Barebacking...

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2014 7:40 PM GMT
    Jerred saidTHE IMPORTANT PART of the article suggests to use condoms because when HIV patients go to doctors they don't test your semen, they test your blood.


    HIV in semen and other body fluids is very controversial. Nobody really knows....yet. Your article was from 2012.

    "What do these findings mean for HIV transmission risk? While the results show that viral “shedding” can occur within a one-hour interval among men with undetectable blood viral load, “this timing should not be considered to place individuals at greater risk for HIV transmission than previously reported,” the authors state. They do conclude, however, that the nearly 20% proportion of men with detectable HIV RNA in semen despite stable undetectable blood viral load “should balance messages on the individual risk of HIV transmission through unprotected sex as an exclusive preventive strategy in serodifferent couples with procreation desires.”

    That said, no study to date has identified a seminal viral load “threshold” at which HIV transmission becomes likely. Questions clearly remain about the links between HIV viral load, viral load in semen, and risk for HIV transmission in the setting of antiretroviral treatment."

    http://betablog.org/rapid-changes-possible-in-semen-viral-load/

    So why haven't ANY people in the Swiss, Partner's Study, etc. contracted HIV?


    This may be a clue:
    "The classical paradigm of HIV infectivity centers on the blood HIV RNA viral load. However, while other fluid compartments such as semen and cerebrospinal fluid can have distinct viral loads from blood, the causes of localized HIV shedding are not fully understood. Since the semen viral load is an independent predictor of HIV transmission risk, it is critical to understand the local factors that trigger increased semen viral shedding in order to develop novel preventative strategies. Here, we evaluated the semen microbiome, bacterial load, and cytokine levels in 22 HIV-uninfected men who have sex with men (MSM) and in 27 HIV-infected MSM before and after initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART). We found that HIV infection reduces semen microbiome biodiversity, which is restored with ART and immune reconstitution. We also found that semen bacterial load in untreated, HIV-infected men is associated with the levels of seven semen cytokines, relationships not seen in the uninfected controls. In particular, the cytokine IL-1b was uniquely correlated with both semen bacterial and viral load. Our findings support the interaction between semen microbiome and local immunology, and suggest that IL-1b could be a mechanism for semen microbiome to trigger semen viral shedding."

    [url]http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1004262[/url]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2014 8:07 PM GMT
    The article I posted flat out points out there is NO threshhold studied when it comes to semen. Again, they warn you to use condoms regardless.

    "Research has not determined if the low levels of HIV in these men's semen could result in HIV transmission from a man to a woman, or from a man to a man. But certainly there is some risk that a man with detectable HIV in semen can pass the virus to a sex partner."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 4:02 PM GMT
    If your in a long term relationship or married then i see no reason why not to bareback, assuming your both viral free.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 8:30 PM GMT
    someguyhelp saidIf your in a long term relationship or married then i see no reason why not to bareback, assuming your both viral free.

    This is so stupid. Healthy men show no sigs for up to 10 years.icon_idea.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2014 9:34 PM GMT
    Wear a condom. Don't share needles. If you're willing to take the small risk that PrEP causes kidney damage, because you cannot consistently control your behavior, then by all means take the pill because HIV is a known quantity and not one any rational person would desire.

    If you're poz, take your meds, wear condoms (there is more than HIV out there guys, let's not talk about Hepatitis, HPV warts, and other bacterial STD/STIs), and affirmatively disclose your status since you're essentially carrying a loaded gun in your blood. Stigma is not a good thing, but neither is minimizing how costly properly HIV treatment is, nor how devastating AIDS is if untreated (a la 1980s-90s in the USA, and presently in sub-saharan Africa). And before we start the stigma march, ANYTIME you have a communicable disease with no cure (herpes, oral/mouth herpes, HPV warts, etc.) you owe society at large, and your partner specifically, to inform him/her of that disease and to then let him/her make an informed consent or rejection.

