Discussion:
question on 6 month post TX
(too old to reply)
mags
2005-12-29 13:46:14 UTC
Permalink
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.


I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?

Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
e***@webtv.net
2005-12-29 14:09:33 UTC
Permalink
There are no statistics pertaining to SVR rates for the regimen you're
taking. That's why you're in the clinical trial.....you're the guinea
pig they're going to base their numbers on. :-) But based on other
regimens, it seems pretty safe to assume that if you're undetectable
early in tx (<12 weeks), then your chances for SVR are pretty damn good.
Relax, Mags! You're on the right track.
elmo







http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile




http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum
Frank
2005-12-29 15:22:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
Post by mags
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive again
for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
e***@webtv.net
2005-12-29 15:44:03 UTC
Permalink
Re: question on 6 month post TX

Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 9:22am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <***@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
***@rogers.com says...
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo







http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile




http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum
Frank
2005-12-29 16:02:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@webtv.net
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo
I stand corrected. Thanks elmo.
e***@webtv.net
2005-12-29 16:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Re: question on 6 month post TX

Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 10:02am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <14406-43B40443-***@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net>,
***@webtv.net says...
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 9:22am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <***@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
***@rogers.com says...
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo
I stand corrected. Thanks elmo.
///////
yep! Now let's get back to crepitating. :-)
elmo







http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile




http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum
Frank
2005-12-29 16:32:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@webtv.net
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo
I stand corrected. Thanks elmo.
///////
yep! Now let's get back to crepitating. :-)
elmo
I farted and it popped like Bazooka bubble gum. Does that count. ;}
e***@webtv.net
2005-12-29 16:43:02 UTC
Permalink
Re: question on 6 month post TX

Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 10:32am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <14405-43B40B2E-***@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net>,
***@webtv.net says...
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 10:02am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <14406-43B40443-***@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net>,
***@webtv.net says...
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 9:22am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <***@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
***@rogers.com says...
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo
I stand corrected. Thanks elmo.
///////
yep! Now let's get back to crepitating. :-) elmo
I farted and it popped like Bazooka bubble gum. Does that count. =A0 ;}
//////////
Yeah! And it gets you 20 points, as long as you didn't blotch.
elmo







http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile




http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-29 16:20:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@webtv.net
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo
Here: http://www.hivandhepatitis.com/2005icr/easl/docs/041805_b.html

Using Peg-IFN and Riba, in a study of non-responders and relapsers, 61%
of that group who had a viral load of 0 at week 12 achieved SVR. That
number is higher for people who were on their first round of treatment.

Elmo - the 90% figure maybe comes from the number for people who don't
respond at 12 weeks, it's 98% chance of the the treatment _not_ working.

G
e***@webtv.net
2005-12-29 16:40:15 UTC
Permalink
Re: question on 6 month post TX

Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 4:20pm (CST+6)
From: ***@yahoo.com (Gordo=A0Mondragon)
In article <14406-43B40443-***@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net>,
***@webtv.net wrote:
Re: question on 6 month post TX
Group: alt.support.hepatitis-c Date: Thu, Dec 29, 2005, 9:22am From:
***@verizon.com (Frank)
In article <***@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
***@rogers.com says...
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
According to my BCLD, about 25% show no response after 12 weeks and are
temporarily taken off medication.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
You can show SVR after 48 weeks but 6 months thereafter, test positive
again for HCV. That is the 40% they're speaking of, mags.
////////////
Sorry, Frank, but you're incorrect. The 40% I believe Mags is referring
to are the 40% that don't achieve SVR with the current tx with Peg and
riba. If you're undetectable by 12 weeks, I think the SVR rate becomes
near 90%.
elmo
Here: http://www.hivandhepatitis.com/2005icr/easl/docs/041805_b.html
Using Peg-IFN and Riba, in a study of non-responders and relapsers, 61%
of that group who had a viral load of 0 at week 12 achieved SVR. That
number is higher for people who were on their first round of treatment.
Elmo - the 90% figure maybe comes from the number for people who don't
respond at 12 weeks, it's 98% chance of the the treatment _not_ working.
G
////////////
Ummm....maybe. But I don't think so. :-)
elmo







http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile




http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-29 16:23:13 UTC
Permalink
[..]
Post by mags
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
You're on a new drug, no?

If everyone is responding to treatment early on then that - with the old
drugs - is associated with a higher rate of SVR.

What they hope is that the SVR rate with the new drug will be at least
as good if not better based on the same early response.

It's as good as the news you could have at this point could be, I think.

G
mags
2005-12-29 22:20:21 UTC
Permalink
I don't think peginterferon 2b and riba combo is new. My study is all
about the time whether to increase it to 72 weeks for slow responders
G1 types.

Mags
kjoh
2005-12-29 21:19:00 UTC
Permalink
Hidy Ho Mags. Did you get a straight answer? You can always rely on us for
that :) I can't help you much because of my befoggedness. But the 12 week
big drop is very important. I've seen at least a couple of studies that
boost tx-naive early responders into a much higher SVR probability class.


I think there are a number of people here, Russ for sure, who went
undetectable at 12, 24, 48, and then relapsed. Alot of the second and
third timers may be in that category.

Do I recall correctly that your study involves typical doses of Ifn and
Riba, but that you're switching to redipens midstream? Wierd...

More confusion for ya.
kj
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I >>had a question for
the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
mags
2005-12-29 22:10:00 UTC
Permalink
Yes you are correcto mondo Katho. I also asked about the Redipens and
they are unsure if I am switching to them. At this point I feel like a
pro mixer/shooter and it really doesn't matter to me. They first said
that they wanted comments on what is better for the patient - mixing or
redi pens so who knows. Oh yeah my doses are typical. I am taking
pegint. 2b and riba dosed at my weight. The only thing different in my
study is that it goes for 72 weeks if I am unlucky enough on the flip
of a coin should i not be virus free at 12 and 24 weeks. Have a lot
riding on yesterdays blood work lol.
Russ that sucks which treatment did you have? I was hoping to be cured
and having a glass of red wine on week 49!

Mags
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-29 22:13:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Yes you are correcto mondo Katho. I also asked about the Redipens and
they are unsure if I am switching to them. At this point I feel like a
pro mixer/shooter and it really doesn't matter to me. They first said
that they wanted comments on what is better for the patient - mixing or
redi pens so who knows. Oh yeah my doses are typical. I am taking
pegint. 2b and riba dosed at my weight. The only thing different in my
study is that it goes for 72 weeks if I am unlucky enough on the flip
of a coin should i not be virus free at 12 and 24 weeks. Have a lot
riding on yesterdays blood work lol.
So mags, is this your 12 week or 24 week test?

G
mags
2005-12-29 22:17:20 UTC
Permalink
Hey Gordo - its my 12 week test but if it goes virus free then I only
do 48 weeks of treatment.

Mags
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-29 22:24:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Hey Gordo - its my 12 week test but if it goes virus free then I only
do 48 weeks of treatment.
I wonder what they will do if you've got the 2log drop but not an
undetectable VL at 12 weeks. Did they say anything about that?

G
mags
2005-12-29 23:12:48 UTC
Permalink
If I still have a vl at 12 weeks I carry on to 24 weeks. If not
detectable at 24 weeks then i go into the coin toss group. Some get
to take only 48 weeks of treatment - the others an additional 6 months.
If I am detectable then they remove me from the study.

Mags
dortski
2005-12-29 23:33:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
If I still have a vl at 12 weeks I carry on to 24 weeks. If not
detectable at 24 weeks then i go into the coin toss group. Some get
to take only 48 weeks of treatment - the others an additional 6 months.
If I am detectable then they remove me from the study.
Mags
Hey Mags....when will you get your results of the blood work? I will be
going for my 12 wk vl on the 13th of Jan so here's to 13 being lucky!

