HIV Undetectable

Replies

• ST

  

  Steve

  Mar 12, 2015

  Someone with an undetectable viral load is "positive" - they carry antibodies for HIV, and although HIV is undetectable in their blood, where their HIV drugs circulate and are most effective, the virus remains hidden in other tissues.  Yes, you can still get HIV from contact with an undetectable partner, although the risk is less than 1/20th the risk otherwise, low enough that it's difficult to study. Seethis recent study, of mixed-status couples. These were people under intensive testing and care, of course. The greatest risk is probably that undetectable people can quite quickly become detectable again, with any irregularity or failure in their drug regime or change in their virus, and neither they nor their partners will know this until they're again evaluated.  For the highest-risk sort of contact, particularly with anyone other than a live-in partner whose health and status you are always aware of, it would be best to observe the usual precautions. I was in a mixed-status relationship for years, and yea, the usual precautions are a bit of a chore, but do become a routine. Outside a relationship, it's something to negotiate, but if you are not comfortable asserting yourself or your partner presses you to risk your health, even a little,move on. You deserve better.
  
  

  ReactReply
• IC

  

  Ichigo928Original Poster

  Mar 13, 2015

  Thanks for the information, man. I really appreciate it.

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Nov 22, 2017

  This is no longer considered true. 10 years of studies with thousands and thousands of serodiscordant couples (one poz, one neg, the poz man undetectable) has resulted in zero transmission. Condoms fail 2-8 percent of the time. The scientific consensus is endorsed by almost everyone including the CDC. The greatest risk still remains from men or women who don't test and assume their status is negative, by a massive margin. Everyone must choose for themselves what they think is risky and what is not, but the strategy most have used which is turning down Poz folx who disclose has had awful repercussions, both in terms of stigma but also the ongoing crisis, because a person is only as negative as their last test before sex again.

  ReactReply
• CR

  

  craigop

  Feb 24, 2018

  The last study I read about mixed couples, one with HIV and one Neg, there were zero new conversions between these thousands of couples. That being said, even if there was an absolute zero risk one must add to the mix other STDs. It always pays to practice "safer sex."

  ReactReply
• CR

  

  craigop

  Feb 24, 2018

  there is more risk of other STDs than HIV (if the poz person remains on the meds). In my opinion, people who do not get tested on a regular basis or people who just don't care about others are the biggest risk of all.

  ReactReply
• ME

  Member

  Feb 28, 2018

  Great question. Undetectable simply means that the viral load is very low and therefore that person is less efficient at passing on the virus while they remain on meds and continue to be "undetectable". It is true that if the person continues to put themselves at risk by having unprotected with multiple partners or engaging in drug injecting activities, they are more likely to revert to detectable which makes it easier to pass on the virus. While condoms or other barriers are not 100% effective 100% of the time, they are among the best alternative we have, except for celibacy which may not be appropriate for everyone.

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Mar 30, 2018

  It means for example that there is no virus in my semen. None. So without virus how are you at risk?

  Your choices are your choices but you were just given numbers that show condom use is far riskier than sex with an undetectable partner without. The studies now cover 10k subjects. Not one case of transmission..

  Stigma and fear continue to make it hard to see that things have changed. The reality is that for me, I have been unable to transmit since 1998. I waited decades for the science to be in and the data is clear: I, nor anyone like me can transmit.

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Mar 30, 2018

  No. None of this is true. This is old information and falsehood. In the early years, the data threashold for viral load was 40ppm. We could not measure finer numbers. This does not mean undetectable is not zero. It means we did not know for certain The current diagnostic does down to 0ppm. It's over a decade old. The information you just passed on is derived from the early protocol. Turns out those at 40ppm were actually 0ppm. So this is 100% false information stigmatizing poz folx AGAIN. Moreover the 40ppm is not enough to cause infection. The virus needs to be present in much higher amounts or the immune system eradicates it.

  Please inform yourself before making such crucial statements yet that are false.

