Posted on 12/05/2017 7:36:22 PM PST by markomalley
Last year, Chris Kimmenez and his wife asked their doctors a simple question. Could Chris, who has been HIV positive since 1989 but keeps the virus in check through medication, transmit it sexually to Paula?
They were pretty sure they knew the answer. Married for more than 30 years, they had not always practiced safe sex, but Paula showed no signs of having the virus.
Their physicians were less certain.
“They had a conversation, and they did some research on it,” Kimmenez said. “They came back to us and said there may still be a risk, but we’re comfortable enough” that unprotected sex is safe.
“We knew that all along,” said Kimmenez, 56.
Simple acknowledgments like that one, spoken quietly in the privacy of doctors’ offices, mark the arrival of a historic moment in the history of HIV: Medical authorities are publicly agreeing that people with undetectable viral loads cannot transmit the virus that causes AIDS.
The policy change has profound implications for the way people view HIV. The change promises not just unprotected sex for couples like Kimmenez and his wife, but also reduced stigma for the 1.2 million Americans living with HIV. The policy change also offers the hope that more people will be tested and begin treatment if they are found to have the virus rather than live in denial.
“There was something in me that said I’m damaged and I made a mistake, and people see it and I’m a danger,” said Mark King, 56, a writer and activist who tested positive for HIV in 1985. But now, treatment has fully suppressed the virus. “When I finally internalized this message . . . something suddenly lifted off of me that is hard to describe. It was almost as if someone wiped me clean. I no longer feel like this diseased pariah.”
(Excerpt) Read more at heraldtribune.com ...
A few years ago, here in Seattle, gay activists began to aggressively violate the donor exclusion for anyone who had male-on-male sex.
The Seattle blood centers meekly resisted for several months, then quietly surrendered after the CDC publicly suggested it might not be dangerous to accept gay blood.
I already had two concerns about unsanitary procedures at my donation center.
First, I was very uncomfortable that their technicians would probe my veins with ungloved fingers - I don't care how effective the anti-septic might be, pressing my veins without gloves was a completely unnecessary infection risk.
Second, after the donation, the techs would fold a gauze bandage wearing unsterilized gloves, withdraw the needle, and then press the now-contaminated gauze directly onto the open puncture in my arm. Once again, a completely senseless infection risk.
After the gay donors began showing up, I stopped donating.
I have a high demand blood type, and the blood center emails me about once a week and urges me to come in, but I have never gone back.
My only concern is that I will need a blood transfusion before medical scientists finally make an artificial blood substitute.
The study combined numbers of condomless vaginal and anal sex acts...did the # of anal acts = vaginal? Vaginal sex supposedly has less transmission of hiv....the authors admit that undectable means that the test used is able to detect the hiv when above a certain level....did they use that same test on the hiv free subject?.
That means the recipient could have hiv virus but it is just”undectable” and they are supposedly.not infected.how long was the followup post sex? 2 weeks...2 year?..did some people have more sex than others...i gotta read that study report before jumpin on the STD bandwagon.
Odd. I've always limited my sex life to the woman I'm in love with - my wife. "A risk" of giving her a deadly disease would be nowhere near an acceptable trade just for the physical pleasure of unprotected sex. Leftists disgust me.
but now, I can see gays pretty much anywhere....there's that look....
Huh?
Meanwhile, though, I am not allowed to donate blood because of my duty assignments when I was on active duty.
Per the Red Cross:
You are not eligible to donate if:
From January 1, 1980, through December 31, 1996, you spent (visited or lived) a cumulative time of 3 months or more, in the United Kingdom (UK), or
From January 1, 1980, to present, you had a blood transfusion in any country(ies) in the (UK) or France. The UK includes any of the countries listed below.
- Channel Islands
- England
- Falkland Islands
- Gibraltar
- Isle of Man
- Northern Ireland
- Scotland
- Wales
You were a member of the of the U.S. military, a civilian military employee, or a dependent of a member of the U.S. military who spent a total time of 6 months on or associated with a military base in any of the following areas during the specified time frames
- From 1980 through 1990 - Belgium, the Netherlands (Holland), or Germany (check)
- From 1980 through 1996 - Spain, Portugal, Turkey, Italy or Greece. (check)
You spent (visited or lived) a cumulative time of 5 years or more from January 1, 1980, to present, in any combination of country(ies) in Europe, including
- in the UK from 1980 through 1996 as listed above
- on or associated with military bases as described above, and
- in other countries in Europe as listed below:
- Albania
- Austria
- Azores
- Belgium
- Bosnia/Herzegovina (check)
- Bulgaria
- Canary Islands
- Croatia (check)
- Czech Republic
- Denmark
- Finland
- France
- French Guiana
- Germany (check)
- Greece
- Hungary
- Ireland (Republic of)
- Italy (check)
- Kosovo
- Le Reunion
- Liechtenstein
- Luxembourg
- Macedonia
- Martinique
- Montenegro
- Netherlands (Holland)
- Norway
- Poland
- Portugal
- Romania
- Serbia
- Slovak Republic
- Slovenia (check)
- Spain
- Spanish North African Territories (Penon de Velez De la Gomera, Penon de Alhucemas, Islas Chafarinas, and the cities of Centa and Melilla)
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Yugoslavia (or the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) (check)
Go figure.
I read this a different way: a defense for minimizing the charges when HIV+ deviants knowingly expose others to the virus. Remember this was in the news recently where activists wanted it downgraded to something like a misdemeanor (instead of the attempted murder it actually represents)?
Re: “I am not allowed to donate blood because of my duty assignments...”
“Mad Cow” disease, right?
It’s killed like 250 people in Europe in the last 40 years.
As I recall, we have never had an indigenous human case of Mad Cow in the USA, just imported cases.
Still, compared to the health risks of AIDS and Hepatitis, Mad Cow is just a statistical blip.
What could go wrong?
Don’t let these folks around male ebola survivors.
“Sure, the virus can survive in your semen for at least six months, but don’t worry, it’s not transmittable.”
BS! It’s like you’re still playing Russian Roulette, only with a 50-shooter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.