In my country people give it the same importance as a simple cold.
In my country people give it the same importance as a simple cold.
I like how you've inverted the common "US represents the world" fallacy by literally asserting that your herpes-blind nation is representative of the entire world exclusive of the US.
Consider the line from the Wikipedia page:
"Worldwide rates of either HSV-1 or HSV-2 are between 60% and 95% in adults."
If infection rates are that high, it's probably not that big of a deal for most people.
Colds resolve in a few days to a week. There is absolutely a cure, just not one in pill form.
[0]: https://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2013/06/17/igm-blood-test-...
We're not talking about HPV, which I (and you) very likely have wether we know it or not, without vaccination.
"Oral herpes infection is mostly asymptomatic, and the majority of people with HSV-1 infection are unaware they are infected." [1]
[1] From https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/herpes-simp...
It actually is. Most people are asymptomatic, or their symptoms are so mild that they confuse them for a pimple.
If you didn't get it as a kid you really should get vaccinated for it as an adult. Being exposed to the attenuated form of HHV-3 in the vaccine is way safer than actually catching the disease.
1. a something widespread does usually have naturally higher societal acceptance
2. [IANAD] kind of "de-facto" vaccination/immunization. For example i (like many many Russians) have occasional cold sores (once in a 1-4 years, in CA seems to be less frequently than back in Russia) since childhood. I've had it on both sides of my lips which probably means that i have both - HSV1 and HSV2. That also means that i never going to get it anywhere else on my body (once any one site in the body gets infected with herpes the rest of the body develops immunity)
From descriptions genital herpes seems to be worse than lip cold sores. In US (at least in CA) i see no people with cold sores, so the majority of the population is most probably susceptible to the infection. Given that sexual contact is a frequent transmission method in adulthood (while not a factor in childhood), i'm not surprised that for US population "herpes" statistically means and happens as "genital herpes" (while i haven't heard about such a thing back in Russia where we get it early in the childhood as cold sores on lips).
Also, whats source of such common early childhood herpes in Russia? Kissing from infected relatives? Given lethality of neonatal herpes it seems unlikely to be interuterine transmission.
Do you have a source for that? I have somewhat suspected that was the case based on some other things I've heard, but I have been unable to find any real sources on it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2...
"But as people gained awareness of the contagious nature of cold sores, they became more cautious about exposing young children to a skin outbreak. That means more and more of us get to adulthood without any HSV immunity.
On the one hand, that makes the younger generation more susceptible to HSV-2 -- one won't 100 percent protect you from contracting the other, but they have some antibodies in common. On the other hand, it means that more and more people get their first exposure to HSV-1 not through kissing, but through oral sex."
This is definitely not true. HSV2 showing up on lips is extremely uncommon. I've had HSV1 for my entire life and any area of my mouth is fair game, as so is the inside of my nose.
This is all contrary to my understanding.
You can definitely spread either strain to other areas of your body. You can spread it around your mouth more and transfer it from your mouth to your genitals.
Thinking you can't get it more will not lead to pleasant outcomes.
HSV takes up latency in usually either the dorsal root ganglion (which typically presents with lesions in the genital region), or in the trigeminal ganglion which typically presents with oral lesions.
You are right that infection with one strain does not necessarily grant immunity to infection with another strain.
It is also not true that oral lesions necessarily indicate HSV1 infection, and that genital lesions necessarily indicate HSV2 infection.