 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Herpes / December 2003How does the HSV virus work?
Just curious, I know that to infect someone for the first time, the herpes virus needs a host cell, but is it a CERTAIN host cell or will it attach to ANY host cell? Is anyone here educated on this type of information? THanks! Jo Joanne, I thought I read in one of your posts that you actually had the book written by Stephen L. Sacks MD called "The Truth About Herpes." Don't you read your books? If you have this book then you should be able to read the entire thing and all your questions would be answered. Angela www.yoshi2me.com > Just curious, I know that to infect someone for the first time, the > herpes virus needs a host cell, but is it a CERTAIN host cell or will [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > THanks! > Jo >Joanne, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Angela >www.yoshi2me.com Yes I've read it. It just says "skin" or "nerve" cells but I wanted to know more. For instance, we have skin cells on our elbow but herpes doesn't grow there. So it must be certain cells it needs to attach to. You need to read up on transmission. Here's a good site for you to hang on to: http://www.westoverheights.com/freebooktext.html#transmission . Angela www.yoshi2me.com > Yes I've read it. It just says "skin" or "nerve" cells but I wanted > to know more. For instance, we have skin cells on our elbow but > herpes doesn't grow there. So it must be certain cells it needs to > attach to. >You need to read up on transmission. Here's a good site for you to hang on >to: http://www.westoverheights.com/freebooktext.html#transmission . > >Angela >www.yoshi2me.com From the website YOU quoted me: "Although some antibodies to the herpes virus are transferred from mother to baby during pregnancy, the antibodies are not adequate to completely protect the baby against infection." And once again, antibodies are not passed before 28 weeks of gestation, so quit giving people the impression that they are passed from the beginning of a pregnancy. So what's protecting the baby before that? What if a lesion is really close to the baby before 28 weeks? THESE are my concerns. And they are valid concerns. Joanne ~ You need to research what the *PLACENTA* is and what it does for the unborn child. The pla-cen-ta protects the fetus. This protection occurs throughout the entire pregnancy. Now ... when we talk about herpes and pregnancy and the sharing of *herpes* antibodies ... you need to focus on how long it takes for a person to develop *herpes* antibodies and depending on when the pregnant mom contracted herpes. There are different scenarios depending on if the pregnant mom had herpes *prior* to conception or contracted herpes during her pregnancy for the first time. The time to be concerned is if mom contracts herpes during the last trimester. Why? Because there might not be enough time for those *herpes* antibodies to be developed and shared with the unborn child. Back to the PLACENTA . . . The pla-cen-ta protects the baby throughout the entire pregnancy herpes or no herpes. By the way ... how far along did you say you were? Also . . . This from the University of Washington: What are the risks from herpes during pregnancy? In very rare cases, women with genital herpes can transmit the virus to the baby if the mother has HSV in the birth canal during delivery. Herpes in the newborn is a very serious illness. However, some 20-25% of pregnant women have genital herpes and a majority of women with genital herpes give birth to healthy, happy babies. Women who acquire HSV for the first time towards the end of pregnancy have the highest risk of transmission of HSV to the baby. http://depts.washington.edu/herpes/ Herpes and Pregnancy: http://www.ashastd.org/hrc/educate.html#preg Angela >Back to the PLACENTA . . . > >The pla-cen-ta protects the baby throughout the entire pregnancy herpes or >no herpes. > >By the way ... how far along did you say you were? The placenta protects the baby from toxins that come through the mothers blood system. AGAIN, I am referring to a lesion INSIDE the cervix right next to the membranes. The placenta has nothing to do with an infection that ascends upward about a half a centimeter to the bag of waters. Most women do not get lesions on or inside their cervix during a recurrence. But a few unlucky few DO. What about those women where this horrible reccurence happens before 28 weeks? <snip> >What about those women where this horrible reccurence happens before 28 weeks? They need to see a doctor. Or, if they've already seen a doctor and haven't had any luck creating a level of hysteria in the doctor's office, then they need to bombard a support group to try to whip up the required indignation and horror. What difference that will make to the baby is anyone's guess. Mike Joanne, Now you are sounding like a drama queen. Please get a grip. You say "this HORRIBLE recurrence?" I think you are starting to obsess because we are not getting anywhere. First of all . . . herpes is NOT blood borne. There are lots of other things around the placenta as well as a mucous plug. Your baby is quite safe. It's active virus on the surface of the skin during labor and delivery that the baby has a chance of being exposed to herpes. That's 40 weeks later! Please go talk to Terri Warren. You are exhausting me. Angela www.yoshi2me.com >>Joanne, >>I thought I read in one of your posts that you actually had the book written >>by Stephen L. Sacks MD called "The Truth About Herpes." Don't you read your >>books? If you have this book then you should be able to read the entire >>thing and all your questions would be answered. >>Angela >>www.yoshi2me.com >Yes I've read it. It just says "skin" or "nerve" cells but I wanted >to know more. For instance, we have skin cells on our elbow but >herpes doesn't grow there. So it must be certain cells it needs to >attach to. It's possible to get herpes anywhere on the body, Joanne, including the elbow, but, as avid readers of Stephen Sacks know, herpes "prefers" the thin skin and ready access to the nerve cells in the oral and genital regions. Does that help? Mike >>>Joanne, > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Mike A bit, I guess. Again, I want to know why you won't/don't ask your MIDWIFE??? None of us are doctors and the internet, albeit a wonderful place to