?

Log in

Circumcision, HIV, and sensitivity (public entry) - Anti-Circ Snark [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Anti-Circ Snark

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Circumcision Fact Finder Circumstitions~Focus on Intactivism Urinary Tract Infection and Circumcision Jews Against Circumcision National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers ]

Circumcision, HIV, and sensitivity (public entry) [Mar. 29th, 2007|01:32 am]
Anti-Circ Snark

anti_circ_snark

[rawness]
CIRCUMCISION AND HIV

LONDON: Circumcision may reduce men's chances of contracting HIV by up to 60 percent — but early results suggest the procedure may put women at increased risk of infection, according to preliminary data presented Tuesday.

Among 70 men with HIV who underwent circumcision, 11 of their female partners became infected with the virus in the month after the surgery. In contrast, only four partners of 54 uncircumcised men with HIV in the control group caught the virus — a figure more than 46 percent lower, early results showed.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/03/06/europe/EU-MED-AIDS-Circumcision.php


http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20070305/hl_hsn/scientistsdiscovernaturalbarriertohiv

For decades, the common wisdom was that HIV easily enters and infects Langerhans cells. Geijtenbeek's team has now cast doubt on that notion.

Looking closely at the interaction of HIV and Langerhans cells, they found that the cells "do not become infected by HIV-1, because the cells have the protein Langerin on their cell surface," Geijtenbeek said. "Langerin captures HIV-1 very efficiently, and this Langerin-bound HIV-1 is taken up (a bit like eating) by the Langerhans cells and destroyed."

In essence, Geijtenbeek said, "Langerhans cells act more like a virus vacuum cleaner."


(Langerhans cells are the ones all of these studies are saying "attact" HIV in the foreskin)


and

http://www.medindia.net/news/view_news_main.asp?x=18736
http://www.afrol.com/articles/24469


SENSITIVITY:

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x

CONCLUSIONS
The glans of the circumcised penis is less sensitive to fine touch than the glans of the uncircumcised penis. The transitional region from the external to the internal prepuce is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis. Circumcision ablates the most sensitive parts of the penis.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: iworshipsatin
2007-03-29 05:36 am (UTC)
Post this in pregnant. :-D
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lovestohateyou
2007-03-29 06:18 am (UTC)
Thank you for posting this! I'm really excited, I really think that we will see the end of RIC in the next five years (not soon enough!).

You should post this in pregnant! I left that community long ago because I couldn't trust myself not to be a snarling bitch ;)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ladygaia87
2007-03-29 07:03 am (UTC)
You should post this is both pregnant, AND _pregnant_. I almost always come close to jumping on people because of their decision. I can't freaking help it!! So, I just avoid commenting. And sit here..and rant about it to the first unlucky person to sign online.

Anyways, thank you for posting this. Sometimes I wonder...why the hell can't they find out WHAT exactly it is in the langheran's cells that is killing the HIV?...Umm..then that would like..END HIV....it makes sense. I mean, seriously...search for a cure damnit, not for a way to use some other disease as a reason to circ.

/rant...
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ladygaia87
2007-03-29 07:04 am (UTC)
oh..oops..I totally did not mean to get off on a rant lol. It just..happened. But, its not directed at the article..just the general stupidity of medical science....
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: txncowboy
2007-04-12 07:41 am (UTC)
From what Ive read about it it seems the langheran's cells basicaly phagocytise the HIV cells, which basicaly means they absorb it then digest it. If thats the case your not going to find a cure for HIV from a cell extract, but if you could find a way to have other immune cells coated with langerin and have them then phagocytise HIV cells without being a detriment to the imune system that could do it. But my guess is that theres a reason they are not coated with langerin and trying to coat them would cause problems, not to mention to do so would probably require a change in genetics or in gene expresion.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: rawness
2007-03-29 03:08 pm (UTC)
Hey you are more than welcomed to join the community then if that's how you feel. No need to just watch us, come join in :D
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: xnaivetex
2007-03-29 03:36 pm (UTC)
Among 70 men with HIV who underwent circumcision, 11 of their female partners became infected with the virus in the month after the surgery. In contrast, only four partners of 54 uncircumcised men with HIV in the control group caught the virus — a figure more than 46 percent lower, early results showed.

This part confuses me though

If you figure the percentage of 11 out of 70, the percentage of people who caught HIV is 15.7%

If you figure the percentage of 4 out of 54, the percentage of people who caught HIV in the intact group is 7.4%

So I'm not sure how that's 46% lower? It is lower, yeah, but I'm confused.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: txncowboy
2007-04-12 07:36 am (UTC)
because 7.4 is 46% of 15.7 I know thats a wierd way to put it, but thats how all the Africa studies show that circumcised guys are 50-60% less likly to get AIDs when the diferences in % of the groups that became infected is between .5% and 1%... Its just a way of making results sound more atractive than they would otherwise to a lay person.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: hugh7
2007-10-13 08:24 am (UTC)
The way real medical science measures these things is "Number Needed to Treat" (NNT) and "Number Needed to Harm" (NNH). The NNHs in the random controlled trials might be huge (they'll be much lower when mass circumcision campaigns begin), but the NNTs are South Africa, 34; Kenya, 30; Uganda, 55. That's huge compared to the NNTs for real surgery or vaccination, which is usually highly effective. That's to say, you have to circumcise 110 men in Uganda to prevent two HIV transmissions - which is pretty cold comfort to one circumcised man who gets HIV anyway.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: txncowboy
2007-04-12 07:32 am (UTC)
permision to cross post?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: rawness
2007-04-13 10:22 am (UTC)
absolutely
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)