This topic is out of curiosity. I just want to know how HIV tests are being conducted in Nigeria. I have been in the states for a long time and here there have always been Blood Drive and people are encouraged to donate. I was told that i cannot Donate not because i have a disease but because i was born in West Africa. This topic is related to the HIV antibodies strands that are currently undetectable when the modern tests are conducted. I have been told that even though i have tested Negative to test conducted, they cannot be sure that i do not have the disease from a strand that cannot be detected. I have confirmed this with a couple of Physicians and other medical professionals. So if this is the case the HIV cases in Nigeria could be a much larger percentage than it already is, as in the whole west and central Africa.

This is how avert explains it

There are two types of HIV: HIV-1 and HIV-2. Both types are transmitted by intimate contact, through blood, and from mother to child, and they appear to cause clinically indistinguishable AIDS. However, it seems that HIV-2 is less easily transmitted, and the period between initial infection and illness is longer in the case of HIV-2.

Worldwide, the predominant virus is HIV-1, and generally when people refer to HIV without specifying the type of virus they will be referring to HIV-1. The relatively uncommon HIV-2 type is concentrated in West Africa and is rarely found elsewhere.The strains of HIV-1 can be classified into four groups: the "major" group M, the "outlier" group O and two new groups, N and P. These four groups may represent four separate introductions of simian immunodeficiency virus into humans.The different levels of HIV classification.
Group O appears to be restricted to west-central Africa and group N - a strain discovered in 1998 in Cameroon - is extremely rare. In 2009 a new strain closely relating to gorilla simian immunodeficiency virus was discovered in a Cameroonian woman. It was designated HIV-1 group P.1 More than 90 percent of HIV-1 infections belong to HIV-1 group M and, unless specified, the rest of this page will relate to HIV-1 group M only.

There is a lot more detailed explanation on the website

http://www.avert.org/hiv-types.htm

I want to hear from Physicians and Nurses with the knowledge, preferably Nigerian Physicians, although some Americans can contribute as well. Thank you in advance

wow i never heard f the HIV-2 omg , thanks for posting this. I hope some others can make some meaningful contributions to this discussion.

Wow this is So reviling

No wonder many Americans keep saying that we Africans have strands of AIDs that are undiscovered, I took it as a joking matter but it looks like that is the case. Please i also want to know more

"undiscovered strands of AIDs"?

Never heard that one before.

I'm no medical practictioner but it stands to reason that it's either a person is infected with the virus or not.

Hahahahah, strange indeed!
First, the whites lied that HIV was from West Africa,
Now, the west africans have a type of HIV that is undetectable,
In the future, you all will be good only for making fertilizer and manure,

They are simply afraid becos you may transfer malaria infection to them.

you dey mind them?

Apparently Glaxo or Pfizer just came up with the strand and tested it in remote west Africa. When these ideiots conjure some of these their viral neucloprotein manipulation to create something new, they end up testing their monsters on "dispensible" Africans.

Why will i want to donate my blood to a white anyway?   gotta be a life or death matter before i donate my "bullet proof" blood.

That's just crap!!there's nothing like "undetectable" HIV strain.if the common kits can't pick it up,say the virus is in the window period,it can still be detected using polymerase chain reaction(pcr) or ELISA tests which tests the human dna directly, white people just like to feel smug and superior, The only reason why u can't donate blood if u come from West Africa in my opinion is because of the fear that u may be carrying malaria parasite in your blood, that's all

oyibo will always find a way to rubbish us and relegate us down to under. what kinda rubb ish is dis?
i choose not to be intimidated by there nonsen se

There is a law in the US banning gays from donating since 1983, despite evidence from 1982 in Canada showing spread of HIV to haemophiliacs and from heterosexual couples.

So if you were asked not to donate, why you dey bother yourself?

Foul play! How can they say it's origin is from africa and now it's a different one from theirs?? It's either not true or just mere fabrications,

Lata dem go talk say we b incomplete human being. Damn oyinbo sabi lie and use gramma decieve us no b only hiv 1 and 2 where hiv 0 come go

Scientific claims/theories doesn't necessarily equate to THE TRUTH. Therefore I am labelling this scientific find absolute BULLSHIT.

