New Research on HIV transmission
Chris B.
I just caught the tail end of the evening news that contained a
short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I gather,
the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
had a vasectomy. This just conjured up a picture in my mind (by nature
pessimistic) of homophobes seizing this information and using it to argue
for the procedure to be carried out on men with aids and further to the
whole gay population while they're at it. :(
Chris
Terrance Heath
might get this idea in their head that if gay men begat we will
somehow begat more gay people. Silly idea if you ask me. No great
threat either.
--
Terrance Heath /"Freedom is not something anybody can
he...@athena.cs.uga.edu / be given, freedom is something people take."
/ James Balwin-"Nobody Knows My Name"
University of Georgia
Lawrence C. Foard
I'm sure some people will try that but in general this is a positive thing.
I'm not sure what the current state of the art is, but if vasectomies could
be made fairly painless and reversable (I don't want to totally loose
the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
for stopping the spread of HIV. I think a reasonable approach would be
to make free and anonymous vasectomies available to all who where
interested, if they are indeed effective and a large percentage of men (gay
and straight) got them it might be enough to virutually stop HIV
transmission.
Rather than a knee jerk reaction against it I think it would make sense for
ACT-UP to encourage people to have them. Infact I think phobes would be very
upset if HIV transmission was virtually stopped in the gay communitee, it
would remove one of there biggest excuses they use to "justify homophobia".
Of course this is all hypothetical, the article in USA-Today said that it
was far from certain.
Jeff Bowles
>short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I gather,
>the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
>had a vasectomy.
Untrue. Seminal fluid carries the virus, which is why there are
gay men who can claim "No one's ever ejaculated into me and I'm
still HIV-positive."
Jeff Bowles
Bryan J. Blumberg
cc...@quads.uchicago.edu (Chris B.) wrote:
>
> I just caught the tail end of the evening news that contained a
>short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I
gather,
>the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
>had a vasectomy.
>Chris
Dear Chris,
Either you heard wrong, or you must have been listinging to
the National Enquirer or something. I don't think that vasectomies
have anything to do with HIV transmission. This is the kind of
misinformation which leads ignorant people to suddenly think that
they can abandon safe sex.
========================================
Bryan J. Blumberg, The MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation
815 Colorado Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90041-1777
(213) 259-4914, B_BLU...@MACSCH.COM
Bryan J. Blumberg
>short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I
gather,
>the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
>had a vasectomy.
>Chris
D. Owen Rowley
Uh, I guess what you are saying is regarding the potential for enforced
vasectomy procedures..
But I gotta tell ya chris, I think lots of HIV + gay men would opt for a
vasectomy if it was a safe and effective way to insure not infecting
a partner?
LUX .. owen
--
-=- very happy to be queer -=- -+- right here -+- -*- NOW -*-
*No matter where you go, there you are.*
Terrance Heath
>
>I'm sure some people will try that but in general this is a positive thing.
>I'm not sure what the current state of the art is, but if vasectomies could
>be made fairly painless and reversable (I don't want to totally loose
>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>for stopping the spread of HIV. I think a reasonable approach would be
>to make free and anonymous vasectomies available to all who where
>interested, if they are indeed effective and a large percentage of men (gay
>and straight) got them it might be enough to virutually stop HIV
>transmission.
>Rather than a knee jerk reaction against it I think it would make sense for
>ACT-UP to encourage people to have them. Infact I think phobes would be very
>upset if HIV transmission was virtually stopped in the gay communitee, it
>would remove one of there biggest excuses they use to "justify homophobia".
>Of course this is all hypothetical, the article in USA-Today said that it
>was far from certain.
A few months ago, I sat down to eath dinner while watching the
news, and found myself watching an actual vasectomy being performed. I
dropped my fork. The story went that there was a new procedure that
did not involve using scaples, etc. The point being that perhaps
vasectomies are already being made more painless, and I believe they
are reversable with some degree of success. Does anyone know for sure?
Jack Hamilton
>
> A few months ago, I sat down to eath dinner while watching the
>news, and found myself watching an actual vasectomy being performed. I
>dropped my fork.
I think I saw that program too, on the Physicians Education Channel or
whatever it's called. I turned on the TV and saw that they were doing
surgery, but I couldn't tell what kind. As I watched, I realized that
they were working on something that I had seen before, but never from the
inside.
--
------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton j...@netcom.com
Post Office Box 281107
San Francisco, California 94128
Chris B.
Some people seem to know everything, no matter what anyone
else says. :) Anyway, I located the article in sci.med.aids and
will post it below.
