Womanizing A-lister is HIV positive- Page 5

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 9:55am

Jane, the virus is so suppressed by the combination (cocktail) therapy that the virus is undetectable in the blood.  It's detectable (and multiplying) until the powerful treatment begins.

Updated On: 11/17/15 at 09:55 AM

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 9:56am

@Jane: When he was diagnosed his viral load was detectable. Once he started taking his medication, his viral load decreased to levels that are undetectable.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 9:57am

But Sheen also mentioned that he had  unprotected sex after knowing his status.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 9:58am

FindingNamo said: "Because sex is pleasurable?  People who are HIV positive can have healthy sex lives.  They're on the treatment, they use condoms, and now the partners can be on PreExposure Prophylaxis and they can have all the fun they want.  And should, a fulfilling sex life is good for your health.

 

^ ^ A THOUSAND TIMES THIS!

 

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:00am

Jane2 said: "But Sheen also mentioned that he had  unprotected sex after knowing his status.

 

 

I don't recall him saying that at all. I will have to re-watch it to confirm, but I am 95.5 % sure he did not say that.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:00am

^^^^^^ LOL this!

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:01am

You keep dropping the point, Jane, that he had unprotected sex after knowing his status with the viral load undetectable and with informed partners who had talked to his doctor.  Perhaps they were on PreExposure Prophylaxis.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:04am

FindingNamo said: "You keep dropping the point, Jane, that he had unprotected sex after knowing his status with the viral load undetectable and with informed partners who had talked to his doctor.  Perhaps they were on PreExposure Prophylaxis.

 

^^ BINGO! I think this is where you "drop the mic" Namo....

 

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:04am

No.  I'll do that at the end of this post.  Jane's questions are good ones.

 

Ahem.  California law.  “Any person who exposes another to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) by engaging in unprotected sexual activity when the infected person knows at the time of the unprotected sex that he or she is infected with HIV, has not disclosed his or her HIV-positive status, and acts with the specific intent to infect the other person with HIV, is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for three, five, or eight years.”

 

AND ACTS WITH SPECIFIC INTENT TO INFECT THE OTHER PERSON WITH HIV Liza's GD Hectoring Headband.

 

https://www.wklaw.com/california-hiv-disclosure-laws/

 

As Prince once put it, Shut up already.  Damn.

Updated On: 11/17/15 at 10:04 AM

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:05am

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:16am

"No.  I'll do that at the end of this post.  Jane's questions are good ones."

 

Thank you, Namo. As any intelligent person knows, there are no stupid questions. And I'll be damned if I'll ever be afraid to ask any question I have about anything.

 

"You keep dropping the point, Jane, that he had unprotected sex after knowing his status with the viral load undetectable and with informed partners who had talked to his doctor."

 

I keep dropping the point? I think I made the point once. Anyway, thank you for your responses.

 

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:22am

"I don't recall him saying that at all. I will have to re-watch it to confirm, but I am 95.5 % sure he did not say that."

 

I'm 95.5% sure I heard it. Matt Lauer asked him outright, and Sheen said yes.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:23am

Here are the times the point was dropped to which I was referring:

I also wonder if it's undetectable, how was it detected?

 

After treatment, it is undetectable.  Before treatment, it is detected by an HIV antibody test, which is confirmed with a viral load test.

 

But Sheen also mentioned that he had  unprotected sex after knowing his status.

 

A person is not on treatment before he or she tests positive for HIV.  A person generally begins powerful anti-retroviral treatment immediately upon diagnosis, after which point the viral levels become undetectable.  In a major reputable study of a large number of couples in which one person is HIV positive and the other person is HIV negative and condoms are not always used for intercourse, there have been zero transmissions of HIV.  

I recall Sheen as saying that after diagnosis he informed his partners, he adhered to the treatment regimen and he used condoms.  He talked about two partners who worked with his doctor, perhaps they went on PreExposure prophylaxis in which case it would be impossible for them to contract HIV from Charlie Sheen, even if there were no condoms used.

