Derniers sujets
» Appel à candidature/actions solidaires/missions de volontariat 2020 en Afrique
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyVen 24 Jan 2020, 07:58 par jvsitogo

» Offre de stages/missions de volontariat 2020/2021 en Afrique avec JVSI
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyJeu 23 Jan 2020, 10:38 par jvsitogo

» Appels aux volontaires/Camp chantier de construction d'infrastructure 2020 en Afrique
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyJeu 23 Jan 2020, 10:32 par jvsitogo

» Appel à mobilité international/missions/stages 2020/2021 en Afrique avec JVSI
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyJeu 23 Jan 2020, 10:30 par jvsitogo

» Mission, stage, projet de construction de DISPENSAIRE-MSVD
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMar 14 Jan 2020, 05:58 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Missions humanitaires en 2020 avec MSVD
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMar 14 Jan 2020, 05:58 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Voyages, découvres, aides, travailles avec des jeunes d'autres horizons
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMar 14 Jan 2020, 05:58 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Stage en Médecine au nord du Togo en 2020 avec MSVD
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyDim 01 Déc 2019, 14:47 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Stage en Médecine au nord du Togo en 2020 avec MSVD
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyDim 01 Déc 2019, 14:47 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Missions humanitaires 2010, stages conventionnés à l'étranger
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMer 11 Sep 2019, 14:37 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Aventure de partage culturel, de découverte, de réalisation d'un projet concret
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMer 11 Sep 2019, 14:36 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Aventure de partage culturel, de découverte, de réalisation d'un projet concret
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMer 11 Sep 2019, 14:35 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Tourisme, Stages et missions humanitaires avec MSVD en 2020
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMer 11 Sep 2019, 14:31 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Tourisme, Stages et missions humanitaires avec MSVD en 2020
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyMer 11 Sep 2019, 14:29 par asso-msvd-msvd

» Des offres de chantiers et missions humanitaires en 2019-2020 Togo
What do you know about AIDS ? EmptyLun 15 Juil 2019, 11:12 par hicahumaitaire2

Portail Madariss
site pour le bachelier
Chat Madariss
Chat Madariss
Le Deal du moment : -23%
TV QLED Samsung QE65Q65R 2019
Voir le deal
999 €

What do you know about AIDS ?

Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:03

1st Part:
There are a number of reasons for Rebecca Culshaw's decision - none of them should be a surprise to regulars of this site. They include the non-specific and therefore unreliable nature of the 'HIV test' used to determine infection, the impossibility of modeling the consequences of HIV infection because of disagreements over how exactly the virus acts to kill immune cells, the fact that most deaths of Aids victims are not due to opportunistic infections but are the result of liver failure - a consequence of the drugs that are administered to those who test positive.

Applying statistical models to the data on HIV infection and Aids, Dr Culshaw came across inconsistencies that made it ever harder to understand the epidemic she was helping to overcome. But unlike many others who continue to work in this world of medicine gone very very wrong, Dr Culshaw quit. She explains why in this excellent article - certainly worth reading...

- - -

Why I Quit HIV

(original found on LewRockwell.com)

by Rebecca V. Culshaw

As I write this, in the late winter of 2006, we are more than twenty years into the AIDS era. Like many, a large part of my life has been irreversibly affected by AIDS. My entire adolescence and adult life – as well as the lives of many of my peers – has been overshadowed by the belief in a deadly, sexually transmittable pathogen and the attendant fear of intimacy and lack of trust that belief engenders.

To add to this impact, my chosen career has developed around the HIV model of AIDS. I received my Ph.D. in 2002 for my work constructing mathematical models of HIV infection, a field of study I entered in 1996. Just ten years later, it might seem early for me to be looking back on and seriously reconsidering my chosen field, yet here I am.

My work as a mathematical biologist has been built in large part on the paradigm that HIV causes AIDS, and I have since come to realize that there is good evidence that the entire basis for this theory is wrong. AIDS, it seems, is not a disease so much as a sociopolitical construct that few people understand and even fewer question. The issue of causation, in particular, has become beyond question – even to bring it up is deemed irresponsible.

Why have we as a society been so quick to accept a theory for which so little solid evidence exists? Why do we take proclamations by government institutions like the NIH and the CDC, via newscasters and talk show hosts, entirely on faith? The average citizen has no idea how weak the connection really is between HIV and AIDS, and this is the manner in which scientifically insupportable phrases like "the AIDS virus" or "an AIDS test" have become part of the common vernacular despite no evidence for their accuracy.

