Would you ever bottom bareback for a person who is HIV+ and 'undetectable'

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

    Oct 13, 2014 3:16 AM GMT
    This really should end this stupid argument but I know it won't. It seems Timmm55's love for cum up his ass is greater than his concern for his sexual partner's lives. icon_neutral.gif[/quote]

    This icon_cool.gificon_lol.gif:response is the best one I have seen on here and I nominate for the award of most truthful and cutting response and clever. icon_idea.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 3:20 AM GMT
    Scruffypup said
    Art_Deco saidHere's how the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) answer this question, as pasted from their website minutes ago: "Can I contract HIV from someone who has a low viral load?" [Emphases are mine]

    Yes. Even though having an undetectable viral load greatly lowers the chance that a person with HIV can transmit the virus to a partner, there is still some risk.

    Viral load refers to the amount of HIV in the blood. An undetectable viral load is when the amount of HIV in the blood is so low that it can’t be measured. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces viral load, ideally to an undetectable level, when taken consistently and correctly.

    A person with HIV can still potentially transmit HIV to a partner even if they have an undetectable viral load, because HIV may still be found in genital fluids (e.g., semen, vaginal fluids). The viral load test only measures virus in blood.

    A person’s viral load may go up between tests. When this happens, they may be more likely to transmit HIV to partners. Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) increase viral load in genital fluids.

    This really should end this stupid argument but I know it won't. It seems Timmm55's love for cum up his ass is greater than his concern for his sexual partner's lives. icon_neutral.gif

    Well, you would think it would. But Nutjob won't give up, until he's fucked and infected every guy he can. Just because he's infected himself.

    Yah know, these are the guys we gotta watch out for. Who either lie and say they're negative, or that say they have no other STIs, or who say I'm poz, but I'm low viral vlral load, so don't worry if we bareback.

    But where are they if you turn up poz? They gonna pay for the costs? They gonna stick with you through the lifelong treatments you'll face? We already know the answer to that one. icon_razz.gif

    Don't be stupid. Just stay away from barebackers. Their interest in only their own pleasure, not your safety. You wanna play that game, fine. But don't complain about the consequences later, or expect a lot of sympathy for your own mistake.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 4:00 AM GMT
    Many years ago I had a couple of dates with this incredibly hot guy. But I never fully trusted him because he would act sketchy at times. One night I was lying on his bed when he asked me if I wanted some Tang. I hadn't heard of anyone drinking Tang since I was a kid and thought it odd. But I said "sure" and he mixed me up some in the kitchen and brought it to me on the bed. I started feeling extremely relaxed and giddy for no apparent reason. He then told me he was HIV+ and told me how he fucked this guy at the bath house the night before. I asked him if he used a condom and he said no and that he shot his load inside him. When I asked if he told the guy he was positive, he said "no, he was asleep the whole time." When I protested about how wrong that was he told me "anyone who falls asleep in a bath house deserves it."

    My heart began racing after he told me all this and when he went to the kitchen to make me more "Tang" I got up and tried to run out the door, but that's when I realized I had been heavily drugged because I fell repeatedly once I got outside the door. I made it almost a full block away and was inside a gay bar trying to tell people I had been drugged (he lived on Bourbon Street.) But I couldn't form words very well and no one understood what I was trying to say. He then ran in the door and dragged me back to his house. I couldn't fight back and whatever he gave me made everything seem like a dream and oddly okay.

    He put me in bed and undressed me. He crawled on top of me and started lubing up his dick and tried to mount me. Something inside me managed to gain enough consciousness to reach around me for something to hit him with. There was a heavy curtain rod lying across the table and I picked it up while he was on top of me, but I didn't have the strength or coordination to hit him with it so I hit the window with it and lucky for me it broke. Within just a couple of minutes, someone yelled inside the broken window what happened and I yelled loud enough for them to hear me. The neighbor then started banging on the door and he had to let him in. I begged him to help me out of there and the neighbor didn't act surprised in the least. He said "Joe, let him go." He helped me outside and I woke up on this guy's floor the next morning.