Nawa o, I know the differences but must the whites always attribute bad things to africa?

hi there is a new Hiv strains from cameroun that the current test kits cannot test am health personel and am telling you the truth

eejo:

hi there is a new Hiv strains from cameroun that the current test kits cannot test am health personel and am telling you the truth

And kits in America where the Op is can't detect it?
Bullsh*t and ABSOLUT Bullsh*t.

eejo:

hi there is a new Hiv strains from cameroun that the current test kits cannot test am health personel and am telling you the truth

since it cant be detected how then did u know its a virus and further more hiv strand

Microbes are highly dynamic, don't be surprised if researchers say they don't know much about the strain. The moral there is not to take unnecessary risks with your health.

Exactly,true or not,dnt be caught unawares

. . . all coloured people should henceforth desist from donating their blood to this white baboons period!

From Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is categorized into two types, HIV-1 and HIV-2. Worldwide, most HIV infections are HIV-1, whereas HIV-2 largely has been confined to persons in or from West Africa (1,2). HIV-1 and HIV-2 have the same routes of transmission, and both can cause acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) (3); however, HIV-2 infections should be differentiated from HIV-1 infections because they are less likely to cause AIDS and their clinical management differs (4,5). CDC's current surveillance case definition for HIV infection applies to both variants of HIV (6) but lacks criteria for differentiating between HIV-1 and HIV-2. To enumerate and describe HIV-2 cases reported in the United States, a working case definition was developed. During 1988--June 2010, a total of 242 HIV-2 cases were reported to CDC. Of these, 166 met the working definition. These HIV-2 cases were concentrated in the Northeast (66%, including 46% in New York City) and occurred primarily among persons born in West Africa (81%). Ninety-seven of the HIV-2 cases also had a positive HIV-1 immunoblot antibody test result (e.g., Western blot). Immunoblot antibody tests currently used to confirm HIV reactive screening tests do not contain reagents specific to HIV-2 and thus are not reliable for identification of HIV-2 infections (7). Additional testing specific to HIV-2 should be considered if HIV-1 test results are atypical or inconsistent with clinical findings, especially for persons from West Africa. If an HIV case is reported to the health department but subsequently identified as HIV-2, health-care providers should update the case report to reflect the correct type.

During 2009--2010, CDC convened a workgroup to develop the working HIV-2 definition used in this report. To meet this working definition, cases had to satisfy one or more of the following three criteria: 1) HIV-1/HIV-2 type-differentiating antibody immunoassay (e.g., Bio-Rad Multispot HIV1/HIV-2 Rapid Test) positive for HIV-2 but negative for HIV-1, 2) positive HIV-2 nucleic acid test (DNA or RNA), 3) positive HIV-2 immunoblot and negative or indeterminate HIV-1 immunoblot. In addition, one case reported in 1991 was accepted based only on a positive radioimmunoprecipitation assay (a now obsolete test). Neither the nucleic acid tests nor the immunoblots have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for diagnosis of HIV-2 infection, but the Bio-Rad Multispot HIV-1/HIV-2 Rapid Test has been approved for differentiation of HIV-2 from HIV-1.

During 1988--June 2010, health departments of the 50 states and the District of Columbia reported to CDC a total of 242 HIV-2 cases, based on a variety of criteria with no formal HIV-2 infection case definition. From that total, 47 reported cases were excluded because they had insufficient identifying information to discern whether or not they were duplicate reports. An additional 29 cases were excluded because they did not meet any of the three working definition criteria.

The remaining 166 cases met one or more of the criteria of the working definition and were analyzed by diagnostic test results, reason for suspecting HIV-2 infection, region of report, country of birth, race/ethnicity, sex, age, and transmission risk factor. Poisson regression was used to assess trends in the annual number of diagnoses. The year of diagnosis was defined as the year of the first positive HIV test, which in some cases was years before recognition that the HIV type was HIV-2.

