|WikiProject Medicine||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Microbiology||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Trichomonas vaginalis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Is there an herb which will rid of this problem without the use of the chemical metronidazole?
- This isn't really the right place to ask, and very few herbs have been show to help any disease Nil Einne 16:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
We'll see. The number for humans has been gradually coming down as the quality of the analysis improves. This is also true for most other eukaryotic genomes. Entamoeba 13:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
The T. vag genome project reports ~26K 'evidence supported' genes currently (i.e., similar to known protein or EST sequences), but ~60K protein coding genes in all -- not counting another ~38k 'repeat' genes , also putatively protein-coding (these are not directly retrievable as such from Genbank, but can be gotten from TrichDB.org). As the genome assembly is currently quite fragmented, these numbers will doubtless change. But the T vag genome is truly large, because it contains tons of repetitive regions. TrichDB.org is an NIH-funded genome repository/datamining resource, working in collaboration with the Carlton lab. Sullis (talk) 17:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I was once told that trichomonas can only be transferred from man to woman and not the other way around. Is this true?
--126.96.36.199 13:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
NO! There is no way that men could get infected if this was true. What is true is that women seem more likely to get symptoms from an infection. Entamoeba 13:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Trichomonas vaginalis exhibits corkscrew motility not tumbling motility. (Listeria organisms show tumbling motility). The corkscrew motion is due to its flagella on one end and undulating membrane along its side that causes the organism to rotate about a longitudinal axis when in motion. Jennben4 06:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Nice catch - thanks for the correction. -- MarcoTolo 02:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Proposed category merge
Possible to go undetected for over one year?
Yes, unless there are symptoms there would be no reason for someone to look for it, except perhaps if a partner was diagnosed with the infection. It is difficult to know how long many types of infection persist if the infection is asymptomatic, but certainly from published screening results and subsequent follow-up there are many parasites that can persist for over a year, and I see no reason why Trichomonas should be any different.Entamoeba (talk) 20:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Would someone mind making this page a bit more user-friendly, while the information is correct it is hard to read without a prior understanding of the terms and thus it may not be read at all by most. 188.8.131.52 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC).
 23:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I think we need some clarity. When I was diagnosed with trichomonas ("Trichomoniasis" was nowhere to be found on my paperwork), I was told BY THE DOCTOR that it is not always sexually transmitted. If you read the report from the CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL (CDC) it also says that there are other ways of catching it. Unfortunately, when I do online searches, there are tons of sites, some by professionals, and some by non-professional know-it-alls that say THIS IS AN STD. From what I understand, it's like mono where you usualy get it from making out with someone, but under the right conditions, it can be spread other ways. My point is, I just want to know that Trichomona is a parasite and what its composition/behavior is. Putting it into the STD section is slightly misleading-- unless there is something that says "Usually sexually transmitted" because according to the people who would know BEST, there are (rarely) other ways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 01:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
- We already have clarity. The CDC and the NIH say it's an STD. Links are already in the article. If you have another reliable source I'd like to read it.
The article currently specifies equal infection rates between men and women. Genito-urinary clinic evidence from the UK suggests that the infection is far more common in women , although it is possible fewer men present due to the asymptomatic nature of the disease. Please can this statistic be rectified. Many thanks - B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- I can't see TV in the table. Besides, the East Midlands may not be representative of the whole of the UK, and almost certainly is not representative of the rest of the world. One thing is certain, TV is easier to detect in females, and so surveillance data alone cannot be relied on. Graham Colm (talk) 22:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
The way these two articles are written has created a lot of unnecessary overlap. I would think the two articles should be merged, or the "clinical" section of this article moved over (to trichomoniasis) thereby separating the organism from the clinical illness, or integrating both into one article. As it stands, the other article is fairly weak on content and needs revision. I would foresee that being a lot of cut-and-paste from this one. What do you think? MartinezMD (talk) 02:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- How contagious is this disease? For instance, if the male flips the condom (when he already touch the penis) while he is putting it on, can this allow for the infection to be transfered that way?