wiltshire

Thanks again psycho, In this case what are considered high doses? I also found this link here which suggests long term use is acceptable, if I read it correctly. Valacyclovir and Famcyclovir are also alternatives derived from acyclovir with better, I think it's called "bioavailability" in that it gets into the system more easily and stays longer. Long-term suppressive HSV Valcyclovir therapy for seropositive patients is usualy 1x500mg tab/day (up to 1000mg/day for serious cases) If this information is not readily available is a bit of an oversight as it represents at least an option for partners and couples to enjoy a full sex life without fear of infection, or at least a very seriously reduced risk. Agreed, it's not a vaccine, but it could potentially resolve many psychosocial issues amongst sufferers.

That is a very encouraging answer. I have also found that there is such a protocol of 'cyclovir treatment for seronegative transplant patients in case they come into contact with HSV. I know that manywith HSV wish to protect their partners from being infected. Yet this course of prophylactic treatment is never discussed or considered. Can it really be a blind spot? Cyclovirs are well tolerated by most, even for long term use, but are always looked at as treatment for the seropositive patient e.g. as a supressive therapy against shedding and or symptoms. It is never considered for a seronegative partner. Are there others that concur with Psycho?

Dear all, I have been doing a lot of reading around the subject of HSV treatment, pathology and search for vaccines or prophylaxis. I am not an immunologist by a long way, nor a microbiologist. I do work in the paramedical professions and have a better than average lay understanding of the subject. I understand from another forum that manufacturers valacyclovir, famciclovir etc do not know the answer as nobody has researched it. So the hypothesis is this (based on the papers I have read. I'm sure I could source them at request).... "If 'ciclovir treatment is started as soon as possible after HSV exposure (up to 5 days after) it has been shown to greatly improve prognosis of the infection. It has also been shown that 'cyclovir suppressive treatment takes 5 days to take full effect, which also suppresses viral shedding. It is hypothesised that, prophylactic 'cyclovir treatment of an hsv-seronegative person will help protect against hsv infection from their seropositive partner, further improved if both partners take the medication". Immunologically speaking, what would the immune response be to a virus (dead or alive) that has already been exposed to 'cyclovir during the initial "challenge" in a seronegative person. I'd like to think that (best scenario) it would prevent that infection and thence all future challenges having 'learned' the correct response to HSV....essentially, immunity. Is there any logic here, or am I missing the boat completely. As I say, I am by no means an expert. Many Thanks