Of the 166 HIV-2 cases, 113 (68%) met the first criterion of a result positive for HIV-2 but negative for HIV-1 on a type-differentiating antibody immunoassay, 66 (40%) met the second criterion of a positive HIV-2 nucleic acid test, and 58 (35%) met the third criterion of a positive HIV-2 immunoblot and negative or indeterminate HIV-1 immunoblot. Seventy-one (43%) of the 166 cases met more than one of the three criteria. HIV-1 immunoblot results were available for 163 of the HIV-2 cases; 97 (60%) were positive for HIV-1, 63 (39%) were indeterminate, and three (2%) were negative. Of the 97 HIV-2 cases with positive HIV-1 immunoblot results, the diagnosis of HIV-2 was established by a type-differentiating antibody immunoassay in 46 cases, by an HIV-2 nucleic acid test in 22 cases, and by both in 29 cases (Table 1).

Nucleic acid test evidence of HIV-1 coinfection was present in 19 (11%) of the 166 HIV-2 cases, including two with positive qualitative HIV-1 nucleic acid tests and 17 with detectable HIV-1 viral loads, of which the highest level was 1,000--1,999 copies/mL in six cases, 2,000--4,999 copies/mL in seven cases, and >10,000 copies/mL in four cases. HIV-1 nucleic acid test results were negative in 66 (40%) HIV-2 cases and were missing in 81 (49%) HIV-2 cases.

Data were available for 116 HIV-2 cases regarding why HIV-2 might have been suspected initially. Of these, 65 (56%) patients had an indeterminate HIV-1 immunoblot despite a positive HIV-1 or HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody screening test, 47 (41%) had an undetectable HIV-1 viral load despite a positive HIV-1 immunoblot, and four patients (three born in West Africa and one who had visited West Africa) had a negative HIV-1 immunoblot despite a positive HIV-1 or HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody screening test.

Of the 164 HIV-2 patients for whom birthplace was known, 132 (81%) were born in West Africa. Seven (4%) were born in other parts of Africa, and six (4%) in unspecified parts of Africa. Nine (6%) were born in India, five in the United States, three in Europe, and two in Mexico (Table 2). Of the 166 cases of HIV-2 infection, 77 (46%) were reported from New York City, 33 (20%) from elsewhere in the Northeast, 24 (15%) from the South, 18 (11%) from the Midwest, and 14 (8%) from the West. Among the patients, 89% were non-Hispanic blacks, 58% were men, and the median age at diagnosis of HIV infection was 39 years (range: 21--76 years).

No transmission risk factor was identified in 120 (72%) of the 166 cases, including 78 cases among persons with a history of heterosexual contact but whose sex partners had unknown infection status or were known to be uninfected. The reported risk factors for the remaining 88 cases were heterosexual contact with a sex partner known to be HIV-infected (38 patients, 23%), male-to-male sexual contact (four, 2%), and injection-drug use (four, 2%). Of the 50 women aged 15--44 years at diagnosis, 24 (48%) were pregnant at or after HIV-2 diagnosis. No children born to these 24 women were reported to be HIV-infected, but follow-up information was missing for six of the children born after their mother's diagnosis.

Poisson regression indicated that the annual number of HIV-2 diagnoses in the United States increased significantly from 1987 to 2009; however, the increase might be the result of surveillance artifact. No significant trends in HIV-2 diagnoses were observed during 1990--1999 (mean: 4.3 diagnoses per year; range: 1--, or during 2000--2009 (mean: 12.0 per year; range: 8--19). The annual number increased abruptly from two in 1999 to 12 in 2000, the year that New York began confidential name-based reporting of HIV infection cases in addition to AIDS reporting. Similar results were obtained when the trend analyses included all suspected cases that were excluded from other analyses (Figure).

The 166 HIV-2 cases constituted only 0.01% of the more than 1.4 million U.S. cases of HIV infection diagnosed during 1987--2009 (unadjusted for reporting delay). Of the 5,284 HIV infections reported in the United States among persons born in West Africa, 132 (3%) were HIV-2 infections. Among the HIV-infected persons born in West Africa, the percentage identified as HIV-2 cases varied significantly (p<0.05, chi square test) by reporting region: 5% in New York City, 2% in the rest of the Northeast, 2% in the Midwest, 2% in the West, and 1% in the South.

