I think I see where you are going with this... so let's get on wiht it.If 1 in 4 have gHSV2, and only 1 in 10 people realise they have HSV2, then:

22.5% of the population have gHSV2 without knowing,

2.5% of the population have gHSV2 and know.

(or as I say, 1 in 4 have it, but only 1 in 40 realise that they have it).

And 75% of people don't have gHSV

Whilst 80% of the people have oHSV1

Obvious, but I have to take issue with some of the figures, my understanding from recent studies and stats, is that

Anywhere between 18-40% of people have gHSV2 (US) BUT, this is massively related to other factors such as socio-economic backgrounds and all that. In one GUM clinic study in Paris, the female HSV2 infection rate was 69%... scarey!

It all depends on alsorts, I would say more like 1 in 5 have gHSV2, but it is as fair to say 1 in 4, and it does sound better (roll on self delussion), but the figure you quote is only an estimate.

Secondly, another study indicated that 10 - 20% of gHSV2 are aware of their status, 60 - 80% have 'Inapparent or MIS-diagnosed gHSV' and about 10 - 20% are 'classically assymptomatic'.

Furthermore, to figure out the average risk for the rest of the population is a weird concept. You cannot transmit herpes if you do not have it! Also, your figure of just 70% of new cases been as a result of sex with an unaware partner is interesting. I have personally read it to be 80% of new cases - plus, what the hell does that figure mean anyway.

Think about it, how can such a statistic be measured.

'hi unaware person who may just have given their partner gHSV, did you know you had this?'

'yer sure fucking thing - I'll admit one of the most selfish things I have ever done to a complete stranger - OF COARSE I DIDN'T KNOW YOU FUCKING FREAK' - I mean a person who has concealed it from their partner is hardly going to tell the truth to a stranger are they?

It's like how on earth do you get accurate data on that, and how can you prove someone knew before hand or not?

CAN WE EVER RELIABLEY USE SUCH A STATISTIC?

I think not - but if someone can show me some research I would be glad to look at the logic of it.

And, 39% of new gHSV cases are HSV1 related, which comes from say, 80% of the population who carry HSV1. AND, I would also need the figures of exactly how much sex is been had, on a 'bonk to bonk' basis. All of a sudden you can see that to make an estimate would require so many assumptions to be made, that any estimate would only be a mathematical assumption that wouldn't mean anything anyway. At least on my first one I can list the assumptions I made in a few sentances.

However, disclaimer up front - lets show you why it doesn't make sense:

if 80% of new cases are caused by 22.5% of the population...

then

2.5 % of the population must casue the other 20% of new cases

and that would suggest that having sex with a knowing gHSV2 carrier would make you about 3 times more likely to getting herpes than having sex with someone who doesn't know that they have it. True? I don't think so, but I bet the more symptoms you have, the higher the chance of transmission symptomatic or not...

BESIDES, if 80% of new gHSV cases are caught from people who do not know that they have it, where does the other 20% come from? Because according to one study, there is only an ~ 1 in 10 chance per annum of contracting gHSV2 from a gHSV carrier, no condoms, no antivirals, just abstaining during ob's. That just doesn't make sense either? I believe the figure to be relatively reliable, but that also makes the assumption that all gHSV2 sufferers are as equally aware and educated about the illness, the symptoms, not making mistakes, being equally motivated etc etc.. That figur is 'just' a little bit open to subjectivity aswell.

Does that mean that their is a high number of gHSV2 carriers knowingly infecting partners?

Do people just lie and say, 'nope, don't know where that came from', when they just ignore the issue and carry on regardless?

And where does the 39% of new cases being gHSV1 fit into the whole equation?

Does that mean that 80% of the population with oral HSV1 cause 39% of new gHSV cases?

You see, without knowing what we can't we, we cannot realy make sense of it. Perhaps in time.

BUT BUT BUT what if we carried on from where I left off? A 1 in 30,000 transmission rate, 50 million US people with gHSV, so that is like 150, 000, 000, 000 shaggings lead to 50,000,000 infected gHSV2 people.

I am guessing here, but 250,000,000 US citizens

so if a 1 in 30,000 transmission rate is likely (or even in the same ball park, these figures should tally up... watch this >>>

If there figure if a 1 in 30,000,000 shags/transmissions rate

then

150,000,000,000 shags are responsible for the 50,000,000 igHSV2 infected in the US

I am assuming that there are about 250,000,000 in the US

so therefor

the total number of bonks made by the US people is 600,000,000,000

That would indicate the average number of shags per head of population is 2,400 - in a life time (I think). Now that seems a little high to me, but it is only an average, there will be some higher and some lower...

BUT BUT BUT, if that 2,400 shags/life/US citizen is in the right ball park - which I think it is (as in within a decimal placing) then, that 1 in 30,000 transmission rate would to be within a factor of a decimal place.

However TJ, I can't help you with your question today because I am not stoned enough - I'll come back to it when I am monged...

'Trying to get a perspective'

MrB