Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 17, 2014, 03:28:11 PM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
  • Total Members: 22202
  • Latest: jo88
Stats
  • Total Posts: 620028
  • Total Topics: 46713
  • Online Today: 282
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Author Topic: question. .. .. ..  (Read 4780 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline audioholic

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
question. .. .. ..
« on: September 20, 2007, 10:43:55 PM »
hey guys. . . this is my first post in this thread. . . posted a few times earlier in the other. . .

alright heres the question. . .
my fiance and i (a guy) were laying in bed cuddling and one thing led to another and. . . .

well, hes the top. but he fucked me sans condom. . . . the doc said we could do it pretty safely
if i were on meds, but. . im not. . .
what are the chances of giving it to your partner if your on the receiving end?

any help would be appreciated. .    ;D
4/07-  vl:28,918  cd4:418
7/07-  vl:38,710 cd4:354
10/07-  vl:21,320 cd4:278
baseline started meds 1/08 vl:25,589 cd4:247
2/08 vl:410 cd4:320
2/08 vl:380  cd4:374
3/08 vl:310  cd4:419   23%
3/08 vl:240  cd4:384   27%
4/08 vl:119  cd4:383   23%

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,160
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2007, 10:55:29 PM »
Pretty safely? Your doctor needs a kick up the bum.

Tops can and do get infected. Any one of a number of our members will tell you that. Whilst the bottom is at greater risk from an infected top, there is still a real and present risk from positive bottom to negative top.

If your partner wants to stay negative then he should be using latex condoms and water based lube when he cornholes you, irrespective of whether you take meds or not.

MtD

Offline Lis

  • Member
  • Posts: 593
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2007, 11:18:21 PM »
listen to the damned one... dont be foolish!
poz 1986....

Offline edfu

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,084
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2007, 04:29:34 AM »
You desperately need to find a new doctor, STAT.
"No one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences."--Albert Camus, "The Plague"

"Mankind can never be free until the last brick in the last church falls on the head of the last priest."--Voltaire

Offline audioholic

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #4 on: September 21, 2007, 09:22:17 AM »

i think i mis-represented what my doc said. . . . . :-\ :'(
he just said the chances would be far greater not that it would be safe. . . .

my bad on that. . hes like one of the best in my area  :D


alright. . well, we use condoms every other time and have for the past year. . . . . . . . dont really know what heppend or what we were thinking. . .

i know he still has a risk of getting it and all but does anyone know the actual odds?
4/07-  vl:28,918  cd4:418
7/07-  vl:38,710 cd4:354
10/07-  vl:21,320 cd4:278
baseline started meds 1/08 vl:25,589 cd4:247
2/08 vl:410 cd4:320
2/08 vl:380  cd4:374
3/08 vl:310  cd4:419   23%
3/08 vl:240  cd4:384   27%
4/08 vl:119  cd4:383   23%

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,160
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #5 on: September 21, 2007, 09:30:12 AM »

well, hes the top. but he fucked me sans condom. . . . the doc said we could do it pretty safely
if i were on meds, but. . im not. . .


That's what you said, so if you misrepresented him your doctor should be pretty annoyed with you about now.

i know he still has a risk of getting it and all but does anyone know the actual odds?


There are no "actual" odds. All we know is that fucking a positive someone up the arse without a condom is a real risk for contracting HIV. If you want to reduce your partner's chances of remaining HIV negative to a set of "actual odds" then all I can say is I'm glad I'm single.

Have the best day.

MtD

Offline HealthyMomma

  • Member
  • Posts: 128
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #6 on: September 21, 2007, 09:32:15 AM »
If the odds were 1 in a 1,000 or 1 in 10, isnt that kinda a big risk to be taking with another persons life? Huge risk or tiny risk, theres still a risk. Use a condom  ;)

Offline Peter6836

  • Member
  • Posts: 391
  • Me and my Granddaughter Noa
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #7 on: September 21, 2007, 12:03:36 PM »
Sorry but all I can say to all of this is WOW. Education, is really deficient.

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #8 on: September 21, 2007, 08:05:24 PM »
It's that "invicible" behavior again. "The chances are so low". "I won't cum in you". "I have anti-bacterial". "I've never got anything from topping" ...

You're responsible too. Don't let him enter without a permit. It's cheap and will protect you both.

