Ernotter 15 Posted March 6, 2018 I recently read in a swedish official public clinic treatment requirements paper that an HIV positive person on continuing active treatment, that isn't showing any symptoms related to the virus, is effectively not contagious at all, i e the risk of infection is infinitesimal even with unprotected vaginal penetrating sex, at least as long as there are no damaged membranes. Is this really true? Quote Share this post Link to post
adamgunn 1,460 Posted March 6, 2018 I'll leave the definitive answer to a medical professional, but I believe that HIV is more likely to be spread when one person's blood touches another. But . . . if you get it, you're in big trouble. If your asking if you should protect yourself, don't be stupid. Quote Share this post Link to post
njbm 2,877 Posted March 7, 2018 Condoms are very effective in preventing the transmission. Anyone who would knowingly have unprotected sex with an HIV positive person is playing with fire. Not a difficult cost-benefit analysis. Quote Share this post Link to post
Fundamental Law 2,885 Posted March 7, 2018 I recently read in a swedish official public clinic treatment requirements paper that an HIV positive person on continuing active treatment, that isn't showing any symptoms related to the virus, is effectively not contagious at all, i e the risk of infection is infinitesimal even with unprotected vaginal penetrating sex, at least as long as there are no damaged membranes. Is this really true? In the early days of the HIV epidemic, there was no effective treatment. The development of highly active antiretroviral therapy ("HAART") transformed the infection from "uniformly fatal" to chronic and indolent. The central result is the reduction in "viral load", basically the concentration of virus particles in the blood. Contemporary therapy can reduce the viral load to the (lower) limit of detection and beyond. The patient is not cured, and not infection free. So if the patient has been consistent about taking the medication, the viral load can remain low. Unfortunately, even modest interruptions in HAART therapy can predispose to the appearance of resistant virus. The problem, then, is that we live in an imperfect world, and populated by imperfect humans. In theory, really effective treatment can reduce the risk of transmission during sex to near zero. In practice, no matter how low the risk, the use of a condom will substantially further reduce that risk. There is no such thing as "safe sex". There is "safer sex". Part of that is going to be adherence to antiviral therapy; part of that will be use of commonsense barrier precautions (condoms). As a health care professional, I have cared for hundreds of HIV+ patients. Their lives are irrevocably altered by the infection. I suspect every one would tell you that they wish an ounce of prevention had replaced pounds and pounds of cure. In my view, and not knowing precisely what was said or claimed in the unreferenced Swedish announcement, public health officials should not and must not downplay risk of infection when effective and inexpensive preventative measures are available. That goes for all sorts of infections, not just HIV. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post
njbm 2,877 Posted March 7, 2018 FL, could not be stated better. Thank you for adding your professional experience. Quote Share this post Link to post
adamgunn 1,460 Posted March 7, 2018 Thanks so much, Fundamental Law, for that 'definitive' answer I was asking for. BTW, what do you mean by 'indolent'? Quote Share this post Link to post
Fundamental Law 2,885 Posted March 7, 2018 Thanks so much, Fundamental Law, for that 'definitive' answer I was asking for. BTW, what do you mean by 'indolent'? Greetings, In medical parlance, "indolent" is used to denote a situation that is slow-growing and not immediately problematic. In other words, something a patient 'lives with' but not a substantial threat or cause for discomfort. Most people with arthritis would be described as having a chronic condition, however owing to the pain it would not be described as indolent. Cold sores (herpes) would be described as chronic and recurrent. A small benign fatty tumor such as a lipoma is considered chronic and indolent: most people just live with them until they find their mere presence to be a nuisance. Hope this clarifies. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post