Playing Safe Vs. Bareback

[OrphanPip]

1/5 figure is based on blood testing, so it's unlikely that it is much higher. Of course, the value of the sample is problematic, as it is based on the bar going crowd, who are representative of a large part of the gay community but not all of it. I imagine much of us who just go about our business and don't frequently go to clubs would probably have lower incidence, and the bath house and craigs list crowd has higher incidents.

I'm an OCD germaphobe so I also go with the condom even in monogamous relationships. Regular testing is a must as well.

[zeon]

I think people personally who dont wear condoms are being selfish on themselves and others... However if your in a closed relationship and both partners know its only them then sure take them off and enjoy natures way... Nowadays people need to be careful ive seen people die of hiv and ive had many come screaming to me going i got an sti because i didnt use a condom... Sorry not interested and im bored or i just end it with serves ya right ere u go 30p call the smaritians they might give a shit or tell ya to bloody wear one

[Dreamer]

1/5 figure is based on blood testing, so it's unlikely that it is much higher. Of course, the value of the sample is problematic, as it is based on the bar going crowd, who are representative of a large part of the gay community but not all of it. I imagine much of us who just go about our business and don't frequently go to clubs would probably have lower incidence, and the bath house and craigs list crowd has higher incidents.

I highly disagree with your inquiry that the "1 in 5" statistic is most likely accurate. Studies also confirm that there is a HUGE gap in people getting tested, and that MOST people don't even know their infected. There are many who are in denial or just don't want to know their status. They're held back by the heavy stigma surrounding HIV (it's highest in the gay community), and afraid of being alienated by their loved ones. Those people wouldn't go out to confirm their worst fears, only the honest and brave ones.

There are many men who don't get blood tested for anything! Those people probably don't have insurance to cover it, and/or they're impoverished. If that's not the case, many men who can afford blood screenings usually refuse to sign the consent form required by law(At least in the US, as far as I know) before obliging to take an HIV test.

There's also anonymous HIV test sites were even if someone is tested positive, it's up to them to disclose it to the government and the rest of the world. More than likely, they won't even return for their results or discard the information of their new HIV diagnosis, and continue living life as if they were HIV negative.

Also, regardless if your in the "gay scene" of clubbing and drugs or a total introvert, that doesn't lower your chances of catching HIV, as long as you have sex. You're just much at risk as the junkie next to you. Condoms aren't 100% effective neither, though they do greatly reduce your chances of contracting HIV.

That's why HIV is so prevalent, because it's been forgotten as a death sentence and accepted as treatable, when in reality it's still a killer, and treatments don't equal long fulfilled prosperous lives all of the time, but usually a miserable one contaminated with horrible HIV drug side effects, and constant HIV-related health complications.

If HIV screenings were mandatory yearly for everyone, the REAL numbers of people infected would truly shock the medical world and general public! Then maybe, the drug companies would finally reveal the cure! Unfortunately, the chances of that ever happening is zero! Why? Because the drug company's are profiting way too much on insanely inflated priced drugs costing tens of thousands, or maybe even hundreds of thousands(for some) yearly! Why would any monopoly want to jeopardize such great chronic wealth for a cure that would eliminate all of that money?! If I made the money those drug companies made, I probably wouldn't reveal the cure either because I'd be too busy floating around in my billion dollar yacht to give a damn!

I've watched too many friends die to not speak up on this topic! It doesn't have to occur! This is 100% preventable, and the reasoning behind young gay men refusing to use protection is truly pathetic and sadly ridiculous!


Wrap up your dick people!

[zeon]

I have had some time away from the computer for past couple of hours to find out the results in the town where i live... In Brighton there are approximately 55,000 gay residents and according to stats here 1 in 3 gay men are known to have contracted Hiv/Aids... Of course not all 55,000 residents would of gone for a test but based upon the ones who have and the total amount this is how they came to their figure... If it was based throughout the whole of my town then that would mean that 18,333.333333 (reccourring) have a stage of Hiv/Aids which is alot i would imagen but by the same token i did read somewhere last week i think in the metro paper that scientists tried a drug on monkey form of Hiv and the monkeys they did it on found that they became negative so they are looking at trialling it out for human consumption

Kindest regards

zeonx

[jeffrey]

One of the reasons that I seek a monogamous relationship is so condoms won't be necessary. I simply can't feel anything through them, therefore the pleasure of sex is greatly diminished.

[Ceruleaan]

I remember we studied HIV testing in my psycho-statistics class. One of the major problems with generalizing the incidence rates found in test results is that the sample (those who choose to get tested for HIV) are likely fundamently different from the population (the LGBTQ community at large).

The issue is that those who get tested typically do so because they feel they have potentially being exposed or frequently engage in risque sexual behaviours. Statistically this means that those getting tested would likely have a higher rates of HIV infection.

So, in short, it's extremely likely the above stats are enormous overestimates of the incidence in the gay population at large.

[Psyche2011]

For the non-monogamous types, condoms are truly the difference between life and death. The larger the sex-partner pool, the less you know, the higher the chances are of contracting something. However, if you're in a completely monogamous relationship, and I do mean that you and he are your only sex partners without exception, and you've both been tested negative, I don't see why it should matter.

Unless, of course, HIV comes out of nowhere. :eek:

[jeffrey]

I do feel that condoms make things safer. Even in a monogamous relationship there is always the possibility that someone could be unfaithful. I believe that if two people agree to a monogamous relationship that they should be tested first. I would want to be tested, but I haven't done very much and it's been a few years since I have, but one never knows.

[fredv3b]

If I made the money those drug companies made, I probably wouldn't reveal the cure either because I'd be too busy floating around in my billion dollar yacht to give a damn!

While that may be true for the man at the top, how on earth would be manage to ensure that everybody in the company that knew about the cure for HIV kept the secret? IMO it is an absurd suggestion that a company that large could keep a secret so big. (That said, I accept that drug companies may well be focusing their research on potential treatments rather than potential cures.)

[Braz]

If i was going to have sex, i would always have safe sex and always ask for condoms to be used everytime. mile: