Impact of the OPTN transmissible diseases policy and US PHS increased risk donor guidelines on living donor candidates.

Donor-derived human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmissions in transplantation have led to policies mandating assessment of donor behavioral history, and disclosure of donor increased risk (IR) status to recipients. Organ Procurement Transplantation Network (OPTN) policy safeguards were promulgated in the context of deceased donation, with its narrow time window for organ utilization and uncertainty about donor history. These policies have been applied to living donation without substantive data on risk of disease transmission in living donor transplantation. Unlike for deceased donors, the OPTN does not collect data on living donor IR status. Given the feasibility of thorough living donor evaluation via already-mandated lab tests and clinical assessments, living donor IR assessment and associated disclosures may have limited benefit in improving recipient informed consent. Applying the current IR policy to living donors may also introduce unintended consequences to donors and recipients, causing donors psychological harm, delays in donation to avoid IR status disclosure, and potential withdrawal from donation. We suggest strategies that reduce risk of harm to donor candidates while maintaining policy compliance, and review additional approaches for evaluating risk of disease transmission in living donor candidates. Data on the risk of disease transmission by living donors are needed to inform policy modification.

Limit Cases: How and Why We Can and Should Decriminalise HIV Transmission, Exposure, And Non-Disclosure.

Across the world, people living with HIV and AIDS (PLHA) face investigation, prosecution, conviction, and punishment if they transmit HIV to another person, expose others to the risk of HIV acquisition, or fail to disclose in advance their HIV positive status. This article seeks to explain why limiting the criminalisation of HIV is important and necessary; identifies some of the ways in which it has been, and might be, limited; and, finally, offers some reflections on whether there exists a principled limit to decriminalisation arguments (ie whether there are cases which, even if the general principles underpinning decriminalisation is accepted, justify state punishment). Drawing on recent international policy guidance, current scientific knowledge about HIV prevention and treatment, and research on the impact of criminalisation of PLHA, the article argues that decriminalisation is critical to eradicating HIV and should be a public health priority, that biomedical advances in prevention and treatment will assist the decriminalisation project but are insufficient in the absence of legal and criminal justice practice reform.

Criminal liability for spreading sexually transmitted infections.

Last month's article considered capacity to consent to sexual activity. This month's article reviews the case of a man from Nottingham who was jailed for 7 years for infecting two former lovers with HIV and considers whether those who act recklessly put others at risk of infection during sexual activity should be held criminally liable and prosecuted for their actions.

Sexual transmission of HIV and the law: an Australian medical consensus statement.

INTRODUCTION: Criminal cases involving human immunodeficiency virus transmission or exposure require that courts correctly comprehend the rapidly evolving science of HIV transmission and the impact of an HIV diagnosis. This consensus statement, written by leading HIV clinicians and scientists, provides current scientific evidence to facilitate just outcomes in Australian criminal cases involving HIV.Main recommendations: Caution should be exercised when considering charges or prosecutions regarding HIV transmission or exposure because:Scientific evidence shows that the risk of HIV transmission during sex between partners of different HIV serostatus can be low, negligible or too low to quantify, even when the HIV-positive partner is not taking effective antiretroviral therapy, depending on the nature of the sexual act, the viral load of the partner with HIV, and whether a condom or pre-exposure prophylaxis is employed to reduce risk.The use of phylogenetic analysis in cases of suspected HIV transmission requires careful consideration of its limited probative value as evidence of causation of HIV infection, although such an approach may provide valuable information, particularly in relation to excluding HIV transmission between individuals.Most people recently infected with HIV are able to commence simple treatment providing them a normal and healthy life expectancy, largely comparable with their HIV-negative peers. Among people who have been diagnosed and are receiving treatment, HIV is rarely life threatening. People with HIV can conceive children with negligible risk to their partner and low risk to their child.Changes in management as result of the consensus statement: Given the limited risk of HIV transmission per sexual act and the limited long term harms experienced by most people recently diagnosed with HIV, appropriate care should be taken before HIV prosecutions are pursued. Careful attention should be paid to the best scientific evidence on HIV risk and harms, with consideration given to alternatives to prosecution, including public health management.

HIV transmission law in the age of treatment-as-prevention.

Evidence that treating people with HIV early in infection prevents transmission to sexual partners has reframed HIV prevention paradigms. The resulting emphasis on HIV testing as part of prevention strategies has rekindled the debate as to whether laws that criminalise HIV transmission are counterproductive to the human rights-based public health response. It also raises normative questions about what constitutes 'safe(r) sex' if a person with HIV has undetectable viral load, which has significant implications for sexual practice and health promotion. This paper discusses a recent high-profile Australian case where HIV transmission or exposure has been prosecuted, and considers how the interpretation of law in these instances impacts on HIV prevention paradigms. In addition, we consider the implications of an evolving medical understanding of HIV transmission, and particularly the ability to determine infectiousness through viral load tests, for laws that relate to HIV exposure (as distinct from transmission) offences. We conclude that defensible laws must relate to appreciable risk. Given the evidence that the transmissibility of HIV is reduced to negligible level where viral load is suppressed, this needs to be recognised in the framing, implementation and enforcement of the law. In addition, normative concepts of 'safe(r) sex' need to be expanded to include sex that is 'protected' by means of the positive person being virally suppressed. In jurisdictions where use of a condom has previously mitigated the duty of the person with HIV to disclose to a partner, this might logically also apply to sex that is 'protected' by undetectable viral load.

Prevalence and public health implications of state laws that criminalize potential HIV exposure in the United States.

For the past three decades, legislative approaches to prevent HIV transmission have been used at the national, state, and local levels. One punitive legislative approach has been enactment of laws that criminalize behaviors associated with HIV exposure (HIV-specific criminal laws). In the USA, HIV-specific criminal laws have largely been shaped by state laws. These laws impose criminal penalties on persons who know they have HIV and subsequently engage in certain behaviors, most commonly sexual activity without prior disclosure of HIV-positive serostatus. These laws have been subject to intense public debate. Using public health law research methods, data from the legal database WestlawNext© were analyzed to describe the prevalence and characteristics of laws that criminalize potential HIV exposure in the 50 states (plus the District of Columbia) and to examine the implications of these laws for public health practice. The first state laws were enacted in 1986; as of 2011 a total of 67 laws had been enacted in 33 states. By 1995, nearly two-thirds of all laws had been enacted; by 2000, 85 % of laws had been enacted; and since 2000, an additional 10 laws have been enacted. Twenty-four states require persons who are aware that they have HIV to disclose their status to sexual partners and 14 states require disclosure to needle-sharing partners. Twenty-five states criminalize one or more behaviors that pose a low or negligible risk for HIV transmission. Nearly two-thirds of states in the USA have legislation that criminalizes potential HIV exposure. Many of these laws criminalize behaviors that pose low or negligible risk for HIV transmission. The majority of laws were passed before studies showed that antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces HIV transmission risk and most laws do not account for HIV prevention measures that reduce transmission risk, such as condom use, ART, or pre-exposure prophylaxis. States with HIV-specific criminal laws are encouraged to use the findings of this paper to re-examine those laws, assess the laws' alignment with current evidence regarding HIV transmission risk, and consider whether the laws are the best vehicle to achieve their intended purposes.

The criminal transmission of HIV: issues with condom use and viral load.

This article considers two issues in relation to the criminal transmission of HIV. Currently, the use of condoms, and a defendant's viral load, has not been an issue that has been raised in the courts. The article considers how the defence, prosecution and judge may deal with such evidential issues. It will discuss how an expert opinion may be utilised or discredited by counsel for the defendant and counsel for the prosecution. The article will consider how the defence can demonstrate that the defendant was not reckless and how the prosecution can establish that the defendant was actually reckless. It will also assess how the judge, in trial, may address condom use and the level of the defendant's viral load when directing the jury. Finally, it is argued that it is in the public interest to allow condom use and viral loads to be used to negate recklessness.

