POZ Community Forums
Meds, Mind, Body & Benefits => Questions About Treatment & Side Effects => Topic started by: pinkadam on October 09, 2006, 06:29:38 pm
-
Hi Guys
Iam trying to understand the difference between HIV and AIDS.
According to CDC if you T cell goes below 200 then you are considered to be having full blown AIDS.
Upon treatment if your T cells climbs above 200 does it mean you were HIV+ but got no aids ?
Some people here mentioned, they have not had any issues though their Tcells were in single digit. Does AIDS necessaryly cause the complications to every one who has Tcells under 200 or it will only cause complications to people who are unlucky.
When you have T cells less than 200 and when you are on medication , what all the things to watch out for.
My doctor thinks the terminology of HIV and AIDS are very much irrelevent in the current era.
All responses welcomed and thanks ahead for your reply
Tony
-
My doctor thinks the terminology of HIV and AIDS are very much irrelevent in the current era.
well i don't know what to say about that statement BUT the hospital *I* go to classifies AIDS in two stages (summary below) ... Disclaimer: I don't know the *official* answer to your questions. I'm certain other members here do and will chime in.
- Asymptomatic: means the person has HIV and a low CD4 count BUT the person does NOT HAVE opportunistic infections nor adverse conditions typically associated with AIDS e.g. KS, CMV, PCP, wasting, diarrhea, shingles, thrush, etc.
- Symptomatic: means the person has HIV and a low CD4 count AND the person DOES HAVE one or more opportunistic infections and/or adverse conditions typically associated with AIDS e.g. KS, CMV, PCP, wasting, diarrhea, shingles, thrush, etc.
The above I learned by looking through the paperwork copies given to me by my hospital
-
I also wondered about this. My wife and I were discussing this just a little bit ago. Can a person go in and out of AIDS.....Acuired Immuned difficiency Syndrome.....if your CD4 count goes back aboe the threshold for AIDS then one would assume you no longer meet the criteria for AIDS and are simply HIV positive again.....at least, for the time being. I would like an official answer though, as to wether or not a person can go in and out of the AID syndrome. I understand it is a chronic illness, but understanding the complexities is difficult.
-
According to CDC if you T cell goes below 200 then you are considered to be having full blown AIDS.
My doctor thinks the terminology of HIV and AIDS are very much irrelevent in the current era.
Hey Tony,
Technically yes , above 200=hiv, <200 they"call" aids. Mind you, I believe these standards were made before the advent of HAART when treatment was limited at best. I wouldn't dramatize it by saying full blown.
If it helps you psycolligally (sp lol), take your meds faithfully, get your numbers better.... over 1000 cd4's and i'll be calling you robocop !!
Your doc is most assuredly 100% correct the terms are irrelevant in this age.
-
Hello Bizmark33,
As far as I know, no you don't go in and out but that doesnt mean anything, nor is it the final predictor of one's survival. Maybe CDC will change it to over 200 is being in remission?
P.S. Both me and wife are +, she's been going 6 years (no meds) undetectable with latest cd4 @ 1650 !! Even those little buggers agree with me shes hard to live with lol. Forget haart, just be a grump ;D
-
Well, technically AIDS is not on the paper for classification of adult HIV 1 infection:
HIV Infection classification
| Clinical category: |
| CD4 | A (Asymptomatic) | B (Symptomatic) | C (Symptomatic) |
| 500+ (29%+) | A1 | B1 | C1 |
| 200-499 (14-28%) | A2 | B2 | C2 |
| under 200 (13%-) | A3 | B3 | C3 |
The difference between B and C categories is that the B list of symptomatic presentations is short (indeed, some of the things counted in the US wouldn't often be counted in the UK) and the C list = old 1993 list of AIDS-defining conditions. CDC case surveillance includes AIDS, it goes the well-known asymptomatic, symptomatic, AIDS. In the table above, A3, B3 and C1-3 would = AIDS.
Note that the classification is not intended to be a staging system for disease progression like cancer, although it tends to be used that way. People with acute infection could well fall into an A3 (or even B3) class on diagnosis, but would be unlikely to stay there.
- matt
-
Interesting question...this very question was posed to two ID Dr's at a presentation I attended just a month ago..both in practise many years...they both agreed once diagnosed AIDS..it never changed back.....the cd 200 number was mentioned several times and reference was made to having OI's of various types.... I would hope that the chart "newt" posted would be widely adopted.....
