Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
Newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr Instagram
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 25, 2014, 11:48:05 PM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
  • Total Members: 23787
  • Latest: rvarona
Stats
  • Total Posts: 643600
  • Total Topics: 48970
  • Online Today: 203
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online
Users: 4
Guests: 138
Total: 142

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Author Topic: Question about superinfection  (Read 14641 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hellraiser

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,136
  • Semi-misanthropic
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #50 on: September 03, 2010, 03:53:01 AM »
And to get back on topic...


"Is the clinical treatment of HIV-2 different from that of HIV-1?

Little is known about the best approach to the clinical treatment and care of patients infected with HIV-2. Given the slower development of immunodeficiency and the limited clinical experience with HIV-2, it is unclear whether antiretroviral therapy significantly slows progression. Not all of the drugs used to treat HIV-1 infection are as effective against HIV-2. In vitro (laboratory) studies suggest that nucleoside analogs are active against HIV-2, though not as active as against HIV-1. Protease inhibitors should be active against HIV-2. However, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) are not active against HIV-2. Whether any potential benefits would outweigh the possible adverse effects of treatment is unknown."

This shocks the hell out of me I had never heard that there was any fundamental difference between the major types of HIV.  You learn something new every day I suppose.

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #51 on: September 04, 2010, 07:47:29 AM »
We were originally a sero similar couple since one was infected by the other in a monogomous relationship.  Due to what started as med issues, I am on my 3rd level of salvage treatment. We are now sero discordant from mutations caused by treatment breaks.  Even if sex were possible anymore, which it isn't thanks to my husbands horrendous prostate cancer surgery, we were warned at our ID clinic  NOT to take the risk  of unprotected sex with each other as the riisk to my husband acquiring new mutations was a real possibility. They have even gone so far as to test him for new mutations just to be sure he hasn't caught any new resistances.

Offline Desertguy

  • Member
  • Posts: 183
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #52 on: September 04, 2010, 09:51:26 AM »
"Why does it have to be 2 Guys bare backing???"

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,229
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #53 on: September 04, 2010, 10:12:55 AM »
Does that concept bother you?  Personally I find it pervy and deviant, and against the teachings of the Good Book.
"Iíve slept with enough men to know that Iím not gay"

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #54 on: September 04, 2010, 10:43:56 AM »
"Why does it have to be 2 Guys bare backing???"
if doesn't have to be. ;) that was just a side chat in the bigger conversation. Of course though, with cases of HIV in America being around 60% m2m, when Americans talk about HIV, you're going to hear alot about 2 guys having sex ;D

However, in the big picture, it seems as if superinfections happen when people (of any gender) with discernable viral loads (and therefore usually not on medications) are having unprotected sex.
leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #55 on: September 04, 2010, 12:53:02 PM »
You have to take note of this weeks reported story that the genotype of HIV in Semen varies from the genotype in blood. there were similar reports 3 years ago  and since  meds are matched to the resistance you have and not all meds  cross the genital barrier, you could be infected by a different strain than what your meds cover just the same as some meds don't cross the brain barrier, but something is bad wrong if you are exchanging brain matter between partners!. that in mind, part of the reason for med cock tails is for broader spectrum of coverage.  People just plain have less issues like this on 3 or 4 meds than with one.  The advise we received came from a very respected research university hospital physician, not the pharmacy in Barbados, by the way. The majority of people in the US seem to have adequate control with the 3 drug cocktails to prevent this from being a large spread problem.

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 28,140
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #56 on: September 04, 2010, 01:02:39 PM »
but something is bad wrong if you are exchanging brain matter between partners!.

What, you've never picked your partner's brain? I do that all the time! ;D

Superinfection really is quite rare. There's only been a handful of cases and I think when doctors drone on about it, it's mainly because they have something against poz people having sex lives and are delighted to have something to scare us with. 

It's certainly not something I worry about and my poz partner and I never use condoms. With each other, anyway. ;)
Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #57 on: September 04, 2010, 01:06:41 PM »
Is what she said:  "no unprotected sex with another HIV+" ?  
That sounds like advice a doctor might give.
Like I said, Our doctor told us, and even took the time put it in writing I might add, that it was a risk and we should carefully consider before unprotected sex whether were really willing to take that risk. His advice was if it happened, it would require med changes and further reduce the number of treatment options. Rubbers still suck, but what do you do? We have 2 friends that have resistant strains of virus. Not all meds work depending on your resistance, so  it is possible to add additional mutations to whatever mutations your strain of virus already has. This is why you hear of pos. people that sero-shop their partners.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2010, 01:08:14 PM by Granny60 »

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #58 on: September 04, 2010, 01:09:50 PM »
Honey, we ladies have made picking our partners brain an art form!

