Is There a Cure for HIV?

There is currently not a practical cure for HIV (please see Human Immunodeficiency Virus); however, recently for the first time ever a person has been successfully cured of the virus . The patient, an American man living in Germany, was being treated for leukemia when he received a stem cell transplant in 2007. The cell donor carried an extremely rare inherited gene mutation that supposedly protects the carrier against HIV infection. This rare compatible match between donor and patient allowed the transplant to eliminate both diseases, resulting in the first cure of HIV ever.

While this is an amazing discovery, experts claim that it is not a practical HIV cure for every HIV and AIDS infection because the mutation is extremely rare. Finding a potential donor who also carries the gene mutation is extremely difficult, and even if the correct donor could be found, the process is extremely painful and expensive to perform. For the patient, the transplant was necessary due to his leukemia, but otherwise it is a very dangerous operation. Instead, people should be tested periodically to reduce the spread of HIV and other STDs.

Fortunately, the patient has been off antiretroviral medication for three years now and appears to be in good standing. However, while he may be off his antiretroviral medications, he is now on a strict regimen of immunosuppressant drugs to prevent the rejection of the transplant cells. While it may not be a practical cure for HIV, the discovery definitely presents hope for the future of millions of people living with HIV.

How to get Tested for STD’s

Question:

I have a new girlfriend and last night I thought we were going to have sex for the first time until she popped the question, HAVE I BEEN TESTED FOR STDs? I know some clinics don’t always check for all STDs, so how do I get tested for every STD?

Answer:

When deciding how to get tested for STD’s, you should think about your reason for testing. People get tested for STD’s for different reasons – they may have symptoms or they may have heard that a past partner has an STD. If you have a specific reason to be concerned then you should be sure that reason is covered when you get checked.

Your situation is a little more general. In this case, you are getting tested because your partner needs to know if you have an STD. Rather than trying to find a way to get tested for every STD out there, most people get a general screening for common and/or more serious sexually transmitted diseases, such as HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, and herpes.

For one reason or another, you cannot get screened for every STD. For example HPV, also known as Human Papilloma Virus, causes genital warts and is one of the most common reasons for people to enter an STD clinic. However, there is not a test available for males, so unfortunately symptoms must be present for testing. Fortunately, females are able to get tested through their OBGYN and it is a good idea that they get screened before entering a sexual relationship.

Even if you have never had symptoms for STD’s, you still could have been exposed and even be able to transmit them. Like most things in life, it is not easy to completely rule out any potential risks. Instead, you can try to limit these risks as much as possible by getting tested and taking other steps to preserve your sexual health.

STD Testing Albuquerque

There are many ways to get tested for STDs.  If you need fast, private lab testing there is an STD testing center on Constitution Ave. The hours of the testing center are Monday through Friday from 7:30am to 4:30pm. They do not require an appointment for HIV or STD testing; however you must be pre-registered and put in to the lab system before arrival. They can usually get you into the location the day you call and get results back in 1 – 3 business days. All testing is lab testing.

If the cost of STD testing is your biggest concern, or if you already have government assisted health care, you can contact Sante Fe Public Health to find out what services they offer.

Marijuana Drug Test Detection Time

Q: What is the detection time for marijuana on urine drug test?

A: The detection time depends on how someone’s body metabolizes things and it also depends on their frequency of usage. According to LabCorp, if someone smoked 1 to 2 joints, the detection time would be 2 to 3 days. If they are a heavy smoker on a daily basis, then the detection time would be 10 days. A chronic user smoking more than 5 joints a day would be 14 to 18 days. So the frequency of use and metabolism plays a big role in getting accurate results.

Perhaps, instead of testing for marijuana on a urine specimen, you may consider testing for this on a hair follicle specimen. The hair follicle drug screen usually costs a bit more than the urine, but the detection window is much longer than that of the urine test. This should not be used for usage, suspected to have occurred ONLY within the last six days, as the metabolite could take up to that long to make its way into the hair follicle. After that initial stage, any marijuana usage within the last three months will show up on the hair follicle test.