AIDS Daily Summary
May 11, 1992
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) National AIDS Clearinghouse makes
available the following information as a public service only. Providing
this information does not constitute endorsement by the CDC, the
Clearinghouse, or any other organization. Reproduction of this text is
encouraged; however, copies may not be sold. Copyright 1992,
Information, Inc., Washington, DC
"Vasectomy Studied in AIDS Fight" USA Today (05/11/92), P. 1A (Friend,
Tim)
Vasectomies performed on HIV-positive men may be a means of
preventing the spread of HIV, said experts on Sunday, who added that a
major research initiative should be conducted. Preliminary research
revealed at an American Urological Association meeting indicates that
the strategy could be effective in thwarting HIV, according to John
Krieger of the University of Washington in Seattle. Vasectomies
significantly decrease sperm and white blood cells that may carry HIV
in semen. Krieger said, "Safe sex is great, but we need to look for
better alternatives for preventing sexual transmission of HIV.
Vasectomy is worthy of a systematic study. This is an answerable
question." Researchers tested semen samples from 18 HIV-infected men
who showed no AIDS symptoms; HIV was found in 26 percent of the
samples. Following the vasectomies of four men, HIV couldn't be
detected in their semen. It may be too soon to determine whether a
vasectomy rids semen of HIV, or whether it is present just below the
level of detection.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it is preliminary and a sample of four men is hardly
statistically significant, but it still makes one think about it.
Chris
Gene Ward Smith
lfo...@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
>I'm not sure what the current state of the art is, but if vasectomies could
>be made fairly painless and reversable (I don't want to totally loose
>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>for stopping the spread of HIV.
The current state of the art is that vasectomies are fairly painless
and sometimes reversable. You can also freeze a gob of sperm if that
worries you.
--
Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/CICMA/Concordia University
gsm...@concour.cs.concordia.ca
Gene Ward Smith
>> I just caught the tail end of the evening news that contained a
>>short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I
>gather,
>>the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
>>had a vasectomy.
> Either you heard wrong, or you must have been listinging to
>the National Enquirer or something. I don't think that vasectomies
>have anything to do with HIV transmission. This is the kind of
>misinformation which leads ignorant people to suddenly think that
>they can abandon safe sex.
I don't know why I keep seeing copies of this, and it is getting to
me. Chris' article indicated that this was news, and hence new, and
hence maybe you havn't heard of it yet. All I know about it is
contained in the following re-posting from sci.med.aids:
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Vasectomies and HIV
Jack Hamilton
lfo...@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Lawrence C. Foard) writes:
>
>be made fairly painless and reversable (I don't want to totally loose
>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>for stopping the spread of HIV.
I certainly wouldn't want to stake my life on it. It seems pretty unlikely
that the only HIV carrier to come out of the urethra would be sperm cells.
The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
Besides, condoms prevent infections other than HIV.
Frank Elliott
>short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I gather,
>the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
>had a vasectomy.
HIV is transmitted solely through infected cells with free viral particles
playing no role; however, I'm sure that sperm cells aren't the only cells
in semen. It may be that some other type of cell present can transmit the
virus. Presumably cutting the vas deferens would eventually keep sperm
cells out of the semen, but might not stop the introduction of other
kinds of cells.
Would someone correct me if I'm wrong about this?
Frank
ctw
>> I just caught the tail end of the evening news that contained a
>> short segment on the study of HIV virus transmission. From what I gather,
>> the HIV virus is not able to be transmitted to a partner if the man has
>> had a vasectomy.
> Untrue. Seminal fluid carries the virus, which is why there are
> gay men who can claim "No one's ever ejaculated into me and I'm
> still HIV-positive."
I was in my favorite coffee shop reading _Spin_ (admittedly, not the
best source for scientific material) and it had an article on some
new research that indicates semen may _not_ carry HIV; also, scientists
still seem to be in some confusion as to whether HIV causes AIDS or
not. Anybody know of some harder sources for this info?
--
Christopher A. Tweney / Email: ctw%qo...@gantz.bowlgreen.oh.us
USNAIL: 622 Morton, Bowling Green, Ohio 43402
{$}
I will not be held responsible for the opinions of my computer.
Rob Foye
|> The point being that perhaps
|> vasectomies are already being made more painless, and I believe they
|> are reversable with some degree of success. Does anyone know for sure?
|>
had his vasectomy reversed, and it was quite successful. He and his second
wife now have a beautiful daughter. His vasectomy was about 5 or 6 years
old.
Just a little FYI.
Gene Ward Smith
>I certainly wouldn't want to stake my life on it. It seems pretty unlikely
>that the only HIV carrier to come out of the urethra would be sperm cells.
>The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
The point would be not to stake your life on it, but to get another layer
of protection.
Last night I had a sex dream, and the nice young man came in my mouth.
