PDA

View Full Version : The Truth about AIDS



Pages : [1] 2 3

Admin
05-19-02, 22:01
Select "Add New Message" to post a message.

trainbum17
05-31-02, 18:52
well let's see if we can get a discussion going on THIS subject, guys and girls!
I live in a medium sized metro area in michigan (500,000), and i grew up in metro chicago. Having been in business, both upright and somewhat shady, for years, i have come to know a whole lot of people from many walks of life. All this verboseness is leading up to this one simple fact: out of the 50,000+/- people i have known throughout my 40+ years on this planet, i only know one person who has contracted aids. If you are to believe the government statistics, that number should be more like 500. Bottom line is, in my opinion, the government decided that they need to control our sexual behavior and they have learned from experience that laws won't do it. So, they try scare tactics.
You will probably call me a fool, but i seldom have safe sex, even with professionals. And i have regular check-ups from my doc, including STD screening. Frankly, I am more concerned about catching some virulant form of gonnorhea or syphliss than HIV.
It is my feeling that as long as you avoid anal, hetro or homo, and avoid needle using junkies, you are safe from the "modern plauge". The one person that i mentioned that i know has aids, incidently, is a total flame. I can guess where he got it.
pls reply, people...let the games begin!

JimmyDR
05-31-02, 20:25
Yea, I travel alot as well and don't seem to know anyone with thad Disease Either. Only needle shooters and gay backdoor men.
Maybe we all been lucky?

I hear with all the medicine around you have 15 years. So at 45 I go Wild, then I catch it. I will last until 60. Is that so bad? I have seen guys in my office die of heart attacks at age 52 and of cancer at 60.

TrashMan
06-03-02, 16:05
Trainbum
You are one huge dumb asshole my friend if you do not at least have safe sex that includes wrapping the dog for FS.
DATY, BBBJ in non safe mode is probably pretty low risk other than maybe herpes, but intercourse front or back door without is just stupid.
Bottom line...if she's got it ( clap STD ) then you got it.
I had gonorhea twice as a very young guy and back then a shot of penicillin in the ass and you were good to go. Today, it's a different matter with mutated strains and lots of other cute STD's
The reason I am writing this post is out of pure selfishness. I don't really give a rat's ass about whether you live or die or your dick turns black and falls off, but since I like to fuck women, I don't want your sloppy seconds if you're not safe, got it?

06-05-02, 06:22
Hi trainbum You probably know lots more people with AIDS than you realize, its not the sort of thing people brag about. Still unless you hang out with druggies you are not likely to meet a lot of people with AIDS. The disease is not nearly as common in homosexuals lately as most people think. Gay men learned to deal with the epidemic a long time ago by using condoms for anal sex or not doing it at all. AIDS has lately become much more a disease of drug users. They pass the virus when they share needles. Drug users do not seem to care enough about their own health to take the precautions that would protect them........Aids is still a big concern , but it is rare for a man to get the virus unless he allows another man to fuck him in his ass or he shares needles to shoot drugs.....This is true in the United States and Europe, but the AIDS epidemic is going strong in Africa and some other areas of the world among hetrosexuals due to lack of education , health care and some cultural practices.

masaji lover
06-11-02, 08:38
"The Truth About Aids" is out there if you care to investigate. I suggest Duesberg's book INVENTING THE AIDS VIRUS. Or just plug his name into google and follow some links. There is a huge movement established that has rejected the propaganda put out by the National Institute of Health.

Did you know that if a woman dies of cervical cancer and she is HIV positive, she is classified as an AIDS victim. If she's HIV neg, she's just a cancer victim. The same is true for many other "AIDS related" diseases that the NIH put on the list when the epidemic they predicted in the late 80's never materialized.

Did you know that in Africa, they don't even test AIDS "victims" for HIV? They use "symtom" diagnosis--i.e. if the victim has lost weight, develops high fever, etc etc, they just ASSUME it is AIDS. Why? Money. Money comes pouring in from many agencies as the "epidemic" continues to rage. In fact, Africans are dying from the same diseases and malnutrition that have always existed.

Isn't it amazing how much bigger and stronger Magic Johnson has gotten?

CBGBConnisur
06-30-02, 03:58
Brett, about the advent of AIDS, in Europe wouldn't you know it but most European countries have a very low incidence of the disease?? Would you know that about 0.19 percent of adults in the Netherlands have HIV?? The current rate in the USA is .61, almost triple. In Germany its about 0.1, one sixth of the rate in the States. In France its about .41, in the UK, its .1. All these countries have legal and widespread prostitution yet they have some of the lowest incidences of HIV on the planet. Safe sex and knowledge, along with precautions, go a long way to prevent the outbreak.

Guess Who
07-03-02, 00:49
CBGB,
So what you're saying is for every 200 adults in the US, 1.22 have HIV. That's hard to believe.

CBGBConnisur
07-03-02, 03:16
If you don't believe me, check out the CIA World Factbook on the web, there's an article on Yahoo about Aids as well. Close to 1 million people in the USA are HIV positive. The statistics don't lie check it out for yourself.

Dickhead
07-03-02, 03:45
I don't take a position on whether or not statistics lie, but the CIA lies all day, every day, to the point where they would not know the truth if it bit them on the dick.

Rubber Nursey
07-03-02, 09:23
CBGBConnisur,
Well said. I would presume that those countries that have some form of legal or tolerated prostitution (like mine) are probably ultimately more liberal about sex in general. That means good sexual education in schools and open discussion about diseases and safe sex practices between couples. Also, those Governments are more likely to spend money educating the community with ad campaigns, etc about safe sex, provide needle and syringe exchanges for drug users and encourage condom provision, like public vending machines, to high risk groups such as teenagers, those in prison, and the gay "sex on premises" venues (like in my country). Countries who encourage people to "Just Say NO" are in my opinion doing severe damamge to the health of their citizens with their ignorance (not naming any names! LOL)

masaji lover,
You are correct in saying that the death count is not an accurate measure. As you said, regardless of what actually killed you, the fact that you were HIV positive is recorded on the stats. However, the "new infection" rates in most western countries are pretty reliable statistics.

and to Brett re: "it is rare for a man to get the virus unless he allows another man to fuck him in his ass or he shares needles to shoot drugs"
Yes it is more likely that you will contract HIV if you do either of these things....BUT...firstly there is the fact that many gay men have caught HIV by being the "penetrative partner". There is definitely more risk of catching it if you are the "receptive" partner, but because of the tearing of the anal lining during sex, the penetrative partner can still be exposed to blood. People are very quick to say "Well either way, it's gay sex, so that's why they caught it"...but there is absolutely NO difference when it comes to anal sex with an HIV+ woman. And if you look around this forum, that is a very popular activity among straight men. Also, who's to say that the woman you are sleeping with doesn't have a bisexual boyfriend???

Secondly, the issue of drugs. Lots of people here have said that the way to avoid HIV is to make sure the girl is not a junkie. I don't do drugs myself, so I guess that would make you feel safe with me. But what happens if the last few people that I slept with WERE drug users? Not only that, but drug use is not always easily recognisable. Many doctors and lawyers and other professionals spend their weekends shooting up with friends. Would you consider your new lawyer girlfriend a high HIV risk?

AIDS, like any other STD, does not discriminate. Yes there are more risks of contracting it if you indulge in certain activities...but that doesn't mean you are risk free if you don't.

Guess Who
07-04-02, 19:58
CBGB,
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you were not right. I should have checked before I posted because those stats are downright scary.

masaji lover
07-08-02, 09:38
Let me just reiterate that there is an alternate view of the whole theory of HIV and AIDS that doesn't get any coverage by the mainstream media, who just repeat the propaganda put out by the NIH. I won't bother to recap it all, but it boils down to the fact that the virus is just a passenger virus that many people carry with no medical problems resulting. You can start at www.Duesberg.com and continue with these:

http://www.rethinkingaids.com
This is the website of the Group for the Reappraisal of AIDS.

http://www.virusmyth.com
This website contains more than 500 web pages with over 350 articles about the AIDS controversy.

http://www.aliveandwell.org
The website of Alive & Well AIDS Alternatives, a non-profit education, action and support network founded by a group of HIV positive diagnosed people who live in wellness without AIDS drugs and without fear of AIDS.

Prokofiev
07-08-02, 19:02
Masaji,
While the "Duesberg Theory" is indeed an alternate view of AIDS, the number of scientists and doctors who support it is tiny. To call everything else "propaganda" is silly. The media and medical establishment don't give it much coverage because they don't believe it and leads us down a dangerous path - that HIV infection is unimportant and hence safe sex is relatively unimportant. If drugs were the main reason HIV infected people get sick, why didn't those same drugs cause a world-wide problem prior to the 80's? Heroin, cocaine, poppers and more were widely used for many years. Why did so many HIV infected die prior to AZT? While many good questions are raised - like why African AIDS appears to be different, what are important co-factors and how we count AIDS deaths - the vast majority of researchers believe in the HIV and AIDS link. The fact the Magic Johnson has gotten stronger and bigger (fatter?) is itself contrary to the Duesberg Theory. Because he has taken AZT and the complete cocktail of AIDS drugs for 10 years he should have gotten sick from these drugs which are themselves a major cause of AIDS deaths according to the theory.

Joe Zop
07-08-02, 20:32
Well said, Prokofiev. I prefer my science to be argued by people who actually know what they're talking about and how to look at things, not journalists or creationists who have extra time on their hands.

I've spent a lot of time looking through the Duesberg stuff, and I've been following the epidemic for a very, very long time -- since the early eighties when I worked in a Red Cross blood bank when HIV testing first came out, and had to help manage parts of its implementation. I also used to tutor research design and was engaged to critique the design of a number of scientific studies. There's no question that lots of studies, including those about AIDS, make grander statements and conclusions than are truly warranted, and that they need to be looked at carefully. The nature of the beast is that people make careers by asserting and proving things of large scope, and making baby steps, while it's good science, isn't good career management. (Science also doesn't necessarily happen according to a schedule, and the truth of things is that in scientific terms AIDS is still a pretty young malady, so arguments about what "should" have been found at this point are pretty well bunk.)

One aspect of the Duesberg stuff is that it tends to focus on poking holes in this or that aspect, which is a fine approach and a necessary counterweight, but it then leaps to discounting the entire theory, which is pretty well without basis or supported by anything other than anecdote or assertion. And even managing to prove that a treatment doesn't work (which I don't at all concede) doesn't disprove the theory the treatment is based on.

One thing I think is very significant is the fact that HIV testing has radically reduced transmission of AIDS by transfusion, which was one of the more frequent ways of getting AIDS in the early years (remember Arthur Ashe?)

Personally, I don't care if you call it an invasion from Mars -- I don't wanna get it. All these counter-theories generally manage to overlook the fact that there are a lot of corpses out there who fit specific death patterns that didn't exist in the same quantity up until about thirty years ago. Their explanations for why this should be the case besides AIDS are horribly unconvincing.

Regarding the whole Africa thing -- the fact that it's a more complex equation means nothing. Bad counting or statistical methods have nothing whatsoever to do with baseline immuniological issues. There are also countless strains of countless diseases around the world -- whether we're talking about malaria or syphilis. That said, IMHO, President Mbeki of South Africa is at least half right when he argues that AIDS isn't what the issue there is all about. The continent is so ravaged (my visits there were at times heartbreaking because of the high degree of human misery) and resource-strapped that curing everyone there who is HIV or AIDS positive is not going to solve a thing. I agree with Mbeki that the proper solution is a basic strengthening of the general and nutritional infrastructure first, and attention to the epidemic later. It sounds terrible to say, but a third of that continent is simply going to die because the mechanisms and resources aren't already in place to save them, AIDS or not. And that's not even considering the upcoming politics and wars over resources. It's one of the things that keeps me from spending more time there, and I'd like to because it's such a starkly beautiful continent. But let's not mistake exaggerated statistics as somehow disproving scienctific theory.

I actually know a disproportionately large number of friends and aquaintances here in the US who have died from AIDS, and I know a number who are either fighting the disease currently or have tested positive. (Or, maybe not disproportionate, given the estimate that close to half a million have died here.) It's a scary damn disease, and an absolutely horrible way to die, and things that lull people into thinking they're safe when they're not are potentially handing out free death sentences.

Seydlitz
07-09-02, 22:44
Joe_zop:

I have been following the debate in this forum, and you and I debated the HIV/AIDS controversy before (in the Thailand forum).

For the information of other posters here, I am squarely on the side of the minority view, or the "denialists" as some call them. To me, the whole HIV/AIDS theory just does not add up.

I have little to add on this, and I agree with the posts below from masaji lover, among others.

The point I want to make about your latest post is the following: you write "things that lull people into thinking they're safe when they're not are potentially handing out free death sentences." Now that is insulting for the intelligence of your fellow humans, in particular those who are litterate enough to be reading the posts on this forum.

Don't you think that people can decide for themselves? We are in front of a medical controversy. There are scientist on both sides, with equally impressive credentials. Yes there are many more on the side of the majority (by definition ...) but there is no necessary truth in numbers.

I have been debating this issue for a while now. I have come to the conclusion that you cannot convince people that the HIV/AIDS theory is flawed. All you can do is to make them aware that there is indeed a controversy, point them in the direction of material supporting the Duesberg views etc., and then let them get on that journey if they so wish.

Ultimately, the issue is not only to know whether HIV exists, or even if it causes AIDS, on its own or as a cofactor. There is a very real issue for any HIV positive person to know whether they need to damage their health permanently by taking highly toxic drugs even as they are asymptomatic.

To paraphrase you, I would say "things that lull people into thinking that they need to take huge amounts of toxic drugs to prevent them being sick when they're not are potentially handing out free death sentences as well".

In my view, this is the only thing that really matters in the whole controversy.

Safe sex campaigns do not work. People still have unprotected sex quite a lot (several "classic" STDs are still going pretty strong).

HIV infection rates are still high, this is not surprising as more people get tested than ever before, which tends to increase dramatically the number of "false positives", if you do not believe that all positives are false positives that is.

Billions of dollars have been spent for very little, and there are calls for more. The lobbies are in full swing.

The only thing that really makes a difference is that we are able to help people who are faced with the decision to go on tritherapies etc. to decide for themselves. We must not let those poor souls who have been delivered their HIV positive results go unsupported as the men in white gather around them with their lethal drugs.

Dickhead
07-09-02, 23:26
Originally posted by joe_zop I actually know a disproportionately large number of friends and aquaintances here in the US who have died from AIDS

I don't take sides on this debate and would rather practice safe sex than worry, but I would be sincerely interested to know if any of these friends of yours who unfortunately died were exclusively heterosexual non-drug users.

Prokofiev
07-09-02, 23:53
Seydlitz,

Letting "people decide for themselves" is fine if you are choosing between vanilla and chocolate ice cream. But when it comes to a potenially fatal virus, I think good science is more important than personal choice. The virus is either responsible for millions of deaths or -as Duesberg believes - it's relatively harmless. If one theory is correct, the other is wrong. It is not a matter of personal choice. Choose wrong and you may die. Or worse, infect other partners and ultimate kill yourself and 100's of others.
.
The point about "handing out free death sentences" relates to the fact that if HIV is harmless, then safe sex is unimportant. Simply stay away from certain drugs and you will be healthy. Who cares if you acquire the virus or pass it on to others? Even if you fervently believe this theory, I still believe it is irresponsible to youself and others to help spread HIV.
.
As to the idea that "there are scientists with impressive credentials on both sides" - you make it seem as if it's a 60-40 split between the two sides. Sorry, it's not even 100 to 1. The "minority scientists" are a VERY tiny minority. Most followers are AIDS activists and anti-AZT people, many already HIV+. While pointing out some interesting problems with the HIV-AIDS link, the cause of all these deaths has not been explained by the Duesberg followers. AZT and anti-viral drugs are the cause of AIDS? Then why has the death rate dropped so dramatically by using them? Why did so many die before AZT? Heroin, cocaine and poppers are the root cause - along with an unhealthy lifestyle? Then why didn't these common drugs kill in the millions before the AIDS virus appeared? No shortage of these drugs during the 50's, 60's and 70's. And plenty of unhealthy lifestyles.
.
The decision to take AZT-type drugs or not is indeed a personal one. And it may well be true that the toxicity of these drugs has killed some patients. But the idea of NOT supporting safe sex for HIV prevention is ridiculous, no matter what you believe . . .

Joe Zop
07-10-02, 00:10
Seydlitz:

Yes, we've debated it before, and I continue to respect your intelligence, reasoning, and veracity, even if I disagree with your point of view. I'm well aware that in no way have you at all advocated unsafe sexual practice, and, again, I respect you greatly for that. You well know that I've consistently defended your right to post information about alternative theories, and I hope you continue to do so. (That does not, of course, mean in any way that I'll not keep my option to disagree.) And I agree with you that people can decide for themselves, and I encourage everyone to read fully in order to do so.

However, the truth is that the vast majority of folks will not take the time to follow down the web links, or to delve into the specifics of the studies enough to really understand them or even to read deeply enough to take a personal position that's based on looking at something close to source materials. Things like "Isn't it amazing how much bigger and stronger Magic Johnson has gotten" is not rational factual argument about the AIDS debate; it's inflammatorily misleading at best. And statements such as trainbum17's that statistics are irrelevant because he only knows one person who's got AIDS, so he feels he's ok not worrying about safe sex -- sorry, but the fact that I believe in people intelligently making up their minds doesn't mean I surrender the right to react to statements such as those.

There are several aspects where you and I are at odds. First, you and I disagree about the weight of credentials on one side or another. While there are a couple who I consider credible and stellar on the Duesberg side, there are also those who I consider utterly uncredentialled and crackpots. We disagree clearly about the value of studies and information on this or that side. You and I also disagree about treatments -- I have friends who consider (as do I) that the only reason at all they are alive is based on those treatment therapies as we've watched their health wane and wax along with the treatments. Some of them have gone the routes suggested by some of the Duesberg literature and are not alive to partake in the debate, and others have gone the treatment route and are similarly not alive. So I'm not comforted by things which are basically attempts to reclassify, discredit, or rework statistics -- no matter what the final numbers end up being, my friends are still dead and I will not see them again.

Finally, and most importantly, we disagree about the framework of the debate. To you, it is about the treatment, whether or not people's health is being damaged as a result of that, and whether there is basically a conspiracy to get lots of money to fund false research. To me, particularly in a forum such as this which is all about high-risk sexual practice (defined so by having multiple partners who bring a greater degree of exposure into the equation) this is about intelligent sexual behavior, understanding that there are risks in unsafe practices, and getting a handle on where the risks lie. To me, this is not about the economics or the treatment, this is about the disease.

Joe Zop
07-10-02, 00:19
originally posted by dickhead


i don't take sides on this debate and would rather practice safe sex than worry, but i would be sincerely interested to know if any of these friends of yours who unfortunately died were exclusively heterosexual non-drug users.

i can't swear absolutely about the drug side of things, but needle stuff wasn't prevalent though other stuff (chiefly coke and speed) probably was being used by some. it wasn't a druggie crowd, but this was the eighties. they weren't all gay but lots were. some of the women probably did have sexual contact with bisexual lovers, but to me that simply means that the risk enters my domain, as i had sexual opportunities with some of them (not taken, but they were there.)

Seydlitz
07-10-02, 09:39
joe_zop,

thanks for the kind words.

as you pointed out, I never advocated unsafe sex practices. Quite the contrary. It seems obvious to me that even if you brush aside HIV as either inexistant or harmless, you still have to face tens of bad old STDs, some of them rather nasty, and also the age-old risk of pregnancy.

There is a difference though. STDs, unpleasant as they may be, can be cured, and pregnancy is primarily an issue for the woman. HIV scare is the only thing that is strong enough to have many men use condoms. That is why, I guess, any debate that might lessen that scare is heretic.

About conspiracy etc. , I would not say that I believe there is a conspiracy. There is enough confusion to enable anybody to continue uttering the most outrageous theories along the lines of HIV/AIDS. Recently, I read that the virus keeps a memory of all the failed treatments, thus making it necessary to imagine ever more complex drugs to fight it. That is pretty smart from a mere retrovirus that is after all a very elementary entity. Someone also said last week that even with very powerful retroviral drugs, it might be impossible to eradicate the virus for another 73 years (why 73?). The HIV lobby is preparing the careers of their sons and daughters.

I suspect that western governments are aware that there is a controversy, and many in those circles have doubts about the whole hings. President Mbeki has been quite vocal over the last two years. But who would have the courage to speak up, when it is so much easier to go along.

In the west, governments continue to funds AIDS research, and foot the bill for retroviral drugs. After all it is public spending, a very Keynesian approach. It stimulates the economy, just like building roads etc. Big pharmaceutical companies benefit from that money, but they provide jobs, and they pay taxes. Little harm done here, although we could do with more schools and swimming pools, and rather less pharma subsidies.

As for Africa (and China now. It seems that the powers-that-be have written off Africa, as decidedly too backward to be a presentable AIDS victim continent, and China is the new star. At least there, they can find a single government), western governments do not care about it. It is relatively easy to promise money, not to give it, or to give much less, and even take that money from budgets already assigned to foreign aid.

Africans will not be given access to sophisticated retroviral drugs, which is rather a good thing given their toxicity. It is somewhat ironic that there is a debate on giving retroviral drugs to people who might not even have access to enough water to take the damned pills.

So back to personal choice. If someone tested positive to HIV, knowing that those tests ARE flawed, (even the manufacturers say that they should not be used to diagnose anything), while being otherwise healthy (asymptomatic), what wrong could that person do by refusing to take retroviral drugs, and see what happens ? To put the safe sex lobby at ease, let's assume that the person practices safe sex and uses condoms all the time.

If that person becomes sick, he or she can be treated for the disease for which he of she has symptoms. And of course that person would do better to stop all those activities connected to risk groups (drugs, etc.) and get a healtier lifestyle.

Ultimately, it is a bet with your own life. Nobody should be given authority to overule a person on what to do with that person's life.

There is one thorny issue, though: children. Should parents be given the right to decline retroviral drug treatments for their HIV positive children ? I think yes.

Seydlitz
07-10-02, 09:59
Prokofiev,

you will find nowhere that I ever advocated unsafe sex. Most of us on WSG have intercourse with prostitutes. That is a relatively unsafe activity. Unsafe sex behaviors make us take personal risks, and force our other partners (the wife in particular) to share in those risks, which is irresponsible. Could I be clearer ?

This does not change anything to the HIV/AIDS debate.

You say "The "minority scientists" are a VERY tiny minority". This is true, but a very vocal one. And one can only admire their persistence, and their courage to put their careers at risk wwhen it would be so easy to go along with the flow and be a respected orthodox AIDS scientist.

You say : "No shortage of these drugs during the 50's, 60's and 70's. And plenty of unhealthy lifestyles. " Indeed, and many deaths as well. Just not identified as AIDS cases until a virus, HIV, was connected with a list of pre-existing diseases.

Drugs make people sick and eventually kill them. This is why many are illegal. What made the difference in the 80s was the creation of communities in which those unhealthy lifestyles were concentrated. People died as before, but now they died in clusters in big American cities (NY and SF in particular). It is the increased occurence of those deaths in relativly closed circles that did draw the attention and lead to the suspicion that something was going on. Then came Gallo and HIV.

I do not understand why it was necessary to invent a viral theory, with a totally new virus, so special that it can do increasingly amazing things, to explain what was observed.

Joe Zop
07-10-02, 15:26
Seydlitz:

Regarding the virus having a "memory" -- c'mon now, this is pretty standard stuff, HIV or not! There are many, many viruses out there which have mutated and rendered treatments useless or less effective, requiring more sophisticated ones to be developed. I could cite malaria and the flu off the top of my head, but there are dozens of others. The fact that this is about HIV/AIDS doesn't suddenly make it newsworthy or unusual. It's not about a "smart" retrovirus, it's about evolutionary process. To label an established and understood process as somehow an "outrageous theory" only inflames the rhetoric and adds to the confusion you decry.

And the fact that people make stupid statements about numeric estimates as a way of getting their names in the paper is nothing new and has nothing to do with the facts of the debate. Estimates in this arena are like estimates in any other -- a guess by someone who supposedly has a decent idea. It's not canonical law; it's a guess. "The HIV lobby is preparing the careers of their sons and daughters." Perhaps, instead, the HIV lobby is attempting to bring a dose of reality into the process by lowering short-term expectations in the face of difficult science.

Your statements about public health funding could easily be directed toward any kind of funding, not just HIV. How many years has funding been directed toward cancer, muscular dystrophy, and many others, as opposed to building swimming pools? I can also make the same statements about money going to the farm lobby, weapons research, etc., as opposed to things I'd prefer to see supported.

"What made the difference in the 80s was the creation of communities in which those unhealthy lifestyles were concentrated." Oh, come on -- this is just a ludicrous statement. There have been large concentrations of gays and drug users before, and in fact the historical truth is that these communities, as well as others, have always congregated. People have a tendency to seeks affiliation, purely and simply. In truth, as well, these concentrations took place well before the 80's -- the gay bathouse scene in NYC was in full swing for many years before the 80's and the infamous song YMCA celebrating the fact was from the 70's. The truth of the matter is that the rumors and talk of a "gay plague" is what brought the issue to the forefront in the US, but that discussion was going on well before HIV was labelled as the potential indicator.

As to your final point regarding what parents should be able to do regarding their children's treatment with retroviral drug treatments -- look at the similar issues and arguments that have surrounded, say, laetrile treatments, among others and religious beliefs. One of the things I think is a mistake in the HIV/AIDS discussion is not placing it firmly within the context of other such debates, as such issues have arisen and been discussed before, and those discussions can provide a context for looking at them again.

Again, always good to debate with you on this topic, as healthy dialogue and thought requires opposing points of view.

Seydlitz
07-10-02, 16:51
joe_zop:

The evolutionary pattern is of course that there are subtle variations of genetic material across a given population, and the most fit survive to reproduce themselves. Nature is smart, not the individuals. What I find outrageous about the virus memory thing is that it is presented just like that. The cunning little virus learns from the past attempts at eradicating it and adapts. This presentation gives the damn thing a diabolical dimension that does not help, I think.

About gay communities, of course there have been some for a long time in large cities. It is easier to live a gay life in NY than in Anytown, USA. But those communities grew to a new, large proportion and engaged in increasingly dangerous behaviors relatively recently, say the mid 70's. It took a while for their lifestyle to take its toll, then they started dying in larger numbers than before. Then the world noticed, by the mid 80s. And then Gallo.

About children etc. I am in favor of science. And it is because of that that I have a difficulty to accept that you give toxic drugs to a healthy person, because of a theory that has quite a few weaknesses, to say the least. And if that person is a child, I find unacceptable that the authorities can take the child away.

Overruling parents who oppose treatment for their sick child, whose sickness is detectable and the treatment established to be curative, is one thing. Administering drugs to fight a virus whose trace cannot even be found, only antibodies, drugs that still have tu cure one single person, not just hypothetically lengthen his life, is a totally different matter.

In any case, I have no control on public spending, or the press. I just sit and wait. One day, that madness will stop, and we will see.

Joe Zop
07-10-02, 19:05
Originally posted by Seydlitz
joe_zop:

Administering drugs to fight a virus whose trace cannot even be found, only antibodies, drugs that still have tu cure one single person, not just hypothetically lengthen his life, is a totally different matter.



So (if we remove the "trace" aspects as being some sort of trump card) the argument is that preventive drugs in all forms should be off the table, in your estimation? Or things given to people that might lengthen their lives but don't cure them?

My diabetic cousin, whose parents over her objections injected her with insulin for years without her being cured, will not be thrilled about that concept now that she's an adult. And we'll need to change rather completely our public health policies regarding vaccinations, as we're basically injecting people, including kids, with weakened forms of deadly things to which some have negative reactions, not to cure them but instead to hypothetically lengthen their lives. And, yes, I know there are differences in the specifics of some of these things, but you're talking about drawing a specific line in a broad public policy issue.

I think the difficulty here is where we stand right now in the process, which is in the early stages to middle of the developmental process. In ten to twenty years this will all look silly, one way or another. At least so I earnestly hope!

Seydlitz
07-10-02, 21:30
Joe_zop:

you are twisting what I said.

First, vaccination is all right, as a technique to trigger the production of antibodies that will protect the patient. It is well established, and it is specific. There is one vaccine per disease, with specific antibodies expected.

The problem with HIV is that it is not associated with a specific disease, and that infected patients do not generate specifc antibodies, wich is why the tests cross-react and cause false positives.

