than a year old (May 2007) and has nothing to do with the current turn of the thread.

A factually incorrect statement and link to a website filled with same have been deleted because of potential serious harm to readers, the rest of your post left as is.

"We are all entitled to our opinions -- but not to our own facts."

Specific forum rules on this issue this are being formulated and will be posted shortly. It is taking some time because:

1) we wish to respect people's rights to make use of bona fide alternative/complementary systems of medical care (bona fide in terms of relating to an established discipline which, whether or not one happens to believe in it, at least has clear standards and principles of practice, means of credentialing practitioners etc -- not to be confused with quack cures which pop up and disappear daily on the internet and elsewhere)

2) the line between what the "alternative" and the alleopathic is far from clear cut in many cases, and

3) many people do not view this as an either or dichotomy but rather make informed use of what medical science has to offer while also at times using älternative"treatments in a complementary fashion.

The last 2 points make it undesirable to set up separate health forums along allopathic and "alternative" lines, much as that would make my life as Moderator easier.....

But neither can I stand by and let potewntially harmful factual misstatements stand.