Opposites attract Study Results

  • Ubeaut

    Posts: 228

    Aug 25, 2017 9:07 AM GMT
    A third study to show that undetectable viral load = untransmissible.

    The results are in from an Australian based international study called ‘Opposites Attract’ on HIV transmission risk among gay couples with differing HIV statuses (known as serodiscordant couples). The study conducted by The Kirby Institute, has shown that HIV positive men who are on treatment and have an undetectable viral load (UVL) do not transmit HIV to their partners.
    https://endinghiv.org.au/nsw/blog/opposites-attract/

    And before I get accused of advocating what people should or shouldn't do with their bodies... All I am advocating is that people should be informed and acting on good science.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 26, 2017 3:22 PM GMT
    Ubeaut saidA third study to show that undetectable viral load = untransmissible.

    The results are in from an Australian based international study called ‘Opposites Attract’ on HIV transmission risk among gay couples with differing HIV statuses (known as serodiscordant couples). The study conducted by The Kirby Institute, has shown that HIV positive men who are on treatment and have an undetectable viral load (UVL) do not transmit HIV to their partners.
    https://endinghiv.org.au/nsw/blog/opposites-attract/

    And before I get accused of advocating what people should or shouldn't do with their bodies... All I am advocating is that people should be informed and acting on good science.


    Just letting you know I posed the question of the detailed statistics and was provided it on Facebook. The study details are not contained in the link you Provide above that is merely a press release. If you read the qualifying information you will see that this study doesn't provide evidence that someone who says they have a UVL is safe to have BB sex with. It does document that a verified UVL is safe. I have also not seen any information on how HIV negative men can ensure they remain safe if they make the decision to have ongoing BB sex with PLWHIV who are undetectable for at least six months.

    I was provided good education on HIV prevention and while I applaud the use of updated information and embracing of new bio-medical treatments, the claim of HIV Poz men stigmatised which is very prevelant, isn't helped when Poz men (that think that by having or in some cases those who say they are/think they are but can't prove it or are aware they probably have become detectable) increasingly taking a stance that they have a right to BB HIV neg men many of whom are insisting on condoms. Those Poz men are risking increasing stigma and increasing transmissions. BTW when you read the full report you will see the press release is being tricky. Also I have close friends and FB's who are Poz so if you wanna say I'm a hater of Poz men you will make me and the Poz men I know and some of them who I sleep with laugh.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2017 9:30 AM GMT
    I was to learn long ago, not to trust gay and bi men, when it comes to their dick.
    Thus if it's not on, it's not on.
    Debate over for me.
  • argus

    Posts: 1211

    Aug 28, 2017 4:30 PM GMT
    two_meninlove saidI was to learn long ago, not to trust gay and bi men, when it comes to their dick.
    Thus if it's not on, it's not on.
    Debate over for me.


    Just remember "baa" means "no."
  • Ubeaut

    Posts: 228

    Aug 30, 2017 11:48 PM GMT
    so this article has the statistics requested.

    http://www.aidsmap.com/International-study-of-gay-couples-reports-no-transmissions-from-an-HIV-positive-partner-on-treatment/page/3159177/
  • Ubeaut

    Posts: 228

    Aug 30, 2017 11:49 PM GMT
    There's only so much statistics you can run on zero transmissions.
  • timmm55

    Posts: 13

    Jan 23, 2018 9:50 PM GMT
    "the claim of HIV Poz men stigmatised which is very prevelant, isn't helped when Poz men (that think that by having or in some cases those who say they are/think they are but can't prove it or are aware they probably have become detectable) increasingly taking a stance that they have a right to BB HIV neg men many of whom are insisting on condoms."

    This comment is in itself stigmatizing.
    1) Stigma is a fact. Not a claim.
    2) Your tortured "think that/say that/think that/can't prove/probably have" infectious HIV implies they are ignorant, liars or worse WANT to spread HIV.
    3)" a right to BB HIV neg men" while they insist on condom is an accusation of rape.

    "Research shows that guys who meet each other online are more likely to have anal sex without a condom when compared to guys who don’t meet online. But they are also more likely to use other strategies to reduce their risk of HIV infection, including having sex only with guys who tell them they are HIV negative. This would be an effective strategy if everyone knew their true HIV status all the time. But of course this is not reality, not even among those who use strategy! Even if we are regular testers, we may still have sex with other guys whose HIV status is unknown in between our tests, and most HIV tests require some time before HIV can be detected. So if this is a strategy you regularly use to stay HIV negative, you should be assuming that not every guy who tells you they are HIV negative is actually HIV negative. Not because they are lying, but because they may not know. On the contrary, having sex with a guy who knows they are positive, on treatment, and has an undetectable viral load is a much safer strategy than posting Neg UB2 on your profile."
    http://resiststigma.com/neg-ub2-and-hiv-phobia-in-the-age-of-apps/

    ^^^^ THAT is how HIV is spread today. UB2 when you don't know. It's not from a guy "faking" undetectable.

