My husband got it that way. He thinks he gave it to me but who knows? He's one of those who aren't affected by the disease and only got tested when I was diagnosed.
I know of a couple of other guys who got it that way too. Once has since died from the disease.
Does anyone think this is the reason HCVis kept quiet, that they try to say its just a druggie disease?
Just think about how much money it would cost the Vets if they had to pay for this like they did for agent orange.
Hi Bronzestar,
Welcome and I hope you can sort out your situation and figure out your best next move. Are you thinking about treating very soon or waiting for what looks like a better combo of drugs to eradicate the virus? This new protocol is currently in trials but may emerge very soon as the new protocol. It's worth your while to learn as much as you can about your options.
You (Bronzestar) say: "I firmly believe that's where I first came in contact with the virus but it could be a number of other things too."
That sums up pretty well what people say when they don't know for sure how they got HCV. I myself say I firmly believe I got it through the doctor or dentist because I can't think how else I got it. Did I really? I'd like to know but no, I don't know and never will.
I also have a firm belief that most people probably don't know for sure.
Looking at your profile picture, I see a very handsome dude and a gorgeously large tatoo. Maybe the tatoo played a role, maybe not. Maybe you had surgery as a kid, maybe you went to the dentist, maybe you played 'blood brothers', maybe, maybe, gosh, so many maybes. And, as Mr. Liver said, transmission could have taken place via airguns. Maybe...
Vietnam, by the way, has the highest rate of HCV in the world, surpassing Egypt. (Egypt's high rate was ironically caused by a 'modern' mass immunization program that failed to use appropriate delivery equipment.) And although I don't consider sex a high risk factor for transmission, there's a notable exception, and that's for very rough sex, for example, rape. With Vietnam having such a remarkably high incidence of HCV and with reports of rape during the war, that might be another possibility in the closet. Maybe....
The thing is to move forward and ask yourself if you're ready to tackle this dam-ned virus. I think the VA provides opportunities to treat (could be wrong but there are people here who could point you in the right direction).
Best of luck. You can do this. Heck, I did.
"This new protocol is currently in trials " s/b, "This new combo is currently in trials."
Read this:
http://hcvets.com/data/transmission_methods/Statements/Page4.htm
I remember years ago a member in a forum told a small group of us that genotype 1's could not be cured of HCV. They asked if we knew any and at that moment...... none of us did know of a member geno 1 who had an SVR. It appeared that the assertion could be correct, but none of us believed it to be true. Hahah; it wasn't.
In this case look at the number of actual women in the Viet Nam forces;
http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/femvetsnam.html
"Army, Navy and Air Force Nurses and Medical Specialists numbered over six thousand.
I don't know the actual number and I don't know what they would include if it were enlarged to be the "Viet Nam Era".
....But.....if that number were correct and one assumed a 10% infection rate....that would leave a mere 600 female vets in our pool to make assumptions about.
One might correctly argue that this pool was not involved in active combat and might have reduced risk.
One might also wonder; were they in the same air gun lines as the other vets? Given the numbers involved I don't even know if airguns were used on women. Even if they were it would seem unlikely that it was in the same mass production innoculations. But once again; I don't know.
I'm not sure that you have made a strong case that the infections were caused by flinching. I have wondered if line pressure could also do it. A bad regulator or more *zeal* could account for that.
Probably everyone agrees that there was drug use in Viet Nam. If it were truly rampant the drug use of either IV or by snorting vectors might leave us with higher infection rates. It also does not answer the question about all the people who deny drug use of how they acquired the virus. I often think that the notion of IV drug use gets "sold" to obfuscate the possibility of nocosomail infection, such as in this case air gun injection. I believe that about 30% of us with HCv don't know how they got it. Surely that percentage may also be reflected in the veteran population.
By the way, as Portann also touched on HCV can be transmitted though acts of violence, such as in hand to hand combat or even in contact sports. Surely this must have also occurred in Viet Nam amoungst Vets, but perhaps less so with women veterans.
I'm not running down the people who administered the vaccines. i wasn't there in either case; the schools or in Nam. What I wrote was that if protocols were not followed the chance of infection would likely rise. Yes, actual RN's or doctors with years of training and practice might do a better job than was seen in the military.
If you read some of those links you'll find that the protocols in using the airguns were far less existent in the 70's and were not adhered to especially in the military. Adults of military age may have very good recollection about the event whereas I wonder how many first graders even remember the day. Perhaps the fact that the protocols were revised and improved and the infection rate dropped could be seen as proof that it was not safe but when certain protocols ARE followed it is far more safe. ; ) It's possible.
I think at the heart of this thread and the upset is that Vets resent being forgotten, feel that they are not supported for their sacrifice, and quite often even blamed for acquiring the infection. Who wouldn't be pi$$ed?
best,
Willy
The term is "nonsocomial infection" and it means "hospital acquired infection". Air-gun acquired infection would not be considered nonsocomial unless the procedure was carried out in a hospital. It's a nice term but it applicability is restricted to hospital acquired infections.
Mike