[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference quark::mennotes-v1

Title:Topics Pertaining to Men
Notice:Archived V1 - Current file is QUARK::MENNOTES
Moderator:QUARK::LIONEL
Created:Fri Nov 07 1986
Last Modified:Tue Jan 26 1993
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:867
Total number of notes:32923

232.0. "INTIMACY & AIDS TESTING" by MDVAX1::VIEIRA (PIPOCA) Mon May 23 1988 05:06

    Just Wondering.
    
    Since 1983 I've had four friends die of AIDS, or should I say AIDS
    related illnesses?  Anyway, as a result I am very paranoid.
    
    What I'm wondering is HOW do you bring up the subject of Aids Testing
    if you see that a relationship is heading towards intimacy, and WHEN.  
    I mean it's not like most of us set aside the date and time to become 
    intimate with a person in our daytimers.
    
    I know that it would ease my mind considerably, but what do you do, 
    set aside time to go together to be tested?  Is this whole idea
    INSANE.                                     
    
    PARANOID
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
232.1There is no problem for people with good valuesSPENDR::CLIFFORDNo CommentMon May 23 1988 19:1912
    Do you really want to know what insane is?
    
    Insane is having sex with anyone other then someone you are
    married to. It solves all the problems. If you and your partner
    have never had sex with anyone else there is no risk of either
    of you having or getting a sexually transmitted disease. I have
    no understanding and little respect for anyone who can not have
    the small amount of self control to do this. Especially when you
    know the major risk of AIDS and other VDs. I mean really do you
    play Russian roulette too?
    
~Cliff
232.2VALKYR::RUSTMon May 23 1988 19:588
    Damn. All of us "experienced" folks are just going to have to go out
    and shoot ourselves, aren't we. Or else wait for The Test to come out
    negative, and then start hanging around local kindergartens to grab us
    a virgin... 
    
    ...as long as we remember to check 'em for needle scars first.
    
    -b
232.3they must get a testMERIDN::GERMAINDown to the Sea in ShipsMon May 23 1988 19:5915
    Notwithstanding .1 ............
    
     I have decided that if I were back dating again, I would insist
    on (and be willing to undergo) an AIDs test before I got intimate
    with someone. Of course, you still have the question if your potential
    partner sleeps with someone AFTER taking the test........
    
     The only thing you are losing is a little spontaneity - which can
    be recovered AFTER the test. It is just TOO dangerous.
    
     Besides, the anticipation can generate all kinds of excitment!!!
    
     			Gregg
    
    
232.4there is no room for error, always askLEZAH::BOBBITTI sing the body electricMon May 23 1988 20:5846
re: .1
    
>    Do you really want to know what insane is?

>    Insane is having sex with anyone other then someone you are
>    married to. It solves all the problems. If you and your partner
>    have never had sex with anyone else there is no risk of either
>    of you having or getting a sexually transmitted disease. I have
>    no understanding and little respect for anyone who can not have
>    the small amount of self control to do this. Especially when you
>    know the major risk of AIDS and other VDs. I mean really do you
>    play Russian roulette too?
    
    the chances of someone and their partner both being virgins these
    days seems fairly slim.  the person I lost my virginity to was,
    in my mind "the one" (actually it was a mutual loss) - I was going 
    to spend forever with him.  We got engaged.  We moved in together.  
    But, after two years, it fell apart.  Sorry.  
    
    And the way to reduce the risk of Russian Roulette is to KNOW YOUR
    PARTNER.  know them well. know their "preferences", their substance
    use, anything else that might give you a hint as to whether or not they
    may be carrying a disease.  Talk about it.  I have several monogamous
    relationships...and they generally last several years...and these are
    the only spaces I feel safe getting intimate.  I believe  the proper
    time to discuss tests would be the same way I discuss "what if I get
    pregnant" - before anything *really* intimate happens, but when
    the inkling is there that it may. All of these issues are very
    delicate, difficult to face, and can result in both of you  revealing 
    morals / belief systems / pasts / whatever / that you may fear the
    other person may reject you for.  But if your relationship is strong, 
    and if you know one another well, it should not be a trial by fire.  
    Also, I try not to look on it as a show of distrust to the other 
    person - it is merely something you must ask before continuing...it
    is a primary ground rule that cannot be ignored, no ifs, ands, or
    buts...no exceptions. It is your own life you take into your hands
    when you get intimate with someone (this much is true), but if you 
    know them well, and you answer one another's questions in the 
    trustworthy way that honest relationships must, it is a
    straightforward hurdle that must be taken only once, and need not be 
    too painful emotionally.  If the answers surprise you or alarm you,
    discuss the steps to be taken...gently and with much caring.  
    
    -Jody
    

232.5BUSY::KLEINBERGERA Wish'g Well Of Butterfly TearsMon May 23 1988 21:2437
    I just went to a supervisors/managers seminar on dealing with AIDS
    in the workplace....
    
    A couple of things that really struck home with me were:
    
    	- it can take UP to 9 years after contact to test positive (it
           used to be 7)
    
    	- it takes at least 2 weeks at a minimum to test postive.
    
    I make a point on the second point, only because if you contact
    AIDS on a Sunday night, and give blood on a Monday morning, that
    blood can have the AIDS disease, and STILL not come out postive,
    and that blood CAN be used for a transfusion... SCARY, HECK yes!

    In the last 3 months, the number of population of people who have
    aids has doubled!...
    
    Although I may or may not totally agree with reply number 1, I do
    have to say that even a test may not give you what you are looking
    for...

    Also, there is now 1 case of the 2nd strain of Aids reported in
    the United States.... there is no way of treating this strain (yes,
    I know there is no way of treating the first strain, but at least
    they KNOW more about the first strain)...
    
    One other thing, people don't die of aids... people who have aids
    usually die from two things, a form of pneumonia (I forget the medical
    name), or a form of cancer that they can no longer fight off....
    
    This seminar is going corporate wide.  If you ARE a supervisor/manager,
    I highly suggest seeing it.. it is forom 2 to 4 hours long (depending
    on what is covered).. if you are an individual contributor, I'd
    see if your supervisor/manager would let you attend...
    
    Gale
232.62B::ZAHAREEMichael W. ZahareeTue May 24 1988 13:355
    re .1:
    
    You obviously haven't met my ex-wife.
    
    - M
232.7Ditto .6IPOVAX::BARBERSkyking Tactical ServicesTue May 24 1988 13:572
    
    Nor mine !!!!!
232.8'course, they're probably worse..... {smirk}AXEL::FOLEYRebel without a ClueWed May 25 1988 01:316
       
       
       	You guys are bad.....
       
       
       						mike
232.9Don't let them fool you!GRANMA::MWANNEMACHERWed May 25 1988 13:3920
    RE: .2  The rules of the game have changed drastically.  Anyone
    who goes bedhopping now needs to rethink how they value their and
    other peoples lives.  I firmly believe that if you are responsible
    for spreading aids, you are guilty of murder.  This disease has
    been around a long time.  The reason it hasn't shown itself in such
    a deadly light is because it only existed in creatures (animals)
    whose antibodies could fight the virus.  Whether you like it or
    not, if you are permiscuous you are in grave danger.  Also I really
    don't believe that the government knows all that much about the
    transmission of the disease and I don't think that they are telling
    us all that they do know for fear of a panic.  I'd much rather be
    safe than sorry!
    
    RE: .6  AIDS does kill.  Anyone who tells you different is lying.
    If the AIDS virus didn't destroy your immune system, you would be
    able to combat the other various diseases which work ONLY because
    the AIDS virus is present.  
    
                                                 Mike
232.10Who's "them"?VALKYR::RUSTWed May 25 1988 17:2832
    Re .9:
    
    "Re .2"? I'm puzzled. You seem to think that because I was sarcastic
    about the "marry a virgin or else you're nuts" note, it means I
    must not take AIDS seriously. This is not the case; I simply meant
    to point out (as others have) that .1 is a simplistic answer that
    is not workable for a very large number of people.
    
    Also, kindly do not assume that non-virgins are promiscuous (unless
    you *define* "promiscuous" as "having had more than one sexual partner
    in your life, whether you were married to those people at the time
    or not.")
    
    Back to the original question, which was (I think) how to go about
    broaching the subject with a new flame. I have no suggestions myself,
    other than to make sure you *do* talk about it. There was an episode of
    "Cagney and Lacey" a while back that addressed this; the usually
    in-control Cagney got very flustered and embarrassed while trying to
    raise the topic with her new paramour, only to have him help her out by
    volunteering his personal history, medical test status, and willingness
    to use a condom. Not particularly romantic, but it showed a mutual
    sense of responsibility. 
    
