Deep bleeding wound and contact with positive guy

[Mikem3]

Hi,

Is it possible to have transmission while I had quite deep cut from sharp objects with massive peeled skin and hand covered by blood, if positive guy touch me this wound? He had no massive injure as me, but some minor blood drops possible to touch my damaged skin.

Could you also let me know, why Poz team state that it's not possible to transmit HIV by bloud in other way than injection drugs equipment or needless?
There are well known pages which inform about risk by fighting or bitting with infected person.
And even CDC whom suspect few cases by casual contact.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00030972.htm

I never found any medical study on them, but I don't think that they would to lie, especially CDC.
Could you explain that?

[Jim Allen]

I've seen this speculative publication before, we don't work with speculations anymore and, sure your reading a publication from 1994 regarding guess work done in 1990-1992/3, that is long gone and dismissed today. It at the time ultimately found nothing/no route and is irrelevant.

A lot of this early stuff, like the "toothbrush" possibility in your dated reference and, claims is what still feeds the greatest myths & stigma faced today whilst anyone serious about the topic has long since dismissed it.

https://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=68627.0
https://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=64850.msg

Science since 1990 - 1994 has long moved on and with that there are no day to day contact cases, difference is we now understand why any silly claims are just that and, they are challenged and investigated better instead of being accepted at face value.

Why the CDC holds onto outdated "opinion" papers instead of archiving it, i don't know.  It been speculated about before until the cows come home why the CDC contradict themselves all the time and, in the past liked to publish unscientific works, it did their reputation no good in the HIV communities back than and it still does not.

Next you will be asking me about the famous brothers from the late 1980's who magically gave each-other HIV and the CDC looked into in 1991. I don't fucking think so BTW, and such claims would be laughed at today.

Were not impressed. Anyhow if it concerns you why they hold onto 1990 - 1994 opinions ask them.  The rest of us have long moved on, its 2018 

Jim

[Jim Allen]

Sorry missed this question.

Is it possible to have transmission while I had quite deep cut from sharp objects with massive peeled skin and hand covered by blood, if positive guy touch me this wound? He had no massive injure as me, but some minor blood drops possible to touch my damaged skin.

No.

As said the early 1990's is long past and thankfully now 2018 we know better about how HIV is transmitted and don't have to speculate, about "toothbrushes". Instead cases are investigated with modern science, understanding of HIV transmission mechanics and the environmental needs.

Despite scrapes, cuts and boo boo's there has never been a documented or traced day to day contact transmission. What you are describing is day to day, nowadays we understand far better why that is and  speculation is just that, empty speculation.

HIV is far to fragile to remain infectious exposed in small blood volumes as once it is exposed outside the human body to the environment, small changes in temperature, pH / moisture levels next to exposure to AIR damage the outer receptors that the virus uses to infect human cells and thus renders it unable to infect.

For the cuts/wounds to even be in the slightest possible, it would require both of you to have deep open cuts that are actively bleeding such as from a knife wound and than rub them into each-other. This would not be "day to day" contact anymore and neither of you needed the ER from this incident? Than move on with your life.

See we now know also understand that biologically, four conditions need to be present for transmission to occur: The virus must be present in an infectious body fluid from the HIV positive person, it must be present at sufficient high levels to cause infection. There must be an effective route of transmission, and it must reach susceptible cells in another person.

My advice is to stop reading works"opinions" from 1990-1994

Jim

[Mikem3]

Thanks Jim,
Your answer is very useful.
I don't wanna be rude but I will give you finally two other links, with more recent info than this CDC before.

http://www.aidsmap.com/Fighting/page/1322755/
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hiv.12625

From your answer, I understand that these cases should be also not valid? Or there are some other conditions, that situation described by me at the beginning?
This is just a conflict in my mind, and I hope that you can give some peace!

 Please feel free to delete these links from my message when you answer it (It depends on you).

Thanks in advance, I am not going to take more your time, but hope that this answer will also help others.

[Jim Allen]

Same again, some of it using reports from 1986/87, overall slightly different mix as some is correct, however its lacks real world context, some of it is just stories rather than fact.

Example, lets take the very rare bite cases they use as reference and give it some context. Biting is not a HIV concern, I stand by this statement.

Now lets look at two cases that there is suspected and, plausible that it actually occurred during biting. The context is it was during a seizure whereby an a first-aid responded was bitten (Had a chunk of flesh removed) whilst trying to preform a medical procedure

Does this mean someone posting about a love bite or nibbling on a nipple here has a HIV risk? - No, of course not and we understand the biology behind it, Saliva is hostile towards corroding the receptors needed to infect on HIV and the quantity to infect and route needed as we know the mouth lacks the cells to infect are lacking and so we also understand why the 2 very rare cases are very different than day to day bites and nibbles, so it confirms the rule rather than undermine it that, biting is not a risk.

I hope that gives you some context, trust me I've read it all before there are no day to day contact cases.  The instances under medical professionals or medical situations etc that are highly rare are,  well known, very different circumstances than day to day life and confirm the rule its not a risk.