    So while I'm sure a lot of guys are honest about their HIV status, there are some very sick people out there who are angry about having it and are actively searching for people to infect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 4:16 AM GMT
    I can add a true story about how perpetual anger at BB sex and the subsequent exposure to HIV of one young man 20yr old at the time. Date raped going leaving a club who then went on to my horror to do the same thing that had been done to him only 6 yrs later to a teenager. I only found out this because I was working at the club the first kid got done over at and the second one was chatting online then that evening came up and said he was who I chatted too online. He then pointed the guy out. Anyone wants more details I can message you it later but my point of this story is that when behaviours which are bad are swept ' under the carpet' or just liven band aid solutions medications which is then the real solution is a culture of prevention, When we engage in risky behaviour we are human, but prompting and condoning it where persons who may not know better can possibly see it as fact is wrong and should be subject to community sanction
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 4:21 AM GMT
    My ex-bf was poz in a similar way and no that story was not of him. I knew he was poz before we decided to be partners and move in Together and I'm still neg coz we used condoms he cared too much sometimes to even a slight risk pitty not many like him
  • vhotti26

    Posts: 287

    Oct 13, 2014 9:33 AM GMT
    timmm55 said

    Moron THIS IS FROM THE CDC! I really wish you would read this stuff before trying to argue.



    I recommend you stop claiming your information is from the CDC when you have in reality only selected a certain portion of their information that suits your disgusting (not quite so) ulterior motives.

    How about you have a look at the whole picture? I am actually pretty glad there are quite a few people up against you and nobody who is with you. That leaves a faint trace of hope in my heart. But as long as a minority of idiots like you can still wreak havoc with uneducated or drugged partners, that's probably still not good enough.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 2:02 PM GMT
    Thank you to the guys who challenged the poz BB crew. I have proof that the claims by Timm55 are incorrect but I'd rather see him try to argue his point as a rationale debate. I believe there are others who have agreed with his views even though they may not be aware ff
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 8:25 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said This really should end this stupid argument but I know it won't. It seems Timmm55's love for cum up his ass is greater than his concern for his sexual partner's lives. icon_neutral.gif


    This icon_cool.gificon_lol.gif:response is the best one I have seen on here and I nominate for the award of most truthful and cutting response and clever. icon_idea.gif [/quote]


    I'm a top you moron
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 8:30 PM GMT
    vhotti26 said
    timmm55 said

    Moron THIS IS FROM THE CDC! I really wish you would read this stuff before trying to argue.



    I recommend you stop claiming your information is from the CDC when you have in reality only selected a certain portion of their information that suits your disgusting (not quite so) ulterior motives.

    How about you have a look at the whole picture? I am actually pretty glad there are quite a few people up against you and nobody who is with you. That leaves a faint trace of hope in my heart. But as long as a minority of idiots like you can still wreak havoc with uneducated or drugged partners, that's probably still not good enough.


    it's called the internet, you can pull up information from 4 years ago (LIKE YOU DO),

    THIS IS THE CDC'S HIV NEWEST DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 2014
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2014 8:55 PM GMT
    Art Deco:
    "Well, you would think it would. But Nutjob won't give up, until he's fucked and infected every guy he can. Just because he's infected himself.

    Yah know, these are the guys we gotta watch out for. Who either lie and say they're negative, or that say they have no other STIs, or who say I'm poz, but I'm low viral vlral load, so don't worry if we bareback."

    You wanted me to apologize to YOU? Never in a million years.
    You don't know the difference between AIDS and HIV (and lied about it). You don't know the difference between POZ and POZ/Undetectable (and lied about it). You pretend to be some sort of an HIV advocate, but are in fact a lying, stigmatizing, hating poor excuse for a human being.

    You have stepped too far into slander, where's our lawyer friend?

    "The CDC estimates 20% of HIV-positive people in the US don’t know they’re infected – yet it’s this 20% that researchers estimate account for between 54% and 71% of new infections."

    It's not the POZ/undetectable guys who know. It's the idiots on here who think they are negative, but don't get tested.

    http://www.frontiersla.com/mylifeonprep/Story.aspx?ID=1813678


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

    Oct 13, 2014 9:00 PM GMT
    timmm55 said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said This really should end this stupid argument but I know it won't. It seems Timmm55's love for cum up his ass is greater than his concern for his sexual partner's lives. icon_neutral.gif


    This icon_cool.gificon_lol.gif:response is the best one I have seen on here and I nominate for the award of most truthful and cutting response and clever. icon_idea.gif



    I'm a top you moron[/quote]

    Makes it so much worse all your barebacking advocacy
  • vhotti26

    Posts: 287

    Oct 13, 2014 10:41 PM GMT
    timmm55 said
    "The CDC estimates 20% of HIV-positive people in the US don’t know they’re infected – yet it’s this 20% that researchers estimate account for between 54% and 71% of new infections."

    It's not the POZ/undetectable guys who know. It's the idiots on here who think they are negative, but don't get tested.