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline audioholic

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #9 on: September 21, 2007, 08:27:43 PM »
we will and have been for the past year (using condoms). . . .
kinda stupid of us to have let one slip. . . . .
i just hope hes still ok . . . . . .
like ur advice milker. . thnx
4/07-  vl:28,918  cd4:418
7/07-  vl:38,710 cd4:354
10/07-  vl:21,320 cd4:278
baseline started meds 1/08 vl:25,589 cd4:247
2/08 vl:410 cd4:320
2/08 vl:380  cd4:374
3/08 vl:310  cd4:419   23%
3/08 vl:240  cd4:384   27%
4/08 vl:119  cd4:383   23%

Offline frenchpat

  • Member
  • Posts: 516
  • Love your friends, don't eat them.
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #10 on: September 22, 2007, 03:15:52 AM »
i know he still has a risk of getting it and all but does anyone know the actual odds?

Hi, and first, welcome to the forums.

As for the odds, one time is enough, it is really all it takes. And several of us here can attest to that.

Pat
People have the power - Patti Smith

Offline Morton Salt

  • Member
  • Posts: 98
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2007, 12:07:35 AM »
Dude, your an Idiot!.. Anyone who has sex unprotected while positive or with someone positive is a complete jackass and has complete disregard for human life.  Might i suggest that you go dig a hole in the ground and go bury your stupid ass in it.  Unbelievable.....Im speechless..  I seriously think guys like you should be put in prison.

~MORTON SALT
"Im king of all salt" 


Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2007, 12:14:15 AM »
Dude, your an Idiot!.. Anyone who has sex unprotected while positive or with someone positive is a complete jackass and has complete disregard for human life.  Might i suggest that you go dig a hole in the ground and go bury your stupid ass in it.  Unbelievable.....Im speechless..  I seriously think guys like you should be put in prison.

~MORTON SALT
"Im king of all salt" 


um ok. Both of them knew his status. I don't know you got infected but if it was from sex you also are an idiot, jackass, have a complete disregard for human life, and maybe you should bury your stupid ass in that hole and be put in prison.

Well all made a stupid mistake, we all knew the risks. Now let's try to minimize the future risks of his partner rather than giving that speech.

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline Cerrid

  • Member
  • Posts: 499
  • only as good as your last haircut
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2007, 03:25:52 AM »
the doc said we could do it pretty safely
if i were on meds, but. . im not. . .

Your doc is right. If you were on meds and had an undetectable viral load, the transmission risk would be very slim indeed, the risk being comparable to a deep kiss. There is not a single documented case worldwide where someone with an undetectable VL has infected his/her partner. That doesn't mean it's impossible, but it's just very unlikely. Or, as you put it, "pretty safe" vs. "completely safe". No reason to not disclose, though.

"Boredom is always counterrevolutionary. Always." (Guy Debord)

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #14 on: September 23, 2007, 03:50:34 AM »
There is not a single documented case worldwide where someone with an undetectable VL has infected his/her partner.
So if i'm undetectable i can fuck without worrying about infecting anyone? Cerrid hello?

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline edfu

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,084
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #15 on: September 23, 2007, 04:08:50 AM »
Good grief....When the viral load is declared "undetectable," it is undetectable only via the measurements of the laboratory assay test on peripheral blood ONLY.  Most such tests cannot and do not measure down to ZERO.  More importantly, the virus may still be present in other bodily fluids, such as semen, or in anal and oral mucosa. 

« Last Edit: September 23, 2007, 04:41:58 AM by edfu »
"No one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences."--Albert Camus, "The Plague"

"Mankind can never be free until the last brick in the last church falls on the head of the last priest."--Voltaire

Offline Grasshopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 441
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #16 on: September 23, 2007, 04:11:21 AM »
So if i'm undetectable i can fuck without worrying about infecting anyone? Cerrid hello?

Milker.
Your doc is right. If you were on meds and had an undetectable viral load, the transmission risk would be very slim indeed,.......... That doesn't mean it's impossible, but it's just very unlikely. Or, as you put it, "pretty safe" vs. "completely safe". ......



Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 27,947
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2007, 07:37:30 AM »
It has been proven that a man who has an undetectable viral load in BLOOD test, CAN and often DOES HAVE a detectable viral load in their semen.

Having an undetectable viral load is definitely NOT a license to bareback!

Ann
(who thought people knew this shit!)

Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Offline Grasshopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 441
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #18 on: September 23, 2007, 10:01:40 AM »
It has been proven that a man who has an undetectable viral load in BLOOD test, CAN and often DOES HAVE a detectable viral load in their semen.

Having an undetectable viral load is definitely NOT a license to bareback!

Ann
(who thought people knew this shit!)



Does one have seminal ducts in their rectum ?   ???

Grass
(who will never ever engage in unprotected penetratvive sex with a negative person)
« Last Edit: September 23, 2007, 10:06:23 AM by Grasshopper »

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 27,947
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2007, 10:07:45 AM »
Does one ejaculate semen from their rectum ?