Updated On: 11/17/15 at 10:23 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:34am

So If a person has reached the undetectable point, are they still considered infected? Can they still transmit the infection to another person>

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:36am

perhaps they went on PreExposure prophylaxis in which case it would be impossible for them to contract HIV from Charlie Sheen, even if there were no condoms used.

 

There you go with your dangerous assumptions again... 

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:39am

Just watched the interview, and Matt Lauer seemed a bit infantilizing, even to the point of suggesting maybe Charlie should stop drinking?! 

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:41am

Liza's Headband said: "There you go with your dangerous assumptions again... "

 

Well, what adults who know of his HIV status do to protect themselves is sort of none of our business. Your concern yesterday was him not disclosing. now that he says he has been disclosing, you're finding some new issue to caterwaul about?

[haterobics]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:44am

Jane2 said: "So If a person has reached the undetectable point, are they still considered infected? Can they still transmit the infection to another person"

 

Still HIV-positive, and Charlie's doctor said he can't say there is zero chance, but they do test him every few months and he has always been undetectable once he was on the meds. It is unlikely, though. The big issue, as Liza tries to reframe the main point, is that his partners have all known he is positive, at which point everyone is making informed decisions on what they do.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:46am

I'd like Namo to answer my question.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 10:51am

There you go with your dangerous assumptions again... 

 

^^^ Yes, and this is supposedly from a "centrist"!!!  Hahahahahahahaha.

 

"Perhaps" indicates that no assumption was made.  "Perhaps" means its one of many possibilities Sheen was referring to when he said the two partners saw his doctor.  Some people do that.  They say, "I love this person, I don't want to have a barrier in our intimacy."  This was not always possible in this epidemic.  Today, with treatment and prophylaxis it is entirely possible.  

 

Jane, it's no longer quite the binary it once was.  A person who is HIV positive is always HIV positive.  (There are rare expensive experimental exceptions that are not germane to this discussion).  If a person is HIV positive but does not go on treatment, over time the immune system breaks down and they get a low enough T cell count and certain kinds of infections and at that point receive an AIDS diagnosis.  

 

An HIV positive person who rigorously adheres to treatment can reach "undetectable" status.  A large study of serodiscordant couples (one positive the other not) who did not always use condoms for intercourse showed no transmissions of HIV.  It's highly unlikely a transmission would occur.  If a condom is used correctly, even less likely.  If the partner is on pre-exposure prophylaxis (one pill a day taken as directed every single day), transmission is impossible.

Updated On: 11/17/15 at 10:51 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 11:04am

 Thanks. I may sound like I'm totally uninformed about this topic, but that's not the case. As I"ve said before, I did spend about 22 years of my life with my friends in the gay community. At least 20 of them died of  AIDS, the first being right at the start, in the early 80's. I was close to the situation, as I was close to my friends who  were infected, and learned all I knew from them.

 

However, this was the 80's, thirty years ago. The treatment of HIV and AIDS  has changed drastically, in a good way, thanks god. So, my questions are sincere in my desire to learn more about the current treatments.

[Jane2]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 11:13am

Carlos, I just heard it again on the radio. Sheen said Yes, but the two people were told I had HIV and being treated by my doctor.

[Kad]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 11:17am

Jane, not only has treatment of HIV/AIDS changed drastically in the last three decades, but it has changed drastically in just the last few YEARS. 4-5 years ago, this discussion would be radically different.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 11:18am

I totally know where you're coming from. Literally, as the kids say.  It's not easy for us first wavers to adjust what we know with the latest information. Things are totally different now. Many "unsafe" behaviors back then are now things that people can engage in safely, no matter how nervous that makes us. 

 

Stigmatization on and punishment are actively harmful, which the Headband refuses to see, even ignoring what the law actually says so desperate is he to see somebody punished. Simple solutions for simpletons. 

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/15 at 11:24am

This might be a great time to resurrect the PrEP thread, which is something I just can't make happen via my phone.