Criminal prosecution of a male partner for sexual transmission of infectious diseases: the views of educated people living in Togo.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the views of educated people in Togo on the acceptability of criminal prosecution of a male partner for sexual transmission of infectious diseases (STIDs) to his female partner. METHODS: 199 adults living in Kara, Togo judged acceptability of criminal prosecution for STID in 45 scenarios composed of combinations of five factors: (a) severity of disease; (b) awareness and communication of one's serological status; (c) partners' marital status; (d) number of sexual partners the female partner has and (e) male partner's subsequent attitude (supportive or not). RESULTS: Acceptability was lower (a) when the male partner decided to take care of his female partner he had infected than when he decided to leave, (b) when both partners were informed but decided not to take precautions than when none of them was informed or when only the male partner was informed and (c) when the female partner has had several male sexual partners than when she has had only one. Two qualitatively different views were identified. For 66% of participants, when the male partner accepts to take care of his partner, he should not be sued, except when he did not disclose his serological status. For 34%, when both partners were informed, the male partner should not be sued, irrespective of other circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding criminal prosecution for STID, most people in the sample endorsed the position of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS that urges governments not to apply criminal law to cases where sexual partners disclosed their status or were not informed of it.

Imprisonment for non-intentional transmission of HIV: can it be supported using established principles for justifying criminal sentencing?

In England, Wales and Scotland, those who unintentionally transmit HIV through sexual intercourse are at risk of criminal prosecution, and furthermore may be at risk of imprisonment under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. These sentences have ranged between 1 and 10 years. There has been a long debate on whether this is an acceptable use of the law, and indeed whether those who transmit HIV in this manner should be subjected to legal proceedings. Previous debate has embraced the rhetoric of shared responsibility and public health. In this paper, we wished instead to apply traditional justifications for sentencing (including retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation and reparation) to imprisonment for non-intentional transmission of HIV through consensual sexual intercourse. We argue that when these principles are applied to imprisonment for this 'crime', we are unable to justify imprisonment sufficiently, and therefore, that imprisonment is a misguided response to HIV transmission.

'The intention may not be cruel... but the impact may be': understanding legislators' motives and wider public attitudes to a draft HIV Bill in Malawi.

OBJECTIVES: The law in relation to HIV has prominence in the formation and regulation of moral norms-in regard to human rights, and in regard to criminalisation, the policing of sexuality and intimate behaviours, and the production of stigma. The research focuses on the potential and impotence of the law to govern for, and enable, the human right to health in the context of HIV in Malawi. METHODS: This one-country qualitative case study (Malawi) action research involved data collection during a 6-month period (October 2010-March 2011). Datasets include interviews with law commissioners (n=10), opinion leaders (n=22), life story participants who were people living with and closely affected by HIV (n=20), reflections of the action research team (n=6), and a review of the proposed HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Management) Bill, legal and policy documents. RESULTS: The analysis of the perspectives of the law commissioners, who formed the Special Law Commission and drafted the Bill, revealed that stigma was consciously invoked to delineate social norms and guide governance of notions of personal responsibility. The analysis of the perspectives of the life story participants, whose lives would be most directly impacted if these provisions came into force, reveals the extent to which the stigma associating criminality and HIV is falling on fertile ground through its engagement and generation of internalised stigma; unearthing an uneasy link between stigma and the law in response to HIV in Malawi. DISCUSSION: The results indicated that the proposed HIV Bill in Malawi manifests a tension between intention and impact. By incorporating criminal sanctions as part of the proposed HIV Bill, the lawmakers actively seek to use stigma to shape social attitudes and attempt to guide normative behaviour.

Control of communicable disease; foreign--requirements for importers of nonhuman primates (NHP). Final rule.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), located within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is amending regulations for the importation of live nonhuman primates (NHPs) by extending existing requirements for the importation of Macaca fascicularis (cynomolgus), Chlorocebus aethiops (African green), and Macaca mulatta (rhesus) monkeys to all NHPs with the exception of the filovirus testing requirement. Filovirus testing will only be required for Old World NHPs in quarantine that have illness consistent with filovirus infection or that die for any reason other than trauma during quarantine. HHS/CDC is also finalizing a provision to reduce the frequency at which importers of cynomolgus, African green, and rhesus monkeys are required to renew their special permits (from every 180 days to every 2 years). HHS/CDC is incorporating existing guidelines into the regulations and adding new provisions to address the following: NHPs imported as part of an animal act; NHPs imported or transferred by zoological societies; the transfer of NHPs from approved laboratories; and non-live imported NHP products. Finally, HHS/CDC is also requiring that all NHPs be imported only through ports of entry where a HHS/CDC quarantine station is located.