    Are you stupid or what? Of course those who don't know are responsible for most new infections, that's only logical.
    I know logic isn't your strong point, but the numbers you quote mean 29-46% of new infections are passed by positive guys who know their status. Doesn't quite mean they are safe, does it?
    And it certainly doesn't mean that 'undetectable' pozzers should bareback with other guys, they are also included in that number.

    You are a dumb fucking idiot and nothing you say will ever change that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 14, 2014 8:10 PM GMT
    vhotti26 said
    timmm55 said
    "The CDC estimates 20% of HIV-positive people in the US don’t know they’re infected – yet it’s this 20% that researchers estimate account for between 54% and 71% of new infections."

    It's not the POZ/undetectable guys who know. It's the idiots on here who think they are negative, but don't get tested.



    Are you stupid or what? Of course those who don't know are responsible for most new infections, that's only logical.
    I know logic isn't your strong point, but the numbers you quote mean 29-46% of new infections are passed by positive guys who know their status. Doesn't quite mean they are safe, does it?
    And it certainly doesn't mean that 'undetectable' pozzers should bareback with other guys, they are also included in that number.

    You are a dumb fucking idiot and nothing you say will ever change that.


    Your half a brain got it half right!

    I guess I need to help you with the basics:

    HIV 101
    In the United States, HIV is spread mainly by

    Having sex with someone who has HIV. In general:
    Anal sex is the highest-risk sexual behavior. Receptive anal sex (bottoming) is riskier than insertive anal sex (topping).
    Vaginal sex is the second highest-risk sexual behavior.
    Having multiple sex partners or having other sexually transmitted infections can increase the risk of infection through sex.
    Sharing needles, syringes, rinse water, or other equipment (works) used to prepare injection drugs with someone who has HIV.

    Less commonly, HIV may be spread by

    Being born to an infected mother. HIV can be passed from mother to child during pregnancy, birth, or breastfeeding.
    Being stuck with an HIV-contaminated needle or other sharp object. This is a risk mainly for health care workers.
    Receiving blood transfusions, blood products, or organ/tissue transplants that are contaminated with HIV. This risk is extremely small because of rigorous testing of the US blood supply and donated organs and tissues.
    Eating food that has been pre-chewed by an HIV-infected person. The contamination occurs when infected blood from a caregiver’s mouth mixes with food while chewing, and is very rare.
    Being bitten by a person with HIV. Each of the very small number of documented cases has involved severe trauma with extensive tissue damage and the presence of blood. There is no risk of transmission if the skin is not broken.
    Oral sex—using the mouth to stimulate the penis, vagina, or anus (fellatio, cunnilingus, and rimming). Giving fellatio (mouth to penis oral sex) and having the person ejaculate (cum) in your mouth is riskier than other types of oral sex.
    Contact between broken skin, wounds, or mucous membranes and HIV-infected blood or blood-contaminated body fluids. These reports have also been extremely rare.
    Deep, open-mouth kissing if the person with HIV has sores or bleeding gums and blood is exchanged. HIV is not spread through saliva. Transmission through kissing alone is extremely rare.
    http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/transmission.html#panel0

    There are certainly a few psychopaths (in the true clinical sense....not like the idiotic comments here) who intentionally spread HIV. They are Gay and straight, here and around the world. ONE person can affect 100s or even thousands.

    There are a few bug chasers/gift givers, but I doubt their numbers are significant.

    Condoms, surely one of the best defenses, is 80-85 percent effective according to the CDC.

    Condoms-only/no anal sex
    This category is pretty self-explanatory and was found to be 74 percent effective in reducing HIV infections in the 2012 study. However, a 2013 study from CROI found that condoms are only 70 percent effective in preventing HIV infections, and only if used every time. Inconsistent condom use had no prevention effect.
    http://www.hivplusmag.com/treatment/prevention/2013/12/05/condoms-arent-only-answer-more-hiv-prevention-options
    (Let's see? Subtract the 250,000 from 1.1 million POZ, and factor in a 25% human error rate (condoms, used properly are 98% effective)....and what do you get????)

    Some people "jump the gun" on PrEP and ART Therapy. There is a minimum ramp up period of 6 months for both AND an Undetectable value for ART.

    Yes, the 250,00 Undetectables are included in the 1.1 million of Positive people in the US. I AM POSITIVE!
    But as I've linked to many times: "HIV positive patients on anti-retroviral treatment who are virally suppressed did not transmit HIV to their negative partners."
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/renato-barucco/beyond-poz-and-neg-five-h_b_5039729.html

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

    Oct 14, 2014 8:26 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said
    timmm55 said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 said This really should end this stupid argument but I know it won't. It seems Timmm55's love for cum up his ass is greater than his concern for his sexual partner's lives. icon_neutral.gif


    This icon_cool.gificon_lol.gif:response is the best one I have seen on here and I nominate for the award of most truthful and cutting response and clever. icon_idea.gif



    I'm a top you moron


    Makes it so much worse all your barebacking advocacy [/quote]

    It's not advocacy. It's 53% majority as a reality. If you don't address reality how can you end an epidemic?

