Herpes Vaccine & Disclosure

[hippyherpy]

I hope you guys understand that having a dialogue about this stuff can only prove your point more. I'm not trying troll or be combative. I'm trying to understand my new circumstance.

 

I'm not an expert in this yet, and I get mixed messages about how to move forward from a lot of different sources.

 

For example, I might not have become aware of the HSV / herpes "connection" posted above if I hadn't started this thread or hadn't kept probing on the nature of all of this stuff.

 

As far as HIV goes, Dr. Corey was talking about it within the context of researching transmission of HIV within the male gay community. This is significant because that population has a much higher likelihood of HIV than most heterosexuals would.

 

So when it's stated that herpes raises the chance of transmission three times- that's only if you are in a high risk population. It doesn't really apply to people who aren't likely to be having sex with other people who HIV.

 

For someone like me, a heterosexual man who isn't having sex with high risk HIV populations, it's not the case that having herpes is going to make me three times more likely to be infected by HIV.

 

Do you see what I'm trying to say?

 

To be clear, I now know that if I were to have anal sex with someone who had HIV, that I would be three times more likely to get HIV than if I didn't.

 

And that's fine with me because I'm not into dudes and don't particularly enjoy anal with girls any way.

[hippyherpy]

I am curious to know if the fact that I don't have as intense symptoms as some of the people on here might factor into my own rate of transmission.

 

A question would be- the general rate of transmission that is accepted (either 2.5% or 1%) is based on data that lumps together people from all sides of the spectrum of symptoms?

 

If it is the case that someone who is essentially Asymptomatic has a less likely chance of passing it on than someone who gets a lot of outbreaks, shouldn't that factor in to how we determine transmission rates?

[2Legit2Quit]

It appears the HIV subject, is something you just wanted to debunk, not understand. Your statement's that it is does not up the risk for you by a 3 fold are incorrect. They absolutely do, still being a straight male. This higher risk actually has nothing to do w whom you sleep w, it has to do w the science behind it. All your posts argue against anything you don't want to believe, because it does not serve your position well. I think being right is more important, than trying to learn and understand. You expend all your energy trying to debunk our information, instead of researching things on your own to view both sides, you only Google looking for ways to debunk, not learn more. At the end of the day, I don't care if you believe me. I am much more educated than you on the topic of STDs and I don't research just to support my POV. it's not me being wreckless w thwir sexual health, so you can take the information or leave it. W that said, your cross examinations are very time consuming, because you want to be right. I spent 3hrs on this forum yesterday. Yu took so much time up, that it took me longer to get to others. Please be cognizant of others. It's not just about you.

 

Apparently you didn't read my post about how the mechanic's of it all work. You get microscopic tearing during sex no matter what. The old school of thinking it was only a higher risk w sores, now they have found that not to be true, due to our immune response to having H, so it does keep these cells around there.

[hippyherpy]

I did read your entire post. Did you read mine?

 

I said that I get that it increases the risk 3x regardless of sores.. but that's only if you are sleeping with someone who has HIV. Saying that getting herpes instantly puts you at 3x greater risk of getting HIV without specifying the sexual orientation I think isn't painting the full picture because it does matter if you are a straight male and aren't sleeping with high risk populations. If a straight man with herpes sleeps with someone who has HIV, they are 3x more likely to get it than a straight man who doesn't. Yes, I get that already. I'm not arguing that.

 

I'm saying that making a blanket statement that everybody who has herpes, even those that aren't sleeping around with people who have HIV, are now at a greater risk of getting HIV doesn't make any sense.

 

If people are worried about getting HIV, they should avoid sleeping with high risk populations regardless of having herpes or not.

 

I'm also not just posting for you to respond. I appreciate your input like your post on how Herpes can increase the risk even if sores aren't present, but my post aren't intended to be just a conversation between you and me, although you do seem to know a lot about this stuff.

[2Legit2Quit]

Btw., your frequent casual sex lifestyle, dkes out you in the high risk category and no where in his latest study, as that was the first one, does he say anything about that. That was the first and older study, than his new findings. You can't just be open to what supports what you want to believe, you ha e to be open to the reality of the situation, despite psychological dissonance and fear if it.