Reliability of the HIV DNA PCR

I have been told that the PCR test is not supposed to be used for diagnostic purposes. I had a PCR test done for HIV a month after I had sex with someone who turned out to be a different person than I thought he was. The PCR test said “not detected”, but if it isn’t a diagnostic test, what good is it? Do I have to start over now?

A “not detected” HIV-1 DNA PCR at one month after exposure is an extremely reliable result, and there doesn’t seem to be any compelling reason for you to retest. The actual diagnosis of HIV infection is currently given on the basis of a positive ELISA antibody test which has been confirmed by a positive Western Blot test. Positive or reactive results on an antibody test are actually diagnostic because they confirm the presence of antibodies and therefore infer the presence of the virus itself. The PCR is actually diagnostic as well, but at the present time it has not yet been given this status by the CDC. The most likely reason that the PCR is not considered to be diagnostic at the present time is that it is so sensitive that there is still a possibility of a false “detected” result, with no immediate way to confirm its veracity. False positive ELISA results are possible as well, but the Western Blot is there to weed those out immediately. It should be noted that false “detected” results on the PCR have become fewer and fewer in recent years and are now quite rare.

Back to your original question, remember that a diagnosis requires that some disease or condition be present. As an example, one is “diagnosed “ as having diabetes, but is not “diagnosed” as not having diabetes. In my example, determining that someone does not have diabetes “rules out” diabetes. It does not actually “diagnose” that person as not having diabetes. This might seem like a picky detail, but it is actually critical to the understanding of the problem posed by your question. You might not want to diagnose HIV with a PCR, but there is no better or faster way to rule it out, and ruling it out is really what we want to do.

Take, for example, a chest x-ray done because there is a family history of lung cancer. We know that many chest x-rays show some dark spots, but only a few of these turn out to be cancer. We would not begin radiation and chemotherapy upon discovery of one of those dark spots without doing a biopsy and making a diagnosis of lung cancer first. This doesn’t make the x-ray a problem, just a very sensitive type of test. Likewise, we would not begin HIV treatment without doing an ELISA/Western Blot confirmation and giving a diagnosis of HIV. This doesn’t make the PCR a problem, just a very sensitive type of test. If you are worried about lung cancer, a negative x-ray will tell you that most likely you don’t have it, not that you definitely do have it. If you are worried about recent HIV exposure, and you do not want to wait three months for a conclusive result, the HIV DNA PCR can tell you that you were not infected, and that is primarily what you want to know.

Is 65 days enough for an HIV EIA?

Hi there,

I have a question:

I had protected sex. After 65 days from that, I did an HIV EIA test. The result is negative.

My question is: does that mean I am 100% free from HIV? Is an EIA enough? Do I need retest again or am I fine?

Thank you so much

To Whom It May Concern,

The HIV EIA test is an extremely reliable test, given that you wait an appropriate amount of time after the possible exposure to get reliable results. EIA is short for ELISA which stands for enzyme-linked immuno-sorbent assay, meaning that it tests for your body’s immune response to the virus, in this case the HIV virus. This production of antibodies, in most people, takes up to 6 weeks. About 95%-97% of the population will have a detectable immune response after 41 days, just one day short of 6 weeks. For individuals with a healthy immune system, the results are considered conclusive, meaning that no further testing is necessary, after 3 months.

In your situation, you waited 65 days, or about 9 weeks. The fact that you did not get a positive HIV test results is more than promising, since by this time, most of the population would test positive. Nonetheless, the window period is 3 months, which means a follow-up HIV antibody test is a good idea.

There is one other aspect of your question that I have not yet addressed. The fact that you used protection is extremely important and means that you were most likely protected from getting most sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV.

If you simply did not want to wait the full 3 months to get conclusive results on the antibody test, you should consider the HIV DNA PCR test (human immunodeficiency virus, deoxyribonucleic acid, polymerase chain reaction test), which offers conclusive results after just 28 days, per manufacturer’s recommendation. Given what we know about the acute stage of the virus and the test itself, you are able to test even earlier than 28 days, and still get extremely reliable test results. Between 11 and 16 days after exposure, somebody with HIV will after a viral count of over one million copies of HIV virus per milliliter of blood. The DNA PCR test detects as little as 10 copies of HIV DNA per milliliter of blood. As you can see, the amount of virus present would greatly exceed the minimum limit of virus needed to show up on the test.