Offline newt

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,885
  • the one and original newt
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #59 on: September 04, 2010, 02:46:48 PM »
Quote
His advice was if it happened, it would require med changes and further reduce the number of treatment options.

Rubbish. This ain't necessarily so. He don't like the idea of skin on skin sex I reckon.

- matt
"The object is to be a well patient, not a good patient"

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #60 on: September 04, 2010, 04:07:42 PM »
Our doctor told us, and even took the time put it in writing I might add, that it was a risk and we should carefully consider before unprotected sex whether were really willing to take that risk. His advice was if it happened, it would require med changes and further reduce the number of treatment options. Rubbers still suck, but what do you do? We have 2 friends that have resistant strains of virus. Not all meds work depending on your resistance, so  it is possible to add additional mutations to whatever mutations your strain of virus already has. This is why you hear of pos. people that sero-shop their partners.
the issue lies in that partners have to actually have enough virus to transmit. Of course, just like with oral sex, the risk is not 0%; however, when both partners are UD to whatever strain of HIV with it's resistance that they have, then the transmission from one currently-treated UD partner to another currently-treated UD partner is virtually nil.

i would imagine doctors don't discuss this matter properly 1) because they are simply against pozzies having sex; or 2) they are so used to the "safe sex" method to slow/stop the virus spread that they don't pay enough attention to the science of UD viral load slowing/stopping virus spread also
leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #61 on: September 04, 2010, 04:30:44 PM »
Of course, just like with oral sex, the risk is not 0%



While I totally agree with the gist of our post, I wish people would stop saying "Oral sex" as though it was one act, with one set of circumstances. Insertive versus receptive fellatio, insertive versus receptive cunnilingus, reflect an ongoing issue with transmission that bleeds freely into the superinfection issue.

As has been pointed out in other threads, the chance of infection drops dramatically when the positive partner's VL is undetectable. When BOTH partners are on HAART, unprotected sex should not be in the least an issue for HIV superinfection. Especially considering how rare -even absolutely elusive - it seems to be even WITH a detectable viral load.

I wish doctors respected their patients enough to be specific, rather than paint with a broad brush everyone with HIV as an infectious threat. I think we could start promoting that change by being at least as careful among one another as we expect our heath professionals to be with us.

Worried wells SCOUR these threads (and in a few notable cases, infiltrate them) to look for ANY HINT that their fears are justified. I wish that someof these forums were locked to anonymous viewing, but I understand why this is so.

In that sense, we are all considered experts when we type, and I hope we are able to take that seriously.

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 28,140
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #62 on: September 04, 2010, 05:01:10 PM »

While I totally agree with the gist of our post, I wish people would stop saying "Oral sex" as though it was one act, with one set of circumstances. Insertive versus receptive fellatio, insertive versus receptive cunnilingus, reflect an ongoing issue with transmission that bleeds freely into the superinfection issue.

Worth repeating again and again and again and again.... this is one of the main problems we have in the Am I forum, this idiotic generalisation of what constitutes a risk. And even when things like "receptive oral" are specified, people still don't get it because they think "I received a blowjob" when it actually means receiving the other person's genitals into your mouth. Why can't we just say "getting your dick sucked is no risk"? Why does it have to be couched in pseudo-scientific language? Call a fucking spade a fucking (or sucking) spade already and cut out the damned ambiguity. Fuck me. It pisses me off no end. 

[/rant]
Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,238
  • Ninja Please
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #63 on: September 04, 2010, 05:50:51 PM »
Worth repeating again and again and again and again.... this is one of the main problems we have in the Am I forum, this idiotic generalisation of what constitutes a risk. And even when things like "receptive oral" are specified, people still don't get it because they think "I received a blowjob" when it actually means receiving the other person's genitals into your mouth. Why can't we just say "getting your dick sucked is no risk"? Why does it have to be couched in pseudo-scientific language? Call a fucking spade a fucking (or sucking) spade already and cut out the damned ambiguity. Fuck me. It pisses me off no end. 

[/rant]

A-FUCKING-MEN!

(In every sense of the word) :)

MtD

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,229
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #64 on: September 04, 2010, 06:56:00 PM »
we still get lonely at times and yes we will part this earth alone.. thats why Jesus is sooo amazing- when no one else is around and even ur loved ones can hurt ur feelings sometimes- Jesus is Always there and would Never hurt you... i pray that the Spirit of the Lord overwhelms you and overcomes you and takes away any bad feelings and any lies from the devil and replaces them with peace and comfort and joy.. Your never alone when you have Jesus- God bless you.
"Iíve slept with enough men to know that Iím not gay"

Online Jeff G

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 12,203
  • How am I doing Beren ?
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #65 on: September 04, 2010, 08:03:55 PM »
I like pie

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #66 on: September 04, 2010, 09:26:45 PM »
just like the straights with UD VL can have sex and get pregnant without passing along any virus, the same "should" hold true for gays. I mean how can an UD VL be passed on (ie reinfection)? ??? 
don't give up hope!  ;D
Hope is a delightful thing! Actually the best chance of a positive mother not  passing HIV onto their newborn is if the mother is on meds, thus reducing the viral load in the bloodstream. There is a second level of protection in that the placenta is somewhat of a barrier itself. Most newborns that get infected usually acquire HIV from breastmilk.  I haven't yet met a man with a placenta up his ass.  something to give thought about.


Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #67 on: September 04, 2010, 09:31:27 PM »
posting in the quote box again. ???

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #68 on: September 04, 2010, 09:34:39 PM »
we still get lonely at times and yes we will part this earth alone.. thats why Jesus is sooo amazing- when no one else is around and even ur loved ones can hurt ur feelings sometimes- Jesus is Always there and would Never hurt you... i pray that the Spirit of the Lord overwhelms you and overcomes you and takes away any bad feelings and any lies from the devil and replaces them with peace and comfort and joy.. Your never alone when you have Jesus- God bless you.

O.k. Where is MissPhilicia?  I do think he has been abducted by an alien being who has stolen his sign in pass word.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,238
  • Ninja Please
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #69 on: September 04, 2010, 09:44:50 PM »
posting in the quote box again. ???

Probably you didn't close your quote tags properly. Edit your message and make sure there's a:

Code: [Select]
[/quote]
after the text you quoted and before your response.

O.k. Where is MissPhilicia?  I do think he has been abducted by an alien being who has stolen his sign in pass word.

I think she's over in Orf Torpic sticking things up her bum. :)

MtD

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #70 on: September 04, 2010, 11:47:17 PM »
Most newborns that get infected usually acquire HIV from breastmilk.  I haven't yet met a man with a placenta up his ass.  something to give thought about.
Most HIV infection of newborns (which technically is very off-topic to the subject of superinfection) comes through the actual birth process or through breastfeeding. sadly the placenta really doesn't help protect babies too much during either of those events

"HIV can cross the placenta during pregnancy, infect the baby during the birth process, and unlike most other STDs, can infect the baby through breastfeeding."
http://www.cdc.gov/std/pregnancy/STDFact-Pregnancy.htm

"Mothers with higher viral loads are more likely to infect their babies. However, no viral load is low enough to be "safe." Infection can occur any time during pregnancy, but usually happens just before or during delivery. The baby is more likely to be infected if the delivery takes a long time. During delivery, the newborn is exposed to the mother's blood. Drinking breast milk from an infected woman can also infect babies

Note: HIV transmission statistics in this fact sheet are from a 2005 publication of the United Nations Joint Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS.) "
http://www.thebody.com/content/art6090.html
Actually the best chance of a positive mother not  passing HIV onto their newborn is if the mother is on meds, thus reducing the viral load in the bloodstream.
more information that having an UD viral load reduces the chance of the virus being spread ;)
leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #71 on: September 05, 2010, 12:25:31 AM »
Most HIV infection of newborns (which technically is very off-topic to the subject of superinfection) comes through the actual birth process or through breastfeeding. sadly the placenta really doesn't help protect babies too much during either of those events

"HIV can cross the placenta during pregnancy, infect the baby during the birth process, and unlike most other STDs, can infect the baby through breastfeeding."
http://www.cdc.gov/std/pregnancy/STDFact-Pregnancy.htm

"Mothers with higher viral loads are more likely to infect their babies. However, no viral load is low enough to be "safe." Infection can occur any time during pregnancy, but usually happens just before or during delivery. The baby is more likely to be infected if the delivery takes a long time. During delivery, the newborn is exposed to the mother's blood. Drinking breast milk from an infected woman can also infect babies


Leatherman, I just read an article tonight about a new Texas state law that took effect Jan 1 that discusses the new change for STD  testing of pregnant mothers. It discussed  not only earlier diagnosis and putting the mother on meds but also that knowing the mother is HIV positive and doing a cesarean reduced the likelyhood of the baby becoming infected. Blood does not cross the placenta. That is how you have a mother of one blood type and a baby of another blood type. When the blood does cross the placenta, it can be toxic to the mother. I know these things. I have given birth several times more than you, of that I am certain. No barrier is 100%. The placenta does give some protection which is not equivelient to no protection.  It also mentioned that the majority of babies in Africa acquire HIV from breast milk and that putting the mother on HIV meds could cut infection rates of babies by 30% or more.  I just went through my stack of magazines I read tonight trying to find the story and didn't find it, but I will link it as soon as I do if I can keep my eyes open that long tonight. I did find that Latoya Johnson mentioned a condensed 3 paragraph version of the same info on page  13 of the  April/ May 2010 POZ print magazine. It is rare that I disagree with you, but I'm afraid you lost this round. And on a side note since I am throwing rocks at your windows,  you may not know/ remember the circumstance,  but thank you for the time you were so nice to my husband.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2010, 12:27:52 AM by Granny60 »