When it was announced in 1984 that the cause of AIDS had been found in a retrovirus that came to be known as HIV, there was a palpable panic. My own family was immediately affected by this panic, since my mother had had several blood transfusions in the early 1980s as a result of three late miscarriages she had experienced. In the early days, we feared mosquito bites, kissing, and public toilet seats. I can still recall the panic I felt after looking up in a public restroom and seeing some graffiti that read "Do you have AIDS yet? If not, sit on this toilet seat."

But I was only ten years old then, and over time the panic subsided to more of a dull roar as it became clear that AIDS was not as easy to "catch" as we had initially believed. Fear of going to the bathroom or the dentist was replaced with a more realistic wariness of having sex with anyone we didn't know really, really well. As a teenager who was in no way promiscuous, I didn't have much to worry about.

That all changed – or so I thought – when I was twenty-one. Due to circumstances in my personal life and a bit of paranoia that (as it turned out, falsely and completely groundlessly) led me to believe I had somehow contracted "AIDS," I got an HIV test. I spent two weeks waiting for the results, convinced that I would soon die, and that it would be "all my fault." This was despite the fact that I was perfectly healthy, didn’t use drugs, and wasn’t promiscuous – low-risk by any definition. As it happened, the test was negative, and, having felt I had been granted a reprieve, I vowed not to take more risks, and to quit worrying so much.

Over the past ten years, my attitude toward HIV and AIDS has undergone a dramatic shift. This shift was catalyzed by the work I did as a graduate student, analyzing mathematical models of HIV and the immune system. As a mathematician, I found virtually every model I studied to be unrealistic. The biological assumptions on which the models were based varied from author to author, and this made no sense to me. It was around this time, too, that I became increasingly perplexed by the stories I heard about long-term survivors. From my admittedly inexpert viewpoint, the major thing they all had in common – other than HIV – was that they lived extremely healthy lifestyles. Part of me was becoming suspicious that being HIV-positive didn’t necessarily mean you would ever get AIDS.

By a rather curious twist of fate, it was on my way to a conference to present the results of a model of HIV that I had proposed together with my advisor, that I came across an article by Dr. David Rasnick about AIDS and the corruption of modern science. As I sat on the airplane reading this story, in which he said "the more I examined HIV, the less it made sense that this largely inactive, barely detectable virus could cause such devastation," everything he wrote started making sense to me in a way that the currently accepted model did not. I didn’t have anywhere near all the information, but my instincts told me that what he said seemed to fit.

Over the past ten years, I nevertheless continued my research into mathematical models of HIV infection, all the while keeping an ear open for dissenting voices. By now, I have read hundreds of articles on HIV and AIDS, many from the dissident point of view but far, far more from that of the establishment, which unequivocally promotes the idea that HIV causes AIDS and that the case is closed. In that time, I even published four papers on HIV (from a modeling perspective). I justified my contributions to a theory I wasn’t convinced of by telling myself these were purely theoretical, mathematical constructs, never to be applied in the real world. I suppose, in some sense also, I wanted to keep an open mind.

So why is it that only now have I decided that enough is enough, and I can no longer in any capacity continue to support the paradigm on which my entire career has been built?

As a mathematician, I was taught early on about the importance of clear definitions. AIDS, if you consider its definition, is far from clear, and is in fact not even a consistent entity. The classification "AIDS" was introduced in the early 1980s not as a disease but as a surveillance tool to help doctors and public health officials understand and control a strange "new" syndrome affecting mostly young gay men. In the two decades intervening, it has evolved into something quite different. AIDS today bears little or no resemblance to the syndrome for which it was named. For one thing, the definition has actually been changed by the CDC several times, continually expanding to include ever more diseases (all of which existed for decades prior to AIDS), and sometimes, no disease whatsoever. More than half of all AIDS diagnoses in the past several years in the United States have been made on the basis of a T-cell count and a "confirmed" positive antibody test – in other words, a deadly disease has been diagnosed over and over again on the basis of no clinical disease at all. And the leading cause of death in HIV-positives in the last few years has been liver failure, not an AIDS-defining disease in any way, but rather an acknowledged side effect of protease inhibitors, which asymptomatic individuals take in massive daily doses, for years.

