Some Lubes Raise Risks

posted: 27/05/2010

Gay and Bi men have been advised for many years to use a water or silicone-based lube for anal sex. A  new research study helps men and women who have anal sex to choose the lubes that are safer and work well - like Wet Platinum .

The results suggest people should avoid  the ones like KY Jelly that seem to increase the risk of sexually tranmsitted infections (STIs).

This new study has caused a stir at the International Microbicides Conference, underway in Pittsburg, USA.
 

STI risks rise with some lubes

Some lubes increase the risk of getting a bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI), like gonorrhoea, chlamydia or syphilis. Almost twice as many people using certain lubes (12%) were diagnosed with rectal gonorrhoea, chlamydia or syphilis, compared with 5% of those who didn’t use a lubricant.
 

Even when the researchers took into account things like the number of partners, frequency of sex, and condom use, they found that the use of certain lubes was associated with a three times bigger rise in rectal STIs.
 

Lubricants are not regulated like medicines: they are ‘medical devices’ and do not have strict safety testing. Many include things that are ‘not friendly’ to the cells lining the rectum. KY Jelly, for example, contains the disinfectant clorhexidine.
 

Keep using lube – but change your brand?
People should continue to use lube for anal sex. Without lube there’s a good chance of discomfort, pain, soreness, bleeding, and tissue damage in the anus and rectum – and this makes it much easier for HIV and STIs to be passed on.

People in this study used various kinds of lubricant: 67% had used a water-based one such as KY Jelly, 28% a silicone-based lubricant, 17% an oil-based lubricant such as Crisco, and 6% used a numbing lubricant to deaden feelings.
 

Choose lubes carefully
The researchers recommend choosing lubricant carefully. More research is needed to assess the risks with each of those commonly used.
 

Better Choice

The study found that a silicone-based lube, Wet Platinum,  and a vaginal water-based lube, PRé, did not damage the cells.
 

Best Avoided

Other studies have shown KY Jelly can kill friendly bacteria in the vagina, and this and several similar water-based lubricants damaged the cell lining of the rectum. Another study tested six lubricants that can be bought over the counter in the USA. They studied the physical properties of each.

Four lubricants Astroglide, KY Jelly, ID Glide and Elbow Grease did risky things to rectums. They are strongly hyperosmolar. This means they suck water out of the cells lining the rectum into the rectum and they also strip off the protective epithelium (lining) of the rectum. Astroglide caused almost as much damage as nonoxynol-9, the spermicide that increases the risk of HIV infection.
 

These lubes were also tested on ‘friendly’ bacteria that are part of the normal vaginal flora. Astroglide killed off one species of Lactobacillus, and KY Jelly, which contains the disinfectant clorhexidine, killed all species.

PRÉ  (limited UK availability) and Wet Platinum   caused relatively little damage and seem a better choice.

There is an urgent need to conduct further research into sexual lubes, to distinguish between harmful and harmless ones, and it looks like it is time to have stricter safety checks before allowing sexual lubes to be sold.
 

Source
 
 

Pregnancy – Risks for Men and Women

posted: 24/05/2010

Men have twice the risk of catching HIV when their partner is pregnant, say researchers. A study of more than 3,000 couples in Africa also backed earlier research that showed women are more at risk of HIV infection when they are pregnant. And pregnant women can transmit HIV to their baby, although this can now be almost always prevented. The researchers speculate that changes in a pregnant woman's immune system may increase the chance that her partner gets HIV.
 

Microbicides hope too
The findings were presented at the International Microbicides Conference in Pittsburgh, USA, alongside a separate study showing a microbicidal gel is safe to use during pregnancy to prevent HIV transmission.
 

Pregnancy HIV risks – to men as well
Several studies have shown evidence that pregnancy puts women more at risk of catching HIV from their partner, but this is the first time researchers have shown that men are more at risk of HIV susceptible to infection if their partners are pregnant.
 

The study, carried out in Botswana, Kenya, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia, involved 3,321 couples in which one partner was HIV-infected and the other not.
 

Over two years there were 823 pregnancies, and analysis showed that pregnancy increased both male-to-female and female-to-male infection. For the women, it seemed that factors other than pregnancy contributed to the increased risk of HIV infection.
 

