HIV+ Linebacker Arrested For Sexual Assault

[Mercy!]

The Raffy comment was in jest..

 

Save your posting suggestions. And I don't care if "we're fine".

 

There's nothing you can do to convince me or change my opinion. HIV is deadly and unpredictable. Everyday new things come up concerning it. To say that it's not a legit bathroom (or anywhere - including hospitals where people get HIV from blood transfusions...) concern is ignorant - as in unformed - at the very least. Until there is a cure, it is an unknown. And a risk I'm fine with being overly cautious about.

Being cautious, even “overly cautious” as you put it, is a fine thing as far as I’m concerned. It’s the first step toward educating yourself about the REAL risk of anything, and then protecting yourself. But now you’ve jumped from YOUR statement (not mine!) about the bathroom and introduced a straw man in this particular discussion with your blood transfusion statement - and then thrown “ignorant” into the mix for good measure. I know you understand the fallacy in that thinking. I’m just not sure why anyone would try to make such a weird connection. Unless that was in jest, also.

 

Anyway, if you wish to hold onto your opinion (even if it is not supported by the facts) that’s okay, too, isn’t it? But in regards to sports (and not just professional football), society needs to have policies in place to deal with the thousands of HIV+ people who are participating right now.

 

I see now instead of offering to convince you, I should have just asked you to provide references for any proof that HIV can be transmitted via toilet seats, urinals, or showers. Please. And puhleese.

[Mercy!]

I’ve got to believe that everyone here has a fundamental grasp on how HIV is transmitted; that you can’t get it from toilet seats or showers, that sort of thing. The CDC link I gave above covers the basics.

 

Regarding the fear of blood-borne transmission during contact sports, I found references to a few articles from the 1990’s. I imagine the procedures that everyone implemented around that time have dealt with this issue appropriately, even though public misconceptions admittedly still abound. If anyone knows something which contradicts the findings that HIV is exceeding difficult to transmit except by intimate contact, needle sharing and transfusions of infected blood products - could you post a reference, please? My cursory search reminded me that we have totally ignored a true nasty in this discussion – Hepatitis. That’s worthy of some serious concern.

 

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/...full/104/6/1400

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS:

Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Other Blood-borne Viral Pathogens in the Athletic Setting

 

Such [HIV] transmission appears to require, in addition to a portal of entry, prolonged exposure to large quantities of blood. Transmission through intact skin has not been documented: no HIV infections occurred after 2712 such exposures in 1 large prospective study (95% CI, 0%-.1%). Transmission of HIV in sports has not been documented.

 

http://annals.org/cgi/content/full/122/4/283

Transmission of Blood-Borne Pathogens during Sports

Risk and Prevention

 

Only one instance of HIV infection thought to be related to sports has been reported in the medical literature; this infection was diagnosed in a recreational soccer player in Italy [1]. However, public health officials in Italy who reviewed the available data could not satisfactorily rule out nonathletic risk factors for this man, who had been working in a drug-dependency rehabilitation center, nor could they definitively establish athletic activity as the source of infection [2]. In this issue of Annals, a study of on-the-field bleeding injuries during professional football competitions in the United States [3] concludes that the potential risk for HIV transmission to each player is extremely low (less than 1 per 85 million game contacts). Although no episode of HIV transmission during sports has been documented, two reports of transmission during bloody fistfights [4,5] and two reports of transmission in households in which blood contact occurred [6] have been published. These cases were not sports-related; however, they support the concept that preventing blood contact is prudent.

 

http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/122/4/271

Bleeding Injuries in Professional Football:

Estimating the Risk for HIV Transmission

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...3&dopt=Abstract

HIV/AIDS policies and sports: the National Football League.

[jackie hayes]

Those look like good references and good studies. But they answer a different question. Take the "Estimating the Risk for HIV Transmission" paper as an example -- the question answered there is, What is the risk of any particular player contracting HIV during his career? And they guess that the rate is less than 1 transmission per 85 million game contacts.

 

Which is very low. But the questions here are, what is the probability that a particular HIV positive player will, at some time during his career pass on the virus through contact? And how much does his probability of transmission increase when he has a cut? That number will be much larger, though still low. But how low is low enough? Say it's 1 in 500 -- is he obligated to stop playing, or is that risk acceptable?

 

I'm not arguing that it is a big deal -- just that it's too much to call someone ignorant for worrying about blood-borne HIV transmission from someone who is known to be HIV positive.

[Steff]

I see now instead of offering to convince you, I should have just asked you to provide references for any proof that HIV can be transmitted via toilet seats, urinals, or showers.  Please.  And puhleese.

 

Because that's what I said, right (actually no I didn't) - DESPITE giving other examples not associated with using a toilet or taking a shower... specifically drug use, bleeding, and sexual intercourse.

 

 

Now.. I'm sure it's fun and all.. but don't you have anything better to do then to chase me around posting all these links trying to make a point...???

 

 

:rolly

[Mercy!]

Those look like good references and good studies.  But they answer a different question.  Take the "Estimating the Risk for HIV Transmission" paper as an example -- the question answered there is, What is the risk of any particular player contracting HIV during his career?  And they guess that the rate is less than 1 transmission per 85 million game contacts.