Have fun on your trip, get a note from your doc, and carry your meds with
you at all times while en-route. Get a good sunscreen too! Enjoy those
frozen virgin margaritas!

dort
mags
2005-12-29 23:39:35 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Dort. I was hoping to have my vl by the time I leave next
Tuesday but I have made arrangements for my daughter to email me the
results when they are in. I have my letter and have been instructed to
carry my drugs on board the airplane. Bummer on the virgin margaritas
lol. Good luck to you Dort.

Mags
dortski
2005-12-29 23:47:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Thanks Dort. I was hoping to have my vl by the time I leave next
Tuesday but I have made arrangements for my daughter to email me the
results when they are in. I have my letter and have been instructed to
carry my drugs on board the airplane. Bummer on the virgin margaritas
lol. Good luck to you Dort.
Mags
I am sending positive energy along with the email with the results. And you
never know....the placebo effect of having a virgin margarita in the right
atmosphere may be just as good as the real thing! We are being positive here
now girl!

dort
kjoh
2005-12-30 00:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Mags, I'm following you now. I just ran a sophisticated statistical
analysis and determined that you'll remain undetectable, stop tx at 48, and
get the SVR. Relearning your pace will be the trick until then.

Stay cool
kj
Post by mags
If I still have a vl at 12 weeks I carry on to 24 weeks. If not
detectable at 24 weeks then i go into the coin toss group. Some get to
take only 48 weeks of treatment - the others an additional 6 months. If I
am detectable then they remove me from the study.
Mags
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:06:19 UTC
Permalink
Mags -

I looked back and remembered that you had a >2 log drop at week 4.

I know you'll be sweating until you get the 12-week results but I think
that the percentages are with you on the results being what you want.

G

In article
Post by kjoh
Thanks Mags, I'm following you now. I just ran a sophisticated statistical
analysis and determined that you'll remain undetectable, stop tx at 48, and
get the SVR. Relearning your pace will be the trick until then.
Stay cool
kj
Post by mags
If I still have a vl at 12 weeks I carry on to 24 weeks. If not
detectable at 24 weeks then i go into the coin toss group. Some get to
take only 48 weeks of treatment - the others an additional 6 months. If I
am detectable then they remove me from the study.
Mags
mags
2005-12-30 18:10:43 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.

Mags
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:22:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.
Right, week 8 you were officially undetectable.

From my understanding of what the two drugs do, reducing your Riba dose
early on would probably have been a worse thing than reducing the
interferon for 2 weeks early on. No way of knowing, but you seem to be
responding well so far.

Gordo
greyhackles
2005-12-30 18:42:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by mags
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.
Right, week 8 you were officially undetectable.
Well, no, she wasn't undetectable. She was close, and had a really good drop
after 8 weeks on tx, but detectable is still detectable, whatever that might
in turn imply...

Cheers

/greyhackles
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:48:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by mags
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.
Right, week 8 you were officially undetectable.
Well, no, she wasn't undetectable. She was close, and had a really good drop
after 8 weeks on tx, but detectable is still detectable, whatever that might
in turn imply...
"Viral load 353 - considered nil under 600 ".
greyhackles
2005-12-30 19:07:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by greyhackles
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by mags
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.
Right, week 8 you were officially undetectable.
Well, no, she wasn't undetectable. She was close, and had a really good drop
after 8 weeks on tx, but detectable is still detectable, whatever that might
in turn imply...
"Viral load 353 - considered nil under 600 ".
When you read that sentence, what do you interpret it to mean?
And where did it actually come from?

At the risk of being wrong twice in one day:

If you can count 'em, they're still there.
If you cannot count 'em, they may *still* be there, in quantities lower than
the test used can repeatedly detect with some acceptable level of assurance.

Cheers

/greyhackles
Waterspider
2005-12-30 19:58:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
If you can count 'em, they're still there.
If you cannot count 'em, they may *still* be there, in quantities lower than
the test used can repeatedly detect with some acceptable level of assurance.
Yes, precisely and exactly, and well put too!

WS
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 20:42:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by greyhackles
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by mags
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.
Right, week 8 you were officially undetectable.
Well, no, she wasn't undetectable. She was close, and had a really good drop
after 8 weeks on tx, but detectable is still detectable, whatever that might
in turn imply...
"Viral load 353 - considered nil under 600 ".
When you read that sentence, what do you interpret it to mean?
And where did it actually come from?
She posted it. I remember it because it led me to look up what numbers
that are less than lower cut-off point actually mean.
Post by greyhackles
If you can count 'em, they're still there.
But because of how PCR works, it's not virus you're counting, it's
segments of genes that have been copied a large number of times, thus
the possibility of noise.
Post by greyhackles
If you cannot count 'em, they may *still* be there, in quantities lower than
the test used can repeatedly detect with some acceptable level of assurance.
That is very true.

G
greyhackles
2005-12-30 21:50:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by greyhackles
Post by Gordo Mondragon
"Viral load 353 - considered nil under 600 ".
When you read that sentence, what do you interpret it to mean?
And where did it actually come from?
She posted it. I remember it because it led me to look up what numbers
that are less than lower cut-off point actually mean.
Post by greyhackles
If you can count 'em, they're still there.
But because of how PCR works, it's not virus you're counting, it's
segments of genes that have been copied a large number of times, thus
the possibility of noise.
Post by greyhackles
If you cannot count 'em, they may *still* be there, in quantities lower than
the test used can repeatedly detect with some acceptable level of assurance.
That is very true.
You could be correct, but I would expect PCR tests to focus on
highly-conserved sections of viral RNA to avoid such errors.

If anyone else has ever been given the results of an HCV RNA PCR that
indicated positive counts below the stated test threshold - and especially if
accompanied by any statement that such results are considered "undetectable" -
I'd like to hear about it.

Cheers

/greyhackles
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-31 00:10:54 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
greyhackles <***@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:

[...]
Post by greyhackles
You could be correct, but I would expect PCR tests to focus on
highly-conserved sections of viral RNA to avoid such errors.
If anyone else has ever been given the results of an HCV RNA PCR that
indicated positive counts below the stated test threshold - and especially if
accompanied by any statement that such results are considered "undetectable"
I have, repeatedly, for both HCV and HIV.

G
Frank
2005-12-31 01:11:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Thanks Gordo - I had an eight log drop by week 8 and my vl was down to
353. My worry is that by reducing my muscle drug (peg) for 2 weeks
while my wbc went back up that it allowed the virus to flourish. Elmo
warned me about this and I am troubled about it.
Mags
At least you're a responder and that alone should be encouraging in itself.
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:03:16 UTC
Permalink
That would be a hard decision to make. If you're still significantly
detectable at 12 weeks almost all the information available says that
the 48 weeks isn't going to give you a SVR. The question they're trying
to answer is if the additional six months makes a difference.

If it was me I think I'd kick and scream to get the extra six months and
if I didn't I think I'd probably quit at 24.

G
Post by mags
If I still have a vl at 12 weeks I carry on to 24 weeks. If not
detectable at 24 weeks then i go into the coin toss group. Some get
to take only 48 weeks of treatment - the others an additional 6 months.
If I am detectable then they remove me from the study.
Mags
e***@webtv.net
2005-12-30 14:01:43 UTC
Permalink
Did Russ go undetectable at 12 weeks?
elmo
(yes, I can read....ahahahahah)

Hidy Ho Mags. Did you get a straight answer? You can always rely on us
for that :) I can't help you much because of my befoggedness. But the 12
week big drop is very important. I've seen at least a couple of studies
that boost tx-naive early responders into a much higher SVR probability
class.
I think there are a number of people here, Russ for sure, who went
undetectable at 12, 24, 48, and then relapsed. Alot of the second and
third timers may be in that category.
Do I recall correctly that your study involves typical doses of Ifn and
Riba, but that you're switching to redipens midstream? Wierd...
More confusion for ya.
kj
MAGS WROTE:
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I >>had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get one
here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12, 24, 48
to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment. I asked
her this question because as you know I am in a study and the nurse told
me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have completed the
program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who are the 40
percent who don't?
Mags







http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/DocElmosHepFile




http://community.webtv.net/elmoemerson/TheFamilyAlbum
kjoh
2005-12-30 18:23:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@webtv.net
Did Russ go undetectable at 12 weeks?
elmo
(yes, I can read....ahahahahah)
Hey Elmo, Mags. I could be wrong about Russ's vl. I thought he said he
was undectecable from the beginning. Guess we'll have to wait for him to
get back from his excellent adventure to clear that one up ;)

kj
greyhackles
2005-12-30 18:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by kjoh
Post by e***@webtv.net
Did Russ go undetectable at 12 weeks?
elmo
(yes, I can read....ahahahahah)
Hey Elmo, Mags. I could be wrong about Russ's vl. I thought he said he
was undectecable from the beginning. Guess we'll have to wait for him to
get back from his excellent adventure to clear that one up ;)
kj
I clearly remember Russ stated he was undetectable at 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and
at EOTx. It was significant to me at the time as I was also undetectable at
all three tests and wondering what each test step might mean with regards to
the odds of successful therapy...

Cheers

/greyhackles
Stretch
2005-12-30 00:43:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
My BCLD just told me that he had (for the first time) a patient relapse
after three years(!) He was being checked every six months.

My other BCLD had one relapse after one year.

(sigh)
Doug
2005-12-30 00:48:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stretch
Post by mags
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
My BCLD just told me that he had (for the first time) a patient relapse
after three years(!) He was being checked every six months.
My other BCLD had one relapse after one year.
(sigh)
That's a concern I'm not lookin forward to. Doug
dortski
2005-12-30 00:55:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug
Post by Stretch
Post by mags
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
My BCLD just told me that he had (for the first time) a patient relapse
after three years(!) He was being checked every six months.
My other BCLD had one relapse after one year.
(sigh)
That's a concern I'm not lookin forward to. Doug
I think you speak for all of us on that one. I was wondering, once you get
your SVR are you still able to transmit the virus? I guess so huh, cuz the
test doesn't go to zero right? Also when would be a good time to replace
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper? I realize I am asking a lot of
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!

dort
mags
2005-12-30 01:01:29 UTC
Permalink
No stupid questions in here dort as long as they are hep questions and
not god questions lol.

Mags
dortski
2005-12-30 01:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
No stupid questions in here dort as long as they are hep questions and
not god questions lol.
Mags
How about a stupid god joke?

What did the dyslexic agnostic sit around contemplating?

He sat around wondering if there really was a dog.

Advisory... for entertainment perposes only, some folks might find this
material unsuitable and should not view it.

dort
Doug
2005-12-30 01:37:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by mags
No stupid questions in here dort as long as they are hep questions and
not god questions lol.
Mags
How about a stupid god joke?
What did the dyslexic agnostic sit around contemplating?
He sat around wondering if there really was a dog.
Advisory... for entertainment perposes only, some folks might find this
material unsuitable and should not view it.
dort
Thanks for the warning. Haaaaaaahaha! Doug btw. that's funny
dortski
2005-12-30 16:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug
Post by dortski
Post by mags
No stupid questions in here dort as long as they are hep questions and
not god questions lol.
Mags
How about a stupid god joke?
What did the dyslexic agnostic sit around contemplating?
He sat around wondering if there really was a dog.
Advisory... for entertainment perposes only, some folks might find this
material unsuitable and should not view it.
dort
Thanks for the warning. Haaaaaaahaha! Doug btw. that's funny
Well hey there Doug...glad you liked it. I love stupid jokes. I should have
put the advisory on top and used spell check but no big whoop...right?
mags
2005-12-30 18:12:19 UTC
Permalink
I like you Dort!

Mags
chuckling
dortski
2005-12-30 20:10:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
I like you Dort!
Mags
chuckling
I like you to Mags, in fact I like this entire group. I am going to miss not
being able to hang out here in my jammies all day when I go back to work.

dortie
Doug
2005-12-30 01:38:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by Doug
Post by Stretch
Post by mags
Hi Everyone. I was at my appt. yesterday and I had a question for the
hep nurse. I am not sure I got a straight answer. I know I will get
one here. How many people tested negative for the virus from week 12,
24, 48 to have the virus come back to life 6 months past the treatment.
I asked her this question because as you know I am in a study and the
nurse told me that everyone is responding to treatment but none have
completed the program. If everyone is responding to treatment then who
are the 40 percent who don't?
Mags
thanks for the spellchecker link!
My BCLD just told me that he had (for the first time) a patient relapse
after three years(!) He was being checked every six months.
My other BCLD had one relapse after one year.
(sigh)
That's a concern I'm not lookin forward to. Doug
I think you speak for all of us on that one. I was wondering, once you get
your SVR are you still able to transmit the virus? I guess so huh, cuz the
test doesn't go to zero right? Also when would be a good time to replace
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper? I realize I am asking a lot of
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!
dort
I was wondering the same thing. Doug
Waterspider
2005-12-30 02:08:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
I think you speak for all of us on that one. I was wondering, once you get
your SVR are you still able to transmit the virus?
Depends if you still have any virus left in your blood.

I guess so huh, cuz the
Post by dortski
test doesn't go to zero right?
Right, so until they get a finer test, you never know if you have absolutely
no HCV left, or just a few.

Also when would be a good time to replace
Post by dortski
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper?
Absolutely, and I'm sure it would explain a lot of the "relapses." I was a
paranoid fool on tx, got a new toothbrush every week, wouldn't use razors or
clippers or nailfiles until after tx, threw out all my earrings except the
diamond studs that I'll have reset into something else, threw out a really,
really nice pair of boots that gave me a blister the first time I wore them,
contemplated having the cats declawed. Just kidding about that last one...

I realize I am asking a lot of
Post by dortski
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!
Not stupid questions at all, Dortlet. Fact is, you can never know the exact
moment that the last little bastard virus in your blood dies, and everything
bloody up until that point is a risk.

To be honest, I still occasionally wonder if the virus will show up again. I
doubt it, because it's been years, but there have been "relapses" recorded
after five years (I suspect that the patients reinfected themselves, but I
don't know for sure).

Spidey
dortski
2005-12-30 03:33:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by dortski
I think you speak for all of us on that one. I was wondering, once you
get your SVR are you still able to transmit the virus?
Depends if you still have any virus left in your blood.
I guess so huh, cuz the
Post by dortski
test doesn't go to zero right?
Right, so until they get a finer test, you never know if you have
absolutely no HCV left, or just a few.
Also when would be a good time to replace
Post by dortski
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper?
Absolutely, and I'm sure it would explain a lot of the "relapses." I was a
paranoid fool on tx, got a new toothbrush every week, wouldn't use razors
or clippers or nailfiles until after tx, threw out all my earrings except
the diamond studs that I'll have reset into something else, threw out a
really, really nice pair of boots that gave me a blister the first time I
wore them, contemplated having the cats declawed. Just kidding about that
last one...
I realize I am asking a lot of
Post by dortski
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!
Not stupid questions at all, Dortlet. Fact is, you can never know the
exact moment that the last little bastard virus in your blood dies, and
everything bloody up until that point is a risk.
To be honest, I still occasionally wonder if the virus will show up again.
I doubt it, because it's been years, but there have been "relapses"
recorded after five years (I suspect that the patients reinfected
themselves, but I don't know for sure).
Spidey
Holy crap! You didn't clip your nails or file them or shave for 6 months!
Maybe I should take my items and run them through the autoclave after each
use. If I go that long without clipping my nails, unless biting is ok....I
wouldn't be able to work.The shaving I could give up easy enough, in fact I
notice it doesn't grow on my legs overnight like it use to...sorry if that
was TMI. It makes sense to not use old items though if that is a route of
transmission.

How long is it that Hep B can live outside the body, is it 2 or 3 days. Has
is been established how long C can live? It's not easy getting these
questions answered is it?