Then I had to worry about AIDS. Maybe if I had dreamed he had a vasectomy
it would have helped. It's something to consider, anyway.
Rob Bernardo
>I'm sure some people will try that but in general this is a positive thing.
>I'm not sure what the current state of the art is, but if vasectomies could
>be made fairly painless and reversable (I don't want to totally loose
>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>for stopping the spread of HIV.
I'm not sure. Many of those people who would bother to go through a
vasectomy to prevent HIV from spreading are people who would be
conscientious enough to already be practicing rather safe sex.
Do you really think, e.g., that teenagers and very young adults who are
too clueless to practice safe-sex (out of that "I'm invincible" belief
people of that age often hold) are going get vasectomies.
As I see it, it's main benefit would not be in preventing new HIV
infections, but rather making more sexual activities safe.
> I think a reasonable approach would be
>to make free and anonymous vasectomies available to all who where
>interested, if they are indeed effective and a large percentage of men (gay
>and straight) got them it might be enough to virutually stop HIV
>transmission.
I very much doubt vasectomies would "sell" all that well among those
who see having offspring as just a part of their lives.
> Infact I think phobes would be very
>upset if HIV transmission was virtually stopped in the gay communitee, it
>would remove one of there biggest excuses they use to "justify homophobia".
As it's been said here before, very little homophobia actually occurs for
the reasons the homophobes state. Those are just rationalizations
(after the fact).
>Of course this is all hypothetical, the article in USA-Today said that it
>was far from certain.
Let's hope though.
--
Rob Bernardo
r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US
Rob Bernardo
>>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>>for stopping the spread of HIV.
>
>I certainly wouldn't want to stake my life on it. It seems pretty unlikely
>that the only HIV carrier to come out of the urethra would be sperm cells.
On what basis do you think it's unlikely?
>The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
Because the chances of infection were reduced so greatly that the risk
of infection was small enough to take.
--
Rob Bernardo
r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US
Jack Hamilton
In article <1992May17....@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US>
r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo) writes:
>j...@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) wrote:
>>>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>>>for stopping the spread of HIV.
>>
>>I certainly wouldn't want to stake my life on it. It seems pretty unlikely
>>that the only HIV carrier to come out of the urethra would be sperm cells.
>
>On what basis do you think it's unlikely?
Because cells other than sperm cells come out of the urethra. As someone
else pointed out, the sperm cells themselves are only a part of the
ejaculate.
>>The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
>
>Because the chances of infection were reduced so greatly that the risk
>of infection was small enough to take.
The level of risk you find acceptable is entirely up to you, of course.
Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
--
------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton
j...@netcom.com
P. O. Box 281107
SFIA, CA 94128-1107
George Dalton Madison
>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
Unlike an HIV test, a vasectomy leaves a scar one can check for.
() Seems like lesbians are *always* hanging around bushes...
() -- Amelia T. Smith
-----
[> George D. Madison | NBCS: B8f+t+w-e+s+k+a!cv | Just say NO to razors! <]
[> It's a BEAR thing -- you wouldn't understand. <|> fu...@cup.portal.com <]
Jess Anderson
In article <59...@cup.portal.com> Fu...@cup.portal.com
(George Dalton Madison) writes:
>Jack Hamilton writes:
>>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
>Unlike an HIV test, a vasectomy leaves a scar one can check for.
Excuse me, but the images of checking for it conjure up
great hilarity in my mind. "What are you *doing* down
there?" "Oh, nothing, just checking out your vasectomy
scar." Romance is getting weirder every day.
<> I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become
<> what I will be. -- Albert Einstein
--
Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin
Internet: ande...@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson
NeXTmail w/attachments: ande...@yak.macc.wisc.edu Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc
Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
Robert Coren
>
> In article <59...@cup.portal.com> Fu...@cup.portal.com
> (George Dalton Madison) writes:
> >Unlike an HIV test, a vasectomy leaves a scar one can check for.
>
> Excuse me, but the images of checking for it conjure up
> great hilarity in my mind. "What are you *doing* down
> there?" "Oh, nothing, just checking out your vasectomy
> scar." Romance is getting weirder every day.
Well, I found this image amusing too, but it's not as entirely silly
as you make it sound. The theory here is that the vasectomy is
supposed to make unshielded fellatio safe, right? Well, if this is an
issue, you're going to be in the vicinity; it doesn't seem like it
would be that difficult to make a surreptitious check.
Rob Bernardo
>About vasectomies to prevent the spread of HIV:
>
>In article <1992May17....@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US>
>r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo) writes:
>>j...@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) wrote:
>>>>the option of having kids), I think it would be a very reasonable option
>>>>for stopping the spread of HIV.