 

Which is very low.  But the questions here are, what is the probability that a particular HIV positive player will, at some time during his career pass on the virus through contact?  And how much does his probability of transmission increase when he has a cut?  That number will be much larger, though still low.  But how low is low enough?  Say it's 1 in 500 -- is he obligated to stop playing, or is that risk acceptable?

 

I'm not arguing that it is a big deal -- just that it's too much to call someone ignorant for worrying about blood-borne HIV transmission from someone who is known to be HIV positive.

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

 

First, could we please stop passing that “ignorant” along? If you’ll follow the trail of that word’s usage in this thread – I believe you’ll find that you and Steff are the only ones who have used it. I most definitely have not called anyone ignorant.

 

These studies were 10-15 years old. Wouldn’t you think that with all the school athletic programs over the years, and all the many possibilities of HIV transmission, that if what you are speculating were true, that this would be well-documented by now? This is one of those cases where you really need to back up your speculation with a reference.

 

I really didn’t think that posting that story would produce some of the remarks that have resulted. But I will admit my personal bias. I’m so up to here with our culture’s hyping of barely existent threats, compared to the real dangers in our lives. You know what I mean

 

Number of deaths due to automobile accidents every year in the USA – 43,000+

Number of smoking related deaths every year in the USA - ~440,000

Number of individuals proven to have even caught HIV through contact sports ever– ZERO.

 

Anyway, thanks again for the neutral response. And now, I'm late for my health club visit - honestly. And I've got to say, I've had some concerns about the possiblities of some of the bugs I could catch in that environment. But none of them rise to the threat of what we've been discussing. And, boy, I sure have become addicted to that whirlpool at the end of the session.

[kapkomet]

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

 

First, could we please stop passing that “ignorant” along?    If you’ll follow the trail of that word’s usage in this thread – I believe you’ll find that you and Steff are the only ones who have used it.  I most definitely have not called anyone ignorant.

 

These studies were 10-15 years old.  Wouldn’t you think that with all the school athletic programs over the years, and all the many possibilities of HIV transmission, that if what you are speculating were true, that this would be well-documented by now?  This is one of those cases where you really need to back up your speculation with a reference.

 

I really didn’t think that posting that story would produce some of the remarks that have resulted.  But I will admit my personal bias.  I’m so up to here with our culture’s hyping of barely existent threats, compared to the real dangers in our lives.  You know what I mean

 

Number of deaths due to automobile accidents every year in the USA – 43,000+

Number of smoking related deaths every year in the USA - ~440,000

Number of individuals proven to have even caught HIV through contact sports ever– ZERO.

 

Anyway, thanks again for the neutral response.  And now, I'm late for my health club visit - honestly.  And I've got to say, I've had some concerns about the possiblities of some of the bugs I could catch in that environment.  But none of them rise to the threat of what we've been discussing.  And, boy, I sure have become addicted to that whirlpool at the end of the session.

Thank goodness for chlorinated water - keeps the bugs out of the whirlpool water.

 

[jackie hayes]

Let's start that trail at the first post.

I might as well not comment about the sexual assault part since it’s only an accusation at this point.  But I’m surprised that the level of ignorance is still so high about how HIV is contracted.  The remarks by Tony Miles sound like something you might have heard 15 years ago.

First, could we please stop passing that “ignorant” along?    If you’ll follow the trail of that word’s usage in this thread – I believe you’ll find that you and Steff are the only ones who have used it.  I most definitely have not called anyone ignorant.

So his remarks display a surprising "level of ignorance", but you would never dream of calling him ignorant. Explain, please.

[Mercy!]

Let's start that trail at the first post.

So his remarks display a surprising "level of ignorance", but you would never dream of calling him ignorant.  Explain, please.

I was wrong. Thanks for setting the record straight. I missed that entirely. Next time I search for words in a thread, I’d better search for variants.

 

Though I’ll understand if no one agrees with me, I personally draw a distinction between talking about the “level of ignorance” of someone’s statements in an article, and using the word “ignorant” to describe fellow posters or their statements in a thread. I try to avoid the latter usage - these days on a par with the word, “stupid” - since it is usually not understood to ever mean “uninformed,” hence tends to be inflammatory.

 

I also realized that instead of mentioning 440,000 annual smoking-related deaths in my tangent about real life risks, I might have made a more cogent link to the topic by giving the number of deaths and catastrophic injuries sustained by high school, college and pro athletes every single year. But I’m guessing everyone’s tired of this by now. For sure, it wouldn’t incite those everyday passions like the mention of AIDS and HIV.

[Steff]

I try to avoid the latter usage - these days on a par with the word, “stupid” - since it is usually not understood to ever mean “uninformed,” hence tends to be inflammatory.

 

 

Unless your told the context but choose to ignore it..

[Yossarian]

About ten years ago or so ago a good friend of mine was attending a conference of medical and related professionals. One of the seminars was on HIV. A graphic presentation was given complete with power point and a number of overheads and other high tech accompaniments. It was shown in stunning detail how HIV overpowers and disables the immune system. My friend said the affect on the audience was powerful, at one point there was total silence in the lecture hall. I'm not going to take a smug and superior attitude towards a football player who doesn't have the prequisite eloquence to suit some of you. Maybe the risk is very small, but he has every right to be concerned. If you get this there is no reset button.