tanbark813 Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 It stands to reason that since there is no cure for herpes and that medication reduces the chance of a breakout and people get breakouts throughout their life then that would equate to a life time of medication TB.. To expand on the prior cold analogy: It stands to reason that since there is no cure for the common cold and that medication reduces the symptoms and people catch colds throughout their life then that would equate to a life time of medication A_C..
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 No ... I said I wanted you to stop expressing an uninformed opinion that has no basis in fact or experience - I would add that you express it repeatedly, despite the attempts of others to give you some facts and personal experience, which you ignore.
Trialbyfire Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 To expand on the prior cold analogy: It stands to reason that since there is no cure for the common cold and that medication reduces the symptoms and people catch colds throughout their life then that would equate to a life time of medication A_C.. Not too many colds cause encephalitis in babies.
tanbark813 Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Not too many colds cause encephalitis in babies. And? What does that have to do with cost or frequency of medication?
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "Not too many colds cause encephalitis in babies." What on earth does that have to do with the analogy? We're talking about medication being a choice, rather than being essential. That's the point being made. We're not talking about the possible effects of a disease. Most diseases have possible extreme effects - mumps in children can be catastrophic!
tanbark813 Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Nice expansion of the analogy Tanbark Thank you, kind sir.
tanbark813 Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 We're not talking about the possible effects of a disease. Most diseases have possible extreme effects - mumps in children can be catastrophic! Good point. Chicken pox, another form of herpes nearly everyone has, can be fatal for adults.
Trialbyfire Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 And? What does that have to do with cost or frequency of medication?When you have a disease that can cause such neonatal damage, wouldn't you be more interested in getting medication to ensure there's less risk of spread, thus less risk of damage?
tanbark813 Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 When you have a disease that can cause such neonatal damage, wouldn't you be more interested in getting medication to ensure there's less risk of spread, thus less risk of damage? I suppose if I were a pregnant woman with HSV2, then yes.
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Medication doesn't ensure there's less risk of a spread. How do you think medication protects anyone? It is not a vaccine, or a protective device. Not having sex when you have symptons is the thing that ensures there's less risk of a spread. Educating people who may carry the virus but know nothing about it helps to ensure there's less risk of a spread. Educating people who have oral herpes, but don't think it's got any link to STDs may help to ensure there's less risk of a spread. Trying to educate ill-informed people may help to ensure there's less risk of a spread. That's why I'm here talking to you.
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Regarding giving birth and having herpes - virtually all doctors agree that the only time when there is risk is when the mother has a herpes outbreak at the time of giving birth. If this occurred a C section could be employed.
Art_Critic Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 No ... I said I wanted you to stop expressing an uninformed opinion that has no basis in fact or experience - I would add that you express it repeatedly, despite the attempts of others to give you some facts and personal experience, which you ignore. thanks for trying to tell me what and how I should post my opinion... Experience isn't a requirement for posting on LS and if it was then there would hardly ever be any words written... This thread started out asking opinions from people who DID NOT have any experience with herpes or did.... The OP didn't specify that only people who had herpes should post thier opinion.. I do however have some experience as I have been tested.. I have been taught some about it from my mom an RN... I have also life experience that has taught me enough about STD's.
Trialbyfire Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 I suppose if I were a pregnant woman with HSV2, then yes. Everytime a man has sex with a woman, there's risk of pregnancy and contraction of herpes. It's known and accepted theory that outbreaks happen more frequently during the first year of contraction. The gestational period for human babies is less than a year. You're more likely to spread herpes during an outbreak but yes, it can be contracted through viral shedding. Medication helps to suppress outbreaks. As for the comment about C-sections, right. I'm sure the medical community would be thrilled with women electing to have C-sections so they can sleep with people who have herpes.
garnet Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Regarding giving birth and having herpes - virtually all doctors agree that the only time when there is risk is when the mother has a herpes outbreak at the time of giving birth. If this occurred a C section could be employed. I have herpes and have never been pregnant, but this is what my gynocologist has told me as well. As far as medication goes, I've never had the need for it. I rarely have symptoms, and when I do, they're extremely mild. I kind of wish this thread would die. There's a lot of misinformation and useless negativity going on here.
