Conference moira::parenting

    You are being unfair to your kid's best friend. Besides, what would you
    do? Change school? No use, you will probably find HIV. pos children
    anywhere. 
    
    Do not get paranoid, GET INFORMED!! You have no reason to worry. 
    
    And I would suggest you do not make any sort of negative comments about
    the child with the HIV. positive in front of your child. It would be so
    vicious for both ... and totally unnecessary.
    
    L�cia
    

   Yep, I can see where it could get a little bit scary... maybe the best
   thing would be for you to get as educated about HIV as possible, and
   then have a warm, friendly, face-to-face chat with the parents...  let
   them know how you feel, and that you want to do what is best without
   getting paranoid...  I am not in that situation, but I would guess
   that the parents have already been through the whole spectrum of
   feelings and questions... open, non-confrontational communication
   might be just the ticket..
   
   just my opinion,
   
   - Tom

    I am probably going to invite cross fire with this reply but I would
    venture to say that the statement "no need to worry" is perhaps being a
    little over optimistic about the situation.

    First of all, we *really* don't know the exact circumstances that the
    HIV virus is transmitted, at one time, they said that you could not get
    it by direct contact with blood (I refer you to the book And The Band
    Played On which is an excellent (although somewhat biased) account of
    how the HIV virus was first isolated), at other times, they have said
    that you needed repeat exposure to be infected (no longer believed to
    be the case). We still *don't* know (and my never know) how the dentist
    passed on the HIV virus to his patients. It is believed that he did not
    clean his instruments, up until that point it was believed that you
    needed to be exposed to a large does of the virus in order to contract
    it, that is no longer the case. 

    There is now talk that the the virus goes through a shedding stage and
    that you can only contract it from another if they are in the shedding
    stage.

    My point is that no one *really* knows the definitive answers to how
    this disease is transmitted.

    In the case of your child's friend, s/he didn't ask for the disease, it
    is a human crime that s/he has to suffer with it and most probably will
    end up dying young from it.

    In the case of your daughter, she's not asking for the disease either,
    she needs a certain amount of protection (guidance) from you. She
    should not be kissing her friend, she should not be biting, scratching
    her friend (and vice versa).

    I think that everyone in this situation needs compassionate education
    on preventative measures that the children (and parents!) can take.
    Without instilling fear, the children need to know (and respect)
    limitations on both sides.

    I would not take my child out of such a situation, but I would insist
    on a parents/teacher/director conference to get information passed on
    and to serve as an opportunity to ask questions and receive
    instruction.

    There is a need to worry but with proper precaution, management,
    education, and compassion, the need to worry will be greatly reduced
    (but never entirely eliminated).

    			Wendy

    re: .3
    
    I think that was a super reponse and great advice!  
    

    re: Not completely sure how it is transmitted.
    
    My father is convinced that mosquitoes can carry this disease and the
    medical community won't release this information due to mass panic. 
    Now there's a scary thought.  I personally don't believe that but how
    can you argue with it?  I definitely can see how that is believeable.
    

>    Now there's a scary thought.  I personally don't believe that but how
>    can you argue with it?  I definitely can see how that is believeable.

Some people believe that flying saucers crashed in New Mexico 30 years ago,
and that the government isn't telling us about it because they want to
avoid a panic.  That's a scary thought, too, and equally easy (or hard)
to argue with.

	-Neil

    	However in this particular case, I think that it is more believable
    that mosquitoes (which suck up the body fluid blood and which have, in
    the past, been incriminated in carrying and transmitting the malaria
    virus from human to human infecting them with the disease) *may* be one
    day proven to be carriers/transmitters of the HIV virus (which is
    comparable in size).

    	Now about that flying saucer crash, it *must* be true, wasn't it
    recently featured on Unsolved Mysteries (and you know that if they put
    it on prime time TV, then it's got to be true....)

    				Wendy

    In the U.S., the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta closely tracks
    HIV infections.  They probably have a database showing how every case
    was transmitted, including those where the source is unkown.
    