Reported by
Lucia V. Torian, PhD, Bur of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control, New York City Dept of Health and Mental Hygiene. Richard M. Selik, MD, Bernard Branson, MD, S. Michele Owen, PhD, Timothy Granade, MS, R. Luke Shouse, MD, M. Patricia Joyce, MD, Danuta Pieniazek, PhD, Richard Kline, MS, Div of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention, CDC. Corresponding contributor: Richard M. Selik, rselik@cdc.gov, 404-639-4495.

Editorial Note
The results of the analyses described in this report indicate that HIV-2 infections in the United States are rare, concentrated in the Northeast, and limited mainly to persons born in West Africa. Regional differences in the percentage of reported HIV cases caused by HIV-2 might be, in part, a result of the nonuniform geographic distribution of U.S. residents born in West Africa. New York is a major gateway for African immigrants to the United States (.

However, regional differences in the percentage of HIV cases caused by HIV-2 also could be the result of variations in completeness of diagnosis and reporting of HIV-2 by laboratories and state HIV surveillance programs. In particular, the large percentage of HIV-2 cases reported from New York City might have resulted, in part, from an increased focus on ascertainment of HIV-2 cases by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, which has conducted active investigations to identify HIV-2 infections (9) and issued an advisory to clinicians regarding diagnostic testing for HIV-2. The percentage of HIV-2 diagnoses based on an HIV-2 DNA test was several times higher among cases reported from New York City (68%), where many cases were diagnosed by the city's public health laboratory, than among cases from the four other regions (range: zero to 26%).

The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, the surveillance case definition for HIV infection and the working HIV-2 definition used in this analysis are intended primarily for analysis of epidemiologic trends and associations and might be inappropriate for other purposes, such as the clinical management of patients, which might require diagnostic considerations beyond the criteria used for the case definition. CDC currently is reviewing the HIV surveillance case definition to identify areas for revision, including the addition of specific criteria for HIV-2. Second, the 166 HIV-2 infections described in this report are likely an underestimate of HIV-2 cases in the United States. Many of the 76 suspected cases excluded from the analysis because of inadequate data on test results or missing identifiers might be actual HIV-2 cases. Other cases might not have been diagnosed because diagnostic tests specific for HIV-2 (e.g., DNA test or type-differentiating antibody immunoassay) were not widely used, and some cases might not have been recognized because of negative or persistently indeterminate results on assays designed primarily to detect HIV-1 antibodies. Finally, although 11% of HIV-2 cases had nucleic acid evidence of possible coinfection with HIV-1, the full extent of coinfection could not be assessed because HIV-1 nucleic acid test results were missing for 49% of the HIV-2 cases. In addition, 13 of the 17 detectable HIV-1 viral loads were <5,000 copies/mL, raising the possibility that they might be falsely positive.

Additional specific testing for HIV-2 should be considered if test results for HIV-1 are inconsistent with one another, inconclusive, or imply the absence of HIV infection despite clinical evidence suggesting its presence, particularly if the patient was born in or had other associations with areas such as West Africa, where HIV-2 infection is prevalent. Suspected HIV-2 cases should be reported to state or local health departments, which can conduct supplemental diagnostic tests for HIV-2 or arrange for them to be done at the CDC laboratory. In every state, confirmed HIV infection diagnoses are required by law or regulation to be reported to the health department.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6029a3.htm

Agnesqueen:

This topic is out of curiosity. I just want to know how HIV tests are being conducted in Nigeria. I have been in the states for a long time and here there have always been Blood Drive and people are encouraged to donate. I was told that i cannot Donate not because i have a disease but because i was born in West Africa. This topic is related to the HIV antibodies strands that are currently undetectable when the modern tests are conducted. I have been told that even though i have tested Negative to test conducted, they cannot be sure that i do not have the disease from a strand that cannot be detected. I have confirmed this with a couple of Physicians and other medical professionals. So if this is the case the HIV cases in Nigeria could be a much larger percentage than it already is, as in the whole west and central Africa.

