Need a bit of insight

[Angel-Ronnie]

I recently took applied for a policy here in South Africa, now on the application for and the report my Doctor had to give they asked which stage I am on, indicated by stage 1 down to 4, now living positively for 4 years it was the first time that i saw this. I was under the impression that when you are positive there is hiv or aids but not stages. Can any one help me with the understanding of this or were i can find info on this.....PLEASE

[newt]

The WHO clinical staging is explained here

http://www.aidsetc.org/aidsetc?page=cm-105_disease#S7X

Note that the WHO system uses no lab results

The CDC system is eplained here

http://www.aidsetc.org/aidsetc?page=cm-105_disease#S6X << it's the same webpage

This combines lab results plus clinical symptoms. Broadly speaking, the CDC system refines HIV and AIDS into a grid, which means that AIDS = CD4 less than 200 or an AIDS-defining illness at any CD4 count.

Hope this helps, not quite sure if it's what you are after.

- matt

[Angel-Ronnie]

Matt Thank you it is exactly what i am looking for much appreciated.

Ronnie

[Ann]

Hmmm... interesting that this question should come up now. Yesterday I had my head buried in research papers and articles all day long, learning in more depth about WB testing. I came across one article from 2000 which mentioned that someone with counts between 200 and 500 were considered to have ARC - Aids Related Complex. I thought that term went out in the mid-90s, if not earlier. Is it still in use now? Other than that, the article seemed to be pretty much up-to-date for 2000.

Newt?

Ann

[minismom]

I'm glad you asked this, Ronnie.  I never knew there was such a thing as "stages", either. I've heard of HIV-1 and HIV-2.  Not sure what the difference there is, either.

Thanks for the links, Matt.

Ann, so according to your research, the "stages" would be HIV, ARC, then AIDS?  Is all of this just semantics or a short-hand explaination of t-cell ranges?

Mum

[veritas]

Ann,

ARC is outdated. I believe the last time the term was used was back in 2000.This gives a quik review:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS-related_complex

Does seem like a lifetime ago.

Minismom,
Your right, it is semantics, however today it is just HIV and Aids.

v

[Ann]

Ann,

ARC is outdated. I believe the last time the term was used was back in 2000.This gives a quik review:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS-related_complex

Does seem like a lifetime ago.

Thanks V, I thought it went out of usage years before 2000 and was very surprised to see it mentioned in that article. As I said, the rest of the article was up-to-date for its time and that's what made me so surprised.

I've heard of HIV-1 and HIV-2.  Not sure what the difference there is, either.

Ann, so according to your research, the "stages" would be HIV, ARC, then AIDS?  Is all of this just semantics or a short-hand explaination of t-cell ranges?

I believe that's how it went - hiv, arc, aids. As V said, arc is no longer used and yes, it's all pretty much just semantics. I wasn't reading research about stages, I was reading in more depth about WB testing and this just cropped up in the "background" section of an article.

Hiv 1 and hiv 2 are two different strains. Hiv 1 is thought to have originated in chimpanzees while hiv 2 is thought to have originated in sooty mangabeys. While both strains are transmitted in the same ways, hiv 2 seems to be less infectious. Progression in people with hiv 2 is slower than in people with hiv 1, although people with either strain will succumb to the same OIs. Hiv 2 is less successfully treated with PIs than hiv 1. Hiv 1 mutates much more easily than hiv 2 but they both have several sub-types. Hiv 1 is found world-wide and is the most prevalent strain, while hiv 2 is mainly found only in West Africa. To read a very nerdy discussion of some of the differences between hiv 1 and 2, click here

Ann

edited to correct a bit of mis-information.

[aztecan]

... I came across one article from 2000 which mentioned that someone with counts between 200 and 500 were considered to have ARC - Aids Related Complex. I thought that term went out in the mid-90s, if not earlier. Is it still in use now? Other than that, the article seemed to be pretty much up-to-date for 2000.

Newt?

Ann

It is funny you should ask about ARC. I recently saw it in a life insurance application sent to me by AARP. It is one of the four questions they ask when you are trying to buy insurance

Figures the insurance industry is 20 years out of date!

The WHO clinical staging is interesting.

From what I could tell, I would be considered an Asymptomatic Stage 1, even though I have had the bug for more than two decades

Weird.

HUGS,

Mark

[tednlou2]

Man, I was just looking at the illnesses that define the classifications.  So depressing to look at all those things and all the people who've experienced some or many of them. 

It was very interesting, however. 

[Angel-Ronnie]

I must say that i do have a better understanding now that i read about this Matt thank you for your help it was more than enough for me all you guys just Rock with me and the support thank you so much guys.