    Have fun, just tell the truth and bag it up. This isn't rocket science guys.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 25, 2014 3:06 AM GMT
    Of course barebacking feels better, at least for the top, but thats NOT reason enough to bareback in anything other than monogamous ltr. Do it and deal with an HIV+ status for the rest of your life. Good luck!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 25, 2014 8:36 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle said
    Wyndahoi saidJerred-

    I'm sorry you have HIV and chronic kidney disease.
    What stage is your CKD? Because that diagnosis covers a wide range from no big deal to you need a transplant. The reality is though your experience with Truvada is not comparable to someone on PrEP. HIV alone can damage the kidneys and since you were being treated for HIV you already had you were taking other medications that may have potentiated the harm Truvada did to your kidneys.
    Someone on PrEP is taking Truvada alone. They're being screened for harm to their kidneys. If there are any signs of kidney damage the medication would be stopped.
    Also, no one has been on or is going to be on PrEP for 20 years. It is something that people can start and stop as needed.
    There are no freebies in medicine. There is risk with every medication you take. But for some people the risk of taking Truvada is MUCH lower than having high risk sex without it.


    What Jered/Stuart/Reaper does not acknowledge fully is that his "hard" drug use started at the prepubescent age of thirteen more than likely had a negative impact on his health. Three decades later and he wants to blame Truvada? A medication he's been taking for a mere couple of years?


    You are exaggerating as I confessed my drug use was pretty limited in terms of my whole life and took place at a young age. I just got a message here from someone who started Truvada as PREP a month ago and is suddenly having kidney problems. He also mentioned he has never done drugs. I HAVE THE BEST FUCKING DOCTORS now at a VERY prestigious hospital in Newport Beach California. They all tell me this had to do with Truvada alone.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2016 10:52 AM GMT
    Not an excuse as alternatives are available, but having a latex allergy makes you more inclined to be raw too...

    Used to think that way, luckily i only have sex with my partner(s) of that time, all of which i had test results of
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 22, 2016 2:54 PM GMT
    Aleco_Graves saidNot an excuse as alternatives are available, but having a latex allergy makes you more inclined to be raw too...

    Used to think that way, luckily i only have sex with my partner(s) of that time, all of which i had test results of


    Bit of a necro-thread, but just to point out there are non-latex condoms available so it's not an excuse not to use condoms. Admittedly they tend to be more difficult to put on than regular ones but it's a small price to pay for protecting yourself and a partner.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 24, 2016 8:09 AM GMT
    PulseFit said
    Aleco_Graves saidNot an excuse as alternatives are available, but having a latex allergy makes you more inclined to be raw too...

    Used to think that way, luckily i only have sex with my partner(s) of that time, all of which i had test results of


    Bit of a necro-thread, but just to point out there are non-latex condoms available so it's not an excuse not to use condoms. Admittedly they tend to be more difficult to put on than regular ones but it's a small price to pay for protecting yourself and a partner.


    If you are protecting yourself use PrEP (if negative) it's 96% effective. That does not mean you have a 4% chance of getting HIV. 96% is a confidence level. Thus far there has been ONE (1) case that has been validated.

    If you are HIV+ go on ART and become undetectable.........you are PROTECTING your partner, approaching a 100% confidence level. ZERO proven transmissions in over 56,000 sexual "risky" acts. (see PARTNER STUDY).

    Condoms are 70% with anal, 85% with vaginal sex, effective in preventing HIV or STIs.
    If you think condoms are the best, ask your sister, mother or aunt why they are on birth control. The PILL, IUDs, and other devices are much better than condoms. but they don't prevent STIs.

    To prevent STIs....use a condom. If you want to prevent HIV or unwanted pregnancy use medical alternatives.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 24, 2016 6:04 PM GMT
    Aleco_Graves saidPeople preaching that these drugs that make you HIV undetectable is the answer to barebacking with HIV icon_rolleyes.gif

    Your not just a pretty face Aleco

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 24, 2016 6:19 PM GMT
    Aleco_Graves saidNot an excuse as alternatives are available, but having a latex allergy makes you more inclined to be raw too...

