Guys: would you date a girl with herpes

[Art_Critic]

New things have came into play.

 

Could you enlighten us as to what those new things are that have come into play that might make what Krtyie's physician said as being no longer valid ?

[dreamergrl]

If you know how our immune system works, it detects viruses using... glycoproteins if I remember correctly. That's why one virus such as cowpox can provide you immunity to smallpox as well... even though the viruses are different.

 

How many different types of strains of "colds" are out there? Just because you get them every year, doesn't mean your body is immune to the rest of them.

 

HSV 1 and 2 are completely different. They transmit similar, yes, but remain different. HSV 1 doesn't come with the same blisters. So the symptoms are quite different. A 1 sore/blister is quite different then 2.

[dreamergrl]

Could you enlighten us as to what those new things are that have come into play that might make what Krtyie's physician said as being no longer valid ?

 

For one, it was once thought that HSV is only transmitted during an outbreak. Now it's been proven that you can transmit it without an outbreak through viral shedding.

 

Viral shedding occurs most often with herpes simplex virus infections. The virus remains in cells in the body after the first infection in a latent or dormant form. At some point this latency ends and the virus begins to multiply becoming transmittable. This shedding may or may not be accompanied by symptoms of a rash. HSV-2 is more likely to shed than HSV-1, especially in women. As a matter of fact, it is possible that over half of the people infected with HSV-2 shed the virus at some time without having any symptoms or rash. It is also estimated that one-third of all HSV-2 infections are caused when a non-infected person comes in contact with someone who is shedding virus without symptoms.

[Art_Critic]

For one, it was once thought that HSV is only transmitted during an outbreak. Now it's been proven that you can transmit it without an outbreak through viral shedding.

 

How does that make Krytie's statement incorrect ?

 

I'm not saying that his physician is right or wrong.. I'm just asking why you think he is wrong and asking for that info.

 

Also, and this is what a doctor told me six years ago when I asked... I haven't researched it myself, but if you have HSV-1, you are less likely to be infected with HSV-II because the virus already exists in your body.

[dreamergrl]

How does that make Krytie's statement incorrect ?

 

I'm not saying that his physician is right or wrong.. I'm just asking why you think he is wrong and asking for that info.

 

My point is so much has been learned since then - to rely on information about a common disease given to you that long ago is ignorant.

 

If you have HSV 1 orally you can still just as easily get HSV 2 genitally, however where it becomes unlikely but not impossible, is getting both simplexes in the same area.

 

http://www.herpes.com/hsv1-2.html

[dreamergrl]

Look at it this way, if you could become immune to HSV 2 because you have HSV 1, with 90% of the population having HSV 1, how would so many people have HSV 2??

 

Also if it where that simple, there would be a vaccine for simplex 2 and 1. There is not.

[BUENG1]

Look at it this way, if you could become immune to HSV 2 because you have HSV 1, with 90% of the population having HSV 1, how would so many people have HSV 2??

 

Also if it where that simple, there would be a vaccine for simplex 2 and 1. There is not.

 

The structure of the two viruses are nearly identical, so it makes sense that having one would make you less susceptible to the other. No one said that you would be immune he said that you would be less likely to get the other one.

[dreamergrl]

The structure of the two viruses are nearly identical, so it makes sense that having one would make you less susceptible to the other. No one said that you would be immune he said that you would be less likely to get the other one.

 

Again is only less likely should they be in the same area. It's not nearly either, they share 50% of the same DNA.

 

It too was ONCE thought because you have one you wont get the other, which WAS proven wrong.

[Art_Critic]

My point is so much has been learned since then - to rely on information about a common disease given to you that long ago is ignorant.

 

You keep using the word ignorant.. I'm about over that shiot..

WTF is wrong with you people ?.. can you not have a debate without calling another poster ignorant ?

 

Yesterday I was told that if I don't have any experience in having herpes then I shouldn't post about the cost of medicine even though I wasn't even making any factual assertions but today you are posting info and making factual assertions with out any data to back it up.

 

All I have asked you to do is supply the reasoning behind your assertions and also to back it up..

[dreamergrl]

You keep using the word ignorant.. I'm about over that shiot..

WTF is wrong with you people ?.. can you not have a debate without calling another poster ignorant ?

 

Yesterday I was told that if I don't have any experience in having herpes then I shouldn't post about the cost of medicine even though I wasn't even making any factual assertions but today you are posting info and making factual assertions with out any data to back it up.

 

All I have asked you to do is supply the reasoning behind your assertions and also to back it up..