    Other developed countries have similar government agencies, with
    statistical information shared internationally.
    
    Now I'm no expert, but I believe that they are able to identify the
    source in nearly all cases, and that when the source is unknown that's
    nearly always because there are several possible sources (such as
    sharing needles and sex with other addicts).
    
    If my assumption is correct, then you can readily obtain factual
    information about the likelihood of one child transmitting to another,
    based on case studies.
    
    As an earlier noter recommended, a conference of all concerned parties
    (parents, teacher, principal, a medical authority) is highly
    appropriate.  Someone familiar with the epidemiology could speak to the
    group and address the concerns.  If I were in the situation, I would
    first discuss it with the teacher or principal, rather than the parents
    of the infected child.  This would be more diplomatic and nearly as
    direct.
    
    I'll be interested to see what people say here in PARENTING.  I have
    wondered about this same question myself.
    
    L

    I feel so sorry for the child with HIV, and I know that she shouldn't
    be shortchanged because of having a disease that isn't her fault and
    doesn't make her a less special person, but...... if I knew there was
    an HIV positive child at my son's day-care, I would remove him.  People
    may think I'm selfish and mean for saying this, but when it comes down
    to it, the life of my child is always going to be my #1 priority.
    
    I read an article recently about epidemics in past history--things
    like plagues and various contagious diseases that wiped out large
    portions of the population in their time.  In many cases, the virus
    itself changed over time, so that it became easier and easier to catch
    the disease.  In other words, at first the victims could only catch the
    disease by direct contact with an infected person, for example, but months 
    later the virus had changed so that the victims were catching it just by 
    being too close to an infected person.  The concern is that HIV may be
    getting easier and easier to catch.  While today we may confidently say
    that you can only catch it via methods A, B, or C, who is to say that
    tomorrow you might not catch it by method D?  It's a risk I'm just not
    willing to take, even though I would feel terribly sad at having to
    hurt the feelings of an infected child by not allowing my child to play
    with her.  
    
    Of course, I'm thinking of the toddler and early school age group. 
    When children are older and can be reliably taught to take appropriate
    precautions, then I would not remove my child from a school that had an
    HIV positive child enrolled.
    
    
    

Since I'm not in your position, anything I say is pure speculation, and it's
awfully easy to be self-righteous when it's all hypothetical.

I'm a worrier.  If I were in your situation, I know that I would worry.
I would probably never be able to completely extinguish the lurking dread
of "what if".  But I hope -- I *hope* -- that my rationality would overcome
that emotional response.  After all, *everything* in life is a risk.  My child
is constantly being exposed to risks -- many of them no doubt by my own 
choice -- that are enormously greater than her risk of contracting HIV
from a daycare friend.

One of the hardest parts of parenting is accepting that life has risks, that
I can't protect my child from all of them, and that if I could, it would
probably be at the cost of turning her into an emotional cripple (and isn't
that a risk, too?).  So the best I can do is to come to a realistic assessment
of what the risks in her life actually are, and to try to avoid the ones that
are significant, and to try not to worry about the others.

Well put, Neil!


Hamp

    	re:.10

    	Yes, that's right, but this *is* a risk from which you can protect
    your children.

    	You can teach your children (even the wee little ones) to not bite
    and scratch and to not share eating utensils.

    	You can teach the older ones about safe sex, to not do drugs, the
    importance of not sharing needles.

    	You can *teach* and thereby minimize the risk. To say that a child
    has greater risks in life and then to blow this one off based on that
    reasoning, is to, in my opinion, play Russian Roulette with your
    child's life. 

    	One hopes that one's child never gets hit by a car (statistically
    speaking the chances are low) and yet we all (at a very early age)
    teach our children to look both ways before crossing the road. Would
    you do any less educating for a communicable terminal illness like AIDS?

    			Wendy

    
       I had this data at my desk,  so in an effort to educate ourselves
       here is some data (stats).
    
