Interesting stuff there Emma. I had no idea that there would have to be 5minutes of airtight seal for something bad to potentially happen. Good to know.

I have also heard this rumor, but never heard about any victims. Something I know for sure, it exists a crime trend around here about using a hypodermic needle as an offensive weapon during hold-up thefts. This is pretty lame.

Just thought i'd mention that about a week ago, I found a melted hypodermic stuck to a sweater when I pulled it out of a laundromat dryer... and as I stood there going "Aaaaugh!", some lady came up and told me a variant of this legend.

100% more likely that some diabetic (or junkie) left it in a pocket or something. I suppose it's payback for all the change I take out of the dryers there.

I've heard it be used as a threat by those animal rights activists. they threaten a person who has connections with an animal testing lab and say something like (in a letter) "when you least expect it, walking down a road you'll feel a little prick and it'll be me infecting you with AIDS"

Posted by mada Heroin addicts have more important things to worry about than trying to infect the general public with HIV.

Werd.

stuff like that makes me more paranoid then any

Meh even if heroin addicts DID do this, it's not like you'd become an addict after pricking yourself on a needle and barely injecting a few milliters of fluid into your skin. At the very worst (assuming this was on your hand) you'd get a nasty "heroin blister" on the site of injection which would slowly dissolve into your body, probably causing a high no more intense than Oxycotin taken as directed.

Posted by Horus Meh even if heroin addicts DID do this, it's not like you'd become an addict after pricking yourself on a needle and barely injecting a few milliters of fluid into your skin. At the very worst (assuming this was on your hand) you'd get a nasty "heroin blister" on the site of injection which would slowly dissolve into your body, probably causing a high no more intense than Oxycotin taken as directed.

...or you'd die of nervous anxiety thinking you'd been infected with HIV from a junky's shitty gear.

Posted by KublaKhan ...or you'd die of nervous anxiety thinking you'd been infected with HIV from a junky's shitty gear.

^-^

I work in a needle exchange, and no, junkies don't do stuff like that. They do throw away their needles on the streets, but I'd be more concerned about Hepa C than HIV. Also, yes, HIV dies rather soon as sy mentioned earlier...

HIV will only survive for so long outside the body.

The strongest strain lasts 72 hours.

Posted by Emma Peel You'd need to form an airtight seal around the wound for a minimum of five minutes....

Source? (Sorry to necropost).

Posted by MindHacker Source? (Sorry to necropost).

Christ. My source was a teacher I had in HIGH SCHOOL, who had various PhDs and doctorates and had studied HIV/AIDS and numerous other diseases in depth and in person. We did a whole unit on HIV/AIDS, if I REMEMBER correctly. Source after 4 years? You're lucky I even SAW your post, to reply at all!

Posted by Emma Peel Christ. My source was a teacher I had in HIGH SCHOOL, who had various PhDs and doctorates and had studied HIV/AIDS and numerous other diseases in depth and in person. We did a whole unit on HIV/AIDS, if I REMEMBER correctly. Source after 4 years? You're lucky I even SAW your post, to reply at all!

Ok, well, I officially call BS. The amount known about aids has grown exponentially in the past years, and I'm gonna say that you don't need an "air tight seal" nor do you need 5 minutes. Normally, I'd just let a thread like this die, but those are serious misunderstandings with potentially fatal consequences...

Posted by MindHacker Ok, well, I officially call BS. The amount known about aids has grown exponentially in the past years, and I'm gonna say that you don't need an "air tight seal" nor do you need 5 minutes. Normally, I'd just let a thread like this die, but those are serious misunderstandings with potentially fatal consequences...

You can't call BS on something stated in 2004. WTF? You said it yourself -- the amount known about AIDS has grown exponentially in the past years -- so I think the information you're calling BS on is a little dated.

Should I let the medical profession that you're going to be calling BS on frontal lobotomies, as well? OMGZ NOES!

Posted by Emma Peel You can't call BS on something stated in 2004. WTF? You said it yourself -- the amount known about AIDS has grown exponentially in the past years -- so I think the information you're calling BS on is a little dated. Should I let the medical profession that you're going to be calling BS on frontal lobotomies, as well? OMGZ NOES!

Of course you can, the medical profession does so all the time. It doesn't mean you were intentionally misleading anyone, but the data is indeed worth less than even bovine manure. Probably less, as it could kill someone, and fecal material has potential positive uses in fertilizer. _{(Also your leetspeek suffers from excessive pluralizations, and it makes you look even less in touch with trends than you likely are, such as when someones mother says things like "word up, dawg, those some groovy kicks ya got there son, way hip.")}

Posted by MindHacker Of course you can, the medical profession does so all the time. It doesn't mean you were intentionally misleading anyone, but the data is indeed worth less than even bovine manure. Probably less, as it could kill someone, and fecal material has potential positive uses in fertilizer. (Also your leetspeek suffers from excessive pluralizations, and it makes you look even less in touch with trends than you likely are, such as when someones mother says things like "word up, dawg, those some groovy kicks ya got there son, way hip.")

Whatever, kid. The medical profession doesn't "call BS" on outdated information - advances are a given and nobody "calls BS." They also don't go around boards on Urban Exploration websites, looking for 4-year-old posts to specifically point out that the information contained in them is outdated. Especially when it comes to advances in medical technology and medical knowledge, in general, most people realize that 4-year-old information is going to be quite a bit outdated.

If you happen to have any more personal attacks you'd like to throw my way, I suggest you begin PMing me and keep threads on-topic. Otherwise, I have far better things to do than sit here and feebly try to figure out which of us has a bigger stick.

If by "leetspeak," you mean "use of correct grammar," then I'm guilty, as charged.

Anything else, take it to PM. Consider this your warning.



Edit: Actually, "calling BS" on the airtight seal thing is incorrect. I'm going to repeat what I said four years ago. Oxygen deactivates and eventually KILLS HIV/AIDS, therefore, you'd need an "airtight seal" in order to effectively transmit the disease.

Unless, of course, the atmosphere on YOUR home planet is nitrogen-rich, instead of oxygen-rich. Here on Earth, we have an oxygen-rich atmosphere, which proves detrimental to viruses -- even HIV/AIDS.

Posted by MindHacker Ok, well, I officially call BS. The amount known about aids has grown exponentially in the past years, and I'm gonna say that you don't need an "air tight seal" nor do you need 5 minutes. Normally, I'd just let a thread like this die, but those are serious misunderstandings with potentially fatal consequences...

It would be an airtight seal, no question. As to whether it takes exactly five minutes, who cares? Would you call BS if it took four minutes? Six minutes? The point Mrs Peel was making was that it takes longer than casual contact permits.

HIV has been transmitted via knife-wound. Which means that the blood was not sealed in some air-tight container, but only protected from gaseous oxygen (there is dissolved oxygen in all blood, so obviously not all oxygen will destroy it) by layers of blood over that. And then the contact, rather than lasting 4 or 6 minutes, lasted seconds.

And no, but medical types already know this. Stupid kids do read these boards however, and they may make flawed decisions based on bad facts. Oh, and medical types do call BS on each other. Case in point: the spermicidal properties of coca-cola. They just released two studies one after another affirm and then denying the fact.

Warning of what? You're going to ban me because I said you were uncool?

Posted by MindHacker HIV has been transmitted via knife-wound. Which means that the blood was not sealed in some air-tight container, but only protected from gaseous oxygen (there is dissolved oxygen in all blood, so obviously not all oxygen will destroy it) by layers of blood over that. And then the contact, rather than lasting 4 or 6 minutes, lasted seconds.

Link?