    And, while I wouldn't go so far as to agree with .1, I would say
    that these days a person would be taking a serious risk if s/he
    chose to have sex with a new partner *without* discussing the issue
    and following the recommended precautions.

    And I'm not going to lose my sense of humor, either. The more serious
    things get, the more you need one...
    
    -b
232.11HANDY::MALLETTSituation hopeless but not seriousWed May 25 1988 20:0216
232.12BUSY::KLEINBERGERA Wish'g Well Of Butterfly TearsThu May 26 1988 14:475
    I don't kow whether the seminar is/will be mandatory for all 
    managers/supervisors but I do know that it was for us... and I'm
    glad now...
    
    Gale
232.13The tables have turnedSTING::BARBERSkyking Tactical ServicesThu May 26 1988 15:3613
    It use to be that in days gone by, that women refrained from
    having sexual relations with sailors/military types for fear
    of VD type diseases. Today that routine is changing. Since 
    Uncle Sam is so paranoid about a spread of AIDS in the military
    all service members, reserve and active, now get mandatory blood 
    tests for AIDS and other VD type diseases once every 6 mo.
    
    So today if you wana be safe ...sleep with a sailor !!!
    
                                            BB

    P.S. Yo, Mike F...'course were bad. Just ask we/they will tell you so !!
232.14LIONEL::SAISIFri May 27 1988 16:418
    	Gale,
    	  I would just like to question one of the facts you mentioned
    	from the seminar.  It is my understanding that the time it takes
    	from exposure until a person tests antibody positive is 6 months
    	maximum.  The 9 year figure is I believe the longest known time 
    	between when a person tested positive and showed symptoms of ARC 
    	or AIDS.  Could you clarify this?
    		Linda
232.1538599::KLEINBERGERA Wish'g Well Of Butterfly TearsFri May 27 1988 22:0911
   There was a question about the timing aspect, and the Nurse, who
    has extensive study and grants to study this said it can take UP
    to 9 years to get a positive result... they had thought previously
    tht it was 7 years, but they have had a case where it took nine
    years to have a positive reading...
    
    Some people test postive, and NEVER show symptoms of ARC or AIDS,
    but have tested positive within the research group they are working
    with... 
    
    Gale
232.17HYDRA::ECKERTJerry EckertSun May 29 1988 20:375
    I, too, question the accuracy of the 9 year figure.  However, it
    is known that the ELISA test used to screen for HIV antibodies
    has a false negative rate of about 3%.
    
    	- Jerry
232.18BUSY::KLEINBERGERA Wish'g Well Of Butterfly TearsMon May 30 1988 22:0812
    RE: The last two...
    
    Well, I for one WILL not question the results of the studies that
    were shown to us in the seminar...
    
    Again... if you question it, have your boss approve you going to
    the seminar if you are in an IC role...
    
    Contact your local Health Office to see when your plant is scheduled
    for the seminar....  Mike LMO *will* be giving more of them...
    
    Gale
232.19Let me clarify the mistaken assumptionsGRANMA::MWANNEMACHERTue May 31 1988 14:2029
    RE.10  Your original note, .2, was sarcastic and gave the impression
    that you "experienced" people didn't see a need to change your
    behavior.  I, too, have had more than one partner.  Now that I am
    married, I wish that I would have had the sense to wait so as my
    wife could have been the one and only.
    
    I see a problem with assumptions here.  You assume that I think that
    all non-virgins are permiscuous.  This is very incorrect.  My words
    were "if you are permiscuous you are in grave danger". Note that
    there is nothing in there about "all non-virgins being permiscuous".
    Also, I believe I referred people who go "bedhopping" as the ones
    who need to rethink things.  I still feel this way.  
    
    When the commwercials regarding AIDS are presented on TV abstinence
    is barely mentioned and treated as something that is pretty much
    out of the question anyway.  I believe that this is wrong.  Abstinence
    should be presented as the best and ONLY SURE alternative, because
    it is the truth.  Our society is involved in a very big moral decay.
    I believe that .1 was basically saying that we have to get back
    to the basics of morality.  No, I am not part of the moral majority,
    and yes, I am as guilty of the above charges I have made on society.
    I don't want people to think I'm self righteous or an egotist, because
    I am not.  I do however, see a need for us to make the above mentioned
    changes, not for the good of ourselves, but for the good of our
    children.  After all, isn't it them who are going to have to pay
    for what we have expended?
                              
                                                  Thanks for listening,
                                                  Mike
232.20making a moral issue out of a physical oneOZZAIB::GERMAINDown to the Sea in ShipsTue May 31 1988 15:2424
    While abstinence will prevent catching the disease, unless, of course,
    you get a blood transfusion that carries the virus, or if you are
    an IV drug user, or,...or...or..........
    
     You see?
    
     I cannot agree with your concept of morality, and in addition,
    I think that the two issues - morality and not catching AIDS are
    totally separate. I get the feeling that some people (like the Far
    Right Moral Majority) are "cashing" in on AIDS as an excuse to prove
    that their views on issues like sex were correct all along. Some
    have gone so far as to proclaim AIDS as a punishment from God for
    our wicked, wicked deeds.
    
     As regards to morality in sex (a colossal rathole...), I will only
    say that there are good reasons for having sex (love, caring, sharing),
    and not so good reasons. But this is MY opinion, and I am not trying
    to foist them off on anyone else. 
    
     Today, there is ample reason to be VERY careful. There is ample
    reason to be moral. Definitions of morality ARE individual, whether
    you like it or not. The twain do not meet.
    
    			Gregg
232.21SPENDR::CLIFFORDNo CommentTue May 31 1988 16:3215
    The obvious message in most of these replies is that people
    who have multiple partners and give blood are not only foolish 
    (for taking the risk) but evil. Not necessarily for having sex
    but for putting the rest of the population into risk.
    
    If you want to take the chance that you'll catch AIDS go right
    ahead but when you give blood and put others at risk you are
    asking me to take your risk unawares. That's not fair and is the
    moral equivalent of forcing me to play Russian Roulette with you
    loading the gun and pulling the trigger. If you can still live
    with yourself how can anyone else. Perhaps you consider giving
    me AIDS to be OK morally, as I can see know other reason a loose
    person could give blood with a clear conscience, but don't ask me to.
    
~Cliff
232.22well maybeGRANMA::MWANNEMACHERWed Jun 01 1988 13:5421
    RE:20
    
    Yes, there are circumstances where people have contacted AIDS through
    no fault of their own.  This is unfortunate and I have no answers
    on these matters other than the blood donor ought to be prosecuted  
    if he or she had multiple sexual partners and still proceeded to
    give blood, I admit this is a very grey area.  The fact is however, 
    that the majority of the people who contract the AIDS virus are in 
    the "high risk" groups.  These groups being intravenous drug users
    and homosexuals.  I believe that the next highest risk group are
    people who have multiple partners. (Not sure on this though)  The
    high risk groups are people who partake in activities which either
    break mans law or (in most instances) religious laws.  I also don't
    want to force my views on anyone, however, I think discussions such
    as this are good in that they can give people ideas and they can
    either accept them or reject them.  
    
                                                  Have a good day,
    
                                                   Mike
    
232.23ATPS::GREENHALGEMouseWed Jun 01 1988 20:5622
    
    re: .1
    
    Without reading all the replies to this note, I want to pick up
    on a comment you made.  I believe you said if you and your partner
    have sex with no one but each other, it solves the problem.  This
    is incorrect and the biggest mistake most people make.
    
    Anyone shooting drugs with a dirty needle or sharing needles runs
    a very high risk of AIDS regardless of how monogamous a relation-
    ship he and his partner have.  If you have sex with someone who
    has been with another that has used the needles, you are at risk,
    etc.
    
    If you decide to have sex with a drug addict make sure that person 
    is tested.  If the test comes back negative, wait three months and 
    have the person tested again.  When the test comes back the second 
    time, if it is still negative then it is safe to have sex with that
    person.  But, be sure you are both tested on a regular basis from 
    that point on.

    
232.24"good" people get AIDS tooSSDEVO::YOUNGEREveryone is entitled to my opinonThu Jun 02 1988 02:215
    Not to mention that two virgins marry, don't do drugs, only have sex
    with each other, one of them needs a transfusion, they both get AIDS.
    How have these people broken any laws (Judeo-Christian or civil)?
    
    Elizabeth 
232.25A heated ReplyBISTRO::WOODMad Dogs and....Thu Jun 02 1988 06:0234
Let me ask a couple of questions;


1.  Given that one has had sex in the past X time period ( Where X is the time
it takes for an AIDS test to prove positive), especially given that X could 
well be in excess of several years, and is not known at this time.

2.  Given the choice between dying from lack of blood, and excepting blood 
from somebody who has been "sleeping around"  I know what my choice is, what 
is yours?

Maybe I am just tired and am misreading these notes, but, it appears that some
people have a very high  horse that they could well fall off of!!

Hmm, having re-read this reply, I think I've discovered the answer to AIDS;

First of all getting AIDS from blood:-  Only woman are to be allowed to give 
blood, and they must all have a virginity, drugs and AIDS test, failing any one 
bars them from giving blood.

And AIDS from Sex:-
All woman are to be given a Virginity test, any failing it are to be Shot.  All 
passing this test will be kept in special compounds where they will be allowed
sex only to concieve. This should ensure that within a generation the world 
will be AIDS free.  As it is not possible to give men a Virginity test this is 
the only way I can see to solve the problem.  Married woman would obviously NOT
be exempt as they could have affairs, and thus ruin the program.

But better yet why don't we all kill ourselves "Just in case", well OK not
evrybody just anyone that has had sex in the last 9 years.


Maybe I'm well out of order here, but I think this needs to be put in 
perspective. 
232.26SPENDR::CLIFFORDNo CommentThu Jun 02 1988 14:1720
    What people are saying basically is:
    
    Normal people can't help having sex with anyone who turns them on
    
    and
    
    The blood supply isn't safe so why bother trying to restrain myself
    
    Is that it? I'm willing to believe that many of you lack the self
    control to make love only to one person but do you really believe
    it's ok to give blood too? Is it fair? I know of one person who
    has decided not to have anymore kids because of the risk of AIDS
    if she needs a transfusion during a Cesarian. 
    
    Sure there are other ways then sex to get AIDS. Most are avoidable.
    Only blood transfusion are not but most of you are justifying
    contaminating the blood supply just so you can indulge in random
    sex. I find that disgusting and selfish.
    
~Cliff
232.27HANDY::MALLETTSituation hopeless but not seriousThu Jun 02 1988 15:0736
232.28As always, rather be safe than sorry!!GRANMA::MWANNEMACHERThu Jun 02 1988 16:3215
    RE: .25  I think it is quite irresponsible of you to say that anyone
    who opposes your viewpoint is on a "high horse".  I believe that
    people are saying that having several partners or doing any of the
    other "high risk" activities which I think most of us are aware
    of, are endangering themselves.  If they contribute blood, then
    they are endangering others who are in trouble to begin with.  I
    admit that some of the views are to one side of the argument as
    yours is to the other side.  It seems to me that in a situation
    where the danger of death is almost certain if the disease is acquired,
    it is better to be on the side which is keeping people out of danger.
    I would point out that, again, these are only my opinions.  I've
    now got to go and give a pint of blood. 
    
                                             Monogomously yours,
                                             Mike
232.29yupGNUVAX::BOBBITTMy shoes are...on top of the worldThu Jun 02 1988 17:007
    re: .27
    
    exactly what I thought when reading .26, but  much more gently said 
    than I'd have done.
    
    -Jody
    
232.30This isn't a procreative planet!BSS::BLAZEKDancing with My SelfFri Jun 03 1988 02:1515
    	Always wonder how many people with the how-disgusting-of-you-
    	to-sleep-with-more-than-one-person-in-your-life attitude are 
    	single?  
    
    	Look, if you're happily monogamous and with someone you plan 
    	on spending the rest of your life with, GREAT!  I'm sincerely 
    	happy for you.  But please stop moralistically rubbing our 
    	noses in it, okay?
    
    	Some people are simply (or not) searching for what you have 
    	already found and are hardly trying to destroy the world or
    	humankind.  So cool it.
    
    						Carla
    
232.31statisticsGNUVAX::BOBBITTMy shoes are...on top of the worldFri Jun 03 1988 14:3032
From a graph of "AIDS caseload" in USA Today, figures derived from
Center for Disease Control:
 
Year	"Caseload"	Ratio from prev. year	Doubling time (years)
81	   271
82	 1,023		3.77			 .52
83	 2,852		2.79			 .68
84	 5,761		2.02			 .99
85	10,463		1.82			1.16
86	16,243		1.55			1.58
87	21,590		1.33			2.44
 
    So, although the absolute number of cases and absolute rate of increase
    is growing, the doubling time is rising (amount of years it takes for
    the actual number of cases to double) fast.  Given that the time-delay
    between infection and observable disease is (av) 2 to 5 years (and so these
    numbers are really for several years ago), it may be that the virus
    transmission is now below the point at which the epidemic can sustain
    itself. 

    I suppose it's probably not the greatest of news (the greatest news
    would be a cure...) (come to think of it, I wonder what
    will happen to this "new morality" we are creating by abstaining
    from random sexual encounters when they do find a cure, or better
    yet, some sort of immunization), but it suggests that people are
    being careful, that concern about aids is affecting the way they
    live, and the disease may not be growing as fast as first
    suspected it would.
    
-Jody
    
232.32QUARK::LIONELWe all live in a yellow subroutineFri Jun 03 1988 15:075
    Has anyone read that pamphlet on AIDS stuffed in our mailboxes by
    the government recently?  Low key, but a lot of good information.
    I wonder if it will help.
    
    				Steve
232.33Let's look at the stats in another way.GRANMA::MWANNEMACHERFri Jun 03 1988 15:1619
    RE: .31  Whereas the statistics which were presented in .31 are
    ecouraging in that we are slowing down the doubling time, they are
    also alarmig.  It is much easier to double 271 than 21,590.  Using
    the statistics in the previous note, in 1981 it would take one year
    to for 271 cases of AIDS to arise.  In 1987 it takes 4.58 days to
    see the same number of reported AIDS cases.
    
    Did anyone else recently recieve the surgeon general's report on
    AIDS?  I just recieved one and I really haven't had time to read
    it as of yet.
    
    I believe someone took offense at the way I signed my last note.
    My intend was not ot offend, but to indicate that I have changed
    my lifestyle and I am very happy with the change.  I understand
    how difficult it is to find a person who is right for you and you
    for them.  I agree, I was lucky.  Sorry if I offended.
    
                                           Have a nice weekend,
    
232.34BUFFER::PCORMIERNo good deed goes unpunishedFri Jun 03 1988 15:187
    RE: .32
    
    	Yup, I read it and agree that it does have lots of good info.
    It's too bad the people it could most help (IV drug users) don't
    usually have a mailing address....
    
    Paul C. 
232.36Responsibility: Anyone got any?FLOWER::JASNIEWSKIMon Jun 06 1988 13:1313
    
    	This is a matter where 100% certainty is not attainable, unless
    you happen to meet the well known requirements. The best you can
    do is to do what most of the population *hates* - be responsible.
    Having enough money wont buy you out of this responsibility, Sorry!
    This is where it comes down to whether you really care about anyone,
    save good 'ol individualist you! Procedure is well documented, for
    whatever "risk catagory" you happen to come under. Take some
    responsibility, please, for yourself and your corresponding potential.
    The worst, is outright denial: "Oh *not* me! That'll *never* happen
    to me"
    	
    	Joe Jas
232.37when was YOUR last testMERIDN::GERMAINDown to the Sea in ShipsMon Jun 06 1988 17:2641
    Re: .1 and .26
    
     Hooray for .27, .29, and .30!!! 
    
     How many of you self proclaimed moral "SAFE" blood donors have
    ACTUALLY had a series of tests over a lengthy period of time?
    Like, for example, over a six or eight year period? Huh? How many?
    
     Now, I agree with .36 - there isn't total certainty, but there
    are procedures that can be followed for every risk level. And a
    person would be a fool not to follow them.
    
     If you want to argue that total celibacy (until marriage) is crucial,
    I would entertain the argument. What angers me is the little attachment
    added on that says, "Which is what you should have been doing all
    along - AIDS or no AIDS."
    
     How you people can claim a person is promiscuous, when you are
    TOTALLY ignorant of their actual lifestyles, which include protection
    taken, and tests taken, is beyond me.
    
     And you claim that you'll stick with your spouse, thereby lessening
    the risks and circulation of the disease. And that we unmarried
    folk must be celibate, in order to simulate your situation. Well,
    I've got news for you - 50% of your marriages are going to fail
    (or whatever the national average is). What are you going to do
    then? Stay celibate for the rest of your lives? Uh huh! I hope that
    NONE of your marriages fail - no one should go through that. But
    marriages DO end - divorce, death. What then? I would expect that
    you will fall in love and remarry. Good for you! 
    
     And the plain fact is NONE of you can assure me, unless you have
    had a barrage of tests over a long period of time - that YOU don't
    have AIDS - or your spouse.

    
     Like .36 says - you have to face the responsibility. No argument
    there. 
    