It is that simple: no virus, no antibodies, no vaccine. But then there in no disease either.

And your diabetic cousin was in no danger with my theory either. She had a serious life-treatening condition, and insulin was demonstrated as a means to remedy to that condition. Sadly, she cannot be cured, but as long as she takes the insulin, she will be fine.

This is not the case for people on tritherapies. They are healthy to start with, then they take 20-30 pills a day that damage their health beyond recovery. Their immune system collapses, they get one of many diseases and they die. Another victim of this tragedy.

It is so much the opposite of your cousin's situation: there are increasing occurences of doctors prescribing drug holidays to their patients who suffer too much from the tritherapy. Do you believe that your cousin's doctor would have prescribed an insulin holiday ? Doctors know that the drugs are highly toxic. They prescribe them anyway, but they can accept that the treatment be suspended. Realpolitik ?

Dickhead
07-11-02, 01:14
Although I am a dickhead and this must always be taken into consideration when judging the value of my opinion, it seems to me that if everyone used condoms and practiced safe sex, this either disease or alleged disease, or virus or alleged virus, would die out in a generation. Seems like a small price to pay considering the lack of medical consensus and the extreme and overarching risk involved.

Seems to me like there's risks worth taking, and there's risks not worth taking.

Now anyone who has not been practicing safe sex and is running around exposing others to this either disease or alleged disease, is a shithead, IMO, and that is far worse than being a

Dickhead

Joe Zop
07-11-02, 02:46
Seydlitz, you are completely missing my point, which was about your call for broad public policies that allow people to assert, against the prevailing medical opinion, that a treatment should not be given to minors. That very much is in the same category as the examples I mentioned. As I said, the science of those precise examples doesn't track, and I was not at all talking about your theory, but you were talking about policy and not medicine and my examples relate to policy.

Your perspective that tritherapies absolutely damage people's systems, do no good, and in fact cause damage and disease, is decidedly a minority opinion. While I think it's very important that the issues continue to be debated and the prevailing wisdom challenged and flaws pointed out and pursued, that doesn't mean that the minority opinion should suddenly become a matter of policy.

The truth of it is very simple -- if someone who is HIV-positive chooses to believe the same things that you do, they are under no obligation, providing that they are an adult, to enter into tritherapies. Yes, they will be strongly urged to do so precisely because according the the vast majority of the medical profession that is the indicated treatment. But it is their choice -- no one can force you to undergo radiation therapy for cancer if you choose not to, and no one can force you to undergo this therapy either. You are free to reject prevailing wisdom and seek other options, and that is how it should be as long as doing so doesn't pose a substantial public health risk (which, since neither approach eliminates the HIV indication and thereby the potential transmission, is the case here.)

The problematic aspect I see in all of this, to be honest, is contained in Dickhead's indictment -- that your position indicates to folks who are HIV-positive that they are not in any way a danger to other people, so they should feel free to do as they please, including, (if they choose to be, as Dickhead labels them, shitheads) engaging in unsafe sex. And please note the distinction I'm making -- I'm not saying you are endorsing that approach or implication as I know that's very much not the case, I'm saying it is a conclusion someone could come to based on the argument that HIV does not lead to AIDS. If your position is correct, then no damage will be done by this. If your position is incorrect, then the there is the possibility that infectious people who believe they are not a risk will act irresponsibly and infect still more people.

Prokofiev
07-11-02, 03:36
The idea that drugs, gay sex and unhealthy lifestyles suddenly occured in the early 80's is laughable. Concentrations of gay men in New York, Paris, New Orleans, San Fran etc. goes back to the last CENTURY, at least. Bathhouses and public urinals since Roman times have been centers of gay sexual activity. The % of gay men has remained constant through time. Their numbers grew with the population, not any faster. The only change in the 70's was that it became more open and that the other 90% of the population became aware of what had been happening for the last few millenia. "Gay Pride" emerged. The sex was always there.
.
The assertion that drug addicts and gay men have always been dying and we only just noticed it in the early 80's is absurd. AIDS was recognized years before the HIV virus. Something DRAMATIC had happened in a short period of time. Perhaps the numbers are now inflated, but millions of people were not dying "unnoticed" prior to 1981.
.

Dickhead
07-11-02, 03:58
Although I don't have any kids, for which the world should probably be thankful, if I DID I would vaccinate them against known or suspected dangers such as measles, diphtheria, and yes even smallpox post 9/11.

I am a pragmatist as well as a dickhead and so I think if this generation used condoms it would "vaccinate" future generations against AIDS, alleged AIDS, HIV, alleged HIV, hepatitis A thru Z and all its possible alleged permutations, and plus maybe annoying non-fatal shit like chlamydia, the clap, and assorted other drips, leaks, and drizzles. That would be good, I think.

Condoms do make sex less pleasurable and anyone who claims otherwise is probably only using them to jack off into. I like math (sorry, FU) so here is some. If condoms make sex say 50% less pleasurable (probably an overstatement in my opinion; I'd say more like 25% if someone is holding a gun to my head), maybe one way to make up for that would be to fuck twice as often. Or as I posted a long time ago, before I had perfected my Dickhead persona, if the condom eliminates 50% of the sensation, make her suck twice as hard.

I am a patriot. Not an American patriot, but a pussy patriot. It is our patriotic duty as men to practice safe sex, and women's patriotic duty to suck as hard as necessary for us to get a good, safe, guilt-free nut.

This is my opinion (and JZ, please do not refer to my opinions as indictments as I am not running for attorney general). I don't like condoms, but I don't like red lights either and I stop at them anyway.

Your less than humble, overly opinionated, but loyal and reasonably well-informed servant,

Dickhead

Seydlitz
07-11-02, 09:41
Prokofiev:

the website aidsrealitycheck cites the CDC 2001 mid-year report in the following quote:

<CDC Finally Releases Its "Midyear Report" for 2001

As a nation of 270 million people, the U.S. has less than 5% of the world's population, but we have almost *29%* of the world's reported "AIDS" cases! In fact, the U.S. has the highest per capita rate of "AIDS" of ANY nation, industrialized OR developing.

The CDC's "Midyear Report" for 2001 is finally available on the internet. It shows a 6% DECREASE, yes, *DECREASE* in annual cases of "AIDS" from the previous year. Pediatric cases of so-called "AIDS" saw a DECREASE of over 13% annually over last year's figures. In total, in a nation of 270 million people, the CDC reports only 793,000 cases of "AIDS" in OVER TWENTY YEARS OF *CUMULATIVE* REPORTING!>

Less than 1 million deaths in 20 years ... This is far less than car crashes, lung cancer, gunshots, and so many other causes of death that plague the American society.

Such a phenomenon could easily have gone unnoticed for a long time.

It is about definition and statistics: pneumonia without HIV = pneumonia, pneumonia with HIV = AIDS

Joe Zop
07-11-02, 15:17
Dickhead,

Sorry, that came out stronger than I meant it to -- in no way did I intend to imply (as on rereading I may have) that you were in favor of what I was saying.

But I must confess I never pictured you as utopian dreamer: an entire generation sacrificing sexual pleasure to keep future generations safe. Wow.

Dickhead
07-11-02, 17:17
JZ, I AM in favor of what you are saying and I agree with your position almost completely. But Dickhead is no utopian. Dickhead is the ultimate pragmatist. Remember I said to fuck twice as much to make up for the lost pleasure (wouldn't help me much right now as 2 x 0 = 0). Quantity is quality when it comes to sex, if you're a

Dickhead

Prokofiev
07-11-02, 18:56
seydlitz,
reading through most of your website links is like talking to ufo/ roswell advocates or any conspiracy theorists - it's a series of facts and true statements that mysteriously morph into questionable ideas and dubious links and then goes on to make far-fetched associations, totally unwarranted by the original statements. when written by a literate - though misguided - author with an air of authority, it can read as if it has scientific credence.
.
. an example - one article gives a long list of symptoms of benzyne poisoning and then links the info to benzoic acid and benzoates which are common preservatives in food/drinks. it then links perrier water, fat-free foods and diet soda which contain benzoates to cronic fatigue syndrome "of yuppies" and in turn to aids because both have similar symptoms! please!!!
.
it seems that sexual lubricants, silicone, trojan condoms (and most other latex-types) are a major cause of aids! when used in the rectum these products cause toxic reactions and attack the immune system. according to one article, since almost all anal sex and lubricants were associated with gays (huh??) the problem first appeared among gay "botttoms". o.k. - a couple questions. prior to 1985, how many gay men used condoms? do you think more straight or gay couples used condoms? do you think anal sex only occured among gays? do you think women having anal sex didn't use lubricants? crazy! but the most disturbing aspect of this line of reasoning is that it is completely contrary to safe sex practice. latex condoms - trojans included - are the #1 recommendation for safe sex. lubricants for anal sex? a very good idea.
.
don't confuse the ramblings of fringe thinkers and psuedo-scientists who post their "findings" on the inter-net with ideas critiqued by peer review in scientific and medical journals. i don't claim that the cdc and the "medical establishment" have all the answers or that some of the duesberg objections are quite interesting and need to be addressed. maybe anti-aids drug therapies are not the right answer for all hiv+ people. it certainly appears that the number of aids deaths has been inflated and confused with other diseases -especially in africa. but over-all, the hiv-aids link appears strong and explains so much about what we know. the majority is not always right but, it's usually right. _ p

Seydlitz
07-11-02, 22:59
Prokofiev:

now that you have read some of the material, you will have noticed that those websites are a repository of articles written by different persons at different times. All they have in common is that the authors question some or al af the majority view on HIV/AIDS.

Regrettably, they do not agree with each other on fundamental issues. Some deny that HIV exists, most say that HIV and AIDS are not related, etc. In fact the "denialists" are not a lobby. They could use a bit more coordination and need to articulate their views if they want to be able to convince people, not just add to the confusion.

Please bear in mind that I have written none of those articles, and that I do not endorse everything in those websites. I have formed my opinion, as you can do with yours, based on that material, and some more.

Your point about condoms and lubricants is fine with me. That part of the material on the websites is very dubious, even if there are serious allergies to latex, and if many lubricants can be toxic when used intensively or aggressively, as can be the case in anal gay sex.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 00:00
The truth about AIDS:

1). A lot of it is caused by anal gay sex.
2). A lot more of it is caused by shooting up dope.

Both of these practices are very disgusting in my opinion.

Prokofiev
07-12-02, 00:13
DickHead,

How about straight anal sex? A little hot backdoor action with a cute and willing woman who gets-off with anal penetration? Or is that disgusting too? It can have the same net effect. Both boy and girl butts will bleed when stretched.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 00:45
Originally posted by Prokofiev
DickHead,

How about straight anal sex? A little hot backdoor action with a cute and willing woman who gets-off with anal penetration? Or is that disgusting too? It can have the same net effect. Both boy and girl butts will bleed when stretched.

Yes, FWIW I find straight anal sex disgusting also, although for some reason not QUITE as disgusting as gay anal sex = prejudice (feelings aren't rational). YEMV. I recommend digital penetration or using dildos if one's female partner is anally oriented.

Anal sex without the use of condoms is just way, way, way disgusting to me, and you can get SO many fucking diseases that way without even considering AIDS.

Anal sex with the use of condoms is merely way, way disgusting to me (one fewer "way").

Live like you want to live, but anyone who is having condomless anal sex is

1) affecting me personally by increasing the incidence of STDs, and
2) dumber than dirt.

This is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of WSG, my employer, my family, my pets and blah blah blah.

I think another poster said it best when he said "the anus is an exit, not an entrance."

Prokofiev
07-12-02, 01:13
Mr. Richard Head,
Why do you feel that there are "so many ***** diseases" associated with anal sex? AIDS -yes. But others (herpes, clap, syphillis, etc) are no more likely encountered from behind. No, I would NOT recommend condom-less anal sex (or vaginal) with pros or pick-ups, but if you have a wife or girlfriend and you KNOW you are both disease-free, what is the big deal? Having had several significant others who were "anal-oriented" I have gone that route perhaps a 1000 or more times. Enjoyable for both parties - and more so without latex. Lambskin seems to be particularly enjoyable (although I know it is NOT recommended as effective against the HIV virus).
.
I find it interesting that so many sources connect anal sex with gay men, but not with women. In overall numbers (not %) I'm sure there is more female anal sex than male. Or do I just live in a different world? I can't believe that my women over the years were SO different from the norm. Most women do not want to admit or talk about anal sex, but in my experience it is not at all uncommon. And looking at this web-site, it appears plenty of men want it as well. But to each his own, Mr. Head. Whatever floats your boat . . . Peace - P

Dickhead
07-12-02, 01:28
Epididimitis (sp?) in particular is transmitted by condomless anal sex. This makes your balls swell up real bad and often leads to sterility. Urinary tract (primarily bladder) infections are relatively uncommon in men as opposed to women, but are relatively much more common in men who engage in anal sex (with whatever gender). In neither case does it matter if both partners are "clean," monogamous, or whatever as these are bacterial rather than viral in nature.

I know a lot of guys (and gals, unfortunately) like anal sex, and before you ask, yes, I've tried it, several times. I personally don't like it and think it's dirty and dangerous. Dickhead aims to please but is no longer willing to do that just to please a woman.

But as long as guys use condoms, I don't take it personally. I DO take it personally if they don't use condoms, cuz that affects ME.

Richard "Dick" Head (all my friends and most of my enemies just call me Dick!)

Joe Zop
07-12-02, 04:05
Personally, I'm fine with people having sex with whomever, whatever, and in whatever ways they want to, as long as there aren't kids or unhappy livestock involved (and I could probably be convinced the livestock is consenting in some instances.) I'm just not particularly thrilled with that behavior affecting me if I've slept with someone who's slept with someone and those folks I've not had the pleasure with have managed to pass infection to me.

The whole gay sex/druggie thing I find a complete and unfortunate distraction. The US has a higher proportion of transmission in those areas than many other places, but that (unless you follow the alternative theory viewpoint) is less about the disease itself and how it acts and more about being close to the danger zone. Of course sharing needles is a prime scenario, because there's direct blood exchange. Same with gay anal sex -- there's tearing involved, and in general the lifestyle, similar to the one we discuss here, involves multiple partners. I'm not about to be comforted to hear that there's a rampant epidemic of smallpox in, say, Wyoming, just because mostly cowboys are getting it and I'm not a cowboy and I'm not in the west. One ranch hand with a bad sense of direction (and really, really tireless horse) and I'm at risk.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 05:28
Okay, JZ, you brought it up. Speaking of consenting livestock, how does a lazy cowboy screw a mule? (consenting mule over the age of 18 and using a condom of course):

"Giddyup. Whoa. Giddyup. Whoa. Giddyup. Whoa."

PS: You said: "The whole gay sex/druggie thing I find a complete and unfortunate distraction"; I did not understand what you meant by this. Can you amplify or explain further? DH

Rubber Nursey
07-12-02, 07:13
Joe,

I agree with your position exactly. It's all very well to say that you're "careful" in choosing your sexual partners...but who's to say that your partners are taking as much care as you are?

For instance, if it WAS only a gay/IV drug users disease (not that I believe for a second that it is) I may sleep with a man who I know is neither gay nor a drug user, thinking I'm safe. But HIS last partner may have been an IV drug user...and HER last partner may have been a gay IV drug user! Who knows? Or what about the wealthy businessmen in a suit who I feel completely safe with...who neglected to tell me that he has just returned from an unprotected sex junket to Thailand???

It's pretty darn stupid to claim it's an African/IV drug user/gay male/Thai prostitute problem. Even if that WAS the case...these people still get around, (they are not the "exclusive" groups that people think they are and they still mix with the general community whether people like it or not), and suddenly it lands in YOUR backyard too.

Joe Zop
07-12-02, 13:34
exactly, rn. dickhead, what i meant is that it's not as if hiv/aids is genetically connected to gay folks, looking for some sort of chromosome (as with sickle cell anemia, for example) and then going to town. it's not as if hiv/aids is a true byproduct of intravenous drug use, being something that's an interaction of particular illicit drugs. these groups are more at risk, yes, because their behavior and who they're with leads them toward more possibility of exposure, but that has nothing to do with the disease itself. and because these groups are marginalized, people can focus on that as opposed to the danger of the disease to themselves. it's "others" who get it, people who are different than i am -- gays, druggies, foreigners. in the us, despite hearing from the ryan whites (hemopheliac kid who contracted it, for those non-us readers) and mary fischers (socialite mom who caught it from her husband), we still are busy feeling mostly safe because we're not "them" where them is a member of one of the groups where the incidence is higher.

it's now a decade since fisher made her famous speech to the republican national convention -- "hiv asks only one thing of those it attacks. are you human? and this is the right question. are you human? because people with hiv have not entered some alien state of being" -- and i don't see where the prevailing sentiment has changed all that much. we still want to marginalize and blame the victims as opposed to worry we might be next.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 17:54
Personally, my interest is not in placing blame but figuring out how risky it is to get a BBBJ from someone I've known for a long time and whom I'm certain is not bisexual or an IV drug user, but who sleeps with a couple of other people whom I'm also certain are not bisexual or IV drug users. Certainly the risk is not zero but people take risks every day.

Motorcycle helmets are a possible parallel. I believe they reduce risk and I use one 100% of the time when I ride, but I could still get killed, and even with a helmet, motorcycling is riskier than driving a car (although approximately 75% of car/motorcycle accidents are the car driver's fault, I'd still be dead). There is no helmet law in my state, and if others choose to ride without a helmet, the increased medical costs fall on the general population to a certain extent. There are reasonably reliable statistics I could look up as to what percentage of motorcycle fatalities are wearing helmets, and I could compare the death rates to states where helmet laws are mandatory (so you could assume almost all the riders were wearing helmets), but that really doesn't tell me what I need to know. What I need is the fatality and injury rates per mile for helmeted vs. helmet-less riders.

Of course, you can tell if someone is wearing a helmet or not but you can't tell if someone has HIV or AIDS. In the case of HIV/AIDS, what I need to know is what percentage of what sex acts result in the transmission of AIDS, and I doubt very seriously if there will ever be reliable numbers on that. So I choose to use condoms all the time when I am with hookers, and I try to use them with amateurs but here is where the problem lies: the women don't want to use them and think that my wanting to use them "says something" about them. Well, it does "say something" about them; it says that there is a non-zero probability that they (or even perhaps me although I get tested every six months) are HIV positive. Nothing more and nothing less. So a lot of times I lie and say we should use them for birth control even though Dickhead only fires blanks.

Then plus even if I am in a long-term relationship and we have both been tested, women always cheat (that has been my experience 100% of the time), and then they lie about cheating. This then leads to a situation where I want to keep using condoms even after we've been together a while and been tested, and then they think I'M cheating. Dickhead doesn't cheat, ever. I'll break up before I'll cheat.

So it sucks, and I can't win, and this is why I proposed that condoms be used for an entire generation until this whole plague goes away. I know it won't happen but the death rate is one per capita regardless and I've already had more fun than I ever dreamed of.

End of rant. Sorry.

Joe Zop
07-12-02, 18:24
Originally posted by Dickhead
So I choose to use condoms all the time when I am with hookers, and I try to use them with amateurs"

Well, from a pure statistical standpoint, there's no doubt that prostitutes have a higher level of HIV/AIDS infection than the general population, dramatically and frighteningly higher in some locales, so I'm always astonished to hear folks on this board who are willing to go bareback in the face of that. Until prostitution is absolutely legalized and sex workers are regularly tested (and this is the wrong thread for that discussion) there's always going to be a greater risk simply because sex workers are going to have more partners.

Whether or not all women (or men) cheat, the essence of the equation is that without a condom you put your life in the hands of someone who may or may not be telling you the truth. And lies about who people have or haven't slept with have gotta be the most common lies there are, unless we count words that come out of the mouths of politicians.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 19:29
JZ, agree with everything you say BUT you put your life in someone else's hands every time you drive or fly (plus I like to bungee jump), etc. And AIDS is a lousy way to die but in a car accident you could become a quadriplegic which to me would be a fate worse than death.

So it kinda sounds like I'm better off letting my friend (who tells me honestly that she cannot be monogamous) blow me without a condom (she won't do it any other way) as opposed to getting in a long-term relationship with someone I can't trust.

The Truth About AIDS is .... (drum roll, please) unknown at this point. Latex condoms provide substantial risk reduction but I don't think it will ever get to the point where steady sex partners use them unless there are extenuating circumstances such as the known presence of HIV (and even then ....)

Seydlitz
07-12-02, 19:34
About statistics:

let's not forget that prostitution is very much a matter of class, socially I mean. Nutrition, hygiene, lifestyle, etc. do have an enormous impact on the risk one takes of having intercourse, protected or not, with a working girl.

Equally, prostitutes do not necessarily constitute a higher risk of infection (HIV or STDs) than many promiscuous "amateurs".

One thing I will never understand is why a woman would accept to have unprotected sex. For a man, I know, it is often very hard to resist the temptation of going bareback, at the cost of taking a risk, because condoms do remove quite a lot of the pleasure of sex.

But a woman ? She has nothing to gain, and everything to lose.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 19:46
Originally posted by Seydlitz
One thing I will never understand is why a woman would accept to have unprotected sex. For a man, I know, it is often very hard to resist the temptation of going bareback, at the cost of taking a risk, because condoms do remove quite a lot of the pleasure of sex.

But a woman ? She has nothing to gain, and everything to lose.

Some women tell me that condoms are uncomfortable for them, give them rashes or burning, create increased friction, etc. Other women tell me they enjoy the jizz as part of the experience.

SOME, mind you, not all. Others have just said stuff like "I hate condoms" and don't really care to discuss it further.

Seydlitz
07-12-02, 19:56
Dickhead:

unless I am gravely mistaken (always a possibility), even the CDC does not see much risk in being on the receiving end of a BBBJ (unless your penis is in such a state of decay that your girlfriend would not blow you anyway ...

Dickhead
07-12-02, 20:53
Well, that's not really what the CDC says. It does say the risk is smaller than for vaginal or anal (yuck!) sex. But we already knew that. So the question is how small is small and they don't quantify that and anyway I would question their data collection techniques if they did.

But I mean I got sucked by at least 50 women in the past year, with condoms, and what would be the risk if I did the same thing without condoms? So what we really need to know is whether the risk increases more per different partner or per total number of blow jobs. Is it riskier to get 5 BBBJs from 1 girl vs. 1 BBBJ from each of 5 girls?

Then the other issue is, if the risk is greater for the suckor than for the suckee, what is the morality of the suckee allowing the BBBJ knowing the greater risk to the suckor? Even a dickhead like me cares about that to some extent.

And this is not an academic question because I have a willing would-be suckor who 1) thinks AIDS will never happen to her because she is "clean," 2) has no idea that I have been with hundreds of hookers, 3) is really hot and gives great blow jobs, and 4) is one of the best friends I've ever had.

I guess maybe I should tell her that I've been with hundreds of women (no need to specify that a large majority were hookers) in recent years but have always used condoms, and then if she is still willing I will take the BBBJs.

Seydlitz
07-12-02, 21:26
Dickhead:

this is what the CDC says:
<Can I get HIV from performing oral sex?

Yes, it is possible for you to become infected with HIV through performing oral sex. There have been a few cases of HIV transmission from performing oral sex on a person infected with HIV. While no one knows exactly what the degree of risk is, evidence suggests that the risk is less than that of unprotected anal or vaginal sex.

Blood, semen, pre-seminal fluid, and vaginal fluid all may contain the virus. Cells in the mucous lining of the mouth may carry HIV into the lymph nodes or the bloodstream. The risk increases:
if you have cuts or sores around or in your mouth or throat;
if your partner ejaculates in your mouth; or
if your partner has another sexually transmitted disease (STD).
If you choose to have oral sex, and your partner is male, use a latex condom on the penis; or
if you or your partner is allergic to latex, plastic (polyurethane) condoms can be used.
Research has shown the effectiveness of latex condoms used on the penis to prevent the transmission of HIV. Condoms are not risk-free, but they greatly reduce your risk of becoming HIV-infected if your partner has the virus.

If you choose to have oral sex, and your partner is female, use a latex barrier (such as a dental dam or a cut-open condom that makes a square) between your mouth and the vagina. Plastic food wrap also can be used as a barrier. >

I gave you my interpretation of that, but it is better to quote chapter and verse.

About your personal situation, if you have a partner willing to give you BBBJ and that you know that yourself you are virus-free, I cannot see why you should get her into the confidence about those hundreds of other women. Just enjoy he situation. You are doing nothing wrong.

Now about your rhetorical questions, I would say that oral sex is a significantly lower risk activity than penetrative sex, no matter what. In sex there is no such thing as zero risk. If all those women were average general population women, I'd say that there would be little more risk involved in your having BBBJ than covered BJ.

Now, since you say that many of those were prostitutes, then there is a higher probability of trouble, due to potentially poorer hygiene, etc. Still the risk is very much lower than if you had condomless sex with them.

Even so, I believe that you should be fine receiving BBBJ. Giving it is another matter, and as you say, I do not quite see why a woman would want to do that.

Still, the best compromise between customer (or boyfriend) satisfaction and manageable risk might be BBBJ and protected penetration.

Dickhead
07-12-02, 21:55
Yes, I have read the CDC site many times. I do agree your earlier paraphrasation was basically and roughly accurate although not as precise as quoting the actual site (which I read again right before my last post).

She won't fuck me regardless of condom or no and will only blow me. I've fucked her lots of times years ago but now she has a live in boyfriend and so she thinks it is being "less unfaithful" to him if she just blows me. Her words. Probably I could talk her into fucking me in the heat of the moment but she is much better at oral, primarily due to being a very poor kisser in my opinion.

I guess I should be concerned about passing something on to her boyfriend, but since I know he is being unfaithful to her with one of my other best friends (which my friend does not know and that's another issue), there's really nowhere to draw a line that I can see.

Only due to the increased awareness and knowledge I have gotten from this board am I even worrying about this. I mean, I've been having sex with her off and on for years, decades even, and she's never been monogamous and never used condoms and I've never gotten anything from her or given anything to her. And I've been going to hookers the whole time and using condoms the whole time so why I am driving myself nuts?

I guess it's because I don't think she has the same level of knowledge that I do (that's a polite way to put it and really I should say she has her head in the sand) and so if I am taking a risk it is an informed risk whereas she is taking an uninformed risk. That's why I was considering telling her about all the hookers. Plus I DON'T "know" that I am virus-free; I only know that I tested negative at the end of March and that I always use condoms with hookers and that I don't shoot up or engage in anal sex. There's an incubation period and no one claims that condoms are 100% effective in preventing AIDS, and I've been with hookers since my last test.

Seydlitz
07-12-02, 22:54
It seems to me that you are a very safe-sex minded person, and should be ok.

A balanced healthy lifestyle, rigorous personal hygiene plus safe sex practices should really put you in the lowest risk level.

After all, these nasty things we are afraid of are rather less virulent than the Ebola fever ! You can hardly catch an STD in a split second exposure of healthy skin or tissue. And even if you did, those are curable.

As for HIV, I do not know if it is current gospel, but at one point the good doctors at the CDC and others indicated that infection came for the repetition of exposure rather than any individual exposure (which incidentally, I have always found rather surprising if you believe in the viral theory).

And if your girl friend is uninformed, you might want to enlighten her on those issues, rather than mentioning the 100 prostitutes. But who am I to offer personal advice...

About your getting tested regularly, you might as well keep in mind the so many (100+?) instances of documented reasons for false positives. The good news is that even a positive does not necessarily mean death over the horizon, the bad news is that the test is so unreliable that even a negative might be wrong too...

Dickhead
07-13-02, 00:09
Personally, I do not believe that "rigorous personal hygiene," whatever that involves, provides protection against AIDs or any other STD. I shower, brush and floss my teeth, and wear clean clothes. I wash my hands after I use the toilet. Is that "rigorous personal hygiene"? If so I have it and if not not. Sometimes I pick my nose if no one is looking.

I do believe that eating right and staying in shape might help you stay healthier longer if you did get AIDS. But that's not why I do it. I do it because I don't want to get fat and I want to be able to either run from anybody who tries to fuck with me or jack his jaw, whichever seems more prudent at the time.

And yeah, I'm hip to the possibility of false postive and false negative AIDS tests. My doctor offers AIDS testing for free (probably since she is queer as a four dollar bill) so I do it. Otherwise I probably wouldn't since it wouldn't really change anything. But the women seem to have a funny attitude about it, like the fact that I get tested means I'm LESS safe. That's pretty fucked up, I think. Like the last time I was in a steady relationship, after we both said we wanted to just see each other, I said, "Well, let's get HIV tests and if they're both negative we can stop using condoms." Her response was like "IF? What do you mean IF?" So I patiently explained that anyone who was sexually active with anyone other than a single partner who was a virgin at the time and then had no other sex partners ever ever ever ever had SOME risk.

