Jump to content
World's Largest Herpes Support Group
Sign in to follow this  
yadayadayadayada

SURVEY - What if you knew when you are shedding?

Recommended Posts

yadayadayadayada

Hi everybody,

I'd greatly appreciate your input here, please feel free to send this link to anybody you think could be interested: https://fs3.formsite.com/CRa5Yw/form1/index.html

I'm greatly curious to know if you'd find it valuable (and how valuable) to know whether you are actively shedding at a given moment.

The virus is not active from 70% to up to 99% of the time. When it is not active, you can't infect anybody with it. So knowing whether it is active or not (at least IMHO) would be greatly valuable. But want to get feedback on this. So please add your answer to this survey: https://fs3.formsite.com/CRa5Yw/form1/index.html  

NOTE: For the sake of this questions please simply assume that you could know 100% that you're active or not.  Please let's not get into the specifics of "okay but how would you know" and "you can't always know" and "how could you be sure".

Thanks, everybody!

Best,

Felix

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont quit!17
4 minutes ago, yadayadayadayada said:

Hi everybody,

I'd greatly appreciate your input here, please feel free to send this link to anybody you think could be interested: https://fs3.formsite.com/CRa5Yw/form1/index.html

I'm greatly curious to know if you'd find it valuable (and how valuable) to know whether you are actively shedding at a given moment.

The virus is not active from 70% to up to 99% of the time. When it is not active, you can't infect anybody with it. So knowing whether it is active or not (at least IMHO) would be greatly valuable. But want to get feedback on this. So please add your answer to this survey: https://fs3.formsite.com/CRa5Yw/form1/index.html  

NOTE: For the sake of this questions please simply assume that you could know 100% that you're active or not.  Please let's not get into the specifics of "okay but how would you know" and "you can't always know" and "how could you be sure".

Thanks, everybody!

Best,

Felix

 

With technology advancing, I think this should be the next focus. Knowing when you literally shed could help keep loved ones protected especially with discordant couples and small children. Since scientist can't figure out the approach to a functional cure, this is what we should be focusing on. With daily Valtrex and knowing when we shed asymptomatically, that should be enough to seal the deal for discordant couples who actually care for each other. 

Another breakthrough would be knowing what cortisol levels were at any given day. When a person stresses out,  cortisol increases in the systemic body, when cortisol increases in the body it decreases immuno-function thus causing shedding and outbreaks. If we could find a marker on what are cortisol level and the correlation between certain markers and transmission then this would be a step in the right direction. It could be a way to self-check ourselves to stop stressing and stop with behaviors that cause us to stress like too much drinking or not getting enough sleep. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9

@Felix

Why are you asking a question that has an OBVIOUS answer? Do we really need a survey Felix?

Edited by Cas9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yadayadayadayada

@Cas9 You'd be surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
3 minutes ago, yadayadayadayada said:

@Cas9 You'd be surprised.

Yes, I would be surprised. And what would be gained by finding out someone would rather not know when they were shedding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yadayadayadayada

@Cas9 many people I discussed this with honestly didn't see the value in paying to know ("I'll still have to disclose, not woth paying for, I'm paranoid about results, I'm doing everything I can already so what's the point"). Which I don't understand, I'm with you but I want to get a sense of whether I talked to outliers or people are evenly split on this. One doctor I discussed it with said aiming to pinpoint active shedding "is crazy". He literally got angry at how misguided that train of thought is. So I mean what do I know...

Personally... I'd pay up to $50 to know if I'm shedding before date night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
7 minutes ago, yadayadayadayada said:

@Cas9 many people I discussed this with honestly didn't see the value in paying to know ("I'll still have to disclose, not woth paying for, I'm paranoid about results, I'm doing everything I can already so what's the point"). Which I don't understand, I'm with you but I want to get a sense of whether I talked to outliers or people are evenly split on this. One doctor I discussed it with said aiming to pinpoint active shedding "is crazy". He literally got angry at how misguided that train of thought is. So I mean what do I know...

Personally... I'd pay up to $50 to know if I'm shedding before date night.

Well yes, of course if you are going to factor in a dollar amount for finding out if you are shedding then some people will say "NO". But what is to be gained by knowing that? All that shows is that people have their limits on what they'll pay. Isn't that obvious?

