Theoretical question about AIDS....

[Cuda1447]

Say you had a dentist that had AIDS, do you think its your right to know that he has AIDS?

Switch it around, if you work in the medical field do you think its your right to know if your customer has AIDS?

 

[iwearnosox]

Yes and yes.

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Sifl
Yes and yes.

Does the law agree with you?

*edit* Isn't it considered an invasion of privacy?

 

[bleeb]

Yes and Yes.

 

[Actaeon]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Sifl
Yes and yes.

Does the law agree with you?

Nope.

I agree with Yes and yes though. I believe if any patient/doctor thing is going on, you must know about such diseases before getting worked on.

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Actaeon

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Sifl
Yes and yes.

Does the law agree with you?

Nope.

I agree with Yes and yes though. I believe if any patient/doctor thing is going on, you must know about such diseases before getting worked on.

Then why does the law state otherwise?

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Actaeon

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Sifl
Yes and yes.

Does the law agree with you?

Nope.

I agree with Yes and yes though. I believe if any patient/doctor thing is going on, you must know about such diseases before getting worked on.

Then why does the law state otherwise?

 

[Actaeon]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Actaeon

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Sifl
Yes and yes.

Does the law agree with you?

Nope.

I agree with Yes and yes though. I believe if any patient/doctor thing is going on, you must know about such diseases before getting worked on.

Then why does the law state otherwise?

Because of "security" and "privacy" issues.

There are plenty of stupid laws, just because its a law, doesn't mean its right or an intelligent choice.

 

[Schadenfroh]

i would like to know if my patients or my doctor had aids or any other infectious disease

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
i would like to know if my patients or my doctor had aids or any other infectious disease

If you went to one, and he had aids but you didnt know, and later found out... what would you do about it? Anything?

 

[TitanDiddly]

Yes, Yes, and YES.

 

[OutHouse]

AIDS will be pretty obvious. i think you mean if your dentist is HIV+.

Big difference.

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Citrix
AIDS will be pretty obvious. i think you mean if your dentist is HIV+.

Big difference.

Thats what I meant, sorry.

 

[Yo Ma Ma]

It seems it would be more essential for the patient to know the doctor or dentist was HIV+. As a patient, what could I do to protect myself? Not much. OTOH, the health care provider can take precautions while caring for the patient, gloves, mask, goggles, etc.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: Yo_Ma-Ma
It seems it would be more essential for the patient to know the doctor or dentist was HIV+. As a patient, what could I do to protect myself? Not much. OTOH, the health care provider can take precautions while caring for the patient, gloves, mask, goggles, etc.

How likely do you think it is for the patient to come into contact with their health care worker's bodily fluids vs. the other way around?

Approx. 12,000 health care workers in the United States contract Hepatitis B from their patients through needle and other exposure accidents. About 200~300 of them will die as a result. Numerous others will require liver transplants or have lifelong health problems.

You can count on your fingers and toes the number of patients contracting blood-borne pathogens from health care workers annually.

 

[bdjohnson]

no i dont think so because it would make them lose business from people who dont understand the lack of risk.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
Say you had a dentist that had AIDS, do you think its your right to know that he has AIDS?

No. The ONE case in which it is thought that HIV was transmitted from dentist to patient was obviously intentional, as NO other cases happened before, or since. If universal precautions are taken, there is no risk. If your Dentist is not using universal precautions, find a new one.

Switch it around, if you work in the medical field do you think its your right to know if your customer has AIDS?

No, for the same reason above. Universal precautions dictate that EVERYONE is treated as if they are infectious. For a medical provider, there is NO reason to know because you wouldn't treat them any differently IF you are employing universal precautions.

In fact, the only reason a medical provider should know is so they can treat the HIV infection, NOT so they can take "extra precautions" because they should already be taking every precaution.

There is a lot of fear and hype surrounding HIV and AIDS. Educate yourself.

 

[Yo Ma Ma]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: Yo_Ma-Ma
It seems it would be more essential for the patient to know the doctor or dentist was HIV+. As a patient, what could I do to protect myself? Not much. OTOH, the health care provider can take precautions while caring for the patient, gloves, mask, goggles, etc.

How likely do you think it is for the patient to come into contact with their health care worker's bodily fluids vs. the other way around?

Approx. 12,000 health care workers in the United States contract Hepatitis B from their patients through needle and other exposure accidents. About 200~300 of them will die as a result. Numerous others will require liver transplants or have lifelong health problems.

You can count on your fingers and toes the number of patients contracting blood-borne pathogens from health care workers annually.

I'm sure your're right about the actual (vs. perceived) risk, being very small to the patient, excluding the case of that nutty dentist who set out to infect his patients on purpose.

 

[tcsenter]

I'm sure your're right about the actual (vs. perceived) risk, being very small to the patient, excluding the case of that nutty dentist who set out to infect his patients on purpose

And even the case of the 'nutty dentist' has been discredited.

The CDC's bungling of the Florida dentist case stirred-up public fears and indignation over a non-existant epidemic that were already near fever pitch. It is perhaps the sole reason behind today's continued misconception among the public that there is anything more than an infinitesimal risk of contracting HIV from a health care worker vs. the other way around.

The CDC concluded it was 'very likely' that Dr. David Acer transmitted HIV to six of his patients, but there was no evidence he did so deliberately. That hypothesis was merely one of three that were offered as possible explanations for how the transmission could have happened, the other two being unintended in nature.

 

[rh71]

I'd definitely want to know - just so I'm more careful.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
i would like to know if my patients or my doctor had aids or any other infectious disease

If you went to one, and he had aids but you didnt know, and later found out... what would you do about it? Anything?

If it bothered you, I suppose you could stop going.

It's interesting how liberals love to hate the government and its agencies, but jump right to quoting the CDC when it's convenient.

 

[Mallow]

If your a doctor working on a patient you should definitely know b/c you can get a needle stick and have to know how to treat yourself. Also, the patient should know if the doctor does.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Mallow
If your a doctor working on a patient you should definitely know b/c you can get a needle stick and have to know how to treat yourself.

This is why we have universal precautions.

Also, the patient should know if the doctor does.

Why? In all the years since HIV was discovered, there has been ONE case of Dentist/Doctor to patient transmission. And if you look at that case objectively and in context, it's obvious he did it intentionally.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

I'm sure your're right about the actual (vs. perceived) risk, being very small to the patient, excluding the case of that nutty dentist who set out to infect his patients on purpose

And even the case of the 'nutty dentist' has been discredited.

The CDC's bungling of the Florida dentist case stirred-up public fears and indignation over a non-existant epidemic that were already near fever pitch. It is perhaps the sole reason behind today's continued misconception among the public that there is anything more than an infinitesimal risk of contracting HIV from a health care worker vs. the other way around.

The CDC concluded it was 'very likely' that Dr. David Acer transmitted HIV to six of his patients, but there was no evidence he did so deliberately. That hypothesis was merely one of three that were offered as possible explanations for how the transmission could have happened, the other two being unintended in nature.

Hardly. If you look at the case objectively, and in context, it is obvious that he did it intentionally. Even unsanitary HIV positive health care workers in Africa who are not using universal precautions don't have his transmition rate.

 

[tcsenter]

Hardly. If you look at the case objectively, and in context, it is obvious that he did it intentionally. Even unsanitary HIV positive health care workers in Africa who are not using universal precautions don't have his transmition rate.

There was no greater prevalance of HIV among Acer's patients than was analogous to rates found among the general population in that community, nor compared with rates of HIV seropositivity found among several other large patient surveys.