I remember a post some time back asking why there isn't a celebrity
spokesperson to help get the word out about this virus. Why not Oprah? She
always seems game to help out a worthy cause. Think we could convince her to
take Naomi Judd's place? So am I talking crazy or do you think it might be
something we could collectively work on? Just throwing it out there.....

dortlet....that's so cute!
Waterspider
2005-12-30 04:02:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by Waterspider
I was wondering, once you get your SVR are you still able to transmit
the virus?
Depends if you still have any virus left in your blood.
I guess so huh, cuz the
test doesn't go to zero right?
Right, so until they get a finer test, you never know if you have
absolutely no HCV left, or just a few.
Also when would be a good time to replace
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper?
Absolutely, and I'm sure it would explain a lot of the "relapses." I was
a paranoid fool on tx, got a new toothbrush every week, wouldn't use
razors or clippers or nailfiles until after tx, threw out all my earrings
except the diamond studs that I'll have reset into something else, threw
out a really, really nice pair of boots that gave me a blister the first
time I wore them, contemplated having the cats declawed. Just kidding
about that last one...
I realize I am asking a lot of
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!
Not stupid questions at all, Dortlet. Fact is, you can never know the
exact moment that the last little bastard virus in your blood dies, and
everything bloody up until that point is a risk.
To be honest, I still occasionally wonder if the virus will show up
again. I doubt it, because it's been years, but there have been
"relapses" recorded after five years (I suspect that the patients
reinfected themselves, but I don't know for sure).
Holy crap! You didn't clip your nails or file them or shave for 6 months!
Yup, I was a long-nailed hobbit-woman, and for the last couple of months
went around wearing this ghastly touque because I got pisssed off at my
falling hair and had it chopped of really close to my scalp. I'd also lost
60 pounds so I looked like an anorexic long-nailed butch hobbit woman, pale
as a vampire and snarling at everyone! It was hilarious, I was feeling so
rotten I just didn't care what I looked like.
Post by dortski
Maybe I should take my items and run them through the autoclave after each
use. If I go that long without clipping my nails, unless biting is ok....I
wouldn't be able to work.
Get yourself a new pair of clippers, don't let anyone else use them and if
you nick yourself, replace them. Don't wear sleeveless tops and miniskirts
unless you're on a holiday in Europe or Quebec or some old hippie colony.

The shaving I could give up easy enough, in fact I
Post by dortski
notice it doesn't grow on my legs overnight like it use to...sorry if that
was TMI. It makes sense to not use old items though if that is a route of
transmission.
How long is it that Hep B can live outside the body, is it 2 or 3 days.
Has is been established how long C can live? It's not easy getting these
questions answered is it?
They haven't figured out this one either.
Post by dortski
I remember a post some time back asking why there isn't a celebrity
spokesperson to help get the word out about this virus. Why not Oprah? She
always seems game to help out a worthy cause. Think we could convince her
to take Naomi Judd's place? So am I talking crazy or do you think it might
be something we could collectively work on? Just throwing it out
there.....
Willie Nelson is doing something I hear. A few years back someone listed a
whole slew of celebrities with hep c; that would be a good start. Forget
Pamela Anderson, though (even though she's from BC), she's not been a great
help with her endorsements.
Post by dortski
dortlet....that's so cute!
Ut-oh! Elmo hears that, he's gonna start calling you Fartlet.

Spidey
dortski
2005-12-30 16:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by dortski
Post by Waterspider
I was wondering, once you get your SVR are you still able to transmit
the virus?
Depends if you still have any virus left in your blood.
I guess so huh, cuz the
test doesn't go to zero right?
Right, so until they get a finer test, you never know if you have
absolutely no HCV left, or just a few.
Also when would be a good time to replace
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper?
Absolutely, and I'm sure it would explain a lot of the "relapses." I was
a paranoid fool on tx, got a new toothbrush every week, wouldn't use
razors or clippers or nailfiles until after tx, threw out all my
earrings except the diamond studs that I'll have reset into something
else, threw out a really, really nice pair of boots that gave me a
blister the first time I wore them, contemplated having the cats
declawed. Just kidding about that last one...
I realize I am asking a lot of
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!
Not stupid questions at all, Dortlet. Fact is, you can never know the
exact moment that the last little bastard virus in your blood dies, and
everything bloody up until that point is a risk.
To be honest, I still occasionally wonder if the virus will show up
again. I doubt it, because it's been years, but there have been
"relapses" recorded after five years (I suspect that the patients
reinfected themselves, but I don't know for sure).
Holy crap! You didn't clip your nails or file them or shave for 6 months!
Yup, I was a long-nailed hobbit-woman, and for the last couple of months
went around wearing this ghastly touque because I got pisssed off at my
falling hair and had it chopped of really close to my scalp. I'd also lost
60 pounds so I looked like an anorexic long-nailed butch hobbit woman,
pale as a vampire and snarling at everyone! It was hilarious, I was
feeling so rotten I just didn't care what I looked like.
Post by dortski
Maybe I should take my items and run them through the autoclave after
each use. If I go that long without clipping my nails, unless biting is
ok....I wouldn't be able to work.
Get yourself a new pair of clippers, don't let anyone else use them and if
you nick yourself, replace them. Don't wear sleeveless tops and miniskirts
unless you're on a holiday in Europe or Quebec or some old hippie colony.
The shaving I could give up easy enough, in fact I
Post by dortski
notice it doesn't grow on my legs overnight like it use to...sorry if
that was TMI. It makes sense to not use old items though if that is a
route of transmission.
How long is it that Hep B can live outside the body, is it 2 or 3 days.
Has is been established how long C can live? It's not easy getting these
questions answered is it?
They haven't figured out this one either.
Post by dortski
I remember a post some time back asking why there isn't a celebrity
spokesperson to help get the word out about this virus. Why not Oprah?
She always seems game to help out a worthy cause. Think we could convince
her to take Naomi Judd's place? So am I talking crazy or do you think it
might be something we could collectively work on? Just throwing it out
there.....
Willie Nelson is doing something I hear. A few years back someone listed a
whole slew of celebrities with hep c; that would be a good start. Forget
Pamela Anderson, though (even though she's from BC), she's not been a
great help with her endorsements.
Post by dortski
dortlet....that's so cute!
Ut-oh! Elmo hears that, he's gonna start calling you Fartlet.
Spidey
Ya know Spidey, I seem to remember and article in the Austin Chronical where
a bunch of local musicians infected with HCV were working on putting
something together. The guy from Asleep at the Wheel what's his name....Ray
Benson, Alejandro Escovedo, and I think a few others. I'll have to see if I
can find the article. Maybe we can find out exactly what Willy is doing for
the cause.

I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?

Hey, I finally took the movie back, and changed my jammies.....dorlet is a
good girl!

dort
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 17:58:18 UTC
Permalink
In article <Qvdtf.11805$***@tornado.texas.rr.com>,
"dortski" <***@austin.rr.com> wrote:

[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.

G
Michael Cody
2005-12-30 18:36:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.
G
Well, my wife doesn't have it and we have had unprotected sex for over
twenty years.
--
Cody

Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
Doug
2005-12-30 19:25:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.
G
5 to 6% that's significant! over 1 out of twenty! Doug
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 20:39:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.
G
5 to 6% that's significant! over 1 out of twenty! Doug
It depends on where you look. I've seen large studies where it was 0.
Waterspider
2005-12-30 20:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by Doug
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.
5 to 6% that's significant! over 1 out of twenty! Doug
It depends on where you look. I've seen large studies where it was 0.
I have never found (and believe me, I've looked!) a proper study that proves
sexual transmission of hcv and, as we all know, statistics lie.

The bit that got me questioning the sexual transmission thing was the "fact"
that having sex with more than one partner increases the risk of contracting
hep c. I just can't make sense of that one.