This led to a huge argument, with her accusing me of accusing her of being a ****, so I told her to hit the road and I went to Amsterdam for a week. But that gets really expensive.

Seydlitz, I know you are not an American but do you see the shit we go through?

Rubber Nursey
07-13-02, 07:26
Dickhead,
Personally (for obvious, selfish reasons) I don't think the fact that you had sex with prostitutes has anything to do with anything. I'm not gonna start quoting stats again don't worry, but as you know there are certain places in the world (that you have been to) where the hookers are MUCH "cleaner" than the general population. I also think there needs to be a distinction between street hookers, brothel workers, etc...to say that "hookers" in general are a high risk factor is unfair, and untrue in a lot of cases. The fact is though, whether they are higher risk or not, you used condoms with those women. Therefore your risk of catching anything from them is extremely small. What you SHOULD be telling her is the amount of times you have had UNPROTECTED sex...regardless of who it was with.

As for not wanting to use condoms "saying something" about the women you are with...it sure as hell does in my books! When I was working and someone asked me for oral without a condom, I would always say "Don't you think that if I do it with you, that I usually do it with everyone??" That stopped them in their tracks. It's all too easy to think that we are "special", and that the woman likes us a little more than all the rest of the people that she sleeps with, but that is a really naive attitude to take. A woman who would compromise her health with you, is likely to do it with others.

Like someone pointed out, women have more to worry about than men do. If you think that she is not well educated on those matters, and that she doesn't have the information required to assess the risks, then I think you should be telling her. However, if she knows the risks and really doesn't care too much...I would be keeping my dick in my pants!!

Rubber Nursey
07-13-02, 07:49
Oh, by the way Dickhead...

Well said about the testing. Honestly, for a person who regularly has different partners (and doesn't use condoms) testing is moot. Your results are only as good as the exact moment that you had the tests done. If you go out and get laid straight after your doctors appointment, your status could be different before you even get your results back! And then there is the window periods...I may have JUST caught chlamydia the day before my appointment, but it won't show up until I'm tested next time. In the meantime I have infected heaps of others, believing I was "clean".

That is part of my argument against mandatory testing of sex workers (one of many reasons!!). Unless you are in a truly exclusive relationship, and you KNOW the other person is being monogamous as well, you are never risk free. When I have sex I always treat the other person as if they are infected. Either way, I can't enjoy sex if I'm laying there wondering if I'm going to catch something. I would rather use a condom (which I don't particularly like) and be able to relax.

Seydlitz
07-13-02, 09:17
Dickhead,

as you say, I am not an American, but I know what you have to put up with.

My own experience is that many american women are shallow, materialistic and somewhat paranoid about women rights etc.

All this makes them very unattractive as companions, although as a European, I have found that I am given a certain "margin" compared to American men. Many American women are willing to accept being told a number of things by a European man, that would make them jump at the throat of the American man who would be foolish enough to say them.

In a way, Europeans are exotic, the more so when they act in a way that contrasts with the US behavior. American women are outraged, but somewhat fascinated.

Still I do not remember ever having had sex with an American woman, because I do find them unattractive.

Joe Zop
07-13-02, 11:48
Ah, but the basic point of testing isn't to certify that someone is necessarily safe, but to identify someone's situation at the time of the test. We may want to use these tests as some sort of STD litmus tool, but that's a social issue -- the underlying medical idea for such tests is to screen for those who are infected and be able to treat them.

That said, obviously an ongoing series of tests gives a better idea of overall status, even if activity renders the latest test less reliable than the previous ones. If your results for STDs come back negative after more than one test, then your status is that of clean or of recently infected, which means that a) you've probably caught nothing from past partners, or b) that your infection is in the early stages and thus, if identified, less likely to do substantial harm to your system if treated.

Also, here's a nice resource -- a literature review for things about prostitution and HIV/AIDS: http://www.aidslaw.ca/Maincontent/issues/prostitution/e-info-oa1.htm

Rubber Nursey
07-13-02, 12:10
Oops Joe...after reading your post and then re-reading mine, I realised that I may have sounded like I was suggesting that testing was pointless.

I should really make the distinction...what I meant was that getting tested and then saying "I'm clean...let's not bother with the condoms" was kind of pointless, and a bit irresponsible.

Getting tested for your own health and wellbeing...as well as that of your regular partners...is still something I would definitely encourage. :)

And thank you for that link too. I have already read many of the documents listed on that site, and will make an effort to track down the ones that I have yet to see.

Joe Zop
07-13-02, 17:55
Actually, RN, considering all the discussion about testing, I also just wanted to point out that people tend to want to use tests in broader ways than they're really designed from a strictly medical perspective. This relates, as well, to Seydlitz's comments about the unreliability of HIV testing -- while it's true that the test often yields false positives, and also that it's possible that some with HIV are not properly identified, a series of tests is the normal way of confirming most medical conditions as opposed to one single one which could be anomalous. Most tests improve in reliability when given more than once or when combined with others that test for the same condition.

And the social agenda (proving people are "safe" or not) does have a tendency to overwhelm and overshadow the medical purpose of the tests. While such data is useful to some extent in looking at overall rates of exposure and infection, and thereby giving a kind of overall risk factor to, say, a region, it becomes more problematic when drawing distinctions within groups or when making blanket statements about the safety of individuals. Take, for example, your complaint that "to say that 'hookers' in general are a high risk factor is unfair." In truth, that's not the case -- precisely when you're talking "in general" and using the broad definition, sex workers generally do have higher infection rates than the general population. (Prostitutes in Nairobi, for example, are generally HIV positive at a rate of close to 50% as opposed to the appallingly high rate of the rest of the country. The infection rate for prostitutes in NYC is far higher than that of the city as a whole.) As you properly point out, this blanket statement doesn't reflect the different striations or types of sex workers, and the truth varies radically depending on where and who we're talking about. Not to mention, of course, that the data is quite often murky and incomplete.

I did understand what you were saying as testing relates to the whole issue of mandatory testing of sex workers, which is a complex and unfortunate issue -- unfortunate in that a well-regulated and well-educated sector could very well keep everyone safer, but education and regulation tend to be at odds in this particular case because of the social stigmas involved. In a perfect place, all sex workers would be tested and would remove themselves from the workplace if they were infected; in real life government demands for such time-outs or removal (as well as being formally identified as a sex worker) generally has the effect of driving those most at risk underground. What's needed, I think, is a mutually trusted intermediary organization that educates, provides tests and medical assistance, but has a buffer between them and governmental registration or control as a way of reducing fear and stigma. (And ideally an additional support structure for integrating and supporting those sex workers who are undergoing treatment and not working.) Most importantly, it also takes an acknowledgement that these sex workers didn't get infected on their own, and that their customers are equally culpable in the equation.

Unfortunately, that latter fact is something that's politically far more difficult to deal with than just about anything else. Wouldn't it be nice, in the face of continued criminalization of prostitution in various places, if convictions for soliciting or frequenting prostitutes didn't mean going to John school or paying a fine or forfeiting your car, but simply meant you had to get tested for STDs and, if needed, treated? And that was that? (And before people jump on me, I'll note again that I'm firmly and absolutely in favor of decriminilization!) In the long run, that would be far more socially productive. Of course, the odds that this kind of thing would happen in lieu of other penalties are slim and none -- it's far more likely something like that would be added on as an additional condition, and probably coupled with some form of further social embarrassment, which has the same effect of mandatory testing of sex workers in defeating the purpose.

Rubber Nursey
07-13-02, 20:52
Joe, (GREAT post by the way!)

Take, for example, your complaint that "to say that 'hookers' in general are a high risk factor is unfair." In truth, that's not the case -- precisely when you're talking "in general" and using the broad definition, sex workers generally do have higher infection rates than the general population.

I know that in most countries, prostitutes have a higher rate of HIV infection. (And that this is a direct result of social stigma, government/police interference in the sex industry, poverty, lack of health education, no access to safe sex equipment, etc...) I guess I was annoyed with the blanket statements for two reasons.
a) I come from a country where sex workers ARE "cleaner" than the general community (and I guess my own pride just can't let me sit back and read it without commenting! LOL) and,
b) I find the attitudes in here re: hookers versus "normal" girls to be really naive, and in some cases, maybe even dangerous.

Soooo many posts in this and the safe sex section (including all the stuff in the old forum) say things like "I'd only do that with a normal girl, not a hooker" and "barebacking is a death sentence with a hooker...save it for the "amateurs". Everyone is so convinced that hookers are the "vectors of disease" and that so-called normal girls are somehow safer. It has nothing much to do with the number of men a hooker sleeps with, and everything to do with safe sex practices. IMHO a hooker who always insists on using condoms with her 5 clients a day is a lot safer than the "normal" girl who NEVER uses condoms and picks up a different guy every week.

I think this is very much the same argument as the gay man/IV drug user discussion. People can not keep considering it to be simply a "hooker problem"....ANY woman who sleeps with many partners or indulges in unsafe sex is a high risk. To think otherwise is simply lulling yourself into a false sense of security every time you have sex with a "good girl".

What's needed, I think, is a mutually trusted intermediary organization that educates, provides tests and medical assistance, but has a buffer between them and governmental registration or control as a way of reducing fear and stigma. (And ideally an additional support structure for integrating and supporting those sex workers who are undergoing treatment and not working.)

That is exactly what I do...that is where I work. There is at least one agency in every Australian state that provides these exact services, and they are all Government funded. Every service is provided with complete anonymity, which makes sex workers more than willing to seek us out. We also go to them in their places of work. Most importantly, we do not question about age, drug habits, immigration status, etc...things that will usually force a worker to stay hidden from authorities. It is solely because of these agencies that the Oz sex industry is so "clean" in comparison to most other places in the world. If every other Government had half a brain, they would fund something similar (and if OUR Government had half a brain, they would realise that we do half the work off our own backs because we do not get ENOUGH funding!! LOL) Unfortunately, the welfare of the public is always so much more important to the powers that be than the welfare of the sex workers. I wish they would wake up and realise that by assisting the industry, public health will benefit.

Joe Zop
07-13-02, 22:05
I knew that was Aussie pride (and pride in one's work) I heard crackling in the background! And it's loud, too, and irresistable to tweak. ;)

I agree with you wholeheartedly about the similarity of "gay/druggie" and "hooker" categorizations. Again, it's a way of making it something that happens to others and not you, and it looks at the victims as opposed to the diseases. Safe practice is safe practice, no matter who's doing the practicing.

And I do feel compelled to just briefly comment on your statement "It has nothing much to do with the number of men a hooker sleeps with, and everything to do with safe sex practices." Well, really, it's both. Condoms break, precautions fail, and being in a situation of multiple partners still means a greater general risk. But your point is well taken about overall safety and the tendency of guys to be less careful with "good girls." Personally, I'll find little comfort knowing that the person who ends up being the death of me was an amatuer.

So, is there a civil service exam to get hired in your job? Interesting pictures swirl in my head regarding the questions and necessary demonstrations of expertise involved :)

Rubber Nursey
07-14-02, 04:02
heh heh i'm a stubborn woman...i can't help it, sorry *grin*

i know it's totally off topic, but i thought i would answer your question re: the sex worker agencies in oz (solely out of pride again of course! lol)

they are based on a "peer education" model, as are most of the drug agencies, hiv support, etc. everything is done with complete confidentiality at the interview...to the extent that i actually did 2 cvs, one with my "regular" qualifications on it (i have studied a few different things) and one with my industry experience on it. the regular cv is held on file with my other employment details, and the industry one is never seen again.

there have been lots of studies recently into the benefits of peer education, especially in the case of the sex industry. ex or current workers can go places that regular health workers just cannot access. also, sex workers tend to see anyone that is not "one of them" as either a prospective rescuer (which they do not want) or a spy. you can see their faces when you first meet them...they ask you a hesitant question on how to do something and when you start with "well, when i was working..." they instantly change demeanor. that simple statement not only puts us on equal footing, but it validates what they do and ultimately who they are.

the other advantage of peer education, is that there is hardly anyone who is as well practiced in the art of condom use as a hooker is! our health authorities (who actually fund us) realise this...oz sex workers' safe sex practices were referred to as "exemplary" in a recent report on hiv. who better to teach sex education?? ;) also, we are a lot more broadminded as far as discussing actual sex acts, which makes communication much easier.

just a little note on hookers being more likely to catch something on the basis of increased exposure...
there's a couple of extra things to consider. one is that the condom breakage rate of (health educated) sex workers is extremely small. they know to use heaps of lubricant which many regular girls don't do; they use different sized condoms to fit different penises, which a lot of regular girls don't even know about, and they also usually will not use a condom provided by the man; they are more aware of tongue rings, fingernails, etc when handling a condom; and most importantly, they do a dc before even starting, while many regular women wouldn't even know what to look for.

the difference with sex workers is fear. they treat every client with suspicion, and therefore take every precaution possible. on the other hand, when most regular women meet someone they are attracted to, they are likely to throw caution to the wind, or be afraid of "offending" their partner with asking questions or looking to closely at his dangly bits! (there is also often the issue of alcohol to increase risks further).

yes, i know this doesn't account for every sex worker, but there are a few other factors to consider rather than just basing it on repeated exposure. and (i hate doing this, it sounds terrible! lol) i worked five days a week, seeing an average of 5 clients a day for (taking into account time off) around 4 years. that's a hell of a lot of exposure. however, and this is the absolute truth, i never caught anything from ony one of them. as i noted in a previous post, the only time i came horribly close to catching something, was a few years before when i was married. because i trusted him...and i certainly never trusted my clients. :)

Shakiraa
07-14-02, 10:09
hey guys....can anyone tell me wat's the risk of getting a BBBJ from porstitutes???......can i get AIDS from that???......plz reply...forgive me for my ignorance....

Seydlitz
07-14-02, 10:53
shakiraa:

we just discussed this very issue in this forum. I would suggest you read the last two or three pages, and you will have a better understanding of the issue.

07-30-02, 23:11
shakiraa
your chances of getting AIDS from an uncovered blowjob are very very low,,,,nearly 0......but you can get other nasty little sexually transmitted deseases from that blowjob
. Mostly AIDS is transmitted sexually through anal sex. '''Simply put, if you allow a man with AIDS to fuck you in your ass, you are at high risk. Other than that its a difficult virus for a male to get sexually unless he has open sores on his penis. It can be transmitted other ways, but the odds of getting AIDS through any sexual act other than anal are small. In the United States it is mostly transmitted through anal sex or if you share needles to take drugs. In Africa AIDS is much more easily spread because of untreated venereal diseases, cultural practices of genital piercings, the common practice of having anal sex with women to avoid pregnancy and other social issues that are not common in the United States. Some people also sugest that men who are not circumcised may run a higher risk if their hygene is poor(as is common in third world countries), but thats not been proven.

Macauman
08-01-02, 00:04
Brett,
Thank you for adding a voice of sanity to the continuing debate over the risks of heterosexually transmitted AIDS. I agree with everything you have written, and I compliment you on the sucinct (sic?) and informative manner in which you have described the actual risks. I have a friend who is a doctor here in Houston - the 4th largest city in the US, with a very large gay, and consequently, HIV-infected population. He has routinely tested patients for HIV infection for the last 15 years, and says that to this day, he has never been wrong when he has predicted a negative result. Not once. If you are not doing receptive anal, and/or sharing needles, your risk of contracting HIV, while existent, is VERY small, particularly in the US. Check out Michael Fumento's "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS" for more details.

John Dough
09-13-02, 01:19
http://www.cures4aids.com/

ExpatCat
10-06-02, 05:15
Just to muddy the waters a little. I came across an article a few years ago disputing the 'cast iron' connection between HIV and AIDS. Unfortunately I chucked the magazine. Since then I've followed the debate, particularly noting dissenters such as Tabo MBeki (South Africa) and the journalist Bernard Trink (Bangkok Post) who are also unconvinced as to the direct link. If you would care for a more intellectual study on the case. Please look at the following link http://www.nexusmagazine.com/ and scroll down to the story "DOES HIV CAUSE AIDS? Pt.1, Pt.2, Pt.3
- by Valendar F. Turner and Andrew McIntyre". It makes interesting reading.

Joe Zop
10-06-02, 17:11
I like and admire Trink for lots of things, and he's always an interesting read, but this is hardly an area where he has any authority.

GaijinTony
10-13-02, 18:23
Originally posted by Seydlitz
Dickhead,

as you say, I am not an American, but I know what you have to put up with.

My own experience is that many american women are shallow, materialistic and somewhat paranoid about women rights etc.

All this makes them very unattractive as companions, although as a European, I have found that I am given a certain "margin" compared to American men. Many American women are willing to accept being told a number of things by a European man, that would make them jump at the throat of the American man who would be foolish enough to say them.

In a way, Europeans are exotic, the more so when they act in a way that contrasts with the US behavior. American women are outraged, but somewhat fascinated.

Still I do not remember ever having had sex with an American woman, because I do find them unattractive.

You got that nailed, Seydlitz. Thanks to endless indoctrination by militant educators and feministst, American women are convinced that American men are responsible for the ills of the world. God forbid you be white or towards the conservative end of the spectrum - in that case, you're hosed. I gave up dealing with the games played by American-born women years ago, and will never go back...

Luvgirls
11-20-02, 10:51
I was an Aids Hospice worker for several years. The only hetrosexual Clients I had was one Hemophiiac (Bleeder) A prostitute and a Male wh caught aids from a blood transfusion> This does not discount that aids is not present among Hetrosexuals.
If you are out paying for sex take into consideration were your sex worker was before you came across her. You do not know whether or not she is an IV drug user. Most Curb walkers are getting smart and putting thier needles in places where their tracks won't show. ie between the toes, some Ive heard use thier clit. You do not kow the health habits of their partner before you. For all you know the previous partner was a flaming homosexual who decided to have a one night stand with a female sex worker.
Most Curb workers to begin with have bad health habits. They have fail in the higher class places and they had to resort to street walking. Since they do not eat right, the do not sleep right. They smoke, and 9 out of ten time they are hooked some sort of street drug they have a poor immunity any way so it does not take much for them to become HIV positive.
Thats why I think its suicidal to have sex with a SW with out the use of a condom. The Agency I worked for told me that even with a condom you are playing Russian roulet every time you pick up a street worker.
Heres the even more scary part. The HIV positive part may not even show positive for year. one minute your healthy the next minute you fall with an un explained illness. So as a Fellow *****monger I urge you never to have sex with out the Condom. Bear backing can only mean instant dealth.
One other thing: People with aids get a disease called thrush mouth.(Bleeding gums) You may have a small cut on your penis not detected from a naked eye. This is a big invitation for HIV. So condoms should always be used when getting a BJ

ManonsanBoy
11-20-02, 22:05
HIV causes AIDs, eventually, get it. Sure? No buts and no ifs. How long it takes depends on how healthy you are, what medications you take (if any) and a few other factors.

The calculated risk per vaginal intercourse is about 1:300-500. The risk from oral sex is lower.

HIV infection rate in Thailand is falling because the government had an enlightened attitude towards prevention (contrast Burma,India and until recently China).

BBJ-well, you make the decision but sex without condom, it is about the same of the risk of death per year of the average age of people on this board.

Luvgirls
11-23-02, 17:06
You can thiank the Islam for the spread of aids in Africa. Because Adultry/ and un married Premiscuity is a lawful sin punishable by stoning most woman take it in the ass so that their Hyman stays in tack

Rubber Nursey
11-24-02, 04:25
What about the Catholics, who ban their "flock" from using condoms?

I would think the high incidence of HIV in Africa has very little to do with religion, and is very much to do with a lack of education. Their Government refuses to inform the people of the risks, and a number of high ranking officials have even denied that AIDS exists! The only way to slow the spread of AIDS in Africa (and other severely affected countries) is with nationwide sexual health education.

Even if having anal sex for religious reasons WAS responsible for the high rate of infection, anal sex can be just as safe as vaginal sex when done with a condom. The people of Africa simply don't know how to protect themselves. And their Government is to blame for that...not their faith.

Organicgrowth
11-24-02, 22:34
Well balanced, and IMHO correct RN.

Education is the key, nothing else. In many cases, not just Africa, it is this basic sexual education that is lacking. Very slowly (too slowly unfortunately) a number of third world countries are starting condom awareness campaigns, making them freely available to sex workers.... The pressure placed on SW’s to work bare-backed (and indeed ignorance on the part of the mongers…) need to be tackled at the same time. Active public awareness is a good start: better still and at the same time is a consistent campaign of education starting with school kids.

Religion, I feel does have some blame. However Luvgirls is wrong to blame Islam. The general ideology of “no sex outside marriage” is accepted by virtually all religions. As I understand it, Islamists (Muslims) are allowed to use condoms, but not have pre-marital. Catholics seem to be more strict in so far as condoms are concerned as well as pre-marital sex.

Education is the key: education for the kids, so the future is safe; education for the politicians so they can see the truth…. Oh yes, education for the powerful pharmaceutical companies so they learn a little more compassion in business and provide cheaper HIV drugs…

Regards,

Havanaman

Skinless
11-25-02, 00:20
African areas which follow the teachings of the Prophet tend to have much LOWER rates than areas where Christians or animists predominate. The Muslim faith, like the Jewish faith, also stresses hygiene (washing five times a day and praying to Mecca). Muslim men, like Jews, also tend to be "skiness", a fact some attribute for deflating their HIV rates. Also, in Africa, other STIs and skin infections are rampant and genital piercing is common. Multi partnering does not help either. Its pandemic poverty is also a factor. Interestingly, HIV and STI rates (syphilis in particular) are out of control in SE Asia. Bangladesh (Muslim) and Philippines (Catholic) seem to have very low HIV rates. In sub Sahara, "non Muslim" Africa, HIV is now simply a way of life. Blaiming it on religions which are no so widespread there does not help. Poverty and corruption are more blameworthy than a lack of education (a Western style of thinking about Africa perhaps?). The drug cocktails Big Pharam gave to Africa to help stem HIV recently went on sale - in Germany and Switzerland.

The E
11-25-02, 02:01
Originally posted by Havanaman
Well balanced, and IMHO correct RN.

Education is the key, nothing else. In many cases, not just Africa, it is this basic sexual education that is lacking. Very slowly (too slowly unfortunately) a number of third world countries are starting condom awareness campaigns, making them freely available to sex workers.... The pressure placed on SW’s to work bare-backed (and indeed ignorance on the part of the mongers…) need to be tackled at the same time. Active public awareness is a good start: better still and at the same time is a consistent campaign of education starting with school kids.




Sorry dude, but the reason why third world countries have such a high prevelance is not becasue of education or the lack thereof, but lack of finance. When I was in Mexico "a third world country" a pack of three condoms was about $3 US dollars. I know that this doesn't sound like much, but when you take into account that they make about $10 a day, that's a hell of a lot of money. Condoms are a luxury that many people in third world countries can't afford. And you can't tell them to not have sex, that's basically impossible.

Rubber Nursey
11-25-02, 08:04
The E,

You're absolutely right. Cost and/or accessability is a HUGE factor. The Government is again guilty when it comes to this...along with the much-needed sexual health education, should come subsidised (or free) safe sex equipment. I have no idea of actual costs, but I would think that it would cost less to supply free condoms to 10 million people, than it would cost to administer HIV treatment to 10 million people.

There's no point teaching someone to use a condom if they're never going to be able to afford to buy one, and there's no point handing someone a condom and not teaching them what it's for.

Organicgrowth
11-26-02, 18:49
The E, RN, skinless,

There is no definitive answer to this thread; it is however realistic to say that the answer is a combination of the knowledge of the subject as well as the availability of contraception. Suffice to say that without education, especially targeted towards the young, the whole concept of disease and contraception is pointless (both for the present and future). Education on the existence, free availability and indeed correct usage of condoms is thus paramount.

The contraception campaigns I referred to, which were first pioneered by WHO & UNESCO, then later expanded by international private charities (as well as “in house” country specific charities), all have FREE condom distribution: see http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organizations/healthnet/contra/topic10.html

Free condoms are available at every WHO & UNESCO sponsored health clinic (general medicine, as well as G.U.M), in every country they operate in throughout the world. Free condoms are also available throughout Europe from health centres as part of the Pan-European Health Initiative started in 1999. The free condoms are off course the basic “heavy duty” type and offer non of the luxury of the ultra-thin / flavoured / multi-coloured varieties.

Comparing Mexico (a “third world country”) (?) to lets say Uganda (allegedly also a “third world country”) is I feel unfair. The notion of a “fourth / fifth” world needs to be considered for the African nations as well as some of the Asian countries.

A 2002 survey has shown that 44% of pregnant women (urban) in Botswana are HIV+ (Source -UNAIDS). The age range of these women was 14 – 20 years. These women had access to free condoms, and some education. The equivalent figures for rural women (not having such free access to either education or condoms) must be devastatingly frightening.

In conclusion the issue of education isn’t one of pure academia, but one of basic knowledge: what condoms are, what they do, how to use them, where to get them from (free and otherwise), and above all IMHO the knowledge that its “OK” to use them….

Regards,

Havanaman

Luvgirls
12-04-02, 10:56
Like I have been telling you earliar, It does not matter if they come from a third world country or they come from wall street, The profession of prostitution is considered a high risk group. You don't know whether they bare backed with their previous john or not. You do not know what their life style is like before you meet them. or whether they use IV drugs.
Unlike most illness AIDS has no face. I knew a male dentist in San Diego who had aids. He had the money to get properly treated every time he got sick from Aids. So a majority of the time he looked healthy. It was when he was healthy that he cruised the streets and picked up SW's. This applies to a SW. Most of them are not going to be out working when they are sick from Aids. You can never know whether your SW is HIV positive or not. And if she is you can better understand that there is no way they are going to tell you.
I have been an AIDS hospice worker for years. I have seen friends die of the disease. Straight or Gay, Aids does not discreminate. My last patient was a Male who contacted Aids from his wife. She got Aids from tainted blood that she recieved when she got in an Auto moble accident and she had a blood transfusion. Niether couple participated in High Risk behavior. For those who think Aids is an Anal disease you better think twice.
I can finish this by stating that if you choose to go the route of Having sex with a SW you are a fool if you insist on bare backing it.

Rubber Nursey
12-04-02, 12:07
Luvgirls,

Yes, the profession of prostitution is considered a high risk group. WE are at high risk of infection. People like the dentist you mentioned make me sick...the entire community shouts sex workers down as the "vectors of disease" and blames hookers for the transmission of HIV among hetrosexual couples. But does anyone even stop to think how WE may have caught it?? Does anyone give a damn that there are people like that dentist wandering the streets...knowingly putting each and every girl he sleeps with at risk???

By the way, you said: "You don't know whether they bare backed with their previous john or not. You do not know what their life style is like before you meet them. or whether they use IV drugs". If you meet a woman who is NOT a sex worker, can you be sure that she used a condom with her last partner? Can you be sure she hasn't used drugs? Do you think she is going to tell you if she is HIV positive, before you have sex with her? More importantly...do you take her word for it???

I'm not arguing with you about the risks...in fact, I wholeheartedly agree with the last sentence of your post...it's just that I fear sometimes that all this talk about "AIDS infected street workers" may be lulling people into a false sense of security when they are NOT with a sex worker. Prostitute = huge AIDS risk; nice girl = safe. People should be taking these precautions with ANYONE they sleep with...not just hookers.

And on the other hand, it is also unfair to women (and men) like me, who take extremely good care of their health and would never consider putting a client at risk. My best friend has NEVER had an STI test...and after all these years sleeping around, without condoms, she is now too scared to!! Who's safer then? Me...the hooker who's slept with thousands and has regular testing, or her...the "good girl" who could possibly have every disease under the sun. In my country, it's safer to sleep with a hooker than it is to pick up a girl from the pub (that's a Health Dept fact, too!)

Again, I know I'm just being pedantic, but I think people need to start talking about HIV in general terms. The fact is, we don't know ANYONE'S sexual history or health status. Like you said...AIDS doesn't discriminate. We shouldn't be bare-backing with anyone, until we know for sure that they are disease free...hooker or not.

