Talk:Herpes

Template:Vital article

Semi-protected edit request on 6 March 2019

EDIT REQUEST: Remove first two paragraphs of "Society and Culture" section and modify third paragraph. References do not support claims.

In the first paragraph, it cites a single paper (ref #108) from 1975 that doesn't have a separate column in their table for herpes as proof that "no significant morbidity problem (i.e. mental anxiety or illness) was associated with the virus." This source does not support this information. This source (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1047831/?page=4) discusses the history of the disease and some of the stigma associated.

In the second section, references #109 and #110 are used to support the claim that the disease was "invented" to sell drugs. The full quote from reference #109 does NOT support this claim: "While in charge of R&D at Burroughs Wellcome Co. from 1975 to 1985, I witnessed many startling examples of the folly of rendering early marketing (or technical) predictions when dealing with novel compounds or diseases. During the D&D of acyclovir (Zovirax), marketing insisted that there were “no markets” for this compound. Most had hardly heard of genital herpes, to say nothing about the common and devastating systemic herpetic infections in immunocompromised patients. But those with knowledge of clinical medicine knew that these were very serious and prevalent conditions for which there were no other therapies."

Reference #110 defines "disease mongering" but provides no claims related to herpes. 216.46.13.3 (talk) 20:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done – Þjarkur (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Herpes virus

Cross-posted here, at Talk:Herpesviridae, and at Talk:Herpes simplex virus

Hi everyone. What do you think of this disambiguation-page: Herpes virus

I tried to make this into the shortest introduction one could possibly have to the subject. Maybe that page should be moved to Herpes, which is currently a redirect to Herpes simplex. Incorrectly, if you ask me. "Herpes" can refer to both a virus and a disease. Where I live, Netherlands, most people associate the word "herpes" with either herpes labialis (cold sores) or genital herpes. So, if they search for "herpes" on Wikipedia, it might be a good idea to present them with a short page explaining the terminology right away, in a concise manner. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 19:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

can you explain what is Herpes simplex? I'm using the dictionary of virology which defines it as: "herpes simplex virus 1 and 2 There are 2 antigenic types: herpes simplex virus 1; herpes simplex type 2 is a synonym for Human herpesvirus 2." The definitions of Human herpesvirus 1/2 detail the symptoms and prognosis of the disease. How does this page relate to it? Thanks 2003:EC:2718:B1E9:DC6C:613B:133C:DCFA (talk) 10:28, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Non-medical therapy for genital herpes

I have it on very good authority that one can decisively control genital herpes by diligently identifying trigger actions -- exclusively consumption -- and eliminating them, with near 100% efficacy. For example, one middle-aged American male was able to eliminate frequent outbreaks or pre-outbreaks by eliminating a dozen or so foods and consumables: coffee, black tea, chocolate, white chicken meat, peanuts, soy sauce, balsamic vinegar, and whisky. A number of these items fell into the "arginine" category discouraged for herpes infectees. But by scrupulously following the dietary restrictions, herpes went from an unpredictable multi-month issue for many years to a non-issue. And no medications were used.

I think the article should report non-medical successful approaches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbrummel (talk • contribs) 20:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Rbrummel, Based on what sources? MrOllie (talk) 20:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request removal of false sentences from Signs and Symptoms and Pathophysiology

Please remove the sentence "As a result of primary infection, the body produces antibodies to the particular type of HSV involved, preventing a subsequent infection of that type at a different site." because it is not true. Accordingly, please remove the sentence "Antibodies that develop following an initial infection with a type of HSV prevents reinfection with the same virus type—a person with a history of orofacial infection caused by HSV-1 cannot contract herpes whitlow or a genital infection caused by HSV-1" because it is also false. Thank you. thethirdmanlettuce — Preceding undated comment added 04:07, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Possible error about HSV reinfections

The article makes the following claim without citation: "In HSV-1-infected individuals, seroconversion after an oral infection prevents additional HSV-1 infections such as whitlow, genital herpes, and herpes of the eye."

This seems contradicted by the NHS, which says that herpes of the eye usually come from reinfection at a new site: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/herpes-simplex-eye-infections/?fbclid=IwAR0upARMKw2yL34Vrkj2VcbxQ1ospEuKWFoK1hL2Fz6ASm0I_XSKd61ULSo

I see three possibilities:

(1) The NHS is wrong

(2) The article is wrong

(3) The article is using the word "prevents" in the sense of "helps prevent" rather than "prevents 100%" (similar to how a vaccine prevents disease)

The most charitable and likely interpretation is #3, so I've edited the section to say "helps prevent" instead of "prevents."

If any of you are HSV experts, please feel free to correct me. Ted Sanders (talk) 05:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)