Online tednlou2

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,989
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #72 on: September 05, 2010, 01:10:56 AM »
It's certainly not something I worry about and my poz partner and I never use condoms. With each other, anyway. ;)

Ann likes to swing??   :o

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #73 on: September 05, 2010, 02:09:20 AM »
Ann is off the hook.
"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #74 on: September 05, 2010, 03:24:02 AM »
so do you believe in "superinfection"? Do you think it can happen to any pozzies? Or only those that have a detectable VL? ??? I mean that is what this thread is about. It's not about how newborns can be infected by HIV.

I only pointed out that positive straight people, with UD VL, have been able to successfully NOT spread HIV through unprotected sex to their negative partners - and have even produced HIV- children. If such a thing is possible due to having UD viral loads, that could corroborate HIV+ people (straight or gay DesertGuy ;) ), with UD VL, having unprotected sex with one anyone and NOT causing "superinfection".

Obviously babies, IF the infection was spread to them from their parents, would NOT have a superinfection (though their strain might already have mutations). If you'd really like to talk about newborns being infected perhaps you can start another topic as that has nothing to do with this thread.

Quote
The placenta does give some protection which is not equivelient to no protection.
you obviously misunderstood me. I think we're actually saying the same things. Perhaps if I had worded it so that it meant that the HIV+ male with an UD VL did not pass along the virus to his offspring, you would have understand better what I mean about the straight couples not spreading the virus. I mainly replied because your sexist, and vaguely homophobic, comment of men not having a placenta up their ass kinda got under my skin. ;)

However, I never said the placenta offered no protection, just that it doesn't during delivery (when the majority of newborns are infected HIV) nor afterwards when they are breastfeeding. It only protects the fetus in utero.

When the blood does cross the placenta
fortunately I did show a CDC link that states the opposite of what you wrote. Since the most I know about birthing and placenta has been with puppies (5 litters of cocker spaniels over the years), where the moms have totally grossed me out by eating the placenta :o, I will be happy to read through your links when you provide them. I didn't really think that I needed to know much about birthing, being 48 and gay, and since we were discussing superinfection in this thread; but I do read a lot of non-fiction so I'll be happy to read your links too and see why you're "disagreeing", not with me, but with information from the CDC and UNAIDS that I quoted.

My further reading of this matter (see info at the end of this post) however does show that while the placenta usually does give exceptional protection to the fetus, that HIV can cross through the placenta and the fetus can be infected in utero

We are now sero discordant from mutations caused by treatment breaks.  Even if sex were possible anymore, which it isn't thanks to my husbands horrendous prostate cancer surgery, we were warned at our ID clinic  NOT to take the risk  of unprotected sex with each other as the risk to my husband acquiring new mutations was a real possibility. They have even gone so far as to test him for new mutations just to be sure he hasn't caught any new resistances.
Technically you are not sero-discordant as you both are positive ;) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serodiscordant); however your strains are discordant due to mutations.

However, if you both have UD VL the risk of "superinfecting" one another is virtually nil. In a previous discussion (Re-infection! http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=32981.msg407560#msg407560) about this issue, I researched the topic (as you can see below that I also did with the prenatal/perinatal topic ;) ) and the studies/reports with documented "superinfections" ALL were based on HIV+ people who did NOT have UD VL. They were newly-diagnosed, untreated or non-adherent.

from that other thread (and this article http://www.napwa.org.au/resource/hiv-tests-and-treatments/antiviral-treatments/reinfection-superinfection-with-hiv):
Quote
"We do know that adherence to treatments may impact and provide protection against the possibility of re-infection occurring (e.g. it may be less likely to occur if both HIV positive partners are currently on treatments with a low or undetectable viral load)."
so someone at your ID clinic told you the exact opposite of the NAPWA literature "HIV Tests and Treatments" from aug 2009. I could understand the poz-on-poz sex warning if we were seeing this superinfection phenomomen amongst UD VL pozzies, but so far that is not the case. there's been a lot of poz-on-poz sex in the last 30 yrs ;D and if superinfection was happening to pozzies with UD VL, a whole lot of us here would be dealing with the issue and finding that our meds were failing. That just isn't happening.

For me, that right there is the gist of the matter. If superinfections were happening to anyone except those who were untreated, undiagnosed or non-adherent, then many people would find their meds failing as the secondary infection spread. Of course, those untreated and undiagnosed are usually genotyped at first to work around whatever mutations they picked up when they got infected. But to tell pozzies with UD VL that superinfection is a "real risk" just isn't the truth. Just like some other unprotected sexual acts are a near 0% risk (was that better by being generic? LOL), unprotected poz-on-poz sex between two individuals (it's not always gay bare-backing LOL) is a near 0% risk also.