This is how avert explains it

There is a lot more detailed explanation on the website

http://www.avert.org/hiv-types.htm

I want to hear from Physicians and Nurses with the knowledge, preferably Nigerian Physicians, although some Americans can contribute as well. Thank you in advance

Kudos to talking about it, disregard the idiotic retorts.

Somorin#1:

Kudos to talking about it, disregard the idiotic retorts.

Who is more of an idiotic dolt? One who has a brain, uses it to reason and sieve the truth from a bunch of unconfirmed data/information OR one who absorbs everything thrown at him by western scientists?

phreakabit:

Who is more of an idiotic dolt? One who has a brain, uses it to reason and sieve the truth from a bunch of unconfirmed date/information OR one who absorbs everything thrown at him by western scientists?

I rest my case.

Somorin#1:

I rest my case.

Indeed you should. . . .

There is every likelihood of this happening! Micro organisms keeps mutating and various strains emerging, predominantly due to misuse of antibiotics! These new strains emerges as defence mechanism to make them resistant to drugs!
Now ave always heard of HIV 1 and 11 but am not an experts on RVD(retro viral disease)! However the issue of it originating from Africa is not incomprehensible! When you visit these Donor agencies that help people living with HIV\AIDs your hearts bleeds! Now these organizations operate in such a way that after a while( maybe 5 or 6yrs) depending on the contract, they close down! Eventually plans are made to open a new one, maybe the same organization or another doing essentially the same thing! The time span it will take them to reopen what happens to their patients? These people are left with No drugs! And the effectiveness of this therapy depends on consistency of the medication More often than not when the patients is placed on these drugs you find out that they become resistant to then and then you have to change the therapy!
The disadvantage of this is the development of these new strains that now become stronger in combating these drugs! They may not be common ( as they are emerging) but I don't doubt their existence at all! And infact more of these are yet to be discovered!

I spoke with a frined that did HIV test recently and she did confirm that some strands can take up to 6 months to show up in the system HIV 1 can take up to 2 weeks, that is what she was told in her counselling

27naira:

you dey mind them?

Apparently Glaxo or Pfizer just came up with the strand and tested it in remote west Africa. When these ideiots conjure some of these their viral neucloprotein manipulation to create something new, they end up testing their monsters on "dispensible" Africans.

Why will i want to donate my blood to a white anyway? gotta be a life or death matter before i donate my "bullet proof" blood.

Agreed the claims of the topic under discussion are questionable

but, @ the bolded - so if you're in a life 'n death situation, would you be happy to recieve blood from a white? I ask becuause your statemtent is a bit strong. . .

Agnesqueen:

This topic is out of curiosity. I just want to know how HIV tests are being conducted in Nigeria. I have been in the states for a long time and here there have always been Blood Drive and people are encouraged to donate. I was told that i cannot Donate not because i have a disease but because i was born in West Africa. This topic is related to the HIV antibodies strands that are currently undetectable when the modern tests are conducted. I have been told that even though i have tested Negative to test conducted, they cannot be sure that i do not have the disease from a strand that cannot be detected. I have confirmed this with a couple of Physicians and other medical professionals. So if this is the case the HIV cases in Nigeria could be a much larger percentage than it already is, as in the whole west and central Africa.

This is how avert explains it

There is a lot more detailed explanation on the website

http://www.avert.org/hiv-types.htm

I want to hear from Physicians and Nurses with the knowledge, preferably Nigerian Physicians, although some Americans can contribute as well. Thank you in advance

A predominant reason cited by hospitals in the US for refusing blood donation from inhabitants of the tropical regions of the world has to do with the presence of a latent (but not dead) form of plasmodium in their red blood cells. If you have had malaria before, chances are that a latent form of the causative organisms remains in your blood stream for up to 3 years. Since most hospitals in the US lack the expertise/experience of detecting malaria in the blood stream, they would rather not risk transferring malaria to their people which invariably offer no resistance to malaria. Also see link below

http://www.redcrossblood.org/donating-blood/eligibility-requirements/eligibility-criteria-alphabetical-listing#arc7