i don't know how sperm donation works.
is the sperm exposed to open air or do they have
a system where you deposit it into a vaccum?
anyways, i thought hiv can't survive in open air.
so how can hiv stay alive in sperm that is
donated? from what i understant hiv is not able
to survive for more than a few seconds in open air.
am i correct on this?
thanks for anyones help.

<ml34b@hotmail.com> wrote in message
May 5, 7:09 PM (ET)

By DAVID CRARY

NEW YORK (AP) - To the dismay of gay-rights activists, the Food and Drug Administration is
about to implement new rules recommending that any man who has engaged in homosexual sex in the
previous five years be barred from serving as an anonymous sperm donor.

The FDA has rejected calls to scrap the provision, insisting that gay men collectively pose a
higher-than-average risk of carrying the AIDS virus. Critics accuse the FDA of stigmatizing all
gay men rather than adopting a screening process that focuses on high-risk sexual behavior by
any would-be donor, gay or straight.

"Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with HIV-positive prostitutes
would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is
not OK unless he's been celibate for five years," said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in
Alameda, Calif., that seeks gay sperm donors.

Traiman said adequate safety assurances can be provided by testing a sperm donor at the time of
the initial donation, then freezing the sperm for a six-month quarantine and testing the donor
again to be sure there is no new sign of HIV or other infectious diseases.

Although there is disagreement over whether the FDA guideline regarding gay men will have the
force of law, most doctors and clinics are expected to observe it.

The practical effect of the provision - part of a broader set of cell and tissue donation
regulations that take effect May 25 - is hard to gauge. It is likely to affect some lesbian
couples who want a child and prefer to use a gay man's sperm for artificial insemination.

But it is the provision's symbolic aspect that particularly troubles gay-rights groups. Kevin
Cathcart, executive director of Lambda Legal, has called it "policy based on bigotry."

"The part I find most offensive - and a little frightening - is that it isn't based on good
science," Cathcart said. "There's a steadily increasing trend of heterosexual transmission of
HIV, and yet the FDA still has this notion that you protect people by putting gay men out of
the pool."

In a letter to the FDA, Lambda Legal has suggested a screening procedure based on sexual
behavior, not sexual orientation. Prospective donors - gay or straight - would be rejected if
they had engaged in unprotected sex in the previous 12 months with an HIV-positive person, an
illegal drug user, or "an individual of unknown HIV status outside of a monogamous
relationship."

But an FDA spokeswoman cited FDA documents suggesting that officials felt the broader exclusion
was prudent even if it affected gay men who practice safe sex.

"The FDA is very much aware that strict exclusion policies eliminate some safe donors," said
one document.

Many doctors and fertility clinics already have been rejecting gay sperm donors, citing the
pending FDA rules or existing regulations of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

"With an anonymous sperm donor, you can't be too careful," said a society spokeswoman, Eleanor
Nicoll. "Our concern is for the health of the recipient, not to let more and more people be
sperm donors."

However, some sperm banks, notably in California, have welcomed gay donors. The director of one
of them, Alice Ruby of the Oakland-based Sperm Bank of California, said her staff had developed
procedures for identifying gay men with an acceptably low risk of HIV.

Gay men are a major donor source at Traiman's Rainbow Flag sperm bank, and he said that
practice would continue despite the new rules.

"We're going to continue to follow judicious, careful testing procedures for our clients that
even experts within the FDA say is safe," said Traiman, referring to the six-month quarantine.

The FDA rules do not prohibit gay men from serving as "directed" sperm donors. If a woman
wishing to become pregnant knows a gay man and asks that he provide sperm for artificial
insemination, a clinic could provide that service even if the man had engaged in sex with other
men within five years.

However, Traiman said some lesbian couples do not have a gay friend they know and trust well
enough to be the biological father of their child, and would thus prefer an anonymous donor.

Dr. Deborah Cohan, an obstetrics and gynecology instructor at the University of California, San
Francisco, said some lesbians prefer to receive sperm from a gay donor because they feel such a
man would be more receptive to the concept of a family headed by a same-sex couple.

"This rule will make things legally more difficult for them," she said. "I can't think of a
scientifically valid reason - it has to be an issue of discrimination."


FDA site: http://www.fda.gov

yes, i saw that article. that is why i posted my question.
can someone explain how hiv survives in sperm?

Well it's really quite simple if you just think about it for a minute. The
HIV virus is in the sperm and if the sperm is treated in a manner that keeps
the actual sperm cells viable and able to be fertile then the HIV virus is
protected right along with it.

As to HIV's not being able to be exposed to air that is true however not
applicable in this case because the HIV is protected from direct contact
with air by the liquid of the ejaculate. If the sperm was allowed to air dry
then yes the HIV virus would die as soon as it came into contact with air
absent that it stays alive in the sperm.

Gary Stein

<ml34b@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1115347705.960474.163500@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...

On 5 May 2005 19:48:26 -0700, ml34b@hotmail.com wrote:

To add a bit to Gary's comments, semen is a liquid that contains sperm
as well as a variety of other cells. HIV infects some of these various
cells that are found in semen, such as macrophages (or other white
blood cells). Cell-free HIV is also found in sperm. The evidence as
far as I've seen suggests that HIV does not infect sperm cells or
attach to them.

