Serodiscordant Sex — Would you?

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

    Feb 08, 2013 2:12 PM GMT
    Probably, but not if it's a hookup
  • rnch

    Posts: 11557

    Feb 08, 2013 4:18 PM GMT
    great_scott saidI'd rather not.





    You prolly already have....one of both of ya'll just didn't know it at the time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:01 PM GMT
    This thread terrifies me. I doubt any of you are qualified to be giving out sexual health/medical advice. Also, please realize young kids are likely to read this and many of you are suggesting it is perfectly safe and actually unfair of them to turn down sex with someone who has a transmissible disease.

    The actually question of this thread was would you have sex with someone if they know they are HIV positive. Many of you are taing about safe sex and other things. For my purposes, I am assuming that everyone is being smart and always practicing safe sex (unless in a monogamous relationship, with their 6mo test since last partner done).

    So looking at the numbers a bit:

    HIV + person: chance of having the virus 100%, approximate cure rate 0%

    HIV unknown: chance of having the virus 0.366% (1.15 mil incidence/314 mil in the USA)

    For those of you saying we've probably already had sex with someone who is positive, I don't know how many sexual partners you've had....but odds are, I haven't. What those numbers say, you are way less likely to get HIV, having sex with someone who doesn't know, than someone who says they are positive....again, assuming you will practice safe sex either way.

    Looking at transmission. For every 100 infected individuals there are about 4 transmissions per year in the states. That's a 4% annually and that's only with cases actually diagnosed. Per sexual act, it is closer to 1% transmission, but that is not specific to sexual act. Anal intercourse is the most likely to cause transmission by far. That is why of the about 50,000 new cases every year in the states that 63% are in gay and bisexual males. If you factor that into the transmission rate and the gay population being less than 10% of the general population, you're actually looking at a higher relative risk in this community.

    Talking about safe sex and viral loads. Yes, you should always be practicing safe sex. Yes viral load has an affect on transmission rates. Looking at the numbers though, more people practice safe sex and monitor their viral loads today, but that is why the transmission rates are down to about 1% from around 4% a few decades ago. So that is somewhat already in the numbers. Condoms fail (break, have defects etc) between 2-4% of the time. Fluid transmission can occur before and after you have a condom on, precum can contain the virus. Guys might not know or even lie about being HIV positive, but they are just as likely to lie about their viral load or CD4 counts, forget their meds, have drug/alcohol interactions, etc.

    Now those wonderful drugs. Yes, lots of effort has gone into making some incredible medications that allow HIV positive individuals to live years longer, and live healthier lives. They aren't perfect though, and the largest flaw is people remembering to take their meds at the right time, every time. They should also be avoiding alcohol and monitoring other drug use for interactions. One barrier is simply cost. These drugs used to be over 10,000 every month! They are still 2-4k every single month. Not everyone can afford that. Also this number does not include testing, hospitalizations and lost income, it is just the meds. In countries with public health care (and potentially under Obama care too) this becomes a national burden, and thus one that everyone is paying for through taxes. I'm not sure it's entirely fair to have that much impact on everyone else's pocket book because you take sexual risks. It's estimated that for every diagnosis it costs 1.3 million dollars lifetime in Canada.

    So there are some real numbers and facts instead of only opinions. It's important for young people (especially since they are most likely to have unsafe sex) to know some of these risks. It's funny how many say its wrong to not have sex with a HIV positive person.....would you have sex with someone who says they have gonorrhea? Probably not, and that one is easily cured. This talk about it not being PC to say no? It's Not PC to use the 'n' word, but it's 100% someone's business and right to be aware and refuse the risks, especially where their health is concerned. For a health website you'd think people would respect that more, especially when there are far more superficially reasons to turn someone down for sex.

    As for turning away from love? If I were actually single, there are about 3 people at this point in my life that should they be HIV positive and we wanted to get into a relationship I would consider it. There would be a big discussion, a lot of thinking and even if I decided to proceed, we would need to be extremely careful. When you talk about a relationship with someone HIV positive, that's repeated risky sexual acts. Over time it adds up, and that is a consideration.

    So just for kicks (and the kids), please always uses protection (condoms, barrier methods, minimize bleeding/rough sex, minimize fluid exchange, avoid sex if you have sores or urinary issues), get checked frequently, use doctors liberally. If HIV positive, please always take your meds, stay on top of your viral load and CD4 count and always be upfront about your condition before engaging in any sexual activity. It's one thing to risk your health, another to endanger others.

    All that said, it's your right to have sex with who you choose and take those risks. It's also everyone else's right to be informed about your sexual health and refuse sex at any time. Be respectful of others choices, just like we try to be about your choices, logical or not.