Grass
(who will never ever engage in unprotected penetratvive sex with a negative person)

No, but it stands to reason that if an undetectable amount of virus in the blood doesn't necessarily mean there is an undetectable amount in the semen, other bodily fluids that have been shown to be infectious (such as rectal mucus) may also not be undetectable just because the blood is undetectable.

Ann
(who detects a smart-arse) ;)

Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Offline Grasshopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 441
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #20 on: September 23, 2007, 10:20:25 AM »
No, but it stands to reason that if an undetectable amount of virus in the blood doesn't necessarily mean there is an undetectable amount in the semen, other bodily fluids that have been shown to be infectious (such as rectal mucus) may also not be undetectable just because the blood is undetectable.

Ann
(who detects a smart-arse) ;)



The basic question was: to what degree is rectal mucus in a poz person with an undetect. viralload infectious ?

All replies, yours included Ann !!,  have been focused on viralload in sperm, thus derailling the question.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2007, 10:24:07 AM by Grasshopper »

Offline Paulette

  • Member
  • Posts: 112
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #21 on: September 23, 2007, 10:25:02 AM »
I agree with Ann, you would think that everybody already knew this shit.  Also no-one has mentioned that if one is on meds and the other not, you can build up a resistance to the Hiv meds that your partner is taking and when the time comes they might not work for you. also even if you both are positive you can still take the chance of reinfecting your partner (so why take that chance?) also i read somewhere that it is harder for a man that isn't circumcised to become infected.(has any one else heard this as well?)
Paulette
I have HIV; it doesn't me;)

Offline Grasshopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 441
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #22 on: September 23, 2007, 10:30:35 AM »
also i read somewhere that it is harder for a man that isn't circumcised to become infected.(has any one else heard this as well?)
Paulette

I have heard of a different version of your theory

Offline Catman

  • Member
  • Posts: 419
  • Blessed with more than 9 lives! + since 1986
    • Who is the Catman?
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #23 on: September 23, 2007, 10:45:04 AM »
The basic question was: to what degree is rectal mucus in a poz person with an undetect. viralload infectious ?

All replies, yours included Ann !!,  have been focused on viralload in sperm, thus derailling the question.

I understand and back up Grasshopper's comment. I reserve my comment, my experience and present relationship practices with my 12 year "negative" partner because 98% of the persons here will jump on me like red ants on sugar. Besides, I would not like to set an example to other couples...this is just my partner and my own preference and choice. No more comment on this...
Catman

Meow to the birds
Meow to the tree's
Meow to the end
of this dreadful disease...

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 23,558
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2007, 11:17:49 AM »
also i read somewhere that it is harder for a man that isn't circumcised to become infected.(has any one else heard this as well?)
Paulette

Did you write that correctly?  You think a foreskin offers greater protection?
"I’ve slept with enough men to know that I’m not gay"

Offline Catman

  • Member
  • Posts: 419
  • Blessed with more than 9 lives! + since 1986
    • Who is the Catman?
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #25 on: September 23, 2007, 12:00:03 PM »
I read somewhere that it is harder for a man that isn't circumcised to become infected.(has any one else heard this as well?)
Paulette

Philly;  I think I know what she means. I also read somewhere (magazine or internet) that circumcised men where less likely to contract some venereal diseases than uncircumcised men (including hiv). Something about the foreskin's temperature underneath being a hive for bacteria that can harvest some diseases. I think  there was also a study made in Africa that backed up this statement. I read that a few months back...if it's true or not, who knows. ???
Catman

Meow to the birds
Meow to the tree's
Meow to the end
of this dreadful disease...

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 23,558
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #26 on: September 23, 2007, 12:13:42 PM »
Philly;  I think I know what she means. I also read somewhere (magazine or internet) that circumcised men where less likely to contract some venereal diseases than uncircumcised men (including hiv). Something about the foreskin's temperature underneath being a hive for bacteria that can harvest some diseases. I think  there was also a study made in Africa that backed up this statement. I read that a few months back...if it's true or not, who knows. ???

Yes, but in my reading of her post she's mixed it up entirely and wrote the reverse, which is why I asked her to clarify what she stated.  Using the word "harder" and "isn't" skirts close to a double-negative.

So let's clarify if she believes that foreskin offers less or more protection for an infection.
"I’ve slept with enough men to know that I’m not gay"

Offline Ann

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 27,947
  • It just is, OK?
    • Num is sum qui mentiar tibi?
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #27 on: September 23, 2007, 12:28:24 PM »
The cut vs uncut debate still rages on, with the cut men coming out on top so far in the transmission reduction stakes. There's been a few articles in the AM News section in the past year about various studies.