.Personally for those who have a real need to know( insurance forms , clinic admittance etc.. ) I always say HIV+...that is it......I never mention AIDS since even Health care workers seem to step back and put on two pairs of gloves if you do so....
Nick
-
My Dr. does not use the word AIDS. Only HIV infection and he uses the classification Matt pointed out. According to my last medical report I was in stage A1.
Years ago, AIDS diagnosis was used to receive certain help from the government. It is no longer used.
-
Hi Tony,
I can share my experiences with you. I was diagnosed in '93 with around 300 tcells, and then they dropped down to 160 within months, and have stayed below 200 mark since '94. Throughout the years I have been mostly asymptomatic. I was ill in 2000, then starting this past year, I have been symptomatic...thrush, cmv, diarrhea, stomach problems (although the gut issues I think have been med related). I have been on meds the whole time, I just never responded very well to them even with great adherence.
I agree with your doctor. Numbers are a guideline to work with, but not the determining factor of your health and well being. Your health consists of your physical, mental and spiritual well being.
Christine
-
AIDS, HIV; Remember ARC????? Blondbeauty's Doc is right. Labels get people all hung up.
This rush to terminology (especially when sale of a newly packaged drug is possible), when we are pretty much just setting arbitrary quantitative borders, is kind of silly.
We have HIV. HIV is AIDS. HIV is also a cancer. That's pretty much how I answer people's questions about it. If they ask a follow-up I usually answer "Yeah, AIDS is just a way of saying having HIV and sicker." The rest is unimportant to me. Kind of reminds me of folks getting all hung up on "undetectable". Sure it's great do have a small VL, but we've all got the same virus.
PS Though I hope Ann won't banish this post to the Off-Topic thread, I've been wondering if your picture isn't that kid who played Dennis the Menace on TV wearing something out of Margaret's closet? :o
-
I enclose my last medical report with the clasification of HIV infection IA. AIDS is no longer used in Spain protocols.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
The same doctor that diagnosed me with Aids also interchanges the wording to Advanced HIV disease, but to the State Health Department it is still classified as AIDS. Once classified as AIDS, the label never changes.
-
Matty the Damned copped a diagnosis of AIDS early in the piece, about 12 months after he tested positive. Candida of the oesophageus was what ensured my seat was upgraded to first class.
But what of it? HIV positive, AIDS, advanced HIV disease are all just labels and don't seem to make much of a difference to my daily life.
MtD
-
Some people asked for a reference...
HIV Classification: CDC and WHO Staging Systems (ATEC) (http://www.aidsetc.org/aetc/aetc?page=cm-105_disease)
- matt
-
Should the "label" be a concern? Because if your MD calls it HIV and NOT AIDS, the feds could get kinda weird about it.
Also, from what I read about "returning" CD-4 cells, they really don't matter squat because they dont have the memory the previous ones had.
I had AIDS Related Dementia when I was diagnosed (02/14/94). The next year I had "decimated" Histoplasmosis. A fungal thing that grows from bird crap that has dried in the field/ground.
I see a Family MD (when I have "normal" problems :D ) who's been great to Jane & I, however she "classifies" me as not having AIDS, but advanced HIV. Her belief is that I'm in no danger of OI's.
Our HIV/AIDS specialist has told me I will always have AIDS because of the illnesses I've had. My CD-4's are >500 and VL's are <50. But, I get sick every year at literally the same time for 4-6 weeks (when Spring hits). Levaquin is the only thing that works to get rid of it.
-
Hey Clarke I'm glad to see someone else with Decimating Histoplasmosis. I've been battling it for over a year and still am unable to control it. So far the only way they've been able to control it is with IV amphotericin B. I should know soon if I have to go back on on IV therapy again. They have me on itraconazole 300 mg twice a day and so far it isn't working due to the Sustiva and Truvada causing it not be be absorbed in my system to gain a high enough rate and my Histo level is on the rise again. It's back up to 51 percent compaired to the 157 percent that put me in the hospital the first time. Hope you aren't having the problems I'm having.
-
Also, from what I read about "returning" CD-4 cells, they really don't matter squat because they dont have the memory the previous ones had.
This is a little bit of an explanation of the state of the new CD4 cells on thebody http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/TreatExp/Current/Q175294.html.
I've never posted a link here so I hope I don't get run :-\