    But aren't you are a Neg Top, who thinks he can't get HIV by strategic positioning!?

    Anyway I serosort with POZ/POZU guys. You guys blame everybody but yourselves.
  • vhotti26

    Posts: 287

    Oct 14, 2014 8:32 PM GMT
    You are like the pope.

    Pray for HIV to end itself, but god forbid don't allow condoms in.

    Maybe you should go to the Vatican?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 14, 2014 9:38 PM GMT
    vhotti26 saidYou are like the pope.

    Pray for HIV to end itself, but god forbid don't allow condoms in.

    Maybe you should go to the Vatican?


    Where do you make this shit up?

    DO USE condoms!!!!!

    Also/and/or use PrEP and TasP.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 14, 2014 9:42 PM GMT
    vhotti26 said



    Are you stupid or what?


    You are a dumb fucking idiot and nothing you say will ever change that.


    In related HIV TasP news:
    Renowned HIV/AIDS researcher to be inducted to Canadian Medical Hall of Fame
    October 7, 2014

    Published in: CTV News
    Featuring: Montaner J

    VANCOUVER - A Vancouver doctor and world-renowned HIV/AIDS researcher has been selected for induction into the Canadian Medical Hall of Fame.

    Dr. Julio Montaner, director of the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, is one of six Canadian physicians chosen for the award honouring contributions that have led to extraordinary improvements in human health.

    A written news release says Montaner's work includes pioneering the HIV cocktail, which was adopted by the World Health Organization and the UNAIDS program in 2000.

    Montaner is also a longtime advocate of the AIDS/HIV treatment-as-prevention model, which he says has led B.C. to see a consistent decline in both mortality rates and new cases of HIV.


    I'm an idiot? Have you been inducted into a Medical Hall of Fame? I'll listen to Montaner and Fauci before you!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 14, 2014 10:06 PM GMT
    Scruffypup said
    Art_Deco saidHere's how the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) answer this question, as pasted from their website minutes ago: "Can I contract HIV from someone who has a low viral load?" [Emphases are mine]

    Yes. Even though having an undetectable viral load greatly lowers the chance that a person with HIV can transmit the virus to a partner, there is still some risk.

    Viral load refers to the amount of HIV in the blood. An undetectable viral load is when the amount of HIV in the blood is so low that it can’t be measured. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces viral load, ideally to an undetectable level, when taken consistently and correctly.

    A person with HIV can still potentially transmit HIV to a partner even if they have an undetectable viral load, because HIV may still be found in genital fluids (e.g., semen, vaginal fluids). The viral load test only measures virus in blood.

    A person’s viral load may go up between tests. When this happens, they may be more likely to transmit HIV to partners. Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) increase viral load in genital fluids.


    ∆ This really should end this stupid argument but I know it won't. It seems Timmm55's love for cum up his ass is greater than his concern for his sexual partner's lives. icon_neutral.gif


    Stupid you! Not a bottom, but I do swallow lol

    Now check the DATES on that piece....it was valid as of the last 6 months to a years AGO.

    Now, bare with me......this might take you a few minutes to comprehend. The NEW CDC campaign is -----drum roll please--------Sept. 17, 2014.

    Now read the link AGAIN
    http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/2014/HIV-Treatment-Works-press-release.html

    While it certainly doesn't say NOT to use condoms....but they aren't mentioned either.
    "“Our goal is to help everyone with HIV know the tremendous health benefits treatment offers to them and the protection it provides to their partners.”

    Everyone
    included the 53% who don't use condoms. Not just the 47% who do. If you don't treat thr 53% who don't use condoms the epidemic will never end. But TasP has already make significant inroads into reduced HIV transmissions and obvious health improvements.

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

    Oct 14, 2014 10:16 PM GMT
    Here's the ultimate litmus test of TasP:

    Find anyone who has gotten HIV from someone who was clinically undetectable (<50 copies. 6 months or more).

    Go ahead! Even with blips, semen variances and all the other "possibilities" the result has been ZERO.

    While I anticipate some, I've yet to find one. The few that mentioned were discredited. Like PrEP, when used as directed (and condoms for that matter) they are nearly 100% effective.