[WCSDancer2010]

I am curious to know if the fact that I don't have as intense symptoms as some of the people on here might factor into my own rate of transmission.

 

A question would be- the general rate of transmission that is accepted (either 2.5% or 1%) is based on data that lumps together people from all sides of the spectrum of symptoms?

 

If it is the case that someone who is essentially Asymptomatic has a less likely chance of passing it on than someone who gets a lot of outbreaks, shouldn't that factor in to how we determine transmission rates?

 

Actually, the rates of those who are asymptomatic transmission are HIGHER simply because many are like you. They feel they don't have symptoms so they don't need to tell their partners, or they don't use precautions, and then there's the 80% who just plain don't know. And then there's those who were told by their Dr that you can only pass when you have symptoms.

 

Point being, those of us who have more symptoms are more likely to pay VERY close attention to our bodies, more likely to take the meds, use condoms, etc. than those who have no symptoms. No symptoms makes people more careless and less likely to disclose (for many of the reasons you have tried to argue here).

 

The studies about rates of shedding came from a complete cross-section of people with H - from the ones with constant symptoms to those with none. There is no way to know exactly when you are shedding. So you should assume that your risk is exactly the same as everyone else.

[WCSDancer2010]

Once again you seem to be trying to find a way to minimize your "risk". Trying one more avenue/"selling point" for your disclosures.

 

The stats are the stats. The risks are the risks. Without condoms and meds M-F transmission is about 10% per year (With meds and condoms your risk goes down to about 2.5%) assuming you have sex 2x/week. You sound like you may be having sex a LOT more than 2x/week. So technically that puts your risk factor UP.

 

Just like Russian Roulette - the more times you shoot, the higher your risk that one day a bullet will come out of that chamber.

[hippyherpy]

I need some simple clarification on one particular issue related to HIV and herpes-

 

Is it the area where you had the outbreak that gets up 3x risk wise, or is it the entire "boxers" area that includes your butt cheeks, inner thighs etc.?

[hippyherpy]

Also, I'm a little confused about the micro tearing thing-

 

Do these microtears happen on the penis or vagina or both during sex? And the micro tears release HIV? I thought it travels through blood or semen.

 

For example, if I were having sex with a girl with out a condom, and she had HIV, and I didn't have herpes, and there was no blood, I'd still be getting HIV on me and could still get it? Wouldn't that mean that a lot more hetero people would have it?

 

Another question: does this also happen in HSV 1 people in their mouths? The micro tearing? Are people who have HSV1 oral and no outbreaks at 3x greater risk of getting HIV as well. With all the oral sex going on and 90% of people have HSV 1 oral, it would seem like there would be a lot more infections of HIV via oral transmission.

[2Legit2Quit]

Well, it doesn't go into detail where, but I think mainly in and around areas pentracted or doing the penetration. Micro tears can happen anywhere that the rubbking is taking place. So long as you're wearing Condoms, you should be fine

 

Nope, there are people who some how manage not to get HIV after having unprotected sex w them. Even Charlie Sheen ex didn't get it from him.... Having H just makes it easier to contract, than had we not had H.

 

I believe 50,000 are infected each year in the States still. That's a lot to me. Yes, the gay commuria at the greatest risk, but there are a lot of men who sleep w Frans women (I know one) and consider themselves straight and have relationships w women. There are men on the down low sleeping w women. You just never know.

 

I believe it applies both ways, bit not as risky. It mentions HSV 1 in that article I shared.

[WCSDancer2010]

For one thing, this is NOT an HIV forum and it is not our specialty here so perhaps you should join a forum for people who have or want to know more about HIV to get more accurate answers.

 

That said, while there *is* an increased risk of getting HIV with HSV, I'm willing to GUESS that women are at higher risk because we can unknowingly have internal OB's and thus have an avenue there that not only allows the virus in more easily but the vagina will hold the semen/fluids in the area longer than a guy who likely gets up and wipes off the potentially affected area.