Some quarters are calling for circumcision for all. Personally, I'm not convinced it makes a big enough difference. What worries me is the danger that too many cut men will think they're invincible. We've already been talking about how invincible many tops are to begin with.

Ann
Condoms are a girl's best friend

Condom and Lube Info  



"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2007, 12:39:08 PM »
Yes, but in my reading of her post she's mixed it up entirely and wrote the reverse, which is why I asked her to clarify what she stated.  Using the word "harder" and "isn't" skirts close to a double-negative.

So let's clarify if she believes that foreskin offers less or more protection for an infection.
Yes I heard the opposite of what she said tho. And no, i'm not going to remove my foreskin when adding another temporary layer just does the trick (woah play on words woohoo  :o)

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline edfu

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,084
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #29 on: September 23, 2007, 05:32:45 PM »
"No one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences."--Albert Camus, "The Plague"

"Mankind can never be free until the last brick in the last church falls on the head of the last priest."--Voltaire

Offline edfu

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,084
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #30 on: September 23, 2007, 05:45:44 PM »
Perhaps Cerrid and Grasshopper would care to enlighten us as to how they have managed to have their rectal mucosa tested for the presence of HIV.
"No one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences."--Albert Camus, "The Plague"

"Mankind can never be free until the last brick in the last church falls on the head of the last priest."--Voltaire

Offline Grasshopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 441
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #31 on: September 23, 2007, 06:57:40 PM »
Perhaps Cerrid and Grasshopper would care to enlighten us as to how they have managed to have their rectal mucosa tested for the presence of HIV.

Nope, I'm not THAT gullible. 

edited for typos
« Last Edit: September 23, 2007, 07:06:01 PM by Grasshopper »

Offline Cerrid

  • Member
  • Posts: 499
  • only as good as your last haircut
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #32 on: September 24, 2007, 11:46:14 AM »
Perhaps Cerrid and Grasshopper would care to enlighten us as to how they have managed to have their rectal mucosa tested for the presence of HIV.

I'm afraid you miss the point. It is well known that, even if the VL in blood is undectectable, the same is not necessarily true for semen, rectal mucosa. There's a strong relation, but the numbers are not always the same. There's no discussion about that. However, based on the medical evidence that there isn't a single reported case where someone who's on meds has infected his/her partner, it seems as if the viral concentration in these body fluids, when suppressed, is not high enough to cause an infection.

There's also virus in saliva, in detectable amounts, mostly hidden in the T4 cells. But as the concentration is very low and there are no documented cases where someone was infected by kissing a pozzie (luckily), it is concluded that kissing is "safe". Or as we call it, a "theoretical risk". The same is true for feces and urine, indicating that (among other factors) there is a critical viral threshold concentration needed to cause an infection.

The higher the VL, the higher the transmission risk. The lower the VL, the smaller the risk. This has been proven in numerous studies. As the VL is never zero, even with a perfect working HAART, the risk is never zero. There is no 100% safety in medicine, nowhere. There's always a remaining risk of transmission (even it's very small) and this has to be taken into account when engaging in these actions. Undetectability is not a free ticket to bareback and shouldn't be viewed as such!

BTW: There's no need to jump on me personally. I'm just interested in a scientific discussion, so let's keep it factual. While I know that my views are a bit different from others, it's the opinion of doctors and public health officials who prefer to base their recommendations on medical evidence rather than on assumption and speculation, politics and ideologies.



"Boredom is always counterrevolutionary. Always." (Guy Debord)

Offline poz1970

  • Member
  • Posts: 480
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #33 on: September 24, 2007, 12:53:54 PM »
Dude, your an Idiot!.. Anyone who has sex unprotected while positive or with someone positive is a complete jackass and has complete disregard for human life.  Might i suggest that you go dig a hole in the ground and go bury your stupid ass in it.  Unbelievable.....Im speechless..  I seriously think guys like you should be put in prison.

~MORTON SALT
"Im king of all salt" 



Very constructive and useful response.
"The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to  heterosexuals. That doesn`t mean that God doesn`t love heterosexuals. It`s just that they need more supervision." -- Lynn Lavne

Offline poz1970

  • Member
  • Posts: 480
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #34 on: September 24, 2007, 12:59:46 PM »
Your doc is right. If you were on meds and had an undetectable viral load, the transmission risk would be very slim indeed, the risk being comparable to a deep kiss. There is not a single documented case worldwide where someone with an undetectable VL has infected his/her partner. That doesn't mean it's impossible, but it's just very unlikely. Or, as you put it, "pretty safe" vs. "completely safe". No reason to not disclose, though.