The "I'll still have to disclose" doesn't really make sense. First of all, if the test was foolproof then I suppose there's a precedent for not disclosing since it would be impossible to infect the other person. But if one still chose to disclose, how does that negate the advantage of knowing if you're shedding. In other words, the point of knowing whether you are shedding is to prevent the possibility of infecting your partner. And if you did disclose, wouldn't it be nice to show your partner that the test  reveals whether you are shedding or not? This would provide total security for them and not inhibit the sexual encounter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notthesame
5 hours ago, dont quit!17 said:

Knowing when you literally shed could help keep loved ones protected especially with discordant couples and small children

You mention small children. Do you think there is a risk to children as when I've asked people have said no unless there's abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ManagingIllness

Old research hypothesized that the virus wasn't "active" most of the time. Modern research has shown that it is active almost 24/7. In other words, the average sufferer only sheds 3.5 days a month, but the virus is active, and actively being suppressed by the immune system, around the clock.

The amount of activity varies, of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yadayadayadayada

@ManagingIllness can you link some of that research? It doesn't make much sense to me based on previous studies but would love to read up on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont quit!17
2 hours ago, Notthesame said:

You mention small children. Do you think there is a risk to children as when I've asked people have said no unless there's abuse.

not necessarily but Ive heard of newborns getting infected from people kissing them on their cheeks. that is an unwanted possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
19 minutes ago, yadayadayadayada said:

@ManagingIllness can you link some of that research? It doesn't make much sense to me based on previous studies but would love to read up on it.

As I understand it, the virus it continually trying to replicate but the nerve cell suppresses it most of the time. In other words, the virus is not sleeping as often as was originally thought. When the virus wins the battle in the cell, that is when there's viral replication and subsequent shedding or an OB. That's when you have the 3.5 days of shedding mentioned by Managingillness. But he may have a better answer for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yadayadayadayada

@Cas9 isn't that a "technicality"? From the sound of it this means that on a cellular level there is a daily battle but at the end of the day the virus can't transmit until it is present on the skin... right? I mean the question will still be: how many days is the virus present and transmittable. The mechanism (the technicality) is important but also not important... but I could be wrong, just trying to interpret. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
3 minutes ago, yadayadayadayada said:

@Cas9 isn't that a "technicality"? From the sound of it this means that on a cellular level there is a daily battle but at the end of the day the virus can't transmit until it is present on the skin... right? I mean the question will still be: how many days is the virus present and transmittable. The mechanism (the technicality) is important but also not important... but I could be wrong, just trying to interpret. 

I wasn't following the conversation closely, but yes, all that matters in terms of being contagious is if the virus makes it to the skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus
1 minute ago, Cas9 said:

I wasn't following the conversation closely, but yes, all that matters in terms of being contagious is if the virus makes it to the skin.

I’d build on this to say that the volume of virus is critical. It has been observed that shedding instances where there are 10^7 virions are required for a pragmatic chance to actually get through the skin and it’s natural defences. Most shedding instances are well below this threshold.

I’d also suggest that for many asymptomatic transmissions, most of the virus comes to the surface during the sexual act itself. So little point testing beforehand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yadayadayadayada

@WilsoInAus Interesting, is there research I can read regarding this? That the virus comes to the surface during the sex act? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quest
19 hours ago, WilsoInAus said:

I’d build on this to say that the volume of virus is critical. It has been observed that shedding instances where there are 10^7 virions are required for a pragmatic chance to actually get through the skin and it’s natural defences. Most shedding instances are well below this threshold.

I’d also suggest that for many asymptomatic transmissions, most of the virus comes to the surface during the sexual act itself. So little point testing beforehand.

Where can we get more info on this?

Edited by Quest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus
4 hours ago, Quest said:

Where can we get more info on this?

This is an interesting paper on the subject of shedding and quantity required. Anna Wald is an author.

http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/11/95/20140160

The paper talks about the latest thinking regarding shedding. This includes the extremely rapid appearance and then decay of the virus. It just doesn’t hang around on your skin for very long. You’ll note a comment that samples 2 hours apart can see expansion or  decay of the virus being over a factor of 10. 

It is also noted that it takes quite a lot of the virus to be present in order for infection to occur. The peaks of viral shedding only sometimes reaches its a critical mass at its maximum, which does not remain effective for very long.