 

It is ignorant to rely on outdated information on a disease you want to debate about. Be up to date and current if you want to use it.

 

And I did back it up, I listed a website. Here's another http://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2005;volume=71;issue=1;spage=26;epage=30;aulast=Shivaswamy

 

Amongst 135 STD clinic cases, 106 cases were males and 29 cases were females with male to female ratio of 3.65:1. The mean age was 32.2 years (range 16-65 years). Among study group cases, 112 (82.9%) cases were co-infected with HSV-1 and HSV-2, 11 (8.1%) cases were seropositive for HSV-1 alone and 3 (2.2%) cases were seropositive for HSV-2 alone. In the control group, 112 (82.9%) cases were co-infected with HSV-1 and 2, 12 (9.6%) for HSV-1 alone and 1(0.8%) for HSV-2 alone.

[Trialbyfire]

It is ignorant to rely on outdated information on a disease you want to debate about. Be up to date and current if you want to use it.

 

And I did back it up, I listed a website. Here's another http://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2005;volume=71;issue=1;spage=26;epage=30;aulast=Shivaswamy

 

Amongst 135 STD clinic cases, 106 cases were males and 29 cases were females with male to female ratio of 3.65:1. The mean age was 32.2 years (range 16-65 years). Among study group cases, 112 (82.9%) cases were co-infected with HSV-1 and HSV-2, 11 (8.1%) cases were seropositive for HSV-1 alone and 3 (2.2%) cases were seropositive for HSV-2 alone. In the control group, 112 (82.9%) cases were co-infected with HSV-1 and 2, 12 (9.6%) for HSV-1 alone and 1(0.8%) for HSV-2 alone.

You might be careful what you're saying about ignorant v. outdated. The study you linked has the following lifespan:

 

September 2001 to April 2003

[dreamergrl]

You keep using the word ignorant.. I'm about over that shiot..

WTF is wrong with you people ?.. can you not have a debate without calling another poster ignorant ?

 

Yesterday I was told that if I don't have any experience in having herpes then I shouldn't post about the cost of medicine even though I wasn't even making any factual assertions but today you are posting info and making factual assertions with out any data to back it up.

 

All I have asked you to do is supply the reasoning behind your assertions and also to back it up..

 

And actually you were making factual assertions about the cost of herpes, that you'd spend x amount in a life time, when in fact two thirds of infected people don't even have cases that severe, and those who do, a majority of them only have 4-6 severe cases.

[dreamergrl]

You might be careful what you're saying about ignorant v. outdated. The study you linked has the following lifespan:

 

That's more up to date then a doctor's visit 6 years ago.

[Untouchable_Fire]

How many different types of strains of "colds" are out there? Just because you get them every year, doesn't mean your body is immune to the rest of them.

 

HSV 1 and 2 are completely different. They transmit similar, yes, but remain different. HSV 1 doesn't come with the same blisters. So the symptoms are quite different. A 1 sore/blister is quite different then 2.

 

The cold is not a retrovirus.

 

Also, HSV1 and HSV2 are both structurally similar. Look it up if you don't believe me.

[dreamergrl]

The cold is not a retrovirus.

 

Also, HSV1 and HSV2 are both structurally similar. Look it up if you don't believe me.

 

They only share 50% of the same dna. I've studied it plenty. Like someone else here, I've dated a person with HSV-2 - and became educated on it.

[Trialbyfire]

That's more up to date then a doctor's visit 6 years ago.

Not by much since the study began over 7 years ago.

 

Regardless, I need to go out for awhile so I can't focus on that study. Of what I saw from a quick cursory glance, it was a very small study with under 150 people involved, in India, where your average person isn't as healthy as North America, thus have lower immune systems. Also, the study was heavily swayed by men v. women. I'm certain I could rip it apart more when I have time and I'm most definitely not a medical expert. Are you one?

[Art_Critic]

My point is so much has been learned since then - to rely on information about a common disease given to you that long ago is ignorant.

 

If you have HSV 1 orally you can still just as easily get HSV 2 genitally, however where it becomes unlikely but not impossible, is getting both simplexes in the same area.

 

http://www.herpes.com/hsv1-2.html

 

You keep posting links to studies and such and they don't back up your assertion that Krytie's physician is wrong..

Unless of course it is buried deep in that study and in that case I certainly don't have 2 hours to read it..

 

I did find this little nugget in your link though disproving your assertion and proving Kryties physician as being correct.

According to one study, almost 100% of recognizable HSV-2 infection is genital (Nahmias, Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases Supplement, 1990). One reason is that most adults are already infected with HSV-1 orally, which provides some immunity against infection with HSV 2. Another reason is that oral HSV-2 rarely reactivates, so even if an infection does exist, no one knows.