Luvgirls
12-04-02, 15:14
RN,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT. i LIKE THE WAY YOU POINTED OUT sw AND NICE GIRL. yOUR RIGHT ESPECIALLY IN nEVADA THE GIRLS ARE CHECKED OUT ONCE A WEEK BY A DOCTOR, AND THE RUBBER JACKET IS A MUST.
As a single dating male I can tell you some scare stories of some of the women I have dated. Some of which wanted sex within hours on the date and they were the aggresser and Not I. Some even pointed out that I did not need a rain jacket because they were safe. This even scared me more. If they wanted Sex within hour on the date how many unsafe partners did they have prior to Me?
This is why I like your view on precausion. In the medical field we are trained that everyone might be contagious so play it safe use protection.(Rubber gloves).
I mentioned the Dentist in my last post because I wanted to point out that not all people With AIDS looks sick. In fact some are carriers for years before the start geting some of the Aids related illnesses. This is why it not safe to ever go bare back with some one you do not know
It is also suggested that even if you find a steady partner that you both test regularly for the first two years before you even consider bare backing. Because just because you recieve one negitive test, doe'snt mean that you are negitive. It might mean that the virus has not increbated yet to test positive. Some of the people I know suggest that you test in two different places at the same time and you get both results. You do this in a sieries of three test a year for the next two years.
Well got to go....... Well guys play it safe. Fifteen minutes of pleasure can lead to a life long torture if you don't play it safe. Remember There is nothing more foolish the a presistant bare back john

PeeWee
12-14-02, 23:06
luvgirls,,,,,,,,,,
i have also experienced this from women i think it's mostly a mind game to see if the guy rattles when you shake him some get off mentally on this there are allot of aggressive women out there now but still if you don't know her well it's best to play it safe until you can be sure ,, i have been dating one regular for a year now and i finally got her to ware the female condom but for oral we do bare back and clean right afterwards and i never had any std problems with any girl and i have been around for awhile.

and now that i am on this subject what about porn stars and swingers this group never seems to have safe sex and (wow) there doing anal that's a little heavy for me:)

Loser
04-15-03, 17:00
There is no short cut, however hard we may debate, we have to go with condom in any situation in any country, that is it, even if a single guy misses it, it may effect hundred others, and if a single guy use it, it helps hundred others. Its as simple as that, begining of the 19th century, we had maleria, cholera, pnemonia as the killer disease, now we have AIDS, hepatasis, and it wil go on an on. Now recently we have SARS, when it all going to end. Never, i think, all this debate of spreading aids by toucing kissing anal french is useless, we have to sacrifice a bit of pleasure to get going, that is all, the cuer may be near, considering the past diseases, and the cures, but till then we have to sacrifice a bit.

thx

Loser, I tried to send you an email, but you have set your email address to reject email from the WSG. Please revise this as soon as possible if you have any desire to be changed to Senor Member status.

Jackson

Loser
04-16-03, 10:59
Hello Jackson,

I have not blocked the incoming WSG messages from you, it was an auto feature of my mail account to block adult mails, I have deactivated it, Sorry for the inconvenience caused. Hopefully it should work now. or you may please mail me at lavista4u@yahoo.com

Thanking you,

Cool

Sun Devil
10-18-03, 00:25
Here is a newspaper article about the use of drug cocktails to prolong those suffereing from AIDS.



AIDS Drugs Shown to Slash Death Rates


Patricia Reaney

LONDON (Reuters) - Cocktails of AIDS medicines have slashed death rates by more than 80 percent and now most patients taking the drugs can expect to survive more than a decade and perhaps much longer, scientists said on Friday.

The introduction of life-saving drug combinations known as Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) in 1997 means AIDS is no longer an automatic death sentence.

Death rates were halved shortly after the drug cocktails became available and declined by over 80 percent by 2001.

"Nine out of 10 people could expect to live for 10 years regardless of the age at which they became infected. We haven't reached the medium yet so it could be 17 or 20 years -- we can't really say at the moment," said Dr. Kholoud Porter, of Britain's Medical Research Council (MRC).

Before HAART, only about half of people infected would have expected to be alive 10 years later and even fewer if they were more than 40 years old when they were infected.

Ageism no longer seems to be an issue because older people on HAART do not have a reduced life expectancy. But the research, reported in The Lancet medical journal, shows that people who caught the virus by injecting drugs are four times more likely to die of AIDS than men infected through sexual contact.

Porter said they are less likely to take the sometimes complicated combinations of anti-AIDS drugs properly. Intravenous drug users are also more likely to have co-infections with other viruses, particularly hepatitis C.

"Before, age mattered, now it doesn't. Before, exposure category or risk group didn't matter and now it does," Porter told Reuters.

GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR

While HAART has extended the lives of AIDS patients in countries where people can afford to pay, the treatment is still scarce in poor nations, despite intense pressure for pharmaceutical companies to cut prices.

The World Health Organization welcomed the study, saying it gives added backing to its push to deliver AIDS drugs to three million people in the developing world by the end of 2005.

"Treatment with antiretrovirals works for everyone -- rich or poor. Now the poor urgently need access to these drugs," said Dr Charlie Gilks, of the WHO.

Last month, drug companies said they had doubled the supply of AIDS medicine to Africa. More than 76,300 Africans were receiving cut-price drugs from six pharmaceutical firms at the end of June 2003, compared to 35,500 in March 2002.


But UNAIDS, the United Nations group spearheading the global battle against the epidemic, estimates that 4.1 million Africans desperately need the treatment. Thirty million of the 42 million people worldwide infected with the AIDS virus live in sub-Saharan Africa.

Porter's findings were based on an analysis of 22 different studies across Europe, Australia and Canada, where the drugs are readily available.

HAART refers to a combination of three or more medicines from at least two classes of anti-AIDS drugs. The treatments attack the AIDS virus in different phases of its life cycle.

"We hope we go on seeing survival improvements and that people infected with HIV will end up having the same survival expectations as people who are (HIV) negative," Porter added.

GettingTang
10-18-03, 00:56
I a huge conusor of BBBJ. Or I should say I was. I am luckily still HIV negative and plan to stay that way. I have as of late, decided to cover up for even a BJ. I recall for years calling the CDC HIV information hotline and being told way back in the early 90's that catching HIV from receiving oral sex was basically non existent! It seems they have now changed their stance. Now they say the risk is significant, but less then other activities! It seems to me that given their formal policies in the late 80's and early 90's giving false information might and perhaps should subject them to a suit of some kind.

I have always felt receiving a BJ is not totally safe, given basic reasoning. Ever brushed your teeth? Ever ate an apple? And your dealing with SW who have bad oral hygiene. Their gums are probably always bleeding! I assure you there is substantial real risk for getting BBBJ. I do it no longer, no matter how good she looks.

And for those of you who think the drug cocktails are going to save your ars. Better think again. The virus is mutating, it changes, it's smarter then the scientists who try and defeat it. Also 1/3 of people taking these cocktails have bad reactions or cannot stomach the strict drug regiments. In time these medications will be rendered useless. I almost assure you of it.

Many strains of new infected HIV patients have drug resistant strains, indicating the virus has already went full circle and is coming back with a vengeance. The average life expectancy of someone who catches the virus today may have jumped, but for how long is still unknown. From what I have read, I would venture a guess of maybe 15-20 years at best. Better then the old 10 year calculations in the past, however you must figure 3-4 of those 15-20 years will be of low quality and be lined with many illnesses. Not fun in my book! Best keep it covered boys, all they way for every activity!

GETTINGTANG~!

Lexton
11-03-03, 23:52
As a person who enjoys the BBBJTC, I follow the news on it. Here is an article that discusses just one of the reasons that women do not get AIDS from the BBBJTC. This reason has been newly discovered, apparently.

As an aside, I keep mint Listerine in the room and suggest to the women that they rinse with it immediately, just to make them feel better. I hope they will ask for it from other men or begin to carry it themselves. Listerine has been found to kill both the AIDS virus and the HERPES virus, which actually worries me more.

I also keep 96% alcohol in a spray bottle and clean with it immediately after. No, it doesn't burn the penis. It DOES, however, hurt like hell on the scrotum for about 3 minutes, so you have to be careful there.


Researchers Discover Oral Defenses Against AIDS
Thu Oct 30, 7:00 PM ET

Source: Case Western Reserve University School of Dentistry
by: Susan Griffith


Researchers at Case Western Reserve University and the Cleveland Clinic have discovered a way that the mouth may prevent the contraction of HIV (news - web sites).

The findings, which are reported in the November 7, 2003, issue of the international journal "AIDS (news - web sites)," hold potential for discovering new ways of preventing AIDS and other infections in the body, according to the researchers.

With the lining of the mouth constantly under attack by a barrage of bacteria that commensally lives and grows in the mouth, the lining of the oral cavity has put up an innate and formidable defense line of peptides called human beta defensins 2 and 3 (hBD2 and hBD3) that may prevent humans from getting sick and may promote rapid healing from food abrasions or accidental bites to the tongue and mouth.

"It is the unique properties of the good bugs found in the mouth that are inducing the expression of hBD2 and 3," said Aaron Weinberg, director of research at the Case School of Dentistry.

The study, entitled "Human Epithelial Beta Defensins 2 and 3 Inhibit HIV-1 Replication," was the result of a 12-member research team, including Michael Lederman, an internationally known AIDS researcher from the Case School of Medicine and University Hospitals of Cleveland, and Miguel E. Quinones-Mateu, the first author on the paper and a virologist from the Lerner Research Center at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. Their recent discovery, which went on the fast track for publication in "AIDS" is the result of a National Institute of Health-funded study on oral defenses against AIDS, of which Weinberg is the principal investigator.

The discovery suggests that the small peptides produced by cells lining the oral cavity bind to the viral particles directly and can even regulate important receptors the virus uses to infect human cells.

Since the 1990s, Weinberg, a dentist and microbiologist at the Case School of Dentistry, has been studying the natural defenses found in the mouth and how they react to bacteria and viruses.

These latest findings were driven by Weinberg's curiosity about the knowledge that HIV, which leads to AIDS, is rarely contracted through the mouth.

While human beta defensins, particularly hBD-1, are found throughout the body's skin and epithelial cells to ward off general infections, it was hBD2 and hBD3 in the normal lining of the mouth that responded to HIV.

Weinberg said that hBD2 increased by almost 80 fold in the presence of HIV introduced to a monolayer of human oral epithelial cells grown in the lab and maintained their response rate for

72 hours-long after the time the virus could live in the conditions in the mouth.

Information gained from the study, according to Weinberg, has the potential to develop new medical interventions using natural products, such as those being isolated from the "good oral bugs" that induce hBD2 and 3, in other sites of the body that are more susceptible to HIV infection. These products also have the potential as a coating on catheters, intubations and implants to prevent secondary infections within the body, which result in annual health care costs of over $15 billion.


Copyright © 2003 Acurian Inc. All Rights Reserved

Dash
11-16-03, 18:18
Dear Sirs:
re: Blow jobs and AIDS risk.

The risk to the man recieving a blow job is probably non-existent. When I had an HIV test to satisfy an annoying girlfriend last April, the educator went into detail about how saliva is not known to contain the virus. This is why they don't say you can't make out or kiss someone.

In a nutshell, blood and semen contain the virus. If what you do doesn't get the girl's blood or semen (oh, she doesn't have that!) into your body, you are safe.

Accordingly, if you come outside on a girl, she has protected herself from the virus. It hasn't the capability of penetrating the skin of her belly, or ass as the case may be :)

The politics of AIDS support the misconception that is transmissable both male to female and female to male, which is in contadiction to the facts.

Incidentally, I kept the paper saying I was "negative" and it helps to have around, the girl then may be more likely to not be so afraid of having someone come in her mouth.

Relax and have the blowjob. I keep some newman's own lemonade and viva paper towels around. The hard part is some hos are horny and want to be fucked instead!

Regards,
Dash

Rob Brown
11-17-03, 01:48
Data taken from un.org. For the conscious traveler may be worth considering. You can be sure that the actual infection rate is much higher in the cities & resorts where the action is.

2001 HIV Prevalence rate aged 15-49, per cent (UNAIDS Estimate)

Algeria 0.1
Angola 5.5
Argentina 0.7
Armenia 0.1
Australia 0.1
Austria 0.2
Azerbaijan 0.11
Bahamas 3.5
Bahrain 0.3
Bangladesh 0.11
Barbados 1.2
Belarus 0.3
Belgium 0.2
Belize 2.0
Benin 3.6
Bhutan 0.11
Bolivia 0.1
Bosnia and Herzegovina 0.11
Botswana 38.8
Brazil 0.7
Bulgaria 0.11
Burkina Faso 6.5
Burundi 8.3
Cambodia 2.7
Cameroon 11.8
Canada 0.3
Central African Republic 12.9
Chad 3.6
Chile 0.3
China 0.1
China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 0.1
Colombia 0.4
Congo 7.2
Costa Rica 0.6
Cote d'Ivoire 9.7
Croatia 0.11
Cuba 0.11
Cyprus 0.3
Czech Republic 0.11
Democratic Republic of the Congo 4.9
Denmark 0.1
Dominican Republic 2.5
Ecuador 0.3
Egypt 0.11
El Salvador 0.6
Equatorial Guinea 3.4
Eritrea 2.8
Estonia 1.0
Ethiopia 6.4
Fiji 0.1
Finland 0.11
France 0.3
Gambia 1.6
Georgia 0.11
Germany 0.1
Ghana 3.0
Greece 0.2
Guatemala 1.0
Guinea-Bissau 2.8
Guyana 2.7
Haiti 6.1
Honduras 1.6
Hungary 0.1
Iceland 0.1
India 0.8
Indonesia 0.1
Iran (Islamic Republic of) 0.11
Iraq 0.11
Ireland 0.1
Israel 0.1
Italy 0.4
Jamaica 1.2
Japan 0.11
Jordan 0.11
Kazakhstan 0.1
Kenya 15.0
Korea, Republic of 0.11
Kyrgyzstan 0.11
Lao People's Democratic Republic 0.11
Latvia 0.4
Lesotho 31.0
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 0.2
Lithuania 0.1
Luxembourg 0.2
Madagascar 0.3
Malawi 15.0
Malaysia 0.3
Maldives 0.1
Mali 1.6
Malta 0.1
Mauritius 0.1
Mexico 0.3
Mongolia 0.11
Morocco 0.1
Mozambique 13.0
Namibia 22.5
Nepal 0.5
Netherlands 0.2
New Zealand 0.1
Nicaragua 0.2
Nigeria 5.8
Norway 0.1
Oman 0.1
Pakistan 0.1
Panama 1.5
Papua New Guinea 0.7
Peru 0.3
Philippines 0.11
Poland 0.1
Portugal 0.5
Republic of Moldova 0.2
Romania 0.11
Russian Federation 0.9
Rwanda 8.9
Senegal 0.5
Serbia and Montenegro 0.2
Sierra Leone 7.0
Singapore 0.2
Slovakia 0.11
Slovenia 0.11
Somalia 1.0
South Africa 20.1
Spain 0.5
Sri Lanka 0.11
Sudan 2.6
Suriname 1.2
Swaziland 33.4
Sweden 0.1
Switzerland 0.5
Tajikistan 0.11
Thailand 1.8
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 0.11
Togo 6.0
Trinidad and Tobago 2.5
Turkey 0.11
Turkmenistan 0.11
Uganda 5.0
Ukraine 1.0
United Kingdom 0.1
United Republic of Tanzania 7.8
United States 0.6
Uruguay 0.3
Uzbekistan 0.11
Venezuela 0.5
Viet Nam 0.3
Yemen 0.1
Zambia 21.5
Zimbabwe 33.7

Country John
11-18-03, 01:27
Not having protected sex is like walking through a mine field wearing snow-shoes.

Listerine is also a cure for athletes foot.

Giving the girl mouthwash after bbbj is something I AWAYS do. It is a nice thing to do for the girl who should always be shown respect.

Being wrong just once about AIDS is all it takes. We can debate until we all dissappear up our own assholes and this will NOT change the CONSEQUENCES of the risk however low it might be.

Mess with the bull, get the horns.

Be safe my brothers and sisters.

Also be nice and treat the ladies with respect.

Country John

Sharq
01-25-04, 18:50
People,

Recently a SW gave me a BBBJ and I went down on her (DATY) after which she offered me unprotected sex, (which probably implies that she has had that with other customers). Of course I did not indulge in that.

My question to you is, what are the chances of contracting an infection such as HIV thru such a person given that she did BBBJ and I indulged in DATY with her?

This question is driving me nuts, hence my question to you!

Regards,

Sharq

EDITOR's NOTE: Posting of this report was delayed pending revisions to capitalize the word "I". To avoid future delays, please use a capital "I" to refer to yourself in future reports. Thanks!

RX-7
01-25-04, 21:24
sharq, it is possible to contract HIV in that manner (bbbj, DATY) the chances are smaller then unprotected sex, but is still there... I would say contact a doctor and talk to him about your problem and arange for an STD/HIV test.

RX-7
01-25-04, 21:38
hate to break it to you Dash, but you CAN get AIDS from a BJ and saliva DOES contain the AIDS virus. mind you the amount of the virus in Saliva is SO minute that would have to drink about 2 litres of it to have a fiar risk of infection (put it in other terms for you... you'd have to continually french kiss for about 11 hours for that much of an exchange)

now this isn't cause the virus is "in the salvia", it's cause of minute cuts or abrashions (sp?) in the gums and cheeks that pass blood into the saliva.

now the same hold true for BJs... think of it this way you are poking your dick into her mouth... what about her teeth? all that has to happen is for the most minute scratch of the shin (you may not even notice it!) and a similiar one in her mouth! and then some unlucky contact between the two sores and you're a dead man walking.

Also Vaginal fluid contains the virus as well and in large amounts (roughly the same concentration as semen) that is what makes DATY so dangerous.... once again a cut in the mouth (from her hairs/stubble) and enough fluid and again your a dead man walking.

word of advice, when you want to play, wear the gear.

Organicgrowth
01-29-04, 00:19
Rob Brown:

Fascinating data. Thank you for presenting it.

I followed the UN.ORG pages and it makes for very interesting research. After my reading, I’m keeping a number of the African countries (e.g. Zimbabwe) purely as eye-candy destinations: looking but not touching…

Having said that, its all a matter of luck really. As said by many a person: it just takes one… the wrong one…

A lesson for everyone: be safe. A little self-respect and respect for the lady goes to help us all: main point ~ keeping it covered!

Regards, Havanaman

Capt Fred
01-29-04, 20:29
You may all want to read about AIDS on these web sites:

www.iewb.org

www.iewb.org/health.htm

Please pay close attention to the topics under the "Health" section.

"AIDS is a very serious disease -- for homosexuals, drug users, and receptive partners in anal sex from an AIDS-infected partner".

"HIV is extremely difficult to transmit sexually, particularly from a female to a male."

"The transfer of AIDS from a woman to a man is very rare since the penis would have to be either infected with an open sore or tissue torn by extreme roughness in intercourse." Not just by scratches from a Ladies teeth on your penis!

"Because HIV is so difficult to transmit heterosexually, HIV infections that are caused by heterosexual contact usually arise from a regular, long term sexual relationship with an IV drug user."

Now, I am not saying go around and fuck everything and anything without protection! No, I am not! You have to be cautious, and be careful.

-> * Even if your sex partner is STD free and HIV free, you should at least get tested once every six months for STD and HIV. All insurance companies in USA pay for it. At the first sign of HIV virus, the virus can be fought and treated.

There was a reported case were a female police officer was infected when she was helping a battered gay (HIV positive)victim. She had minute cuts on her hand, and while trying to take the victim to the hospital, her hands were soaked in his blood. Unfortunately, she wasn't wearing gloves. Due to the circumstances, the hospital tested her for HIV, and she was tested positive for HIV. She was immediately treated and after 3 months of treatment, she was free from the virus!

BTW, the best way to get tested for HIV is a “DNA - AIDS Testing” that can show if you have been infected within few days of your contact. If you really want to have this test, your doctor can help you to get it and have the insurance company cover the cost.

RX-7
01-29-04, 21:34
yes, cause a website used, maintained, and posted by working girls will be FULL of good info and the truth....

want REAL info? Goto www.CDC.gov or www.hc-sc.gc.ca both or any other OFFICAL MEDICAL webpage! If you continue to goto "amatuer" health sites for your info and believe what they tell you..... I got some prime lunar property to sell you at a good price!

RX-7
01-29-04, 21:56
and for the record fred.....

hiv virus (the virus that causes aids) is found in infectous levels in the following bodily fluids...

blood
semen
vaginal fluid
breast milk.


the virus is also found, but at extremely low levels, almost non infectious levels , in:

saliva
tears
mucus (i.e: snot)

their is no cure to hiv/aids once you have it, you have it for life. and it will kill you. drugs and drug cocktails can help slow down the speed at which the virus kills you but it will still kill you all the same.

as for your female cop example.... 2 things could have happened... 1: she tested as a false positive and then underwent several months of needless drug therepy for nothing more then piece of mind. 2: the drug cocktails she was on reduced the amount of hiv in her system to a non-detectable level, thus she tested as negative the second time.

for #1, this happens fairly often if you miss the incubation period. all hospitals recommend 6 tests for hiv. one at the moment (or asap) of believed infection, an other test 3 weeks later, then 3 months after the infection , then 6 months after infection, then a year after infection, then every 6 months after that. the tests only become truly accurate around the one year mark cause that is the amount of time that the virus takes to build up in the quantities that can be tested for best results.


as for #2, the only treatment for hiv is mass quantities of drugs taken daily for the rest of your life! there is no cure, no wonder drug, you are simply a dead man walking till some other aids related disease kills you. true that with properly maintained drug levels you can live a relatively normal life for many years with out ill (disease related) effects, you are still dying, and you can still pass that hiv/aids onto anyone else that you have sex with.

don't kid yourself, or others..... a latex condom is the only truely safe way to monger. trying to argue differently is simply stupidity and utter nonsense!

Capt Fred
01-29-04, 22:07
JUST MY INPUT!

And, not kidding myself! I AM NOT PROMOTING UN-PROTECTED SEX HERE!

Another amazing thing you may want to think about: Did any woman ever come forward claiming that she had been infected with HIV, after having sex with Magic Johnson? Zero! Can you imagine the size of that law suit? According to his stories, he used to have so much sex, that his penis bled from scars! Oh please don't tell me he paid them off to keep them quite!

No wars, just some input. BTW, you may want to call CDC & NIH and request some of their updated reports by mail, not what is printed on web sites! CDC and NIH reports all indicate a drop in the statistics, and it is not just becasue of use of condoms!

Travis Bickle 2
01-30-04, 00:07
Actually I've heard what Capt. Fred says is true. If for example you've been stuck with an HIV infected needle and start treatment immediately (within 12-24 hours) often you can eliminate the virus before it gets established. But once it gets established there is no way to get rid of it. But its kind of a one time deal; if you're regularly having unprotected sex, it's not like you can receive the treatment several times a month.

And HIV is not automatically a death sentence anymore. Take Magic Johnson, he is still symptom free after fourteen years and with any luck may survive long enough to see an effective treatment. We're getting closer all the time.

That being said, people do die from AIDS everyday, and the treatment is often horrendous. Taking 20 or 30 pills a day, setting your alarm clock to go off every two hours all night long to take more pills; severe diarhrea and flu-like side effects from the pills; fatigue, etc. So best to be careful, though I think RX-7 you are overstating the risk of infection from BBBJ. For one the the skin on the penis is fairly thick and not prone to tearing. Believe me if a SW tooth makes a break in your skin you'll know it. I mean right now.

Herpes and sypihlis sores make transmission possible. I do definately use a condom for FS.

Civ2K

RX-7
01-30-04, 12:25
I am not saying that if you get a bbbj that you are 100% gonna get infected... heck I am not even saying there is a 50%, or a 15% chance for that matter.... What I am trying to simply say is that you have a FAR greater chance of getting infected by a bbbj then a CBJ.

As for the cuts in the penis... you'd be amazed, the cut doesn't have to be a deep one or even bleeding. We are talking about a virus, a singled cell organism.... how big of a cut do you think you need? Chances are you have several cuts in your groin region right now. (Scratched your balls recently?) and don't even know it.

As for the chances of getting HIV from a BBJ from an infected partner.... I would have to out the odds at MAYBE 1-3% and even that sounds a bit high to me. (not a doctor... just have a family member that a microbiologist) but that means that if you got a BBJ from 100 infected people.... you're infected too!

As for Magic Johnson... he's lucky! He's been getting great care, great doctors, was in great shape to start. But eventually he will die fromt he disease... the clock is ticking down for him. Maybe not this year, or the next, or even the next.... but eventually he will run out of time.

As for a cure? God I hope it comes soon! There are so many great people in this world who are sick and dying right now cause of this disease, It would be wonderful if we could cure them all soon. Sadly I think the first thing that will come will be a vaxination which would be great for all of us non-infected, but shitty for those that are.

Joe Zop
01-30-04, 16:31
RX-7, you're waaay high on those odds. I've read that the odds of being infected by HIV from a single needle prick from a contaminated needle are about 1 in 300 (ten times more likely to get Hep C under the same scenario, btw) The figure I've seen says that the risk to the person giving a blowjob without a condom is basically the same as the risk for someone using a condom while having anal sex with someone whose infection status is unknown -- around 0.04%. The odds while being a recipient of a blow are far lower still.

In other words, it's much safer to receive an uncovered blowjob (in terms of HIV transmission) than it is to have protected anal sex.

RX-7
01-30-04, 21:41
interesting.... could you post a link to that source? Or tell me the source? I just want to compare it to the info I have from the links I have listed below and see if I miss-read, or something.

Paddy
01-31-04, 06:33
RX7,

On the site "Go Ask Alice" which is conducted by the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons for the student body, they state that the chances of getting HIV from a BBBJ are almost "non-existent." Of course, you can get herpes and a whole array of STD's from a BBBJ. Overall, they feel that BBBJ's represents low risk behavior for the receiver.

"Go Ask Alice" is a highly respected site and is often quoted health and mental health personnel. I'd highly recommend it and I think that you would enjoy the site. I do.

Paddy

RX-7
01-31-04, 09:41
thanks Paddy.. I'll check it out.

Paddy
01-31-04, 15:11
RX7,

If you or any of the other guys are interested, the website address for "Go Ask Alice" is www.goaskalice.columbia.edu.

Just click on Sexual Health and they cover just about everything imaginable in regard to human sexual behavior. It's a fascinating site. As I read the Q&A's I'm always amazed at the weird stuff that kids are into. They also update the Q&A responses as medical knowledge evolves.

Joe Zop
02-01-04, 04:20
RX-7, the CDC did a study aboput four years ago that reported the stats I mention (can't manage to put my hands on it at the moment, naturally, but I'll go through my history links and see if I can track it down.)

RX-7
02-02-04, 08:47
JZ, if it's on the CDC site I can find it... just have to dig deep enough

Pokey
02-04-04, 09:51
rx-7 i was just on the cdc web site, and did a search under oral sex. i was surprised it said, they have documented a few cases of hiv from bbbj. i always asumed that they didn't have any cases, but knew it was possible to get hiv that way, but the chances were very very low to almost non-existent.

rx-7, i still feel this way, after reading all this information, so please let me enjoy my bbbj. its one of the few pleasures i left left in life. i been getting bbbj for years, and have never caugh anything from them. once i went to the doctor, because my penis was a little red on the top, and felt a little itchy and weird.
i went to the doctor and admitted i was with a prostitute, but only had oral sex. the doctor said, its hard to catch anything from oral sex, and the girl just sucked too hard. he gave me some antibiotics just in case, and said don't worry about it. he also only gave me a [CodeWord109] (http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord109) test that was negative.

RX-7
02-05-04, 05:38
Enjoy all you like Pokey, I am not here to try to rain on your parade. Just someone (I can;t even remember who) asked if you could catch HIV/AIDS from a BBBJ and the answer is "yes" If you find that the level of risk is acceptable to you then go for. Personally, I prefer to limit any chance as much as humanly possible.

Rayman
02-12-04, 23:18
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=457294&section=news

The agency also reported a 27 percent increase in HIV infections among heterosexuals, but added that 80 percent of the cases were infected in countries with a high prevalence of HIV.

As always totally amazed at the number of you guys doing the DATY and having sex with no protection etc etc

Chris H
02-13-04, 18:10
I just wanted to inform everyone that you can get a STD from oral, because I have gotten twice. Luckily it was just Gonnera or Clyamdia, so I was able to get it cleared up. I would suggest usiing a condom for oral and anything else, because the feeling of those STD's is not comfortable at all, and it is just not worth the trouble, IMHO.

You Got Male
02-15-04, 06:16
Does anybody know what urea plasma or plasma urea is? I have a friend in Europe who has that. I tried to look it up, but I can't find any information about it.