gather information, is not where you need answers from. Secondly....I am curious and freaked out. Is this person a troll or not? >>>>Joanne, >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >A bit, I guess. >Again, I want to know why you won't/don't ask your MIDWIFE??? None of >us are doctors and the internet, albeit a wonderful place to gather >information, is not where you need answers from. >Secondly....I am curious and freaked out. Is this person a troll or >not? When you get right down to it, sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between mental dysfunction and the typical, somewhat malicious, immature behavior that typifies most trolls. In Joanne's case, it's very hard to know what the underlying cause is, but the effect is the same. She draws people into discussing what is purportedly some deep worry that she has on one subject or another, and then later asks the same question again, with a slightly different name, changing obstetrician to midwife, etc. She may feel it is necessary to lie in order to enhance the drama associated with her questions in the hope for quicker answers, or maybe just to lure more empathetic people into the threads. The thing is, as you point out, r, whether her questions are put forth in good faith or not, she's been answered as honestly and as fully as we know how, on several occasions, and she doesn't seem to want to let it go at that. Whether it's done out of pure ignorance or something slightly more willful, it's still trollish. Take care, Mike >The thing is, as you point out, r, whether her questions are put forth >in good faith or not, she's been answered as honestly and as fully as [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Mike I'll let it go. But stop giving out misinformation. Most of the info you all give is excellent. But the thing about the anibodies is way off. Angela is making them sound like something magical that happens from day one. If one gets a lesion inside the cervix before 28 weeks, the baby could be in trouble. Yes, this is extremely rare, but a few women DO. >>The thing is, as you point out, r, whether her questions are put forth >>in good faith or not, she's been answered as honestly and as fully as >>we know how, on several occasions, and she doesn't seem to want to let >>it go at that. Whether it's done out of pure ignorance or something >>slightly more willful, it's still trollish. >I'll let it go. But stop giving out misinformation. You mean misinformation like you can't have any more children? Or is it misinformation that you're four months pregnant? Or that you have a lesion inside your cervix? You understand why you don't seem very credible, don't you? Except for my own small mea culpa the info given here has been right on. It's only by finer and finer hair splitting that you've been able to find any fault, but a.s.h. doesn't function as a technical medical clearing house, it's a support group. You've been repeatedly given the supporting advice that your worries are largely unfounded and that you should consult further with your doctor. > Most of the info >you all give is excellent. But the thing about the anibodies is way >off. Angela is making them sound like something magical that happens >from day one. If one gets a lesion inside the cervix before 28 weeks, >the baby could be in trouble. Yes, this is extremely rare, but a few >women DO. You seem to oblivious to the obvious: The mother has antibodies from day one, especially the mother who has had herpes for ten years. You claim to have delivered a healthy baby in 2002 following exactly the same scenario that you're obsessing over now, lesions on your cervix. Why do you suppose anything is different now? Mike >>I'll let it go. But stop giving out misinformation. > >You mean misinformation like you can't have any more children? Or is >it misinformation that you're four months pregnant? Or that you have >a lesion inside your cervix? I have been told that after this I can no longer have shildren due to some uterine surgery that I have endured. If this baby doesn't make it (G*d forbid), then my daughter will be an only child. According to the midwife (who is very negative) this is a reasonable possiblilty. >You seem to oblivious to the obvious: The mother has antibodies from >day one, especially the mother who has had herpes for ten years. > >You claim to have delivered a healthy baby in 2002 following exactly >the same scenario that you're obsessing over now, lesions on your >cervix. Why do you suppose anything is different now? The mother does have antibodies from day one, but the BABY does not start to receive them until 28 weeks gestation. I believe all of these books and websites are not taking into account that there could be lesions inside the cervix and VERY close to the amniotic sac. I am one of the few unlucky who occasionally gets recurrence lesions on my cervix. That happened to me during my last pregnancy and I was worried. This time is different to me because the midwife told me I had a lesion INSIDE my cervical opening, and she actually told me it may get to the baby since I have a short cervix and the membranes to the baby are RIGHT NEXT to the virus. My baby does not yet have any herpes antibodies, so what's protecting them now? Nothing, according to the midwife. Do you have children? I would guess not, since you don't seem to understand a parent's concern, which is heightened by pregnancy hormones, Mike. >>>I'll let it go. But stop giving out misinformation. >>You mean misinformation like you can't have any more children? Or is >>it misinformation that you're four months pregnant? Or that you have >>a lesion inside your cervix? >I have been told that after this I can no longer have shildren due to >some uterine surgery that I have endured. If this baby doesn't make >it (G*d forbid), then my daughter will be an only child. According to >the midwife (who is very negative) this is a reasonable possiblilty. The problem with liars is that one never knows when they're finally telling the truth. Below are excerpts from a couple of your recent posts elsewhere. You're either lying above, or you're lying below. Or you're lying in both places. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Message-ID: <7e5095f6.0311241603.706d3bdc@posting.google.com> "I cannot have any more children and I am feeling terribly guilty for not giving my daughter someone. Our family (including extended family) is very small. She really does not have any cousins or anyone in the family to play with. My husband was an only child and my brother has no kids. Our family is tiny. My husband and I are older and I worry that be won't be around as long as I would like. I really wish I could bear another child so that she would not be alone later in life. Not to mention having a playmate when she's little. I'm not so much saddened for myself that we can't have any more children, I am saddened for my child." Message-ID: <2k8tsvk9bnt6advj2mo127nqtmqtti1a17@4ax.com> "I cannot have another child, and that is a HUGE deal to me." "I am disappointed that I cannot conceive again, and that my daughter will not have a sibling. But I am very lucky to have the child I have." =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>You seem to oblivious to the obvious: The mother has antibodies from >>day one, especially the mother who has had herpes for ten years. >>You claim to have delivered a healthy baby in 2002 following exactly >>the same scenario that you're obsessing over now, lesions on your >>cervix. Why do you suppose anything is different now? >The mother does have antibodies from day one, but the BABY does not >start to receive them until 28 weeks gestation. I believe all of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >herpes antibodies, so what's protecting them now? Nothing, according >to the midwife. Uh huh, and you just happened to post the following this last September, which shows you obsessing about herpes and your cervix and the baby long before your alleged midwife saw any alleged lesion on your alleged cervix. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Message-ID: <a91ab680a6c71e1e5559c5470c806e81@news.teranews.com> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:43:09 GMT From: Jo <no@nospam.com> Newsgroups: alt.support.herpes Subject: Whose had a baby? I have an 18 month old, so I know having a healthy baby is possible. I've had herpes for 10 years. Here's my concern- I went in for my first prenatal exam (pap smear, pelvic exam, etc) and I told the OB I was in the middle of a herpes outbreak and did not think the exams were a good idea. The OB said it would be fine and used the dreaded speculums, did the exams, plus a pelvic exam. My worry is that the OB could have pushed the active virus up into my cervix and uterus and spread it to the baby. Did anyone else have an outbreak and an exam like this at the same time? I am only 6 weeks along. Thanks. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >Do you have children? I would guess not, since you >don't seem to understand a parent's concern, which is heightened by >pregnancy hormones, Mike. You may be on to something there, Jo, it's quite likely that your hormones have affected your connection with reality. Mike >>I have been told that after this I can no longer have shildren due to >>some uterine surgery that I have endured. If this baby doesn't make [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >You're either lying above, or you're lying below. Or you're lying in >both places. Ya know, Mike, I really don't care what you believe. There is nothing wrong with me exploring the "positives" of having only one child because the midwife has made me believe that is what will happen. If this baby does not make it, it's over as far as having children go. THis is my last shot and the midwife makes the prognosis of this new baby sound very dismal. I'm sorry you don't get that, but you don't matter to me, nor do I matter to you. >>>I have been told that after this I can no longer have shildren due to >>>some uterine surgery that I have endured. If this baby doesn't make >>>it (G*d forbid), then my daughter will be an only child. According to >>>the midwife (who is very negative) this is a reasonable possiblilty. >>The problem with liars is that one never knows when they're finally >>telling the truth. >>Below are excerpts from a couple of your recent posts elsewhere. >>You're either lying above, or you're lying below. Or you're lying in >>both places. >Ya know, Mike, I really don't care what you believe. There is nothing >wrong with me exploring the "positives" of having only one child [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >baby sound very dismal. I'm sorry you don't get that, but you don't >matter to me, nor do I matter to you. Either your midwife needs to be reported to whomever oversees such people (at the least you need to fire her and seek more professional guidance) or you need to seek psyciatric attention for yourself. No matter what the truth is, lady, you've got mental problems. If the fate of another human being truly is dependent on the choices *you* make, seek help, seek professional accredited help, and do it quickly. Mike >Again, I want to know why you won't/don't ask your MIDWIFE??? None of >us are doctors and the internet, albeit a wonderful place to gather >information, is not where you need answers from. > >Secondly....I am curious and freaked out. Is this person a troll or >not? The midwife is very negative about herpes. Call me a troll if you want. I could care less. I guess I'm a troll with herpes. Doesn't change the fact that some of you are giving out bad info. >The midwife is very negative about herpes. Call me a troll if you >want. I could care less. I guess I'm a troll with herpes. Doesn't >change the fact that some of you are giving out bad info. You might want to consider that the answers given here are as good as the questions asked. Anyone who shows up and asks, "How does the HSV virus work?", is going to get a very general and nebulous answer, due to the broad nature of the question. I suppose it's then possible to rip the general answer as being "bad info" if the questioner actually wanted something very much more specific, but personally, I'd lay the fault with the questioner. And then there's the question of credibility. You start out asking childishly general questions and then it turns out you want to explore the extremely technical aspects of antibody machinery under rather rare circumstances? You either very stupid or a troll, and they'll be no satisfying you under any circumstances. Mike Joanne . . . if you have the 4th edition of "The Truth About Herpes." you need to read chapter 6. Angela |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.