    Used to think that way, luckily i only have sex with my partner(s) of that time, all of which i had test results of


    Just an observation Aleco, it may actually be the type of lube you use when bottoming from a guy who is wearing a rubber. Water based lube is the only one I know of approved not to break down condoms but I have been told that it irritates the lining of the Anus for some guys. Also the douching process may have something to do with it as it reduces the amount of anal mucus. Oil based lubes breakdown condoms but people who like barebacking and have stated having a bad reaction Bottoming during protected sex, have all said they don't have same issue with oil based lubes. Regarding Prep, their is under reporting of it's true rate of efficacy ie. There is more than just one verified case of guys contracting HIV while on Prep so while it does reduce your chances of getting HIV its not designed to be a fail safe. Those guys who do
    Not use anything else for protection should all be on Prep as it is far better even at the 41% efficacy rate from
    The first study on Prep than zero. On the other hand swapping condoms for Prep and thinking your safe is a fools paradise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 24, 2016 8:14 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said
    Aleco_Graves saidNot an excuse as alternatives are available, but having a latex allergy makes you more inclined to be raw too...


    Not use anything else for protection should all be on Prep as it is far better even at the 41% efficacy rate from
    The first study on Prep than zero. On the other hand swapping condoms for Prep and thinking your safe is a fools paradise.


    STOP! Why do you report (without a link no less) old studies?


    IPREX STUDY 2010
    "The first randomised controlled trial of PrEP in humans to produce a statistically meaningful result announced its findings on 23 November 2010. The iPrEx (Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Initiative) trial found that the HIV infection rate in HIV-negative gay men who were given a daily pill containing two HIV drugs was reduced by 44%, compared with men given a placebo.1
    The efficacy in subjects who, by self-report and pill count, took the drugs more than 90% of the time was 73%.

    The other big finding of the trial was that while 93% of trial subjects reported taking the pills correctly, on the basis of drug-level monitoring in blood tests only 51% actually did so. The investigators calculated that if participants had taken their pills every time, the efficacy of the drug regimen would have been at least 92%, compared with a placebo."

    http://www.aidsmap.com/The-iPrEx-study/page/1746640/

    No new HIV infections seen in San Francisco's Strut PrEP programme


    http://www.aidsmap.com/No-new-HIV-infections-seen-in-San-Franciscos-Strut-PrEP-programme/page/3077541/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2016 10:29 AM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidWater based lube is the only one I know of approved not to break down condoms


    Not true, you can also use silicone-based lubes which have a more oily quality than water based (which makes them ideal for shower sex just as an aside).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2016 4:34 PM GMT
    PulseFit said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidWater based lube is the only one I know of approved not to break down condoms


    Not true, you can also use silicone-based lubes which have a more oily quality than water based (which makes them ideal for shower sex just as an aside).


    Www.spunklube.com

    A. May. Zing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2016 1:43 PM GMT
    Thanks for all the great advice guys (especially sydney rugby jock ;) ) . I dont use condoms with my monogomous partner of 2+ years, as we also get tested every 4 months ( for medical benefits), but i will try a condom with our preferred KY jellie (have to check if its condom safe first)
  • BambiBoy98

    Posts: 72

    Sep 30, 2016 5:47 AM GMT
    Barebacking is something i'm not really interested in. If i'm having sex with someone I hardly know its either he wears a condom or i'm just not having sex. Now if its a significant other i'd consider it if we both knew our statuses. But honestly I don't see the turn-on factor of barebacking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2016 2:15 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]JonSpringon said[/cite]
    PulseFit said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidWater based lube is the only one I know of approved not to break down condoms


    Not true, you can also use silicone-based lubes which have a more oily quality than water based (which makes them ideal for shower sex just as an aside).


