Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › COULD mbp medically cause herpes?
- This topic has 29 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by nishtdayngesheft.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 23, 2015 7:35 pm at 7:35 pm #614952frumnotyeshivishParticipant
It seems that there are folks who believe it can’t. Mohelim agree to be tested and use mouthwash. It seems that they concede that it CAN.
See article and comments:
February 23, 2015 8:57 pm at 8:57 pm #1060912goofusParticipantIt absolutely CAN.
HSV1 and HSV2 are transmitted through direct contact of bodily fluids (mouth to open surgical wound).
The thought that there is no possibility of transmission of the virus while performing MBP is completely unfounded and downright wrong.
edited
February 24, 2015 1:05 am at 1:05 am #1060913nishtdayngesheftParticipantThe discussion is not when a Mohel (or any person for that matter)has an active case of HSV 1 (Cold sores. All Mohelim know that they should not perform MbP then. And they don’t.
However, there are those who insist that it can shed even when not active, which for some reason has not been proven. Which is strange, because 80% of people have inactive HSV1, so it should be simple to check and prove. The fact that it hasn’t says a lot.
In addition, no is sure that a parent who has active HSV 1 is careful enough to make sure that they do not spread it to a new born child.
Disregard Goofus’ comment about HSV 2. that is not the issue with Mohelim.
Edited. Such comments will not be tolerated.
February 24, 2015 2:18 am at 2:18 am #1060914JosephParticipantKissing a baby can also transmit herpes. Should that be banned to?
February 24, 2015 5:33 am at 5:33 am #1060915docyaelMemberNisht, there has been enough ‘crossover’ in recent years that HSV types 1 and 2 are no longer specific to one area of the body i.e. HSV-2 can cause oral lesions. There are also numerous studies demonstrating transmission of HSV even before the prodromal phase.
sorry, no links
February 24, 2015 5:55 am at 5:55 am #1060916goofusParticipantNisht,
I only mention HSV2 for the sake of completeness. A good way to remember the difference is that HSV 1 typcally shows up in the upper half of the body and HSV2 shows up in the lower half, although this is not set in stone as crossovers have been known to happen.
Lior,
What should be banned is the transmission of diseases to children when preventable. Yes, kissing should be banned when the child’s health is at risk. You wouldn’t kiss an infant if you had the flu (I hope).
February 24, 2015 6:21 am at 6:21 am #1060917JosephParticipantSo propose legislation to that effect. Call it the 2015 Banning Kissing Babies Whilst Ill Act. Ill Parents won’t kiss and ill mohels wont do mbp.
February 24, 2015 7:00 am at 7:00 am #1060918interjectionParticipantLior:
There’s no need for legislating something that most parents try to do anyway.
February 24, 2015 8:16 am at 8:16 am #1060919frumnotyeshivishParticipantThe numbers cited claim that MBP infants get hsv at a lower rate than the average population. Is anyone going to adjust those numbers for the lower overall HSV rate within the parents of such children? It would seem that fewer than 80% of mbp parents having hsv is a reasonable assumption. Is there any reliable data to prove or disprove this assumption?
February 24, 2015 8:17 am at 8:17 am #1060920frumnotyeshivishParticipantLior – were there a nonreligious custom for nonparents to kiss infants on their cuts, you can rest assured it would be very, very banned.
February 24, 2015 8:19 am at 8:19 am #1060921HealthParticipantThe fact is the more people that touch the baby, the more chance there is in spreading an infection. Is there a law that anybody who touches a baby, including health personnel have to sign a wavier?
February 24, 2015 12:53 pm at 12:53 pm #1060922JosephParticipantfny: Parents also kiss their babies.
February 24, 2015 6:39 pm at 6:39 pm #1060924Sam2ParticipantLior: Parents aren’t a real problem as long as the child is breast-fed because the mother gives the kid immunity to almost anything she has with the milk.
February 24, 2015 7:09 pm at 7:09 pm #1060925zahavasdadParticipantMost people dont touch babies in certain areas and that is what people are concerned about.
February 24, 2015 7:27 pm at 7:27 pm #1060926Sam2Participantzd: False. The concern is viruses on an open wound. That’s it.
February 24, 2015 8:22 pm at 8:22 pm #1060927lesschumrasParticipantLior, how often do you kiss a baby on the mouth?
February 24, 2015 9:10 pm at 9:10 pm #1060928nishtdayngesheftParticipant“It would seem that fewer than 80% of mbp parents having hsv is a reasonable assumption.”
Why is this a reasonable assumption? We are talking about cold sores here, not an STD.
