What an idiot. I POST here that I'm POZ and undetectable. Same for any ap or site. Accusing me of NOT disclosing when I clearly do every time, show you are just fear mongering with false accusations.
This is ignorant X 10 "a different strain that renders your current medication useless." I guess you don't have a link to that do you? It's not true.
I wouldn't say I'm "justify fucking people without a condom." That isn't for you or me to decide. Serodiscordant couples do all the time.....with PrEP, ART. That's up to them. Between the two it's very low risk.
You do indeed say you are positive. I hope you're telling your sex partners that, too.
My late partner told me he was poz, and I loved him no less. Well, maybe even more for his honestness with me. And we always had safe sex, I wasn't afraid, as the CDC and other reputable health agencies define safe sex. Not as you wrongly & dangerously define it.
Nobody here is "fear mongering". Nor discriminating against poz men. Gawd knows I haven't. But your misinformation, and misunderstanding of the data on this subject, is dangerous to our community. You are indeed a menace, who needs to be confronted and challenged about your lethal falsehoods.
My goal is to see not a single more case of HIV. All the efforts & resources of my husband and myself are directed to that end.
You, however, seem more interested in a selfish interest in seeing negative guys getting barebacked by positive guys. Or poz guys barebacked by someone with a different HIV strain. Well, yah know, I and a lot of other guys here aren't gonna let that pass.
So expect to see a lot of opposition to this barebacking propaganda you're trying to spread here. And that you're just not gonna win this argument. Not as long as I'm on this site, anyway.
That makes you a LIAR yet again. You demonstrate hatred at every turn....why? Because I acknowledge other alternatives?
Here's the Australian Statement yet again.
There are now at least five strategies that reasonably constitute‘safe sex’,provided that certain parameters are met.
1.The use of Condoms during casual encounters between men of unknown or discordant serostatus.
2.HIV negative men taking effective pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).
3.Men living with HIV who only have sex without condoms when they have a sustained undetectable viral load (UVL) and in the absence of sexually transmissible infections (STIs).
4.Effective use of serosorting between HIV positive men.
5.Effective negotiated safety agreements.
Ad I won't be talked down to, certainly not by you. Someone who stupidly says:
"So all this BS about sex being safe with an undetectable poz guy is just medical talk dealing with controlled conditions. That has no application, bearing or relevance to the real world situations in which you & I actually operate. And such basic medical research shouldn't be misinterpreted to be providing guidance as to how gay men should behave sexually with each other."
All that does is reinforce the stigma that POZ people are dangerous, and NEG equals good.
Want a reputable site?
How about the Depart of Justice? (this thread is about LAW after all, not you ex boyfriends. ).
U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division
Best Practices Guide to Reform HIV-
Specific Criminal Laws to Align with Scientifically Supported Factors
Most of these laws do not account for actual scientifically-
supported level of risk by type of activities engaged in or risk reduction measures undertaken. As a result, many of these state laws criminalize behaviors that the CDC regards as posing either no or negligible risk for HIV transmission even in the absence of risk reduction measures.
2 The majority were passed before the development of
antiretroviral therapy (“ART”), which the CDC acknowledges can reduce the risk of HIV transmission by up to 96%.
3 Most of these laws do not, therefore, account for the use of ART, condoms, or pre-exposure prophylaxis.
The Article encourages states to use scientific findings to,“re-examine [these] 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.”
There is no question that “HIV stigma has been shown to be a barrier to HIV testing” and the CDC has unequivocally asserted that HIV “stigma hampers prevention.
As a result, certain of these laws do not accurately reflect the current science of transmission, do not account for risk reduction behaviors and medical protocols that greatly reduce transmission risk,
and do not reflect that, with testing and treatment, HIV may be a manageable medical condition.
The message that you put out here is that YOU have the "TRUE WORD" of HIV prevention. That any other view is dangerous and must be stopped.........is rather self-righteous and smacks of Imperialism. But the emperor has no clothes.