EDITOR's NOTE: Posting of this report was delayed pending revisions to add standard capitalization and punctuation. To avoid delays in future reports, please refrain from using the "chat room" style of writing with no caps or punctuation. Thanks!

Clandestine782
02-16-04, 15:43
AIDS. 2002 Jun 14;16(9):1296-7.

Evaluating the risk of HIV transmission through unprotected orogenital sex.

del Romero J, Marincovich B, Castilla J, Garcia S, Campo J, Hernando V, Rodriguez C.

Centro Sanitario Sandoval, Servicio Regional de Salud, Madrid, Spain.

We analysed a cohort of heterosexual HIV- serodiscordant couples with the aim of evaluating the risk of transmission ascribed to unprotected orogenital intercourse. A total of 135 seronegative individuals (110 women and 25 men), whose only risk exposure to HIV was unprotected orogenital sex with their infected partner, registered 210 person-years of follow-up. After an estimated total of over 19,000 unprotected orogenital exposures with the infected partner not a single HIV seroconversion occurred.

Clandestine782
02-17-04, 07:25
Ann Intern Med. 1998 Feb 15;128(4):306-12. Related Articles, Links

The care of persons with recent sexual exposure to HIV.

Katz MH, Gerberding JL.

San Francisco Department of Public Health, California, USA.

Until recently, patients had little motivation to seek medical care soon after sexual exposure to HIV. However, evidence that antiretroviral treatment prevents HIV infection after occupational exposure has led to the recommendation that prophylaxis be considered after sexual exposure. This recommendation will result in an increased number of recently exposed patients presenting for care. Clinicians should seize this opportunity to reach persons who are at high risk for HIV seroconversion and provide them with evaluation, treatment, and counseling. A comprehensive approach to the care of persons recently exposed to HIV is proposed. Candidates for postexposure prophylaxis should be identified and given appropriate antiretroviral treatment. Physicians must perform HIV antibody testing to determine which persons are already infected with HIV and must do baseline laboratory studies. Follow-up care includes assessment of side effects from postexposure treatment and surveillance for development of primary HIV infection. Most important, clinicians must provide risk-reduction counseling to decrease the chance of future exposures. Public health messages must emphasize that postexposure treatment should be used only as a backup for failure of primary prevention methods, such as avoidance of high-risk sexual exposures or use of condoms.

Laali
02-24-04, 08:26
I'm a very panicky *****monger. Like I'm naturally anxious so I'm wonderin what are the rates of STD transmissal with condom use in heterosexual sex? I know the info's probably somewhere but please help me out. Also, is dousing your penis with alcohol after sex a good precaution to kill any germs that might have slipped thru the condom?

EDITOR's NOTE: Posting of this report was delayed pending revisions to correctly spell the words "you", "are" and "because". To avoid delays in future reports, please refrain from using "u" instead of "you", "r" instead or "are", "em" instead of "them", and "cuz" instead of "because", etc. Thanks!

Blind Lust
04-26-04, 19:27
Panicky monger, Condoms are relatively good, but only if they are used correctly. Germs typically don't "get through" a condom, unless the integrity of the condom is compromised (pinholes, tearing, etc.) Also, remember that sheep membrane condoms (Naturalamb, etc.) do not adequately guard against the transmission of S.T.I. Secondly, dousing your penis with alcohol after the fact is poor prophylaxis (disease prevention), as any bacteria or viruses will have entered your body via the urethral opening ("[CodeWord140] (http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140) slit") at the end of your member, presuming that you have no open wounds, scratches etc. on your penis. Also, do not forget that DATY, while safer than some forms of unprotected sexual contact, can allow herpes, clamydia and other illnesses to enter your body; even DFK can transmit everything from oral gonorrhea to the common cold! Sexual advice is readily available, including a wide variety of online resources. Use them.

And please, play safely.

BL

Ashton
05-17-04, 12:14
Just want to throw this in the fray and see what you guys think. I went to the public health center in Denver a year or two ago after some risky behavior in Thailand.

Here's what the counselor said, almost verbatum:

"I don't want to give you carte blanche to go back to Asia and have unprotected sex, but it is very hard for men to contract HIV through unorotected heterosexual sex.

I kind of did take it as carte blanche because I am addicted to BB everything and giving oral but I know common sense tells me that's foolish.

In fact I was just getting ready to go to the Miari RDL in Seoul tonight and get nasty but after reading these posts I'm a little bummed at the thought that I really ought to wrap my rascal.

Thoughts?

Opebo
05-17-04, 23:35
Good information Ashton. Enjoy life and don't believe the puritan fear-mongers.

Sonidos
05-17-04, 23:56
Ashton,

Regarding what the counselor at the Denver Public Health Center told you, he or she should be promptly removed from that position. Just look at what is happening in Africa where HIV/AIDS is rampant. It is overwhelmingly through unprotected heterosexual sex. I am African and I have lost a lot of friends through HIV/AIDS. There are seven doctors in my family and I am in the medical field so I have seen more than you want to see. It is really horrible to watch someone die of AIDS. It is popularly known as the "Wasting Disease" in a lot of African nations. Yes, I am monger and I always wear condom. Please protect yourself and your partner by wearing condom.

Have fun.

Member #1846

Bradman
05-18-04, 21:55
Ok guys, we need to set a few things straight and using Clandestine's posted references is a good place to start. Form what Clandestine posted, I think he is trying to suggest there is medical evidence to back up the idea that quick post-exposure medication can stop infection and that HIV is not transmissable through bbbj.

If you delve further into the article from the annals of internal medicine, you will find that "The probability is highest with unprotected receptive anal intercourse (0.008 to 0.032). The risk is higher with receptive vaginal intercourse (0.0005 to 0.0015) than with insertive vaginal intercourse (0.0003 to 0.0009) . No per-contact estimates of risk with insertive anal intercourse or with oral intercourse have been published, although seroconversion as a result of oral sex has been documented." The short and skinny there is that the odds are very low. If you understand statistics, you will realize that those odds don't really apply to you when you stick your wang in someone. Those are average odds for LOTS of people. If you do it with someone once, you can get it, or if you do it with someone 100 times, you might not get it. The thing is, you can get it and if you are one of those who does, you are 100% infected and you are going to die from it. Also, please understand that while those numbers may seem low, millions of people are infected each year and those low odds don't help them.


Another thing to take away from this article is that it is not saying you can prevent HIV infection by quick post-exposure treatment. It says in the text of the article " evidence that postexposure treatment with zidovudine is associated with a significant decrease in risk for occupational HIV infection." What that means is NOT that you can prevent infection. It means that if you count up the people who did not get treatment and were exposed and the people who did get treatment and were exposed, there were less in the treatment group that ended up with disease. There were still people that were infected even after taking the drug, just as there were people who were not infected when they didn't take the drug. Also, The authors of the study admit that their results are statistically insignificant and could therefore be the result of some unknown bias in their study.

As to the other report that Clandestine mentions, the authors state that they didn't find any seroconversion in 19,000 oral sexual encounters. That would corresponde to a risk only ten-fold less than that of insertive vaginal intercourse. I would expect the risk to be much lower than that so this study really doesn't tell us much. Also, the authors trusted the word of the participants that they did not have unprotected vaginal sex. It is well-established that trusting participants statements on these type of things is not a good idea.

BTW, AIDS IS a death sentence. With intensive drug therapy, one can last a long time without symptoms, but there is NO cure. Viral loads can be reduced to below the detectable limit, but there is still virus and that person still has HIV, and unless a cure is found, that person will die from it.

Migrant One
05-18-04, 23:35
My 2 cents,

After hearing of a woman whom I've had sex with on and off for a couple years was HIV+ I not only panicked, but did some studying. I also got tested and was neg (whew!).

Our intercourse (both vag & anal) were covered, but DATY & BBBJ were also tossed in often.

The facts I came across were similar to your posts, you need an exchange of body fluids through a cut or some other entry into the body (kissing per say may allow fluids into the body, but the stomach acid is too strong for the virus).

Therefore us gentlemen who are the inserters (hopefully?!?) are less likely to pick up the fluids of our partners. Oral, if you have no cuts, is safe for that reason but let's face it, you could have a small cut from some food that could allow some fluids in. The same with the genital areas.

Like Bradman said they are odds, in our favor, but only odds.

What's the old saying, 'don't do the crime if you can't do the time'.

I had a lot to think about while I was waiting my results and my biggest concern was spreading it to others, hey if I played the game and lost that's my fault. If I prefer BBBJ and get the virus, only my blame.

Anyway, my rant sorry guys

migrant

Rush 2112
05-19-04, 21:38
Attached is a link to Internal Medicine News regarding a new oral HIV antibody test which may be available this summer. Notice the statistic that 40% of those infected with the virus only find out after they have been diagnosed with AIDS.
www2.einternalmedicinenews.com/scripts/om.dll/serve?action=searchDB&searchDBfor=art&artType=full&id=aqm04037901d

That Asshole
05-20-04, 14:17
I am just so amazed by all contributors to this discussion doing nothing else but quoting from medical journals and researches and doctors opinions and etcetera.

Do not anybody do their own thinking here?

AIDS is a multibillion dollar business as is all kind of "healthcare". In fact it should be called "sickness care" as good health is no business for no one. Disease on the other hand is the business. Therefore you are led to believe that you need to spend so much money to care for your "health".

I think that good health is for free. It costs nothing. And also you cannot buy it. It is just a mental state when you discard all the bullshit that comes at you through your eyes and ears and you do your own thinking. First of all you avoid those who profit from the selling of disease, medicines, etc. The doctors, researchers, scientists.

Therefore nobody profits from people having good health. But creating mass histeria about some invisible enemies, invaders, germs, viruses that you can fight off by applying some powerful weapon medication, ointment, pill, surgery is great business. Money, $$$. (And also it is great business to create mass histeria about evil terrorists. That being another story but closely related.)

So, just take all the medical researches with a great amount of scepticism. Whoever doesn't agree with the system that makes the money will not be funded anymore. Finished, cut off. There are scientists who have concluded that the whole AIDS scare is bullshit but their voice is very small because of course they are not allocated research funds any more.

Also, researches conclude whatever they were supposed to conclude. Figures show what they are worth in $$$. There is no point at all to publish figures that are not worth $$. Researchers and scientists are people too. They have lives, families, pets, mortgages and most importantly they have women in their lives.All these things cost $$$. (Especially the latter one).

Please calm down and do some thinking of your own. Whoever wants to die will die. Whoever wants to live will live. Eventually we all reach the point when we no longer want to live then we die. Whoever wants to live will not die and whoever wants to die cannot live. This is beyond science and has been proven ever and ever again. Is this correct?

So, why all this scientific sounding jargon about viruses and bacterias and enzimes and shit. Just make sure that you have willpower to live and you will live irrespective of any microscopic creatures in any bodily fluid of yours. Also, if you have no zest for life, you don't want to live, no amount of medications will keep you alive.

All these things cost zero money therefore are no great business for no one. So, the voice is very little. But after reading some of the discussion on this subject I had to laugh and to make this note.

It's so funny. Adult men taking things that they read or hear at face value and believe that they are true because they have been told so. (Same goes for "international terrorism" too, I guess).

So, who dies of AIDS today? And who dies of car accidents? And of malaria? And so on. The point is not what you die of but that you die. Bugs do not get into a healthy tree. Make sure that you are healthy and at peace and you will live to the longest possible extent. And when your willpower is dead then you are dead too. Then the bug of whatever takes you.

The motto of our platoon in the Army was "Vigilance". That is the point. Just to be vigilant for life.

I don't mean this to be a religious teaching any more than you could call a movie "Natural Born Killers" (with Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis) a religious film. Do you remember the line when they ask Mickey (Harrelson) why he kills people? His answer is: "I don't kill anyone. These people are already dead. I just put them out of their misery."

And so does AIDS and malaria and head on collisions. So, who's going to put you out of your misery today? And what pill are you going to take against it?

Did all this make any sense?

About the writer:

If you do a search you will find that Alexander is no missionary of any sort but has done some serious pussy hunting and is intending to do so for another few years. Nevertheless there is a philosophy behind all the game. It's better to do it that way, I guess.

Bradman
05-21-04, 19:39
wow!!!! alexander, that is truly one of the most astonishingly large piles of crap that i have ever read.

as one of those scientists who researches those "viruses and bacterias and enzimes and shit" (and one who knows we don't make very much money at all), i can tell you that i don't take anything i read at face value. i am, however, educated enough to know when research is sound and when results of studies are worthwhile.

i certainly don't do what i do for the money. i could have been a surgeon and earned craploads of cash, but instead i work in a lab earning shit and trying to solve problems to help people, even people like you who don't believe you need help. you said that whoever wants to live will not die and that it has been proven. when has that ever been proven? i tell you what, you come into my lab, and rub some of the bacteria that i work with on yourself. i guarantee that however much you want to live, you won't. the only chance you will have for survival is to take medicine developed by the "sickness care" business.

i can also tell you that the conclusions of the research i and every scientist i know are not dependent on anything but scientific evidence. i am sure there are people out there who are corrupt, just the same as there are corrupt cops, politicians, lawyers, schoolteachers, and everything else. but the outcome of most science is not determined by who writes the check. what you don't realize is that when people do fake their science, there is a peer review process that allows other non-crooked scientists can decide whether the work is crap or not. that is the reason those "scientists" who believe the aids scare is fake have no voice. they don't get funded anymore because real scientists know they are full of shit and don't want to waste money on worthless studies.

everything we do in life has risks. some more than others. it is possible that you could catch malaria, or get killed in a head-on collision, or get aids. the reason that some of us are quoting from medical journals in this forum is because the studies done in those journals provide us with estimates of that risk. that way, those of us who want to make informed decisions on where to stick our wangs, can do so without blindly wondering if we have enough zest for life to survive hiv infection.

the reason your army platoon had a motto of "vigilance" was not so that you could imagine you would be safe, but so that you would be vigilant and not get killed while being a dumbass and not paying attention. i'm sure your commander would allow you to walk into enemy fire when you told him "it's ok, i want to live, i won't get hurt by that bullet coming straight at my head."

so i guess the answer to your question is "yes, some people do their own thinking here."

Play2
05-22-04, 08:57
Nice post, Bradman. Good, scientific information is always welcome on these boards.


I believe that 'The Truth about AIDS' is as follows:

(1) HIV/AIDS is primarily transmitted via blood and sexual organ fluids.
(2) Wearing a condom (if it doesn't break) is a great deterrant against contraction of this disease. Primary prevention is the key.
(3) If one is worried having HIV/AIDS, one should see a physican and get an ELISA test. Early treatment can prolong your life.
(4) If one's ELISA test is negative 6 months after potential exposure, then that person is about 99.9% likely to not have contracted HIV.
(5) 1 million people in the US are HIV positive, but only half or less currently know it. That's about 1 in 250 people living in the US.

We all take our own calculated risks, and we are all entitled to our own opinions and actions. In my opinion, I agree that the drug/medical industry is monetarily driven. Nonetheless, it is also saving and helping lives and, without it, we would all be at a loss.

Alexander, if the industry simply wished to make money, they would never make ads to support primary prevention; after all, they would lose customers. Nonetheless, it is a well-known fact that many companies (ie. Pfizer, etc.) take the time and spend profits in order to advertise primary prevention, and it has been a key in what physicians and other medical providers preach. The system isn't perfect, but it provides enough for us become educated and help ourselves.


Alexander wrote, "The point is not what you die of, but that you die."

Again, you are entitled to your philosophy. However, my weary eyes have seen too many people stricken by AIDS, mutilated by head-on collisions, and, even in the states, inpacitated by malaria. The majority of these people do not simply embrace fate as stoically as you stated in your soliloquy. In contrast, many of these people ardently wish that they could have prevented their tragedy, and they work at educating themselves, their friends, and their families, so that others will not make the same mistake that they had made. The point 'truly is' what they are 'dieing of' or 'hurting from.'

I cannot believe that the Army simply defines vigilance in the l'aissez faire manner that you have written, Alexander; as you hopefully know, your context was a bit off in that soldiers should "simply be vigilant of life." Indeed, I believe that soldiers must be extremely vigilant and well-prepared at all times.

Personally, I take risks, as well, but they are calculated risks that I have studied carefully. One cannot fault others for becoming worried and asking for advice. Their paranoia is not simply our unwanton burden; their paranoia is exposed for others to educate and empower.



That's my two bits. You can take it or leave it, my friends.

Domino
05-22-04, 09:23
i agree with everybody here, even with those who do not agree with each other.

the aids industry is a multi billion dollar industry. i will be at the aids conference in bangkok in july and i will be doing field work to see how many bangkok hookers do bareback, bbbj, anal etc. unfortunatley, i have to fund my own research. if any of you guys can help with frequent flyer miles (on virgin airways or on thai hookers) that would be good. vouchers for pizzaland near nana would also help.

i too am a scientist and i would have cured aids and cancer years ago only i am too busy fucking hookers to do the final push on my research. the world will have to wait until i get over this hobby.

if your elisa test is negative 666 months after potential exposure, then you are about 99.999% likely to not have contracted hiv. though you could have the measles for all i know or care.

""please calm down and do some thinking of your own. whoever wants to die will die. whoever wants to live will live. eventually we all reach the point when we no longer want to live then we die. whoever wants to live will not die and whoever wants to die cannot live. this is beyond science and has been proven ever and ever again. is this correct?" yes it is correct alexander (the great.) and whatever about science, it is beyond me. i have taken your advice and calmed down as i am on lithium, taking a break from viagra which the kind drug peddlers of pfizer supply me with.

whacko scientists are still funded by creationists and others. i am an exception in that no one will fund my field research. this is so even though i publish my findings here for it to be peer reviewed.

i like your line that "bugs do not get into a healthy tree". that is good news for my wooden leg. i must remember to repeat it when i am trying to convince thai skanks/trees of the advantages of going bareback with me. maybe i should just fuck |thai trees instead.

the motto of my platoon was also "vigilance". i once knew a hooker with that name. she got pregnant. maybe her motto was "no vigilance".

i am also glad you take your philosophy from "natural born killers" (with woody harrelson and juliette lewis). it should be required watching for us all.

as to your question of " so, who's going to put you out of your misery today?" i am. i am going to eat a few king sized pizzas, stop reading this for today and watch natural born killers(with woody harrelson and juliette lewis a pizza packed 3 sum).

"did all this make any sense?" no, it didn't. i must have dropped a bad tab of acid.

peace & pizzas.

Rezza
06-03-04, 00:03
Gentlemen,

I never thought my poss. biggest contribution would come in this section!

I have been to Brazil 5 times since my friend had a wedding there 2 years ago. Obviously, I fell in Love with way of life and everything, but most of all the wonderful selection of hotties. Anyway, my 1st time there, I really got carried away, we went to Porto Seguro as well and there were many girls available and one night I picked one up from a club, no money ever discussed, we went to the beach and had sex,……..with out condom! She was a beautiful college student of 20, I was drunk, had no condoms in some tiny village at 5.00am, the odds were stacked against me and my little head gave in! This was unusual for me as I always have protected sex with one nighters or casual lovers. So, my behaviour was playing a little in my mind, but this quickly went after the next trip. I managed to stay safe again in Brazil until last October where I ended up with a GFE for 6 days (3 days unprotected!) – she was what I call a semi gdp who I met with her friends on the beach in ipanema and took out to Melt that night, an 8 easy, tough to resist – have had gfe’s before but not unprotected, this girl was hot and was crazy for me to come insider her (I took her to pharmacy for pills next day before you ask!) Anyway, she had a rich boyfriend who was sending her money every month so did not do helpi or agency – I only paid her 1st 2 nights and then bought her a few gifts. As she put it, she did not need any money and had sex if she was herself hungry for it with someone she was attracted to - boyfriend only there 6 months a year to have sex with her and this was not good enough – this is probably a separate lesson for some of us guys! Anyway, she was having an operation to enlarge her beautiful breasts which this guy was paying for! Sorry, what I am trying to say and my point is she was all checked out before her operation which was in a week – I went to the doctor with her myself as she was a bit nervous before her operation – this girl was surely clean! Still in touch with this girl.

Now, back to the UK and it still played with me that I had unprotected sex with 2 girls even though risk was low and recent porn star guy new catching it did not help – my main worry, the one nighter as I had lots of protected sex in Rio before and my dick was a bit battered and bruised from condom sex - was also receiving messages through things (call it paranoia for now) that I should have an HIV test to overcome any doubts.

So finally last week (after deciding I went to go to Rio again soon), I booked an appointment at the local health centre to have a needle prick test as I didn’t want to wait 2-3 days for lab tests - was confident to be negative of-course. Went in on the day and was called, the test took like 5mins, but the whole process including the wait felt like 5hrs. Anyway, came back 20mins later for the result and she calls me in the room again which I thought unusual. Then she says she needs to do the test again as this one came up with a very faint line! I said, well what does this mean? She said that she has not seen one and she needs to do the test again and also take my blood through needle to send to lab just in case the next finger prick one comes out the same. So I again come back in 20 mins and this time the counsellor wants to see me!!!!!!!!!!! I SHAT MYSELF AT THIS POINT! I have survived a very bad car accident 2.5 years ago and a high fever bug I picked up in Malaysia 6 years ago. Anyway, this was a worse feeling even though no physical pain - I went totally empty – had my mongering finally caught up with me? Was it my one night stand in porto seguro or gfe last October! Anyway, he sat me down and said they could not get a result again and he could not tell me about the faint line! I asked him is it supposed to be clear totally if negative and he says YES from his experience, but also that when positive, there is clear red marks. He says we will know for sure when blood tests come back from lab in 2 days! YIKES!!

I went home and looked at this site and others for some info – I was very nervous and decided to call up further health centres to see if they had any experience of this faint red line. Got hold of this lady at a biggest health centre for HIV tests and I was relieved to hear her say they had 1 incident like the faint line and the guy was negative,..pheeeeeeeeeeeeeeew!She said the senior advisor would call me though. Felt a bit better although still in shock about the whole thing. Now the senior women rings me 3hrs later and says IF THERE IS ANY LINE THEN YOUR POSITIVE!! BOMB, again! I went null. I swear guys, like I said I have faced really bad pain and nearly died before, but this was different, HIV+, what would my family go through knowing am going to die from sex disease– this was my main concern. The senior ***** (explain later!) said she was there for counselling and I could call her or the other guy – I said, how is it possible, only 2 unprotected encounters with girl none anal, am not gay, no drug abuse, chances must have been so low, no symptoms either (although this may not be a determinant) – she said, did you have unprotected sex with a girl in Brazil and I said yes – she said well that’s how you have it! What could I say, she was right! She said there is an almost 2% chance I am negative, but we will know 100% in 2 days!

Anyway, tried to be positive the next day but it was hard – managed to do some more research and it was not all good, what with most sources citing 99% accuracy on finger prick tests.

I called the “result line” in 2 days – I did not want to wake up that morning and called more nearer afternoon! It was the same senior ***** lady who said, why did you not call us sooner, your councillor needs to speak to you. Didnt say anything else. I was sure I had it now as why would I need to speak to the councillor if I have called the result line for my results. Finally speak to the councillor who tells me that I am NEGATIVE! Oh man, what a roller coaster ride! I felt relief, but still empty. I suspect I was told positive as they could not risk me having sex with anyone whilst waiting for lab tests! Slightly harsh don't you think?

Anyway, he said he needs to still see me as he wants to make sure I am ok mentally after the experience. Well, I am ok, but it was another big eye opener in my life. That’s 3 lives used already. Went in and he said I must have a guardian angel looking after me cause the prick tests (how appropiatly named!) are very accurate. Anyway, they used 2 methods, one Elisa and another which totally proved I was negative. He said the prick result was probably due to massive blood transfusion I had 2 years ago after my car accident – even if blood given to me is negative, it can mess with the finger prick result. Hello!! I gave you this information before i had the test! Obviously now I would recommend anyone just go for the proper lab test results! I told him that people with so called faint lines should not be diagnosed as HIV+ like the ***** told me over the phone. He said they are still learning and this experience would help them and not many cases like me so this helped chill me out that I knew this experience could help others.This post as well guys, take it as you will and am not here to spoil anyones fun. I am certainly not going to stop my mongering but I will never put myself in that situation of unprotected sex again – am even going to give up BBBJ (and poss DATY - this is tough!) – covered sex from now for me unless I know girl is tested or know history. You might think this is extreme or sensible or whatever,…unless you go through 2 days thinking you have got HIV then you will never be able to feel how I feel about it. Durex Performa will be the tool of my trade from now ;)

It’s a really nasty disease and I hope the brilliant scientists and doctors find a cure for it – it’s a harsh price to pay cause even going BB, we as men and women are only doing what is human nature, but it sure is a deadly game to play so stay safe guys!

On a brighter note, I am going back to Rio for lots of PROTECTED sex in Sept :)

Smut Villain
06-03-04, 05:35
Rezza,

DAMN!!! I'll bet that was the scare of your life!!! Still, I'm glad everything turned out OK.

Maybe those guys at the clinic should familiarize themselves a little more with their tests; I know you said they haven't run into too many cases like yours, but we're talking about a mans' LIFE here for God's sake!

That isn't the time to NOT be sure.

Bradman
06-03-04, 14:19
Damn Rezza!!!

That is a harrowing, fucked up story. Glad you're alright though.

Boxcc
06-03-04, 16:31
Rezza, that was a hell of a story! I'm glad things worked out for you and that everything is okay. I am even happier to hear that you aren't giving up mongering, but will never go it again unprotected!

I think protection is the key. As long as you protect yourself, you should be fine. I myself have been tempted to stop DATY and BBBJs, but I think the risk is low. But, then again, I don't want to live the experience that you described either!

Magic501
06-03-04, 17:22
Rezza,

Everytime I think about going unprotected, I just remind myself of a T-shirt I once saw: a johnson puttin' on a condom saying, "COVER ME - I'M GOING IN!"

Keep it in mind and stay safe!

Joe Zop
06-03-04, 19:55
Amen to that last sentiment, Boxcc. Rezza's story is as close as one can get to an object lesson without being a complete disaster.

If I were you, Rezza, I'd be getting follow-up tests for the next six months, just to be safe. As I'm sure you know by now, icubation periods vary, false positives do happen, and a clean test at any one instance doesn't necessarily mean absolute safety. I say this not at all to alarm you, (because you've clearly been through more than enough!) but as a way toward complete peace of mind.

Seamus
06-20-04, 00:51
Rezza,

Thanks for that harrowing report. As a newcomer to this site, and a rookie mongerer who is planning his first trip to Asia, your words really clarify the stomach churning fear that can become a part of anyone's life. All for passion. Yes, it is sooo hard to do the right thing at times, yet just imagine explaining to your children, or parents, or others close to you that you have this scarlet letter of a disease.

Best of luck in the future, and have a great time in S. America!

Lastly, thanks for all the honest reports on this site. Any dishonest writers, F.U.

Rolly Polly
06-28-04, 15:26
I read that all cases of HIV transmission via oral sex has been that the one doing the "sucking" was the one to become infected. In the same article I read that there has not been any confirmed cases of becoming HIV+ from recieving oral. Can anyone confirm or deny this and perhaps provide a link for proof??

Pluto2
07-01-04, 19:53
Fast tests and slow tests.

My understaning is that a test can be biased to show either false positive or false negative for various nasty bugs and other condidions.

The medical community for fast tests prefers false positives as the errors, since if they have a bug killer and give it to you then there is probably no harm done. Fast tests produce false positives as the desired type of error. Better than false negative wher your death could have been avoided if they had only given you the magic pill in time.

Having said that, their is no pill for AIDS and not likely to be any time soon.

Avoid crack *****s, needle addicts and women that look unhealthy like the plague. Or like AIDS to be more precise.

Germany is a good yard stick to use in measureing your behavior and that of your temporary partner.

Pluto2
07-02-04, 05:02
AIDS Symptoms NIH

Although symptoms are not always present (asymptomatic), it makes good sense to inspect your partner. If she has any brains, she has probably already inspected you. Again, countries with real health systems and liscensed prostitutes are your safest bet. See Germany.

nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000603.htm

AIDS-related complex - ARC; Chronic symptomatic HIV infection
Definition Return to top

Early symptomatic HIV infection is the stage of viral infection caused by HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) where symptoms have begun to manifest, but before the development of AIDS (which involves life-threatening infections).
Causes, incidence, and risk factors Return to top

Early symptomatic HIV infection is characterized by signs and symptoms typical of HIV infection that are not AIDS-defining. These symptoms are usually not present in asymptomatic HIV infection.