I suspect that it came from some doctor recommending safe sex to a hepper
(hey, it's a good idea for anybody!) and it slipped into "common knowledge"
without anyone noticing or stopping to think about it.

Spidey
dortski
2005-12-30 21:16:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by Doug
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the stigma don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.
5 to 6% that's significant! over 1 out of twenty! Doug
It depends on where you look. I've seen large studies where it was 0.
I have never found (and believe me, I've looked!) a proper study that
proves sexual transmission of hcv and, as we all know, statistics lie.
The bit that got me questioning the sexual transmission thing was the
"fact" that having sex with more than one partner increases the risk of
contracting hep c. I just can't make sense of that one.
I suspect that it came from some doctor recommending safe sex to a hepper
(hey, it's a good idea for anybody!) and it slipped into "common
knowledge" without anyone noticing or stopping to think about it.
Spidey
I guess what bothers me is how much bad publicity is out there. The
reference in the movie Bewitched. Pamela, it pissed me off that they brought
up her infection at her stupid roast as if it's a laughable subject. My room
mate told me about the roast and deduced that it wasn't that serious a
illness. I gave him quite an education that night. It all adds to the
negative reactons we experiance when we disclose we have the virus. My point
I guess is we know how it's transmitted and how serious it is. But the
general public has no idea. It bugs me. Ok, I'm done bitching.

dort
Waterspider
2005-12-30 23:10:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by Waterspider
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by Doug
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very dramatic
and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted through
blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the
stigma
don't
ya think?
"Can be" covers a lot of territory. Studies of long-term sexually
active monogamous partners show almost no transmission of Hep C.
5 to 6% that's significant! over 1 out of twenty! Doug
It depends on where you look. I've seen large studies where it was 0.
I have never found (and believe me, I've looked!) a proper study that
proves sexual transmission of hcv and, as we all know, statistics lie.
The bit that got me questioning the sexual transmission thing was the
"fact" that having sex with more than one partner increases the risk of
contracting hep c. I just can't make sense of that one.
I suspect that it came from some doctor recommending safe sex to a hepper
(hey, it's a good idea for anybody!) and it slipped into "common
knowledge" without anyone noticing or stopping to think about it.
Spidey
I guess what bothers me is how much bad publicity is out there. The
reference in the movie Bewitched. Pamela, it pissed me off that they
brought up her infection at her stupid roast as if it's a laughable
subject. My room mate told me about the roast and deduced that it wasn't
that serious a illness. I gave him quite an education that night. It all
adds to the negative reactons we experiance when we disclose we have the
virus. My point I guess is we know how it's transmitted and how serious it
is. But the general public has no idea. It bugs me. Ok, I'm done bitching.
Transmission is strictly and specifically by blood-to-blood contact, and
yeah, I agree with all your bitches!

WS
kjoh
2005-12-30 22:10:09 UTC
Permalink
I think that correlation between multiple sex partners and higher risk is
akin to saying the more times you step in front of a bus, the more likely
you are to get run over. An obvious sort of hypothesis, but tricky to
test, eh?

kj
Waterspider
2005-12-30 23:10:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by kjoh
I think that correlation between multiple sex partners and higher risk is
akin to saying the more times you step in front of a bus, the more likely
you are to get run over. An obvious sort of hypothesis, but tricky to
test, eh?
LOL!
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-31 00:12:41 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by kjoh
I think that correlation between multiple sex partners and higher risk is
akin to saying the more times you step in front of a bus, the more likely
you are to get run over. An obvious sort of hypothesis, but tricky to
test, eh?
But if you're having sex with someone who's infected, is that the bus
most likely to run you over?

G
kjoh
2005-12-31 01:07:47 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by kjoh
I think that correlation between multiple sex partners and higher risk is
akin to saying the more times you step in front of a bus, the more likely
you are to get run over. An obvious sort of hypothesis, but tricky to
test, eh?
But if you're having sex with someone who's >infected, is that the bus
most likely to run you >over?
Post by kjoh
G
OK Gordo - so there are infected buses and uninfected buses. The more
infected buses you sleep with, the more likely you are to get run over by
one. I think this is how I got hep c.

(Refer to Figure 10 in Doc Elmo's Hep File :)

kj
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-31 00:12:01 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@corp.supernews.com>,
"Waterspider" <***@moonlight.net> wrote:

[...]
Post by Waterspider
The bit that got me questioning the sexual transmission thing was the "fact"
that having sex with more than one partner increases the risk of contracting
hep c. I just can't make sense of that one.
I suspect that it came from some doctor recommending safe sex to a hepper
(hey, it's a good idea for anybody!) and it slipped into "common knowledge"
without anyone noticing or stopping to think about it.
There's definitely a statistical correlation but there are correlations
with a lot of other things as well. Hard to know.

G
Waterspider
2005-12-31 00:35:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
[...]
Post by Waterspider
The bit that got me questioning the sexual transmission thing was the "fact"
that having sex with more than one partner increases the risk of contracting
hep c. I just can't make sense of that one.
I suspect that it came from some doctor recommending safe sex to a hepper
(hey, it's a good idea for anybody!) and it slipped into "common knowledge"
without anyone noticing or stopping to think about it.
There's definitely a statistical correlation but there are correlations
with a lot of other things as well. Hard to know.
Yes it is, but people don't go around saying that drinking milk as a baby
causes heroin addiction.

Spidey
Waterspider
2005-12-30 18:11:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by Waterspider
Post by dortski
Post by Waterspider
I was wondering, once you get your SVR are you still able to transmit
the virus?
Depends if you still have any virus left in your blood.
I guess so huh, cuz the
test doesn't go to zero right?
Right, so until they get a finer test, you never know if you have
absolutely no HCV left, or just a few.
Also when would be a good time to replace
items that could have tainted blood on them? I mean is it possible to
reinfect yourself with an old nail clipper?
Absolutely, and I'm sure it would explain a lot of the "relapses." I
was a paranoid fool on tx, got a new toothbrush every week, wouldn't
use razors or clippers or nailfiles until after tx, threw out all my
earrings except the diamond studs that I'll have reset into something
else, threw out a really, really nice pair of boots that gave me a
blister the first time I wore them, contemplated having the cats
declawed. Just kidding about that last one...
I realize I am asking a lot of
stupid questions, you know why? I'm stupid! lol!
Not stupid questions at all, Dortlet. Fact is, you can never know the
exact moment that the last little bastard virus in your blood dies, and
everything bloody up until that point is a risk.
To be honest, I still occasionally wonder if the virus will show up
again. I doubt it, because it's been years, but there have been
"relapses" recorded after five years (I suspect that the patients
reinfected themselves, but I don't know for sure).
Holy crap! You didn't clip your nails or file them or shave for 6 months!
Yup, I was a long-nailed hobbit-woman, and for the last couple of months
went around wearing this ghastly touque because I got pisssed off at my
falling hair and had it chopped of really close to my scalp. I'd also
lost 60 pounds so I looked like an anorexic long-nailed butch hobbit
woman, pale as a vampire and snarling at everyone! It was hilarious, I
was feeling so rotten I just didn't care what I looked like.
Post by dortski
Maybe I should take my items and run them through the autoclave after
each use. If I go that long without clipping my nails, unless biting is
ok....I wouldn't be able to work.
Get yourself a new pair of clippers, don't let anyone else use them and
if you nick yourself, replace them. Don't wear sleeveless tops and
miniskirts unless you're on a holiday in Europe or Quebec or some old
hippie colony.
The shaving I could give up easy enough, in fact I
Post by dortski
notice it doesn't grow on my legs overnight like it use to...sorry if
that was TMI. It makes sense to not use old items though if that is a
route of transmission.
How long is it that Hep B can live outside the body, is it 2 or 3 days.
Has is been established how long C can live? It's not easy getting these
questions answered is it?
They haven't figured out this one either.
Post by dortski
I remember a post some time back asking why there isn't a celebrity
spokesperson to help get the word out about this virus. Why not Oprah?
She always seems game to help out a worthy cause. Think we could
convince her to take Naomi Judd's place? So am I talking crazy or do you
think it might be something we could collectively work on? Just throwing
it out there.....
Willie Nelson is doing something I hear. A few years back someone listed
a whole slew of celebrities with hep c; that would be a good start.
Forget Pamela Anderson, though (even though she's from BC), she's not
been a great help with her endorsements.
Post by dortski
dortlet....that's so cute!
Ut-oh! Elmo hears that, he's gonna start calling you Fartlet.
Spidey
Ya know Spidey, I seem to remember and article in the Austin Chronical
where a bunch of local musicians infected with HCV were working on putting
something together. The guy from Asleep at the Wheel what's his
name....Ray Benson, Alejandro Escovedo, and I think a few others. I'll
have to see if I can find the article. Maybe we can find out exactly what
Willy is doing for the cause.
Purrrrfect! Alseep at the Wheel, couldn't be a better band (just cuz of the
name), they must all be heppers!
Post by dortski
I saw a commercial for the show House the other night. It was very
dramatic and House says something like, "anything that can be transmitted
through blood can be transmitted through sex"....that should ad to the
stigma don't ya think?
House is a program with a lot of potential, but there have been a couple of
real crashing disappointments in reference to hep c.
Post by dortski
Hey, I finally took the movie back, and changed my jammies.....dorlet is a
good girl!
Hey, and you did all that guilting for nothing!
Jammies for a few days, wat da fuk, it simply unimportant in the big picture
(big picture = kill the dragon).
Take care,