But for the men, the link between pregnancy and their risk of infection was much clearer, even after accounting for other factors, such as having unprotected sex. The woman’s viral load and CD4 couple made no difference to whether HIV was passed on to the man.
 

Study leader Dr Nelly Mugo, from the University of Nairobi and the University of Washington in Seattle, said it could be that biological changes during pregnancy make a woman more infectious: "increased female-to-male transmission of HIV during pregnancy may be due to physiological and immunological changes that occur with pregnancy." It may also be affected by the couples sexual behaviour.
For more information on the Pittsburg conference M2010, go to: http://www.microbicides2010.org
 

Source
 

image

Election gay HIV ‘risk’

posted: 22/04/2010

David Cameron was urged by the Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, to sack one of his Conservative frontbench team, for claiming that the age of consent for gay / bisexual males should not have been lowered to 16, because it put teenage youth at "serious physical risk" and in danger of catching HIV.
 

Julian Lewis, the shadow minister for Defence, and Conservative parliamentary candidate for the Hampshire seat of New Forest East, wrote to a constituent last week saying he had been "very strongly against" lowering the age of consent for gays from 18 to 16 because of the "seriously increased risk of HIV". He appeared to compare it with the decision to prevent service personnel aged under 18 from fighting on frontlines. Last night, Dr Lewis repeated this, telling The Independent that anyone aged 16 to 18 who had unprotected gay sex was "at risk, and potentially at risk of their lives".
 

George House Trust comment

George House Trust is mystified about what he means by ‘seriously increased risk of HIV.’ Risky sex is risky sex whatever your age. Being 16 or 17 doesn’t make the risk of infection any better or worse. Going back to criminalising 16 and 17 year old gay youth for having a sexual life would probably worsen their risks of HIV infection. Importantly, the age of consent is all about the equality and human rights of his young gay constituents, rights he appears to ignore. And does he really mean to suggest that unprotected gay sex is equivalent to fighting in Afghanistan?
 

‘I’m no expert’ admission
Challenged about his views on the dangers of homosexual sex, he said: "I do not hold myself up as any kind of expert in this and I am willing to be shown I'm wrong if I am wrong, but I honestly don't think I am wrong." George House Trust suggests that when you don't know it makes sense to ask before mouthing off nonsense that reinforces HIV stigma and homophobia.

Conservative gay disarray
His outspoken views have reopened debate about the Conservative party's stance on gay and lesbian rights. Two weeks ago, the shadow Home Secretary, Chris Grayling, suggested that owners of bed-and-breakfast hotels should have the right to turn away gay couples.
 

Seriously increased risk 
The age of consent for gay men was lowered from 18 to 16 in 2000. Dr Lewis wrote last week: "There is a seriously increased risk of HIV infection from male homosexual activity. When it comes to legalising practices that involve serious risk, I believe the higher limit should apply. This is the reason we no longer allow 16- and 17-year-olds into frontline situations in the armed forces, for example."
Dr Lewis, 58, has a history of voting against legal equality for gay people. He opposed adoptions by gay couples and the repeal of Section 28 – a law enacted by Margaret Thatcher's Tory government in 1988 to prevent schools from "promoting" homosexuality.
 

Defending his comments last night, Dr Lewis said he would have supported keeping the age of consent for gay men at 18. He said he had not intended to make the "preposterous suggestion" that gay sex was as dangerous as fighting on the frontline. However, he went on to say that engaging in unprotected gay sex put teenagers "at risk, and potentially at risk of their lives". Dr Lewis added: "It is nevertheless true that someone is just as much dead if they are among one of the much smaller percentage of people who would be unfortunate enough to contract a deadly disease through a form of sexual activity as they are if they are in the frontline and they find themselves being injured or killed."
 

Sacking Call

The Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, urged the Conservative leader to sack Dr Lewis from his shadow cabinet. He said: "[Mr Cameron has] been seeking the votes of gay people ... but [his] frontbench team includes people who are against any notion of homosexual equality. [He needs] to show some leadership and sack Mr Lewis."
 