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Apr 8, 2018

  Further, a protocol compliant patient who has sex with thousands of men cannot get 'new' HIV or extra HIV or become infectious. If the person is less than three months poz, a new strain can supplant the original that is drug resistant there are two cases of this. After that, any new virus is immediately inhibited by the meds and attacked by the immune system. Injection drugs don't give you HIV either when you have it already. Non compliance can cause viral load to spike. Party lifestyle is not necessarily supportive of compliance but its important to say drug addicts are good at taking drugs. If a person is undetectable they cannot transmit. HIV is being spread by people who don't know their status. Not poz folks on meds.

  ReactReply
• TJ

  

  TJ

  Aug 30, 2018

  [quote]No. None of this is true. This is old information and falsehood. In the early years, the data threashold for viral load was 40ppm. We could not measure finer numbers. This does not mean undetectable is not zero. It means we did not know for certain The current diagnostic does down to 0ppm. It's over a decade old. The information you just passed on is derived from the early protocol. Turns out those at 40ppm were actually 0ppm. So this is 100% false information stigmatizing poz folx AGAIN. Moreover the 40ppm is not enough to cause infection. The virus needs to be present in much higher amounts or the immune system eradicates it. Please inform yourself before making such crucial statements yet that are false.[/quote] Well....I see things are perfectly under control here. Well done.

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Jun 8, 2019

  [quote]Having been a victim of "studies" I have Multiple Sclerosis from the Flu shot in the 90's. I was made to take the shot in the military and every shot made me ill for weeks to months,.., one even sent me to the ICU in Germany where my German doctor resigned his US Army Contract when he was made to resend his recommendation NOT to give me any further Flu vaccines. All this said,..., Drugs are not always the great saviors, I called the company that makes this HIV preventative and they told me that is was not 100% effective for all folks. This is a fact across the board with ALL HUMANS, we are a like and yet not all the way alike. Yes this undetectable issue is hazy but my test is that IF the meds were stopped would the disease return? of course it would,..., any disease would. The mistake Humans make is that they like to spin words. Undetectable has become the word "safe". Problem is something you can not detect is still there and the arrogance of the Human race is that it thinks it controls Nature. Just like any virus or bacteria, it will adapt and mutate, it already has in Gonorrhea and Syphilis, a number of times to where there are "Super Strains". Just the simple strains of flu can mutate with in a year and once again make an already worthless flu shot almost totally a fool's game so relentless and sophisticated viruses and bacteria will and have done so as well. To fall back on "studies" as the last word,...,, well Mother Nature always has the last word and every living organism has the will and ability to "win",..., and HIV is a very hungry winner sorry to say. Right now I am happy the HIV population has something to make their lives as normal as possible,..., but this 100% faith in Mankind's' ability to conquer all is a bit daunting in my own mind. OK so first off, I am really sorry you had a vaccine related severe illness. They do happen and that sometimes it's patients who suffer is awful, but it's the price of science. Informed consent is the cornerstone of trials. No one is now given any drug testing or clinical trials or first roll out without knowing the risks. This is how science works. It's not perfect but when you look up the lives saved dollars saved etc over the lives lost, there is no comparison. Every vaccine successfully trialled has worked wonders. The company that you called, which makes the drug Truvada (just so you understand statistics there is never any 100% result. Ever. It's how stats work. If a company claims 100% effectiveness it's a lie). The highest possible percentile is 99%. Truvada is at 99%, which means it's one of the most successful drugs in the history of drugs (I know this because I've read the comparative research paper on drugs success). So what you're taking as horrible news isn't at all. There are zero drug failures in the Truvada study. There are human failures numbering three. Not even statistically significant. Moreover your really regrettable injury came from the development stage of the drug and it was for a virus completely different in every regard than HIV. Truvada was researched and approved for the poz market long before it became PrEP. It simply isn't fair logical or ethical to compare the failure of early flu drugs to the top of the pack success of hiv prevention drugs. What happened to you didn't happen to any PrEP patients nor was it even possible. This is the science, it is sound, arguing against a drug that has already saved billions of dollars in a crisis and tens of thousands of lives and has not killed nor maimed nor rendered ill one person is really not a good plan. If one person reads that and makes the choice to skip because you convinced them, that's because what is written is not true nor presented properly. You need some basic science to make claims like the ones you make and not having it means you made mistakes. Undetectable is safe. How the hell are you going to get a disease from someone who has no virus in the blood or semen? I'm really sorry but you don't understand the science again. HIV is a virus. It communicates by blood, by semen and rarely saliva. ARV therapy eliminates the virus from those three places. No. Virus. So sorry, how is the person getting infected by something the other doesn't have? The cohort on that study is now 20,000 it's one of the biggest samples in history, there are zero effective transmissions, this study is not bad because you found one that is, you need to discuss why the methods and results of this study should not be trusted, not claim its tainted by magical transference of bad juju. The rest is fear mongering. Stop fear mongering.