Sperm that winds up in a vagina or an anal canal that is infected is
in a warm spot, relatively anaerobic, that allows blood transmission.

Sperm washing can permit an HIV+ man to impregnate his HIV- partner
and significantly reduce any risk to her or the baby of becoming
infected.

George M. Carter
**
Alexander NJ. HIV and germinal cells: how close an association? J
Reprod Immunol. 1998 Dec;41(1-2):17-26.

Organon Inc., West Orange, NJ 07052, USA.
alexandn@am.father.umc.atzonobel.nl

Whether semen from someone who is HIV-positive can be prepared so that
it is safe for insemination is a critical question particularly to
couples in which the male is seropositive and the female is
seronegative. It is reassuring that some investigators have reported
great success in using sperm washing to dramatically reduce HIV levels
in the ejaculate. Such reports suggest that if free virus and
leukocytes in the seminal plasma are removed, the specimen may be safe
for insemination. Whether the virus ever is associated with
spermatozoa themselves is not fully understood. In situ hybridization
as well as electron microscopic studies have suggested the presence of
viral particles but whether these are preparation artifacts or
evidence of viable viral DNA is not known. Studies of whether the
virus is incorporated into developing spermatozoa or is shed in the
reproductive tract will aid in the elucidation of sexual transmission
of HIV.

**
Semprini AE, Vucetich A, Hollander L. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2004
Dec;16(6):465-70. Sperm washing, use of HAART and role of elective
Caesarean section.

University of Milan, via Carlo Crivelli 20, 20122 Milan, Italy.
semprini@esman.it

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Today, 50% of people living with HIV are women
and most have been sexually infected. Highly active antiretroviral
therapy (HAART) reduces the rates of both sexual and vertical
infection, but maximum protection is achieved with sperm washing and
elective Caesarean section. RECENT FINDINGS: Men taking HAART have
lower seminal concentration of HIV, and sexual transmission may be
reduced. However, a certain percentage of aviraemic men retain viral
presence in semen, and unprotected intercourse to achieve
fertilization must be discouraged as it carries the risk of sexual
transmission of the virus. HIV-discordant couples should be informed
that sperm washing can remove HIV from semen, allowing conception
without the risk of infection for the seronegative female and
eventually the child. In HIV-positive women, perinatal transmission of
HIV can be curtailed to less than 2% by using HAART to decrease
maternal viral load and offering prenatal preexposure prophylaxis of
the fetus, and elective Caesarean section. Each intervention carries
specific risks and benefits. The contribution of each preventive arm
in achieving fetal protection can only be crudely measured and optimal
obstetric management must involve discussion with the pregnant woman
of the pros and cons of each strategy. SUMMARY: In HIV-positive men
taking HAART, seminal viral load is decreased but not eliminated and
fertilization should be achieved through sperm washing to offer
maximum protection for the uninfected female. Pregnant HIV-positive
women on antiretroviral medication have a reduced risk of transmitting
the virus, but should still be counselled about the possibility to
further limit the chances of infecting their infant through elective
Caesarean section.

<ml34b@hotmail.com> wrote in message...

Do you even have to ask such a stupid question? First of all,
sperm samples are quickly sealed to prevent degeneration, and
although some exposure to air is inevitable, virtually all the
sperm in the sample are contained within the gob of semen and
are thus NOT exposed to airborne oxygen molecules. If the
sperm doesn't die, neither does the HIV virus. But yes, I
suppose it is possible (though I've never read of any research
that proved it) that HIV-infected semen that has dried
completely for several hours is probably far less infectious
than fresh semen. But would you still touch it?

"GMCarter" <fiar@verizon.net> wrote...
Which leads me to ask the question on whether it is ethical to subject
any uninfected person to ANY risk of contracting HIV, especially for
a non-life-threatening thing like reproduction. A blood tranfusion
still carries some risk but it can be argued that saving the life of a
patient outweighs that risk. But reproduction is largely voluntary,
a person will not die if he/she does not have children. And since the
emotional bonds between couples who wish to reproduce are so strong
that they could amount to an undue influence and that any consent to
accept the risk of contracting HIV through artificial insemination
with "washed" sperm amounts to incompetence and should not be allowed.
Maybe the risk is only 1%, but do you still have the right to infect
your partner and your baby with your nasty plague?

Ingsoc wrote:

ever heard the expression 'died in childbirth/' as well as many laws in
several us states that have a clause '...or the life of the mother...'
there's a reason they've been used.

also google on 'preeclampsia' with and without a hyphen.

just for a start.

b/

What is your problem? Don't be a condescending prick.
My question is not stupid. I don't know much about hiv.
I ask the question hoping the answers will educate all
and not just me. I think this is a newsgroup where you
need to turn off your arrogance. As hard as it may be for some.

What is your problem? Don't be a condescending prick.
My question is not stupid. I don't know much about hiv.
I ask the question hoping the answers will educate all
and not just me. I think this is a newsgroup where you
need to turn off your arrogance. As hard as it may be for some.

Ingsoc wrote:
What is your problem? Don't be a condescending prick.
My question is not stupid. I don't know much about hiv.
I ask the question hoping the answers will educate all
and not just me. I think this is a newsgroup where you
need to turn off your arrogance. As hard as it may be for some.