Last night, the Conservative leadership distanced itself from Dr Lewis' remarks, but allowed him to keep his job as shadow defence minister. " These are Dr Lewis' long held and personal views," a spokesman said. "They are not the view of the Conservative Party and the terms in which he expressed them is wrong. Under this Labour government we have seen a massive increase in HIV infections and STDs across all the population – straight and gay."

Source The Independent

Source Pink News

Image

More details in PinkNews

The letter, which Dr Lewis' office faxed to PinkNews said:

"I was very strongly against lowering the age of consent from 18 to 16. My reasoning was that there is a seriously increased risk of HIV infection arising from male homosexual activity. When it comes to legalising practices that involve serious risk, I believe the higher limit should apply. This is the reason we no longer allow 16 and 17-year-old into front-line situations in the Armed Forces, for example."

NW Gay HIV Stigma and Risks

posted: 04/01/2010

The NW England results of the annual Gay Men’s Sex Survey are now out. ‘Vital Statistics 2008’ gives us the latest information on the prevention needs of gay and bisexual men in the UK and our region.

It also tells us some useful things about HIV stigma across the region, the numbers of men who have never taken a HIV test, and about the numbers who take significant HIV risks.
 

Blackpool – gay hotspot missing
There had to be 20 or more men in a NHS district (Manchester, Liverpool etc) fill in a survey for results from that district to appear in this report.  Unfortunately the gay hotspot of Blackpool only had 17 men fill in the survey, so we can’t say much about gay and bisexual men’s needs there.

Stigma and rejecting men with HIV
This survey asked questions about what undiagnosed men say they would do if a potential sex partner told them he had HIV. Would they change their mind and turn down sex, have sex but be extra careful, have sex just as they planned, or do something else?
 

Men who said they’d reject positive men are showing strong signs of HIV stigma and discrimination. Across NW England half the men said they would reject any HIV positive man for sex. This really discourages diagnosed men from talking and telling any sex partners about HIV.
Things look best for positive men in Manchester and Stockport, but not much better – in Manchester 39% of undiagnosed men say they would reject any positive man for sex.
 

Are George House Trust’s anti-stigma campaigns at Pride helping to cut stigma by rejection locally? It’s difficult to say – in next door Salford the rejection rate is higher – with rejection by almost half the men, like the regional average. HIV rejection is worst of all in Cumbria and Sefton (Merseyside) at 61%, and 56% of undiagnosed men would reject any positive man in Liverpool. [See 19 in the report].

Mixed HIV status relationships
The number of men who have regular partners of a different HIV status is another way of trying to measure how much HIV stigma is about. Sadly it is almost impossible to reach a clear answer from the survey report. In Manchester around 1 in 10 do have a regular partner of a different HIV status. Another 1 in 4 have a partner of the same HIV status, which could be where both men are HIV positive, or both are HIV negative – we just don’t know.

Another 1 in 10 have a regular partner and the man has no idea whether they have the same HIV status or not – a recipe for risking HIV transmission. [See 10 in the report].

Testing or not?
Last year the Health Protection Agency advised that the amount of HIV in Manchester, Salford and Blackpool meant special measures to increase HIV testing are needed and that gay and bisexual men living there should test at least once a year.
 

1 in 5 gay and bisexual men in Manchester have still not tested, ever. Almost as many didn’t test last year but have tested at least once before.

However 28% of Manchester men in the survey have tested HIV positive. That does NOT mean 28% of gay men in Manchester have HIV – just that more men with HIV took part in the survey. A previous study shows the real HIV rate on the scene in the city is about 1 in 10. [See 13 in the report]
 

Risk taking evidence
When men were asked how they rated their chances of passing on or picking up HIV in the next year, 6% think HIV transmission is very or quite likely for them within 12 months.

77% think it is very or quite unlikely, which just shows how many men really are deluding themselves. 63% had also told the survey they had at least one partner with whom they had unprotected sex that year. And 1 in 10 Manchester men reported they had 5 or more partners a year with whom they had anal sex without condoms. [See 14 and 16 in report].
 

We thank all the men who completed either a booklet or the website survey that George House Trust promoted.

