Skye249

Doc said asymptomatic shedding more likely in asymptomatic people

6 posts in this topic

A doctor speaking at the Herpes Viruses Association (HVA) conference I went to in February said that asymptomatic shedding is twice as likely to happen as outbreaks and that people who've never had an outbreak may asymptomatically shed the virus more than people who are symptomatic. He said this was because people who have outbreaks deal with the virus this way, while in asymptomatic people, their bodies are more likely to deal with the virus by shedding it without symptoms. 

Everything I read prior to the conference stated the opposite - that people who have outbreaks shed more asymptomatically. 

Are there two schools of thought on this?

And what does this mean for people who have outbreaks for the first few years after contracting the virus and then stop having them? 

hurryup likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Skye249 I've read both. I think what it comes down to is nothing is definitive with this virus. It just depends on the individual. If you are + the best you can do is manage your outbreaks, disclose, use protection, and perhaps suppressive therapy. And hope for a cure/vaccine in the near future. 

Whyyyyy, crisper and Dan S H like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks hopingforthebest08. I think you are right. 

It just makes me think this is another reason to encourage testing. 

hopingforthebest08 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup.  The answer is:

 

We doctors are clueless.  No ryhme or reason.  Might be a slightly dif strain, poorer immune system or a bunch of dif reasons mixed....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you please elaborate @SupermansJustice

Edited by Skye249
To add @

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Los médicos se quedaron con los libros  y el concepto de los 80 y 90 ni siquiera saben diagnosticar al 100% el hsv menos van a saber de lesiones y arrojar 

Esta la creencia de que si no hay brote no hay contagió

La creencia de que es sólo un problema de la piel

La creencia de que el medicamento de supresión es 100% eficaz

La creencia de que puedes llevar una vida normal sin que te afecte físicamente y emocionalmente ya que para ellos sólo es un problema de la piel y que si no tienes lesiones no derramas 

En mi opinión los asintomáticos controlan un poco más la replicación del hsv pero eso no existen lesiones pero eso no evita que se escapen alguna partículas virales y se expongan en la piel

 

The doctors kept the books and the concept of the 80s and 90s do not even know to diagnose 100% the hsv less will know of injuries and throw

This is the belief that if there is no outbreak there is no contagion

The belief that it is just a skin problem

The belief that the suppression drug is 100% effective

The belief that you can lead a normal life without affecting you physically and emotionally because for them is only a problem of the skin and if you do not have injuries do not spill

In my opinion the asymptomatic control a little more the replication of the hsv but that there are no injuries but that does not prevent that they escape some viral particles and expose themselves in the skin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Herpes Dating Web Site

    Guest, would you like to try dating another Herpster in your area?

    Search Now
  • Newbies

  • Latest Buzz

    • WilsoInAus
      Boil is my guess too, but if you have concerns then please attend your doctor. If you have been having sex with partner(s) whose STD status you do not know then please consider an STD panel that includes at least HIV, Hep A/B/C, gon, syph, chlam, trich, HSV 1/2.
    • WilsoInAus
      I remember trying to look into this some time ago but best I could come up with was that the chance was say in the range of 1-10% for the sexual episode. Obviously the nature of the outbreak, its positioning etc. all plays a role. You suggest this is HSV-2 with a diagnosis over 12 years ago? Have you checked the type with a blood test? May be a chance it is HSV-1 that your husband may already have for example. Agree that antivirals have no preventative properties, only benefit is taking the edge of the impact of an initial infection if this occurs (which as mentioned is still the realms of quite unlikely). Having HSV-1 does not provide any protection from HSV-2 so the figures show. Interestingly the other way around there is almost complete immunity, that is, people with an established HSV-2 infection are much less likely to be infected with HSV-1.
    • Lisajd
      You are more at risk when there is an outbreak so it is possible but as the other person said he may already have it anyway because if you have been in a relationship with him and having sex over a frequent period it is more likely that he would have it according to the experts.  And if he takes an antiviral straight away it does not stop him from getting it I'm not sure what the above person was referring to there
    • Lisajd
      If a person tells you that their partner has been tested and is negative then you can take that as a yes it can help. No symptoms does not mean not infected. Meds and condims reduce to 1%.  
    • Cas9
      Yes!!!  If antivirals stopped us from being contagious we would all be celebrating naked in Times Square.
    • GlitterDx
      It is still possible to pass the virus while on antivirals. 
  • Trending