And on a side note since I am throwing rocks at your windows,  you may not know/ remember the circumstance,  but thank you for the time you were so nice to my husband.
without emoticons, printed words sometimes are hard to interpret, but since you said "throwing rocks at my windows", should I take it that your comment was sarcastic? I have actually wondered if you were related to another member here, so perhaps I do remember speaking with him. ;)




OFF TOPIC information regarding prenatal HIV infection
so I went on by myself to learn about HIV involving prenatal and perinatal situations and the placenta. a google search of "HIV placenta" (or "HIV in utero +placenta") yields plenty of reports that boil down to saying that while most MTCT (mother-to-child transmission) occurs during delivery or through breast feeding, in certain circumstances HIV can cross through the placenta, and some infants are infected in the womb.

I came across a 99 Texas report http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102187800.html that studied early prenatal care (including anti-HIV meds given to the mother prior to delivery and to the baby following delivery) and sadly showed that many of those HIV-infected mothers in Texas were not receiving the proper prenatal care. "In the PSD study population, close to 27% of HIV-infected mothers did not receive prenatal care. The proportion of the general population reporting no prenatal care is much lower (1.6%)."

The CDC has information about perinatal transmission http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/perinatal/resources/factsheets/perinatal.htm.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/perinatal/1test2lives/default.htm
"Approximately 40% of the mothers of HIV-infected infants born in the United States in 2000 were not known to have HIV before delivery. So clearly not all pregnant women are being screened for HIV during pregnancy.

Perinatal transmission accounts for 91% of all AIDS cases among children in the United States. Antiretroviral therapy during pregnancy can reduce the transmission rate to 2% or less. The transmission rate is 25% without treatment."

"Prenatally (in utero): Some babies acquire HIV because the virus crossed the placenta during pregnancy -- this doesn't happen very often, but it can. During pregnancy, the mother's blood supply is connected to the fetal blood supply via the umbilical cord and placenta. The mother and the baby do not share the same blood supply, but sometimes HIV in the mother's blood is able to cross the placenta and infect the baby. The following conditions can increase the risk of transmission during gestation:

Becoming infected with HIV during pregnancy. A person's viral load is very high right after they acquire the virus, and a high viral load increases the transmission risk to the fetus.

Infections of the chorion, amniotic membranes, or reproductive tract. Sexually-transmitted vaginal infections like chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomoniasis can cause a spike in the pregnant woman's viral load, which can in turn increase the risk of transmission to her fetus."

http://i-base.info/guides/pregnancy/in-utero
"Transmission during pregnancy (in utero)
This may happen if the placentais damaged, making it possible for HIV-infected blood from the mother to transfer into the blood circulation of the foetus.


Chorioamnionitis, for example, has been associated with damage to the placenta and increased transmission risk of HIV.

This is thought to happen either via infected cells traveling across the placenta, or by progressive infection of different layers of the placenta until the virus reaches the foetoplacental circulation.

The reason we know that in utero transmission happens is that a proportion of HIV-positive babies tested when they are a few days old already have detectable virus in their blood. The rapid progression of HIV disease in some babies has also made scientists conclude that this happens.

ēHaving a high viral load, AIDS and a low CD4 make in utero transmission more likely.
ēHaving TB (tuberculosis) at the same time also makes it more likely and HIV makes in utero transmission of TB more likely.
ēMalaria also increases the risk of HIV transmission"

http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102197662.html
"Transplacental transmission of HIV is an important route of neonatal infection....Thus, the placenta may serve as a reservoir of HIV infection during pregnancy contributing to transplacental infection of the fetus, and decreased placental hormone production may result in impaired fetal"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17883121
"we examined 51 placentae of HIV positive mothers, prospectively over a one year period and compared the pathology of the cases treated with zidovudine (AZT) or nevirapine (NVP) with untreated cases. We also correlated the placental pathology with the HIV status of the neonates. The maternal to child transmission rate was 4.44%."

http://www.jci.org/articles/view/12094
"Much progress has been made in preventing the transmission of HIV-1 from an infected mother to her infant.....Remarkably, even a single dose of the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor nevirapine, when administered during labor and to an infant shortly after birth, can reduce vertical transmission by 50% (5). With the availability of antiprotease inhibitors used in combination with other antiretrovirals, transmission can be reduced to less than 2%. In spite of these advances, it is estimated that daily 1,600 infants are still being infected with HIV-1 perinatally worldwide (6)."

http://www.jstor.org/pss/30123048
"Both the mRNA and the protein for the HIV receptor (CD4) were present in fetal-derived plcacenta."
leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 28,140
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #75 on: September 05, 2010, 08:11:05 AM »

Ann likes to swing??   :o

I wouldn't call what I (we) do "swinging".