    			Gregg
    
232.38Hope, Prayer, and MoneyMSDOA1::CUNNINGHAMWed Jun 08 1988 18:4927
    Since I can't protect the whole world, I will try and concentrate
    on my children.  To both my son and daughters I am trying to teach
    them that being virginal on their wedding day and marrying a virgin
    is a good idea.  Remaining monogomous during marriage and not getting
    divorced is also a good idea.  Will this happen?  I have no idea,
    but what is wrong with aiming high?  After all 50 years ago this
    was the norm, and was that so bad?  There are risk of contaminated
    blood from a transfusion, but there are ways of dealing with that
    as well (such as supplying your own blood in advance of planned
    surgery).  Obviously we cannot protect ourselves completely, just
    being alive we take risk every day.  Far more people die of car
    wrecks every year than aids.  How often do we cut down on unnecessary
    trips?  Any minute we could get blown to atomic dust!  But I do
    see it as odd that in all the talk about "Safe Sex" abstinance is
    rarely mentioned.  
    	I have a good friend from college who contracted AIDS from a
    blood transfusion given during a C-section when her child was born.
    She hasn't died yet, but she has lived through the hell of watching
    her child grow and die from the disease.  No one deserves this terrible
    disease, and all sufferers and their love ones need our love and
    support.  We need to be careful not to make assumptions about why
    someone has the disease, and we have no ground to stand on to be
    judgmental.  Let us all hope, and for those of us who believe in
    God pray for a solution and a cure.  Please support financially
    those organizations doing research.  
    					DRC
    
232.39GLINKA::GREENEMon Jun 13 1988 16:0516
    re: .38
    
    >>				  There are risk of contaminated
    >>blood from a transfusion, but there are ways of dealing with that
    >>as well (such as supplying your own blood in advance of planned
    >>surgery).  
      
    Unfortunately, even this is not always possible.  Some people have
    blood disorders which is why they would need *other* blood if a
    transfusion during surgery were needed.  And then there are the
    "unexpected" emergency surgeries;  someone on vacation or a business
    trip is not likely to have his/her own blood stored at the local
    hospital.  
    
    So someone *needs* a transfusion: then what?  The probability of
    getting AIDS from it are pretty low, but not zero.
232.40Some more infoGRANMA::MWANNEMACHERTue Jun 14 1988 14:4951
    First I would like to reply to .37- I have not read a response in
    the entire content which directly referred to anyone as permiscuous.
    I have seen some that said something to the order of, if you are
    permiscuous, you are nuts.  Also, if you have donateds blood in
    the past few years, they fill up two seperate viles which are used
    for testing.  If your blood is contaminated, I believe the red cross
    informs you.  They have the blood ID'd so as they can contact you.
    Now to the real point.
    
    There is some information which has been presented from the AIDS
    conference which is taking place in Stockholm Sweden.
    
    -Non-monogomous sexual contact is becoming more dangerous as AIDS
     victims are becoming more infectious.
    
    -The risk to non-infected people is growing.
    
    -In the US new AIDS cases are reported every 14 minutes.
    
    -An estimated 365,000 cases will have been reported in the US by
     1992. (this number could vary either way by 50,000)
    
    -The nuber of reported AIDS cases in Europe has reached 12,221 and
     is doubling every 11 months.
    
    -Australian researchers described six cases in which mothers who
     became infected after birth passed the virus to their infants through
     breast milk.
    
    -Dr Curran of the Centers for Disease Control said the spread of
     AIDS appears to slowing but it is difficult to tell if the epidemic is
     beginning to level off and said he didn't consider that an important
     question.
     
    -Dr Curran predicted the transmission of AIDS among heterosexuals
     will continue to grow.
    
    -Dr Curran stated that the data are too incomplete for firm conclusion.
    
    
    I also saw a television program this weekend which dealt with AIDS.
    On this program (I can't recall the name) they reported that AIDS
    can be transmitted through saliva.  They went on to say that the
    disease can be transmitted through french kissing.  
    
    My conclusion: I really don't think the "experts" or anyone else
    knows for sure how the disease is transmitted or what the long term
    consequences are going to be.  All I know is that it is all pretty
    scary, and it is something that everyone has a direct involvement
    in.  Here's hoping that a cure can be discovered in the near future
    (like today).  
232.41.40 - reread .26CTOAVX::GERMAINWed Jun 15 1988 13:3655
    Re: .40 (Mike, is it?)
    
     Here is where I got the idea:
    
     read .26. In it you will find the phrase (and I am paraphrasing),
    ".....just so MOST OF YOU can indulge in random sex.......I find
    that disgusting and selfish..." (capital letters mine). 
    
     You will also find phrases like, "....only with the one I am married
    to..." Again some of us are not married. .27 said it best. You meet
    someone, and you think that they are going to be the one, so maybe
    you move in, or whatever, and then it doesn't work out. With divorce
    so easy to get, I see no practical difference between moving in
    and getting married. There may be a emotional difference, but as
    a matter of straight practicality, there is no difference. Everybody
    hopes that their present relationship will work out. And AIDS may
    make people work harder along that line, but you have no control
    over your spouse - he/she can leave any time they want. You then
    have some big decisions to make concerning, among other things,
    whether or not you will have sex again.
    
     No one is trying to justify bed hopping. But if, like .26, you
    accuse people of contaminating the blood supply just so they can
    indulge in random sex, then you are making a mistake.
    
    
     Now to an AIDS related issue. - 
    
     If I heard that a schoolmate of my daughter's has AIDS, I would
    take my daughter out of school that instant, and enroll her somewhere
    else. there is no way I am going to risk her getting exposed. We
    have all heard about the atrocities committed against families whose
    children carry the virus.
    
     This is a tough issue - on the one hand, I would want that child
    removed from my daughter's school immediately. Mainly because, although
    they SAY that the chances of contracting the virus would be minimal
   , I am NOT willing to risk my daughter on something that has only
    had a few years of real research applied to it. 
    
     On the other hand, the affected children, and their families become
    ostracized, outcasts, shunned. This isn't very compassionate, loving,
    or helpful. What are the choices? Special schools for AIDs carriers?
    Sounds too close to concentration camp mentality to me.
    
    If the viru continues to spread and larger percentages of the
    population are affected, this may become even more important 
    
    - no,
    strike that, as human beings, it is important NOW, because fellow
    humans are in this predicament.
    
     Do you have any ideas?
    
    			Gregg
232.42You've got a point there.GRANMA::MWANNEMACHERWed Jun 15 1988 19:0922
    RE .41  Gregg, I agree with you on the first example.  I guess I
    didn't pay much attention to it, although in retrospect I remember
    thinking to myself This is kind of ridiculous as I read it.  As far as
    "only the one I'm married to"...what's wrong with that?  Anyway
    this is trivial, I just wanted to make sure that everyone who expressed
    support of monogomous relationships weren't lumped in the same catagory
    of being self-righteous people.  As far as living together being
    the same as marriage, I am going to have to strongly disagree with
    you on this point.  It is much easier to walk away from someone
    who you have made no commitment or vow to.  Marriage is something
    which is a formal commitment made publicly, and it is a commitment
    which is to last forever (granted, many times this is not the case).
    
    As far as the rest of your note goes I would have problems in making
    a decision if I found out that someone at my daughters school had
    AIDS.  The thing that makes a child with AIDS more tragic is that
    in a vast majority of cases the virus was contracted from non high
    risk behavior.  There are going to be alot of hard decisions to
    be made.  It makes a person wonder what's next in the social disease
    spectrum.  Can it get any worse?
    
                                                Mike
232.43ok, time to get back to the issues......MERIDN::GERMAINDown to the Sea in ShipsThu Jun 16 1988 12:5228
    Marriage vs living together issues belong in a differnt note, I
    think, but I will say that you have to remember that some ppeople
    treat the wedding ceremony very lightly - the notion of "declaring
    one's eternal faithfulness IN FRONT OF OTHERS" does not mean much
    to them. And it's not that they are WRONG or BAD or SHALLOW, just
    that they feel that you can make a committment with equal power
    and value without the church ceremony. Well anyway.....
    
     I agree - some hard decisions are going to have to be made, and
    probably pretty soon. One of the stumbling blocks to making informed
    decisions is, I think, the very confusion that shows up even in
    this note:
    
    you need one test - two tests every 3 months - .....it takes 6 years
    to detect it - no, 9 years, you can catch it by kissing, sharing
    utinsils, no you can't......etc. There is just so much confusion,
    even within the medical fraternity, that it's really tough to put
    aside prejudices - prejudices, I might add, that come, in part,
    from the types of disease that people have dealt with in the last
    200 years. Where isolation of the infected people was necessary.
    