Spidey
mags
2005-12-30 18:19:14 UTC
Permalink
Spidey you crack me up - thanks for the laugh and the visual. Dortlet
is kind of catchy Dort. Remember Dort you could hang out with the
greatful Dead groupies and fit right in.

Mag
or
Maglet
or
Maggit ewww
dortski
2005-12-30 20:13:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Spidey you crack me up - thanks for the laugh and the visual. Dortlet
is kind of catchy Dort. Remember Dort you could hang out with the
greatful Dead groupies and fit right in.
Mag
or
Maglet
or
Maggit ewww
Oh to fit in somewhere, that would be nice. I like the Maglet. When you post
something enlightening you could sign off with Maglite....but drop the
Maggit

dort
mags
2005-12-30 22:18:46 UTC
Permalink
Dortlet there won't be any enlightening posts until the fall when I
reclaim my brain - I hope!

Maglet
just finished shot 14
dortski
2005-12-30 22:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Dortlet there won't be any enlightening posts until the fall when I
reclaim my brain - I hope!
Maglet
just finished shot 14
I beg to differ Magster....I've gotten quite a bit from a lot of your posts.
I like the fact that even though you feel like total doo doo you always seem
spunky in your posts!
Just finished your shot for the night? You do yours this early? Does it
help? I notice I start feeling better by Wed. so would taking the shot
earlier on Friday might help getting over it earlier per chance?

dotster
mags
2005-12-30 18:22:04 UTC
Permalink
What is the scoop on Pammy - did she receive treatment, what geno type
etc. etc. I last recall her saying she would die in less than 10 yrs.
Comforting eh heppers?

Mags
Waterspider
2005-12-30 19:06:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
What is the scoop on Pammy - did she receive treatment, what geno type
etc. etc. I last recall her saying she would die in less than 10 yrs.
Comforting eh heppers?
Pammy spent most of her energy trying to blame her "rock and roll lifestyle"
and ex hubby Kid Rock for her hep c, because they got tattoos together and
that, she says, is how she got it. Oddly, it seems that ex hubby doesn't
have it. Problem is that she added to the picture of the typical hepper
being a wild druggie.

Then she proclaimed to be a media spokesperson for hep c, but most of her
official business focused on AIDS. Fundraising for AIDS isn't a bad thing,
but you shouldn't be doing it if you're saying that you're supporting HCV
fundraising. Enough with the confusion between the two!

Then she told the world that she's managing her hepatitis c quite well with
herbs and natural treatments. Oooooo, Pammy, have you had a biopsy yet?

Finally, quite recently, she said that she would quit drinking because of
hepatitis c.

The woman is the epitome of a big-breasted blonde bimbo. It appears that she
was infected only in the past few years, has no symptoms and probably has
yet no significant liver damage. I presume that she has not much knowledge
about the disease, its prognosis or its treatment and <whisper> I'd like to
stuff a sock in her mouth to stop her from trivializing this potentially
deadly disease.

Spidey
mags
2005-12-30 00:58:57 UTC
Permalink
That sucks! Was behaviour or blood products the reason I wonder??
Who in here has been SVR the longest?? Would drinking wine affect the
outcome of the virus returning?

Mags
pining for a glass
Stretch
2005-12-30 05:17:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
That sucks! Was behaviour or blood products the reason I wonder??
Who in here has been SVR the longest?? Would drinking wine affect the
outcome of the virus returning?
Mags
pining for a glass
Those are surely oddball cases from doctors who've treated hundreds
(maybe thousands) of HCV patients. I wouldn't get hung up over it.

I'll let ya know if (when, cause I'll keep asking) I find out anything else.
Waterspider
2005-12-30 05:45:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
That sucks! Was behaviour or blood products the reason I wonder??
Who in here has been SVR the longest?? Would drinking wine affect the
outcome of the virus returning?
Hi Mags,

SVR means Sustained Viral Response, and that's a medical term for, "Well, we
*think* we killed it but we don't have a test to confirm it." When SVR is
achieved, it looks like the virus is destroyed, but it's not known for sure
because tests still can't detect miniscule numbers of HCV (minimum detection
level is 5-50 copies per million, I think, depending on the lab). If HCV is
undetectable at 12 weeks, there's a darn good chance of SVR by the end of
tx, and then you can be *almost* certain that it's truly dead and gone.

But, the theory is that a very small, undetectable amount of surviving virus
can take a long time, sometimes years, to build up again to the detectable
level. Because there's no zero-hcv test, there's no way to test the theory.
That's why people get tested at regular intervals after achieving an SVR.

So, it's not that the virus returns, it's either that it was never gone in
the first place or that one is re-infected with a brand new batch of hep c
by blood-to-blood contact.

Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.

All the best,

Waterspider
greyhackles
2005-12-30 15:51:27 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:45:06 -0800, "Waterspider" <***@moonlight.net>
wrote:
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.

Cheers

/greyhackles
dortski
2005-12-30 16:52:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:45:06 -0800, "Waterspider"
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
Cheers
/greyhackles
Hi Greyhackles, just wanted to chime in with what I was given at the
doctors when I got me meds. A nice green little folders with all these
handouts chock full of information. One sheet, this one was stapled to the
outside so you wouldn't miss it and it states among other things...
"Alcohol acts as a fertilizer for the hepatitis C virus to help damage the
liver much faster." so ain't they saying in a sense that it helps the virus?

I am being a little cheeky here. I didn't find much in those handouts very
useful.

dort
Waterspider
2005-12-30 18:18:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by greyhackles
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:45:06 -0800, "Waterspider"
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
Cheers
/greyhackles
Hi Greyhackles, just wanted to chime in with what I was given at the
doctors when I got me meds. A nice green little folders with all these
handouts chock full of information. One sheet, this one was stapled to the
outside so you wouldn't miss it and it states among other things...
"Alcohol acts as a fertilizer for the hepatitis C virus to help damage the
liver much faster." so ain't they saying in a sense that it helps the virus?
I am being a little cheeky here. I didn't find much in those handouts very
useful.
dort
You gotta watch those little pamphlets! They're often done by volunteers
with not much knowledge of the disease and using outdated information. For
example, most of them say that hep c is a sexually transmitted disease
(NOT!).
In this case, I agree with Greyhackles; I was running off at the mouth
without thinking the thing through.