AIDS is top news story of 2009

Any development that accounts for more deaths of people who would otherwise be alive at the end of 2009 as they were at the start of the year should by all accounts be the overwhelming choice for the year’s top news story.
Forget about transitory political issues (though those issues impact on Swaziland’s ability to cope with the AIDS crisis), the parade of personalities (mostly the notorious individuals who garner attention through scandal or venality) and the trumpeting of programmes devoted to this and that, even the dire economic news of 2009 has had far less life and death impact on Swazis as HIV and AIDS.
How many people died of AIDS in Swaziland this year?  No one knows.  The taboo persists about the disease.  Despite the national emergency, essential data does not exist.
Testing is still voluntary, though some dissenting voices were raised against this long-standing policy which remains sound human rights policy (privacy as manifested in the desire to be ignorant of one’s medical condition is a human right) if disastrous public health policy.
The way things have worked has been called into question this year.  In South Africa, the government of Jacob Zuma reversed the Mbeki-era approach toward AIDS.
In Swaziland the biggest AIDS-related development of 2009 was the meteoric interest in male circumcision.
Critics called the upswing in the numbers of young men undergoing the procedure as safe sex avoidance, but medical practitioners who did the procedures insisted that all patients were adequately counseled that MC was one part of the HIV-avoidance package, and not in itself a 100% avoidance tool.
This was the year that the first clinic devoted to men was opened in Swaziland, the Letsemba Letfu Clinic in Matsapha.
Even before the clinic was officially opened, 1 000 young men had visited to undergo the procedure.  Each day 35 patients are circumcised by appointment, with ‘walk in’ patients handled as well.
There is no charge for the procedure.  Importantly, 92% of patients who underwent MC also took an HIV test.
Global Warming was 2009’s top environmental issue, climaxed by this month’s Copenhagen Summit, and the topic even had ramifications for HIV and AIDS.
Researchers calculated that global warming would threaten crop production in areas where there were a large number of people living with HIV and AIDS; generally poorer countries whose HIV-positive population segments would have their ARV treatments compromised if they failed to obtain enough food for proper nutrition.
Tuberculosis received the attention of an emergency regional summit in October here in Swaziland because of TB’s link to HIV and AIDS – the disease is the primary opportunistic disease affecting people living with HIV and AIDS, both here and throughout Southern Africa.
So serious has the growth of tuberculosis in Swaziland, a disease once close to being vanquished in our country until the advent of AIDS, that health officials are now calling TB and AIDS ‘a dual epidemic.’
“When you look at the history of TB in Southern Africa you see that it was considered a very serious disease in the 1950s but seemed to be under control by the 1980s.  But with the arrival of HIV and AIDS, TB rates have really gone out of control,” said Dr. Alan Whiteside, Executive Director of HEARD at the University of KwaZulu Natal told AIDS LIFELINE.
Médecins San Frontiéres Head of Mission in Swaziland Aymeric Peguillan told conference delegates, “The Kingdom of Swaziland is in the midst of an HIV/TB epidemic.  The management of the co-epidemic represents the country’s most serious health-related challenge.”
2009 was a typical year in that once again individuals announced they had discovered the AIDS ‘cure.’  And also as usual, they were not qualified researchers and sought not to share with humanity but to sell to desperate people living with AIDS their potions.
NERCHA and the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare more than once had to remind the public that, sadly, there is no AIDS cure.
However, progress was made in 2009 toward an AIDS vaccine, the Holy Grail of research into the prevention of HIV infections.  Trials in Thailand proved promising.
Much work has to be done before the vaccine is available, but for the first time such words as ‘never’ and ‘impossible’ have been dropped from medical discussion on the subject of a possible AIDS vaccine.
For Swaziland, such an AIDS preventative would be a life saver, because 2009 repeated the history of all previous years of the AIDS epidemic in one important respect: no measurable change was found in people’s sexual behaviour modification. AIDS remained a preventable disease in 2009.  That did not change.  Nor in any appreciable way did people’s sex lives change according to various surveys.
Prevention remains a person’s the best hope to avoid AIDS.  However, all efforts to inspire people on a large scale to look after themselves again fell short in 2009.
But the year was not without its accomplishments, from the stream of young men seeking male circumcision to wider debate of sexual matters once considered taboo – even though the greatest taboo unfortunately remains, the reluctance of most people to recognise the reality of HIV in themselves and their loved ones.