>>>
>>>I certainly wouldn't want to stake my life on it. It seems pretty unlikely
>>>that the only HIV carrier to come out of the urethra would be sperm cells.
>>
>>On what basis do you think it's unlikely?
>
>Because cells other than sperm cells come out of the urethra. As someone
>else pointed out, the sperm cells themselves are only a part of the
>ejaculate.
Do you have any idea either way whether those "other cells" (actually,
there's the extracellular fluid medium, too) carry hiv? When you say
"(un)likely", you seem to be stating something based on something more
than merely "possible". That's what I want to know; what information
is there on whether or not those "other cells" contain hiv?
>>>The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
>>
>>Because the chances of infection were reduced so greatly that the risk
>>of infection was small enough to take.
>
>The level of risk you find acceptable is entirely up to you, of course.
But your rhetorical question (and I took it rhetorically since isn't
not a novel expression) "why take the chance" implies that the risk
would be great.
>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
That's a separate issue.
--
Rob Bernardo
r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US
Jess Anderson
In article <1992May18.1...@osf.org> co...@osf.org
(Robert Coren) writes:
>In article <1992May18....@macc.wisc.edu>,
>ande...@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>> Excuse me, but the images of checking for it conjure up
>> great hilarity in my mind. "What are you *doing* down
>> there?" "Oh, nothing, just checking out your vasectomy
>> scar." Romance is getting weirder every day.
>Well, I found this image amusing too, but it's not as entirely silly
>as you make it sound. The theory here is that the vasectomy is
>supposed to make unshielded fellatio safe, right?
There are other delights in the general area (ahem).
>Well, if this is an
>issue, you're going to be in the vicinity; it doesn't seem like it
>would be that difficult to make a surreptitious check.
But you're confirming my point: perhaps I'm more of a codger
than I thought, but last time I had an opportunity to check,
surreptitiousness and romance didn't seem like a particularly
interesting mix: now, unbeknownst to you, I'm going to sneak
a peak at your ... hm, now that you mention it ... hm ...
Well, I'd like to try it before making further comments,
I guess. :-)
<> During a recent three-hour train journey in a carriage
<> full of bawling kiddies, it struck me that it is odd that
<> railways and airlines separate smokers from non-smokers,
<> but not children from people.
<> -- Eamonn McManus
Speaking of codgers ...
Jim Bouyack
>>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
>
>Unlike an HIV test, a vasectomy leaves a scar one can check for.
>
Bzzzzt! Thank you for playing.
My vasectomy left no visible scar (I just checked again to
make sure). In fact, only one week after the stiches were
removed, I could not see the scar, and I knew exactly
where to look!
I suppose every man is different, and I haven't done any
vasectomy studies, but it was my impression that most do
not leave visible scars. But there may be other signs to
look for: my "loose ends" hardened, and these can be even
funner to look for than scars!
--
--------------------
Jim Bouyack
j...@cblpe.att.com
Robert Coren
> But you're confirming my point: perhaps I'm more of a codger
> than I thought, but last time I had an opportunity to check,
> surreptitiousness and romance didn't seem like a particularly
> interesting mix: now, unbeknownst to you, I'm going to sneak
> a peak at your ... hm, now that you mention it ... hm ...
>
> Well, I'd like to try it before making further comments,
> I guess. :-)
I hope the opportunity arises, so to speak.
> <> During a recent three-hour train journey in a carriage
> <> full of bawling kiddies, it struck me that it is odd that
> <> railways and airlines separate smokers from non-smokers,
> <> but not children from people.
> <> -- Eamonn McManus
>
> Speaking of codgers ...
Well, I'm with Eamonn on this one, young codger that he is. Airplanes
and restaurants, too.
Jack Hamilton
>
>Do you have any idea either way whether those "other cells" (actually,
>there's the extracellular fluid medium, too) carry hiv? When you say
>"(un)likely", you seem to be stating something based on something more
>than merely "possible". That's what I want to know; what information
>is there on whether or not those "other cells" contain hiv?
A lay person's knowledge of medicine would tell me that, but here are some
references:
----------
Mermin JH Holodniy M Katzenstein DA Merigan TC
Detection of human immunodeficiency virus DNA and RNA in semen by the
polymerase chain reaction.
