Question:
"The herpes virus is famous for its communicability. Unlike many pathogens, it can remain dormant and healthy outside of a host body for hours at a time. Exactly how long is a matter of some debate. This means that the face pad that an infected client used may now pass the virus to another client. Used face cloths and towels may also harbor the virus. Even leaving aside the possibility of infecting other people, herpes is notorious for spreading to other parts of the body."

http://www.massagetoday.com/mpacms/m...010e01ac75cdb8

--------------------------------



This certainly goes against reports that the virus only lasts for a few minutes outside the body, and that it is extremely fragile.

Answer:
exactly how long is a matter of some debate . was the key line in ur statment.
they havent determined.

Answer:
I would think there would be more definitive scientific knowledge about something like this, and less debate. Knowing how long a herpes virus lasts outside the body seems to be very important on many levels. I've heard a few minutes to a few hours - that's a wide margin.

Yet another reason why herpes is so insidious.

Answer:
exactly....nobody can ever give a straight answer on ANYTHING when it comes to herpes, the longevity of the virus outside the body, spreading it, etc ad nauseum. It is SO frustrating to me. (hence the reason I have developed a form of OCD because of it. Perhaps if we all had definititive answers, I and many others wouldn't be so frightened of passing this on or spreading it through simple things as touch/clothing/etc.)

Answer:
Amen to that! As soon as I think I've got some issue clear in my mind, I go and read something else that contradicts it.

It's so easy to put a positive spin on this thing, and alternatively to put a particualry negative spin on it, and I honestly think both are right! It depends on what you read - and of course what you believe.

I've never understood how they can possibly say how many days we shed the virus. Also, when they say most people catch it form someone who's asymptomatic - how do they know. Were they ignoring obvious signs, were they not aware of mild signs etc etc. I think most of this is guess work.

I've NEVER known a condition so CONFUSING, COTRADITORY AND, now I come to think about, SO UNDER RESEARCHED.

I mean, how can it be ok for people who go to STD clinics and who specifically ask to be tested for STDs and for them NOT to be tested for herpes (or at least ASKED it they want to be tested for herpes). I just can't see how this is ethical.

It would be like me assessing my patients for mental health problems except....oh let's say depression!!! IT'S LUDICROUS and as I say unethical.

It says nothing about OUR needs, it says EVERYTHING about how it's viewed by 'specialists' ie incurable - so why bother. OR, maybe it's more to do with the government. Someone on here once called it an epidemic - would the government really want the general public to be aware of how rife this thing is.

Sorry, chunter over.

Answer:
I'm gonna go off topic just a smidge and go with tothefutures comment.

You make an interesting comment on the government taking responsibility for stopping an epidemic. The issue is that from country to country and if in the USA state to state there are differing opinions on what should be law or legislated.

The biggest problem I've seen in the US is that std's and abortion and birth control keep getting stuck in the morality bin. They want us to abstain from sex and then none of these issues will have relevance in the law making world. I've seen the craziest notions about sex ed where they want kids to not learn about condoms etc. because that is considered encouraging sexual behavior and they want us to teach abstinence instead. So we have all of these kids who think oral sex isn't sex and the hsv rate is going through the roof.

I've been racking my brain trying to come up with a legitimate way to float the idea (legally) that drs need to take a more proactive role in asking adults to request testing. HMO's don't want to foot the bill for more tests. They discourage proactive healthcare. You can't force parents to allow us to add one more thing to sex education because they want to pretend (ok not every parent) that their kid isn't thinking about sex. But if you watch the news kids are doing it whether we think they are or not and most don't have a clue about herpes.

The pharmaceutical companies will only research what they can make money off of and I can bet that there is less money being donated to research herpes because you usually can't die from it. So how else will we find out the truth? Anyone out there lobby pharmaceutical companies?

Just my two cents.

Answer:
What does the author mean by "The good news about herpes is that the social stigma that used to be attached to this infection has been largely lifted." How is this true? - I don't feel like it is. People at my high school just say "eww" when they hear the word herpes. Thats one reason it makes me feel better to call it HSV. Those morons don't even know what HSV is.

I wash my hands a lot. What are my chances of getting it on my fingers? I think I'd kill myself if I did.