          "A healthy person probably needs multiple exposures to the
           virus to get infected.  Junkies may have such high rates
           of infection because they're sick and already weakened.
           Consider that among health-care workers accidentally pricked
           or cut by infected needles and instruments as of early 1989,
           only 0.5 percent, or 1~in~200, showed sign of AIDS antibodies"
    
       I enter this only to show some stats.  I don't think I've analyzed
       my own opinion enough to show a commitment here/now.  I do find the 
       discussion very interesting.
    
       Oh - the source for the preceeding:
    
                   "Why Things Are"
                    by Joel Achenbach  (yeah really)
                    1991 Random House
    
       Oh,  and heres one last stat for you, from the same source:
    
            "Dr. Barbara Johnson, research biologist with the Center
             for Infectious Diseases in Fort Collins, Colorado, and
             an expert in mosquito-born viruses, says, 'My Calculation
             is that it would take approximately four thousand mosquito
             bites, where each mosquito had fed on an AIDS patient, to
             have a -probability- ' of the infection being introduced
             to a second person."
    
      
    /pjs
                                                          

    I am just curious Sonja, how did you originally find out your daughters
    friend had the HIV virus?  Is it only because they are close friends
    that you knew and do all the parents know?

If it were my child, and who knows, perhaps my child plays with an HIV positive
child everyday, I would become educated.  I would call 
the AIDS hotline number (there's an 800 number, call 1-800-555-1212 for it), 
and ask for information.  Then I would decide if I needed to talk to the child's
parents or do anything else.

Given that there are HIV positive people around all of us everyday, it is a good
idea to become educated anyway.  I'm sure I've shaken the hands of HIV positive
people and not known it.

Small children are difficult to protect, whether from HIV, other diseases, or
hurricanes.  The best we can do is understand the risks of any threat, then
decide what we can live with.  We can't protect them (or ourselves) from 
everything, so we have to focus on the ones that worry us the most.  After doing
research, you may choose to remove your child, you may choose to ask the school
to change procedures, or you may choose to do nothing.  (I hope you wouldn't
ask the school to expel the HIV positive child; that family has enough problems
without that.)

Good luck.  It's a difficult issue, for many, many reasons.  And one we should
all become educated on, to do what we can to stop it from spreading.

Pat

Being that I am around a high risk group (gay men) a fair amount, I have
probably had more exposure to HIV+ people than most of the noters here.
Therefore, I have paid some attention to what behaviours on my part and the
part of my child(ren) could put us at risk.

***********************
* The most important thing to remember here is that even if a preschooler shows
* up as HIV+ that does *not* mean the child has, or is ever going to get, AIDS.
* Young children are born with their birth mother's antibodies, and it is
* the presence of those particular *antibodies* in a person's system which makes
* them HIV+.  If the disease which causes AIDS is not present in their system, 
* then eventually those antibodies should go away, and the child will test 
* HIV-.  In such a case, the child was never at risk to become ill with AIDS 
* (or AIDS-related illnesses) and no one around the child was ever at risk.
************************

I understand the nervousness.  Whenever I have been (closely) around people
with AIDS I have been nervous.  The first time was in 1983.  I not only
ate at the house of a man with AIDS, but he was the one to cook the dinner.
I *freaked* when I learned that he *sampled* the food, then used the same 
spoon/fork back in the pot.  As I said, this was 1983.  I did not get AIDS;
I did not get sick; I didn't die.  :-)   All of the studies I have seen said
that it is okay to eat after someone with AIDS (much less someone who is 
simply HIV+) and that it is okay to (dry) kiss them.  I assume that your child
doesn't tongue-kiss her friends, so she should be fine.  Really, there's no
need to worry about that.

I agree with Wendy about not allowing biting and scratching.  My personal
opinion is that every child should be taught not to bite or scratch, but it
does become much more important with someone who potentially has a disease.
If you teach your child this, and the other parents teach their child the
same, then your child should be fine whether or not the other child is 
actually infected.