 

1) You ask about the whole boxer shorts area and HIV. Likely the immediate genital area is the area most at risk... but if your partner scratched you somehow, then of course that is an avenue where the HIV virus could enter...with oral sex, people often have sub-clinical gum disease, canker sores, chapped lips, etc .... all these areas are places where a virus or bacteria can enter the body.

 

This is why I tell people that if they have HSV2 genitally that if their partner has any kind of chapped lip/mouth ulcer/etc issue *I* would suggest they hold off oral even tho H2 only contributes to 1% of all oral HSV... because there's no use in pushing your luck when there's sooo many other ways to get your freak on.

 

2) Microtears can happen anywhere in the genital region where the skin is being stretched/rubbed/pulled/etc. The microtear doesn't "release" HIV - but there will be a *small* amount of blood in the area of the tear (that you may never see). HIV can also enter the body through the urethra. The reason the gay community has a higher incidence of HIV is that the anal region isn't designed for repeated pounding with any kind of object, so that area tears more easily during sex - ie. the "bottom" is at higher risk if HIV than the "top".

 

3) Yes, if you had sex with a girl who had HIV without a condom, you likely have been EXPOSED to HIV just as many people have likely been exposed to HSV1 and 2.

 

Here's the thing:

 

We are EXPOSED to TONS of virus and bacteria every day. If the "dose" of each virus/bacteria is small our body can fight it off even without the antibodies.... because the general White Blood Cells will overpower small infiltrations of "foreign bodies". But if you are repeatedly exposed or your body is already fighting something else, or you get a big enough "dose" then the WBC's can't fight it off and you get the disease, whether it be Flu, Pneumonia, STD's, MRSA, TB, etc.

 

Too many people look at Oral sex as the "safe" alternative to sex. Obviously, WE know that's not true thanks to HSV1 transmission stats. From what I can gather with a quick look around the web, the giver of Oral is more likely to get HIV simply because the virus can be in the ejaculate.

 

I think that this link is the best I can find about HIV risk... if you have any more questions, I suggest that you find another forum that deal with HIV because they can give you more info from those who are dealing with that disease and who will know more than we do here

 

https://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/prevention/reduce-your-risk/understanding-risk-activities/index.html

[hippyherpy]

Ok cool- I asked about it here because she had said we are 3x more likely to get HIV since we have HSV 2, which could freak some people out if they don't know what context that it is. It freaked me out to read that.

[WCSDancer2010]

Well, we DO have the potential to have lesions so that right there increases our risk... and as 2legit posted, there's the issue of the fact that HIV attacks the White blood T cells that we produce in response to the Herpes virus.... so yes, we DO need to be more cautious.... but really, that is a GOOD thing because we are less likely to throw caution to the wind knowing that our risk is increased now that we know we CAN get an STD (never mind the increased risk).

 

Point being.... if you use condoms your risk should be greatly minimized. But the ONLY way you can completely reduce your risk is to have monogamous sex with someone who you know has been tested. That was true before you got H, and it's even more "true" now.

[hippyherpy]

I've got a little dilemma.

 

There are two girls I've been talking to online who swear they are clean. I've disclosed that I have herpes and they both still say they want to have unprotected sex with me.

 

I'm a little scarred of getting HIV now that I have herpes. My odds of getting it through vaginal sex if HIV is present in my partner is 1/1000. That's extremely low.

 

Couple that with the fact that heterosexual women in USA have extremely low rates of HIV, and I'm thinking it is a super low possibility that I'd get it.

 

 

That said, if a girl is agreeing to have sex with a guy raw who has explained that he has herpes and also told her that he's using pills, what does that say about her?

[hippyherpy]

Also found this article about HSV and how it relates to HIV

 

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/hivs-biggest-moves-are-hetero-and-needle-free

 

Straight, Needle-Free Populations Are Becoming HIV's Biggest Movers

Written by MICHAEL BYRNE

June 28, 2014 // 04:10 PM EST

Among diseases, HIV has a unique relationship with its risk factors. While pretty much any illness has a set of circumstances that make it more likely for a given individual to contract it—some diseases and individuals much more than others—HIV spent much of its named existence as something "of" certain populations. Inevitably then, risk factors comingled with identity, and stigma bloomed.

