Guys: would you date a girl with herpes

[Art_Critic]

"it's irrelevant with HSV and HPV because a condom doesn't guard you. Both live in the boxer shorts region, so there's no safe sex when it comes to these diseases.

 

See.. now that is speaking misinformation.."

 

How is that misinformation? Perhaps she should have said "100% guard you", but still, what you pasted said exactly the same:

 

"Genital ulcer diseases can occur in both male and female genital areas that are covered or protected by a latex condom, as well as in areas that are not covered. Correct and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce the risk of genital herpes."

 

Yes, a condom can help reduce the risk, but it does not 100% protect. This is because HSV is site specific - you pass the virus through infected skin-to-skin contact. If the area you get HSV is one that is covered by the condom, then yes, a condom reduces the likelihood of skin to skin contact and so reduces the risk of transference. If the area you get HSV is not covered by the condom, then a condom does not reduce the risk at all. Again, though, it is down to skin-to-skin contact, so if that area does not come into contact with your partner's body, then the risk is reduced again. If there are no symptoms present then the risk is even more greatly reduced - most doctors speculate that viral shedding, if it exists, occurs on less than 5% of days on average.

 

 

You're stretching Macon...She stated that Safe Sex is irrelevant in protecting someone from contracting the virus when clearly the CDC doesn't think so..

 

If you are so into correcting the misinformation then why didn't you correct that poster ??

 

You claim I'm the one spreading misinformation when clearly there have been 2 posters in the last few pages that I have corrected their misinformation and you have not..

[Replicant]

Replicant, you have also said I am putting other people's lives at risk. The facts are I have a non life-threatening virus, and I am honest and open and I practice safe sex. How can this put lives at risk?

 

Are you trying to differentiate between a fatal disease vs one which incurs suffering to a unspecific degree? Because like any disease it effects everyone differently, symptoms may be limited or severe. Regardless of safe sex procedures, and application of disease education. The only difference is you are aware you have it, and now are providing a choice. If they choose to accept then you consider it is an educated an non biased person in your eyes, they are able to look beyond the disease. But the fact remains, our immune systems cannot remove HSV so essentially beneath all the emotion and education exchanged you are putting an uninfected persons health at risk here based on statistics and assumption. If a large number of those 40 million adopted this thinking, and applied it through various (which is pretty normal now) future relationships is it any wonder why STD's are climbing and not falling?? Pharmaceutical companies are laughing all the way to the bank on this.

[MrsHellnoFire]

I was surprised to learn on here that 40 mil people in the us have this disease. Now I wonder, since many here say that safe sex eliminates much of the risk, does that mean over 13% of the us population (much higher when assuming the 15+ year old category- i dont have time to look into precise stats) is involved in such risky behavior, or is it easier to contract than most are aware. I think most people just believe a condom will do. It's just not always the case and there should be more thorough sex ed at our schools. It's like we are being under-educated on purpose.

[macon]

I'm not sure which 2 posters you are referring to. Replicant believes HSV is a life-threatening disease. If you're the one correcting all the misinformation round here, how have you conveniently ignored all those posts? It's ridiculous to accuse me of being selective when you have clearly been so yourself.

[macon]

"Are you trying to differentiate between a fatal disease vs one which incurs suffering to a unspecific degree? Because like any disease it effects everyone differently, symptoms may be limited or severe. "

 

I am saying that HSV is not life-threatening. That is a very simple premise and is medical fact. Of course disease affect individuals differently, especially in the case of HSV - but that's not to the extreme of killing some and not others! Having Genital Herpes is NOT LIFE-THREATENING - why can you not accept this fact?

 

"Regardless of safe sex procedures, and application of disease education."

 

I personally think safe sex and disease education is essential. Why don't you?

 

"But the fact remains, our immune systems cannot remove HSV so essentially beneath all the emotion and education exchanged you are putting an uninfected persons health at risk here based on statistics and assumption. "

 

Statistics and assumption? I'm sorry? More like medical science, education, honesty and respect.

[MrsHellnoFire]

I think one of the scariest phenomenons that I've read recently (i know im a little behind in this area of news- article from 2003) were pertaining to "bug chasers".. now this was specifically tied to "AIDS" in the article, but the same mode of thinking would likely be linked to other diseases as well. It basically stated that there is an underground group of people that CHASE the Aids virus. They get aroused by taking the risk of infection. The entire article interviewed a few of these guys and I was completely disturbed afterwards.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5939950/bug_chasers

[dreamergrl]

See.. now that is speaking misinformation..