The onset of symptoms signals the transition from HIV infection to HIV disease. However, at this stage of HIV infection, the person does not have AIDS-defining diseases of immune deficiency, such as opportunistic infections and/or certain cancers or a CD4 count of less than 200.

Risk factors for HIV infection are sexual contact with an infected sexual partner that includes exchange of semen or vaginal secretions, intravenous drug use, receipt of blood transfusion or blood components, or being born to an HIV-positive mother.

Symptoms Return to top

mouth disorders
hairy leukoplakia of tongue
oral thrush (a yeast infection of the mouth)
gingivitis
prolonged diarrhea
skin disorders
seborrheic dermatitis
molluscum contagiosum
dermatophyte infection (fungal infection of the skin or nails)
swollen lymph glands
sweating, excessive -- night sweats
bacterial pneumonia
prolonged fever
prolonged fatigue
malaise (vague feeling of discomfort)
weight loss
joint pain
peripheral neuropathy
pap smear that shows cervical dysplasia
recurrent herpes zoster -- herpes that occurs over a very discrete patch of skin
a rare disease called ITP (idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura) -- where your platelets are destroyed
Signs and tests Return to top

HIV ELISA/Western blot positive for HIV antibodies
Lab tests that indicate immune system suppression include:
CD4 lymphocyte count decreased
CBC, WBC less than 4,000
platelet count less than 100,000
skin test anergy -- no response to special skin tests used to test for infection or immune function
Treatment Return to top

Many of the symptoms of early symptomatic HIV infection can be successfully treated with medications. More important, the treatment of the HIV infection can prevent the onset of many of these conditions.

Antiviral therapy suppresses the replication of the HIV infection in the body. A combination of several antiretroviral agents, termed Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy (HAART) has been highly effective in reducing the number of HIV particles in the blood stream, and as a result, increasing the CD4 count.

Although people on HAART have suppressed levels of HIV, they can still transmit the virus to others through sex or needle sharing. HAART is not a cure for HIV, but the treatment slows disease progression and may strengthen the immune system (immune reconstitution).

Support Groups Return to top

For additional information and resources, see AIDS support group.
Expectations (prognosis) Return to top

There is no cure for HIV infection or AIDS. However, anti-retroviral therapy and HAART can dramatically improve the length and quality of life for people infected with HIV, and can delay the onset of AIDS. The treatments for conditions associated with early symptomatic HIV disease are variably effective, with some infections and disease processes being more readily treatable with medications.
Complications Return to top

Advanced HIV disease (AIDS), characterized by the development of opportunistic infections and malignancies (cancers), may develop.
Calling your health care provider Return to top

Call for an appointment with your health care provider if symptoms of chronic symptomatic HIV infection are present.

Call for an appointment with your health care provider if you have chronic symptomatic HIV infection and develop new symptoms.
Prevention Return to top

Safer sex behaviors may reduce the risk of acquiring the infection. There is a risk of acquiring the infection even if "safe sex" is practiced with the use of condoms. Abstinence is the only sure way to prevent sexual transmission of the virus.

Do not have sexual intercourse with:
people known or suspected to be infected with AIDS
numerous partners
people who have multiple partners
people who use IV drugs
Do not use intravenous drugs. If IV drugs are used, do not share needles or syringes.

People with AIDS or who have had positive antibody tests may pass the disease on to others and should not donate blood, plasma, body organs, or sperm. They should not exchange body fluids during sexual activity.

Frequently Asked Questions:

Q: How long does it take for HIV to cause AIDS?

A: About half the people with HIV develop AIDS within 10 years after becoming infected. This time varies greatly from person to person and can depend on many factors. Today, medical treatments can slow the rate at which HIV weakens the immune system, thus preventing the onset of AIDS.

Q: How can I tell if I am infected with HIV?

A: The only way to determine for sure whether you are infected is to be tested for HIV infection. You cannot rely on symptoms to know whether or not you are infected with HIV. Many people who are infected with HIV do not have any symptoms at all for many years.

Q: How good is the current treatment for HIV infection?

A: The current treatment for HIV infection, termed HAART or highly active anti-retroviral therapy is very good. It suppresses the amount of HIV in the blood, allowing the immune system to recover. Mortality from AIDS has dropped since the introduction of HAART.

This treatment, however, is not a cure. Several patients become resistant to the benefits of HAART, and require "rescue" or "salvage" therapy be given in an attempt to continue to suppress HIV in the blood. Why some patients become resistant is unclear, but it may have to do with the strain of the virus and how compliant the patient was with taking his/her medication.

Update Date: 2/3/2004

Updated by: Kenneth Wener, M.D., Division of Infectious Diseases, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA. Review provided by VeriMed Healthcare Network.

Rayman
07-06-04, 13:31
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/africa/03/aids_debate/html/default.stm

Quite a lot on AIDS on the BBC recently.

Would anyone admit to actually meeting or knowing an AIDS case? General question.

Joe Zop
07-06-04, 13:49
Sure, Rayman, I'll bite. I've known a pretty fair number of people with AIDS -- a large number in the gay community who were infected and died fairly early on, as well as one who's one of the longest surviving people (got it back in the early eighties) with the full-blown disease, several who got it via drugs, a handful of sex workers or ex- workers (though for the most part they're HIV positive rather than with full-blown AIDS) and I've also met any number of people while I was in Kenya and India who had it and a couple of hemophiliacs who got it via blood transfusions waaay back before the blood supply got cleaned up. I've also watched it take its toll on a couple of these folks down pretty much to the end -- it's not pretty.

Murilloa
07-06-04, 16:28
Yes, Rayman, one of my greatest friends, a wit, raconteur, intellectual and twenty-five years ago he was as silly about being promiscuously gay as Muri is now about fucking prostitutes.

Difference? That was then, this is now. In 1980 he enjoyed the summer of his life, pre-AIDS, fucking any and every man. Meanwhile, Muri was chastely faithful to girlfriends, then wife.

Now Muri is divorced, and does his mongering clad in love's rubber armour. His friend is dead. Came from a good family, his parents forgave/understood him, he had all the love and medical care possible, but died young, slowly, horribly. And about TWELVE years ago, so why should there be any doubts about AIDS in the year 2004?

Ask the same question in Southern Africa and sit back for the harrowing answers.

Stay safe, AIDS is for real:

happy fucking,

Mur

Rayman
07-08-04, 05:16
Good Post Muri.

Can't say I know anyone personally, just anecdotal stories from guys I have worked with, and they (the stories) are getting a touch more numerous.

As for my situation: I am not much of a paying mongerer, but I indulge in 'rubber free' freebies most weeks, although never DATY. This I must stop.

Rayman
07-10-04, 10:19
I guess the following is slightly related to Rezza's post.
Early morning today a fellow co-worker came into my office white as a sheet and all nervous like, puffing away at his fag. Turned up that he had a rubber split on him whilst doing a russian pro., and asked me some advice on AIDS testing, and how long the incubation period was as he is also concerned about his girlfriend and a married woman he is having a fling with. Knowing him as a shallow sort, he will be bonking them both without protection within a few days after he calms down, and i guess this also goes to show how quickly the virus COULD spread. Thats all.

Mensis
07-10-04, 22:48
Yes, Rayman, one of my greatest friends, a wit, raconteur, intellectual and twenty-five years ago he was as silly about being promiscuously gay as Muri is now about fucking prostitutes.Muri, do you ever worry about getting HIV even with the armour? I've had sex now with three prostitutes, each time using a condom. Yet I'm shitting myself. The last time, I ended up with a mate at this brothel in Lisbon (long story), we both had a girl, and the day after he started worrying himself sick about HIV. Now it's like I've caught his paranoia, going over every little thing that could have gone wrong. I think, I hope, I'm just being paranoid. It doesn't help having to wait three months for the results. Does it ever bother you, bearing in mind what happened to your mate?

Netsik
07-17-04, 14:10
Dear Mongers,

I have been reading on the net about aids. Hulda Clark (inventer of "zapper" a natural doctor) defends the opinion that Aids is caused by a intestinal fluke and benzene polution in the body. Benzene is a solvent and these two always excisting in the body who ever has aids. There are also many cases of aids where there is no HIV antibodies.

If you type on a search engine "benzene aids" will come up a lot of sites that talks about this.

Please give me your opinions.

Netsik

Netsik
07-17-04, 14:17
Dear Mongers

This a part of an e-mail I received from a health yahoo group that I belong. I think it is interesting.

" As a member of the local San Diego gay community, I am and have been very concerned about the gay community and HIV/AIDS. I understand that you work with Dr. Douglas Richman whom was just honored for his work in HIV/AIDS and AZT research. My concern is that with my 20 years here in San Diego, I have seen many of my friends die, supposedly from HIV/AIDS. But as I look back, I see that the only ones whom died were the ones that took medications, especially AZT, and/or those whom had been in extremely intense emotional pain. I also personally know many, many very long term HIV positive people right here in the San Diego Community, whom have always refused to take medications or have anything to do with the AIDS medical community, and all of the ones I know, are still alive and well and want nothing to do with the medications. Not a one of them has as yet died from AIDS. I even know personally several people that had tested positive for years and without ever having taken any type of HIV/AIDS drugs, suddenly no longer even test positive to HIV! As such, I really just end up believing that very possibly, and even most probably, the medical profession, in its very sincere and best efforts to help and do no harm, and zealousness to defeat HIV, has ended up killing more people than ever with deadly medications and is also most probably on the wrong track in pursuing the mysterious and elusive HIV retrovirus as the cause of AIDS. Also, with the help of the media and a fear filled mass hysteria driven public, and also driven by studies underwritten by pharmaceutical companies that stood to make fortunes by selling their drugs and gaining research money, people that have tested HIV positive have been filled with fear and despair that their immune systems would not function and would give out in the coming years. The never ending stress of even having that kind of belief is enough to kill anyone! These deadly medications, along with depression, fear, and despair that all people that test positive have succumbed to, has more than anything, in my opinion, caused their deaths. Do you know that none of the people that I personally know that have ever tested positive, has even been told that there are quite a number of PROVEN things that could be in their blood that would also cause a positive test? They go to UCSD and other doctors and are simply told to HIT HARD and HIT EARLY with expensive and toxic drugs. To this day, the supposed HIV retrovirus has never even been isolated. And to this day, there is still no proven connection that HIV even causes AIDS. I am sure that no one in the medical community wants to be wrong, and none wish to lose the jobs that they have all truly believed in for so long, and all involved would feel absolutely awful if it were to be found that the community is off track and has been since early on, but I see it as a very very strong possibility. Can you imagine how Dr. Richman himself would feel if it were to be found out that his drug trials had killed many many people? I truly doubt that He could allow himself to believe or even conceive it as it would be such a blow to him that he could not even live with himself."

Netsik

Joe Zop
07-17-04, 22:24
Netsik, it would be nice if somewhere, anywhere, there was even a mention of any kind of actual scientific testing process or study that had been done by either Clark or Byrnes (the other big proponent of Benzene as a cause) or anyone else to look at this. Thus far I've been unable to locate any, and given that Clark's theories are over a decade old, that's rather problematic. If this is something that actually works or is true, it surely would not be terribly difficult to set up clinical trials. It would also be nice if any of the people pushing this were actually trained as MDs as opposed to simply having PhDs in various chemical sciences.

I also find it highly problematic that Africa is essentially (and conveniently) dismissed within these equations and discussions as not being relevant, because it is "an epidemic of malnutrition and drought." There are also few, if any, references I can find to Asian AIDS victims, etc. Gee. Given that the culprit here -- benzene -- is something that's seen as primarily a byproduct of western civilization, this is very troubling.

GettingTang
07-17-04, 22:51
Netsik,
Do you also believe in the toothfairy?
Good God buddy, be real, these people are nuts! We are way past the connection behind HIV=AIDS=DEATH!!

People who get this little simple nasty virus, always get sick and die! Only a few handful of very rare instances are there people who do not always progress to AIDS, with these less then, 01% they suspect their bodies produce a natural rare protein that blocks rapid reproduction of HIV. Other then these VERY rare cases, those who catch HIV will eventually always progress to an AIDS diagnosis. Modern medicines used to treat HIV only slow this progression but are not a silver bullet. as it stands today, if you catch HIV, you will still likely die from it. Only difference is, you might stand a chance at living 15-18 years rather then the old 7-11 years. The median life expectancy rate has yet to be determined since the new line of drugs has come about.

Also, yes, I do agree with you, that if they find medication to fully control HIV, you will likely eventually die from the side affects of of those medications, they are very toxic.

I think for all practical intents and purposes, a person who catches HIV today, can expect to live about 20 years MAX!

So yes, you still need to keep it covered or DIE young!

TANG~!

Dickhead
07-17-04, 23:10
Does the name Magic Johnson mean anything to you? He announced he had the virus in 1992. 2004-1992 = 12 years and he is healthy. It's also worth noting that wife Cookie did not get the virus.

MAGIC = My Ass Got Infected, Coach

GettingTang
07-17-04, 23:49
Facts about HIV and medications

1. The medication used to treat HIV are extremely toxic, so much so, that about 15% of those given them cannot sustain the regimen.

2. Many of the HIV medications used today are failing, this is called resistant HIV. Most scientists feel the virus is much smarter and in the long run will win the battle against the meds being thrown at it. The virus lies dormant deep within the bodies brain and lymph nodes, the virus is changing and mutating constantly! It will always emerge again within its host.

3. There is no way to know for certain the average life expectancy for those who catch HIV today, because the meds have only been out since about 1996. Most sceintists agree it will be about 20 years, for a healthy person who catches HIV and gets very early treatement. If you HIV for years and don't know it, then your life expectency would decrease significantly, as much damage would already be done prior to treatment.

4. Numerous people who began taking the miracle drugs in the mid 90s (protease inhibitors) are either developing resistant strains of HIV, thus seeing treatment failure, and HIV numbers jumping dramatically, or are having serious liver, kidney, cancer, intestinal problems causing death in many cases associated with the side affects the medication they have been taking.

None of us know for certain Magic's overall health status, he is just one of millions of people who have the disease. There are rumors that his liver has begun to have problems. The list of meds he is taking grows every year, due to intense side affects from the drugs he is on. He also appears bloated, and his skin is blotchy. He does not look like the picture of health these days and remember whenever you or I see Magic, he is made up for television, makeup and all.. I guarantee you, his health will deteriorate sooner or later. He is noted for making, more and more frequent doctor's visits also.?? There are also rumors that he recently had to switch drugs for the third time in the past 12 months as the protease inhibitors he has been taking are failing and the virus jumped dramatically, causing a reduction in his T-cell counts. Magic, fails to address these issues publicly.

Dickhead, it's your life, if you really believe HIV is so damn hard to catch, why do you think so many fricken people have it? Because it's so hard to catch right? WRONG buddy!

The WHO, is predicting a huge epidemic of HIV throughout Europe and Asia coming in the next decade. Half of Africa already has it. These disease is not going away and will flourish. It's easier to catch then we have all been lead to believe. There are many strains mutating all the time. Get real and play safe, or die. It's really a rather simple concept.

TANG~!

Dickhead
07-18-04, 01:22
I never said anything about how hard or easy it is to catch AIDS and I never have. I was question your assertion that eveyone who gets it dies. Well, everyone who gets it does die because the death rate is one per capita, but do they die of AIDS? That is what you haven't supported.

I haven't noticed Magic being blotchy but I will admit I have pretty much given up on the NBA and am watching mostly college hoops. But is he bloated or did he just gain some weight after retiring like most competitive athletes do? Magic's been pretty open about his whole AIDS situation so I would think he would be open about a significant deterioration in his health also. I could be wrong.

To avoid AIDS, either avoid sex or wrap it up. Also don't shoot up drugs or butt fuck. Me, I think if I avoid shooting up and butt fucking, getting BBBJ is an acceptable risk although certainly non-zero. The way they drive down here I'll be lucky to last 20 more years anyway.

But if I get AIDS or any type of cancer, I am not going to take a bunch of drugs that make me feel like shit. I am going to die on my feet and not live on my knees. Same goes for prostate problems. Not gonna take drugs that make me impotent. Gonna live til I die.

GettingTang
07-18-04, 01:33
This I totally agree with.
As they say, get busy living, or get busy dying! This applies to life in general.

I would never let them cut out my prostate. I'll die with hard-on and a smile, before I live an extra few years with no pecker. Life is about quality and not quantity. I like you wrap it up for everything but receiving oral. I also won't go down on the girls even though I enjoy this a lot. I save that for my regular faithful girlfriends, whom I'm sure have no diseases of any kind.
To me a covered blowjob is not a blowjob at all. I will accept this risk and only this risk, as i agree it is low. However, the possibilities due to blood in the mouth is always there. I have never been into anything anal and have never taken any form of street drugs in my life. The only possible risk I have even taken is receiving oral sex without a condom, this I have done 1000s of times and I do get tested regularly.

TANG~!



Dickehead quote: "I am not going to take a bunch of drugs that make me feel like shit. I am going to die on my feet and not live on my knees. Same goes for prostate problems. Not gonna take drugs that make me impotent. Gonna live til I die."

Dickhead
07-18-04, 01:44
I have gone down on 100s of hookers and I have gotten a few sore throats that may have been related. Nothing else. Of course alcohol does help kill germs so I try to keep a fairly high level in my system at all times.

Down here, it is impossible not to eat some of these sweet, sweet girls. I use the rule my brother taught me when I was 14: "If it smells good, eat it."

Rayman
07-25-04, 14:10
Certainly the scientific community is divided and they are cases such as Magic wife (and Paul Michael Glazer (Starsky fame)) whose infected partner did don't pass on the virus. BUT until this debate is finalised I am bagging it up EVERY time with pros, never DATY and at my discretion with non-pros. As a p.o.v. we should be balanced when looking at the risks and BTW, I have just received my health card and it is all aok..great :-)

Hot Diggidy Dog
07-26-04, 07:17
Netsik,

Please don't take this the wrong way.

Your reference for your beliefs is an e-mail you got through a yahoo health group. So what? There are yahoo groups where people will tell you, in all sincerity, that the earth is flat.

Yes, people argue "If HIV causes AIDS, why are there documented cases of AIDS without HIV?"

Good question. Let's also ask, "If the influenza virus causes influenza, why arethere documented cases of influenza without the influenza virus?" The answer is that the diagnosis of a disease like influenza or AIDS is from a bag full of symptoms. And you can get influenze from chemical exposure.

The benzene connection is an interesting one as long as you believe, like people did 20 years ago, that AIDS is a disease of homosexuals. Yeah, homosexuals are exposed the the materials in certain lubes. But the really explosive growth in AIDS infections is among heteros in Africa, India, and China. Not places known for lube use.

The vast majority of people with AIDS have verifiable elevated HIV antigen levels. That is evidence that they have HIV in their systems. The extremely high levels of HIV antigens in those who die shows that their bodies are fighting hard against HIV.

Your quoted message says that the folks with HIV who died of AIDS either took drugs or were unhappy. Well, being sick makes people unhappy. Makes them feel bad. Many such folks will go to a doctor and take drugs. So yes, there are few people who never take drugs and never get unhappy and who have already died of AIDS. The word "already" governs here.

As you pointed out in your first post, "Dr." Hulda Clark is behind lots of the opinions you hold. Check her out on "Quack Watch".
She bases her 'treatments' on her degree as a 'naturopath.' She bought the degree for $695 from a correspondence school (unaccredited) in Clayton, Alabama.

"Dr." Clark also claims to treat all cancers, 100% of them, all patients recover, in 5 days. Also all other diseases. She does this by removing any fillings from your mouth, then administering a purgative. She says this clears up liver fluke (it does not) which along with metal fillings are the source of all disease.

Now think about this: Metal fillings are just a few hundred years old. Was there disease before there were dentists? If so, Clark would seem to be a fraud.

GettingTang
08-21-04, 23:45
Hot Diggidy Dog,

I fully agree, we are past the "does HIV cause AIDS" debate. Yes it does! It's been proven long ago. However, the college you mention is accredited and the leader in holistic medicinal values in the world. They are for real. Mrs. Clark, is indeed a quack.

My biggest and only fear about HIV, is can you get the disease from receiving a bbbj, (BLOWJOB WITH no CONDOM) I've had quite a few of these in my days and with numerous girls. I do everything else with a condom. I accpet the risk, I just wish I knew for sure, how much risk, I am in fact accpeting?!?!?!

I do get tested every 6 months, for peace of mind, all negative to date. Will my luck run out? About 70% of men who seek out the services of a prostitute, also take their BJ bareback. I just figure is there was a huge risk, many mongers would be coming down with HIV.

I personally think there is a much bigger risk going to a local nightclub and taking home a girl and having unprotected sex with her, then there is getting a BBBJ from a working girl and screwing with a condom on.

Tang~!

Cachondito
09-01-04, 16:21
GettingTang:

Getting AIDS by BBBJ is certainly possible, but not more likely than your plane crashing. In both of these, you're sure to die, but the chances of facing that deathly situation is tiny enough to be ignored. Briefly, if you're not afraid to use airplanes, you shouldn't be that much afraid of getting a BBBJ.

I had unprotected sex once, and I was scared shitless about catching HIV. I phoned the local AIDS line and asked a few things.. He said, unless you're the one performing the oral sex instead of the one getting it, chances of contracting HIV are extremely slim. Unless your willy, your partner's pussy or ass, or her gums have some open scars, your chances of getting AIDS from an infected woman is less than 2%.

As long as you avoid uncovered anal sex, you have no reason to tremble with fear of AIDS. But then again, I have to give my friendly advice too: Once you get fear strucken by the thought of a possible STD, even seeing your negative test result will cease to help at some point. I lost my health for quite a while because of that, and had to use medication to get back to my mental health.

Right now, if someone pointed a gun at me and told me to either eat a pile of dung or get a BBBJ, I'd certainly eat the pile of dung, although I know the risk of a BBBJ is tiny. Remember even some lesbians end up with HIV, and this is way too serious to leave to chance. You're probably lucky enough not to get the virus, but if you're not, you're dead.. :-(

So you'd better get your sucks covered at least when you're doing a street hooker.



Dickhead:

Magic Johnson never announced whether or not he was cerropositive (?). Which means, some people will carry the virus, but the virus won't be capable of damaging their immune system like it does to normal people. No stats have been taken regarding this issue, but a common wild guess by the authorities say 1 black person in every 300 have this thing, and are basically immune to AIDS. But we white asses are shit out of luck. The same wild guess says 1 white woman out of every 800 is likely to carry this cerropositive gene, while the number in white men is almost funny compared to that. My uncle's friend shot some porn flicks in Germany, caught HIV, and of course he fucked his wife too! Now his wife carries AIDS, but she's as healthy as you and me because the virus can't do shit to her. But if someone fucks her, he'll get the virus and most likely die. And the man is spending his last years as an alive person.. :-( (All these people are pure white arian)

So don't you ever get fooled by the Magic Johnson case, he might be cerropositive, or hell he could even be in it for the sake of advertising and simply lying! You know those people, Britney was a virgin too..



Slightly off-topic, but I also want to share something I learnt while I was afraid and searching about AIDS for that reason. If you get into a suspicious intercourse, and have the fear of having caught AIDS, you can apply for an antibiotic profphilaxy within the first 72 hours following the intercourse. This is basically loading your body with a whole lot of antibiotics, and causing your body to produce so many anticors that the virii will have no chance to reproduce as they'll be busy fighting these anticors. When they can't reproduce enough, they'll fall weak and start dying rapidly. That way, even if you got the virus and there's no medicine to heal it, all the virii in your blood will die and you'll no longer have HIV in your blood. When you go for such a treatment, you have to go under a PCR test every week within the first month, and then a regular Eliza test every 3 months for a year. That way you'll be certain whether the virus has fucked off or is still around. But you have to do this within 72 hours of the intercourse, and take the PCR tests regularly.

PCR test is a test that differs from the regular Eliza in way of seeking out the virus. Eliza searches for the anticors in your blood, which means it won't give a healthy result if you apply it before the time your immune system requires to produce a sufficient number of anticors. PCR test on the other hand, searches directly for the virus itself, and it'll give a healthy result as of the first month after the suspicious intercourse. This test is unfortunately rather expensive, starting from 200 bucks or such. And the antibiotic prophilaxy is nowhere cheaper.

Rubber Nursey
09-01-04, 17:34
please don't feel like i'm contradicting what you just said...i'm just adding some more to it. :)

post exposure prophylaxis (pep) is quite a risky treatment. not only can it make you pretty darn sick, but it can - possibly - cause more trouble than it solves. like cachondito said, it aims to stop you from contracting the virus with large doses of medication. however, if you are unlucky enough to have the virus survive and you become infected, there is a chance that all that medication could have made the virus more resistant to future treatment. pep is effective, but, like most medications, certainly not 100%.

pep is usually only recommended when you are absolutely, positively sure that the other person was hiv+ (for example in an occupational setting, where a doctor may get a needle stick injury from a known hiv+ patient). unless your doctor is a money-hungry creep, he/she would more than likely talk you out the treatment (or refuse it) after having unprotected sex with a sex worker. (that may be different in countries with very high infection rates among sex workers, i guess). the chances of a man contracting hiv from a woman are really very small and although you shouldn't be complacent about the risks - you shouldn't panic too much, either. you have much, much more chance of catching some other nasty. i would recommend an sti test as soon as possible after having unprotected sex or a broken condom...but pep probably shouldn't be considered as an option.

can i also just add...
yes, with bbbj and unprotected sex the risks to you may be minimal - but please spare a thought for the woman involved. as the receptive partner, it is much easier for us to contract hiv from a client, than it is for a client to get it from us. sex workers are at particular risk of having small tears or irritation inside their vaginas, due to thing like frequent, rough or prolonged sex sessions, recent use of sex toys and regular sti screening (the doctor scrapes around inside when he/she does the tests).
and don't forget that there are probably lots of guys in your area getting bareback services, from a small number of girls. if one of you passes something on - you could all end up getting it.

Travis Bickle 2
09-01-04, 21:10
Cachondito, I believe Magic Johnson did announce he was seriopostive for HIV. I believe his exact words at the time were" "I've tested postive for the HIV virus."

To say he might be lying and making the whole thing up for advertising is absolutely the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

When he tested positive he was at the pinacle of the game which he deeply loved. He had to give up playing basketball and as such has lost over 100 million dollars in salaries, product endorsements, you name it. I don't for a second believe he would give all that up to put his face on HIV.

By your own admission that flying in a plane is just as dangerous if not more so than receieving bbbj; then one must assume that if someone pointed a gun at your head and said get on this airline and fly to Paris or eat this pile of dung -- then you would surely eat the pile of dung.

That whole thing about the guy getting HIV and giving it to his wife and him being sick but not her is non-sensical as well. Everyone has differing lengths of times it takes to start showing symptoms. Some in a year or less and others may take twenty years or more even without treatment. It is well known in the medical establishment that for some reason not everyone dies even from a virus such as HIV. There have also been plenty of white men (aryan as you say for reasons unknown to me, I know of no studies testing non-Jewish causcasians) that have been seriopostive for extended periods of time and have shown no symptoms.

Rock Dog
09-02-04, 03:47
Greetings,

There's one story that I found quite interesting. This happened quite a few years back now, but still seems relevant to the current discussion.

Paul Micheal Glaser (Starsky, from Starsky and Hutch) was married to a woman who caught HIV through a blood transfusion. She was unaware of this fact for several years. I assume that they had a fairly normal sex life and yet, he never caught it from her.

They had unprotected sex for years and he never contracted the virus from his own wife. This would seem to go along with current evidence that normal intercourse isn't a very effective means of transmission.

It would also seem to make sense that a BBBJ wouldn't be very effective either. On the other hand, other factors such as co-infection with other STD's greatly enhance transmission. This is especially true if both partners have some other kind of infection such as chlamydia or herpes.

You could also look at things from a common sense viewpoint. Let's say a prostitute (or any girl) told you straight up that she was HIV positive. Would you still want put your bare cock in her mouth? NO? I didn't think so. It's easy to convince yourself that "she probably doesn't have anything, and even if she did I probably won't get it because it's just a BJ".

I work as a health-care professional. Many of my patients have stuff and you would never guess it. Serious stuff like herpes, HIV as well as Hep C, and those are the ones who are willing to tell me about it.

It's easy for guys to reassure themselves with thoughts about how low the risk is. It's still a risk though.

Rock

Cachondito
09-06-04, 21:04
Civ2000,

Please post only about stuff you know something about. Your style is rude, and your ignorant approach is appalling.