Ann is off the hook.

Ann and her partner just have open minds and are secure in their love for each other. They just don't live in one another's pockets. Thank goodness. Life is good.
Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #76 on: September 05, 2010, 01:43:19 PM »
so do you believe in "superinfection"?  since you said "throwing rocks at my windows", should I take it that your comment was sarcastic?.
Quote

I just feel like when I argue with someone that it is like throwing rocks. Sorry.  don't mean anything bad,  just trying to get the story straight.

Quote
without emoticons, printed words sometimes are hard to interpret, b I have actually wondered if you were related to another member here, so perhaps I do remember speaking with him. ;)
Quote

 Not a member any more, but you were very nice to him at the time.




   
Quote
I came across a 99 Texas report http
Quote

TOO OLD! 1999???



Perinatal transmission accounts for 91% of all AIDS cases among children in the United States. Antiretroviral therapy during pregnancy can reduce the transmission rate to 2% or less. The transmission rate is 25% without treatment."

"Prenatally (in utero): Some babies acquire HIV because the virus crossed the placenta during pregnancy -- this doesn't happen very often, but it can. During pregnancy, the mother's blood supply is connected to the fetal blood supply via the umbilical cord and placenta. The mother and the baby do not share the same blood supply, but sometimes HIV in the mother's blood is able to cross the placenta and infect the baby. The following conditions can increase the risk of transmission during gestation:




This was enough to say it all.

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #77 on: September 05, 2010, 01:51:37 PM »
Technically you are not sero-discordant as you both are positive ;) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serodiscordant); however your strains are discordant due to mutations.

You are correct sir.  and which mutations you have can determine what meds will control the virus. You spent a lot of time on your last post. I hope you didn't have to cancel any dates to do all that.

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,229
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #78 on: September 05, 2010, 04:40:38 PM »
Why do people make forum posts that are literally three times the length of my 21.5" iMac screen?  I mean honestly, nobody is going to read that.  tl;dr x 10
"Iíve slept with enough men to know that Iím not gay"

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,238
  • Ninja Please
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #79 on: September 05, 2010, 04:45:04 PM »
Why do people make forum posts that are literally three times the length of my 21.5" iMac screen?  I mean honestly, nobody is going to read that.  tl;dr x 10


MtD

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #80 on: September 05, 2010, 07:11:10 PM »
Why do people make forum posts that are literally three times the length of my 21.5" iMac screen?  I mean honestly, nobody is going to read that.  tl;dr x 10
hey, it's not my fault that without tons of research noted that someone will nitpick a post to tiny little shreds to find the little ittiest-bittiest bitch to fuss about. Lord knows, there are some mighty bitchy people here that just love to come out of the woodword to nitpick things other people post, so I say it's better to post long and super scientific than give those people one iota with which to fault me. Anyway just earlier JK was fussing about gawkers misconstruing all of our posts here. I laid out a lot of evidence there so no unfortunate passerby would misconstrue anything I posted.

Nor is it my fault that you would choose to discuss a topic with short little one line quips. If you don't want to hold a legitimate conversation, with appropriate references, then I suggest moving back along to one of your endless personal posts about dildoes or Brazilian boys or your frankly off-topic weirdo posts about Jesus  :D. Just think - the more you leave my posts alone, the less I'll have to write in them defending every jot and tittle.

tl;dr
i read about 5 books a week, so anyone that uses an excuse of it's too long so I didn't read it, sounds like either someone that's illiterate or a whiner to me. I would never, in a million yrs, say that someone's post, book, or article was so long that I just didn't bother to read it - and then have the temerity to try to comment on it.

shit! half of my previous post was clearly marked to be links about hiv infections in newborns and not necessary to this topic anyway, so that means you could have have skipped the half that didn't pertain.

Sad, just sad.

But I understand. ;) Neither one of you can ever just pass a thread up without posting - even with you have nothing to say; much less when you have something sarcastic to say. ;) So look like fools and admit that you didn't even read the posts, keep posting your own comments that don't add at all to the discussion, and keep on pounding out all that sarcastic hatefulness.
leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #81 on: September 05, 2010, 07:11:27 PM »
You spent a lot of time on your last post. I hope you didn't have to cancel any dates to do all that.
nope, it took about 30 mins of research to throw that together. Although I haven't needed that info before, now that I'm working with my ASO, their health fair booths, and the state AIDS task force (and now probably need to know more than just the "gay" statistics) maybe that info will come in handy. ;D

TOO OLD! 1999???
i mentioned that because I'm sure that it is because of that study and studies similar to that which led to the new Texas law of which you spoke. They usually don't make up health laws out of the clear blue. In Texas there was obviously a problem with a lack of prenatal care leading to more infected babies (as the '99 study showed) which led to that newer law. How sad that it took a decade to make the changes.

