English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In other words, is it inevitable that the disease will be passed on genetically?

How about in a scenario in which the parent has HIV laying dormant when the child is born, and then it takes effect some time after the child is born?

2006-11-07 05:13:42 · 6 answers · asked by Telltale Muffin 3 in Health Diseases & Conditions STDs

Awesome, thanks for the answers. It really helped me out a lot.

2006-11-07 05:34:59 · update #1

6 answers

HIV is not passed on genetically. It is transmissible. With pregancy and childbirth, it usually occurs in the birth canal-childbirth though a beautiful process is also bloody and traumatic.

But every child born of a known HIV positive parent is tested and treated prophylactically. This treatment really decreases the amount of babies who acquire HIV in the birthing process. The child is then tested at increments, about every 6 month for the first couple of years. If at the 24 mo. mark, the child is still negative, then the HIV negative diagnosis holds. If the child tests positive at or around the 24 mo. mark, the child has his/her own antibodies to HIV and is really positive.

The confusion of HIV and childbirth happens because babies are born with their mom's antibodies to lots of viruses, it keeps them safe until they develop their own antibodies-meaning their own immune system matures-this starts happening after the first few months of life.

2006-11-07 05:40:35 · answer #1 · answered by gottaplaygirl 4 · 0 0

HIV is a virus, not something genetic.
There is no gurantee that the child will have HIV but there is a very high chance. Like 99%. But the chances can be reduced if the woman takes anti-viral medication, like AZT, while pregnant.
It is the same situation if the HIV is dormant.

2006-11-07 13:22:31 · answer #2 · answered by christigmc 5 · 0 0

No it is not. As a matter of fact for the first few years of HIV testing the babies were all diagnosed as having the disease. That is because they were only testing for the anitbodies back then, and the babies all had the antibodies but a vast majority did not have HIV. As a matter of fact they are the most HIV resistant people around and many are contributing to the search for a vaccine to duplicate the natural antibodies.

2006-11-07 13:24:09 · answer #3 · answered by K M 4 · 0 0

No. It can vary between one in two and one in three infants born to HIV-positve mothers. Most will test positive for a few months to a year, and then go to negative. The mother can take certain medications to help prevent transmission to the infant she is carrying, but nothing is 100%.

2006-11-07 17:09:09 · answer #4 · answered by Dovie 5 · 0 0

you know that HIV is a virus and its not Genetic deseas
so if parents have HIV children may dont have it
but more times they will get it from their parents

2006-11-07 13:18:22 · answer #5 · answered by mona 2 · 0 0

no usually a 50/50 chance

2006-11-07 16:06:25 · answer #6 · answered by sexydee_lpn 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers