|
|
GMCarter wrote:
> On 28 Sep 2006 02:18:58 -0700, "DavidT" <david199@volcanomail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> "HIV-1 can be transmitted through contaminated blood and blood
> products, from mother to child, or through sexual contact. The
> predominant mode of transmission of human immunodeficiency virus
> worldwide is heterosexual intercourse."
>
> You use the numbers as if they prove that heterosexuals have nothing
> to worry about. How silly. How deeply stupid and uncomprehending of
> the paper you cite.
>
> You want to use this paper to neatly wrap up your delusions.
>
> Sadly, it doesn't work that way.
>
> But, and I agree with David, there are definitely ways to reduce HIV
> transmissibility that we have LONG known about. Condoms. Diagnosis and
> treatment of concomitant STIs.
>
> What is also ridiculous about your assertions is that you don't look
> at the risk of other infections. Syphilis. Gonorrhea. Chlamydia.
>
>
> George M. Carter
drdach replies:
We know from HIV testing of military recruits that the incidence of an
HIV positive test in the general population is about 4 per thousand.
This is public domain data.
Assuming random heterosexual contacts in this population, it is easy to
calculate the number of sexual contacts needed for HIV transmission and
sero-conversion for the average person.
On the average, 250 different sexual contacts within the general
population will be required to find the one HIV positive person who
could then transmit the HIV virus. Assuming a monogamous relationship
with this HIV positive person, 1000 sexual contact with that one person
would then be needed for HIV transmission. However, instead of a
monogamous relationship, there is the continued pattern of unprotected
sexual contacts throughout the general population, then 250 x 1000
would be the calculated number of sexual contacts. This requires
250,000 different sexual contacts. This explains why heterosexual
transmission of HIV in the general population is quite rare. It is far
more likely that our hypothetical sexually adventurous individual would
have multiple recurring garden variety nasty STD's with their
consequences for many years before HIV seroconversion. This also
explains why no heterosexual epidemic has materialized after 20 years
of dire predictions.
The numbers change of course for high risk populations where many of
the sexual partners are HIV positive. For example if our hypothetical
adventurous person has sex with 300 people per year (one a day) and all
these people are HIV positive, then one could calculate sero-conversion
within three years. Of course, other factors such as co-existing STD's
may accelerate this time table.
So this then brings us to a discussion of the question of the origin of
the HIV in the 0.4 per cent (4 per thousand) of the general population
which is HIV positive, if heterosexual transmission would require
250,000 different sexual contacts. How did these 0.4 percent or 1
million people in the general population get to be HIV positive? The
obvious possible answer is via maternal - fetal transmission. They
received the HIV from their mothers.
For readers who would like more discussion of this issue, please reply
to my contact page on my web site www.drdach.com
Here is direct quote from Horsburg's article from an AIDS conference
which provides a reference for the 1 per thousand number. This is the
article you are asking about and here is the quote which you can read
for yourself.
Longini IM Jr., Clark WS, Haber M and Horsburgh CR. The stages of
HIV-1
infection, ... heterosexual HIV-1 transmission. J Infect Dis
1990,161:833-877
"The probability of transmission of HIV-1 from male to female during
an
episode of intercourse has been examined in seven studies. Analysis of
data from North American and European studies of heterosexual couples
provide estimates of per-sex-act HIV-1 transmission of approximately 1
in 1000 (0.001, ranging from 0.0008 to 0.002)."
http://www.retroconference.org/2001/posters/222.pdf
regards from www.drdach.com
|
|