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Jun 25, 2019

  . Some experts predict that HPV-caused mouth and throat cancers will become more common than cervical cancer by 2020." 3 years ago the official count of HPVs in the Human race was around 140, I have no idea where the other 60 have come from. *https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/hpv-transmission-during-oral-sex-a-growing-cause-of-mouth-and-throat-cancer-201306046346[/quote] Part of being a sexually active person is maintaining sexual health. I for example see the doctor 4 times a year for full blood screening, anal pap, skin issues, and a variety of other tests on longer schedules. I go immediately if I feel sick in any way. He screens for HPV. It's available as a test in most any place modern medicine is. There is a vaccine for this now. I had it along with regular boosters and others. There is no reason this should be a problem if people don't ignore their sexual health. The problem is many don't educate themselves and rely on gp's who may not be worried about these things. Speaking of herpes, the most deadly form especially for adults, chickenpox is a real threat to even those vaccinated before the 1990's. It's airborne. Anyone who was not recently vaccinated needs a booster. I've had mine. Everybody else should too. Sex like life has risks. Disease kills people. Always has, always will. It's up to each of us to deternine how much risk we will tolerate and how much we will avoid. But no risk avoidance plan is perfect and if all we ever do is worry about the risks we face living we stop living in any real sense of the word. Re: studies and projections. Different organizations use different data collection models and epidemiology as well as methods to estimate the spread of any given disease. Sometimes new data makes the incidence projection jump because there was a flaw or something not considered previously, sometimes a disease hits critical mass, other times comorbidities factor in. Get screened for HPV and put your mind at rest.

  ReactReply
• BR

  

  Bryan

  Jul 24, 2019

  Hello,,

  your question re catching HIV from a person who has HIV and is undetectable, is no you cannot catch it, we swing and this has been a concern of course for us, but if you check medical records, NO person has been infected with a person who is undetectable, the medicines now are so save that as long as they continue to take them all is good, no side effects at all with most people taking them either, check the medical sites or ask the HIV people at your hospital about hiv, but they play save and say that it is still better to play safe with a condom because of other virus's of course

  ReactReply
• BR

  

  Bryan

  Jul 24, 2019

  Hello,,

  your question re catching HIV from a person who has HIV and is undetectable, is no you cannot catch it, we swing and this has been a concern of course for us, but if you check medical records, NO person has been infected with a person who is undetectable, the medicines now are so save that as long as they continue to take them all is good, no side effects at all with most people taking them either, check the medical sites or ask the HIV people at your hospital about hiv, but they play save and say that it is still better to play safe with a condom because of other virus's of course

  ReactReply
• JI

  

  Jim

  Nov 3, 2019

  [quote]Hello,, your question re catching HIV from a person who has HIV and is undetectable, is no you cannot catch it, we swing and this has been a concern of course for us, but if you check medical records, NO person has been infected with a person who is undetectable, the medicines now are so save that as long as they continue to take them all is good, no side effects at all with most people taking them either, check the medical sites or ask the HIV people at your hospital about hiv, but they play save and say that it is still better to play safe with a condom because of other virus's of course[/quote] The other thing is taking care of sexual health by testing regularly if you're active with more than one partner, getting any abnormal symptoms checked early and informing partners if there's a doubt (better to treat and not have an STI than to not treat and have it transmitting) and following your gut instincts about what is good for you and not. Condoms are very effective but only if used correctly. They fail 3 to 15% otherwise for vaginal sex low end anal sex high end. Those are horrible stats. Proper size not expired or heated by storing lotsa lube and no oils. It also bears saying oral sex is a vector for all the other STI s and few people use condoms for that.

  ReactReply