Hello,
I know nothing about viruses etc.
I am currently writing a paper on the legal aspects of criminalisation of those who carry the HIV virus, and go on to infect non-infected partners and others through sexual intercourse.
I understand the concept of Phylogenetics (but not the scientific details).
The problem I have is this.
Person A is HIV+ and is aware.
He goes on to infect B (who is not HIV+), but they do have another Sexually Transmitted Disease. B's immunity is not at an optimal state. Now, if A infects B, B will become HIV+.
Does the fact that B's pre-HIV+ Sexually Transmitted Disease state compound the effects that that HIV+ status will have on B? Will B really be worse off having contracted HIV whilst having the Sexually Transmitted Disease?
Is phylogentics as certain as it can be? A criminal conviction is dependent on evidence, and that a conviction is to be held 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Can phylogentics as a process/test be wrong? If it is a matter of degree, how wrong can phylogenetics be?
What are the challenges, and obstacles to knowing that an infection came from Mr D and not Mr E, Mr F or Mr G? Is it the analysis of 'structural' markers of the virus, or is it a case of looking at the structural markers and it taking on the attributes of the individual who then becomes infected?
It is my understanding that people are promiscuous. In a paper that I have read, where evidence is lacking, it has been suggested that the police could prosecute where the injured party (newly infected with HIV), was monogamous with a defendant for a period of time or was a virgin. Does time, other infections, age and other biological processes make the virus/cells change so much that it is very difficult or impossible to be certain that a party who is HIV+ goes on to infect another person who is not infected, and for this to be evidenced?
I apologise in advance if there are misunderstanding / lack of clarity in the above, but any assistance would be appreciated.
Thank you.