 

It is being spoken out of not being educated enough or being ill-informed or is it just ignorance ?

 

According to the CDC:

 

http://www.cdc.gov/std/herpes/STDFact-herpes.htm

 

A condom only covers your penis. Not your boxer short region. HSV and HPV lay in more then just your penis. You'd need to completely cover your butt, upper thighs, any where pubic hair covers, and the same for the girl you'd be sleeping with to eliminate risk, and that's assuming you stay covered, nothing busts or breaks. A condom will not protect you from either of these diseases. And that's just genitally....

[dreamergrl]

Who said Macon is putting other people's lives at risk?? Is that suppose to mean that anyone with an STD should not be able to be with another person who doesn't have that disease??

 

As long as Macon or anyone else with and STD for that matter is honest with their partner - no one is putting anyone at risk. It's the other person's choice, and there are people out there willing to deal with HSV and not be so judgmental.

 

HSV doesn't kill people. As long as the person maintains a healthy life style, HSV will cause very minimal problems. Most don't even deal with symptoms.

[macon]

I'd add to that that educating yourself and your partner should be the first step toward safer sex. If you get the information and deal with the facts, not the fiction, then you should be able to have a great sex life without transference.

 

I also think we should educate people with oral herpes that they should disclose their HSV status and realise that they are also a potential STD risk. For some reason no one thinks to reveal this, and it is just as important to disclose oral herpes as revealing you have genital herpes.

 

One of my best friends' has been having unprotected sex with her husband for well over 10 years, and he has no symptoms. They don't have sex when she has a symptom, and like many of us, she only gets symptoms yearly. He may have the disease already - before he met her, or he may have caught it from her - the difficulty with HSV is that anyone can have it because so many don't exhibit symptoms and there is no 100% surefire test unless symptoms are present.

 

We are all people and we can all catch this disease, regardless of our sexual activity. Realising that it is certainly not a death sentence, or the end of your sex life, and very unlikely to be the beginning of a lifetime of medication, is very important. Deal with facts not fiction.

[Art_Critic]

HSV doesn't kill people. As long as the person maintains a healthy life style, HSV will cause very minimal problems. Most don't even deal with symptoms.

 

I would agree that Herpes isn't "Life" threatening.. but after saying that there are many life threatening complications that can arise out of having herpes.

 

Herpes can lead to something that can kill you..

 

Possible Complications

 

Various complications are associated with herpes infection. The herpes virus is of special significance to women because research has found that it can cause cancer of the cervix. The risk increases when HSV is present in combination with human papilloma virus (HPV), the virus responsible for genital warts (condyloma).

 

For pregnant women, HSV-1 or HSV-2 on the outside of the genitals or in the birth canal is a threat to the infant. Infection of the newborn can lead to herpetic meningitis, herpetic viremia, chronic skin infection, and even death.

 

Herpes infection also poses a serious problem for people who have a weakened immune system because they have AIDS, are undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy, or take high doses of cortisone. These people may develop infections of various organs, including:

 

* Encephalitis (rare)

* Herpetic esophagitis (herpes infection of the esophagus)

* Herpetic keratitis (herpes infection of the eye)

* Herpetic hepatitis (herpes infection of the liver)

* Incontinence

* Persistent infection of the mucous membranes and skin of the nose, mouth, and throat

* Pneumonitis (herpes infection of the lung)

* Recurrent disease

* Spread of the virus to other organs of the body

* Transverse myelopathy (damage that extends across the spinal cord)

 

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000857.htm#Complications

[dreamergrl]

I would agree that Herpes isn't "Life" threatening.. but after saying that there are many life threatening complications that can arise out of having herpes.

 

Herpes can lead to something that can kill you..

 

 

 

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000857.htm#Complications

Various complications are associated with herpes infection. The herpes virus is of special significance to women because research has found that it can cause cancer of the cervix. The risk increases when HSV is present in combination with human papilloma virus (HPV), the virus responsible for genital warts (condyloma).

 

For pregnant women, HSV-1 or HSV-2 on the outside of the genitals or in the birth canal is a threat to the infant. Infection of the newborn can lead to herpetic meningitis, herpetic viremia, chronic skin infection, and even death.

 

Herpes infection also poses a serious problem for people who have a weakened immune system because they have AIDS, are undergoing chemotherapy or radiation therapy, or take high doses of cortisone. These people may develop infections of various organs, including:

 

* Encephalitis (rare)

* Herpetic esophagitis (herpes infection of the esophagus)

* Herpetic keratitis (herpes infection of the eye)

* Herpetic hepatitis (herpes infection of the liver)

* Incontinence

* Persistent infection of the mucous membranes and skin of the nose, mouth, and throat

* Pneumonitis (herpes infection of the lung)

* Recurrent disease

* Spread of the virus to other organs of the body

* Transverse myelopathy (damage that extends across the spinal cord)

 

All of these are combined with another STD - with the exception of pregnancy which is easily fixed by a c-section.

