Herpes in Gay couples

[alwaysamommy.livejournal.com]

This doesn't actually apply to me but I was curious. Last night, I was watching the commercial for Valtrex. At the bottom of the screen, a disclaimer flashed saying that Valtrex has only been tested in heterosexual couples. Honestly, I can't see a difference. It's not like a virus such as Herpes is going to care if you're male or female, right?
I was just curious what any potential difference would be.

Comments

[dangerousface.livejournal.com]

I would think the effectiveness could be affected by methods of transmission which would boil down to how people have sex and since lots of gay people don't always have the same kinds of sex that standard heterosexual folks do...

[alwaysamommy.livejournal.com]

I suppose you're right but the types of sex aren't that different. Anyone can have anal sex and get herpes around their anus, and we all know about mouth to genital transmission and vice versa. The person would be just as likely to have an outbreak if they were gay, as opposed to straight. They have to have their disclaimers in case they get sued, I realize. It just seemed kind of silly.

[geminigirl]

Very true, but the methods that the manufacturer used to calculate the effectiveness at reducing transmission probably only account for PIV sex between a man and a woman, rather than oral or anal sex between any combination of people. It's not so much "heterosexual" as it is the particular behavior that people engage in. Could they account for other sexual behaviors? Probably. Is it worth their time and effort and money? Probably not. Valtrex is used as effective suppressive therapy in people of various sexual orientations.

[http://users.livejournal.com/__recidivist/]

We know that anyone can have anal intercourse, and anyone can have mainly manual and oral sex with no PIV, and the companies probably realise that in theory, but I think that the general cultural assumption for heterosexual sex is PIV. They might not have wanted to say that, though.

We probably have that idea that heterosexual sex=PIV because it actually is most common practise for heterosexual couples. Therefore, the subjects in Valtrex's studies might have had anal intercourse a few times and might not have had much, if any, PIV. Female partners might have been strapping on, and partners might have been having a mainly manual sex. But, for whatever reason, we view those as "alternative" behaviours ("if there's no penis in your relationship, you can use a dildo or your hands. If there's no vagina in your relationship, you can penetrate an anus.") rather than standard ones, and assume that if there is a penis and a vagina in a sexual relationship, they'll tend to find one another.

Fair and truthful? Not really. But I think that it might still be safe to guess that most of those partners were engaged mainly in oral sex and PIV for most of their sexual activity.

It'd be pretty interesting to learn if Valtrex actually collected information on the type of sex that participants in the study were having.

Also, looking at the Valtrex website, it appears that their research studies were "randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial[s] of 1484 immunocompetent, heterosexual, monogamous couples discordant for HSV-2". In other words, their official trials used specifically (currently) exclusively heterosexual couples, and therefore they may not be allowed by the FDA to extrapolate that data.

This probably also be a deliberate move on Valtrex's part to extend their patent on the for Valtrex. If a drug company can prove that a drug has other uses (first it can protect people having heterosexual sex, and in three years they announce that studies have shown that it can protect men having anal intercourse), they can renew their patent and stave off generics for another few years, so they keep receiving the sales.

I've thought wayyy too much about this.

[alwaysamommy.livejournal.com]

Obviously so have I, because I was thinking a lot of the same things, although you raise a good point about the patent. That one didn't occur to me. Thanks for the insight.

[missjecka.livejournal.com]

I've noticed this, too, but I assumed that they just might have not done tests on homosexual couples, only hetero ones.

[spermeister.livejournal.com]

Since it was a clinical study, they have to be upfront about the sample used in testing. Since it's a drug for an STI, then they have to be upfront that they only tested the drug with people who had partners of the opposite sex. It's only relevant if someone else comes along and runs a similar test and finds different results, and this way the company can say "The differences might be because we only tested it in heterosexual couples, what did you use?"

Just the rules of research.

[daddysambiguity.livejournal.com]

it may be that there are not that many huge differences, but that the tests were only carried out in straight couples, therefore they need to be honest and accurate when they say it was only tested in those groups, even if there aren't a ton of differences -- know what i mean?