J Infect Dis 1991 Oct;164(4):769-72
<DNA, Viral/AN/BL> <HIV/GE/IP> <HIV Infections/MI> <RNA, Viral/AN/BL>
<Semen/CH/IM/MI>
<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/MI> <AIDS-Related Complex/MI>
<Gene Products, gag/AN> <Human> <HIV Antigens/AN> <Leukocyte Count>
<Leukocytes, Mononuclear/MI> <Male> <Polymerase Chain Reaction>
<Spermatozoa/MI> <Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.> <T4 Lymphocytes>
<Viral Core Proteins/AN> <MEDLINE File>
Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and semen of 23 men
infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were examined for
the presence of HIV DNA and RNA using the polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) and a nonisotopic detection assay. None of the men was
receiving antiretroviral therapy at the time of collection. Semen
samples were separated into cell-free seminal fluid, nonspermatozoal
mononuclear cells (NSMC), and spermatozoa. All of the PBMC samples,
17 (74%) of 23 NSMC samples, and none of the spermatozoal samples
were positive for HIV gag gene DNA. Of 23 cell-free seminal fluid
samples, 15 (65%) were positive for HIV gag gene RNA by PCR. Cell-
free HIV RNA was more likely to be present in the semen of men with
less than 400 than in those with greater than or equal to 400
cells/mm3 (P less than .04) and was present in all patient with p24
antigen in serum. The presence of HIV DNA in NSMC samples was not
related to CD4 cell count, disease status, or the presence of p24
antigen in the serum. This study shows that HIV nucleic acid can be
detected by PCR in either the cell-free seminal fluid or NSMC of 87%
of semen samples but not in the DNA of spermatozoa from HIV-infected
men.
Institutional address:
Department of Medicine
Stanford University Medical Center
CA 94305.
----------
Krieger JN Coombs RW Collier AC Ross SO Chaloupka K Cummings DK
Murphy VL Corey L
Recovery of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 from semen: minimal
impact of stage of infection and current antiviral chemotherapy.
J Infect Dis 1991 Feb;163(2):386-8
<HIV Infections/DT/MI> <HIV Seropositivity/DT/MI> <HIV-1/IP> <Semen/MI>
<Zidovudine/TU>
<Human> <Leukocyte Count> <Lymphocytes> <Male> <Risk Factors>
<Support, Non-U.S. Gov't> <Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.>
<MEDLINE File>
Because exposure to semen is important for the sexual transmission of
human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV), the relationship of stage
of infection and antiviral chemotherapy to isolation of HIV from
semen was investigated. Whereas HIV was isolated from peripheral
blood mononuclear cells of all seropositive persons tested, it was
isolated from semen in only 11 (32%) of 34 men, including 3 of 6 who
were studied sequentially over time. HIV was isolated from 6 (32%) of
19 semen specimens from 14 asymptomatic persons (Centers for Disease
Control [CDC] class II or III) and from 10 (28%) of 36 semen
specimens from 20 symptomatic patients (CDC class IV). Isolation of
HIV from semen did not correlate with CD4+ or CD8+ T lymphocytes
counts or zidovudine therapy. Seropositive men may shed HIV in semen
early in the course of infection, and zidovudine therapy seems to
have no effect on the recovery of HIV and, thus, on the potential for
sexual transmission of HIV.
Institutional address:
Department of Urology
University of Washington School of Medicine
Seattle 98195.
----------
Wolff H Anderson DJ
Male genital tract inflammation associated with increased numbers of
potential human immunodeficiency virus host cells in semen.
Andrologia 1988 Sep-Oct;20(5):404-10
<Genital Diseases, Male/MI> <HIV/AN> <Inflammation/MI> <Semen/MI>
<Adult> <Antigens, Differentiation, T-Lymphocyte> <Granulocytes/EN>
<Human> <Lymphocytes/AN> <Macrophages/AN> <Male> <Pancreatopeptidase/AN>
<Support, Non-U.S. Gov't> <Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.>
<MEDLINE File>
In this study we investigated whether elevated levels of the
inflammatory mediator granulocyte elastase in seminal plasma were
associated with increased numbers of CD4+ T helper/inducer
lymphocytes and monocytes/macrophages in semen, the principal host
cells of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Semen samples were
obtained from 105 men attending an infertility clinic. CD4+
lymphocytes, monocytes/macrophages and cells expressing the common
leukocyte antigen (CD45) were identified by monoclonal antibodies
(MAb's) in a biotinstreptavidin immunoperoxidase technique.
Granulocyte elastase levels in seminal plasma were determined by an
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In 17 men, granulocyte elastase
levels were higher than 1000 ng/ml seminal plasma, indicating male
genital tract inflammation. Compared to men with low/normal
granulocyte elastase levels in semen (less than 250 ng/ml), these men
showed significantly higher mean numbers of total leukocytes, CD4+
lymphocytes and monocytes/macrophages in semen (P less than 0.001);
median cell numbers for the group with high/inflammatory granulocyte
elastase levels were increased 38-fold for total leukocytes
(19,800,000 versus 520,625 per ejaculate), 19-fold for
monocytes/macrophages (2,594,000 versus 134,565), and 6-fold for CD4+
lymphocytes (82,900 versus 14,100). Because of the increased numbers
of potential HIV-host cells in inflammatory semen, male genital tract
inflammation may be an important cofactor in the sexual transmission
of the human immunodeficiency virus.