The epidemiology of HIV and AIDS is puzzling and unclear as well. In spite of the fact that AIDS cases increased rapidly from their initial observation in the early 1980s and reached a peak in 1993 before declining rapidly, the number of HIV-positive individuals in the U.S. has remained constant at one million since the advent of widespread HIV antibody testing. This cannot be due to anti-HIV therapy, since the annual mortality rate of North American HIV-positives who are treated with anti-HIV drugs is much higher – between 6.7 and 8.8% – than would be the approximately 1–2% global mortality rate of HIV-positives if all AIDS cases were fatal in a given year.

Even more strangely, HIV has been present everywhere in the U.S., in every population tested including repeat blood donors and military recruits, at a virtually constant rate since testing began in 1985. It is deeply confusing that a virus thought to have been brought to the AIDS epicenters of New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles in the early 1970s could possibly have spread so rapidly at first, yet have stopped spreading completely as soon as testing began.

Returning for a moment to the mathematical modeling, one aspect that had always puzzled me was the lack of agreement on how to accurately represent the actual biological mechanism of immune impairment. AIDS is said to be caused by a dramatic loss of the immune system’s T-cells, said loss being presumably caused by HIV. Why then could no one agree on how to mathematically model the dynamics of the fundamental disease process – that is, how are T-cells actually killed by HIV? Early models assumed that HIV killed T-cells directly, by what is referred to as lysis. An infected cell lyses, or bursts, when the internal viral burden is so high that it can no longer be contained, just like your grocery bag breaks when it’s too full. This is in fact the accepted mechanism of pathogenesis for virtually all other viruses. But it became clear that HIV did not in fact kill T-cells in this manner, and this concept was abandoned, to be replaced by various other ones, each of which resulted in very different models and, therefore, different predictions. Which model was "correct" never was clear.


Dernière édition par @dmin le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:29, édité 2 fois
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:03

2nd Part:

As it turns out, the reason there was no consensus mathematically as to how HIV killed T-cells was because there was no biological consensus. There still isn’t. HIV is possibly the most studied microbe in history – certainly it is the best-funded – yet there is still no agreed-upon mechanism of pathogenesis. Worse than that, there are no data to support the hypothesis that HIV kills T-cells at all. It doesn’t in the test tube. It mostly just sits there, as it does in people – if it can be found at all. In Robert Gallo's seminal 1984 paper in which he claims "proof" that HIV causes AIDS, actual HIV could be found in only 26 out of 72 AIDS patients. To date, actual HIV remains an elusive target in those with AIDS or simply HIV-positive.

This is starkly illustrated by the continued use of antibody tests to diagnose HIV infection. Antibody tests are fairly standard to test for certain microbes, but for anything other than HIV, the main reason they are used in place of direct tests (that is, actually looking for the bacteria or virus itself) is because they are generally much easier and cheaper than direct testing. Most importantly, such antibody tests have been rigorously verified against the gold standard of microbial isolation. This stands in vivid contrast to HIV, for which antibody tests are used because there exists no test for the actual virus. As to so-called "viral load," most people are not aware that tests for viral load are neither licensed nor recommended by the FDA to diagnose HIV infection. This is why an "AIDS test" is still an antibody test. Viral load, however, is used to estimate the health status of those already diagnosed HIV-positive. But there are very good reasons to believe it does not work at all. Viral load uses either PCR or a technique called branched-chained DNA amplification (bDNA). PCR is the same technique used for "DNA fingerprinting" at crime scenes where only trace amounts of materials can be found. PCR essentially mass-produces DNA or RNA so that it can be seen. If something has to be mass-produced to even be seen, and the result of that mass-production is used to estimate how much of a pathogen there is, it might lead a person to wonder how relevant the pathogen was in the first place. Specifically, how could something so hard to find, even using the most sensitive and sophisticated technology, completely decimate the immune system? bDNA, while not magnifying anything directly, nevertheless looks only for fragments of DNA believed, but not proven, to be components of the genome of HIV – but there is no evidence to say that these fragments don’t exist in other genetic sequences unrelated to HIV or to any virus. It is worth noting at this point that viral load, like antibody tests, has never been verified against the gold standard of HIV isolation. bDNA uses PCR as a gold standard, PCR uses antibody tests as a gold standard, and antibody tests use each other. None use HIV itself.

