Anal Sex without condom

[monmon]

Hi everyone, I haven't been on this forum for quite sometime.

I have a new boy friend after 6 years not having a relationship.

Last nite, we had anal sex for the very first time, the first try with condom did not really work.  The second time, he just took off the condom and we had anal sex.  I am positive, and the receiving partner, he is the negative top.  He did not cum.

I have been on Atripla for more than 2 years and have undetectable viral load, his doctor is saying the transmission risk from a positive bottom with undetectable viral load to the negative top is very minimal.

He is not concerned at all, I have told him he should do PEP, and I noticed PEP needs to be done within the first 72 hours.
His doctor is not available, he seems not to concern.

What do you guys think?

I know I should not let him do it without condom, now I am very worried.

I don't want him to be infected.

Please advise.


Monmon

[tednlou2]

This is a question that has been debated here a few times lately.  I suspect you'll get different responses.  Some believe you should never take the risk, even with an UD vl.  I believe someone posted a study about how anal viral loads were found to be higher even when UD??  Dr. Bob at thebody believes you should always wear a condom.  Dr. Gallant at John Hopkins tends to be more relaxed about this, saying the transmission risk would be extremely low and does seem to give the green light for unprotected sex between monogamous partners when their vl has been UD for a long time.  I would say read his archives on the issue, but his site has been down as they are converting his site to a new system.

Maybe the study experts here can refresh our memories on how many neg partners become infected with a partner who is UD.  And, were those studies able to weed out partners who were infected from someone else due to cheating?     

[monmon]

Thanks Tednlou2.

I will research more abt the Dr. Gallant at John Hopkins research.


monmon

[ad2san]

Hi there, FYI if you leave in the EU you may participate in a study www.partnerstudy.eu that goal is to try to find out what is really going on out there ....

Cheers

[buginme2]

There are same studies in the U.S. My partner and I were asked to participate in one. 

Maybe you should discuss these things before u have sex. I dont think pep is necessary. If your ud and neither of you have any other std'sthe risk is minimal.

[carousel]

Hi Monmon

I wonder if your boyfriend and you have come to terms with the fact that you having unprotected sex may end up with him contracting HIV. 

I think some couples are able to steer a relationship through this, but not sure I could.

If you do not want to give him HIV as you say and if he is unwilling/ unable to use a condom, it seems you could be at an impasse.

I was also wondering what his previous experiences have been and has he been tested?

[Buckmark]

Hi everyone, I haven't been on this forum for quite sometime.

I have a new boy friend after 6 years not having a relationship.

Last nite, we had anal sex for the very first time, the first try with condom did not really work.  The second time, he just took off the condom and we had anal sex.  I am positive, and the receiving partner, he is the negative top.  He did not cum.

I have been on Atripla for more than 2 years and have undetectable viral load, his doctor is saying the transmission risk from a positive bottom with undetectable viral load to the negative top is very minimal.

He is not concerned at all, I have told him he should do PEP, and I noticed PEP needs to be done within the first 72 hours.
His doctor is not available, he seems not to concern.

What do you guys think?

I know I should not let him do it without condom, now I am very worried.

I don't want him to be infected.

Please advise.

Monmon

I think that if you and your boyfriend continue to have unprotected anal sex, you are putting him at risk for contracting HIV.  The risk *might* be lower because you are undetectable, but over time, you could certainly transmit the virus to him.  There seems to be a popular myth that tops can't get infected, but I know enough people to know that it's just a myth.  Again, the risk *might* be less, but it's still a risk.

Regards,

Henry

[Rev. Moon]

The risk *might* be lower because you are undetectable, but over time, you could certainly transmit the virus to him. 

I agree.  Lower or minimal risk does not equal "no risk". This new boyfriend of monmon's needs to be responsible for his own health. 

[leatherman]

... and has he been tested?

excellent point!
how do you know this new boyfriend isn't already HIV+ ?

[Matty the Damned]

What I'm about to say is not specific to the OP. I make no comment on his predicament other than to note that I agree with the Fabulously Reverend Moon.

More generally I think claims about undetectable viral load making people "unable to infect" others are quite interesting.

It seems that people contract HIV on a routine basis from having protected sex and oral sex despite the dearth of any evidence supporting such modes of transmission but unprotected anal sex is not a risk so long as one has <40 copies of HIV in every cubic ml of one's peripheral plasma.

What amazing times we live in!

MtD