February 24, 2015 9:13 pm at 9:13 pm #1060929nishtdayngesheftParticipantZD,
You said “Most people dont touch babies in certain areas and that is what people are concerned about.”
I am not sure what you are referring to, however responsible parents do clean their children when changing the diapers. That would result in some touching of those areas while cleaning the baby. Most parents do not wear sterile gloves when changing diapers.
February 24, 2015 9:16 pm at 9:16 pm #1060930nishtdayngesheftParticipantSam,
You said “Parents aren’t a real problem as long as the child is breast-fed because the mother gives the kid immunity to almost anything she has with the milk.”
1) Many Mothers do not nurse.
2) No fathers nurse.
3) Nursing is actually one of the common causes of transmitting HSV to newborns. Probably the most common.
February 24, 2015 9:24 pm at 9:24 pm #1060931nishtdayngesheftParticipantDocYael,
“Nisht, there has been enough ‘crossover’ in recent years that HSV types 1 and 2 are no longer specific to one area of the body”
Regardless of whether HSV can cause oral lesions, HSV 1 is really the concern that everyone is concerned with because it is the common cold sore and is very common.
It is highly unlikely that a Mohel has HSV 2. Such claims are generally offered by the rabid anti-milah crowd who like to portray MbP as a “filthy” act by associating it with HSV 2 and the connotations associated thereto.
In case you think I making this up, Just today I saw a commenter (somewhere else) make such accusations, and lo and behold on his web page he was proudly displaying swastikas.
I am not sayong everyone who is against MbP is a Nazi, but those who cast MbP in a light of “abuse” (using loshon nekiyah) are without doubt rabid anti-semites.
February 24, 2015 11:11 pm at 11:11 pm #1060933Sam2Participantnisht: Almost every disease that a father has antibodies for the mother does because married couples essentially share all germs eventually.
And the Frum people who are anti-MBP are never doing so out of any “inappropriate” connotation. That is an old anti-semitic canard dating back centuries. The Frum people against it have that opinion out of health concerns, nothing else.
February 24, 2015 11:42 pm at 11:42 pm #1060934oomisParticipantFor all the innocent CR readers, ALL Herpes Viruses are now able to be transferred from any part of the body, for reasons which are not appropriate for discussion. We cannot be careless about this. At least one baby has died following his bris. Perhaps there are more, but one is one too many. There was no question, from what I read about this tragedy, that the mohel had active lesions at his mouth. Would any responsible parent want to take the chance of having ANY mohel with a history of cold sores, do MBP on a newborn? Get another mohel.
I will not argue the Halacha here. There are heterim for using the pipette, and many mohelim now do so. But if someone adamantly wants to follow the tradition of the MBP, then EVERY precaution must be taken, and a back up plan must be in place if there is anything questionable about the mohel’s oral health.
February 25, 2015 12:05 am at 12:05 am #1060935Matan1ParticipantAs i’m sure Sam can back me up on, Rav Schachter has publicly stated that MBP should not be done, and a sterile tube should be used instead.
February 25, 2015 12:25 am at 12:25 am #1060936frumnotyeshivishParticipantNisht: why in the world would you assume that because hsv1 involves “cold sores” therefore it is “not an std”?
February 25, 2015 1:23 am at 1:23 am #1060937zahavasdadParticipantThere are Mohels that will try to asertain what the families feelings are will do the Bris accordingly.
February 25, 2015 2:19 am at 2:19 am #1060938nishtdayngesheftParticipantFNY
Really?? Do you know the difference between the 2 viruses?
February 25, 2015 2:42 am at 2:42 am #1060939nishtdayngesheftParticipantZD,
I have never heard of ANY mohel doing MbP against parents’ wishes. Perhaps a Gumco, though.
But none of that relates in anyway to the topic being discussed.
February 25, 2015 3:01 am at 3:01 am #1060940frumnotyeshivishParticipantNisht: really. And yes.
HIV can be transmitted via a blood transfusion. Does that mean it isn’t an std?
I’d be more specific but I don’t think it would get through the mods who have been more particular of late.
February 25, 2015 3:13 am at 3:13 am #1060941nishtdayngesheftParticipantSam,
I never said that’s the reason Frum people don’t do MbP. I was very clear about that. But I was also making clear that those that insist that it is “inappropriate” are hateful anti Semites. And they are thwe ones who intentionally conflate HSV 1 with HSV 2. Because of the connotation
February 25, 2015 3:14 am at 3:14 am #1060942nishtdayngesheftParticipantFNY.
Thanks for proving my point.
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘COULD mbp medically cause herpes?’ is closed to new replies.