 

The actual STD related to cervical cancer is HPV - and a specific strain of HPV at that.

 

And yes, if your immune system sucks, you can catch something else easier, but that's a normal thing with or without HSV.

 

HSV alone is not deadly.

[Art_Critic]

All of these are combined with another STD - with the exception of pregnancy which is easily fixed by a c-section.

 

The actual STD related to cervical cancer is HPV - and a specific strain of HPV at that.

 

And yes, if your immune system sucks, you can catch something else easier, but that's a normal thing with or without HSV.

 

HSV alone is not deadly.

 

I think you misread that ..

The risk is INCREASED with the addition of another STD..

 

Also.. Please don't minimize the seriousness of those complications.. they are very real and some are life threatening..

 

 

Various complications are associated with herpes infection. The herpes virus is of special significance to women because research has found that it can cause cancer of the cervix. The risk increases when HSV is present in combination with human papilloma virus (HPV), the virus responsible for genital warts (condyloma).

[Art_Critic]

HSV alone is not deadly.

 

I already agreed with you on that point earlier..

No need to repost it as I can read.

 

My post was about complications and I posted that I was speaking about complications.

[macon]

The increased risk of cervical cancer is mainly linked to HPV, not to HSV. HSV is a virus that acts in conjunction with HPV to increase a woman's risk, not something that causes increased risk on its own. However, medical science continues to study this, so I wouldn't say the research is conclusive yet, and it may still be that HSV increases your risk of cancer.

 

I would note that other factors, such as smoking, how many children a woman has given birth to and how long she has used oral contraceptive also significantly affect cervical cancer risk. Smoking and oral contraceptives carry a much greater risk than HSV alone.

 

There are life-threatening complications that can arise out of many diseases - the common cold can lead to pneumonia - but we should treat these possibilities with a realistic eye. We are certainly lucky that we in the 'affluent west' live at a time when we have access to medical attention, and if you know you are at an increased risk because of disease or lifestyle then you can mitigate that risk.

[Replicant]

Again, Replicant, I'll ask you -

 

You have said I am putting other people's lives at risk. The facts are I have a non life-threatening virus, and I am honest and open and I practice safe sex. How can this put lives at risk?

 

A direct quote from Art Critic's link, the exact CDC web page i have already read, and has been linked in this thread at least once before.

 

"Genital herpes can cause recurrent painful genital sores in many adults, and herpes infection can be severe in people with suppressed immune systems. Regardless of severity of symptoms, genital herpes frequently causes psychological distress in people who know they are infected.

 

In addition, genital HSV can lead to potentially fatal infections in babies. It is important that women avoid contracting herpes during pregnancy because a newly acquired infection during late pregnancy poses a greater risk of transmission to the baby. If a woman has active genital herpes at delivery, a cesarean delivery is usually performed. Fortunately, infection of a baby from a woman with herpes infection is rare.

Herpes may play a role in the spread of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Herpes can make people more susceptible to HIV infection, and it can make HIV-infected individuals more infectious."

 

 

 

To me infant mortality is death, and is life threatening. While in adults it is not as HSV alone, BUT when coupled with a compromised immune system or with other variables that status quickly can be changed to becoming something life threatening. You cannot dismiss the extent of how it will effect different people based on the best case scenario of HSV.

 

 

 

Why are you disputing this and trying to downplay the seriousness of the disease? Are you going to tell me the CDC are a bunch of uneducated liars?

[Art_Critic]

The increased risk of cervical cancer is mainly linked to HPV, not to HSV. HSV is a virus that acts in conjunction with HPV to increase a woman's risk, not something that causes increased risk on its own. However, medical science continues to study this, so I wouldn't say the research is conclusive yet, and it may still be that HSV increases your risk of cancer.

 

Well.... to quote another poster in this thread...

 

Well' date=' seeing as somewhere between 70 and 90% of people have HPV, it's likely you do.... AND, unfortunately for YOU, men cannot be tested for HPV, only women can. That's why your whole "superiority" argument makes me laugh.[/quote']

 

then if you apply that to the statistics that everyone has been quoting of 1 in 4 people have herpes then the chances of a woman having both HPV and Herpes are pretty high...