Hang in there.  I'm sending you lots of warm wishes and hugs,

         Carol

    re. 13 (HIV statistics)

	I question the statistics that you presented. Although the copy
    right of the book that you cited is 1991 (which probably means the
    material was compiled sometime in 1990) I would venture to guess that
    the research data cited is probably dated in the late 1980's.

    	At one time, they *did* think that multiple exposures to the HIV
    virus was needed in order for you to contract the disease, this is no
    longer the case. The information gathered on the Dentist in Florida
    *greatly* contradicts the multiple exposure theory. The collection of
    stories from people who have had one night stands and then contracting
    the HIV virus *greatly* contradicts the multiple exposure theory.
    Everyday (literally) the information that we gather on this disease
    seems to change (of course, as was alluded to earlier, the fact that
    the virus seems to be mutating - doesn't help the efforts one bit).

    	I also don't buy that mosquito stat either.If it is based on the
    multiple exposure theory then it is invalid, if it is based on
    "scientific evaluation" then it is merely a guess (at best) as there
    are no studies at all on human-HIV mosquito bites (who would
    volunteer). What is interesting, however, is that this scientist is not
    *precluding* the thought that someone *could indeed* get the HIV virus
    from mosquitoes (even if it is over time).

    re.16

    	The child carries the mother's antibodies for approximately 18
    months after the birth *if* the mother is not breast feeding. I don't
    recall the stats for breastfeeding but I believe it is something like 6
    months after breastfeeding the mother's antibodies will be gone
    (however, as we know you can get the HIV virus from human milk - the
    chances greatly increase of the child having the virus if breastfeeding
    occurred). 

    	This being the case, it would be rare for a preschooler to be
    testing positive based on the mother's antibodies.

    	Unfortunately, it is also very rare for a child *born* with the HIV
    virus to live to the age of being a preschooler and be well enough to
    attend school without medical assistance. My guess is that this child
    contracted the virus after her birth.

    	Just wanted to add that I am by no means any kind of an authority
    on HIV, last year when I was 7 months pregnant, I received a certified
    letter telling me that I had to get tested for HIV because the surgeon
    who had operated on me twice (and who was following me through the
    pregnancy for orthopedic problems) had tested positive for HIV.

    	I received a first hand experience of how we as a society treat our
    AIDS victims (some people wouldn't even come near me until I got the
    results of my test (negative)) and as you can bet, I read everything I
    could get my hands on regarding the disease, how it was transmitted, if
    I was positive, what the chances for the baby or my husband being
    positive were, - it was a very stressful time.

    	I did all of this research a year ago, most of what I read is now
    considered out of date. 


    			Wendy

    Wendy,
    
    I'm not sure how to phrase this, but I think that children who are born
    of HIV positive mothers can show HIV positive for a long time.
    
    There is a family in Plymouth, Mass who had a son who died from Aids. 
    To get over their grief they adopted an HIV positive baby.  They also
    became Aids activists.
    
    Just a month or so ago they found out that the latest test on their son
    came back negative.  I believe he is 4.
    
    Sorry, but I can't remember their name.  They are Italian and it begins
    with a P.  (I remember that because of my husband's name: Paolillo.)
    
    I cried when I heard he is no longer HIV positive.
    
    judy

    re.14
    I heard it from a another mother of my daughters friends. I met the
    little boys mother once, I saw her arms. Then the woman told me
    herself, that she used to be a junky back in time, I could hardly
    believe she's not doing drugs anymore. That was some time in summer at
    pre school. So I talked to another mother of a child about it and she
    told me that the woman knows she's positive since 1984, and she still
    had the baby in 1989. But nobody else knows, not even the people at
    pre-school. So I didn't tell anyone either, but I was kind of worrying
    after that. I would never tell anyone in order to discriminate the
    woman (she's a single parent), or the little boy....I just got insecure
    for a moment. 
    