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

    Feb 08, 2013 7:01 PM GMT
    yourname2000 said
    intensity69 said
    AlphaTrigger said
    Wyatt saidHere's a better question:

    Would you willingly give yourself an immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS and will inevitably result in a loss of health or even your life?

    I didn't think so.


    wasWsVJ.jpg


    I have to agree with you, D, and others that have posted similar on this thread.

    Wyatt's position is based on ignorance and stigmatization, and not facts. And he can't see past them to make a rational decision... it's based solely on prejudice and fear.

    The sad "irony" is that it's these guys who get infected. icon_sad.gif They lull themselves into a false sense of security and then make stupid decisions.


    totally agree...get educated....lest you may sound stupid and ignorant? Treat everyone as though they are positive. Wrap that shit up. Self admitted hiv+ men are safer than that stud you just banged in the back alley because he said "yeah dude i'm totally neg brah"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:03 PM GMT
    hairymusclejock said. Self admitted hiv+ men are safer than that stud you just banned in the back alley because he said "yeah dude i'm totally neg brah"


    LMAO (even tho it isnt really funny IRL)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:19 PM GMT
    To the dumb kid with the tldr post...you are an idiot. That is all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:27 PM GMT
    Chainers saidTo the dumb kid with the tldr post...you are an idiot. That is all.


    This!

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

    Feb 08, 2013 7:31 PM GMT
    Chainers saidTo the dumb kid with the tldr post...you are an idiot. That is all.


    Kid? I'm older than you. Idiot? My degrees say otherwise. Your ignorance is appreciated, that is all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:33 PM GMT
    Hyperion said
    Chainers saidTo the dumb kid with the tldr post...you are an idiot. That is all.


    Kid? I'm older than you. Idiot? My degrees say otherwise. Your ignorance is appreciated, that is all.


    Wow you are older than me. Which makes your statement that much more pathetic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:38 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    Hyperion said
    Chainers saidTo the dumb kid with the tldr post...you are an idiot. That is all.


    Kid? I'm older than you. Idiot? My degrees say otherwise. Your ignorance is appreciated, that is all.


    Wow you are older than me. Which makes your statement that much more pathetic.


    Lol, I don't think there is much to gain by bashing each other. So, hope you have a great day mate icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 7:40 PM GMT
    RedWhiteBlue said
    Nabisco saidThis is one of those either/or threads where it's formulation really only leaves for one possible answer that will be accepted while the other will be judged and reviled.


    True....with a caveat. And there are lots of little "gotchas" in the fine print. You're supposed to say yes you would. but I can think of a couple of instances where it's a poor decision, not matter how non-PC.


    Oh I absolutely agree that in the particularities and specificities of real life there are plenty of gray areas. But for the way this thread is formulated and geared nope, only one answer you can give or not answer at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 8:02 PM GMT
    yourname2000 said
    Chainers said
    Hyperion said
    Chainers saidTo the dumb kid with the tldr post...you are an idiot. That is all.


    Kid? I'm older than you. Idiot? My degrees say otherwise. Your ignorance is appreciated, that is all.


    Wow you are older than me. Which makes your statement that much more pathetic.

    Considering you were a raging bottom in San Fran for how many years, D? --I think regardless of "age", you certainly trump guys twice your age on "experience" staying safe in an HIV+ environment. icon_wink.gif


    It was only one but yes I was quite social and popular out there. I mean when you are 20 and like guys in their 30s its kind of easy haha.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 8:16 PM GMT
    when managing your healthcare, you are the consumer. i don't entertain the notion that anecdotes are peer reviewed studies. the only ppl i look to for clinical data are licensed, practicing clinicians...and i never isolate myself to one. no in psychiatry. not in any area. degrees alone don't mean anything to me. they can be purchased.

    so saying something is a fact doesn't mean someone doesn't believe it to be true, it just means it's not valid currency with me.

    i actually have alot of compassion for people who are ill informed because they are the ones who needs it most later regardless of any outcome because an immortality complex is an affliction unto itself, regardless of what their prior stigmatizing behavior might invite. we are all humans. it benefits no one to denigrate each other.

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

    Feb 09, 2013 2:14 AM GMT
    Hyperion said
    HIV unknown: chance of having the virus 0.366% (1.15 mil incidence/314 mil in the USA)


    I'm sorry, what you say is interesting and you make some valid points, but you can't claim to back up on facts if you do data cooking.
    Data cooking is playing with real data to make them compatible with your purpose.

    In the context of that thread, chance of having the virus means number of sexually active male who have sex with male divided by how many are positive.

    So it won't be 1.15 millions positive, but certainly not 314 millions.

    You 0.336 percent means absolutely nothing unless you consider women, toddlers and geriatric patient a potential source of infection.

    It's just the lowest percentage you can compute using US demographic.