    This creates a chasm of distrust between HIV/undetectable and HIV negative men actually increases the rate of HIV infection.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 26, 2018 9:23 PM GMT
    timmm55 said "the claim of HIV Poz men stigmatised which is very prevelant, isn't helped when Poz men (that think that by having or in some cases those who say they are/think they are but can't prove it or are aware they probably have become detectable) increasingly taking a stance that they have a right to BB HIV neg men many of whom are insisting on condoms."

    This comment is in itself stigmatizing.
    1) Stigma is a fact. Not a claim.
    2) Your tortured "think that/say that/think that/can't prove/probably have" infectious HIV implies they are ignorant, liars or worse WANT to spread HIV.
    3)" a right to BB HIV neg men" while they insist on condom is an accusation of rape.

    "Research shows that guys who meet each other online are more likely to have anal sex without a condom when compared to guys who don’t meet online. But they are also more likely to use other strategies to reduce their risk of HIV infection, including having sex only with guys who tell them they are HIV negative. This would be an effective strategy if everyone knew their true HIV status all the time. But of course this is not reality, not even among those who use strategy! Even if we are regular testers, we may still have sex with other guys whose HIV status is unknown in between our tests, and most HIV tests require some time before HIV can be detected. So if this is a strategy you regularly use to stay HIV negative, you should be assuming that not every guy who tells you they are HIV negative is actually HIV negative. Not because they are lying, but because they may not know. On the contrary, having sex with a guy who knows they are positive, on treatment, and has an undetectable viral load is a much safer strategy than posting Neg UB2 on your profile."
    http://resiststigma.com/neg-ub2-and-hiv-phobia-in-the-age-of-apps/

    ^^^^ THAT is how HIV is spread today. UB2 when you don't know. It's not from a guy "faking" undetectable.

    This creates a chasm of distrust between HIV/undetectable and HIV negative men actually increases the rate of HIV infection.


    According to you, if a guy says he is Poz UVL he must be and we should all take him at his word. But if they say they are Negative then they must not be believed. Truth is this Emotive Response word 'Stigma' is a misused and counter productive term. Accept that no matter what a guy says no one has the automatic right to BB and to claim that someone insistance on condom use is stigma is a joke. Yes ignorance is out there and Poz men deserve respect but they must also understand that people have a right to do what they wish with their bodies. Deal with it
  • timmm55

    Posts: 13

    Jan 27, 2018 4:45 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said
    timmm55 said "the claim of HIV Poz men stigmatised which is very prevelant, isn't helped when Poz men (that think that by having or in some cases those who say they are/think they are but can't prove it or are aware they probably have become detectable) increasingly taking a stance that they have a right to BB HIV neg men many of whom are insisting on condoms."

    This comment is in itself stigmatizing.
    1) Stigma is a fact. Not a claim.
    2) Your tortured "think that/say that/think that/can't prove/probably have" infectious HIV implies they are ignorant, liars or worse WANT to spread HIV.
    3)" a right to BB HIV neg men" while they insist on condom is an accusation of rape.

    "Research shows that guys who meet each other online are more likely to have anal sex without a condom when compared to guys who don’t meet online. But they are also more likely to use other strategies to reduce their risk of HIV infection, including having sex only with guys who tell them they are HIV negative. This would be an effective strategy if everyone knew their true HIV status all the time. But of course this is not reality, not even among those who use strategy! Even if we are regular testers, we may still have sex with other guys whose HIV status is unknown in between our tests, and most HIV tests require some time before HIV can be detected. So if this is a strategy you regularly use to stay HIV negative, you should be assuming that not every guy who tells you they are HIV negative is actually HIV negative. Not because they are lying, but because they may not know. On the contrary, having sex with a guy who knows they are positive, on treatment, and has an undetectable viral load is a much safer strategy than posting Neg UB2 on your profile."
    http://resiststigma.com/neg-ub2-and-hiv-phobia-in-the-age-of-apps/

    ^^^^ THAT is how HIV is spread today. UB2 when you don't know. It's not from a guy "faking" undetectable.

    This creates a chasm of distrust between HIV/undetectable and HIV negative men actually increases the rate of HIV infection.


    According to you, if a guy says he is Poz UVL he must be and we should all take him at his word. But if they say they are Negative then they must not be believed. Truth is this Emotive Response word 'Stigma' is a misused and counter productive term. Accept that no matter what a guy says no one has the automatic right to BB and to claim that someone insistance on condom use is stigma is a joke. Yes ignorance is out there and Poz men deserve respect but they must also understand that people have a right to do what they wish with their bodies. Deal with it


    I have said no such thing, but YOU have said undetectable "probably have" transmittable HIV.
    You seem confused. If someone says "BB only" then that is agreed upon. If someone says "condoms only" that is agreed upon..........or if not you are not compatible.

    " 'Stigma' is a misused and counter productive term. " by not accepting it exist does not make it go away.