WS
greyhackles
2005-12-30 18:55:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by dortski
Post by greyhackles
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:45:06 -0800, "Waterspider"
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
Cheers
/greyhackles
Hi Greyhackles, just wanted to chime in with what I was given at the
doctors when I got me meds. A nice green little folders with all these
handouts chock full of information. One sheet, this one was stapled to the
outside so you wouldn't miss it and it states among other things...
"Alcohol acts as a fertilizer for the hepatitis C virus to help damage the
liver much faster." so ain't they saying in a sense that it helps the virus?
I am being a little cheeky here. I didn't find much in those handouts very
useful.
dort
You gotta watch those little pamphlets! They're often done by volunteers
with not much knowledge of the disease and using outdated information. For
example, most of them say that hep c is a sexually transmitted disease
(NOT!).
In this case, I agree with Greyhackles; I was running off at the mouth
without thinking the thing through.
WS
Sorry to have led you astray, but referencing Gordo citation, it appears that
the hypothesis has a good chance of being correct, and in fact may have
already been proven.

About the only thing I know for sure is there's still an awful lot for me to
learn about this disease...

Cheers

/greyhackles
kjoh
2005-12-30 19:18:17 UTC
Permalink
Hi Gang, I swiped the summary below from pubmed.gov. There is a university
library in this town and One of These Days i hope to spend time there
actually reading some of these mysterious articles. Sigh.

One of these days I'll look back and I'll say I left in time...

kj


Alcohol and hepatitis C. Safdar K, Schiff ER. Semin Liver Dis. 2004
Aug;24(3):305-15

Center for Liver Diseases, Division of Hepatology, Department of Medicine,
University of Miami, Miami, Florida 33136, USA.

Alcohol abuse and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection coexist with chronic
liver disease in many patients. The mechanism of injury in these patients
is probably multifactorial and involves, but is not limited to, a
combination of diminished immune clearance of HCV, oxidative stress,
emergence of HCV quasi-species, hepatic steatosis, increased iron stores,
and increased rate of hepatocyte apoptosis. In patients with HCV
infection, alcohol consumption is known to cause accelerated progression
of liver fibrosis, higher frequency of cirrhosis, and increased incidence
of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). These patients also have decreased
survival as compared with patients with either alcohol abuse or HCV liver
injury alone. Alcohol abuse causes decreased response to interferon
treatment in HCV patients. It is therefore necessary for patients with HCV
infection to abstain from alcohol consumption.
Waterspider
2005-12-30 19:53:31 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 10:18:45 -0800, "Waterspider"
Post by Waterspider
Post by dortski
Post by greyhackles
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:45:06 -0800, "Waterspider"
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
Cheers
/greyhackles
Hi Greyhackles, just wanted to chime in with what I was given at the
doctors when I got me meds. A nice green little folders with all these
handouts chock full of information. One sheet, this one was stapled to the
outside so you wouldn't miss it and it states among other things...
"Alcohol acts as a fertilizer for the hepatitis C virus to help damage the
liver much faster." so ain't they saying in a sense that it helps the virus?
I am being a little cheeky here. I didn't find much in those handouts very
useful.
dort
You gotta watch those little pamphlets! They're often done by volunteers
with not much knowledge of the disease and using outdated information. For
example, most of them say that hep c is a sexually transmitted disease
(NOT!).
In this case, I agree with Greyhackles; I was running off at the mouth
without thinking the thing through.
WS
Sorry to have led you astray, but referencing Gordo citation, it appears that
the hypothesis has a good chance of being correct, and in fact may have
already been proven.
Hey, it's all good, now we both know for sure!
About the only thing I know for sure is there's still an awful lot for me to
learn about this disease...
Yeah... you, me, the medical profession, the rest of the world. But hey,
that just makes things more interesting!

All the best to you,

Spidey
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 17:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
There are lab studies that show an increase in viral replication in the
presence of alcohol, and alcohol use (at (as I remember) moderately high
levels and above) is associated with a more rapid onset of liver damage
(beyond what a non-infected person who drank the same amount would have.)

But as we all know, this information comes from depressingly small sets
of people who are studied so who knows?

One could guess that heavy drinking might cause the virus to reappear
sooner if someone was going to relapse.

A less probable guess is that there's a period after treatment when
reasonable amounts of alcohol could make a difference between SVR and no
SVR. Hopefully not - that in the vast majority of people the treatment
either works or doesn't at the point that it's done.

G
mags
2005-12-30 18:04:48 UTC
Permalink
My hep nurse went to a conference on this and the facts they were given
was that one drink of alcohol would negate 4 days of treatment.
Interesting facts.

Mags
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:19:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
My hep nurse went to a conference on this and the facts they were given
was that one drink of alcohol would negate 4 days of treatment.
Interesting facts.
I don't know that it's a fact as much as a hypothesis, but if you're
taking drugs to stop viral replication then also ingesting alcohol which
probably speeds it up is just not using good sense.

G
Waterspider
2005-12-30 19:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by mags
My hep nurse went to a conference on this and the facts they were given
was that one drink of alcohol would negate 4 days of treatment.
Interesting facts.
I don't know that it's a fact as much as a hypothesis, but if you're
taking drugs to stop viral replication then also ingesting alcohol which
probably speeds it up is just not using good sense.
Does alcohol speed up replication or neutralize interferon/ribavirin?
Waterspider
2005-12-30 18:22:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by greyhackles
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
There are lab studies that show an increase in viral replication in the
presence of alcohol, and alcohol use (at (as I remember) moderately high
levels and above) is associated with a more rapid onset of liver damage
(beyond what a non-infected person who drank the same amount would have.)
Yes, alcohol consumption accelerates liver damage, but does it cause the
virus to replicate faster?
Post by Gordo Mondragon
But as we all know, this information comes from depressingly small sets
of people who are studied so who knows?
One could guess that heavy drinking might cause the virus to reappear
sooner if someone was going to relapse.
This would be my guess too, but it's just a guess. As GH said, there's no
evidence.
Post by Gordo Mondragon
A less probable guess is that there's a period after treatment when
reasonable amounts of alcohol could make a difference between SVR and no
SVR. Hopefully not - that in the vast majority of people the treatment
either works or doesn't at the point that it's done.
I know that alcohol compromises tx effectiveness, but I'm not sure how it
does so.
As far as consumption after tx, it shouldn't make any difference in SVR. If
the virus is destroyed (SVR), there's no way that any amount of alcohol can
re-create it.

Spidey
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:27:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by greyhackles
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
There are lab studies that show an increase in viral replication in the
presence of alcohol, and alcohol use (at (as I remember) moderately high
levels and above) is associated with a more rapid onset of liver damage
(beyond what a non-infected person who drank the same amount would have.)
Yes, alcohol consumption accelerates liver damage, but does it cause the
virus to replicate faster?
http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/NewsEvents/NewsReleases/hepatitis.htm

G
greyhackles
2005-12-30 18:52:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/NewsEvents/NewsReleases/hepatitis.htm
G
Thanks, Gordo. Good cite.

If this has been confirmed I will accept it as gospel and stand (well, sit,
actually ;-) corrected.
Alcohol = even worse than I already figured for heppers...

Cheers

/greyhackles
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 20:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
Post by Gordo Mondragon
http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/NewsEvents/NewsReleases/hepatitis.htm
G
Thanks, Gordo. Good cite.
If this has been confirmed I will accept it as gospel and stand (well, sit,
actually ;-) corrected.
It's in liver cells in the lab. Who knows how that maps to a human body
and actual damage? But with this disease we have to work with what's
there...

G
Waterspider
2005-12-30 19:09:54 UTC
Permalink
"Gordo Mondragon" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ga_mondragon-
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by Waterspider
Yes, alcohol consumption accelerates liver damage, but does it cause the
virus to replicate faster?
http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/NewsEvents/NewsReleases/hepatitis.htm
Thanks, Gordo, that clears up the whole issue!