Institutional address:
Department of Obstetrics
Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Harvard Medical School
Boston
Massachusetts.
----------
Weber J
AIDS, HIV and women--the next five years.
Hum Reprod 1987 Jan;2(1):63-5
<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/EP/TM> <Disease Outbreaks/PC> <HIV/IP>
<Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/EP>
<Africa> <Female> <Fertilization in Vitro> <Great Britain> <Human>
<Pregnancy> <Risk> <Semen/MI> <Time Factors> <United States>
<MEDLINE File>
Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is caused by an RNA
retrovirus (HIV-1) and is readily transmitted heterosexually. The
viral receptor is a differentiation antigen on the surface of a class
of immunologically active cells including T 'helper' lymphocytes,
some macrophages and antigen presenting cells. HIV may be transmitted
vertically and viral antigens have been demonstrated in the placenta.
Infants of infected mothers have at least a 60% probability of
acquiring HIV in utero. The normal latent period after infection is
between 2 and 5 years, and it is estimated that for every case of
AIDS, 50-100 people may be infected. Extrapolation of these estimates
suggest 1,000,000 may already be infected and the established risk
group for AIDS may not reflect the pattern of present infection. In
Central and East Africa there now appears to be an epidemic of
enormous proportions. Oocytes and spermatozoa are not attacked by the
HIV virus but associated lymphocytes or monocytes may be infected.
Screening for HIV for semen donation is mandatory and precautions for
infection with HIV should follow procedures adopted for hepatitis B
virus.
----------
Borzy MS Connell RS Kiessling AA
Detection of human immunodeficiency virus in cell-free seminal fluid
[see comments]
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1988;1(5):419-24
<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/MI> <AIDS-Related Complex/MI> <HIV/EN/IP/UL>
<Semen/MI>
<Adult> <Cell-Free System> <Centrifugation, Density Gradient>
<Chromatography, DEAE-Cellulose> <Epididymis/MI> <Homosexuality>
<Human> <Male> <Microscopy, Electron> <Reverse Transcriptase/AN>
<Support, Non-U.S. Gov't> <Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.>
<MEDLINE File>
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was detected by assay of reverse
transcriptase activity in a "virus pellet" obtained by differential
sucrose density centrifugation of cell-free semen from three patients
with the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), one individual
with AIDS-related complex (ARC), and in an asymptomatic homosexual
male. Reverse transcriptase assays indicated virus concentrations in
the range of 10(8) particles/ml of semen, an accumulation
substantiated by electron microscopic visualization of cell-free
virus. This is the first description of cell-free retrovirus in
seminal fluid and at a greater concentration than reported for blood
or other body fluids or tissues. These results suggest that the male
reproductive tract of humans may be a reservoir of HIV expression,
and raises the possibility that the cells lining the epididymal lumen
could be chronically infected with HIV. These are important
considerations in formulating treatment and preventive strategies.
Institutional address:
Department of Pediatrics
Doernbecher Memorial Hospital for Children
Portland
Oregon.
----------
>>>>The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
>>>
>>>Because the chances of infection were reduced so greatly that the risk
>>>of infection was small enough to take.
>>
>>The level of risk you find acceptable is entirely up to you, of course.
>
>But your rhetorical question (and I took it rhetorically since isn't
>not a novel expression) "why take the chance" implies that the risk
>would be great.
The risk of infection isn't all that high under the best (for the virus) of
circumstances. The risk is there. It's not a rhetorical question. If it
might kill you, why not put on a condom?
The safe sex rules apply whether or not your partner has the same
serostatus.
>>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
>
>That's a separate issue.
I don't think so. If we're concerned with evaluating risk, we have to look
at human nature as a factor, just as we have to look at drug use as a
factor.
George Dalton Madison
>(George Dalton Madison) writes:
>>Unlike an HIV test, a vasectomy leaves a scar one can check for.
>
>Excuse me, but the images of checking for it conjure up
>great hilarity in my mind. "What are you *doing* down
>there?" "Oh, nothing, just checking out your vasectomy
>scar." Romance is getting weirder every day.
I *NEVER* claimed it would be _EASY_. ;-{)##]
() He was the patron saint of quality footwear.
() -- David St. Hubbins, on Saint Hubbins
FJ!!
]:great hilarity in my mind. "What are you *doing* down
]:there?" "Oh, nothing, just checking out your vasectomy
]:scar." Romance is getting weirder every day.