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "I'm sure the medical community would be thrilled with women electing to have C-sections so they can sleep with people who have herpes." What? What a ridiculous 'logic' path! I was explaining that the medical community agrees that the risk to a foetus if you are a mother with HSV is only present if you are having symptons at the time of birth. In which case a C-seciton is an appropriate course. I was trying to reassure ladies with HSV that motherhood is not restricted to them, and that your comments about the effect on a foetus are not so dire and can be avoided if you are unlucky enough to have an outbreak at that time. I have absolutely no idea why you would take that reassurance and turn it into some promiscuous story about the desire from ladies who want to contract Herpes so choose to have a C-section to do that?! I'm really not sure you can read!
tanbark813 Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 Everytime a man has sex with a woman, there's risk of pregnancy and contraction of herpes. It's known and accepted theory that outbreaks happen more frequently during the first year of contraction. The gestational period for human babies is less than a year. You're more likely to spread herpes during an outbreak but yes, it can be contracted through viral shedding. Medication helps to suppress outbreaks. You're making no sense here. Babies can only contract herpes during birth so I don't see what this has to do with anything. I'm sure the medical community would be thrilled with women electing to have C-sections so they can sleep with people who have herpes. I don't know about "thrilled" but from what I understand, what macon said about C-sections during birth is standard practice in those cases. And since when did the medical community get to decide who a person chooses to sleep with?
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "I kind of wish this thread would die. There's a lot of misinformation and useless negativity going on here." I completely understand your feelings. Talking to Art Critic doesn't fill me with positive thoughts unfortunately, and this is not an enjoyable discussion - but while misinformation continues to be spouted, I feel I have to respond with some facts.
Trialbyfire Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 You're making no sense here. Babies can only contract herpes during birth so I don't see what this has to do with anything.A man has as much responsibility towards sex potentially causing pregnancy as well. If that man has herpes, he's just as responsible for ensuring that it's not spread, everytime he has sex. I don't know about "thrilled" but from what I understand, what macon said about C-sections during birth is standard practice in those cases. And since when did the medical community get to decide who a person chooses to sleep with? The medical community doesn't but a responsible man with herpes should be trying to ensure that he acts responsibly by not spreading through informing the partner and medicating.
Art_Critic Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "I kind of wish this thread would die. There's a lot of misinformation and useless negativity going on here." I completely understand your feelings. Talking to Art Critic doesn't fill me with positive thoughts unfortunately, and this is not an enjoyable discussion - but while misinformation continues to be spouted, I feel I have to respond with some facts. Oh come on Macon..quite your whinning... I have not knowingly posted any misinformation.. I'm not the only person posting on this thread.. and I myself have asked for backup info from some posters to make it clearer to me..
garnet Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 I completely understand your feelings. Talking to Art Critic doesn't fill me with positive thoughts unfortunately, and this is not an enjoyable discussion - but while misinformation continues to be spouted, I feel I have to respond with some facts. I know, but after awhile it seems pointless. All I have to say is thank goodness I have never encountered individuals in my personal life who hold views like some of the people here.
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 I don't know what you're talking about now. "The medical community doesn't but a responsible man with herpes should be trying to ensure that he acts responsibly by not spreading through informing the partner and medicating." Of course any individual, male or female, should be responsible if they have HSV. Informing their partner and medicating, however, is not the best route to not passing the virus on - not having sex when you have a sympton is the most important thing. As ever you seem to think medication is essential for every HSV carrier. This really is like flogging a dead horse.
Trialbyfire Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 I don't know what you're talking about now. "The medical community doesn't but a responsible man with herpes should be trying to ensure that he acts responsibly by not spreading through informing the partner and medicating." Of course any individual, male or female, should be responsible if they have HSV. Informing their partner and medicating, however, is not the best route to not passing the virus on - not having sex when you have a sympton is the most important thing. As ever you seem to think medication is essential for every HSV carrier. This really is like flogging a dead horse. Viral shedding anyone?
macon Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "Oh come on Macon..quite your whinning..." I'm having a discussion I believe - it's quite amazing that you can discern the tone of my speech from the written word. Perhaps learn to spell before you start insulting people
Art_Critic Posted May 29, 2008 Posted May 29, 2008 "Oh come on Macon..quite your whinning..." I'm having a discussion I believe - it's quite amazing that you can discern the tone of my speech from the written word. Perhaps learn to spell before you start insulting people My spell check didn't catch it because it is spelled correctly.. when I went to edit it I could not any longer.. Why are you resorting to insults ?..
Recommended Posts