NW England 2008 ‘Vital Statistics’ report

Survey questions
UK and English regions reports (including for past years)

Drinking Worsens HIV+ Cardiovascular Risks

posted: 23/12/2009

Heavy drinking increases the risk of cardiovascular disease for men with HIV, a USA study shows. “Hazardous drinking and alcohol abuse or dependence were significantly associated with an increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease as compared with infrequent or moderate drinkers”, they comment.
 

Even 'light-weight' drinking harms more with HIV

What they mean by 'hazardous drinking' may seem pretty light-weight to men on the gay scene in England. They counted anything over 14 alcoholic drinks in one week as hazardous, and six drinks in a single session, more than once a month, as binge-drinking. At Christmas and New Year many men will be drinking well over these.
 

They emphasise that the study shows the risks of heart and other circulation disease harm is there for men with HIV, even after they took account of the usual risks.

We already know drinking is linked to several health problems in people with HIV. These include

• poor adherence to HIV treatments
• liver disease
• worsening HIV disease, as well as a
• bigger risk of cardiovascular disease.

Among HIV negative people, heavy drinking, binge drinking and alcohol dependency, are well known to cause more heart disease and strokes. Is this the same or worse for people with HIV, was the question this study investigated.

So the US investigators studied 4743 HIV positive and negative men veterans from the USA armed forces. Just over half the men (2422, 51%) were HIV-positive. Both HIV-positive and HIV-negative men were likely to be hazardous drinkers, or to binge drink, or be dependant on alcohol - alcoholics.

HIV negative more likely to have some drinking risks

The HIV negative men were statistically more likely to have several traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease than HIV positive men. These risks include

• having high cholesterol,
• diabetes,
• high blood pressure and
• being overweight.

HIV positive men have more of these usual drinking risks

HIV positive men were statistically more likely to

• smoke,
• have hepatitis C, and
• have liver disease.

So the study shows HIV-positive, but not HIV-negative men, who are hazardous drinkers or alcohol dependent have a higher risk of cardiovascular disease.

Similar drinking risks shared by positive and negative men

For both HIV-positive and HIV-negative men, these traditional risk factors 

• being older,
• higher cholesterol,
• high blood pressure, and
• smoking

were also significantly associated with more cardiovascular disease.

Affect of HIV on drinking men

They then looked more closely at how HIV itself affects the risks for men with HIV, by taking out of the equation the traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease.

HIV and drinking – more heart failure, heart disease, cardiovascular disease, strokes
 

They found that hazardous drinking for men with HIV was significantly linked with heart failure; that alcohol dependency was linked to heart disease, and that past alcohol consumption (defined as one or more drink, ever), increased the risk of stroke. Binge drinking increases the risk of cardiovascular disease for those with HIV. [The source quotes how strong these statistical significances are].

“Among HIV-infected veterans, there was a significant increase in the prevalence of cardiovascular disease for hazardous drinking and alcohol abuse”, write the investigators. They suggest that this could partly be explained by the increases in lipids associated with heavy drinking. However, they also note that previous research among this group of US veterans “also demonstrated a temporal and dose-response relationship between alcohol consumption and medication adherence.”

“The effect of alcohol may be more pronounced among those infected with HIV”, conclude the investigators.

How does your own drinking measure up?

One of our earlier articles includes useful weblinks to drink calculators to help you check how much you are drinking and it also tells you where you can get help to cut your drinking down.

Drinking is a common way for men with HIV to manage stress and to socialise, but there is quite a price to pay down the line. As men with HIV live longer because of better HIV treatments, it is more likely men with HIV will die earlier than necessary of alcohol-related cardiovascular disease, [heart attacks, heart failure, strokes, blocked arteries], than of HIV.

Men with HIV who tick these risk boxes, as well as drinking, worsen their life prospects

• smoker
• overweight
• older
• have higher cholesterol
• high blood pressure
• have hepatitis C
• have liver disease
• diabetic.

The more you tick, the higher the risk of harming health and life.

British Heart Foundation page on cardiovasular disease and how to cut your risks

Source

Reference Freiberg and others. The association between alcohol consumption and prevalent cardiovascular diseases among HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2009.