 

I still believe that the way I read the CDC link that Herpes does cause cervical cancer in woman but HPV increases the risk...

 

and as far as smoking and other things causing cancer.. yeah we all know they do..

Mentioning that is just a tactic you are using to minimize the risk

 

this thread is about Herpes..

[macon]

"I still believe that the way I read the CDC link that Herpes does cause cervical cancer in woman but HPV increases the risk..."

 

Read more than just one internet link - you have it round the wrong way. The increased risk is from HPV, and HSV in conjunction with it, not on its own.

 

As regards your other comments, I'm sorry, I thought we were trying to pass information here? I was mentioning other risk factors for cervical cancer to put the HSV risk into context - that is very relevant to this discussion. How is that 'a tactic'? A tactic for what? What were you mentioning the risk of cervical cancer for then, if it wasn't to educate? Was it just to, in some way, to 'score points' against me?

 

I think you may have lost sight of this as a discussion.

[macon]

"and as far as smoking and other things causing cancer.. yeah we all know they do.."

 

You'd be surprised - most people think smoking only increases your risk of lung cancer, not cervical cancer

[Art_Critic]

As regards your other comments, I'm sorry, I thought we were trying to pass information here? I was mentioning other risk factors for cervical cancer to put the HSV risk into context - that is very relevant to this discussion. How is that 'a tactic'? A tactic for what? What were you mentioning the risk of cervical cancer for then, if it wasn't to educate? Was it just to, in some way, to 'score points' against me?

 

I think you may have lost sight of this as a discussion.

 

Lost sight ???. what are you talking about ?..

 

I'm sorry I mentioned the tactic..

but I see many of your posts as trying to lessen or minimize the seriousness of contracting herpes and I feel the cigarette analogy was being used to show the reduction of importance of contracting this disease.

 

Maybe you could tell me why you mentioned the cigarette analogy then ?, maybe it is relevant to herpes and i'm missing something.

[macon]

I think I just did. Again you spread misinformation by saying that HSV increases the risk of cervical cancer - when it is HPV that does that, and HSV only in conjunction with it. I wanted to put the HSV risk into context - otherwise you may have people thinking, from your words, "oh my goodness, if I get HSV I'm going to get cervical cancer!!!" You know, a lot of people who read this thread seem to be uneducated about this subject - I imagine many may also be uneducated about the ways in which the risk of cervical cancer can be increased.

 

"But I see many of your posts as trying to lessen or minimize the seriousness of contracting herpes"

 

No, I'm not trying to lessen or minimize the seriousness of contracting Herpes - I'm trying to present a realistic picture using personal experience and the facts, of which I know a great deal. I think it's likely that I appear to be minimizing the seriousness because the level of seriousness those who don't know too much about Herpes attach to it is inaccurate in the majority of cases.

 

This is the fault of the media and the fault of ourselves for not seeking out education calmly. It is also because, for some reason, we in the west still hold on to an idea that sex is somehow dirty - I think some religions have an awful lot to do with that, but I won't go off on that tangent ...

 

I am trying to dispel some of this misinformation. I passionately believe in reacting to things as they are, rather than fearing things and judging others through ignorance. The fact remains that the majority of people have some form of HSV - we need to stop talking about it as if that's not a fact.

 

I am not trying to score points from you. If I was I would have made a lot of other comments by now.

[Art_Critic]

Again you spread misinformation by saying that HSV increases the risk of cervical cancer -

 

dude.. I posted the CDC link that states what I said.. if you consider what the CDC has to say about the subject as misinformation then so be it..

the same link that has been posted by many of the people who are knowledgeable about herpes..

 

I DID NOT post any misinformation..

 

Please post your sources that refutes what the CDC has found ??

[lovestruck818]

"and as far as smoking and other things causing cancer.. yeah we all know they do.."

 

You'd be surprised - most people think smoking only increases your risk of lung cancer, not cervical cancer

 

Word. The risks of all kinds of cancer are increased when you smoke. Doctors are also reluctant to give people who smoke the birth control pill. Smoking is bad, mmmkay?

[macon]

You know, information is available elsewhere than on the internet. But since you demand web links:

 

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/444106

 

http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2002/E/20023118.html

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2404263.stm

 

http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/cervicalcancerqa/a/cervcanriskfaq.htm

 

Yes, I do think the CDC article is misleading - however, you may recall in a previous post I said that the research is not complete and that they may be discover HSV causes an increased risk on its own - it's possible. I am aware that medicine is an evolving science and we discover new links all the time.

 

Also, could you stop calling me dude? I'm a lovely 33 year old woman from London thanks