3 ms·
That claim isn't a bold assessment of the medical literature at all, it's actually widely held to by the medical organizations responsible for HIV treatment and
by pryce 8y ago
That claim isn't a bold assessment of the medical literature at all, it's actually widely held to by the medical organizations responsible for HIV treatment and prevention.
Here [1] is for instance an article referencing this claim, describing it as "based on strong scientific evidence" that was peer reviewed published by the journal of the American Medical Association. (EDIT: it's important to add the caveat, which is that this claim is about sexual transmission only, and does not cover pregnant-mother-to-child transmission or intravenous needle sharing).
Also your comment now refers to "HPV" which is the name of a different disease.
[1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2720997 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/27209...
- toomuchtodo 8y agoI refer to HPV as a case study in humans not having tests available for a communicable disease (no HPV test exists for men) and underestimating it’s communicability (not to mention it’s role in causing several types of cancer). Apologies if you thought I was confusing HPV and HIV. Too often we think we’re smarter than we are, and the consequences can be damning. Hence why I said its a bold claim that undetectable means it can’t be transmitted. Are we absolutely sure? Because if we’re not, someone could acquire a life long chronic disease that would otherwise have been preventable. But the CDC says undetectable says no transmission; I hope they’re right in 100% of transmission scenarios.