]I *NEVER* claimed it would be _EASY_. ;-{)##]
Use the full bushy beard in that area and I'll let you check up on me
anytime...
FJ!!
John Dorrance
> >The chances of infection might be reduced, but why take the chance?
>
> Because the chances of infection were reduced so greatly that the risk
> of infection was small enough to take.
I take it that getting a vasectomy won't stop you from getting exposed to
HIV, only stop you from passing it on (theoretically, anyway)? Hmm.
Here's the big question: Does a vasectomized man's cum taste different
from an unvasectomized one's?
John, thinking Sperm and Sperm Lite
John Dorrance ACM...@zeus.unomaha.edu ** Disco Diva y Flamenco Chico **
I always thought of you as my brick wall
Built like an angel, six feet tall.
Jack Hamilton
>HIV, only stop you from passing it on (theoretically, anyway)? Hmm.
>
>Here's the big question: Does a vasectomized man's cum taste different
>from an unvasectomized one's?
If you find out, let us know. I suspect not, though.
--
------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton
j...@netcom.com
P. O. Box 281107
SF, CA 94128-1107
George Dalton Madison
SHHHHHHH!!!!!! Do you want to let everyone know why it is that
so many Bears and Bear-Lovers go about with big, satisfied smiles
on their faces? I mean, I wouldn't mind if you mentioned this to
the membership of a motorcycle club or three, but announcing it
to the world at large... [shudder] Imagine the plight of Bears
being hunted by the sexually jaded in search of a new thrill
(since facefur is Fashion Death among the Queens That Matter),
Bears pestered and annoyed by these people, their sensitive noses
assaulted by clashing perfumes.... it's just TOO HORRIBLE.
Keep it under yer hat, FJ. And I'll take you up on that *IF* you
have the facefur yourself to respond in kind...... ;-{)##]
() ********* ***** **
() *************************.*
() ****** *********** ** *******o
() ******* ********* **** ****`-
() ******* ********* *****
() ****** ********** ****
() ## ***** ***** ## ****
() ### ***** ### ****
() #,,, ***,,, ##,,, **,,,
()
() Cogito Ursus Sum!
() -- Dave Lankford, "Bearhunter"
Rob Bernardo
The risk of infection in unprotected sodomy is great insofar as it's not like
the risk of getting into a fatal freeway accident during a commute.
> It's not a rhetorical question. If it
>might kill you, why not put on a condom?
If the condom reduces the pleasure so much that I don't really enjoy the
act, I'd probably just not engage in sodomy. If it turned out true that
a vasectomy cuts down risk to level that I and my partner considered
acceptable, then I'd consider engaging in sodomy without a condom.
>The safe sex rules apply whether or not your partner has the same
>serostatus.
Rules are human inventions. You speak of them as if they are somehow
absolute, perfect, and so detailed that they uniformly apply to each
and every situation with accuracy. Each of us is an adult who should
be free to assess what sorts of risks they run for themselves.
>>>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>>>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
>>
>>That's a separate issue.
>
>I don't think so. If we're concerned with evaluating risk, we have to look
>at human nature as a factor, just as we have to look at drug use as a
>factor.
There's a big difference between saying something's a separate issue
and saying it's an issue to be ignored. You seem to miss the
distinction.
--
Rob Bernardo
r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US
Paul Shorrow
>Unlike an HIV test, a vasectomy leaves a scar one can check for.
NOT TRUE my vasectomy left no visible scar
Paul
Steve Dyer
>The risk of infection in unprotected sodomy is great insofar as it's not like
>If the condom reduces the pleasure so much that I don't really enjoy the
>act, I'd probably just not engage in sodomy. If it turned out true that
Er, Rob, are you trying to be discreet here, or have you been channelling
for Arthur Hu lately? Why the Bibliolatrous vocabulary?
--
Steve Dyer
dy...@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Rod Williams
>The risk of infection in unprotected sodomy is great insofar as it's not like
>the risk of getting into a fatal freeway accident during a commute.
and later...
>If the condom reduces the pleasure so much that I don't really enjoy the
>act, I'd probably just not engage in sodomy. If it turned out true that
>a vasectomy cuts down risk to level that I and my partner considered
>acceptable, then I'd consider engaging in sodomy without a condom.
I know Rob uses words carefully, so I'm surprised to see
his repeated use here of "sodomy". I understand this to
be a pejorative term, shorthand for "the Sin of Sodom".
Moreover, when it appears in State legislation outlawing
specific sexual activities, it is often used as an umbrella
term to include *all* forms of unlawful sex, not just anal
intercourse. Or is Rob trying to reclaim the word, like
"queer", for some deliciously subversive purpose?