    But to remove my daughter from that pre school doesn't make any sense
    right now, I might even place her in a new pre school with 10 positive
    children and wouldn't even know about it, because it is not known in
    pre school who is positive and who is not....
    
    Thanks for your advices, the topic is sure worth talking about! 
    Sonja
    

    ....by the way, even though this doesn't have anything to do with our
    discussion, but just to tell you guys;
    
    the father of the little boy is not living with the woman, because he
    is married to another woman and has 2 kids. His wife doesn't know
    anything about this HIV-story and the "other" family he's got.....weird
    things going on here......

    A few replies in this topic have discussed one of the ways to protect
    a preschool child is by teaching him/her not to bite other children.  Am I 
    the only one who does not take comfort in that advice?  You can teach your
    child as well as you possibly can not to bite other children, not to
    cross a street without looking both ways, etc., etc., but there's
    always the possibility that one day, in a fit of anger or in a fog of
    forgetfullness, they will do differently from what they've been taught.
    Sorry, but I would not depend on a pre-schooler's own self-discipline
    as a way to prevent them from possibly contracting a life threatening
    illness.
    
    Jane
                                              

    
     Re. 17
    
     I agree with your concerns regarding the statistics presented.
     Actually I expected far more of an uproar.
     
     The stats regarding the 1989 report for health care proffesionals
     is an interesting finding....  The author alludes to a multiple exp-
     osure theory - The author is not by any strecth of the imagination 
     an expert,  however the stats are valid (and you justifiably counter
     with the mutation theory),...  just get's more confusing - especially
     when your talking about exposing your child to another child that may
     be carrying the virus  - someone care to offer a stat on what the 
     chances are that one child in day care will be exposed to anothers
     blood?   Is this the real issue?  Is the heart of this a number that
     we decide is acceptable risk?   Seems folks take different views on
     how they base their decision  (this by the way is what I think  is
     the most interesting part of the discussion - not so much the stats
     that I agree change constantly......)
    
     But getting back to the stats, and your concern/questions  -
     The mosquito number is not based on the multiple exposure theory.
     The 4000 bites wasn't for repeat contact, it was based on blood
     volume.
     The virus will not replicate inside the mosquito the way a yellow-
     fever virus can.  The number was simply the quantity of blood 
     (mosquitos proboscis is very small) that you would need to be
     exposed to (or so the research biologist states) for the individual
     to even have a probability of getting the disease (for instance the
     1 - in 200 number from the health care workers).
     Under this you don't even have an amount worth considering.
    
     (where talking about a quantity that is upwards of 1000 times 
     smaller than the amount on the tip of a junkies needle)
     
    
     The article also had the following quotes, in order to put this in
     perspective;
    
               'It probably won't happen in real life"
    
               "I don't think this is one" (method for contacting the
    virus /p)  "..that you should worry about"
    
    /pjs
     

    re.18

    	Judy, 

    	I was not aware of the particular case you cited. That's very
    interesting, as I indicated *just* last year the state AIDS counselor
    who talked to everyone who got called in for HIV tests, told us that
    the mother's antibodies leaves the infant within 15-18 months after the
    birth. Again, due to new information and new strains of the virus, it
    does not surprise me to hear that things may have changed.

    re. the specifics of the child

    	What a horrific situation, for both the mother and the child. I
    don't think that you are betraying anyone's trust by bringing this to
    the attention of the school director (who could then find out if it is
    true or false). It after all, represents a *potentially serious* threat
    to your child and all other children in the school (especially if this
    child is involved in biting and scratching).

    	I would definitely mention it but say that it was something that
    you heard, have no proof, and are concerned.

    	Assuming that it is false, the rumors may (or may not) stop.

    	Assuming that it is true, that mother and child needs to get some
    help in handling this situation (running away from it will not make it
    go away). Both need to learn how to reduce risks to themselves and
    others.

    	What a horrible, horrible, tragedy.