There is good reason to believe the antibody tests are flawed as well. The two types of tests routinely used are the ELISA and the Western Blot (WB). The current testing protocol is to "verify" a positive ELISA with the "more specific" WB (which has actually been banned from diagnostic use in the UK because it is so unreliable). But few people know that the criteria for a positive WB vary from country to country and even from lab to lab. Put bluntly, a person’s HIV status could well change depending on the testing venue. It is also possible to test "WB indeterminate," which translates to any one of "uninfected," "possibly infected," or even, absurdly, "partly infected" under the current interpretation. This conundrum is confounded by the fact that the proteins comprising the different reactive "bands" on the WB test are all claimed to be specific to HIV, raising the question of how a truly uninfected individual could possess antibodies to even one "HIV-specific" protein.

I have come to sincerely believe that these HIV tests do immeasurably more harm than good, due to their astounding lack of specificity and standardization. I can buy the idea that anonymous screening of the blood supply for some nonspecific marker of ill health (which, due to cross reactivity with many known pathogens, a positive HIV antibody test often seems to be) is useful. I cannot buy the idea that any individual needs to have a diagnostic HIV test. A negative test may not be accurate (whatever that means), but a positive one can create utter havoc and destruction in a person’s life – all for a virus that most likely does absolutely nothing. I do not feel it is going too far to say that these tests ought to be banned for diagnostic purposes.

The real victims in this mess are those whose lives are turned upside-down by the stigma of an HIV diagnosis. These people, most of whom are perfectly healthy, are encouraged to avoid intimacy and are further branded with the implication that they were somehow dreadfully foolish and careless. Worse, they are encouraged to take massive daily doses of some of the most toxic drugs ever manufactured. HIV, for many years, has fulfilled the role of a microscopic terrorist. People have lost their jobs, been denied entry into the Armed Forces, been refused residency in and even entry into some countries, even been charged with assault or murder for having consensual sex; babies have been taken from their mothers and had toxic medications forced down their throats. There is no precedent for this type of behavior, as it is all in the name of a completely unproven, fundamentally flawed hypothesis, on the basis of highly suspect, indirect tests for supposed infection with an allegedly deadly virus – a virus that has never been observed to do much of anything.

As to the question of what does cause AIDS, if it is not HIV, there are many plausible explanations given by people known to be experts. Before the discovery of HIV, AIDS was assumed to be a lifestyle syndrome caused mostly by indiscriminate use of recreational drugs. Immunosuppression has multiple causes, from an overload of microbes to malnutrition. Probably all of these are true causes of AIDS. Immune deficiency has many manifestations, and a syndrome with many manifestations is likely multicausal as well. Suffice it to say that the HIV hypothesis of AIDS has offered nothing but predictions – of its spread, of the availability of a vaccine, of a forthcoming animal model, and so on – that have not materialized, and it has not saved a single life.

After ten years involved in the academic side of HIV research, as well as in the academic world at large, I truly believe that the blame for the universal, unconditional, faith-based acceptance of such a flawed theory falls squarely on the shoulders of those among us who have actively endorsed a completely unproven hypothesis in the interests of furthering our careers. Of course, hypotheses in science deserve to be studied, but no hypothesis should be accepted as fact before it is proven, particularly one whose blind acceptance has such dire consequences.

For over twenty years, the general public has been greatly misled and ill-informed. As someone who has been raised by parents who taught me from a young age never to believe anything just because "everyone else accepts it to be true," I can no longer just sit by and do nothing, thereby contributing to this craziness. And the craziness has gone on long enough. As humans – as honest academics and scientists – the only thing we can do is allow the truth to come to light.


March 3, 2006
Form here.

Rebecca V. Culshaw, Ph.D. [send her email to rebeccavculshaw@yahoo.com if you want to know more], is a mathematical biologist who has been working on mathematical models of HIV infection for the past ten years. She received her Ph.D. (mathematics with a specialization in mathematical biology) from Dalhousie University in Canada in 2002 and is currently employed as an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at a university in Texas.
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:06

Rare Treatment Is Reported to Cure AIDS Patient :
Doctors in Berlin are reporting that they cured a man of AIDS by giving him transplanted blood stem cells from a person naturally resistant to the virus.
Skip to next paragraph
Related
RSS Feed

* Get Health News From The New York Times »

But while the case has novel medical implications, experts say it will be of little immediate use in treating AIDS. Top American researchers called the treatment unthinkable for the millions infected in Africa and impractical even for insured patients in top research hospitals.

