Latest news

New research has shown that HIV-negative partners of HIV-positive women are more than twice as likely to become infected with HIV if their partner becomes pregnant.

The research involved 3321 heterosexual couples where one partner was HIV-positive and the other HIV-negative.

There were a total of 823 pregnancies in the study, and 503 of these were in women with HIV.

A total of 64 women became newly infected with HIV as did 57 men.

When the researchers looked at their findings in detail, they found that pregnancy doubled the risk of an HIV-positive woman passing on the virus to a male partner. They also found that the risk of infection with HIV was increased for HIV-negative women during pregnancy.

The researchers think that the changes to the body and immune system that occur during pregnancy could explain these findings.

The findings of this research suggest that it’s especially important to take efforts to prevent transmission of HIV during pregnancy.

It’s therefore important to remember that properly used condoms are an effective way of preventing HIV, as well as other sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy.

But some couples find it difficult to use condoms all the time.

Taking HIV treatment is thought to reduce the infectiousness of a person with HIV. There’s a lot of debate about how effective it is, and it’s not recommended as a replacement for condoms.

If you’re having difficulty using condoms, or if you have other questions about safer sex, you can talk to someone at your clinic, like your doctor, or a health adviser or nurse. It may also help to talk to other people living with HIV, or someone working in an HIV organisation. NAM supports the Terrence Higgins Trust in providing a health support service for people with HIV in several towns in the UK - you can read more about this on the THT website.

Microbicides are an experimental area of HIV prevention. They are often gels, creams or foams that are applied to the vagina or rectum before sex, and it’s hoped that they’ll prevent or reduce the risk of HIV transmission.

A conference is currently underway which is exploring the latest research into this field.

The conference heard that it’s “crunch time” for this area of prevention – more research is needed urgently to explore if microbicides could become a key prevention method.

A number of anti-HIV drugs are being tested in clinical trials as potential microbicides. The results of the first of these will be presented at the International AIDS Conference in Vienna in July.

Standard safer sex advice for almost 30 years has been to use condoms with water or silicone-based lubricant for anal sex.

But now research involving both gay men and women has found that using a lubricant increases the risk of infection with bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

Almost 12% of people who used a lubricant were diagnosed with rectal gonorrhoea, chlamydia or syphilis compared to just 5% of those who didn’t use a lubricant.

When the researchers took into account factors such as number of partners, frequency of sex, and condom use, they found that the use of lubricant was still associated with a threefold increase in rectal STIs.

This research doesn’t mean that people should stop using lubricants for anal sex. Unlubricated anal sex can be painful, cause soreness, bleeding, and damage to tissue in the anus and rectum – and that can also increase the risk of STIs.

Rather, researchers are recommending that people should choose their lubricant carefully.

For example, other research showed that KY Jelly could kill friendly bacteria in the vagina, and this lubricant and several similar water-based lubricants damaged the cell lining of the rectum. The study found that a silicone-based lube, Wet Platinum, and a vaginal water-based lube, PRé, did not damage the cells. Damage to cells in the rectum may explain the higher risk of STIs in lube users found in this study, but more research is needed urgently.

Canadian researchers are calling for policy changes that would allow some gay men to give blood.

As is the case in the UK, all gay men in Canada are banned for life from giving blood.

The ban was introduced in the early 1980s, But the researchers argue that advances in HIV testing technology means that the lifetime ban is now outdated. All blood donations are tested for HIV and other infections such as hepatitis B and C.

Moreover, they believe that the ban is inconsistent and discriminatory. They note that heterosexuals who have multiple sexual partners only have to defer giving blood for twelve months.

The researchers therefore suggest that HIV-negative gay men who’ve been in a stable, monogamous relationship for at least twelve months should be able to give blood.

Gay men with multiple sexual partners would still be banned from giving blood.

They suggest that this change in policy would not substantially increase the risk of an HIV-infected donation entering the blood supply.

Lifetime bans on gay men giving blood is highly contentious. A number of countries have temporary deferments, lasting between one and ten years.

The UK has a lifetime ban. In 2009, the National Blood Service issued a document explaining that this was not based on homophobia. It pointed out that gay men remain the group most affected by HIV, and that many men have an ongoing risk of HIV. In addition, gay men have high rates of other blood-borne infections such as syphilis and hepatitis B.

But not everybody accepts these arguments.