    			Wendy

	I'm not sure where you're located but in Massachusetts every public
 school is now required to have an AIDS policy. The DOE provided lots of
 material to school committees and administrators. Also many health teachers
 have enormous amounts of material and are willing to share this with parents.
 Any school system worth its salt also has a definitive AIDS education program
either seperate or woven into their health curriculum. With this in mind one
of the places I'ld go to get educated is to my local public school. 

	One of your statements here concerns me greatly. As someone who directs
policy in a public school I am often confronted with accusations of inaction 
that would have required me to read someone's mind. Please speak to the mother
of this child. First, confirm from the horses mouth that AIDS is involved. 
Tracks on the arms certainly mean drugs at least were involved but are not more
than an indication AIDS may be present. If AIDS is involved I urge you to 
counsel this woman to inform the school. Not to create alarm but to allow for 
the proper education of staff and parents. Better they here it from her then
from some hysterical, uninformed parent. 

    In addition to my admonitions to Alex about biting, scratching, and
    stuff I wouldn't put past a 7-year-old (swapping gum, ieeuuuu!), I have
    also told her that in the event of another child's accident (scraped
    knee, or a cut, etc.) Alex should NEVER touch the wound, but *help the
    friend by going to get an adult.*
    
    Personally, in the paranoia-to-indifference continuum, I put myself 
    closer to the go-play-in-traffic end than the live-in-a-bubble end.  I
    think we in this conference are probably a lot closer in position than
    we may think, and I *know* all of us put our children's health #1. 
    There are just different styles and different precautions to achieve
    that objective.
    
    Leslie 

RE: .23

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree that speaking to the director is not a
violation of the family's privacy.  Given the circumstances of how the
information was received, I have to call it a rumor that the child is HIV+.  
And *this* particular rumor has a stigma - it sucks, but it's true.

I think if you want to pursue this, that you should ask the woman yourself if
the rumor of the child being HIV positive is true.  It may be false, and at
least then she has the opportunity to straighten the mess out.  *She* can go
to the director for help straightening it out.  And you can go back to where
you heard it and fix it there.

If she confirms it, then you can say that you want to inform the director and
see if she is willing to do so.  It is better that the information come from
her, not from you, because then the director can get the whole story and figure
out what s/he needs to do.

If she won't then at least your information is accurate - that the mother has
confirmed that the child is HIV+.

I think anything else is just spreading a rumor, and a devastating one too.

Pat

I just asked a friend to dig me up some information on HIV transmission,
specifically through biting or mosquitos.  I include here some of the 
information which I received.  I have included all of the reports on biting,
but have *not* included most of the info on mosquitos, in the interest of
keeping down the size of the file.  If anyone would like the rest of the info I
got, please send me mail, preferably in the next week. 

Additionally, if anyone *does* write for the reports which are not summarized
here, would you please put in a summary of the information you receive?? 

Thanks,
        Carol

******************************

Jupp PG  Lyons SF  
Experimental assessment of bedbugs (Cimex lectularius and Cimex
  hemipterus) and mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti formosus) as vectors of
  human immunodeficiency virus.
AIDS 1987 Sep;1(3):171-4

  In vitro experiments were conducted to assess whether bedbugs (Cimex
  lectularius and Cimex hemipterus) and mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti
  formosus) could act as vectors of HIV. These insects engorged through
  a membrane on a blood-virus mixture. Female bedbugs were larger than
  males and took larger blood-meals when fed to repletion. It was
  determined that the full blood-meal of a female bedbug contained 0.09
  x 10(5) tissue culture infectious doses (TCID) of virus and a male
  0.07 x 10(5) TCID, while partial meals taken when feeding was
  interrupted contained 0.013 x 10(5) TCID and 0.015 x 10(5) TCID for
  female and male bugs, respectively. Reverse transcriptase activity
  was assayed after culture of insect extracts in H9 cells: this showed
  survival of virus in C. lectularius for up to 4 h, in C. hemipterus
  for up to 1, possibly 2 h, but no survival in Ae. aegypti formosus.
  Four attempts to transmit the virus by interrupted feeding by C.
  lectularius from a blood-virus mixture to uninfected blood failed. It
  is concluded that Ae. aegypti formosus and probably other mosquitoes
  are not mechanical vectors of HIV and that such transmission is also
  unlikely to occur in bedbugs under natural conditions.