Spidey
Waterspider
2005-12-30 18:16:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by greyhackles
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 21:45:06 -0800, "Waterspider"
[snipped]
Post by Waterspider
Drinking, because it increases liver damage, would allow the virus to
replicate faster and thus become detectable sooner.
You were doing good up to there, but while all-causes liver damage is surely
accumulative - making alcohol = very bad thing for heppers - I don't think
there's an intrinsic link between alcohol intake and viral load.
Cheers
/greyhackles
Grey, you're right, I shouldn't have said that. It's one of those "facts"
that gets thrown around, and I have never seen any proof of it.

Thanks for keeping me on my toes and, btw, the more I see of you here, the
more you seem like my old friend that you so closely resemble. Sure your
real name isn't Gene?

Spidey
Frank
2005-12-31 01:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by mags
That sucks! Was behaviour or blood products the reason I wonder??
Who in here has been SVR the longest?? Would drinking wine affect the
outcome of the virus returning?
Hi Mags,
SVR means Sustained Viral Response, and that's a medical term for, "Well, we
*think* we killed it but we don't have a test to confirm it."
Waterspider
Damn. I thought it meant Stevie Vaughn Ray.
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 17:44:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
That sucks! Was behaviour or blood products the reason I wonder??
Who in here has been SVR the longest?? Would drinking wine affect the
outcome of the virus returning?
It's possible that someone got re-infected instead of relapsing. It's
such a small number of people that it's hard to to sure.

If the virus is gone, the only thing bad about wine would be if you have
liver damage you're trying to heal. It can't make the virus reappear
out of nowhere.

G
mags
2005-12-30 18:03:00 UTC
Permalink
Hey Gordo - my biopsy showed mild level 1 and mild level 1 - whatever
those numbers mean. One day when I stop working 12 hr days and am
feeling better I will get into what the numbers mean. The hep nurse
said that sometimes the liver goes back to normal or if you are a 3 and
3 back to a 2. She said the fact that a year of treatment gives the
liver a rest, I should not have a problem having alcohol if i have SVR.
Do many people have biopsies after obtaining SVR? Any info on that?

Mags
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-30 18:24:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Hey Gordo - my biopsy showed mild level 1 and mild level 1 - whatever
those numbers mean. One day when I stop working 12 hr days and am
feeling better I will get into what the numbers mean. The hep nurse
said that sometimes the liver goes back to normal or if you are a 3 and
3 back to a 2. She said the fact that a year of treatment gives the
liver a rest, I should not have a problem having alcohol if i have SVR.
Do many people have biopsies after obtaining SVR? Any info on that?
I didn't have any liver problems so no biopsy so I don't know. I think
if you're mild level 1 it's unlikely there would be any worries about
your liver after an SVR. I don't know about drinking, though.

G
Waterspider
2005-12-30 19:17:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Hey Gordo - my biopsy showed mild level 1 and mild level 1 - whatever
those numbers mean. One day when I stop working 12 hr days and am
feeling better I will get into what the numbers mean. The hep nurse
said that sometimes the liver goes back to normal or if you are a 3 and
3 back to a 2. She said the fact that a year of treatment gives the
liver a rest, I should not have a problem having alcohol if i have SVR.
Do many people have biopsies after obtaining SVR? Any info on that?
Mags
Many clinical trials require that the subject have a biopsy after treatment
for study purposes, but in normal situations I don't think anyone bothers.
Not something that I felt compelled to do...

You have mild liver damage, the beginnings of fibrosis or scarring, and mild
inflammation of the liver.
Yes, treatment often reverses liver damage, especially when the damage is
minimal, as in your case.
Even without an SVR and even without improvement of liver damage, tx does
give the liver "a rest" and damage would not increase while you're on
treatment. Some non-responders (to treatment) are put on a regime of
interferon "maintenance" when liver damage is severe.

You're a lucky lady, Maglet, and will most likely be enjoying a fine,
risk-free, frozen margarita one day down the road!

Spidey
dortski
2005-12-30 20:16:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Waterspider
Post by mags
Hey Gordo - my biopsy showed mild level 1 and mild level 1 - whatever
those numbers mean. One day when I stop working 12 hr days and am
feeling better I will get into what the numbers mean. The hep nurse
said that sometimes the liver goes back to normal or if you are a 3 and
3 back to a 2. She said the fact that a year of treatment gives the
liver a rest, I should not have a problem having alcohol if i have SVR.
Do many people have biopsies after obtaining SVR? Any info on that?
Mags
Many clinical trials require that the subject have a biopsy after
treatment for study purposes, but in normal situations I don't think
anyone bothers. Not something that I felt compelled to do...
You have mild liver damage, the beginnings of fibrosis or scarring, and
mild inflammation of the liver.
Yes, treatment often reverses liver damage, especially when the damage is
minimal, as in your case.
Even without an SVR and even without improvement of liver damage, tx does
give the liver "a rest" and damage would not increase while you're on
treatment. Some non-responders (to treatment) are put on a regime of
interferon "maintenance" when liver damage is severe.
You're a lucky lady, Maglet, and will most likely be enjoying a fine,
risk-free, frozen margarita one day down the road!
Spidey
This answers the post that anonymousone asked a few days ago.

dort
Waterspider
2005-12-30 20:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by dortski
Post by Waterspider
Post by mags
Hey Gordo - my biopsy showed mild level 1 and mild level 1 - whatever
those numbers mean. One day when I stop working 12 hr days and am
feeling better I will get into what the numbers mean. The hep nurse
said that sometimes the liver goes back to normal or if you are a 3 and
3 back to a 2. She said the fact that a year of treatment gives the
liver a rest, I should not have a problem having alcohol if i have SVR.
Do many people have biopsies after obtaining SVR? Any info on that?
Many clinical trials require that the subject have a biopsy after
treatment for study purposes, but in normal situations I don't think
anyone bothers. Not something that I felt compelled to do...
You have mild liver damage, the beginnings of fibrosis or scarring, and
mild inflammation of the liver.
Yes, treatment often reverses liver damage, especially when the damage is
minimal, as in your case.
Even without an SVR and even without improvement of liver damage, tx does
give the liver "a rest" and damage would not increase while you're on
treatment. Some non-responders (to treatment) are put on a regime of
interferon "maintenance" when liver damage is severe.
You're a lucky lady, Maglet, and will most likely be enjoying a fine,
risk-free, frozen margarita one day down the road!
This answers the post that anonymousone asked a few days ago.
Sorry, I missed that one.
mags
2005-12-30 21:33:32 UTC
Permalink
Thanks spidey for the info. You would think I was an alcoholic the way
I wine oops whine. I just enjoy cooking, glass of wine and a few
laughs on the weekend. I miss that. I did trick myself and poured
ginger ale into a wine glass and felt hung over the next day but then I
feel hungover everyday :)

Maglet
Gordo Mondragon
2005-12-31 00:09:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by mags
Thanks spidey for the info. You would think I was an alcoholic the way
I wine oops whine. I just enjoy cooking, glass of wine and a few
laughs on the weekend. I miss that. I did trick myself and poured
ginger ale into a wine glass and felt hung over the next day but then I
feel hungover everyday :)
I learned that I could enjoy the smell of wine if other people were
having it. I could stick my nose in and get some the aroma.

At first it drove me crazy, though.

G
Waterspider
2005-12-31 00:37:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordo Mondragon
Post by mags
Thanks spidey for the info. You would think I was an alcoholic the way
I wine oops whine. I just enjoy cooking, glass of wine and a few
laughs on the weekend. I miss that. I did trick myself and poured
ginger ale into a wine glass and felt hung over the next day but then I
feel hungover everyday :)
I learned that I could enjoy the smell of wine if other people were
having it. I could stick my nose in and get some the aroma.
At first it drove me crazy, though.
Also perfectly okay to cook with wine <mmmmm> as long as you're putting it
*all* in the recipe and none makes its way down your throat!

Spidey <looking longingly at Cat's Pee on a Gooseberry Bush>
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...