It follows that infection from shedding is most probable when sex occurs at the time a peak shedding eruption occurs and the range either side of the peak is less than 2 hours. The upside of the eruption is of course likely to be rapid but it isn’t know how rapid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quest

Great looking forward to why sex makes us shed. Thanks for the info. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus
12 minutes ago, Quest said:

Great looking forward to why sex makes us shed. Thanks for the info. :)

Note that I didn’t suggest that sex itself necessarily causes shedding, although it does seem possible. What I am saying is that infection can occur with a shedding eruption during sex, meaning any pre sex shedding identification would not provide assurances of no chance of infection during the episode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont quit!17
2 hours ago, WilsoInAus said:

Note that I didn’t suggest that sex itself necessarily causes shedding, although it does seem possible. What I am saying is that infection can occur with a shedding eruption during sex, meaning any pre sex shedding identification would not provide assurances of no chance of infection during the episode.

Yes but if you knew you were shedding at the moment before actually fornicating then most decent people wouldn't expose their partners to it.

Also, if you knew when you were shedding, you probably would start to telegraph instances of when you shed the most. 

Like if you continually shed on Tuesday night for whatever reason or after drinking beer or after getting your ass kicked at work. 

I wouldn't mind knowing this information, unless of course I didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus
4 minutes ago, dont quit!17 said:

Yes but if you knew you were shedding at the moment before actually fornicating then most decent people wouldn't expose their partners to it.

Also, if you knew when you were shedding, you probably would start to telegraph instances of when you shed the most. 

Like if you continually shed on Tuesday night for whatever reason or after drinking beer or after getting your ass kicked at work. 

I wouldn't mind knowing this information, unless of course I didn't. 

I don't disagree with anything you have said. I am pointing out though that at the moment, PCR testing takes an hour and added to say 30 mins of sex means that a negative on the test is no real indication of reduced risk during the sexual episode.

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
Sign in to follow this  

Advertisement

Try a Lysine supplement for cold sores

  • The Hive is Thriving!

    • Total Topics
      68,381
    • Total Posts
      456,620
  • Posts

    • MikeHerp
      Lol, a thousand guinea pigs.  I think you raise a good question (though it's a bit sad that a 1000 guinea pigs might have to die). But every every preclinical study I know, also uses a fairly small number of lab animals.  It's rarely more than a few dozen.  For example, the EDITAS proof of concept ocular herpes solution tested in 36 animals, of which some got placebo, and some got AAV with no editors.  So testing in only a handful of animals seems to be the norm.  So I wouldn't read into that caveat too much, if I were you.  But whether that vaccine can ever enter human trials, that I don't know.   Some things I've read seemed to suggest that ppl are kind of down on the idea of testing vaccines, on account of the failures.  I hope that's not the case.  
    • Bhbr2018
      Yeah @Lukeherpwalker I agree. Many people just see the igg tests and listen to random internet strangers about their results being from a childhood infection and on their mouth.  The fact is I got genital herpes because someone didn’t want to believe their HSV1 was genital when it was. Blood tests never can tell you location. Fact. Let’s deal with facts instead of highly unsupported opinions in the name of a life long virus shall we?
    • MikeHerp
      hi Imsu, No problem about the questions.  Sangamo is a research stage stem cell and gene editing company.  They currently are not researching HSV.  But they have a gene editing and stem cell stage 1/2 trials going on regarding HIV.  The gene editing solution they are using is zinc fingers. https://www.sangamo.com/pipeline/partnered-programs And no problem about your questions.  Feel free to also inbox me if you like and want to continue the conversation.  I'm not an expert, but I've done my research.  Cheers.  
    • Thats_Her
      I’m more than sure you got it from your current boyfriend. 5 days later and you have an outbreak in the anal where you did it for the first time. I had a vaginal outbreak 5 days after unprotected sex with my ex. I knew I was from him because of the negative tests I had during my outbreak. Unfortunately he was i denial about the situation and didn’t support me at all. Your boyfriend may not have been aware that he had it. And he may also lie about it if he finds out he actually does carry the virus. Hopefully he gets tested and things get sorted out for the both of you. 
    • Lukeherpwalker
      If you are having genital symptoms. . and test positive for hsv1 its very relevant. Op may indeed have ghsv1
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.