“It’s very nice, and it’s not even surprising,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “But it’s just off the table of practicality.”

The patient, a 42-year-old American resident in Germany, also has leukemia, which justified the high risk of a stem-cell transplant. Such transplants require wiping out a patient’s immune system, including bone marrow, with radiation and drugs; 10 to 30 percent of those getting them die.

“Frankly, I’d rather take the medicine,” said Dr. Robert C. Gallo, director of the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, referring to antiretroviral drugs.

Moreover, the chances of finding a donor who is a good tissue match for the patient and also has the rare genetic mutation that confers resistance to H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS, are extremely small. Nonetheless, the man has been free of the virus for 20 months even though he is not using antiretroviral drugs, and the success in his case is evidence that a long-dreamed-of therapy for AIDS — injecting stem cells that have been genetically re-engineered with the mutation — might work.

The cure was announced Wednesday by Dr. Gero Hütter and Dr. Eckhard Thiel, blood-cancer specialists at Charité Hospital in Berlin. The case was described last week in The Wall Street Journal.

Attempts to use bone-marrow transplants in AIDS treatment have been made since the 1980s. In one case, a patient with both AIDS and lymphoma died of the cancer two months later, but was found to harbor no H.I.V.; it was not known if something in the transplant had protected him.

And in a famous 1995 case, Jeff Getty, a prominent San Francisco advocate for AIDS patients, received bone marrow from a baboon, which is resistant to the human virus. He survived 11 years, but died of AIDS and cancer; the transplant had not protected him but antiretroviral triple therapy had been invented in time to help.

Dr. Hütter said one of the 80 potential donors who matched his patient closely enough for leukemia treatment also happened to have the mutation.

That mutation, discovered in a few gay men in the 1990s and known as Delta 32, must be inherited from both parents. With it, the white blood cells produced in the marrow lack the surface receptors that allow H.I.V. to invade the immune system.

Even if it is prevented from replicating by drugs, the H.I.V. can lie dormant in lymph and nerve cells for years. But without the necessary receptors, any virus coming out of dormancy has no way to infect them.

Doctors say the case gives hope for therapies that artificially induce the Delta 32 mutation.

For example, Dr. Irvin S. Y. Chen, director of the AIDS Institute at U.C.L.A. , is working on using RNA “hairpin scissors” to cut out the bits of genetic material in blood stem cells that code for the receptors. The concept is working in monkeys, he said. Eventually, he hopes, it will be possible to inject them into humans after wiping out only part of the immune system with drugs. “I think that would carry no risk of death,” he said.
Source.
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:19

Medical Encyclopaedia:
AIDS

Definition

Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is an infectious disease caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). It was first recognized in the United States in 1981. AIDS is the advanced form of infection with the HIV virus, which may not cause recognizable disease for a long period after the initial exposure (latency). No vaccine is currently available to prevent HIV infection. At present, all forms of AIDS therapy are focused on improving the quality and length of life for AIDS patients by slowing or halting the replication of the virus and treating or preventing infections and cancers that take advantage of a person's weakened immune system.

Description

AIDS is considered one of the most devastating public health problems in recent history. In June 2000, the Centers
Risk of acquiring HIV infection by entry site:

Entry site Risk virus reaches entry site Risk virus enters Risk inoculated
Conjunctiva Moderate Moderate Very low
Oral mucosa Moderate Moderate Low
Nasal mucosa Low Low Very low
Lower respiratory Very low Very low Very low
Anus Very high Very high Very high
Skin, intact Very low Very low Very low
Skin, broken Low High High
Sexual:

Vagina Low High High
Penis Low Low High
Ulcers (STD) Medium Low Very high
Blood:

Products High High Low
Shared needles High High High
Accidental needle High Very High Low
Traumatic wound Modest High High
Perinatal High High High

for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that 120,223 (includes only those cases in areas that have confidential HIV reporting) in the United States are HIV-positive, and 311,701 are living with AIDS (includes only those cases where vital status is known). Of these patients, 44% are gay or bisexual men, 20% are heterosexual intravenous drug users, and 17% are women. In addition, approximately 1,000-2,000 children are born each year with HIV infection. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 33 million adults and 1.3 million children worldwide were living with HIV/AIDS as of 1999 with 5.4 million being newly infected that year. Most of these cases are in the developing countries of Asia and Africa.
Risk factors