The woman does have the virus, and she's had it for too long not to show any symptoms. She had PCR tests and all, and the proposed number of the virii in her blood and the T cells have been constant for the last 3 years, which simply means she's cerropositive and not sick withstanding the fact that she was diagnosed as HIV+ 6 years ago. The doctos still advise her to get checked at least annually, but they're pretty sure she's the type that's resistant to HIV. And I'm sure they all know better than you do!

As for Magic Johnson, I didn't say he was lying, I just said it was always a possibility. And he might also be one of those HIV-resistant people just like that woman. Being diagnosed as HIV+ 99% means you'll be six feet under in 12-15 years, but the %1 still exists. And that's what I meant by cerropositive, someone that has the virus but doesn't die.

As for the dung, you can go and eat it if you like. Have you ever heard of the word "analogy"? I meant I wouldn't do it because I was scared shitless of AIDS for quite a while.


CAPITO?

Travis Bickle 2
09-06-04, 23:01
Cachondito, Excuse me but I do know what I'm talking about. I never said the woman wasn't HIV-resistant -- I was merely pointing out that it takes different lengths of time for someone to become sick. For some it can take as little as a year -- for others as long as twenty. Just because after six years she's healthy and he's not doesn't really mean a thing. Where did you come up with the idea that six years is too long to have the virus and not show symptoms?

I know of several white males as well who were diagnosed in the eighties and have yet to develop symptoms or progress into full blown aids. After six years the majority of people with HIV are still symptom-free. Last I heard it took on average 8 to 10 years to progress to the point where they're getting sick. With the anti-viral cocktails that number continues to rise.

With the new drugs very likely you would be alive and well after 12-15 years, just like Magic Johnson. And in 12-15 years there could possibly be more drugs that could further extend your life. At a clinic where I worked I actually heard a doctor say that he would rather have a HIV diagnosis before a HEP C diagnosis as he feels the prognosis is better.

Sure you didn't say Magic lied -- just that possibly he lied. I don't see a lot of difference and you have yet to explain why someone would give up all he did to "possibly lie about having HIV". Doesn't make any sense to me at all. You're the one who brought up the possibility and yet fail to provide even a semi-plausable reason as to why. I've heard many people talk about Magic and AIDS and you're the first one to suggest he might be making the whole thing up.

Also, female to male transmission is difficult even with unprotected anal or vaginal sex. Would I do it? No. But as long as you don't have any breaks in the skin lining your penis (such as with herpes or syphilis) the chances are fairly low. The virus needs direct blood to blood contact and doesn't survive the arduous journey up the male urethra. Of course some skin breaks could be microscopic so I wouldn't test it.

GettingTang
09-07-04, 02:05
Facts:

Still as it stands right now, if you get HIV, you're probably going to die young. Not as young as you would have ten years ago, but still young.

Most scientists are worried they are doing more harm then good with the current regime of HIV cocktails. Why? Because they are now seeing this little nasty virus mutate faster then they could have anticipated or expected. Most estimate that if a new line of miracle drugs are not down the pipe in 6-8 years, the virus will change to the point, the current drugs are useless.

At the current rate of treatment, which again, most scientists do not believe it will last, one can safely expect to live 20-30 years assuming the following: You are infected in your teens, 20s or 30s and are otherwise healthy. AND you get early treatment! If you are unhealthy, old, catch a resistant strain, or do not catch the virus before it has done significant damge, your pretty much fucked no matter what.

All this aside, the drugs you use to treat HIV, make you lethargic, make your skin a mess, give you cancers, ulcers, liver problems, vision problems, toxic and allergic reactions, In other words, it's not a walk in the park. You will often look more sick, then before you even started the meds!

Most idiotic mongers believe, "oh well, if I catch HIV I'll just go see my doc and get my bag of meds and all will be fine." You are so very wrong. The media really did the youth in America a real disservice when they proclaimed HIV now a chronic disease. True, for 20 years, if, if, if, if, if, all the stuff I mentioned above AND during those 20 years, you will still suffer horrendous side affects from all those meds you will need to take and take FOREVER, you will never be able to escape them!

Last, to be fully honest, this all coming from a guy who has probably received about 2000 BBBJ from a good 400 or so different providers. I always use a condom for fucking, I never have or will do anal and I never go down at the Y. I test for all STDs every 6 months, like clock-work

I believe science has proven that getting the blow job is relatively safe, but giving one, or eating out, is not safe. There are studies that have shown, that going down on a female with no protection has transmitted the virus in as high as 6% of the exposures of known HIV positive cases! Sure, some studies show a far less chance. But it amazes me how many of you guys report about going down on the working girls. Are you guys nuts?

It really comes down to this......................"be safe, or die a miserable young death!"

Tang~!

Smut Villain
09-07-04, 03:08
GettingTang's last post should be the final word on this subject; truer words could not have been spoken!

Rubber Nursey
09-07-04, 03:24
I agree --excellent post Getting Tang. :)

Bradman
09-09-04, 15:09
Cachondito,

"Please post only about stuff you know something about. Your style is rude, and your ignorant approach is appalling. "

I have read some ridiculous things on this board, but I have to say that this one is close to the top of my list. When you ***** about someone not knowing what they are talking about, you should make sure that you are better informed than they are. And believe me, you are as ill-informed as anyone I've seen.

First, Civ2000 correctly points out that people can be infected for years before showing symptoms.

"Magic Johnson never announced whether or not he was cerropositive (?). Which means, some people will carry the virus, but the virus won't be capable of damaging their immune system like it does to normal people."

Completely WRONG!!! If someone is Seropositive, it means that they have tested positive for the HIV virus, either by ELISA or PCR. It has nothing to do with being resistant to HIV.

"No stats have been taken regarding this issue, but a common wild guess by the authorities say 1 black person in every 300 have this thing, and are basically immune to AIDS. But we white asses are shit out of luck. The same wild guess says 1 white woman out of every 800 is likely to carry this cerropositive gene, while the number in white men is almost funny compared to that."

There is actually a phenomenon whereby some people are resistant to HIV. Lots of stats have been taken, and it is due to a mutation in the gene that codes for one of the proteins required by HIV for entry into macrophages and T cells. This gene is actually HIGHEST in northern Europeans and practically non-existent in those of African and Asian descent.

You are also completely wrong in your description of post exposure prophylaxis. Antibiotics have absolutely ZERO effect on viruses, they only effect bacteria. HIV is a virus, which is more different from bacteria than we are from mold. You mention that antibiotics will cause your body to produce anticors. I assume by anticors you mean antibodies. Antibiotics have nothing to do with antibodies, and they won't make your body produce them. Also, if you get HIV and you have antibodies to it, you are still screwed. In fact, the ELISA test which tells you if you have an HIV infection is a test to see if your body is producing anti-HIV antibodies. Those antibodies are ineffective in ridding the body of HIV. Otherwise almost everyone who tests positive for HIV would have nothing to worry about.

You are correct in your statement that PCR is a test for the actual virus and that ELISA is a test for antibodies. You must remember though, that just because PCR fails to detect virus, you aren't safe. There is a threshold below which PCR can't detect the virus. And, since HIV is a retrovirus, it inserts its genes into the genes of its host cells. This means that while there may be no virus in the bloodstream, but the virus is still sitting there inside your cells, waiting to come out. This is similar to herpes or shingles where an infection from years ago does nothing until one day it pops out and makes you sick. So even if you somehow get rid of all virus in the bloodstream, you are still going to have an HIV infection. The idea of PEP is to use a shitload of anti-retroviral drugs (which have nasty side effects) and try to kill or inactivate as much virus as possible before the virus can establish an infection.

Maybe you should post only about stuff you know something about.

Webcams
09-12-04, 17:42
I am not a Doctor nor do I claim to be one, however just to drop my opinion in on this subject I belive there is not enough research being done on AIDS HIV because of the religious right wings morals due to the most common methods of transmission.

That said I hope they spend more time and money working on this as we are all at risk from it.

GettingTang
09-14-04, 10:50
not a gay problem, with no moral value tied to it you say? read this.

gay males simply don't give a shit. a gay male prostitutes who is hiv positive, tell his potential clients he has hiv and gives them the option of using a condom, most turn the condom down!

the average gay male will have sex with 64 different partners per year in this country, some as many as 1000 in a year! no moral ties?

86% of people with hiv even today in the us, got the disease from gay male sex, or iv drug use! still no moral ties?

sort of leaves one to conclude the following............."if you don't want aids, then don't get it" sure it's not always that simple, but most often, that is how it plays out!



san francisco -- paul torello is upfront about his life. he sells sex on the streets for drug money, and he's hiv positive. it's a story he tells all of his male clients before he lets them chose whether to proceed with or without a condom.

but more often than not, his words have little effect.

``it's sex that they really want to have,'' torello said. ``that's primarily the attitude in the city. it's a fun thing for them.''

that attitude is partly responsible for an alarming new report released wednesday that finds the hiv infection rate has more than doubled among san francisco's gay men in four years.

the report estimates that 2.2 percent of the 37,000 gay men in san francisco who are not infected with hiv will contract the virus -- up from 1.04 percent in 1997. if nothing changes, 748 gay men in san francisco will fall prey to hiv this year, the report projects.

that draft analysis, released wednesday, combines more than 25 studies by the university of california, san francisco, that surveyed some 10,000 gay men.

"we've been at this for 20 or 21 years, and people are tired of it,'' said dr. tom coates, director of the ucsf aids research institute and one of two dozen researchers and experts on the panel that released the report. ``people would rather not have to talk about difficult issues and not take precautions if they think there's a form of chemicals available to help them.''

indeed, the new antiviral drugs responsible for extending the lives of many hiv patients may be the biggest catalyst driving up the incidence rate of new infections.

long life spans make it possible for victims to spread the virus to more people, said mike shriver, mayor willie brown's adviser on aids and hiv policy and an organizer of the research panel. in addition, he said, the drugs -- first released in the mid-1990s -- have eased the horror of watching loved ones die a slow, agonizing death.

"why is it going up among men having sex among men?" said coates, who's been hiv-positive since 1985. "the whole idea of gay liberation is having sex with whom you want to have sex. it's breaking down old moralistic barriers. but it carries with it something lethal, and it's hard for the gay community to come to grips with.''

coates said he's seen a 50 percent decrease in hiv rates among intravenous drug users. he also hasn't seen any increases in the heterosexual population.

yet a quarter of the city's estimated 46,800 gay men are hiv-positive. and 80 percent of hiv infections in the city are among gay men, the study found.

that means stories like torello's aren't uncommon.

a native of hamden, conn., torello, 36, came to san francisco three years ago and contracted hiv in the past 18 months. he was sharing dirty needles to shoot-up speed and having unprotected sex with whomever would pay. he's not sure how he contracted the virus.

still, he continues to prostitute himself.

``every person who i ever hook up with, i tell them. always,'' said torello. ``but i've only been turned down once or twice.''

the increase isn't unique to san francisco. coates said numbers are on the rise in sydney and vancouver. in addition, the centers for disease control and prevention in atlanta reports an increase in syphilis and gonorrhea among gay males in los angeles, miami and seattle.

``we're definitely concerned about gay men across the county,'' said robert janssen, the cdc's director of the division of hiv/aids prevention. ``we're pulling together and have begun to look at a variety of ways to improve intervention and prevention programs for gay men and to begin to look at specific things we need to do.''

Joe Zop
09-14-04, 16:23
What an utter pile.

"86% of people with HIV even today in the US, got the disease from gay male sex, or IV drug use! Still no moral ties?"

What the hell does that mean -- tying the two together? Because of one stupid story? That's an utterly specious argument.

According to the CDC, in the US, 57% of all AIDS cases among women have been tied to drug use, compared to 31% of cases among men. (If we want to talk immorality, how about ending needle exchange programs when they've been absolutely proven to lower HIV infection rates among drug users? How is that a "moral" position?)

And the WHO still estimates that 80-90% of all those who are HIV positive worldwide have become so via heterosexual sex.

As far as condoms and high-risk behavior I suggest you simply look through the Thailand section (or elsewhere) and notice how many pics show condomless sex or take a read of Opebo's views on disease transmission risks.

A drug user who is a street prostitute hardly sums up the world at large, or its moral issues. People who frequent street sex workers, whether gay or not, are almost always engaging in higher risk behavior.

Could you please cite your source for saying "The average gay male will have sex with 64 different partners per year in this country?" That is higher than any other number I've read that uses current statistics. There's little question that the gay community has higher-risk sexual behavior in general, but tying that to morality is simply your personal perspective. And anyway plenty of mongers here have sex with more partners than that -- oh, wait, I forgot, you consider us all morally decayed, yourself included.

Tell me -- how many partners have you had in the past year or two? If it's a lot, do you deserve AIDS, since that is apparently the silly implication you're making?

GettingTang
09-21-04, 06:01
You people don't get it, I do. Here are some more facts, from the photo board where I was getting hasseled about commenting on a prostitute likely having HIV

I worked a stint as an intern in a drug and aids rehab center in Phoenix, Arizona over half of the summer. I had to take a 90 hour course on HIV and write six, 4 page essays on the matter.

Here is a fact, look it up, if you don't believe me. 85% of HIV positive people have a little ailment called seborrheic dermatitis. Now this varies in severity from person to person, but almost all will develop it and have a harder time treating it as the disease progresses.

We also know, that in the general population, less then 3% of people have seborrheic dermatitis, outside of HIV, yet 85% with HIV have it!

When seborrheic dermatitis is found anywhere but the scalp area, it raises the percentages it is related to HIV. When it is found anywhere else on the body besides the face and or scalp, this almost certainly means HIV infection!

And if that is not enough, 75% of those with seborrheic dermatitis on the face are men, outside of HIV.

So here we have a photo of a prostitute, who takes loads up her snatch and has seborrheic dermatitis on her face. (look closely at the close-up BJ shot) It does NOT take a rocket scientist to figure there is about a 95% chance that fine lady has HIV!!!!!!!!!!

The reason so many HIV positive people have seborrheic dermatitis, is it has NOTHING to do with a deteriorating immune system, it has to do with the immune system itself on high alert and very active as the HIV virus is present in the body, this causes things like increased allergic reactions, and yeast naturally found on the face and scalp to over produce and shed (thus seborrheic dermatitis) So before you all go calling me a fool and make fun, go educate you stupid asses on the matter.

For starters, try "seborrheic dermatitis HIV", in the google search engine, that should be a good start!

Tang~!

PS. oh yes, about 5 years ago, the American Medical association sent out a memo to all doctors across the USA, that when a patient is presented with seborrheic dermatitis, anywhere but the scalp, they should ask the patient if they have been at risk for HIV. It's that common, in HIV positive people!

Pute Nut
09-21-04, 06:49
Getting Tang,

You post some interesting stuff here, thanks for sharing.

What's your position (no pun intended) on DFK? Which STD's are included your battery of tests performed every six months?

Travis Bickle 2
09-21-04, 06:58
Tang, Excellent report as usual.

Only problem is I looked at all the New Zealand Photo's very carefully and saw no evidence of seborrheic dermatitis.

True she had a very poor complexion -- probably a combination of poor nutrition and drug use, but I compared her photos to pictures on the Google sites you recommended and they just don't look like it to me.

To me it looked more like "coke bugs" which is a phenomenon IV cocaine users experience where it feels as if bugs are crawling under the skin and they itch -- it heals -- and the cycle goes on and on.

That being said I completely agree with you that the photos were disgusting and a person would have to be a suicidal idiot to have bareback sex with her.

IMHO, any prostitute willing to go bareback either for bj's or FS either has HIV or is going to get HIV. She obviously cares little about her health.

The reason for this is simple. A SW willing to go bareback is almost always a heroin or crack cocaine user. She feels completely powerless to give up her addiction and believes the addiction is going to kill her before HIV ever will. If she gets a few extra bucks going bareback -- oh well -- she believes she's already dead anyway.

Civ2000

Travis Bickle 2
09-22-04, 06:13
Once again a regular poster on this board is exaggerating to the extreme. I researched HIV classes for interns and it is a four-hour class. This is the class that even HIV counselors take. I would be impressed with this posters knowledge even without his making up taking a 90 hour class in between religious conversions, trips to Thailand and Seattle, and the like.

Please, if you will, could you share some of your HIV essays with us? A ninety hour class? That would be fourteen weeks at most colleges.

Civ2000

GettingTang
09-22-04, 07:38
It was a type error, but you'll never believe me, it was a 6 hour course, given on two separate days. This was the sit in portion, in addition, we had to do for homework, 6, 4 page essays, that added up to an additional 85 hours or more on my own time. I spent this time researching quite extensivly about the disease.


I would consider myself damn near an expert on the topic. Not boasting, but facts are facts and I can dish anything anyone in here would like to know about HIV, if you find anything I post wrong, tell me. I assure you, you won't. The post below is 100% factual.

Also, in certain parts of the world seborrheic dermatitis is all but non existent. I believe it was Samoans and a few other ethnic cultures, they almost never get seborrheic dermatitis, so when someone of this ethnicity comes down with this minor ailment, they are almost always 100% positive. Doctors even use it as a marker.

Now it's been a while, so I could be wrong on the race. I'll check and test my memory.

Bottom line, if you're in your 20s,30s, 40s, and suddenly come down with a case of seborrheic dermatitis on other places then your scalp, you might want to reassess your risk history for HIV and get a test.

Tang~!

Civ, as rude as you can be, I do agree. Most hookers who do not use condoms either, A. Do not care about their life and are basically suicidal and on a "final drug run, or B. Already have the disease.

In the internship I did, over 50% of the prositiutes in the rehab tested positive for HIV. Most caught it from sharing needles. These girls absolutely did not care who they gave the disease too. It really sort of blew my mind. Also, about 55% had one form of hepatitus, or another, many with Hep C. It's scary when you really think about it.

I still admit, i get the occasional BBBJ, I do not believe that unless there is a very large amount of blood in her mouth and you don't have an open sore, then it's safe. Always look for signs of blood.

Also, keep in mind, most street hookers who have HIV are under NO treatment, thus the virus is running rampant in their system, they are much, much more contagious, then someone who is being treated for HIV. However, even when a male's HIV virus levels are undetectable, the virus still is very high in the prostate gland, thus ejeculation, carries high concentrations of HIV, even when the person is being treated. I just thought I would throw that in for all the gays in the room.

Member #1620
09-22-04, 13:43
I must admit, after reading numerous posts, there is a LOT of bullshit here. However, GettingTang has most of the facts down cold. I have also done lots of research on HIV and would make a couple of observations:

There is a reason the ELISA test is the most accepted worldwide.

Magic has HIV. No doubt about it.

There is a big difference in attitude between those whos HIV has "progressed" and those who are "non-progressors." Magic's claim to fame on beating HIV, I beleive to be true. He says one needs to eat a healthy diet and get plenty of excercise and rest. Taking certain vitamins in conjuction with protease inhibitors, anti-viral, and anti-retroviral medications will certainly prolong your life. Magic has had HIV for 13 years. I would bet he'll be around in another 13 years.

Early treatment may help an HIV patient but one should look at the famous case of Rae Lewis-Thornton. She has had full blown AIDS for almost 12 years now (although I haven't seen any updates about her in almost 2 years now).

Last observation: the best treatment for HIV/AIDS is the PREVENTION of HIV/AIDS. Easily said for those who already have it already. For those who do, medicine, diet, vitamins, excercise, and rest combined WILL help you prolong you life the most. For those who don't, I'm sorry if you don't want to hear this, but sex is a part of life most of us don't want to give up. So, WRAP IT UP!!! I must admit, I have had many BBBJ's from suspect girls. About 9 months ago I had one and a few weeks later I had rashes all over my body (I have found out this was just some exacerbation of psoriasis, perhaps from stress, which I have had for 16 years). Then, not to long ago, I began experiencing some headaches, sweating at night, and a little diarrhea. I panicked like a mother-fucker, but today I breathe easily because my test results came back negative.

I have changed my life for the better because of this scare. I believe this was god-willed. I haven't had any more headache or diarrhea and my psoriasis has mellowed out. I will NEVER have any unprotected contact (including BBBJ) ever again.

Yes people, BBBJ has risks. Blood CAN travel to the urethra and most SG's I have come across don't have Delta Dental or any form of dental hygene for that matter and even small amounts of blood can do you in. Or, think if your provider just gave a BBBJ to someone else who was infected and still had some of his cum in her mouth. Do you want some infected guys cum on your pecker?

Be safe all, but don't stop mongering, it's a way of life!

1620

Mock A Bee
09-23-04, 14:38
FYI, anyone interested in reading an excellent article on AIDS and heterosexual men, here is a link to a reprint from Details Magazine, March 2004.

It is a very well written article with a lot of information and details about your risks of contracting AIDS. As well, for those of you who enjoy DATY on pros, it also touches on the risk of oral sex.

After reading the article, it basically summarizes the fact that it is very difficult for men to contract aids from heterosexual sex, even without a condom. However, because of other STD's you should absolutely still use a condom.

Whatever Happened to AIDS and Straight Men?
By Kevin Gray

http://www.aliveandwell.org/html/risk_realities/whatever_happened.html

Member #1620
09-24-04, 13:26
Great link, Mock A Bee. It basically states that there is little risk with oral sex, as most of us know, but why gamble? I am DONE with any form of unprotected sex for a while now. All of you should follow the same; WEAR A CONDOM!!! It's not that hard.

1620

GettingTang
09-24-04, 23:40
Mock A Bee,

There is both truth and a misconception in your last post.

True, HIV is harder for a male to catch in straight heterosexual acts, then say butt screwing homos. Very true. However, the risk is very high for the receptive female. Think about it, first she gets rammed by an infected guys penis, possible irritating the lining of her mucous membrane in her vagina. It's essentially air tight way up in there, and keep in mind the inside of a vagina is nothing but a large mucous membrane. If it's irritated, or openly bleeding, no matter how slight, this increases her risk. Ok, so then the guy shots his wad of semen, containing the highest concentrations of HIV, next to blood, up inside her. Walla, she catches HIV. Now reversing that, the penis, is not a huge mucous membrane. It's basically covered with skin, although fairly thin, it's better then a mucous membrane. However the urethra, is not intact skin. Get her vaginal secretions down into the tip of your penis, and you're at some risk for the disease, especially if you're already packing another disease.

Another fact to consider is what I said before. The stats you quoted are true in the general population. But we are not talking the general population here. We are talking about strung out street walking prostitutes, who do not give 2 cents on the dollar worth a crap about their health. They have some of the highest HIV virus levels on the planet, thus are far more contagious then a female, who keeps good health and is being treated for her disease.

All you really have to do is read numerous articles on "hot spots" right now in the world regarding HIV transmission rates. It will blow your mind! Look at India, where it's common practice for males to use prostitutes and most do not use condoms. These men are catching HIV by the millions in these regions. So it can't be all that difficult to catch from heterosexual acts with a high risk hooker.

You must remember this, in many inner city areas, right here in the good ole USA, as high as 58% of the known street prostitutes are HIV positive! Those are not numbers I'm willing to play with! You have to wear a condom for intercourse, or this nasty disease will get ya! You can count on it!

Tang~!

Rubber Nursey
09-25-04, 15:51
"You must remember this, in many inner city areas, right here in the good ole USA, as high as 58% of the known street prostitutes are HIV positive!"

Can I just point out that those sex workers had to catch it from SOMEONE - and you can bet your bottom dollar it wasn't from shagging a gay guy or a lesbian lover.

Obviously drugs are a factor, but if female sex workers around the world are contracting HIV at those rates, then there are probably a lot of HETROSEXUAL MEN giving it to them as well.

It may be harder for a man to catch than a woman, but obviously its not THAT hard! :)

Rush 2112
09-25-04, 16:34
RN,
The vast majority of them catch it through IV drug use. I pick up SW's in Baltimore, Maryland, and there is an estimated 70,000+ IV drug users in the city. It has been estimated that there are 25,000 SW's here. Nothing more scary than getting a BJ from one of these lovelies, and having her needle fall out of her pocket and on the bed or car seat. These girls have no morals, and many are willing to go condom free (including anal) if it will earn them a small ($10-20 US) tip to buy more dope. $300-500 per day crack cocaine habits also add to the problem. You wouldn't believe what many of them would do for an extra rock. I do not believe in condom free sex outside of BBBJ. There is a very good needle exchange program here, but I've seen them share another's if they don't happen to have their own available. They don't care if they live or die for the most part, as long as they get their dope fix. They probably won't live long enough to die of AIDS anyhow.

Getting Tang Wrote:
All you really have to do is read numerous articles on "hot spots" right now in the world regarding HIV transmission rates. It will blow your mind! Look at India, where it's common practice for males to use prostitutes and most do not use condoms. These men are catching HIV by the millions in these regions. So it can't be all that difficult to catch from heterosexual acts with a high risk hooker.
The HIV rate is no higher than the US, in fact it might be a little lower. There are about 1.3 billion people in India, so a microscopically low percentage of of any disease prevalence rate will look like huge numbers as far as total overall cases. While sex, and new births of HIV infected babies is the leading cause of new cases, IV drug use is becoming a greater problem in that part of the world as well. There is no part of the world, however, that can hold a candle to Africa in the HIV/AIDS problem. How accurate these numbers are, and what is the major transmission method is a matter for debate.
HIV/AIDS statistics (http://w3.whosea.org/hivaids/factsheet.htm)

Peace,
K.J. Baltimonger

Mock A Bee
09-25-04, 21:04
Getting Tang,

Please note that I did not write the article contained in the link, nor do I quote any statistics from the article. As well, I don't specifically claim to make a case for or against the author's writing.

I only posted the link to the article as a benefit for everyone out there on the forum to offer a very well written and researched article that does not come off as particularly biased, but rather in my opinion fairly objective.

Reviewing my posting, I think it is pretty clear that I am just posting the article and do not claim authorship. In fact I included the author's name.

MAB

Rubber Nursey
09-26-04, 06:25
Baltimonger,

I certainly wasn't trying to exclude IV drugs as a significant factor - I was just attempting to remind people that sex workers don't just 'have' HIV. They have to get it from somewhere.

In Getting Tang's post, he says things like "We are talking about strung out street walking prostitutes, who do not give 2 cents on the dollar worth a crap about their health" and "Look at India, where it's common practice for males to use prostitutes and most do not use condoms. These men are catching HIV by the millions in these regions". In your own post you say that "These girls have no morals, and many are willing to go condom free (including anal) if it will earn them a small ($10-20 US) tip to buy more dope".

What I feel people here tend to forget sometimes, is that girls only do it without a condom if it is ASKED FOR, or her offer of unprotected sex is ACCEPTED BY, a client. I'd just like people to take a harder look at the part they themselves play in this problem. Requesting bare back sex and then accusing the GIRL of being immoral or unclean, is ridiculous - and dangerous.

As sexually active people, we ALL have to accept some responsibility for the health of ourselves AND each other. One guy has sex with a hooker and gives her the clap. The next guy has sex with her and - due to the increased risk caused by the internal irritation from the clap - gives her HIV. The next guy who has sex with her has herpes and - thanks to the increased risk from the open sores on his penis - he takes HIV away with him. Obviously that's over-simplified, but it could happen. We all have to take responsibility for our own actions, rather than just blaming it on someone else.

Rush 2112
09-26-04, 16:28
RN, I posted this on 9-10-04:
Bradman,
I think you missed my point. This is what these women do for money. I don’t think they are going to stop doing it because they’ve been outed here. I don’t think their business is going to decrease because they’ve been outed here. Jose the laborer or Joe six pack who might not have even heard of this board will be none the wiser and pick them up. They might in turn catch something and give it to another SW, who in turns gives it to me. Who do I blame? The SW who gave it to me, the monger who gave it to her, or the SW who gave it to him? The answer is: Me.

Many more out there have nasty infections other than those who may get a mention here. Did you know that your G donor had it prior to picking her up? No. Did you take the proper precautions? Obviously not. So why blame her? Let’s put some responsibility on our shoulders for a change. We should be determining the level of risk we are willing to accept.
This was done in response to another post from a monger who said to avoid 2 particular SW's because he caught the clap from one of the two. BTW, one of the 2 SW's named in that post died last night from her drug use. She was one of the smarter ones who understood the risk she was taking, and still lost. I spent time with her landlord and a friend (another SW) talking and reminiscing about her. It was a strange sight. I have many fond sexual and non-sexual memories of her. Mostly the latter. I donated money in her name to a local prostitution resource and outreach center. They had just provided her with new glasses free of charge, and this seemed like a good way to remember her.