As for the speculative reports & publications that are not based on facts but are conclusions based in part on what people claim like "Married never cheated ended up with AIDS" stories, well ... its a nice story rather than based on scientific or biological fact, and we don't deal with stories here, our assessments are based on facts and stories are nothing new to us or the HIV community either and this is well documented. **

Science has simply moved on from taking anecdotal stories a facts, they are just stories,otherwise I would have to warn people of ET given them HIV with his glow finger, trust me people have equally claimed it, just nobody is buying it. Unfortunately not all resources are equally well read or careful.

Now there are also many reasons why someone would rather not admit to an exposure or the full truth. Sadly being newly diagnosed is difficult enough time on its own, for some it is a time of struggling with deep fear of HIV stigma, social judgment & self stigma but also  things like sexuality, religion, family, sexual relationships etc etc come into play as well and for others even legal fears.

Truth is there is allot of misinformation and stories on the internet and lots of opinions or outdated data that get passed around as facts, We however rely on the latest scientific peer reviewed science for our assessments. This also gets fed back into the poz pages on transmission risks if needed and great effort is put into ensuring the message is clear. 

Despite scrapes, cuts and boo boo's there has never been a documented or traced day to day contact transmission. What you are describing is day to day, nowadays we understand far better why that is and early speculation was just that, empty speculation.

HIV is far to fragile to remain infectious exposed in small blood volumes as once it is exposed outside the human body to the environment, small changes in temperature, pH / moisture levels next to exposure to AIR damage the outer receptors that the virus uses to infect human cells and thus renders it unable to infect.

For the cuts/wounds to even be in the slightest possible, it would require both of you to have deep open cuts that are actively bleeding such as from a knife wound and than rub them into each-other. This would not be "day to day" contact anymore and neither of you needed the ER from this incident? Than move on with your life.

See we now know also understand that biologically, four conditions need to be present for transmission to occur: The virus must be present in an infectious body fluid from the HIV positive person, it must be present at sufficient high levels to cause infection. There must be an effective route of transmission, and it must reach susceptible cells in another person.

Nothing you have linked here tonight is new to us, we have read stories about flying pigs before & the 40 year old virgins so to speak it simply changes nothing about the facts regarding HIV, your case or overall that day to day contact is no risk, and so I stand by my risk assessment for you.

Here's what you need to know in order to avoid hiv infection:
Use condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, correctly and consistently, every time, no exceptions.

Keep in mind that some sexual practices which may be described as ‘safe’ in terms of HIV transmission might still pose a risk for transmission of other STI's, so please do get fully tested regularly and at least yearly for all STI's including but not limited to HIV and test more frequently if unprotected intercourse occurs

Also note that it is possible to have an STI and show no signs or symptoms and the only way of knowing is by testing.

More information on HIV Basics, PEP, TaSP and Transmission can be found through the links in my signature to our POZ pages, this includes information on HIV Testing

Kind regards

Jim

Please Note.
As a member of the AM I Infected Forum you are required to only post in this one thread no matter how long between visits or the subject matter. You can find this thread by going to your profile and selecting show own post and it will take you here . It helps us to help you when you keep all your thoughts or questions in one thread and it helps other readers to follow the discussion. Any additional threads will be deleted.

Stories **


2018
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0032885517753163

Underreporting in HIV-Related High-Risk Behaviors: Comparing the Results of Multiple Data Collection Methods in a Behavioral Survey of Prisoners in Iran

Participants reported more sexual contact in prison for their friends than they did for themselves. In men, NSU provided lower estimates than direct questioning, whereas in women NSU estimates were higher. Different data collection methods provide different estimates and collectively offer a more comprehensive picture of HIV-related risk behaviors in prisons.


2018
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5268760/

Socially desirability response bias and other factors that may influence self-reports of substance use and HIV risk behaviors: A qualitative study of drug users in Vietnam

The accuracy of self-report data may be marred by a range of cognitive and motivational biases, including social desirability response bias

2018
http://emj.bmj.com/content/35/1/46
Self-perceived risk of STIs in a population-based study of Scandinavian women

Subjective perception of risk for STI was associated with women’s current risk-taking behaviours, indicating women generally are able to assess their risks for STIs. However, a considerable proportion of women with multiple new partners in the last 6 months and no condom use still considered themselves at no/low risk for STI.

2017
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28509997

Social Desirability Bias and Prevalence of Sexual HIV Risk Behaviors Among People Who Use Drugs in Baltimore, Maryland: Implications for Identifying Individuals Prone to Underreporting Sexual Risk Behaviors.

2017 --In regards to STI's
https://journals.lww.com/stdjournal/toc/2017/07000
Sexually Transmitted Diseases: July 2017 - Volume 44 - Issue 7 - p 390–392

Is Patient-Reported Exposure a Reliable Indicator for Anogenital Gonorrhea and Chlamydia Screening in Young Black Men Who Have Sex With Men?