     It's not going to be easy, and rationality, combined with compassion
    is going to have to be the norm....
    
     of course, it should always be the norm anyway.....
    
    
    		Gregg
232.44Marriage and HIV testingCSCMA::ARCHListen to your heartFri Jun 22 1990 12:5768
(Follow-up to my 463.34 - I believe it belongs here.)  I was going to
enter only a few excerpts, but because of the misconceptions that 
obviously still exist (232.43, for example), I entered pertinent 
sections from two brochures...

GETTING MARRIED? FACTS ABOUT AIDS!
Published by: AIDS Information Services, Massachusetts Department of 
Public Health

Chapter titles include: "What is AIDS?," "What are the symptoms of 
infection?," "Is there a test for AIDS?," "Where can you be tested?," 
"What do the test results mean?"

Also:

"How is the virus spread?"  AIDS is transmitted through blood, semen and 
vaginal fluids.
Medical experts have found only four ways that AIDS has been transmitted:

    1.	Through unprotected, intimate sexual contact, such as vaginal,
	oral or anal intercourse with an infected person.
    2.	By sharing intravenous hypodermic needles with an infected
	person.
    3.	Passing the virus from an AIDS infected mother to a child during
	pregnancy, during birth or by breastfeeding.
    4.  Using contaminated blood or blood products.

<bolded:> "HIV is not spread by the kind of public social contact that 
people have with friends and co-workers."  Additionally, "no case has been 
reported of an individual becoming infected with AIDS by tears, sweat or 
saliva." [_Living and Working with AIDS_]

"Aids is not spread by:
	* sharing telephones, typewriters, tools and other equipment;
	* water fountains, toilet seats, showers or eating utensils;
	* sneezing, spitting or coughing; or
	* working with a person with AIDS, even if contact is daily."

"Are you at risk for AIDS?  You are at greatest risk of infection if you:
	* are a man who has had sex with other men.
	* have shared needles or "works" to inject drugs.
	* received transfusions or blood products between
	  1975 and July 1985.
	* have had sex with any of the people described above.
	* have sex with a lot of other people.
Note: When used correctly, latex condoms plus a "nonoxynol 9" spermicide 
can be a good barrier against the AIDS virus.  <bolded:> Birth control
pills, diaphragms, and IUDs do not protect against infection."

"Is AIDS testing required for persons getting married?  No."

"For your protection, state law requires your written permission before
anyone can test your blood for HIV antibodies or report your test results
to anyone but you.  If you do not want to be tested by your doctor, you can
use the Alternative Test Site Program.  This is a free program, sponsored 
by the Department of Public Health, that offers anonymous testing and 
counseling.  (617) 522-4090"

"Is AIDS education required for persons getting married?  Yes.  It is now 
required by a regulation of the Department of Public Health that city and 
town clerks distribute to marriage license applicants an AIDS educational 
pamphlet.  The contents of the pamphlet should be discussed as part of the 
required premarital medical evalulation for syphillis."

Cheers,
Deb

P.S.  Digital's AIDS Program Office is located at DTN 251-1418.
232.45New transmission means?WOODRO::KEITHReal men double clutchFri Jun 22 1990 14:089
    Last night on the ABC nightly news they had a report from the USSR (
    believe [I didn't see the beginning]) that some infants in that country
    had become infected with AIDS due to a common needle. The report also
    went on to explain (If I heard it correctly) that the children then
    gave their mothers AIDS during breast feeding.
    
    Did anyone else see this? 
    
    Steve
232.46I don't get it.WFOV12::APODACAHomey Don't Play Dat.Fri Jun 22 1990 14:2016
    Can I ask what might be a real dumb question here?
    
    I understand the way AIDS is spread, but just cannot figure out
    why, if transmitted through body fluids, is it still an affliction
    that strikes predominantly at homosexual men?  (I get why it strikes
    lots of needle users--that's not hard to figure out)  
    
    Semen is semen and blood is blood and vaginal fluid is vaginal fluid
    so why should it strike mostly at one sexual orientation group and
    not the other?  I would think the percentages between homosexuals
    and heterosexuals would be much more even, including the ratio between
    women with AIDS and men with AIDS.
    
    Has this been explained clearly before?  Am I just being clueless?
    
    ---kim
232.47CSCMA::ARCHListen to your heartFri Jun 22 1990 14:5819
    re .45  Steve,
    
    The report I saw said that the only discernible means of transmission
    they've found is through open sores on/in the babies' mouths during
    breastfeeding.
    
    re .46 Kim,
    
    The percentage of heterosexual transmission is increasing at a higher
    rate than homosexual transmission in this country.  In Africa, AIDS is 
    almost exclusively a heterosexual disease.  There are a number of
    reasons for this - some social and some anatomical/medical.  I posted
    an article in another conference which might answer some of your 
    questions; I'll see if I can find it and repost it here.

    Cheers,
    deb  :-}
    
    P.S.  There are no 'dumb questions' - only dumb answers...
232.48ignorance aint bliss: oops Deb beat me to itFORTY2::BOYESIts a turnip with a pencil in it !Fri Jun 22 1990 15:1115
If we can start a chain of ignorant questions here:

Answer for Kim: AIDS (HIV?) ultimately has to get into the bloodstream to
have an effect. Needles are obviously the easiest way to do it. Homosexuals
have an added risk of damaging themselves while having sex and getting a
direct semen-blood connection, rather than the hetero semen-mucous membrane-
blood connection.

*Please* correct me if I'm wrong

My stupid question : is that right about the diaphram being no protection ?
That would be my first guess (cos there are plenty of membranes further south)
but someone in the know (?) told me otherwise.

Mark.
232.49VALKYR::RUSTFri Jun 22 1990 15:1512
    Re diaphragms: I'd certainly believe that they are NOT protection
    against AIDS - however, they're supposed to be used with a spermicide,
    and there are brands of spermicides that contain <whatever ingredient
    that is> that's supposedly effective against AIDS. So in that case, it
    wouldn't be the diaphragm that helped, but the substance you're
    supposed to use with it.
    
    I have not heard that the above is an acceptable substitute for a
    condom, however. Might provide an additional measure of security if
    used with one.
    
    -b
232.50FORTY2::BOYESIts a turnip with a pencil in it !Fri Jun 22 1990 15:216
Re: diaphragms (sorry about the spelling before: they're called caps over here)

...also useful as birth control. During 1987 abortions in Oxford (UK) went
up (I think) 20% (maybe more), attributed to people scared of AIDS switching to
condoms.

232.51FSTTOO::BEANAttila the Hun was a LIBERAL!Fri Jun 22 1990 16:0017
    it's my understanding that diaphragms are NOT effective agains the spreading
    of HIV.  Even if used with (whichever) spermicide.  
    
    I believe if the male is the HIV carrier, his sperm may contain the HIV, and
    the HIV will remain in the vaginal path below the diaphragm.  
    
    A condom, obviously, keeps the sperm away from the woman, protecting her
    from the HIV as well.  
    
    Conversely, if the woman is the HIV carrier, the
    diaphragm will not protect the male from vaginal fluids...whereas the condom
    should.
    
    
    Please correct me if I am wrong!
    
    tony
232.52WOODRO::KEITHReal men double clutchFri Jun 22 1990 16:0912
    RE .47
    
    RE Babies giving mothers AIDS:
    
    But the mother still got AIDS (or they figured that is the only they
    could have gotten it) from the babies breast feeding.
    
    Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this (assuming it is proved true) a
    new way of transmitting AIDS; i.e. baby with sores in mouth being
    breast feed?
    
    Steve
232.53AIDS articleCSCMA::ARCHListen to your heartFri Jun 22 1990 17:2335
While I'm writing up responses to .48 - .52, here's the article, from
Soapbox 140.78...
    
      	   AIDS cases slow in '89; spread is to new people/areas
	   -----------------------------------------------------

     New AIDS cases slowed in this country last year--up just nine percent 
over the previous year--the slowest increase ever.  However, the disease is 
spreading faster among heterosexuals, newborns, women and Southerners, 
facts reported by the Centers for Disease Control.

     In comparison, AIDS incidence rose by 34% in 1988, and 60% in 1987.  
The actual number of active new cases were 35,238 during 1989, as compared 
to 32,196 new cases in 1988.

     Of the new cases reported in 1989, 56% occurred among gay/bisexual men 
(down from the previus high mark of ninety-plus percent), but even this 
figure only represents an eight percent increase over 1988 levels.  While 
heterosexual contacts were just four percent of the total new cases, this 
nevertheless represented a 27% increase.

     In regard to women's issues, 547 infants with AIDS were born last 
year, a 17% increase.  While women accounted for roughly 4,000 of the total 
35,000 cases, this was stillup 11% from 1988.