    Www.spunklube.com

    A. May. Zing.[/quote
    I live in Australia and go by Australian official standards so I am correct. I'll take ur word for it and check out your above suggestion.
    As for you Timm55, you know I don't treat forums as publishable peer reviewed uni documents so once a fact has been accepted as true and you again acknowledged it was true I don't need to re-write my source of information. In uni I used APA referencing but this is a forum. PS I was asked by a 21yr old RJ member who is a friend I know in person if I think he should go on Prep and my response was "if you feel that it would be beneficial to you do it". Then I added That I thought he may have already been on Prep due to his close friend being a big advocate for it and he is now on it. As far as new infections go there are 2,,still waiting for formal acknowledgement of that friend of mines situation. It also makes me wary of some of the efficacy data especially when you utilise that reference
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2016 2:15 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]JonSpringon said[/cite]
    PulseFit said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidWater based lube is the only one I know of approved not to break down condoms


    Not true, you can also use silicone-based lubes which have a more oily quality than water based (which makes them ideal for shower sex just as an aside).


    Www.spunklube.com

    A. May. Zing.[/quote
    I live in Australia and go by Australian official standards so I am correct. I'll take ur word for it and check out your above suggestion.
    As for you Timm55, you know I don't treat forums as publishable peer reviewed uni documents so once a fact has been accepted as true and you again acknowledged it was true I don't need to re-write my source of information. In uni I used APA referencing but this is a forum. PS I was asked by a 21yr old RJ member who is a friend I know in person if I think he should go on Prep and my response was "if you feel that it would be beneficial to you do it". Then I added That I thought he may have already been on Prep due to his close friend being a big advocate for it and he is now on it. As far as new infections go there are 2,,still waiting for formal acknowledgement of that friend of mines situation. It also makes me wary of some of the efficacy data especially when you utilise that reference
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2016 2:16 PM GMT
    Aleco_Graves saidThanks for all the great advice guys (especially sydney rugby jock ;) ) . I dont use condoms with my monogomous partner of 2+ years, as we also get tested every 4 months ( for medical benefits), but i will try a condom with our preferred KY jellie (have to check if its condom safe first)


    Anytime mate, hope all goes well for u and your man
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2016 2:16 PM GMT
    Aleco_Graves saidThanks for all the great advice guys (especially sydney rugby jock ;) ) . I dont use condoms with my monogomous partner of 2+ years, as we also get tested every 4 months ( for medical benefits), but i will try a condom with our preferred KY jellie (have to check if its condom safe first)


    Anytime mate, hope all goes well for u and your man
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2016 9:40 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said[quote][cite]JonSpringon said[/cite]
    PulseFit said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidWater based lube is the only one I know of approved not to break down condoms


    Not true, you can also use silicone-based lubes which have a more oily quality than water based (which makes them ideal for shower sex just as an aside).


    Www.spunklube.com

    A. May. Zing.[/quote
    I live in Australia and go by Australian official standards so I am correct. I'll take ur word for it and check out your above suggestion.
    As for you Timm55, you know I don't treat forums as publishable peer reviewed uni documents so once a fact has been accepted as true and you again acknowledged it was true I don't need to re-write my source of information. In uni I used APA referencing but this is a forum. PS I was asked by a 21yr old RJ member who is a friend I know in person if I think he should go on Prep and my response was "if you feel that it would be beneficial to you do it". Then I added That I thought he may have already been on Prep due to his close friend being a big advocate for it and he is now on it. As far as new infections go there are 2,,still waiting for formal acknowledgement of that friend of mines situation. It also makes me wary of some of the efficacy data especially when you utilise that reference



    "I don't treat forums as publishable peer reviewed uni documents". No. forums are not per review, but for the sake of misrepresenting what a study says, or when it was said it is important to provide a link. I don't believe you because you say so. If your source information is outdated it may no longer true.

    Are the 2 new infections related to PrEP or ART? Wait until the results before you assume the data is incorrect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 03, 2016 2:24 PM GMT
    "I don't treat forums as publishable peer reviewed uni documents". No. forums are not per review, but for the sake of misrepresenting what a study says, or when it was said it is important to provide a link. I don't believe you because you say so. If your source information is outdated it may no longer true.


