Defense against HIV

This is a discussion on Defense against HIV within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by sojourner I find it ironic that transmission is less likely through spit, but HIV tests take a swab of someone's mouth (where ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35

Thread: Defense against HIV

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array peacefuljeffrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    south Florida
    Posts
    3,168
    Quote Originally Posted by sojourner View Post
    I find it ironic that transmission is less likely through spit, but HIV tests take a swab of someone's mouth (where the spit is).
    When I went to my doctor for a routine physical exam, they asked if I'd like an HIV test. Why the heck not, I thought, so I got one.
    They took a vial of blood for my test, not a saliva swab.

    I don't know that there is not such a thing as a saliva swab HIV test, but I do know that they did not say, "Which do you want, saliva or blood?" They just busted out the needle.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array peacefuljeffrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    south Florida
    Posts
    3,168
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    That's right.
    Hit With The Spit would be considered to be Battery.
    Your correction appreciated.
    Good looking out. Thanks Sarge45.
    I would think that the jab with the mop would be "battery," not "assault," if we're in a correctin' mood.

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,942
    I think you would actually increase your chances of contracting HIV by shooting the person than by them spitting on you. At least if you were to shoot them at close range. Unless you were wearing a safety shield you could get blood spatter in your eyes or mouth.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array Rob72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    3,468
    From experience: if I felt there had to be an altercation with a bum, I would much rather shoot than use "non-lethal"/H2H, etc., as you will most certainly be scratched, bitten, shanked, etc.. Either be nice and tolerant all the time, or none of the time- it can't be situational.

    Pre-emptively, keep the bums out of the store. Call the cops if the bum(s) are harassing customers. Keep calling. Sooner or later one of the shift Sgts. will get tired of seeing the guy, and dump his butt on the other side of town. We used to have a regular bum-exchange with Dallas, OKC, and Wichita, thanks to Union Pacific.

  6. #20
    Member Array citizen510's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by peacefuljeffrey View Post
    When I went to my doctor for a routine physical exam, they asked if I'd like an HIV test. Why the heck not, I thought, so I got one.
    They took a vial of blood for my test, not a saliva swab.

    I don't know that there is not such a thing as a saliva swab HIV test, but I do know that they did not say, "Which do you want, saliva or blood?" They just busted out the needle.
    Docs usually do the blood thing because it is more thorough and an accepted standard. The OraSure test is used by non-medical clinics and agencies that cannot afford a doc on staff to get a 97% accurate test done. If the oral test comes back positive or ambiguous, they send the client to a doc to do the blood test to make sure the result is accurate.
    It is not the Bill of Privileges. It is not the Bill of Permits. It is the Bill of Rights.

    People should not be afraid of the government; the government should be afraid of the people.

  7. #21
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,394
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen510 View Post
    Docs usually do the blood thing because it is more thorough and an accepted standard. The OraSure test is used by non-medical clinics and agencies that cannot afford a doc on staff to get a 97% accurate test done. If the oral test comes back positive or ambiguous, they send the client to a doc to do the blood test to make sure the result is accurate.
    The oral swab test has become standard for most state health departments becuase of its low cost. If someone test positive they are called back and retested by drawing blood.
    “You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.”

    ― Robert A. Heinlein,

  8. #22
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,059
    Either Or.
    He assaulted that individual AKA the def. "A Violent Attack Upon" it's just by legal definition that "assault & battery" are differentiated and not always coupled together.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  9. #23
    Senior Moderator
    Array limatunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    4,247
    Before I got married I went in and asked them to test me for everything under the sun I could pass to either my husband or my children (should we have any).

    I expected there would be some blood drawing and I was ready for it (and because I HATE needles, getting ready for it is something that's not to easy for me) but what I wasn't ready for was a nurse to come in with BOTH HANDS FILLED with vials.

    They took over TEN vials of blood from me and when I asked what they were all for she said that they needed at least FOUR for the HIV test alone. I congratulate them on being so thorough and when I hear of people getting HIV tests from mouth swabs I want to call up that doctors office and complain.

    It makes sense though that if they wanted to do a very thorough job of testing you for a disease that you may pass on to a husband and kids they would go directly to the blood (and LOTS OF IT). If they were trying to "screen" test you, they would go for something a little less invasive.

    If someone spit on me I'd still be upset, but not so worried about HIV. If they were wielding a needle or something, all bets are off.

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array Rob72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    3,468
    Foe general information:
    HIV may be transmitted through any mucosal surface (eyes, nose, mouth) or open wound (cut, scabbed acne, etc..), as can basically any virus. Equally, there are conjugal partners of HIV+ individuals who have never converted, and there has been 1 OR tech with cystic acne who did convert after blood splashed onto her face, sooo... there is a great deal we don't know. Don't be complacent.