     Regionally, the largest proportional jump in new cases occurred in the 
South, up 22%.  Although the largest majority--70%--of AIDS cases occur in 
cities with a population of one-million or more, the trend is that smaller 
cities are going to be experiencing the largest increase in new cases:  
Those with less than 100,000 population had a 35% increase; those with 
100,000-500,000 had a 32% increase.

				* * * * *
  
Source:  4/12/90 _Bay Windows_ AIDScope column, by Stephan Pardi, p. 15
232.54N2ITIV::LEEThe stupid is always possibleFri Jun 22 1990 18:0112
>    and there are brands of spermicides that contain <whatever ingredient
>    that is> that's supposedly effective against AIDS. So in that case, it

	The ingredient you're talking about is nonoxynol-9.  I believe that
	it is the active ingredient in most spermicides, and (conveniently)
	is effective against the AIDS virus as well. 



	>>AL<<

232.55CSCMA::ARCHListen to your heartFri Jun 22 1990 18:1229
re .48 Mark,

I see nothing wrong with your answer to Kim.  Whoever told you that 
diaphragms protect women from being infected with HIV was incorrect (even
if it used with a spermicide).  As -b said in .49, a diaphragm + spermi-
cide might help, but it is not "an acceptable substitute."

re your .50--I really don't understand what you're saying...Abortions
went up 20% because people switched to condoms?   If you're getting into
the "failure rate" of condoms, it's about 1-2% for the actual product (not
counting negligence and/or misuse).

re .51 Tony - Perfecto!

re .52 Steve,

If it is proven (right now it's only a hypothesis) that the mother became 
infected from the baby's open mouth sores during breastfeeding, then it
would (to *my* knowledge) be a "new way" of transmission.  Even mother-to-
infant transmission of HIV during breastfeeding is very rare (more common
is transmission during pregnancy).  The Russian scientist admitted that 
over 200 babies had been infected in hospitals which, like Romania, re-use
hypodermic needles several times.  Since Russia has just very recently
admitted having *any* AIDS cases at all, I'm going to wait to hear what
the experts have to say and not jump to any conclusions.  I have heard of
no such instances in the U.S. 

Hope that helps,
Deb  :-}
232.56more infoWMOIS::B_REINKEtreasures....most of them dreamsMon Jun 25 1990 02:4112
232.57SX4GTO::HOLThellhounds on my trailMon Jun 25 1990 03:192
    
    Now that's barbaric... !
232.58WMOIS::B_REINKEtreasures....most of them dreamsMon Jun 25 1990 03:246
    I personaly agree with you..
    
    but I'm not in a place to judge customs (such as female circumcision)
    that aren't a part of my cultural background.
    
    Bonnie
232.59Condom TalkCSCMA::ARCHListen to your heartMon Jun 25 1990 13:1173
I found a handout from an AIDS seminar I attended last year:

	  HOW TO TALK ABOUT CONDOMS WITH A RESISTANT, DEFENSIVE
			OR MANIPULATIVE PARTNER


IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I'm on the pill; you don't need a condom."
YOU CAN SAY: "I'd like to use it anyway. We'll both be protected from 
infections we may not realize we have."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I know I'm clean (disease-free); I haven't had sex 
with anyone in 'X' months."
YOU CAN SAY: "Thanks for telling me.  As far as I know, I'm disease-free 
too. But I'd still like to use a condom since either of us could have an 
infection and not know it."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I'm a virgin."
YOU CAN SAY:  "I'm not.  This way we'll both be protected."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I can't feel a thing when I wear a condom; it's like 
wearing a raincoat in the shower."
YOU CAN SAY: "Even if you lose some sensation, you'll still have plenty 
left."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I'll lose my erection by the time I stop and put it 
on."
YOU CAN SAY: "I'll help you put it on - that'll help you keep it."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "By the time you put it on, I'm out of the mood."
YOU CAN SAY: "Maybe so, but we feel strongly enough for each other to stay 
in the mood."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "It destroys the romantic atmosphere."
YOU CAN SAY: "It doesn't have to be that way."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS:  "Condoms are unnatural, fake - a total turnoff."
YOU CAN SAY: "Please let's try to work this out - an infection isn't so 
great either. So let's give the condom a try. Or maybe we can look for 
alternatives."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "What kinds of alternatives?"
YOU CAN SAY: "Maybe we'll just pet, or postpone sex for a while."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "This is an insult! Do you think I'm some disease-
ridden slut/gigolo?"
YOU CAN SAY: "I didn't say or imply that. I care for you, but in my 
opinion, it's best to use a condom."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "None of my other boyfriends uses a condom. A real man 
isn't afraid."
YOU CAN SAY: "Please don't compare me to them. A real man cares about the 
woman he dates, himself, and about their relationship."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I love you! Would I give you an infection?"
YOU CAN SAY: "Not intentionally, but many people don't know they're 
infected. That's why this is best for both of us right now."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "Just this once."
YOU CAN SAY: "Once is all it takes.."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I don't have a condom with me."
YOU CAN SAY: "I do," or "Then let's satisfy each other without intercourse."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "You carry a condom around with you? You were planning 
to seduce me!"
YOU CAN SAY: "I always carry one with me because I care about myself. I 
have one with me tonight because I care about us both."

IF THE PARTNER SAYS: "I won't have sex with you if you're going to use a 
condom."
YOU CAN SAY: "So let's put it off until we can agree," or "OK, then let's 
try some other things besides intercourse."

232.61New HIV BrochureFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:2824
    The following seven notes contain the text of a brand-new brochure
    (copyright 1990) titled:  "HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone
    Should Know."

    I've broken it up into these sections:

	* The Spectrum of HIV Infection
	* HIV and its Transmission
	* Protecting Yourself
	* It's What You Do, Not Who You Are
	* The HIV Antibody Test
	* Minorities, Friends, Women & Gay/Bisexual Men
	* For Further Information...

    Please feel free to print out any portion of this brochure, or
    request copies from:

	American College Health Association
	1300 Piccard Drive, Suite 200
	Rockville, MD  20850
	(301) 963-1100

    
232.62The Spectrum of HIV InfectionFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:2843
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 1 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

	ABOUT HIV INFECTION AND AIDS

AIDS stands for:
	A cquired	not inherited

	I mmune		a breakdown of the body's
	D eficiency	defense system

	S yndrome	a group of related disorders and symptoms

   The virus that causes the syndrome AIDS is called human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV).  Having HIV infection is not the same as having AIDS.  HIV
causes a spectrum of conditions and symptoms.

THE SPECTRUM OF HIV INFECTION [color bar graph]

    	Infected     No Symptoms     Mild Symptoms     AIDS

   AIDS is the most severe, life-threatening form of HIV infection.  Most
people infected with the virus seem healthy, and many do not realize they
have been infected.

   People who have HIV infection may not have symptoms for many years.  The
period of time from infection to serious symptoms seems to average nearly
10 years.  However, people with HIV infection can transmit the virus to
others - even if they have no symptoms and even if they do not know they
have been infected.

   Given currently available information, it appears that, without treatment,
most people with HIV infection will develop serious symptoms at some point
in the future.  However, anti-viral drug therapy can slow down the pro-
gression of HIV infection significantly, and there are many things that
people who have HIV can do to preserve their health.  In addition, new
medical strategies can prevent many complications and postpone serious
problems.  While it is a chronic medical problem, HIV infection is rapidly
becoming manageable.  Using better treatments and strong partnerships with
health care providers, people with HIV infection are staying healthy longer.
Meanwhile, research is providing better treatments for people in all stages
of HIV infection, including AIDS itself.

232.63HIV and its TransmissionFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:2886
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 2 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

			   * * * * * * * * * *

		HIV IS NOT TRANSMITTED BY CASUAL CONTACT 

   Repeated, carefully designed and monitored scientific studies prove
   that there is no risk of transmitting HIV by sharing the same space,
   classroom, athletic or recreational facilities, sauna, swimming 
   pool, bathroom, food, eating utensils, clothing, or books with some-
   one who has HIV infection.  Ordinary objects and surfaces used by
   people with HIV infection present no danger and need not be feared.
   HIV is not transmitted by coughing or sneezing.  Neither animals
   nor insects can transmit HIV.

			   * * * * * * * * * *


	HIV AND ITS TRANSMISSION

   HIV is a fragile virus.  It primarily infects a group of white blood cells
that manage the operations of the immune system.  But it can also infect
cells in the nervous system, colon, and blood vessels.

   Nobody "catches" HIV infection the way people "catch" a cold.  HIV does not
survive long enough outside the body to be caught from the air, or in water, 
or off objects and surfaces.  It is transmitted by semen, blood and blood 
products, and vaginal and cervical secretions.  HIV is not transmitted by 
saliva, sweat, tears, or urine.