Just because a study is old doesn't always mean that the data is irrelevant. ;) Oh and thank you for reading my post and the research material that I took the time to find, learn about, and post links for you. :-*
leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,229
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #82 on: September 05, 2010, 07:14:21 PM »
If you don't want to hold a legitimate conversation, with appropriate references, then I suggest moving back along to one of your endless personal posts about dildoes or Brazilian boys or your frankly off-topic weirdo posts about Jesus

Well darling, you're obviously reading all of my posts.  And I can't say I blame you -- I'm sure in comparison to the Palmetto dilettantes you are accustomed to I'm a horribly exotic creature.  I'll be sure to insert copious emoticons and corpses from now on.
"Iíve slept with enough men to know that Iím not gay"

Offline Nestor

  • Member
  • Posts: 430
  • What we love, we shall grow to resemble.
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #83 on: September 05, 2010, 07:35:41 PM »
I would never, in a million yrs, say that someone's post, book, or article was so long that I just didn't bother to read it - and then have the temerity to try to comment on it.

shit! half of my previous post was clearly marked to be links about hiv infections in newborns and not necessary to this topic anyway, so that means you could have have skipped the half that didn't pertain.


I don't get it either--I read posts when I'm interested in the topic and skip them when I'm not, regardless of length.  People interested in pre-natal transmission of HIV will read your long contribution to that question and appreciate it.  Those not interested in the question would probably not have read it even if it had been three sentences.  But why come in just to say you haven't read something? 


Summer 2004--became HIV+
Dec. 2005--found out

Date          CD4    %       VL
Jan. '06    725    25      9,097
Nov. '06    671    34     52,202
Apr. '07    553    30      24,270
Sept. '07  685    27       4,849
Jan. '08    825    29       4,749
Mar. '08    751    30     16,026
Aug. '08    653    30       3,108
Oct. '08     819    28     10,046
Jan '09      547    31     13,000
May '09     645   25        6,478
Aug. '09    688   30      19,571
Nov. '09     641    27       9,598
Feb. '10     638    27       4,480
May '10      687      9    799,000 (CMV)
July '10      600     21      31,000
Nov '10      682     24     15,000
June '11     563    23     210,000 (blasto)
July  '11      530    22      39,000
Aug '11      677     22      21,000
Sept. '12    747     15      14,000

Offline leatherman

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,273
  • Google and HIV meds are Your Friends
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #84 on: September 05, 2010, 08:01:32 PM »
I'm sure in comparison to the Palmetto dilettantes you are accustomed to I'm a horribly exotic creature.
Hardly. :D after 25 yrs amongst the Buckeyes and visiting around in all those nearby Yankee states, people in SC are actually much more exotic right now. Besides, quite frankly, as Leatherman, there's not much that I haven't already seen or done myself.  ;)

I'll be sure to insert copious emoticons
that'll be the day, says mIkIe the king of emoticons. ROFL  :D At least then others would have understood that your Jesus-related post was meant as sarcasm if you had added this --> ::)

leatherman (aka mIkIE)


chart from 1992-2013; updated 2/09/13  Reyataz/Norvir/Truvada

Granny60

  • Guest
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #85 on: September 05, 2010, 08:23:12 PM »
nope, it took about 30 mins of research to throw that together.  In Texas there was obviously a problem with a lack of prenatal care leading to more infected babies (as the '99 study showed) which led to that newer law. How sad that it took a decade to make the changes.

Just because a study is old doesn't always mean that the data is irrelevant. ;) Oh and thank you for reading my post and the research material that I took the time to find, learn about, and post links for you. :-*

 It always amazes me how fast you can find info Mickey. Some nights I can spend hours finding something. Some days I get well more than I desire. And I do appreciate how you try to back up what you have to say and your willingness to learn more. I like to look at these forums as an educational tool and a place where we can bullshit without being judged, so it is a little hard when people want to pick ans bitch threads to hell and back; The main reason why my husband will never be back here and the "benefactor" locked POZ out of the computer access for the "peoples " that didn't have a computer..  It is is sure a lot better than even just a few years ago when the only place we could get information on the "topic" was to go to a medical university textbook store and buy EXPENSIVE books.  Trying to delve through all that medical jargon in a brain fog was the pits, how quick some of that information became outdated. I just pitched all the books except Cornell Universities 2008 Hiv handbook.

Offline eric48

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,192
  • @HIVPharmaCure & tinyurl.com/HIVPharmaCure
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #86 on: September 05, 2010, 08:32:07 PM »
back to the OT, (I am interested in the topic itself)

I ALWAYS use condoms ( a 25 years - 100 % adherence to this policy that had one and only one YET DRAMATIC exception - I've learned my lesson !)

I ALWAYS use condoms because I feared getting the nasty virus and I would hate infecting anyone , and, I am married.

I am 100 % GAY and that is fine with me

I am happily married to the only person I truly care about

unexpectedly she is a SHE (and that does not make me BI - please...)
I have engaged in this unnatural sex inclusive relationship because I could (only with her, though) and she liked it. I did not really liked IT, I like HER (how romantic, isn't it?)
We 've aged. got nice kids, nice house, nice job, nice $$ , what have you.
Love , true love, but ... no sex ... I am quite younger than her. She does not mind not having sex. I DO

I am craving for good ol'(gay) sex. I would consider a semi-exclusive relationship, but, what guy would like to be in a relationship with a married guy (no intention to divorce)

Now that I am no more at risk to get the NASTY ONE and under meds and hopefully soon UD not at risk of spreading, I am always questioning myself

I see people in Gay clubs freely having the kind of sex I like, I get invited to it. I see all these guys having fun BARE

They really enjoy. I just watch or participate with rubber (cuts the pleasure, I must admit)

Sometimes, I feel I would be more 'accepted' if I'd be more 'free' (bare)

Casual sex is my most likely option (I have no free time for dual life - I once had, though, BF + WIFE, could have worked out for me but they HATED each other so much, still do)

Is it OK to engage in casual bare sex now that I pay my dues to what was once the horror of our fate twice-daily ?

I'm lost...

Eric
NVP/ABC/3TC/... UD; CD4 > 1000; CD4/CD8 ~ 2.0   safety stock : 3 months (2013: FOTO= 5d. ON 2d. OFF)

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,238
  • Ninja Please
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #87 on: September 05, 2010, 08:36:15 PM »
back to the OT, (I am interested in the topic itself)

I ALWAYS use condoms ( a 25 years - 100 % adherence to this policy that had one and only one YET DRAMATIC exception - I've learned my lesson !)

I ALWAYS use condoms because I feared getting the nasty virus and I would hate infecting anyone , and, I am married.

I am 100 % GAY and that is fine with me

I am happily married to the only person I truly care about

unexpectedly she is a SHE (and that does not make me BI - please...)
I have engaged in this unnatural sex inclusive relationship because I could (only with her, though) and she liked it. I did not really liked IT, I like HER (how romantic, isn't it?)
We 've aged. got nice kids, nice house, nice job, nice $$ , what have you.
Love , true love, but ... no sex ... I am quite younger than her. She does not mind not having sex. I DO

I am craving for good ol'(gay) sex. I would consider a semi-exclusive relationship, but, what guy would like to be in a relationship with a married guy (no intention to divorce)

Now that I am no more at risk to get the NASTY ONE and under meds and hopefully soon UD not at risk of spreading, I am always questioning myself

I see people in Gay clubs freely having the kind of sex I like, I get invited to it. I see all these guys having fun BARE

They really enjoy. I just watch or participate with rubber (cuts the pleasure, I must admit)

Sometimes, I feel I would be more 'accepted' if I'd be more 'free' (bare)

Casual sex is my most likely option (I have no free time for dual life - I once had, though, BF + WIFE, could have worked out for me but they HATED each other so much, still do)

Is it OK to engage in casual bare sex now that I pay my dues to what was once the horror of our fate twice-daily ?

I'm lost...

Eric


So you're a gay guy married to a woman and you're wondering if after 25 years of almost total adherence to safe sex you've now earned sufficient decency points to start fucking anonymous tricks bare?

Is that it?

MtD

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,229
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #88 on: September 05, 2010, 08:41:07 PM »
I don't understand eric's post.
"Iíve slept with enough men to know that Iím not gay"

Offline eric48

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,192
  • @HIVPharmaCure & tinyurl.com/HIVPharmaCure
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #89 on: September 05, 2010, 09:03:50 PM »
... earned sufficient decency points to start fucking anonymous tricks bare?

most times TOP but when the opposite is wished, then it is compulsive.

so you are right (start fucking anonymous tricks bare) but you may look at it both ways

Eric
NVP/ABC/3TC/... UD; CD4 > 1000; CD4/CD8 ~ 2.0   safety stock : 3 months (2013: FOTO= 5d. ON 2d. OFF)

Offline TonyDewitt

  • member
  • Member
  • Posts: 49
Re: Question about superinfection
« Reply #90 on: December 30, 2011, 04:56:05 PM »
This is the wildest post I could have ever imagined reading; as with everything in life, I am seeing that more extreme situations and people exist than I could have readily imagined. Add HIV to the mix, and it's just mind blowing. Leatherman - 5 books a day? I mean, I sensed that you were very intelligent, but at this point, why the heck aren't you on Jeopardy?

Happy New Year!


 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.