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjw...@pacbell.com
Mark
r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo) writes:
>
>The risk of infection in unprotected sodomy is great insofar as it's not like
>the risk of getting into a fatal freeway accident during a commute.
I really *hate* that word; it's so 'religious'.
Jess Anderson
In article <1992May20.1...@morrow.stanford.edu>
AH....@forsythe.stanford.edu (Mark) writes:
Gives you a chance to decathect, then, a good plan in
any case.
Nelson Minar
>I know Rob uses words carefully, so I'm surprised to see his repeated
>use here of "sodomy". I understand this to be a pejorative term,
>shorthand for "the Sin of Sodom".
I really like the word. A lot. It makes me hard. I also like "Catamite".
These are good words. Say it, "sodomy", you can't help but smile!
>Or is Rob trying to reclaim the word, like "queer", for some
>deliciously subversive purpose?
Always a good goal.
"Sodomy". "Reginald and I engaged in three acts of sodomy today". "I
enjoy observing people engage in sodomy". "Sodomy is the act of a man
buggering another man".
excuse me, I'm a bit hot and bothered now..
--
__
nel...@reed.edu \/ Don't tread on me
Gerry Swetsky
>Here's the big question: Does a vasectomized man's cum taste different
>from an unvasectomized one's?
I can't wait for someone's testimonial answer. :-)
>John, thinking Sperm and Sperm Lite
Tastes great!
Less filling!
Tastes great!
Less filling!
--
============================================================================
| B4 f+ g++ d t w k+: S4/7 b++ g l/- y+ z o x- a j+ v Gerry Swetsky |
| vpnet - Public access Unix and Usenet |
| Home (708)833-8122 vpnet (708)833-8126 lis...@vpnet.chi.il.us |
============================================================================
FJ!!
]:anytime.
]SHHHHHHH!!!!!! Do you want to let everyone know why it is that
]so many Bears and Bear-Lovers go about with big, satisfied smiles
]on their faces? I mean, I wouldn't mind if you mentioned this to
]the membership of a motorcycle club or three, but announcing it
]to the world at large... [shudder]
FJ!! at a motorclub, the image alone...my mind reels. Let me put it
this mildly: I'd try hard, but I think I wouldn't really fit in. Maybe
if I wouldn't move and talk or something...
]Imagine the plight of Bears
]being hunted by the sexually jaded in search of a new thrill
](since facefur is Fashion Death among the Queens That Matter),
]Bears pestered and annoyed by these people, their sensitive noses
]assaulted by clashing perfumes.... it's just TOO HORRIBLE.
Judging by what you have proclaimed to be 'these people' on previous
occasions, I must tell you that you are too late, George; _I_ already
know. Happily.
]Keep it under yer hat, FJ. And I'll take you up on that *IF* you
]have the facefur yourself to respond in kind...... ;-{)##]
Mommy, he is torturing me, he knows I don't have it.
Hey, I've got other redeeming qualities! I am a seal! Or if you don't
buy that: I am a bear in disguise! Just ask Jeff Stoker.
FJ!!
George Dalton Madison
>]Keep it under yer hat, FJ. And I'll take you up on that *IF* you
>]have the facefur yourself to respond in kind...... ;-{)##]
>
>Mommy, he is torturing me, he knows I don't have it.
No, I didn't. How would I? Besides, I have to ask if you are
saying that you don't have it at the moment, or are *not capable*
of growing a passable beard or goatee due to insufficient facial
fur density?
[Fortunately, I don't have this problem... I started growing a
full beard in my Junior year of high school, and have had it
ever since. Of course, even if I had been facial-fur
disadvantaged, I could have gotten transplants from my chest...
;-{)##]
() How many beers could a bare bear bear,
() If a bare bear could bear beer.
Henry Mensch
->>I know Rob uses words carefully, so I'm surprised to see his repeated
->>use here of "sodomy". I understand this to be a pejorative term,
->>shorthand for "the Sin of Sodom".
i thought he was just avoiding the "fuck" word ...
--
# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / <he...@ads.com>
Mara Chibnik
>i thought he was just avoiding the "fuck" word ...
Which "fuck" word was that?
--
Mara Chibnik
ma...@panix.com Life is too important to be taken seriously.
STella
>Besides, if people will lie about whether they're HIV positive, why
>wouldn't they lie about whether thy've had vasectomies.
They will. Knew a guy back in 1969 who claimed he'd had one, showed
his scars, knocked a friend up anyway. (Yes, I know she _could_ have
caught a case of fetus elsewhere, but given a choice of believing him
and believing her, I found the fact that the only person she'd brought
home in six weeks was him, and that she was blathering about him all
the time, pretty damn compelling.)
STe...@xanadu.com 1016 E. El Camino Real, #302, Sunnyvale, CA 94087