   HIV can be transmitted 1) by particular kinds of sexual contact, 2) by
direct exposure to infected blood, and 3) from an HIV infected woman to her 
fetus during pregnancy or childbirth or, possibly, to her infant during 
breastfeeding.

1) SEXUAL CONTACT

   Anal and Vaginal Intercourse:  HIV is more likely to be transmitted by 
unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse than by other sexual activities. 
Anal intercourse is more likely to allow HIV transmission, because HIV can
attach itself to cells in the lower rectum.  HIV may be easier to transmit
to the receptive partner than to the insertive partner.  HOWEVER, AN
INTACT LATEX CONDOM, PROPERLY USED, SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCES THE RISK OF
TRANSMITTING HIV during anal or vaginal intercourse.

   Oral Sex:  The risk of acquiring HIV infection by performing oral sex on
a man is uncertain.  There seems to be some risk, but it is clearly much
lower than the risk of vaginal or anal intercourse.  Since pre-ejaculatory
fluid ("pre-cum") may contain HIV, it is not necessarily any safer to stop
before the man ejaculates.  The chance of acquiring HIV by performing oral
sex on a woman is not precisely known, but also seems small.  Whether you
are a woman or a man, the risk of contracting HIV by having oral sex per-
formed on you seems extremely low.

   Kissing:  Although HIV is very rarely present in the saliva of people with
HIV infection, there is absolutely no evidence that kissing can transmit the 
virus.  NO CASE OF HIV INFECTION HAS BEEN TRACED TO EXPOSURE TO SALIVA IN ANY 
CIRCUMSTANCES.

   There is no chance of transmitting HIV through sexual activities that do
not involve direct contact of semen, vaginal secretions, or blood with
mucous membranes.  Touching, stroking, massage, and masturbation, alone or 
with a partner, do not transmit HIV.

2) BLOOD

   Needle sharing: No matter what substance is in the needle, if you share
needles with others, you may be directly exposed to their blood.  People
share needles for intravenous drug use (such as heroin and crack), and
for shooting anabolic steroids to build bulk and power for athletic per-
formance.  HIV may also be transmitted if needles are "shared" when used
for tattooing, ear piercing, or acupuncture.

   Accidents in health care: A small number of health care workers who par-
ticipated in the care of people with HIV infection have also acquired HIV.
Usually, they were infected as a result of injuries involving needles con-
taining the blood of people with HIV infection.

3) MOTHER-TO-INFANT

   WOMEN WHO HAVE HIV INFECTION CAN TRANSMIT THE VIRUS TO THEIR BABIES.
Most of these infections seem to occur during pregnancy, but some may happen
during the birth process.  A few babies *may* have been infected through
breast feeding.

232.64Protecting YourselfFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:2987
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 3 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

	PROTECTING YOURSELF

  You can reduce your risk of acquiring HIV by:

* MAKING CAREFUL CHOICES ABOUT SEXUAL ACTIVITY.  Not having anal, vaginal
  or oral sexual intercourse provides 100% protection against the sexual
  transmission of HIV.  If you do have intercourse, YOUR SPECIFIC SEXUAL
  PRACTICES ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT AS THE NUMBER OF PARTNERS YOU HAVE.
  Unsafe intercourse without a condom with one or two partners may be more
  likely to result in HIV infection than safer sex with several partners.
  Plan to protect yourself.  Don't let one thing just lead to another --
  decisions about sexual activity should be active ones.

* COMMUNICATING ASSERTIVELY WITH YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER AND NEGOTIATING FOR
  SAFER SEXUAL PRACTICES.  Many people are unskilled in discussing sexual
  matters or activities or in managing relationships.  Talking about sex
  can seem embarrassing and uncomfortable.  Telling the truth about your
  sexual past may be difficult.  Communicating assertively about your
  desires in a sexual relationship is a real challenge.

     DEVELOP SKILLS TO EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AND CONCERNS; consider *in
  advance* what you would say and do in particular situations.  For 
  example, what would you say to someone who wanted to have intercourse
  without a condom?  Asking a partner about past sexual experiences may
  be helpful too, but, in general, you cannot depend on that information.
  IT IS MUCH SAFER TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS WITH EVERY PARTNER.  Communication
  alone is not enough to protect you.

     Don't give up safer sex as a way to show your love or commitment to
  a relationship.  Safer sex practices will help protect you through the
  early dating period, rough times in the relationship, and the ending of
  the relationship if that should occur.

* REMOVING ALCOHOL AND DRUGS FROM SEXUAL ACTIVITY.  Alcohol and drugs may
  make sexual activity seem easier; they may alleviate uncertainty, anxiety, 
  and ambivalence, but they caneliminate decision making too.  Know your 
  limits when you drink, and learn skills for keeping yourself safe.  At a 
  party, consider a "buddy system," in which someone does not drink alcohol 
  (as in designated driver programs).  Remember, SUI (Sex Under the In-
  fluence) is dangerous just as DUI (Driving Under the Influence) is 
  dangerous.  Drunk sex is rarely safer sex.

     Alcohol and drugs can make communication difficult -- and they can
  blur the issue of consent.  Acquaintance rape ("date rape") is quite
  common.  When men or women are coerced into sexual activity, or are
  unable to give consent (often because they are intoxicated), there are
  usually no precautions taken to prevent transmitting HIV.

* USING LATEX CONDOMS FOR INTERCOURSE.  Whenever you engage in anal or 
  vaginal intercourse, use a latex condom.  Animal membrane (skin) condoms 
  cannot be counted on.  Condoms are not perfect, and they do not provide 
  "SAFE sex."  Nonetheless, a latex condom provides high levels of pro-
  tection against the transmission of HIV if it is used properly:

	** Put the condom on the erect penis prior to any direct
	   contact of the penis to the vagina or anus.

	** Use condoms that have a reservoir tip, or pinch half an
	   inch at the tip of the condom to collect semen.  Put a
	   drop of spermicidal jelly in the tip and then unroll the
	   condom carefully, smoothing out air bubbles, all the way
	   down over the penis.

	** Use adequate amounts of water-based, rather than oil-
	   based, lubricants.  KY Jelly is water-based and safe;
	   hand lotions, Vaseline, and shortening are oil-based
	   and unsafe.

	** After ejaculation, withdraw the penis while it is still
	   erect; hold on to the base of the condom carefully,
	   avoiding spilling its contents.

     Spermicides containing Nonoxynol-9 (jellies, creams, foams used for
  contraception) may increase the protection provided by a condom, but are
  NOT adequate by themselves to prevent transmission of HIV.  A diaphragm,
  or cervical cap, with or without foam, does NOT protect against HIV.
  Birth control pills provide no protection against HIV.

     Latex squares and dental dams are rubber devices that may be used 
  during oral-genital or oral-anal sexual contact.  The level of pro-
  tection they provide is not known, but it is logical to assume that they
  might reduce the risk of acquiring HIV if they are carefully and con-
  sistently used.

232.65It's What You Do, Not Who You AreFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:2931
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 4 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

	HIV IS NOT TRANSMITTED BY CASUAL CONTACT

   Repeated, carefully designed and monitored scientific studies prove
that there is no risk of transmitting HIV by sharing the same space,
classroom, athletic or recreational facilities, sauna, swimming pool,
bathroom, food, eating utensils, clothing, or books with someone who
has HIV infection.  Ordinary objects and surfaces used by people with
HIV infection present no danger and need not be feared.  HIV is not
transmitted by coughing or sneezing.  Neither animals nor insects can
transmit HIV.

	IT'S WHAT YOU DO, NOT WHO YOU ARE

   It's what you do, not who you are, that matters in HIV infection. "Risk
behaviors" are much more important that "risk groups."  Anyone who en-
gages in unsafe sexual behavior or shares needles for any reason can
become infected with HIV.  HIV can be transmitted during sexual inter-
course among people who define themselves as gay, bisexual or straight.
HJIV can be transmitted during needle sharing by people who may or may 
not be "addicted" to drugs.  And "risk behaviors" means the *past* as
well as teh present.  Unsafe sex or needle-sharing a few years ago still
matters now, even if someone no longer has unsafe sex or shares needles.

   Some people know a great deal about HIV and AIDS.  But people "in the
know" still acquire HIV infection.  A lot of people think HIV infection
is a problem for "other" kinds of people in "other" places, and they feel
invulnerable.  But behaviors, not groups, transmit HIV.