Whatever statistical value 'very unlikely' ends up being, its still possible.  Regardless of disclosure, is 'that feeling' (barebacking) worth putting someone's life at risk?

Someone always ends up being the statistic.

J
"The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to  heterosexuals. That doesn`t mean that God doesn`t love heterosexuals. It`s just that they need more supervision." -- Lynn Lavne

Offline Catman

  • Member
  • Posts: 419
  • Blessed with more than 9 lives! + since 1986
    • Who is the Catman?
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #35 on: September 24, 2007, 05:49:23 PM »
Cerrid said: "However, based on the medical evidence that there isn't a single reported case where someone who's on meds has infected his/her partner, it seems as if the viral concentration in these body fluids, when suppressed, is not high enough to cause an infection."


I echo Cerrid's reply (above) on this topic. I also see it that way. And besides, I've never heard of any common test saying that the rectal mucosa inside a person has more, less or the same amount of viral load than semen? There is always a risk, but I have never heard of a negative person getting infected by penetrating a positive "undetectable" bottom (unless he has a small cut, scratch or abrasion on his penis or anything that can provide entrance to his bloodstream when barebacking and that is a "maybe").

"The higher the viral load, the higher the risk...the lower the viral load, the lower the risk." The risk factor will always be there and we all should be conscious of that, but in the end, it's a decision that the persons involved should take and we should not scold or criticize another persons choice in this matter when they know the facts. Advice is good about using condoms, but without a single case reported on transmition between a negative partner and an "undetectable" healthy bottom, then we should not blow this issue out of proportion and label this kind of relationship as "taboo" or "forbidden". It is happening out there at this moment even in long term couples.

 I hope I'm not misunderstood here and I hope my opinion is not conducive to unprotected sex when being in this situation, this is just the way I see it as a positive "undetectable" loyal partner in a 12 year old relationship with a still "negative" loyal partner. (and yes, I feel comfortable using the word "loyal"). :)
« Last Edit: September 25, 2007, 06:19:50 PM by Catman »
Catman

Meow to the birds
Meow to the tree's
Meow to the end
of this dreadful disease...

Offline edfu

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,084
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #36 on: September 24, 2007, 11:09:34 PM »
Cerrid:

Do you have a link or any other proof to support your contention that "there isn't a single reported case where someone who's on meds has infected his/her partner"?
"No one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences."--Albert Camus, "The Plague"

"Mankind can never be free until the last brick in the last church falls on the head of the last priest."--Voltaire

Offline Cerrid

  • Member
  • Posts: 499
  • only as good as your last haircut
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #37 on: September 25, 2007, 09:57:06 AM »
Of course I do. There's an official statement by the head of the AIDS section of the Swiss Federal Health Office made in a published interview, and another statement by the German federal public health authority who I asked this question myself. Both check the scientific papers and both are not aware of any reported cases. However, as these statements are in German, they're probably not comprehensible for you.

Therefore, I suggest and encourage you pose the same question to your own local or federal public health authority, like the CDC. Ask them yourself whether they are aware of any documented cases. The more statement of experts we collect on this issue, the better.
"Boredom is always counterrevolutionary. Always." (Guy Debord)

Offline allopathicholistic

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,258
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #38 on: September 25, 2007, 10:19:04 AM »
Hey Grass, post #19 shows you asked: "Does one ejaculate semen from their rectum ?" ...  If a cumdump bottom has different anonymous poz loads up their rectum then yes they can expel that semen (which is not their own) onto whoknowswhere. I'm not saying the original poster is doing that I'm just saying

Offline Grasshopper

  • Member
  • Posts: 441
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #39 on: September 25, 2007, 10:54:03 AM »
Hey Grass, post #19 shows you asked: "Does one ejaculate semen from their rectum ?" ...  If a cumdump bottom has different anonymous poz loads up their rectum then yes they can expel that semen (which is not their own) onto whoknowswhere. I'm not saying the original poster is doing that I'm just saying

In that case the entire topic would have been about wether it's safe to dip your dick into someonelses jism

Offline edfu

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,084
Re: question. .. .. ..
« Reply #40 on: September 28, 2007, 11:59:01 PM »
http://www.aidsmap.com/en/news/C9C1593C-BF72-47B1-B1CE-4EC80FF3EB85.asp

This recent study seems to contradict the assertions of the Swiss and German authorities, particularly the claim about "undetectable" viral loads conferring non-infectivity. 
"No one will ever be free so long as there are pestilences."--Albert Camus, "The Plague"

"Mankind can never be free until the last brick in the last church falls on the head of the last priest."--Voltaire

 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.