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

    Feb 09, 2013 2:28 AM GMT
    Hyperion saidThis thread terrifies me. I doubt any of you are qualified to be giving out sexual health/medical advice.


    That would be a issues if the opinions here where presented as medical advice, and that's not the case.

    Last time I checked, there is no requirement to have a medical degree to be allowed to have sex, to share experience an opinions on the danger of sex, driving, alcohol or tobacco.

    And if you think the objective scientific knowledge of the risk involved can provide an clear cut answer to such a complicated question, you terrifies me.

    There is a lot of dangerous activities, and the decision is always a trad off between risk and benefits.

    Knowing the exact level of risk involved is of paramount importance, and knowing if a fear is rational or not is equally important.

    When I drive a car, I know I put my life in danger, like anybody, but it doesn't stress me. It doesn't mean I won't die in a car accident, but I do my best to lower the chance.
    Some other drive while drunk.

    When I take a plan, I know the statistics say I'm far safer than in my car.
    Some other panic or plain refuse to use air transport.

    So you can stress for no real reason, or ignore very real danger. For HIV, we have both reactions.


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

    Feb 09, 2013 6:01 AM GMT
    minox said

    I'm sorry, what you say is interesting and you make some valid points, but you can't claim to back up on facts if you do data cooking.
    Data cooking is playing with real data to make them compatible with your purpose.


    It's actually not data cooking, but I will agree its an over simplification, in part because there is only certain data available. So, adjusting for sexual orientation and age (since younger guys are more active and older with HIV is a reduced group without good drugs in the past....we can drive that number up to suit you more).

    Incidence of HIV in 2010 in the US according to the HIV surveillance report done by the CDC from male to male between contact, ages 13-54 is 54.5% of new cases. Extrapolating that over current prevalence of 1.15 million gives approx. 621,000 gay males between 13 and 54 who are HIV positive. Using the 2010 census from the us gives 96,109,000 males in that same age group. Adjusting for gay population we get about 6.5%, but a range of about 6-12% depending on what reference you use for the % of gay men (2-10%).

    So when adjusted for a younger age population and sexual orientation you get a liberal 6-12%. This is still less than 100% in admittedly HIV positive men. Again I assume you would use safe sex either way. I can not calculate risk for positive men based on viral load due to lack of consensus data in peer reviewed articles. Lower viral load is always better tho.

    minox said

    That would be a issues if the opinions here where presented as medical advice, and that's not the case.

    When it's presented as socially unacceptable to turn someone down over their STI status, it affects the health choices they may make. That's all I meant.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2013 6:12 AM GMT
    And to address it: "yes"

    As I've said in many other threads: I would rather be having safer sex with a guy who said and knew he was HIV+, and was successfully treating it, and therefore had a low viral load; than be having safer sex with someone who hadn't been tested recently and may be HIV+ with an out of control viral load. It's a no-brainer, really: safer sex is a given. So do I want to be having "safer" sex with someone who is "risky" (because their viral load is so high, I'm truly relying on the protection of a condom) or with someone who is actually fairly low risk: undetectable, safe, committed to keeping me safe, concerned about minor infections infecting him....again, it's a no-brainer. icon_neutral.gif

    A virus is NOT going to be keeping me from the man I love. And the man Iove isn't going to want to endanger me. [/quote]

    What he said. ;)

    I assume everyone has something anyway--less wondering that way. And I always play safe.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2013 6:36 AM GMT
    First off, I didn't read the entirety of this thread so I'm not sure of other peoples opinions.

    As for me, I'm not going to lie, I would be hesitant to have sex with someone who is HIV+. That being said, that doesn't mean that I wouldn't, or that I would disregard them as an individual. There are risks with sex with people who are negative that I am worried about, so having sex with someone who is positive might just send me over the edge. I am a paranoid person and I don't know how it would be for my mental health to stress over a sexual experience. Mind you, I always play safe, regardless of the persons status.

    Sorry if I offend any positive guys but that's just the way it is for me.
  • wild_sky360

    Posts: 4082

    Feb 09, 2013 8:32 AM GMT
    Twenty years ago, with the knowledge we had then, I would probably have joined the minority on this thread in taking a pass. Since that time, my ex who is an HIV specialist physician, as well as the discoverer of HIV Dr luc montagnier, have both expressed doubts to the virulence of HIV.

    It's not particularly easy to transmit, and mere exposure, even in blood to blood contact, is not necessarily going to result in transmission. There are other major risk factors beside mere exposure. Dr Montagnier has gone on to opine that the average, healthy, non immuno challenged individual can likely fight off a minor exposure like they would a cold or flu and remain negative.

    Repeated exposure to other STD's and the resulting over use of antibiotics, the use of immune suppressing inhalants like poppers, poor nutrition, and a number of other factors, are what will contribute to chronic infection from minor exposure.