Vaccination-induced syphilis and the Hübner malpractice litigation.

This article examines smallpox vaccination in the 19th century as background for a notorious medical malpractice case that occupied Bavarian courts from April 1853 until May 1854. Dr. Georg Hübner, the defendant, was accused of having initiated a small epidemic of syphilis by using the lymph of a syphilitic infant to vaccinate 13 infants. The litigation and its published contemporaneous discussion demonstrate conflicts in the understanding of syphilis, the hazards of having to make a purely clinical diagnosis, the effect of obsolete legal wording in medical litigation, and the attitude of leading physicians to a guilty colleague. This case ultimately led to efforts to make arm-to-arm smallpox vaccination safer, and by 1898 to abandon the technique in favor of bovine sources that were sterilized and stabilized by various methods.

[Duties of TB patients or suspected patients and their close relations]. / Prawne obowiazki chorych lub podejrzanych o zachorowanie na gruzlice i osób z ich otoczenia.

The effective laws impose the duty upon TB patients or persons suspected to have TB as well as their close relations to undergo compulsory sanitary, epidemiological and examinations. Furthermore, treatment is also mandatory and in case of infecting patients hospitalization, isolation and treatment. Duty does not denote enforcement required in certain particularly dangerous infectious diseases. Poland operates a system of mandatory TB vaccination applicable, today, only to infants. Persons suspected of TB have the obligation to provide necessary information helping in diagnosing the disease or helping to find the source of infection and transmission of the disease. TB patients are under obligation to discontinue performing their work in case it may prevent the disease from spreading onto other persons.

[Peculiarities of forensic medical expertise in a situation of massive salmonellosis morbidity in a military unit].

The authors propose to consider infectious diseases as mass clinical conditions in both normative-legal and medical contexts. Peculiarities of commission and comprehensive inspections carried out in situations of massive infectious morbidity among servicemen are illustrated by examples of the work of state forensic medical organizations and investigative authorities of the Russian Defense Ministry.

Needless needle nuisances in Nepal.

Pin-prick injuries which prove not to be infected may still cause fear and distress, but allow the victims, who are often young women, no opportunity for redress. These attacks are causing panic among the targeted population who fear AIDS.

Rapid response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Vietnam government's experience and preliminary success.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has hit all corners of the world, challenging governments to act promptly in controlling the spread of the pandemic. Due to limited resources and inferior technological capacities, developing countries including Vietnam have faced many challenges in combating the pandemic. Since the first cases were detected on 23 January 2020, Vietnam has undergone a 3-month fierce battle to control the outbreak with stringent measures from the government to mitigate the adverse impacts. In this study, we aim to give insights into the Vietnamese government's progress during the first three months of the outbreak. Additionally, we relatively compare Vietnam's response with that of other Southeast Asia countries to deliver a clear and comprehensive view on disease control strategies. METHODS: The data on the number of COVID-19 confirmed and recovered cases in Vietnam was obtained from the Dashboard for COVID-19 statistics of the Ministry of Health (https://ncov.vncdc.gov.vn/). The review on Vietnam's country-level responses was conducted by searching for relevant government documents issued on the online database 'Vietnam Laws Repository' (https://thuvienphapluat.vn/en/index.aspx), with the grey literature on Google and relevant official websites. A stringency index of government policies and the countries' respective numbers of confirmed cases of nine Southeast Asian countries were adapted from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/coronavirus-government-response-tracker). All data was updated as of 24 April 2020. RESULTS: Preliminary positive results have been achieved given that the nation confirmed no new community-transmitted cases since 16 April and zero COVID-19 - related deaths throughout the 3-month pandemic period. To date, the pandemic has been successfully controlled thanks to the Vietnamese government's prompt, proactive and decisive responses including mobilization of the health care systems, security forces, economic policies, along with a creative and effective communication campaign corresponding with crucial milestones of the epidemic's progression. CONCLUSIONS: Vietnam could be one of the role models in pandemic control for low-resource settings. As the pandemic is still ongoing in an unpredictable trajectory, disease control measures should continue to be put in place in the foreseeable short term.