Aa
outer shell query
Hi there,
I had an environmental exposure and have spent the last couple of days searching the internet to see if it really was an exposure or not. It was in a clinical setting with a needle (the blood potentially on the outside of the needle) and introduced into my vein.
My internet searching of reputable sites has come up with the following and I am curious to know if I am correct.
The outer layer of the HIV virus is like a soap bubble, once exposed to many environmental factors this outer shell will literally pop like a soap bubble and render the virus unable to infect as it needs this outer shell to latch onto cells within the body. This happens within seconds.
1.What I take from this is that within a few seconds in the environment the virus may still be 'alive' but simply canot infect as it does not have this outer shell? Am I right? Hence why environmental transmission does not occur.
2. if fluid does get out of the body the transfer must be immediate i.e massive gaping wound with blood literally pouring into it?
If I am correct in what I have found then it means that my situation of blood on needle = transmission is toally impossinble as the outer shell would not be intact. There was a least 30 seconds between the blood being put on the needle and then inserted into my vein
Please tell me if I am correct as this then means that I have an absolute no risk situation.
I had an environmental exposure and have spent the last couple of days searching the internet to see if it really was an exposure or not. It was in a clinical setting with a needle (the blood potentially on the outside of the needle) and introduced into my vein.
My internet searching of reputable sites has come up with the following and I am curious to know if I am correct.
The outer layer of the HIV virus is like a soap bubble, once exposed to many environmental factors this outer shell will literally pop like a soap bubble and render the virus unable to infect as it needs this outer shell to latch onto cells within the body. This happens within seconds.
1.What I take from this is that within a few seconds in the environment the virus may still be 'alive' but simply canot infect as it does not have this outer shell? Am I right? Hence why environmental transmission does not occur.
2. if fluid does get out of the body the transfer must be immediate i.e massive gaping wound with blood literally pouring into it?
If I am correct in what I have found then it means that my situation of blood on needle = transmission is toally impossinble as the outer shell would not be intact. There was a least 30 seconds between the blood being put on the needle and then inserted into my vein
Please tell me if I am correct as this then means that I have an absolute no risk situation.
No one has been infected by a needlestick injury outside of an occupational exposure or IV drug users who share needles.
Your fear is irrational.
Your fear is irrational.
No matter what a nurse would never do anything like that.
Even so people who are going to give blood are not going to have risks that they are currently concerned about.
Even so people who are going to give blood are not going to have risks that they are currently concerned about.
sounds paranoid but it was at a blood drive. Tons of people, harrassed nurse and her hygiene was not the best. Just worried about cross contamination from her hands to the needle.
Like I said sounds paranoid which is why I researched it, I just wanted to make sure that the facts that I found where correct and and that I was not in a risk situation if there was blood on my needle.
What I found was that within seconds of environemtnal exposure this 'outer shell' gets destroyed rendering the virus unable to infect. Which I figured if correct, meant I had NO RISK at all.
Just wanted to make sure that you guys agreed and that the info i rearched was sound.
Like I said sounds paranoid which is why I researched it, I just wanted to make sure that the facts that I found where correct and and that I was not in a risk situation if there was blood on my needle.
What I found was that within seconds of environemtnal exposure this 'outer shell' gets destroyed rendering the virus unable to infect. Which I figured if correct, meant I had NO RISK at all.
Just wanted to make sure that you guys agreed and that the info i rearched was sound.
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the HIV Prevention Community
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
Can I get HIV from surfaces, like toilet seats?
Can you get HIV from casual contact, like hugging?
Frequency of HIV testing depends on your risk.
Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) may help prevent HIV infection.
