My supervisor said he read on some military website that suicide bombers are intentionally being infected with the virus, and have been for a long time. The idea is to mist the infected blood and pass the syndrome to a lot of people.
I ain’t buying it, but is it true? And would it work?
I’m asking for factual answers. I know how it sounds.
Peace
mangeorge
Nothing on Snopes about it, so who knows where it came from…
It could work, in theory. I’m not sure about the transmission of HIV by inhaled aerosols, but there have been cases of transmission when blood drops come into contact with mucous membranes (I’ll look for a cite). Also, if people have gaping wounds and infected blood gets into them, the virus may get in. In the lab, working with blood, we try to keep aerosols to a minimum, because there’s at least a tiny chance that something could be transmitted through the droplets. So I can’t see why this sort of thing wouldn’t stand at least a chance of infecting a few people in the direct vicinity.
As far as I know the jury’s still out on exactly how many virus particles need to get into you to infect you, and I think it also depends on the person.
It’d be unlikely to infect many folks, based on what I know.
Epidemiology indicates so far that what is needed for infectivity is a fairly good sized bolus of blood (1/2 to 1 cc, perhaps) with a fairly high viral load in it which ends up under the skin of the victim where it can be rapidly absorbed into the circulating blood stream. Meet all those criteria and the infectivity rate (last time I checked anyway) is still around 1% per incident.
Such attacks would certainly invoke terror. But they wouldn’t spread HIV too much. Of course, even 1 case spread that way (or any way) is a tragedy, but still…
Interesting.
Why the anti-aerosol measures in labs, then? Overkill, to be really really safe? Or are other diseases (Hepatitis B comes to mind) more easily transmitted this way than HIV?
Probably because ya just never know, and even if the transmission rate by that method is a tenth of a percent, eventually someone will get it via aerosolized blood.
The basic problem is that we lack data on just how infective aerosolized, viremic blood really is.
I brought up the hepatitis thing too, but none of us know much about medicine.
Aside from practical considerations, though, wouldn’t it go (very strongly) against Islam to introduce such an impurity into one’s body?
There are a number of diseases with airborne vectors. There is a strain of ebola, forex that is airborne, as well as a variety of bubonic plague. It’s just AIDS that’s not really a concern for that vector.
I remember being told (in some health class or something) that HIV is quickly destroyed by sunlight. Is this true? Wouldn’t this render this particular delivery method ineffective?
Lots of viruses are quickly destroyed by sunlight (specifically the UV component), so this wouldn’t be something unique to HIV.
Traditionally, HIV, Hep B & C are blood-borne only, not via air spread
Against Islam? Probably. Against the twisted parody of a religion the suicide bombers practice, and call Islam? Who knows.
If terrorists were actually doing this, or people believed they were doing this, it would demoralize medical responders, police, the military, and family and friends of the victims, and deter them from doing their jobs. Deter them from acting to help the injured, take the bodies for burial, clean up or repair the site, etc.
This would increase the effectiveness of the suicide attack.
So just spreading the rumor (especially if unverifiable) would increase the effectiveness of the suicide bombing. Spreading this “information” assists terrorists in their effectiveness.
You might inform your supervisor of this, and see if he wants pass this dampening concept back to wherever he got the original idea.
Just mulling on it.
Knowing a patient had AIDS never deterred me from taking care of them when I was a surgery resident. Nor anyone else I knew. Some of them had been through trauma and had blood everywhere. Draw your gloves on and go in and do whatever you can for suffering human life. It’s what we do.
Think I speak for picunurse, QtM, and many others in the medical and emergency responder community when I saw we would not be deterred at all. At all.
OK, how about a Hepetitus-infected bomber?
Really? I readily admit that my ignorance of biology is all-encompassing, but the above would seem to imply that the risk of getting AIDS/HIV through unprotected sex is practically nil. I mean 1cc of blood would look like an awful lot if it was coming out of your reproductive organs. What am I not understanding?
There’s not much sunlight on the London Underground.
Sorry, that should have been 0.5 to 1 cc exposure, with lesser amounts getting into the tissue. And half a cc isn’t all that much. And an unlucky person who gets a single drop from an infected individual falling right into an open lesion as small at a hangnail may get a sufficient inoculum.
Again, the viral load needs to be significant, too.
Also, we’re still slowly learning about just how much it takes to get infected. It’s not like we do human studies.
Do we have much statistics about medical staff who get exposed to AIDS blood via needle accidents (there is a propper name for such accidents that I can’t remember). Is there careful followup on any medical staff who gets such a prick during work.
Not to mention in the case of a suicide bomber…heat and shock from the explosion.
Here are some statistics - scroll down to see things in table format.
All hospitals have a Post-Exposure Prophylaxis protocol that’s put into action when a needlestick injury occurs. The blood they’ve been exposed to is tested for HIV, and the lab worker’s blood is watched for a while to check for infection. Meanwhile, they start on a combination of antiviral drugs, just in case. It’s not guaranteed to prevent infection, but it’s the best we’ve got for now. The best way, of course, is to prevent the needlesticks and blood exposure in the first place, which is why we use special containers for disposal of sharp waste, and why we try to minimize our contact with blood as much as possible by automating as many tests as we can.
Some hospitals are even using some fun needle safety devices to cap off a needle immediately after use. Just flip the plastic over the needle avter you’ve drawn blood or injected medication, and there’s no way you can poke yourself with it afterwards. They’re expensive, though, so not everyone’s using them.