    That's why the world over TasP has been accepted, except on this blot of ass wipes who can only make it a "Pro BB Agenda"......just stupid people here. The "majority" here is not an indication of the rest of the medical world. The "majority" here is antiquated as far as new methods of HIV prevention are concerned.

    You people really need to read more. I do every day. And I do my initia searches to the last month or more recent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 15, 2014 1:08 AM GMT
    Let's go back to the OP's original post "Receptive anal sex is the highest risk of transmission of HIV, given the confidence of the medical fraternity of their new drug treatments, (insert your own minimum time scale you would consider bare back for an HIV- guy)[Why would you ask a Negative person what HE considers an appropriate time scale? It's a medical issue, not a majority vote of the cynical RJ members to decide]. If you are HIV neg I especially am interested in your responses."
    Of course you do! Because we know the majority is always right, right? And with people like Art Deco, you and others who are completely ill informed (worse, wholly committed to brand anyone who disagrees with you, as "wanting to infect as many people as possible" I think Art Deco said.)


    This interview was back in Nov. 2012 (before the Partner's Study reconfirmation of the other previous studies.)
    "Montaner, like many others in the community, has been criticising the criminalization of HIV lately. Times have changed, Dr Montaner said in a recent canada.com interview. "We can't have a discourse that, on one hand. says things are different now — we can identify HIV, we can treat it, you can have a near normal life — and, on the other hand, says if you do not disclose we’ll put you in jail."

    And it’s true. The reality of undetectable viral load and the “almost zero risk” of HIV transmission, albeit with important caveats, are a key argument now in the case against criminalization. But why haven’t we seen any changes in prevention messaging aimed at HIV-positive people? It looks very much like business as usual, in fact. I asked Montaner why this discrepancy?

    ”Well, I think that the data is very definitive at least in the case of sero-discordant heterosexual couples where we have the best available data, as a result of the randomized controlled trial reported on last year where we know that, after you become (viral-load) suppressed, in the absence of other co-morbidities – STIs and the like – the likelihood of transmission is very, very, very low indeed. Now, the problem here is that people very often want to know is there a risk or isn’t there a risk? And that’s a different discussion. We cannot prove the absence of risk.”

    Montaner adds: “So I’m perfectly comfortable to tell people that if you want to go forward and have, for example, unprotected sex while you are being protected by antiretroviral therapy, that is perfectly acceptable. On the other hand, you need to know that in the process of doing that, if there was a breakdown in adherence for example, you put yourself at risk. As long as you are willing and able to live with that kind of small risk, I’m perfectly happy to live with it.”


    “Some people, they want to be 100% sure that there is no risk. So they are not very comfortable with this kind of approach. What I usually tell people is look, if you think wearing condoms is the way to go and you are happy to advise and counsel people that condoms are as good as safe sex, I think you should be fully comfortable with advising fully suppressed individuals on HAART that they are as well protected as when using condoms, if not better protected. If they are concerned and want to use HAART and condoms, that would be even more protective. But that’s a judgement that fully informed couples should make.”

    “If you are asking me,” Montaner says, “I’m very comfortable that properly used HAART is at least as protective – or more –than condoms.”
    http://www.positivelite.com/component/zoo/item/a-passionate-man-the-julio-montaner-interview-part-two

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

    Oct 16, 2014 10:54 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidThank you to the guys who challenged the poz BB crew. I have proof that the claims by Timm55 are incorrect


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

    Oct 17, 2014 3:25 PM GMT


    "Would you ever bottom bareback for a person who is HIV+ and 'undetectable'"

    Nope.

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

    Oct 17, 2014 5:07 PM GMT
    +1 here and I suspect most other people
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2014 4:45 AM GMT
    timmm55 said
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidThank you to the guys who challenged the poz BB crew. I have proof that the claims by Timm55 are incorrect


    Still waiting!


    There are a million different reasons why people who believe espouse that practices such as barebacking are ok. They can be summed up in 2 catagories.

    1. People already HIV poz (it's not like it matters to them it's seems)
    2. People who would not even expose themselves to the sexual acts of highest risk, even with protection

    I'm still waiting for the HIV negative guy who is willing to bareback as a bottom. Can you find one who is not just a 'bug chaser'. Doubt you will buddy your agenda is real blight on our community and your one reason to keep these laws that give mandatory disclosure. For the record in Australia there must be intent before there are any legal sanctions.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2014 7:06 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidWhy does this topic perpetuate in the forums?

    Everyone, turn off your computers now. Your lives are waiting for you.


    It's because people tell half truths that will lead to serious health issues and some people just want to stand by and let that happen, I won't be doing that so here I am speaking up