 

No doubt there are those remaining, even in 2014, whose whole fucked-up worldview gets a boost from HIV remaining the scourge of gay African-American men and intravenous drug users; for typical far-right narratives, those are two highly-encodable demographics. HIV's relationship to the world is changing, however, and quickly. Years of intensive outreach within high-risk populations is paying off, and the relative silence about HIV outside of those groups is having quite the opposite effect, while, at the same time, HIV itself is finding hetero-transmission help from its pal herpes.

 

In a study released on Friday, researchers at New York University's Center for Drug Use and HIV Research describe HIV infection rates among IV drug users in New York City falling to an epidemic-low of 10 percent, down from '90s highs approaching 50 percent. In the same time period, HIV rates among heterosexual, non-IV drug users, historically considered to be one of lowest risk pools (but still above not-at-all drug users, for a number of reasons), doubled, from 7 to 14 percent. According to researchers, what's behind the increase, in part, is the spread of HIV's viral ally, human herpesvirus 2 (genital herpes, HSV-2).

 

HIV transmission from heterosexual (vaginal) sex is, generally, less likely than other, more-discussed vectors. In fact, the likelihood of transmission from a positive male to a negative female partner is just eight in 10,000, while female to male transmission should occur in four out of 10,000 risk events. For receptive anal intercourse, that jumps to 138 transmissions out of 10,000, and needle sharing should yield 63 infections per 10,000 positive-to-negative shares. The thing about herpes, however, is that it makes transmission much, much more likely, and infection rates for HSV-2 in the United States sit at around one fifth of all adults, with the hardest-hit demographic being African-American women, with a near 50 percent infection rate.

 

"Heterosexual intercourse is usually not very efficient for transmitting HIV, but the efficiency of heterosexual transmission nearly triples in the presence of herpes simplex virus type 2," said Don Des Jarlais, the study's lead author, in a statement from NYU. There are a couple of reasons for the boost, according to the NIH. For one, genital herpes in outbreak mode causes lesions, open sores through which an HIV virus might find easy passge into a new recruit. Second, even if those lesions are healed and the herpes infection is considered latent, the CD4+ T cells that HIV needs to bind with and infect are known to hang around the sites of healed lesions, offering an alternative passage into the host.

 

Part of the answer, according to Jarlais and a growing chorus of public health experts, is what's known as "treatment as prevention." That is, we know well enough that antiretroviral therapy and the corresponding drop in viral load can torpedo the likelihood of HIV transmission. So if more HIV patients are getting proper treatment, then they're far less likely to spread the disease. What's more, administering antiretroviral therapy to uninfected individuals boosts those individuals' resistance to infection as well. Obviously that's not the most general solution, but it makes sense in known high-risk populations. Jarlais concludes optimistically: "If we can implement these programs on a large scale, we should be able to control sexual transmission of HIV in the city, and achieve the goal of an "End to the AIDS Epidemic."

 

 

[WCSDancer2010]

That said, if a girl is agreeing to have sex with a guy raw who has explained that he has herpes and also told her that he's using pills, what does that say about her?

 

I think you know the answer ;)

 

 

[WCSDancer2010]

The thing about herpes, however, is that it makes transmission much, much more likely, and infection rates for HSV-2 in the United States sit at around one fifth of all adults, with the hardest-hit demographic being African-American women, with a near 50 percent infection rate.

 

Interesting that the "experts" are still ignoring the rising rates of Genital HSV1 ... no mention of it here yet I'm sure the risk is the same as for H2....

 

 

[hippyherpy]

I'm still confused about this a little- does herpes make you 3x more likely to receive HIV only at the site of the breakout or anywhere in the boxer shorts area?

 

Is it the same thing with, for example excema or ring worm? Like if you have excema on your finger or a wart, does it also have the same effect as herpes making it three times more likely to get HIV.