{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016129032258064516, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008602150537634409, 'mean_word_length': 4.8924050632911396, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Review of Medical Audit

major endemic sites for HTLV 1 infection. The virus was spread by breast feeding, by sexual contact and by contact with blood either through intravenous drug abuse or by transfusion. The lifetime risk for infected individuals of developing leukaemia was approximately 2% with a rather lower risk for developing myelopathy. Current assays for detecting anti HTLV 1 are of low specificity when used in low prevalence populations such as would be the case for UK donors. Though they are able also to detect antiHTLV 2, many of the serum samples (>90%) giving positive reactions from UK donors have antibody profiles on Western Blot which suggest that the response is unrelated to exposure to HTLV. Before donor-screening is introduced in the UK, methods for confirmation and for differentiation between HTLV 1 and HTLV 2 infection will be needed especially if donor counselling of seropositives is to happen.