    Statistical odds can be approached from so many angles, to make your head spin. I personally like the idea of knowing someone has a low viral load vs. a recently negative guy who is unaware he has an astronomical viral load
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2013 11:46 PM GMT
    Renk saidEssentially would you have sex with a guy you knew was HIV+ while being negative? Vice versa? I ask because a lot of my friends say they would never do have sex with a positive out of fear but I'm on the fence.


    While this is a hot topic I will convey to you my experience: I have dated men with HIV and have enjoyed a wonderful experience. I myself am negative and remain committed to not judging others if they are. I know the ways in which one can contract HIV, and if one is careful and uses precautions, AS ALL SHOULD, they is no need for fear. As with anything, communication and knowledge is essential! So don't let HIV stop you from an opportunity that could be wonderful!
    Dr. D. DeMotte Ph.D
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2013 11:48 PM GMT
    MusclePleasure saidAnd to address it: "yes"

    As I've said in many other threads: I would rather be having safer sex with a guy who said and knew he was HIV+, and was successfully treating it, and therefore had a low viral load; than be having safer sex with someone who hadn't been tested recently and may be HIV+ with an out of control viral load. It's a no-brainer, really: safer sex is a given. So do I want to be having "safer" sex with someone who is "risky" (because their viral load is so high, I'm truly relying on the protection of a condom) or with someone who is actually fairly low risk: undetectable, safe, committed to keeping me safe, concerned about minor infections infecting him....again, it's a no-brainer. icon_neutral.gif

    A virus is NOT going to be keeping me from the man I love. And the man Iove isn't going to want to endanger me.


    What he said. ;)

    I assume everyone has something anyway--less wondering that way. And I always play safe.
    [/quote]

    VERY WELL SAID !!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2013 12:00 AM GMT
    I think alot of people lie about their status- everyone says there negative or I tested negative like two years ago- the only way to avoid HIV is to always use protection or to be celibate- alot of research is concluding that men on meds with little viral loads do not pass the virus-??? who knows it is a risk
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2013 1:23 AM GMT
    Wow.. this surveyed turned into a bashing name calling war within what, 1 page? I'm not surprised.


    My answer to this is no. No, I would choose not to have sex with someone who is HIV+. I'd have no reservations being friends with said person, but no exchange of bodily fluids shall take place.


    If I were having sex with someone for the sake of hooking up, there's no way I'm risking my health and basically jeopardizing the rest of my life to agonizing stress over a mere fuck. Could have been the best fuck of my life, but guess what, I don't think that'll be worth the risk. Especially since I'd be focused on that the entire time.


    If this were a someone I'm dating, I'd still have to say no. I'm the kind of guy that wants to one day settle down, get married, and start a family of mini-me's. There is no room for HIV/AIDS in that picture. If I have to be constantly worried and stressed about either mine or my partner's health with a terminal disease, that would be a very depressing life. So no. Especially if I were given that option at the beginning.


    I don't need to justify my actions to anyone, especially not strangers on the internet. I'll do as I please because life is too short to give a crap about people who don't matter to me. Honestly, what am I losing out on by not sleeping with this HIV+ person?


    Maybe the difference between my perspective and those the other side of the fence is simply being in different shoes. I'm young, I've got big dreams and a whole life ahead of me. I've a guy who I love to death and one day, I wanna start a family with him. And again, no room for HIV/AIDS in this picture. Spare me your prophetic predictions of how we're gonna cheat on each other and give ourselves AIDS, I can already see idiots bitching about that. Seriously, just because you can't seem to find happiness doesn't mean others can't either.


    To all those who's going to be condemning me as a young ignorant dumb fuck, please, go on. You're clearly of the opinion that there's only 1 acceptable stance on this - yours. We'll agree to disagree, or not, but it really doesn't matter to me. Although, it does matter to everyone else reading these posts, thinking that their own life decisions maybe should somehow conform to those of certain narrow-minded trolls on here who claim to know everything.
  • Medjai

    Posts: 2671

    Mar 04, 2013 1:28 AM GMT
    yourname2000 said^^^ LOL. If you read this entire thread, and that's the best you can do, then you've missed the whole point, lol. icon_wink.gif



    ^^^ LOL. If you read the entire post, and that's the best you can do, then you've missed the whole point, lol.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2013 1:33 AM GMT
    yourname2000 said^^^ LOL. If you read this entire thread, and that's the best you can do, then you've missed the whole point, lol. icon_wink.gif



    I'm not gonna write an essay refuting EVERYONE's points. I'm just stating mine with as much justification as I think is needed. But honestly, you seem to be taking personal offence over a difference of opinion. True, many of us aren't as knowledgable on this as you, but come on, live and let live. It's not like we're promoting the spread of HIV here.