Institutional address: 
     Department of Virology
     University of the Witwatersrand
     Johannesburg
     South Africa.

*****JOURNAL OF ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROMES*****

Tsoukas CM  Hadjis T  Shuster J  Theberge L  Feorino P  O'Shaughnessy M  
Lack of transmission of HIV through human bites and scratches.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1988;1(5):505-7


  To examine the relative risk of transmission of the human immuno-
  deficiency virus (HIV) through bites and scratches, we studied 198
  health care workers, 30 of whom were traumatized in this fashion
  while caring for an aggressive AIDS patient. This violent patient
  frequently bit or scratched others, his mouth had blood and saliva,
  while his fingernails were at times soiled with semen, feces, and
  urine. He was HIV antibody and antigen positive. Although HIV was
  recovered from his peripheral blood lymphocytes, after 2.5 years of
  serial follow-up, all traumatized personnel were clinically normal,
  no HIV was cultured from their blood, and all were HIV antibody and
  P24 antigen negative. We conclude that this viremic AIDS patient,
  while producing copious amounts of body fluids, failed to infect
  those caring for him through bites and scratches. The risk of
  transmission of HIV through this route under similar conditions
  should be low.

Institutional address: 
     Division of Clinical Immunology
     Montreal General Hospital
     Canada.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rest had no abstract attached however you may want to write to the
    authors or publishers for reprints

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


*****CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL*****

Parker JE  
Ten years of AIDS [letter]
Can Med Assoc J 1992 May 15;146(10):1692-3

<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/TM> 

<Bites, Human/CO> <Human> <Milk, Human/MI> <Sex Education> <Letter> 
  <MEDLINE File> 


*****JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS*****

Shirley LR  Ross SA  
Risk of transmission of human immunodeficiency virus by bite of an
  infected toddler.
J Pediatr 1989 Mar;114(3):425-7

<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/TM> <Bites and Stings> 
  <Bites, Human> 

<Case Report> <Child Behavior Disorders> <Child, Preschool> 
  <Follow-Up Studies> <Human> <HIV Seropositivity/DI> <Male> 
  <MEDLINE File> 

Institutional address: 
     Department of Pediatrics
     Medical University of South Carolina
     Charleston 29425.


*****JAMA*****

Drummond JA  
Seronegative 18 months after being bitten by a patient with AIDS
  [letter]
JAMA 1986 Nov 7;256(17):2342-3

<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/TM> <Antibodies, Viral/AN> 
  <Bites and Stings/CO> <Bites, Human/CO> 

<Adult> <Case Report> <Female> <Human> <Letter> <MEDLINE File> 

Transmission of HIV by human bite [news]
Lancet 1987 Aug 29;2(8557):522

<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/TM> <Bites and Stings> 
  <Bites, Human> 

<Adult> <Case Report> <Female> <Human> <Male> <News> <MEDLINE File> 


*****JOURNAL - OKLAHOMA STATE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION*****

Istre GR  
What about mosquitoes and saliva? Or, is the human immunodeficiency
  virus transmitted in other ways?
J Okla State Med Assoc 1988 Jul;81(7):399-400

<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/TM> <Mosquitoes> <Saliva/MI> 

<Animal> <Human> <MEDLINE File> 


*****NEW JERSEY MEDICINE*****

Human bite is a deadly weapon.
N J Med 1989 May;86(5):338

<Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/TM> <Bites and Stings/CO> 
  <Bites, Human/CO> <Homicide/LJ> 

<Human> <Minnesota> <MEDLINE File> 
  <Health Planning and Administration File> 

    Thanks Carol,
    
    Excellent reference file.
    
    
    /peter