AIDS can be transmitted in several ways. The risk factors for HIV transmission vary according to category:

* Sexual contact. Persons at greatest risk are those who do not practice safe sex, those who are not monogamous, those who participate in anal intercourse, and those who have sex with a partner with symptoms of advanced HIV infection and/or other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). In the United States and Europe, most cases of sexually transmitted HIV infection have resulted from homosexual contact, whereas in Africa, the disease is spread primarily through sexual intercourse among heterosexuals.
* Transmission in pregnancy. High-risk mothers include women married to bisexual men or men who have an abnormal blood condition called hemophilia and require blood transfusions, intravenous drug users, and women living in neighborhoods with a high rate of HIV infection among heterosexuals. The chances of transmitting the disease to the child are higher in women in advanced stages of the disease. Breast feeding increases the risk of transmission by 10-20%. The use of zidovudine (AZT) during pregnancy, however, can decrease the risk of transmission to the baby.
* Exposure to contaminated blood or blood products. With the introduction of blood product screening in the mid-1980s, the incidence of HIV transmission in blood transfusions has dropped to one in every 100,000 transfused. With respect to HIV transmission among drug abusers, risk increases with the duration of using injections, the frequency of needle sharing, the number of persons who share a needle, and the number of AIDS cases in the local population.
* Needle sticks among health care professionals. Present studies indicate that the risk of HIV transmission by a needle stick is about one in 250. This rate can be decreased if the injured worker is given AZT, an anti-retroviral medication, in combination with other medication.

HIV is not transmitted by handshakes or other casual non-sexual contact, coughing or sneezing, or by blood-sucking insects such as mosquitoes.


AIDS in women

AIDS in women is a serious public health concern. Women exposed to HIV infection through heterosexual contact are the most rapidly growing risk group in the United States population. The percentage of AIDS cases diagnosed in women has risen from 7% in 1985 to 23% in 1999. Women diagnosed with AIDS may not live as long as men, although the reasons for this finding are unclear.


AIDS in children

Since AIDS can be transmitted from an infected mother to the child during pregnancy, during the birth process, or through breast milk, all infants born to HIV-positive mothers are a high-risk group. As of 2000, it was estimated that 87% of HIV-positive women are of childbearing age; 41% of them are drug abusers. Between 15-30% of children born to HIV-positive women will be infected with the virus.

AIDS is one of the 10 leading causes of death in children between one and four years of age. The interval between exposure to HIV and the development of AIDS is shorter in children than in adults. Infants infected with HIV have a 20-30% chance of developing AIDS within a year and dying before age three. In the remainder, AIDS progresses more slowly; the average child patient survives to seven years of age. Some survive into early adolescence.

— Rebecca J. Frey
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:21

Causes and symptoms

The cause of primary AIDS is infection with the HIV virus, transmitted via infected blood or body fluids. Methods of transmission of the virus include unprotected sex, especially anal intercourse; occupational needle stick or body fluid splash, which has an estimated transmission rate of less than 0.3%; sharing of needles in drug abuse; and receiving contaminated blood products.

Opportunistic infections occur in individuals whose CD4 count is less than 200 cells/mm3 and those not taking preventative drugs.

Symptoms of AIDS include:

* cough and shortness of breath
* seizures and lack of coordination
* difficult or painful swallowing
* confusion and forgetfulness
* severe and persistent diarrhea
* fever
* vision loss
* nausea, abdominal cramps, and vomiting
* weight loss and extreme fatigue
* severe headaches with neck stiffness
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:26

Diagnosis

In the early stages of infection, HIV often causes no symptoms and the infection can be diagnosed only by testing a person's blood. Two tests are available to diagnose HIV infection, one that looks for the presence of antibodies produced by the body in response to HIV and the other that looks for the virus itself. Antibodies are proteins produced by the body whenever a disease threatens it. When the body is infected with HIV, it produces antibodies specific to HIV. The first test, called ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), looks for such antibodies in the blood.

A positive ELISA has to be confirmed by another test called western blot or immunofluorescent assay (IFA). All positive tests by ELISA are not accurate and hence, western blot and repeated tests are necessary to confirm a person's HIV status. A person infected with HIV is termed HIV positive or seropositive.

Rapid tests that give results in five to 30 minutes are increasingly being used worldwide. The accuracy of rapid tests is stated to be as good as that of ELISA. Though rapid tests are more expensive, researchers have found them to be more cost effective in terms of the number of people covered and the time the tests take.

