Talk:Post-exposure prophylaxis

message: The section on Herpes seems to be mixing up post-exposure prophylaxis (preventing getting infected with the virus) with suppression of the infection (already having it but reducing outbreaks).  I've made a minimal edit for the moment, but this section needs to be revised more and the presentation of the issue needs to be more clear. MartinezMD (talk) 01:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: How deeply should we look into this?  My first thought is that you are exactly right and that this information should not be on this page at all.  Should the entire section just be moved elsewhere, like to a herpes treatment page?  Blue Rasberry (talk) 04:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever we have needs to be accurate.  I'll cut it out of there and paste it here for now.  We can repair it and paste back after revision.  I'm sure the the Herpes treatment article (haven't looked really but this is rudimentary stuff) already has itself covered.  We need to address the topic even if the sources simply say there is no current prophylaxis (or perhaps there is - we need to look).MartinezMD (talk) 05:26, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Herpes 

message: 71.92.208.8 (talk) 02:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request: A mention of rabies PEP will be greatly useful. 

message: This page is a little confusing, it lists a series of treatments which are clearly related or grouped by the name "Post-exposure prophylaxis" but it does not explain what Post-exposure prophylaxis actually is, why it is names Post-exposure prophylaxis, how it came about, what defines something as being Post-exposure prophylaxis, not when it may be used or when it would not. A good example is the tetanus shot, in the UK if you get injured they give you ONE shot if you have not had one recently, however, they don't give you Post-exposure prophylaxis it seems...   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.83.140 (talk) 00:15, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  what is it? 

message: New updates by the CDC include a comprehensive Guideline for antiretroviral prophylaxis after sexual, injection drug use, or other nonoccupational exposure to HIV—United States, 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugister (talk • contribs) 18:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for sharing. This source is already cited in the "risk evaluation" section under HIV but as you suggest, this article could better summarize that source.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:49, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  HIV 

message: Hi! Thank you for the improvements made in this page. The article shows a neutral point of view giving important information about both the risks and benefits as well as proper steps needed to take to ensure proper "post-exposure prophylaxis". (Monique.payne (talk) 17:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your input on duplicate references. These have been consolidated to one throughout the page. Cbadgley (talk) 20:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

text: You have to read WP:MEDMOS. People is preferred as WP is not a manual for medical providers. Also, from a technical standpoint, a person is not a patient unless they are receiving medical care - i.e. simply being exposed to an illness does not make a person a patient.MartinezMD (talk) 15:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your comments, I reorganized and condensed the Testing and Treatment sections to make it more friendly to a broader range of people (e.g. instead of "Patient Management Guidelines").Sugister (talk) 06:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates to article