For the complete article, please refer to The Swazi Observer.

S. Africa to treat all HIV-positive babies

South Africa will treat all HIV-positive babies and expand testing, the president announced Tuesday, a dramatic and eagerly awaited shift in a country that has more people living with HIV than any other.

President Jacob Zuma’s speech on World AIDS Day was viewed as a definitive turning point for a nation where the previous administration distrusted drugs developed to keep AIDS patients alive and instead promoted garlic treatments. One Harvard study said that resulted in more than 300,000 premature deaths.

Zuma compared the fight against AIDS to the decades-long struggle against the apartheid government, which ended in 1994 with the election of Nelson Mandela in the country’s first multiracial elections.

“At another moment in our history, in another context, the liberation movement observed that the time comes in the life of any nation when there remain only two choices: submit or fight,” Zuma said. “That time has now come in our struggle to overcome AIDS. Let us declare now, as we declared then, that we shall not submit.”

Zuma was greeted with a standing ovation when he entered a Pretoria exhibition hall filled with several thousand people.

In some ways, Zuma is an unlikely AIDS hero. In 2006, while being tried on charges of raping an HIV-positive family friend, he was ridiculed for testifying that he took a shower after sex to lower the risk of AIDS. He was acquitted of rape.

Zuma, a one-time chairman of the country’s national AIDS council, may never live down the shower comment. But he has won praise for appointing Dr. Aaron Motsoaledi as his health minister. AIDS activists say Motsoaledi trusts science and is willing to learn from past mistakes.

UNAIDS executive director Michel Sidibe, who took the podium shortly before Zuma, told the president: “What you do from this day forward will write, or rewrite, the story of AIDS across Africa.”

On Tuesday, in response to a plea from Zuma, the United States announced it was giving South Africa $120 million over the next two years for AIDS treatment drugs.

Zuma said in a speech broadcast across South Africa on state radio and television that the new policy changes would take effect in April.

“It means that people will live longer and more fulfilling lives,” he said.

South Africa, a nation of about 50 million, has an estimated 5.7 million people infected with HIV.

The new steps include treatment for all HIV-positive children under 1 year old, and earlier treatment for patients infected with both the virus that causes AIDS and tuberculosis, and for women who are pregnant and HIV-positive.

Zuma said all health institutions, not just specialist centers, would provide counseling, testing and treatment.

He also called on South Africans to get tested for HIV. But, contrary to speculation in recent days, he did not take an HIV test Tuesday.

“I have taken HIV tests before and I know my status,” he said. “I will do another test soon as part of this new campaign. I urge you to start planning for your own tests.”

The health minister under Zuma’s predecessor distrusted drugs developed to keep AIDS patients alive, instead promoting garlic treatments. Zuma’s government has set a target of getting 80 percent of those who need AIDS drugs on them by 2011.

A Harvard study of the years under President Thabo Mbeki, who questioned the link between HIV and AIDS, concluded that more than 300,000 premature deaths in South Africa could have been prevented had officials here acted sooner to provide drug treatments to AIDS patients and to prevent pregnant women with HIV from passing the virus to their children.

After Zuma won a power struggle within the governing African National Congress, the party forced Mbeki to step down late last year after almost a decade as president. Zuma took over after elections in April.

Setjhaba Ranthako brought his 4-year-old daughter Tshegofatso to hear Zuma’s speech, saying education should start early.

“I’ve see in President Zuma a person who’s willing to listen, and say, `Here I am, come with your views, and let’s turn your views into an effective campaign to combat the spread” of AIDS, said Ranthako, who works with a group that raises awareness about AIDS among men.

After listening to his president, advertising consultant Tedson Tibani said the steps Zuma outlined could significantly reduce infections within a few years. Tibani said putting more people on drugs would cost money, but said he was hopeful others would follow the U.S. in donating money.

