A.I.D.S. patients not less infectious, experts say

Press, 21 February 1987, Page 31

A.I.D.S. patients not less infectious, experts say

PA Wellington People with A.I.D.S. may be more infectious than those who carry the virus but have no symptoms, the A.I.D.S. Advisory Committee has said.

“The committee wishes to highlight that there is no reason to believe that people with (full-blown) A.I.D.S. are less infectious than asymtomatic A.I.D.S. antibody-positive people, said the committee’s chairman, Dr Richard Meech. “The evidence indicates, if anything, the opposite to be the case, i.e. they are more likely to be capable of spreading H.I.V. (human immunodeficiency virus), the cause of A.1.D.5.”

Dr Meech was replying to recently reported claims by a medical research scientist, Dr Carlton Gajdusek, that full-blown A.I.D.S. patients did not spread the disease. . . ...

Dr Gajdusek, an Ameri-can-based joint winner of the Nobel Prize in medicine, said at the scientific congress in Palmerston North last month that mass hysteria about A.I.D.S. patients was “ballyhoo.”

He said the dangers of catching the virus from a patient with, full-blown symptoms were virtually non-existent and that the contagious people were those who carried the virus but did not have symptoms;

Dr Meech said the committee considererd that the claims should be corrected urgently.

The. committee was "gravely concerned” that Dr Gajusek’s attitude should not become widespread. Precautions against infection had to be taken by health-care workers dealing with the blood or body fluids of people with A.I.D.S. and by their sexual partners. The shar-

ing of contaminated intravenous needles or syringes was also dangerous and should be avoided, Dr Meech said. An Australian A.I.D.S. expert, Dr David Cooper, also confirmed the committee’s rebuttal of Dr Gajdusek’s claims. Dr Cooper told the “Dominion” newspaper it was “absolutely untrue” that . patients with fullblown A.I.D.S. could not transmit the disease. Ample scientific evidence showed that anybody infected with the virus could theoretically transmit it through sexual activity, blood tranfusions, or intravenous needles and syringes, he said. In practical terms, it was unlikely that a seriously ill A.I.D.S. patient would pass on the disease because the patient would probably be too ill to engage in sexual activities, would not desire illegal intravenous drugs, and would not be giving

blood. Health-care workers were potentially at risk to the disease if they suffered a needle-prick injury from people with A.I.D.S.

Dr Cooper is director of the National Health and Medical Research Clinic’s special A.I.D.S. epidemiology unit at the A.I.D.S. clinic, in Sydney.

Dr Meech backed his views with reference to specific research and published findings.