The HIV antibodies generally do not reach detectable levels in the blood until about three months after infection. This period, from the time of infection until the blood is tested positive for antibodies, is called the window period. Sometimes, the antibodies might take up to six months to be detected. Even if the tests are negative, during the window period the amount of virus is very high in an infected person. If a person is newly infected, therefore, the risk of transmission is higher.

Another test for HIV is called polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which looks for HIV itself in the blood. This test, which recognizes the presence of the virus' genetic material in the blood, can detect the virus within a few days of infection. There are also tests like radio immuno precipitation assay (RIPA), a confirmatory blood test that may be used when antibody levels are difficult to detect or when western blot test results are uncertain.
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:26

Treatment

Since the early 1990s, several drugs to fight both the HIV infection and its associated infections and cancers have become available, including:

* Reverse transcriptase inhibitors: They interrupt the virus from making copies of itself. These drugs are AZT (zidovudine [Retrovir]), ddC (zalcitabine [Hivid], dideoxyinosine), d4T (stavudine [Zerit]), and 3TC (lamivudine [Epivir]).
* Nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIS): These medications are used in combination with other drugs to help keep the virus from multiplying. Examples of NNRTIS are delavirdine (Rescriptor) and nevirapine (Viramune).
* Protease inhibitors: These medications interrupt virus replication at a later step in its lifecycle. These include ritonavir (Norvir), a lopinavir and ritonavir combination (Kaletra), saquinavir (Invirase), indinavir sulphate (Crixivan), amprenavir (Agenerase), and nelfinavir (Viracept). Using both classes of drugs reduces the chances of developing resistance in the virus.
* Fusion inhibitors: This is the newest class of anti-HIV drugs. The first drug of this class (enfuvirtide [Fuzeon]) has recently been approved in the United States. Fusion inhibitors block HIV from entering the human immune cell.
* A combination of several drugs called highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART): This treatment is not a cure. The virus still persists in various body sites such as in the lymph glands.

The antiretroviral drugs do not cure people of the HIV infection or AIDS. They stop viral replication and delay the development of AIDS. However, they may also have side effects that can be severe. These include decrease of red or white blood cells, inflammation of the pancreas, and painful nerve damage. Other complications are enlarged or fatty liver, which may result in liver failure and death.
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Jeu 04 Déc 2008, 04:28

Recovery and rehabilitation

As there is no cure for AIDS till now, the focus is on maintaining optimum health, activity, and quality of life rather than on complete recovery.

Occupational therapy can have a crucial role in assisting people living with HIV/AIDS to re-engage with life, particularly through vocational rehabilitation programs. Occupational therapy can provide the patient with a series of learning experiences that will enable the individual to make appropriate vocational choices.
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par mehdibouayad20 le Mar 09 Déc 2008, 06:25

how interesting is that !!!!
Thank you ....
mehdibouayad20
mehdibouayad20
Admin.
Admin.

Masculin
Nombre de messages : 2556
Age : 28
Ma ville : PARIS
Date d'inscription : 29/05/2008

Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par dalida le Dim 14 Déc 2008, 17:56

thank you teacher, it's really very interesting. I always repeat that we are have enough knowledge now as students (especially scientifics) to know exactly what is the AIDS
dalida
dalida
Ingén. Mod

Féminin
Nombre de messages : 1695
Age : 28
Ma ville : Fès
Date d'inscription : 19/11/2007

Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Invité le Lun 29 Mar 2010, 16:06

Well, there are rumours of emerging centres belonging to Dr Mohammed Al-Hachemi in Casa and Fez (Narjis1, I heard) where patients get medicine from herbs based on herbs & honey (expensive!) and get better.
Some in internet say it's fake.
Anonymous
Invité
Invité


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par mehdibouayad20 le Mar 30 Mar 2010, 03:58

NOO !!! do say it !
there found an efficient Cure ?!
mehdibouayad20
mehdibouayad20
Admin.
Admin.

Masculin
Nombre de messages : 2556
Age : 28
Ma ville : PARIS
Date d'inscription : 29/05/2008

Revenir en haut Aller en bas

What do you know about AIDS ? Empty Re: What do you know about AIDS ?

Message par Contenu sponsorisé


Contenu sponsorisé


Revenir en haut Aller en bas

Revenir en haut


 
Permission de ce forum:
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum