Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 22, 2014, 06:53:21 AM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
  • Total Members: 23515
  • Latest: Sevans
Stats
  • Total Posts: 639729
  • Total Topics: 48560
  • Online Today: 179
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online
Users: 3
Guests: 136
Total: 139

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: New undetectable threshold  (Read 1946 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,540
New undetectable threshold
« on: October 22, 2010, 06:33:28 AM »
I was mildly concerned before seeing my doctor because I went from being undetectable to having a VL of 30.  It was considered to be undetectable if the vl was less than 48.  They can now test accurately to a vl of 20.  Perhaps some day, we might be able to get this to zero?  I guess this was a fairly new development since I had not heard about it.

Have a great day everybody.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2010, 06:39:30 AM by wolfter »
Complacency is the enemy.  ;)  Challenge yourself daily for maximum  return on investment.

Offline metekrop

  • Member
  • Posts: 354
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #1 on: October 22, 2010, 07:37:44 AM »
Zero VL = negative ve HIV test = cure for HIV.  ..........Ha, Ha, Ha...
Diag on Dec 8, 2000, CD 440 VL 44K, No Meds
Dec/08 - Feb/09 CD< 50 & VL >500k hosp'z.
St. Atripla - July/09 CD 179, VL 197k
Oct/09 CD 300 VL UD Chol 267
Mar/10 CD 468 UD, Ch 220
Aug/10 CD 460 UD, Ch 195
Dec/10 CD 492 UD, Ch 172
Mar/11 CD 636 UD, Ch 201
Aug/11 CD 530 UD, Ch 98
Jan/12 cd 616 UD, ch 189
Jul/12 CD 640 UD, Ch ?
Dec/12 CD 669 Ud, Ch 125
May/7 CD711 Ud, Ch?
Nov/ 22 663 UD, Ch,
April 17 CD 797, UD

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2010, 07:44:13 AM »
Zero VL = negative ve HIV test = cure for HIV.  ..........Ha, Ha, Ha...

Not true -- zero VL, means no circulating virus detected at the time the blood was drawn.  You'd still have antibodies, would still be positive and would certainly not have been cured.

I guess I'm not surprised that the routine VL testing is going to get more and more sensitive over time.  Technology gets better and cheaper.  Of course the important thing to note is that a VL of 30 and VL of <48, are essentially the same.

Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #3 on: October 22, 2010, 08:20:10 AM »
I should have known better.

Muchos apologis to the OP.

MtD
« Last Edit: October 22, 2010, 11:01:07 AM by Matty the Damned »

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 28,140
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #4 on: October 22, 2010, 10:43:33 AM »
Matty, a thread like this isn't really the time or place for humour. I'd greatly appreciated it if you'd save your wit for the Off Topic forum.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ann
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 Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,706
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #5 on: October 22, 2010, 10:45:32 AM »
Matty, you're absolutely right. This thread is NOT about you.

So let's get back on track here and confine responses to those which are responsive to this very legitimate question and concern.

Andy Velez

Offline skeebo1969

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,705
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2010, 11:00:17 AM »



  There's not really much of a difference here, is there?  When I had my first labs done at the ASO in Miami back in 2005 I believe the undetectable range started at <500.  Is there really that much of a difference between that measure as compared to these new sensitive tests that have an undetectable range beginning at say <30?

  And if a patient bounced under and over <30 it wouldn't necessarily be a sign of resistance, would it?
I despise the song Love is in the Air, you should too.

Offline newt

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,885
  • the one and original newt
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2010, 02:11:59 PM »
The important threshold for viral load tests is around 50. At less than 50 copies/mL of blood the virus is asleep. Showing lower than this eg 40, 32, 2 is not yet shown to have any benefit.

Also, consistently having a viral load of less than 50 has been shown to prevent resistance.

50 is the cut-off treatment aims to achieve, not undetectable, which just means you have less than the test in question can detect.

Some research into whether having a blood viral load consistently lower than 50 is of benefit is ongoing, but the topic is not being investigated by a huge amount of people.

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

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,540
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2010, 10:27:28 PM »
Did I miss something since I posted?  Oh my, must be dense cause I didn't get it.  But anyways, just the idea that they're continuely working on better testing which means additional research is being conducted with positive results  (albeit small advances), is exciting.
Complacency is the enemy.  ;)  Challenge yourself daily for maximum  return on investment.

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 28,140
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: New undetectable threshold
« Reply #9 on: October 23, 2010, 10:49:51 AM »
Did I miss something since I posted?  Oh my, must be dense cause I didn't get it.

You didn't miss much, just Matty making a bit of an off topic, thread hijack type post. He meant no harm and was only joking, but he was told off about it nonetheless as it was inappropriate. He edited his post and apologised.

I think it's amazing how low they can go now with the VL tests. I remember when I was first diagnosed the cut-off was 500 and there are some here who remember an even higher cut-off. It will be interesting to see if they make it to zero, as you mentioned in your first post.
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

 


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.