    The flu mutates every year. HIV does also...
    Last edited by Rob72; October 30th, 2007 at 10:08 AM.

  11. #25
    Senior Member
    Array sojourner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    1,054
    Well, after my divorce, I made it a habit to have me and any potential partner get the HIV test from a clinic before furthering our physical relationship. If she did not want to, then I ended the relationship.

    Talk about starting interesting conversations. "Hey honey, why don't we go get a HIV test at the clinic and grab a burger and movie afterward?" And how about the awkward times at the clinic for us to pick up our results together and share them with each other. "How do you think you did on the test dear?"

    The clinic did the swab of the inner cheek. I was told that if positive on that test, a blood test would be taken to confirm. I believe the swab test can give false positives, not false negatives.

    And don't laugh at me thinking I am neurotic. I know the chance of cathing HIV is relatively small, but the severity of the outcome leads to death. Kind of like going out without your CCW. The chance of catching a shiv or lead or whatever is small, but the outcome leads to pain up to and including death.

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array Supertac45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Michigan's U.P.
    Posts
    3,657
    Pretty low risk of transmission. Spit on the pants leg.
    Les Baer 45
    Sig Man
    N.R.A. Patron Life Member
    M.C.R.G.O.

  13. #27
    Senior Member Array Pitmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever there's fried chicken or barbecue
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen510 View Post
    One can be infected with Hep C that has lived on a door knob for 2 years.
    This is an absolute falsehood. The fact is that Hepatitas C can only be transmitted by blood. Sexual and casual contact has not been proven unless there was blood to blood contact.

    Most Hep C cases have been transmitted via blood transfusions that happened before testing for Hep C became available (1990?). IV drug use was the second leading cause. Currently IV drug use is the #1 method of transmission.
    Pitmaster

    HELGA: Where are you going?
    HAGAR: To sign a peace treaty with the King of England.
    HELGA: Then why take all those weapons?
    HAGAR: First we gotta negotiate...

  14. #28
    Member Array soundwave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    356
    When I was taking my medical courses in college we did the calculations on this. What we came up with was that there would have to be about a gallon of spit to make spit an effective transmission source of HIV. Spit contains thousands of enzymes specifically created to break-down proteins (e.g. food). The HIV virus is a protein. Because of this the virus will naturally break-down and die in most cases.

    In order for the virus to actually transmit the person would have to carry the virus, have blood in their spit, the person being spit on would have to have an open and unscabbed wound, at least 8 ounces of spit would have to land directly on the open wound and then you would have a very small chance of being infected.

    Basically, your saliva breaks-down all protein based stuff except you (e.g. inside of your mouth, esophagus, stomach, etc.) and your skin naturally protects you from outside infection from viruses (e.g. influenza or even HIV). HIV can live, however, in blood if the blood is present in the saliva but not for long.
    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall." Adolf Hitler

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array Rob72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    3,468
    Quote Originally Posted by soundwave View Post
    In order for the virus to actually transmit the person would have to carry the virus, have blood in their spit, the person being spit on would have to have an open and unscabbed wound, at least 8 ounces of spit would have to land directly on the open wound and then you would have a very small chance of being infected..
    That's the rub: meth-mouth and its cousins. I won't quibble the numbers, honestly there are too many variables; are you immuno-compromised at the time; what is the perp's viral load; is it Hep, HIV, or...? HIV is the bugaboo, but there are quite a few life-altering nasties we should be concerned about.

  16. #30
    Member Array soundwave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    356
    Yes, I know, but relatively-speaking, even if all of the bad things were in line, it's still a punch in the dark that you could get it from spit. ;O)

    Cheers.
    "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall." Adolf Hitler

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Best Defense
    By C hawk Glock in forum Defensive Books, Video & References
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 3rd, 2010, 06:24 PM
  2. Best Defense
    By rachilders in forum Home (And Away From Home) Defense Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 15th, 2010, 08:37 PM
  3. LMS Defense Home Defense - Defensive Medical COMBO / Yuba City, CA / March 8-10, 2008
    By Tony Siciliano in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 6th, 2008, 12:55 PM
  4. .38 spl or .357 mag for self defense?
    By Joey in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: January 1st, 2008, 11:13 AM
  5. FN Five-Seven for self defense?
    By skystud1 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: November 6th, 2007, 12:02 PM

Search tags for this page

hiv spit 8 ounces

Click on a term to search for related topics.