    Tim55, the official statistics acknowledging people who have aquired HIV while taking Prep and have it overseen and verified by a reputable GP with experience in HIV treatment or a specialist is officially only one person who is living in Canada. This is not factual, there is another man who lives in Sydney and is a good friend of mine. He was ordering in the generic label Prep from overseas as are most people other than those few who are very significantly resourced due to the cost, however there is no doubt that the man i will name G.C (he has a senior government job and wishes to remain anonymous for professional reasons) was prescribed Prep by Sydney's most reputable GP who has been trained to treat people with HIV and has worked in hospital setting and is located in the heart of the Oxford Street 'Gay district' has verified G.C having taken his Prep meds at recommended levels. If there are only 2 which the Prep regime HIV acquisitions stats don't but should show, fine not many but the fact it isn't shown as 2 but only 1 has me feeling suspicious of all the data. I find the statement you make lecturing me about outdated data and making ascertains from personal opinions very interesting, but i guess since you have the track record of doing exactly that you are a good authority on the subject matter.


    Are the 2 new infections related to PrEP? Wait until the results before you assume the data is incorrect. [/quote] The infection of my friend was known to his treating Physician 6 months ago.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 05, 2016 11:04 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said"I don't treat forums as publishable peer reviewed uni documents". No. forums are not per review, but for the sake of misrepresenting what a study says, or when it was said it is important to provide a link. I don't believe you because you say so. If your source information is outdated it may no longer true.


    Tim55, the official statistics acknowledging people who have aquired HIV while taking Prep and have it overseen and verified by a reputable GP with experience in HIV treatment or a specialist is officially only one person who is living in Canada. This is not factual, there is another man who lives in Sydney and is a good friend of mine. He was ordering in the generic label Prep from overseas as are most people other than those few who are very significantly resourced due to the cost, however there is no doubt that the man i will name G.C (he has a senior government job and wishes to remain anonymous for professional reasons) was prescribed Prep by Sydney's most reputable GP who has been trained to treat people with HIV and has worked in hospital setting and is located in the heart of the Oxford Street 'Gay district' has verified G.C having taken his Prep meds at recommended levels. If there are only 2 which the Prep regime HIV acquisitions stats don't but should show, fine not many but the fact it isn't shown as 2 but only 1 has me feeling suspicious of all the data. I find the statement you make lecturing me about outdated data and making ascertains from personal opinions very interesting, but i guess since you have the track record of doing exactly that you are a good authority on the subject matter.


    Are the 2 new infections related to PrEP? Wait until the results before you assume the data is incorrect.
    The infection of my friend was known to his treating Physician 6 months ago.[/quote]

    I have a very good track record of cutting through your BS, along with Art Deco. Two of the most stigmatizing idiots I've gladly never met.

    You said your friend took PrEP as prescribed.

    You don't know that. Have you seem his blood work that determined low much was in his system?

    Oh, wait! Let me guess the doctor showed you, but not him! Lol.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 06, 2016 5:58 PM GMT
    You said your friend took PrEP as prescribed.

    You don't know that. Have you seem his blood work that determined low much was in his system?

    Oh, wait! Let me guess the doctor showed you, but not him! Lol. [/quote]

    Timm55, you never refute anything I say effectively and you insult, shout down or ridicule anybody who disagree with you. Your other tactic is to use made up terms such as 'slut Shaming' or your usual fallback, claim discrimination, awwww so sad buddy but the world is not against Poz guys, just bareback warriors like you who show very little respect for opposing opinions. You quote studies and manipulate the findings to suit your world view then accuse others of doing the same. Please go away, block me or whatever but also realise you are one of the Poz guys that entrenches discrimination through your single minded ranting and total disrespect for any consequences that would result from any persons silly enough to follow your abhorrent advice