Among 485 young black men who have sex with men recruited in Jackson, MS, 90-day anal sexual exposure significantly predicted rectal infection, but 19.4% of rectal infections would have been missed among men denying receptive anal sex. Reports of consistent condom use were associated with lower infection rates only in men reporting insertive anal sex.

2009
The Validity of Teens’ and Young Adults’ Self-reported Condom Use
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/articlepdf/380711/poa80067_61_64.pdf

A significant degree of discordance between self-reports of consistent condom use and YcPCR positivity was observed. Several rival explanations for the observed discordance exist, including (1) teens and young adults inaccurately reported condom use; (2) teens and young adults used condoms consistently but
used them incorrectly, resulting in user error; and (3) teens and young adults responded with socially desirable answers

BMC Public Health 2007
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-7-60

Analyses of data from the Demographic and Health Surveys, Sexual Behaviour Surveys and from other countries show a similar pattern indicating under-reporting
It is probable that as HIV campaigns encouraging delayed sexual debut and abstinence before marriage reach the population, people will report behaviour
assumed to be more socially desirable.

there are some signs of differential reporting bias in our study. We found that controlling for less risky sexual behaviour substantially reduced the association between HIV and survey time among urban men, but less so among women; this may suggest that self-reports from men about sexual behaviour are more reliable. Studies suggest that respondents, especially women, tend to under-report the number of lifetime sexual partners . Therefore, analyses of associations with, and changes in, self-reported sexual behaviour should be interpreted with caution.

2010
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2957626/

Self-presentation bias (wishing to be viewed in a positive light) may result in patients underreporting behaviors they perceive to be stigmatizing

Approximately a third of the men in the sample reported that they did not disclose all of their risk behaviors to the HIV counselor during the face-to-face risk assessment. These results echo similar studies of risk disclosure to medical providers

[Mikem3]

In net are also many pages, where answer is no risk and end of the topic. Or if someone ask why no risk, the answer is almost always the same (no such cases where confirmed). This of course helps to estimate which activities could be risky, but people are sometimes very curious and thats often the reason why people asks similar questions many times. 

For example, I never found the simple explanation why anal fingering using finger with fresh cut and blood is considered so often as no risk, and anal sex is always very high risk. What is biological difference, when blood probably contain even more virus particles than semen.

Or why this is impossible if someone's positive blood from runny nose cover open fresh wound? Is it the only reason that virus will die in the hundred part of second when it contact fresh air or something more?

There is always statement that hiv outside body die immediately. But, if wound is open and covered by blood at the top, does the virus live there or this is also out of the body?

I see that here is only one place in web where people get some extended answers. We all live in the world where hiv is real problem, and will not be solved soon. So often when someone ask for more details, he get the answer that you are OCD. But this OCD can be generated just due to this mess in web where many people even doctors etc. Share some stupid answers.

You do a great job here, I promise that this is last my question here, but some comments from your site to my curiosity will be pleasant.

Have a fine day.

[Jim Allen]

OCD people and no offence intended, my sister is one of them. will over focus on "what if's" instead of asking themselves "Am i really going to be the worlds first?"
 "Is this realistic"

Focusing on stuff that is irrational/irreverent or at least without real world context in my experience is often from people who tend to miss the obvious and actually real risks. 

Plenty of examples of people shagging half the block without a concern in the world, no condom in sight and than despite this real world risk and, it being the leading transmission route than panicking & freaking put about getting their hair cut or because someone sneezed  Its irrational fears and thoughts, little point in entertaining it.

As for the finger question considering the conditions needed as explained before including quantity, are you in the habit of cutting peoples fingers off before having them finger you? I presume not, so put it behind you.( No pun intended )

As you put it, people often ask the same questions, the answer remains the same. This is for good reason, its simply not a real risk There is little point drilling down into every "what if'" as it will not reassure people who should focus on "what is" and I've humored a few of the "what ifs" for you and given you some real world context & perspective on them.

I've explained the mechanics of HIV infection and the biological needs/barriers that mean day to day contact is not a concern.

You do a great job here

You're welcome, read the below back again and, stop reading misguided stories and mistaking them as fact and, stay away from speculation published in the 1980's/90's, its 2018.

Jim

Despite scrapes, cuts and boo boo's there has never been a documented or traced day to day contact transmission. What you are describing is day to day, nowadays we understand far better why that is and early speculation was just that, empty speculation.

HIV is far to fragile to remain infectious exposed in small blood volumes as once it is exposed outside the human body to the environment, small changes in temperature, pH / moisture levels next to exposure to AIR damage the outer receptors that the virus uses to infect human cells and thus renders it unable to infect.

For the cuts/wounds to even be in the slightest possible, it would require both of you to have deep open cuts that are actively bleeding such as from a knife wound and than rub them into each-other. This would not be "day to day" contact anymore and neither of you needed the ER from this incident? Than move on with your life.

See we now know also understand that biologically, four conditions need to be present for transmission to occur: The virus must be present in an infectious body fluid from the HIV positive person, it must be present at sufficient high levels to cause infection. There must be an effective route of transmission, and it must reach susceptible cells in another person.