 

thanks for the link anyhow..

 

Maybe you should read the links you post yourself.

[dreamergrl]

You keep posting links to studies and such and they don't back up your assertion that Krytie's physician is wrong..

Unless of course it is buried deep in that study and in that case I certainly don't have 2 hours to read it..

 

I did find this little nugget in your link though disproving your assertion and proving Kryties physician as being correct.

 

 

thanks for the link anyhow..

 

Maybe you should read the links you post yourself.

 

I have read it, the whole thing - it states that it's less likely to get both in the SAME area.

 

Did you bother reading the other study?

 

 

Here... I'll restate it for you

 

It is ignorant to rely on outdated information on a disease you want to debate about. Be up to date and current if you want to use it.

 

And I did back it up, I listed a website. Here's another http://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2005;volume=71;issue=1;spage=26;epage=30;aulast=Shivaswamy

 

Amongst 135 STD clinic cases, 106 cases were males and 29 cases were females with male to female ratio of 3.65:1. The mean age was 32.2 years (range 16-65 years). Among study group cases, 112 (82.9%) cases were co-infected with HSV-1 and HSV-2, 11 (8.1%) cases were seropositive for HSV-1 alone and 3 (2.2%) cases were seropositive for HSV-2 alone. In the control group, 112 (82.9%) cases were co-infected with HSV-1 and 2, 12 (9.6%) for HSV-1 alone and 1(0.8%) for HSV-2 alone.

[Art_Critic]

I have read it, the whole thing - it states that it's less likely to get both in the SAME area.

 

Did you bother reading the other study?

 

 

Here... I'll restate it for you

 

 

Here is Krytie's post again. you seem to be confused...

 

Also, and this is what a doctor told me six years ago when I asked... I haven't researched it myself, but if you have HSV-1, you are less likely to be infected with HSV-II because the virus already exists in your body.

[Art_Critic]

It is ignorant to rely on outdated information on a disease you want to debate about. Be up to date and current if you want to use it.

 

It seems you are using outdated information.. are you relying on that info ?

[Untouchable_Fire]

They only share 50% of the same dna. I've studied it plenty. Like someone else here, I've dated a person with HSV-2 - and became educated on it.

 

So, you feel this topic is very personal?

 

I've never been in a LTR with anyone that I knew had HSV2. I've stopped dating 3 different women when I found out they had it. 2 were up front and honest... 1 is still a good friend. The 3rd I found out through her Ex, and that made me very, very upset, though in her defense we had not gotten into a situation where I might be at risk. My stance is that I want to know way in advance... like 2nd or 3rd date!

[dreamergrl]

Here is Krytie's post again. you seem to be confused...

 

I'm not confused. If you have HSV 1 ORALLY it doesn't lesson your chance of getting HSV 2 GENITALLY.

 

If you have 1 genitally, you have a less chance of getting an infection with simplex 2 genitally.

 

Less chance off getting an OB in the same area. Your body can build up the anti bodies to reject the infection but you can carry both viruses. You're body can't completely fight off an infection for hsv 2 just because you have hsv 1. Carrying the virus and getting an infection (OB) are two different things.

[Art_Critic]

I reposted my original post about the cost..

I was not making factual statements.. reread my post

 

I also posted info later on that backed up my assertion as well as another poster who has experience talking about the cost if uninsured and on a particular medicine and the cost was within what I had asserted..

 

And actually you were making factual assertions about the cost of herpes, that you'd spend x amount in a life time, when in fact two thirds of infected people don't even have cases that severe, and those who do, a majority of them only have 4-6 severe cases.

 

 

 

Nobody has mentioned the cost for medicine therapy for an entire lifetime as being a factor to consider not jumping into the herpes pool.

Something tells me that the medicines are very expensive and the therapies and regimens can be very costly as well...

 

Throughout a lifetime herpes could well cost into the 10's of thousands of dollars or even higher to properly care for..

[Art_Critic]

............

[dreamergrl]

............

 

According to one study, almost 100% of recognizable HSV-2 infection is genital (Nahmias, Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases Supplement, 1990). One reason is that most adults are already infected with HSV-1 orally, which provides some immunity against infection with HSV 2. Another reason is that oral HSV-2 rarely reactivates, so even if an infection does exist, no one knows.

 

It's saying that HSV 2 is mainly GENITAL because they've built up anti bodies ORALLY - given that so many people have HSV 1 orally, since childhood, so their bodies have built up anti bodies ORALLY.