See I looked my medical history up on line. In the diagnosis code section it says:
Diagnosis: HEPATITIS C CARRIE : V02.62
But he has written: 72 weeks of Interferon. Now undetectable. Seen by GI in NYC and Westchester
So I guess diagnostically since we carry the antibodies still we are considered carriers - which doesn't seem correct to me at all since we can't give it to anybody. Archaic terminology.
Medical terminology doesn't always evolve appropriately, and lots of docs will still use older, antiquated terms which further confuses patients. Hopefully as understanding of hep c grows there will be more precise usage of language, but oftentimes doctors refer to positive antibodies for hcv as someone being a carrier. Nygirl is right, it's archaic.
In the purest scientific term, being a 'carrier' doesn't mean you pass on disease, though; rather, it simply points to some apparent detectable 'trait' that demonstrates some aspect of the disease in the individual -- in this case, the presence of antibodies. Because there are rare cases of relapse post long-term clearance, 'carrier' is not as yet deemed 'wrong' to use from a medical standpoint. So bottom line is, anyone who has hcv antibodies could be labelled a hep c "carrier", but that term does not address whether one has detectable viral load or not.
Congratulations on continued undetectable virus in your treatment! Your stats are looking real good for SVR! Wishing you continued success. ~eureka
She is being told she is a "carrier". Can someone help me with that? Either you have hep c, or you don't. but a carrier?
_________________________________________________________________
Ok, In answer to your question I tried to google the book but only the newest book would come up so I have the book I'm talking about and I'll write what the book says. Page 161 of Dr Melissa Palmer's book Hepatitis & Liver Disease.
Those With Normal ALT Levels
Approximately one-third of all people with chronic hepatitis C have persistently normal ALT levels, despite having elevated viral loads (HCV RNA). The exact significance of this finding is not known and may, in fact, vary from person to person. Some experts believe that these people may never have serious liver disease, and thus, have been referred to as " healthy chronic carriers".
Skipping a couple of paragraphs, this is part of the last part on page 161.
So, should people with persistently normal ALT levels be treated? Well the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) consensus statement in 1997 regarding the management of hepatitis c recommended that people with persistently normal ALT levels refrain from treatment,
Well there it is in a nutshell. That said, the book was published in 2000 and her new book does not mention the above sentiment at all. I'm not surprised as it's full of incorrect information.
Hey I think I just found the link and it looks like this doctor still says the same stuff on page 128 of the new book. Here it is if you want to check it out!
http://books.google.com/books?id=Pf5j8RgzkRMC&pg=PA128&lpg=PA128&dq=and+thus,+have+been+referred+to+as+%22+healthy+chronic+carriers%22.&source=bl&ots=Jsi879bwy8&sig=4mk45s48fWZyijin-dcBQXJiMqA&hl=en&ei=fJnkTIL-EI_4sAPa7OzhCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=and%20thus%2C%20have%20been%20referred%20to%20as%20%22%20healthy%20chronic%20carriers%22.&f=false
I had persistently normal ALTs for years, yet my viral load was 6,000,000 and I was Stage 2 Grade 2 when I got my biopsy.... so that opinion is obviously not correct.
Diane
Here is Wikipedia's definition .... kinda:
Asymptomatic carrier, a person or organism infected with an infectious disease agent, but displaying no symptoms.
Once we are SVR we aren't infected with an infectious disease agent, so we can't be carriers. Since antibodies aren't infectious, that can't be what they are talking about.
Jean: What kind of doctor told your friend she was a carrier?
Diane
Most of us are 'asymptomatic carriers' of chicken pox but we're not actively infected.
All people with hep c were 'infected' at one point or another, regardless of current status, which actually still fits the less than sufficient wiki interpretation given above.
Another way of thinking about it is being an asymptomatic 'carrier' of a genetic disease as opposed to an infectious disease, lets say. You have the presence of something in your blood that shows a marker for an environmental or genetic exposure or condition, but you cannot cause disease all by yourself (or infect another).
It's not the best terminology, but it's not wrong either.