“There’s a kind of hope the president has instilled,” Tibani said. “I’m very happy with that. We’ve never had that before.”

The crowd that had greeted Zuma like a rock star before his speech rose to their feet when Zuma finished Tuesday. Then he danced along with a choir that sang: “Zuma, you are blessed.”

I have gonorrhea, and it won’t go away

I caught gonorrhea about 10 years ago, and because I was so young I didn’t know what to do so it was left untreated. Since then I’ve been in and out of the clinic trying to free myself from this infection, I no longer have the immediate symptoms but I am constantly suffering with being uncomfortable and burning when urinating. The main problem is every time I go to see someone about this they tell me that there’s nothing wrong with me. I know for a fact that there is because I have slept with girls and they have been passed on this infection even though I have tested negatively every time. I’m losing hope because I can’t have a girlfriend due to this ongoing hell that I’m going through, I really do hope that you can recommend a specialist or give me some answers rather than just telling me that I’m fine.

First of all, I want you to know that there isn’t much that we can do for you. It sounds like you have seen at least one doctor about this problem; it may be a good idea to see a specialist like an urologist. If you have already done so, maybe you should see a different one, and get at least a second opinion. I’m not sure where you are located, but if you feel like you have exhausted all your options, something to consider is the MAYO clinic, located in Rochester, Minnesota. Many people view this as their last option, as the MAYO clinic takes patients and cases that seem to be otherwise unsolvable, and try to figure out what is happening, rather than just telling you that there is nothing wrong.

Aside from that, a couple things to think about would be as follows:

-If you have tested negative every time, then you should not have anything to worry about. If you have no bacteria in your urethra, then you shouldn’t be able to pass it on. This kind of infection resides in the urethra, so a urethral swab or a urine test would be the kind testing that you need to perform.

-You could have gotten gonorrhea again. That isn’t out of the question. Assuming that you were treated at some point in the past, you could have gotten it again from a more recent partner. You may have had sex with someone that didn’t have symptoms, so they didn’t know about it, but they could have passed it on to you. Additionally, you might have internal tissue damage due to scarring from the original infection, which means you may still notice the signs that you mentioned.

As frustrating as this may be, do not give up. In order to find urologists in your area, you might try to contact a local American Medical Association office and ask them for a list of urologists in your area. Better yet, just go to your primary care physician and ask him/her for a list or at least a few recommendations. I would start with the latter.

Best of luck to you, and I hope you get closure.

STD Rates Rise in Teen Boys, Better Sex Education Needed

The CDC recently released new data regarding STD infections among teenagers. The result: teens need better sex education. In the past ten years, the annual rate of AIDS diagnoses for 15 to 19 year old boys has nearly doubled. For the report the CDC compiled data from several surveys among people aged 10 to 25, and these are their findings:

Only half of girls and just 35 percent of boys ages 18 and 19 had discussed methods of birth control with a parent, yet more than 80 percent of both boys and girls reported that they had learned to say no to sex.

Statistics indicate that lots of teens aren’t saying no. Thirty percent of 15-17 year old girls said they had engaged in sex, and this number rose to 70.6 percent among 18 and 19 year old girls. Boys shared similar statistics, with 31.6 percent of boys aged 15 to 17 engaging in sex, and 64.6 percent of 18 and 19 year old boys. On a rather disturbing note, nearly ten percent of women ages 18 to 24 reported that their first intercourse experience was involuntary.

In 1997 the number of HIV infections in 15 to 19 year old boys was 1.3 per 100,000 cases. In 2006 that number had increased to 2.5 infections per 100,000 cases. Also on the rise were rates for syphilis in females. There were 1.5 positives per 100,000 cases in 2004 and 2.2 infections per 100,000 cases in 2006.

While many teens are learning about sex, many of the lessons tend to be abstinence-only centered, which explains why lower rates of teens have discussed birth control methods. As rates for HIV and syphilis continue to climb it is important now more than ever that teens are supplied with an expansive sex education so that they know the risks of sexual intercourse and how to prevent them.

*For the complete article, please visit http://stdtest.com/original-articles/

Categories