232.66The HIV Antibody TestFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:3046
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 5 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

	THE HIV ANTIBODY TEST

   Many people emisunderstand blood tests used to detect HIV infection.
There is no "AIDS test."  The tests that are available indicate whether
someone has antibodies to HIV.  If the tests are confirmed as positive,
then the person tested has antibodies to HIV and is considered to have
HIV infection.  If the tests are negative, no antibodies to HIV were
found.  Ordinarily, a negative test result means that the person does
not have HIV infection.  BUT A NEGATIVE TEST SHOULD NOT BE A SUBSTITUTE
FOR SAFER SEX.

   It ordinarily takes three to six months for people who have acquired
HIV infection to develop enough antibody for the test to turn positive.
If they were tested too soon, before enough antibody developed, they
would have an inaccurately negative (false negative) test.  Very rarely,
it may take longer than six months--even years--for the test to turn
positive.  So test results must always be interpreted in the context of
a person's history of sexual and needle-using behaviors.

   SHOULD YOU BE TESTED?  IF YOU ARE CONCERNED, FIRST CONSULT A
KNOWLEDGEABLE HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL OR COUNSELOR FOR INFORMATION AND
ADVICE.  If you feel there is a chance that you have acquired HIV 
infection, you should seriously consider testing.  It is important to 
know that you have HIV infection as early as possible so that you and an
expert health care provider can work together to preserve your health.
If you are a woman and have engaged in unsafe sexual behavior or shared
needles, you should be tested before becoming pregnant.

   HIV ANTIBODY TESTING MAY HAVE NEGATIVE SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL
CONSEQUENCES--depression, anxiety, loss of job, social ostracism, and
even suicide.  TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF DISCRIMINATION, SEEK ANONYMOUS
TESTING (where you do not have to give your name or other identifier)
rather than confidential testing (where you do give your name or social
security number).  BE AWARE OF STATE LAWS REGARDING REPORTING OF
POSITIVE TEST RESULTS.  And protect yourself psychologically; get tested
where you have not only both pre-test and post-test counsellilng, but 
also access to referral services for further psychological assistance
and support.

   NEVER USE BLOOD DONATION AS A WAY TO BE TESTED.  If you were infected
very recently, your test might still be negative even if you had acquired,
and could transmit, HIV infection.

232.67Minorities, Friends, Women and Gay/Bi MenFSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:3065
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 6 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

	RACIAL MINORITIES AND HIV INFECTION

   HIV infection and AIDS have become serious problems for African-Americans
and Latinos, especially in the inner cities.  Both African-Americans and
Latinos are over-represented among people with AIDS.  Most women and infants
with AIDS in the United States are people of racial minorities.

   African-Americans and Latinos are not at greater risk of HIV infection
because of their race.  The explanations lie in social and economic factors:
higher rates of intravenous drug use, urban poverty, and limited access to
health care.  

    Some racial minorities, such as Asian-Americans and Native Americans,
do not have high rates of infection now.  But the risk of HIV infection is 
in what you do, not who you are.  Just as race does not cause greater risk,
race does not bring safety.

	WHAT IF A FRIEND HAS HIV INFECTION OR AIDS?

   People with HIV infection hope for the same kind of support and friend-
ship you always provided before.  Their needs will vary, depending on their
personality and their place along the spectrum of HIV infection.  Although
they may feel hopeful and optimistic much of the time, people with HIV in-
fection may sometimes feel isolateld, frightened, and uncertain about
relationships, their future, and their health.

   You can help by continuing to talk, do things together, and share 
experiences.  A health educator, clinician, or counselor may help you if
you have questions about HIV, or need suggestions about what to say or do.

	WOMEN AND HIV INFECTION

   Increasing numbers of women are acquiring HIV infection and developing
AIDS.  Women acquire HIV through unsafe sexual contact or needle sharing,
just as men do.  YOUR BEHAVIOR CHOICES ALSO DETERMINE YOUR RISK.  

   Lesbian and bisexual women may have special concerns.  It is important
for you to acknowledge to yourself all of your sexual behaviors so you can
plan effectively to protect yourself and others.  The chance of transmit-
ting HIV from woman to woman during sexual encounters is difficult to
evaluate; the risk seems low but uncertain.

   Since a woman with HIV infection can transmit HIV to her fetus, and possi-
bly to her infant by breast-feeding, women with HIV should avoid pregnancy.

	GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN AND HIV INFECTION

   Feeling that you are gay or bisexual does not mean you have had sex with
other men, or that you have unsafe sexual intercourse, or that you are likely
to acquire HIV infection.  The label you use for your sexual orientation
doesn't matter either.  YOUR BEHAVIOR CHOICES DETERMINE YOUR RISK.

   Now that many gay and bisexual men have significantly reduced their risk
of HIV infection by changing their sexual behaviors, THE CHALLENGE IS TO
STAY SAFE.  If you are gay or bisexual, the support of your community, com-
bined with your own self-esteem, will  help you avoid taking risks.

   Bisexual men often feel isolated from both gay and straight communities.
They may not feel the same support that self-identified gay men experience
from their peers.  If you are a bisexual man, remember the importance of
safer sexual practices in all of your relationships.

232.68For Further Info...FSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 11:3031
HIV INFECTION AND AIDS - What Everyone Should Know  (part 7 of 7)
--------------------------------------------------

	FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

   Contact your health service, sexual health program, peer sexuality
educators, lesbian/gay organizations, or health care provider.  Additional
information and support can be obtained from community-based AIDS service
organizations.  The following national hotline services are also available:

	Centers for Disease Control Hotline		1-800-342-AIDS
	Spanish-Language Hotline			1-800-344-SIDA
	Hotline Deaf and Hearing-Impaired People	1-800-243-7889
		Monday-Friday, 10am-10pm		TDD/TTY

   For more information about AIDS:

	AIDS ACTION Line				(617) 536-7733
	     Toll free (Massachusetts)			1-800-235-2331
	Latino AIDS Hotline				(617) 262-7248
	Bilingual AIDS Hotline				1-800-637-3776
	     (English/Spanish in Springfield)
	AIDS Project Worcester				(508) 755-3773
	Alternative Test Site Program (Mass.)		(617) 522-4090

***********************************

American College Health Association
1300 Piccard Drive, Suite 200
Rockville, MD  20850
(301) 963-1100
232.69FSHQA2::DARCHMake it happen!Mon Aug 13 1990 15:016
    Addendum to .61:
    
    Notes .62 - .68 were posted without permission.  Please contact the
    source (listed in .62 and .68) for reprints.
    
    Deb
232.70woman to man risk lower than thought????OLYMP::BENZService(d) with a smileWed May 27 1992 08:1919
    In a Swiss Daily there was a short piece on AIDS, claiming that
    
    - Danger of contacting AIDS through unprotected heterosexual contact is
    very small
    
    - specially transmission from a woman to a man is "amazingly" small. It
    quotes that among males in New York a static shows that from the
    beginning of the epidemic to May last year 26'573 AIDS cases were
    reported, only 8 (eight) of which based on heterosexual contact.
    
    - That the WHO claims 90% of infections are through hetereosexual
    contact, based on the African/Caribien experience. It is now suspected
    that apalling hospital conditions (i.e. use of non-sterile needles)
    could be the problem. It claims that in Rumania, where 90% of AIDS
    cases are children under 4 years, the main source is suspected to be
    poor hospital conditions
    
    Regards,
    Heinrich
232.71MILKWY::ZARLENGAany dead poet will doThu May 28 1992 02:469
.70> - specially transmission from a woman to a man is "amazingly" small.
    
    Female->male transmission has been documented as 27 times less likely
    than male->female transmission, based on data from married couples
    who practice unprotected sex, where one partner was initially infected
    and the other was not.
    
    Is that amazingly small?  You'll have to decide for yourself.  Guessing
    wrong can be pretty costly ...
232.72QUARK::LIONELFree advice is worth every centThu May 28 1992 12:313
Yeah - just ask Magic Johnson....

		Steve
232.73XCUSME::QUAYLEi.e. AnnThu May 28 1992 18:173
    If the woman is having her period, does that increase the chance 
    of female->male infection?  Scary thought since, at the beginning and 
    end of the period, blood is present but not obvious.
232.74HEFTY::CHARBONNDkaraoke virginity intactThu May 28 1992 20:173
    re.72 >Magic Johnson
    
    Even if he truly is heterosexual, his lifestyle is/was hardly typical.
232.75FSOA::DARCHFrom All Walks Of Life - May 31stThu May 28 1992 20:2710
    
    re .73 Ann,
    
    Theoretically yes, since blood contains higher concentrations of HIV
    than vaginal secretions (or semen) in HIV+ people.  Exact transmission
    probabilities are not known; experts can only make educated guesses
    based on other STD transmission rates they've studied.  They do know
    it's more likely for men to transmit it to women (about 20 times) than
    the other way around...insertive vs. receptive,and all that.