I hope I didn't offend you with the usage of the word "girls". Unfortunately, when I look around these streets, I see way too many "girls" working, who haven't reached adulthood. It is quite depressing to say the least to talk to a 26 year old SW, and have her tell you she's been a SW for 13 years. All of the education they receive on STD's is rumor and hearsay they get from others. You would not believe how many of them think that syphilis is an incurable disease. The same ones don't realize that there is no more effective HIV transmission method than sharing needles. Condoms are free and easy to access. They come on the needle exchange van, which comes into the neighborhood several times per week. The can take all they want. Many choose not to. I have been offered bareback several times, if I would give them an extra tip. I simply decline their offer, and place them on my "do not pick up again" list.

However, I do agree with your statement that the men request bareback from their provider and she agrees, then accuses the provider of being immoral or unclean is ridiculous and dangerous. The provider is no more immoral or unclean than their client in this situation.

Peace,
K.J. Baltimonger

Condoms work. Use them.

Rubber Nursey
09-26-04, 16:45
Baltimonger,

That was a fantastic post - thank you for showing it to me and for posting it in the first place (and for putting it in this section, where people come looking for responsible sexual health information such as that).

And please accept my heartfelt sympathy for your loss. Your friend, and the other girls you spoke of, are exactly the reason why I first started in sex worker advocacy/activism. I was so very lucky to have such a truly wonderful experience of the sex industry. So many others around the world are not so lucky. My heart aches every time I hear of another life lost.

Wicked SH
10-05-04, 04:33
does anybody know what the risks are with oral sex with all the diseases such as hpv, hsv, hiv, and hav? is there a web site that goes into any detail?

also i hear quite often it is more difficult for a man to get a disease from intercoarse. is there a good site that goes into those statistics and breaks out each disease?

for instance the likelyhood of a person contracting hpv when a herpes outbreak is not occuring is fairly low even without a condom.

also i always [CodeWord111] (http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord111) and wash as soon after intercoarse as i can. is there any statistics about how that affects transmission?

----
another item is condoms. i seem to have them break to often. they have been properly put on, i am big but by no means huge, i use lubrication with women who need it. i tend to have the most problems with durex sensitive which i have found to provide as much sensation as possible. i realize they are thinner but even so the failure rate shouldn't be between 1 in 5 to 10. i normally only use them to prevent an unwelcome surprise versus a unwanted disease because of this. so they are left only for trusted girl friends that i would have unprotected sex with. also the condoms provided here in china seem to have a pretty high failure rate. for the last year i have been having trojans sent from america and haven't had a failure but also might as well had sex with a blow up dolls.

anyone found a condom that provides great protection but also lets you feel naked?

have there been any studies of transmission with the different thickness' of condoms?

Rubber Nursey
10-06-04, 13:47
I use the ultra-thin Durex condoms, too (marketed as Durex Featherlite in Australia) and I've never had a problem with them breaking. With such a high failure rate, it could very well be the fault of your retailer. Are the condoms kept in a hot store in full sunlight? Are they past their use-by date?

Some general tips for condoms:
* Always make sure the condom is the right size - I don't know about overseas, but Durex Featherlite only come in 'regular' here. Four Seasons also make a 'Sensitive' condom, as do Glyde (in Australia at least) - but both are also only available in a 'regular' size here.
* Watch fingernails, zips and tongue rings - especially with ultra thin condoms.
* Make sure they are kept VERY COOL - if they are exposed to heat or direct sunlight, they will become brittle and break easily. (This includes carrying them in your wallet, pocket or glove compartment). Keep them in the fridge or in a cool, dark room.
* NEVER use oil or oil-based lubricants. Oil rots the latex in minutes. Only ever use water-based lube.
*** Strange fact: Anti-thrush pessaries (tablets pushed into the vagina to treat thrush, which foam up as they dissolve) can rot a condom in SECONDS. Obviously this isn't going to be something you come across often, but watch out if your girl has used a pessary in the last 12 - 24 hours.

As to the other stuff:
* HPV is the genital warts virus. Women could have genital warts on their cervix or vaginal wall and you won't be able to see them. If she does, a condom should protect you from it (but if she has them on the outside of her vagina or her pubic area, your condom won't help at all).
* Herpes is also contagious just prior to, and just after, an outbreak. There may be no visible symptoms at all. Again, condoms will only protect the penis from the virus - not the rest of your pubic area.
* There is a pretty high risk of catching genital herpes getting a blowjob from a girl with oral herpes. A really large percentage of the general population has oral herpes (coldsores).
* It is more difficult for a man to contract HIV from a woman. For all the other sexually transmitted infections - the odds are pretty much as bad for you guys as they are for us. :)

Someone's also written a great post on herpes in the 'Safe Sex' section, that you might wanna check out.

Domino
10-06-04, 15:12
RN: So what type of condom broke on you when the Zimbabwan guy was fucking you?

Rubber Nursey
10-06-04, 15:20
You have an excellent memory!!! Would have been a Four Seasons Extra Large - if they're big and black and beautiful, a Four Seasons Extra Large is the only way to go! :) From memory, he was too big for the extra large, which would be why it broke. Never had a Durex Featherlite break on me, though.

Rubber Nursey
10-06-04, 17:06
PS. Ultra-thin condoms are EXCELLENT for oral sex on a woman. Get some scissors and cut one side from the base right up to the tip and then fold it out. You'll end up with a triangle which is almost a perfect fit and if you place it lube side down, it will even stay put. She'll be able to feel every move you make, right down to the warmth of your breath. Take it from me, it beats the hell outta those dental dams! :)

Bradman
10-06-04, 20:11
Wicked SH,

"For instance the likelyhood of a person contracting HPV when a herpes outbreak is not occuring is fairly low even without a condom."

That liklihood would be extremely low because HPV doesn't cause herpes and herpes doesn't cause HPV.

HPV is the human papillomavirus that causes warts and in some strains, cervical cancer.

Herpes is caused by the herpesvirus.

You can get both even with a condom if they are outside the vagina and come in contact with skin not covered by a rubber.

Worf1972
10-07-04, 17:42
That's why purel or any anti-bacieria spray or gel is good to wash your area that is outside the condom protection. Using alcohol wipes would be great also to carried with your person.

Ron Weasley
10-07-04, 20:14
RN,

I WOULD NEVER TRUST A DUREX!

Maybe they are good in Aussie, but in the US they are crap!. I have several occasions where they have broken(Thankfully on GF's). Living in South Africa now, I actually buy ten 36 packs of Trojans, I have never had a problem with that brand.

But I guess ANY condom brand can break. Just curious, if I used a super thin condom for oral sex with a woman, what if it broke? After all wouldn't a regular non-lubricated condom be better? I guess if you have used a dental dam before you HAVE PUT yourself at risk already so what would be the point of a super thin?

I can understand that people wil take your advise, and it's great advise. Thing is that if they have already been exposed to the risk then what is the point? The best way is NOT TO PERFORM ORAL SEX ON A SW!. Just think of all the guys that she fucked before you. And now you are licking her out? But I guess that's what some nasty buggers like!.

Cheers.

Rubber Nursey
10-09-04, 14:18
Ron Weasley,

Thanks for sharing about the US Durex condoms. I can't vouch for the quality of condoms in other countries. And I don't think we have Trojans here (not that I've seen, anyway) so I can't comment on them at all.

Unless you've got a tongue ring (I have and it means being a little more careful) I can't see how anyone could break a condom when DATY. A regular condom would be fine, but the whole point of me writing about the ultra-thins was because the sensation for the woman is much better. With a lubricated ultra-thin, the layer of latex is thinner and the lubrication on the bottom helps the condom slide across her clit instead of it sticking to her. Dental dams are designed to give maximum protection during oral sex, but I've found them close to impossible to use (yes, I've used them on girls) and when on the receiving end, you can barely feel a thing. You might as well be doing it through her jeans.

As for "if they have already been exposed to the risk then what is the point?" - are you serious? I've got carried away and had sex without a condom before (in my private life, of course) so should I just not bother using condoms any more, seeing as I've already put myself at risk??? I'm hope I'm just misunderstanding your post and that wasn't what you were saying.

If doing oral on a working girl isn't your thing, then nobody's saying you have to. But I can assure you, LOTS of men want to do it and if that's what they want, then they need to know how to protect themselves and the worker concerned. Most of them also like to make it feel GOOD for her as well, which is why I brought up the ultra-thins.

And with a dental dam or condom covering the area, you're not really "licking her out", so it doesn't really matter how many men have been there before you, does it?

Alan Cain
10-09-04, 17:04
QUestions....so I've just had a little condom malfunction recently. Through which I picked up Gonorhea. I'm also getting an HIV test. Naturally I'm more than a little concerned so I've been reading up.

I can understand the scientific reports that talk to the lower likelihood of HIV transmision from woman to man through vaginal sex. I've been to several of the websites that even questions IF HIV has been proven to cause AIDS. Or if HIV even exists?

What I can't figure out is if its NOT vaginal sex...then how is HIV/AIDS spreading in hot spots identified throughout the world?

I'm just trying to put my mind at ease through the weekend while I wait for my test results and it doesn't sound like I can believe anyone since even the Dr told me that tests can show false positive and false negatives....i.e. tells me they aren't very confident in the testing they are administering.

I don't want to open up a can of worms, just trying to educate myself better.

BTW. In response to those comments below. I think there are plenty of reasons why to practice safe sex regardless if HIV/AIDs spreads that way or does or does not exist or whatever. I think THAT is the point.

Rubber Nursey
10-09-04, 17:56
Alan Cain,

Don't panic! (Yeah I know - easy for me to say! :) )

As you can see from Domino's post below, I had a scare myself a few years ago. Unfortunately, all you can do is wait.

"...even the Dr told me that tests can show false positive and false negatives..."

HIV takes some time to show up in a test, so having a test soon after the condom breakage may not give you an accurate result. You will probably have to have another test in a couple of months time.

There's nothing I can say that will make you feel any better, but just remember - in comparison to other STDs, HIV is really not all that easy to catch. Think about how many billions of people are out there having unprotected sex and then think about how many people actually end up infected.

It sounds to me like you didn't get too much pre-testing counselling from your doctor, which is pretty poor form on their part. If I were you, I would ring an anonymous health line or HIV info line and just blurt out everything that's on your mind. Ask them every question that pops into your head. I did exactly that and felt a lot better after it.

Good luck, honey, and try to keep smiling. :)

GettingTang
10-09-04, 20:49
Alan Cain

First and foremost, we are way past the debate as to whether hiv causes aids or not. It does, end of subject.

Next, your chances of catching hiv from a single exposure where the condom broke, is very, very low, but possible. Getting tested is a good idea.

Next, female to male transmission is on the lower end of the spectrum, when it comes to risk, however, it is far from impossible. Basically you're dealing with a virus, it's harder to catch then most viruses, because it has to find a way into your blood stream, whereas other viruses, i.e., cold and flu, simply have to come into contact with any mucous membrane.

HIV needs a solid implant into your blood stream, this can be achieved by a small cut, open sore, or wound and her vaginal secretions, or blood, coming into direct contact with that cut or sore. The presence of other STDs will increase your risk, by about 500%, assuming hiv was present.

What concerns me most about your case, is did you have the gonorrhea, prior to this exposure and perhaps not know it? This would increase the chances of you becoming infected, assuming she was infected.

All in all, the odds are tremendously in your favor. So much so, you can probably bet you life savings on it.

Tang~!

GettingTang
10-09-04, 21:03
Watch for,
one other sign to watch, is 90% of people who become infected will have severe seroconversion illness. If you know specifically when your risk was, you can monitor yourself for possible seroconversion. Now, don't be alarmed if you catch a common cold, or virus, as most people who go through seroconversion become VERY ill.

The medical establishment does not really like to tout these statistics, because they don't believe in people assessing their hiv status on symptoms and this is true. You should never guess your status on symptoms, however, facts are facts.

90% of those infected will seroconvert between 2-5 weeks after exposure, they will become violently ill, so much so that 80% will seek medical attention, although most doctors will not associate this as hiv infection (something the AMA, is working to correct) you will get very Ill, possibly with numerous symptoms, including, but not limited to, severe fever, fatigue, night sweets, possible strep throat infection, diarrhea, severely swollen glands, over 60% will get a large raised rash covering numerous parts of the body, especially the hands and feet, etc., etc., most people develop numerous aliments during conversion. However, a few, get none, or very little. So watch for any signs of conversion illness, be somewhat alarmed, if you become extremely ill in the coming weeks. Remember, I'm not talking a minor cold, or a sniffle, but seriously sick, this could mean you were exposed to hiv. Wait about 5 weeks, get tested, then test again at 13-16 weeks for a final conclusion. It's hell i know, be a neccessary evil of this little hobby we all partake in.

Tang~!

Alan Cain
10-09-04, 21:17
Getting Tang and RN: Thanks for the advice.

I don't think I had Gonorhea to start...I think I received it. With that said there was no REAL way for me to tell.

Do you have some suggested websites links where you are pulling your %'s from? I'd like to do more reading.

BTW. I did come down with a cold this week. HOwever I think it has to do with people coming into work sick than this. So far 2 weeks from the incident and nothing serious in terms of illness. It took about 7 days before something showed up for the Gonorhea in the form of painful urination. But nothing else so far.

Pute Nut
10-09-04, 23:23
In case of an incident with probability of becoming infected (such as accidental stick by contaminated needle) there are some good prophylaxis guidelines (and treatment) available.

http://www.rki.de/INFEKT/AIDS_STD/AZ_ENG/AZ_E.HTM?HIVPEPK_E.HTM&1

Ron Weasley
10-10-04, 05:44
RN,

I WAS NOT JOKING.

Wheither it be unsafe sex, or whatever the case is. If you have had unprotected sex with anyone, and I stress anyone(Man,woman, whatever) Then ANYONE WHO has had unprotected sex potentially has been exposed.

I understand your point fully, not trying to argue but the potential of any diesese could be there. You surely CANNOT tell me that I am wrong on that?

Personal question: There is a well known member of this site. He does post in the NEW ZEALAND boards. He does post pics and has the most on that board. Would you have sex with any of those girls? They have been exposed because this gentelman DOES NOT use condoms or dental dams etc.

Just my thought

After all you are an RN I assume. so you would know better than most(NOT being sarcastic, givign complement.)

Cheers

Rubber Nursey
10-11-04, 19:49
No, I'm not an RN - its just a shortened version of my old forum handle. But I did work in sexual health for several years, plus I was a sex worker, so I had to learn how to protect my own sexual health as well.

I apologise for misunderstanding your last post. I thought you were saying that once you'd been exposed, there was no point using protection.

There is always the potential of getting some sort of infection, like if the condom breaks or you come in contact with a skin-to-skin disease. However, condoms are pretty darn effective and when used properly, the risk for MOST infections is pretty low. And don't forget that a large number of infections are totally curable and if you have regular testing, you can identify and treat them quickly.

As for your question - no, I would not have sex with any of those girls. Nor would I have sex with that particular monger. I wouldn't have sex with anyone who offered me sex without protection (or asked for it) because that says to me that they probably ALWAYS do it. And you're dead right - when you know full well they don't care about their own health, its probably not worth the risk, even with protection.

However, if I was to go to a working girl and she offered me a dental dam (or a client insisted on condom use) then I would trust that they are doing their best to protect themselves and I would trust the condom or dam to do its job. At least that way if the condom broke, I could be 'relatively' safe in the knowledge that the other person was looking after their own health. DATY with a dam or condom I would do without hesitation, because its highly unlikely that I could be exposed to an STD.

Ron Weasley
10-11-04, 21:27
RN,

Well spoken.

Question: What is the risk factor of giving oral to a woman without protection? (IE clean escort type clean shaven etc)

And what is the risk difference between a lubed condom and a non-lubed one? Besides the lube?

Thanks man.

Cheers.

Rubber Nursey
10-12-04, 15:31
"Question: What is the risk factor of giving oral to a woman without protection? (IE clean escort type clean shaven etc)"

There is still a bit of debate about HIV transmission during oral sex (on a woman). The risk would be very, very small, but I guess its still a risk all the same.

The risk of YOU catching oral herpes (coldsores) from her is certainly there, but the risk of HER catching genital herpes from your coldsore is much, much greater. Studies done in my country proved that STD rates in sex workers was much lower than the STD rates of the general public - except herpes, which was almost twice as common in sex workers than in other people. This is probably because coldsores are so very common (1 in 6 people have the virus, from memory?) and the majority of sex workers who offer DATY, do it without protection.

You can catch gonorrhoea of the throat from performing oral sex on a woman (or a man). There are some other STDs, like syphilis, that can also be passed from mouth to vagina and vice versa.

And at the risk of really grossing everyone out - there are 'other' things that could come out of there that wouldn't be very pleasant, like period blood or (I warned you this would be gross!!) someone else's semen. As a woman, I can testify that what goes up, can take a very long time to come back down! :) She may not be doing unprotected sex at work - but she could have had sex with her husband last night or that morning.

"And what is the risk difference between a lubed condom and a non-lubed one? Besides the lube?"

None, I don't think. In theory, the lubricated ones would be safer because they should have less chance of breakage caused by friction. In practice, they never have enough lube on them to really make it worthwhile. Personally, I don't like lubricated condoms much. They taste disgusting (and I like to put condoms on with my mouth!). I prefer to use the brands with little or no lubricant and just add lube out of a bottle, which smells and tastes a lot better and provides much better protection from condom breakage.

Condoms with spermicides on them, however, are a risk to your female partner. The spermicide irritates her vagina, leaving her insides raw and inflamed - a dangerous condition to be in if the condom breaks.

MeatMan
10-12-04, 16:27
I got this report moments ago and it broke my heart:

CHAIYAPHUM: -- A German national is believed to have deliberately infected more than 450 young women with the HIV/AIDS virus in Thailand's northern Chaiyaphum province.

The one-legged naval veteran is in jail for overstaying his 30-day tourist visa by three years. His non-immigrant visa had expired in 2001.

Hans-Otto Schiemann, 56, who has lived in Thailand for nine years, said he went on a sexual rampage after testing positive to HIV/AIDS in 2001.

He would cruise in his car, looking for groups of young people after school and offering them the equivalent of their parents' monthly wages to have unprotected sex. They generally agreed.

His core prey consisted of young girls, 15 and older. "They sell their children here," he said. "The only reason I'm in jail is because I had sex with a policeman's daughter."

Schiemann, who was living off a German disability pension, had also offered loans to poor people in return for use of their daughters.

A spokesman for the German embassy said Schiemann had been detained for overstaying his visa but the embassy was not aware of other allegations.

The deputy head of the provincial police station, Kampol Nonuch, said that under Thai law Schiemann could not be held for deliberately spreading the AIDS virus. "Look, we have him on visa charges, but we want to make it much harder for him than that . . . if we let him go, he might just end up in Cambodia, Laos or Burma and keep spreading this disease," he said.

The Public Health Ministry wants Chaiyaphum's young women tested for HIV, regardless of whether they have had sex with Schiemann. Local hospital staff had posted more than 2000 warnings about the German, urging girls to have blood tests. In response to the appeal, 66 girls had tested positive out of a town of 30,000 people.

"We don't know how many people he has infected, but it's somewhere in the vicinity of 400 to 500," a health official said.

Schiemann's common-law wife, Noi, is dying from AIDS and has allegedly suffered several violent attacks by Schiemann.

--The Age, AU 2004-10-12

I hope this fucker rots!

Rubber Nursey
10-12-04, 16:48
"I got this report moments ago and it broke my heart...

...I hope this fucker rots!"

I'd love to say something about this piece of ______ , but I can't even find the words. I'm with you, honey. I feel sick at the thought.

Joe Zop
10-12-04, 17:46
This is a new definition of low in human depravity.

Winky Dinky
10-12-04, 22:45
I would like to ask RN or any other informed members whether there is any correlation between the amount of time spent bareback and the risk of catching an STD.

On the few occasions when my raincoat has fallen off or been torn during vaginal intercourse, I've been able to find out and pull out in a matter of a few seconds, but do those few seconds equal an entire unprotected session in terms of risk, or I'm I likely to be 'home-free' due to the early detection?

Pute Nut
10-13-04, 18:41
This article is simply BS. Let's get back on topic. The truth.

GettingTang
10-14-04, 05:12
This story from Thailand is complete BS. You can take a syringe, fill it with 2 cc of highly infected HIV tainted blood and directly inject it into people's blood stream and not have the infection rate as this article claims. HIV in normal heterosexual acts is not very contagious. True, it is more contagious for the female recipient, but it still usually take hundreds of exposures before transmission occurs. If they had of claimed he infected 3 or 4 girls, maybe even a dozen, it would be believable, but 400-500? common, he would have to be having sex 200-300 times a day to achieve this feat.

Tang~!

Joe Zop
10-14-04, 05:14
The point is not whether or not the guy infected X or Y number of people, it is the intentionality of the behavior.

Rubber Nursey
10-14-04, 13:04
"The point is not whether or not the guy infected X or Y number of people, it is the intentionality of the behavior".

And for me, as a mother, the fact that he targeted children. I don't care whether he infected 1 person or 1000 people. He was bribing kids to have sex with him, which is bad enough in itself - let alone when he knew full well he was HIV+. That's just sick.

Migrant One
10-14-04, 16:05
RN I agree

Anyone targeting kids shot be strung up by their d...

Also with the knowledge of his infection, compounding the problem.

Much of the problem IMHO is our press nowadays. Not just in this arena, but in all other aspects of life. Free press is wonderful, sensationalism isn't. The numbers quoted in the article seem to high as mentioned here.

The facts on AIDS transmission appear to vary by expert, with some commonality. I had a big scare, found out a lady I had been seeing on and off for 3 years was diagnosed as positive, her doctors best guess was about a year or so before we met.

All our intercourse (both doors) was covered, with only one blowout, but we always started with mutual oral, sometimes to completion. Math a little hazy, don't hold me to particulars but around 20 trips over 3 years (different countries) each trip averaging 10-12 days, generally 2 sessions a day so quite a bit of contact.

migrant

Ngp477
10-14-04, 16:37
Fact is I will probably die from my high cholesteral before I ever get aids. I should be eating more pussy red meat and less animal fat.

Firedick
10-14-04, 20:31
Npaul,

Guess you should stick to skinny girls. (sorry folks, I couldn't resist)

Let's assume, for a moment, that the story is true. Why not just announce his release date and location and be done with it ? My money would be on him not making it to a taxi.

FD

GettingTang
10-15-04, 03:38
Well said Domino,

This story stinks from all angles. For the record, any person who tries to intentionally infect another person with HIV, should be given the death sentence, (in my opinion). So if this guy, even attempted to give it to just one young lady, he deserves no mercy.

However, the facts in this story just don't add up. I for one, feel HIV is somewhat more contagious then what some of us are lead to believe, but I also recognize it's not as contagious as it would have to be, for one guy to infect 400-500 others.

Statistically, if a male who has HIV screws a female, unprotected and cums in her vagina, it takes an average of 100 exposures for her to become infected. If the female is the infected one, it takes about 3000 tries on average, for the male to become infected.

So this guy would have had to have had sex, hundreds of thousands of times, to have infected 500 girls!

As I stated before, even if he were to inject them with HIV tainted blood, the infection rate still lies around at only 15% for this act.

If you took HIV infected blood and pulled it from the HIV infected person's veins, shot it into 100 non HIV infected persons, about 15 on average would catch the virus.

The Thais, as much as I love them all, are famous for sensationalizing things. This is another prime example of this.

These girls were either infected by long term acts of being prostitutes and were complied together to make a case that this single guy got them all, or the story is complete BS. I guess a price one might expect to pay, for screwing the local police man's daughter, in Thailand.

Tang~!

Travis Bickle 2
10-15-04, 03:56
Tang, Once again -- I disagree. When a man has vaginal sex with a women the small blood vessels lining the vagina are always torn to some extent, and semen is loaded with HIV. There is a case in western Washington right now about a guy with HIV who knowingly had sex with about 30 different women -- some only once or twice -- and now about 25 of them have tested positive for the strain of HIV this man carries. It's a lot easier to pass than you might think.

To think that a guy who has been infected for three years (possibly longer) could have sex with six or seven hundred women is not too implausible at all. I'm sure the 400 to five hundred infected by him alone is an exageration, many may have been infected by Big Schlong, LOL! But half that number wouldn't surprise me.

Civ2000

Firedick
10-15-04, 18:45
Domino,

Your points are well taken, but you seem to have overlooked my opening qualifier: "Let's assume, for a moment, that the story is true". Someone who could do such a thing deserves what he gets.

I think that you know me well enough to know that I would not advocate denial of due process, normally. Granted, this is Thailand we're talking about, not the hallowed halls of western judicia, and I would view "proof" or evidence with scepticism. But, if guilt was sure, I could live with street justice trumping due process. OJ walked. Richard Ramirez (the Night Stalker [Thanks Chubby]) would have been beaten to death by his citizen captors had the police not intervened. Now he sits on death row nearly 30 years after his crimes.

Being affected by the emotion of an issue does not make me a simpleton. It is a human response and I am grossly human.

You are a valued contributor to this board, but you can be rather condescending. Your "choir" take is an example IMHO. And this is an opinion section. Mine are not invalidated simply because they differ from yours anymore than yours are invalidated by mine.

I'm sorry that I felt the need to defend myself, but I felt that your post was more of an attack on me than on the validity of the story.

Beer ?

FD

Luv Chubby Girl
10-15-04, 19:05
Richard Ramirez was not the hillside strangler, he was called the "Night Stalker." Angelo Buono and Kenneth Bianci were the "Hillside Stranglers."

Rolly Polly
10-15-04, 19:54
I guess I am part of the choir eventhough I perfer to be recognized as an independant pain in the ass/nosey motherfucker.

I'm not really that smart of a guy, average at best, so I'm having trouble figuring out why someone (Domino in this case) that offers so many opinions (some good/some bad) has such distaste for opinions.

Ok, so granted the thread is entitled "the TRUTH about Aids", but whenever a dialog is in place there are going to be opinions expressed, it just happens.

Domino, this is a question directed towards you, in my pathetic attempt to "brain" storm I came up with an idea to run by you. If we had a doctor or research scientist among us that would come forward as such (I'm sure there are plenty out there) and they were asigned "moderator" of this section to answer questions and defeat mistruths would that satisfy your needs?

Joe Zop
10-15-04, 20:32
Endless reproduction of the same post and repetition of insults is not "discussion" -- it's a Monty Python skit.

Firedick
10-15-04, 22:28
Joe,

"argument is an intellectual process intended to establish a proposition" "no it isn't"

Yes, I'm wasting bandwidth.

Domino,

Sorry for flying off the handle. You just pricked a sensative spot.

I am flattered by making your "top 10".

As for the Philippines. Glad to help. If you think all would like to hear, post a question in the appropiate section. But if you'd rather, PM me with questions. Outside chance I'll be there in Feb. (Phuket and the RP)

Luv Chubby,

Yes ! I was racking my brain but came up short. Thanks for the correction.

FD

Rubber Nursey
10-22-04, 17:47
Firedick,

There was a top ten as well?? Tell me...did I happen to make it into the top ten by any chance?? ;)

Garotoz
11-14-04, 01:26
The data on HIV transmission is frequently clouded by political correctness, NGO agendas and a general lack of good scientific study. That said, there appear to be some reliable studies published in the last few years.

Receiving blood from an infected person is a nearly surefire way to acquire the infection. The rate of sero-conversion will depend on the ammount of the inoculant and the viral load in the infected individual. This kind of behavior is a no no.

Another no no is to engage in unprotected receptive anal intercourse with an infected individual. The major role of the colon is to conserve water through absorbtion. The colon is lined with a very thin layer of cells and is easily abraided. It is well documented that a single act of receptive anal intercourse is enough to catch the disease. Remember, the whole epidemic started with a Canadian airline steward who had single sexual acts with multiple receptive males and the rate of transmission was tremendous.

The rate of HIV transmission from getting a BBBJ is virtually nonexistant, but you can catch other things like gonorrhea.

Now what about other methods? Any sore on the penis or surrounding areas or in the vagina or vulva of women is a welcome wagon for contracting HIV or any other STD for that matter.

Quinn et al conducted a study of concordant couples in Africa. That is a situation where either the male or the female was positive for HIV. They were offered condoms, but most refused. They were followed for 3 years. The results were very interesting. If the infected partner had less than 1500 viral particles per ml, the other partner never sero-converted. No circumsized male ever sero-converted. And it took hundreds of sexual acts (nearly 500) to contract the disease.

In South Africa, it has been reported that only 10% of the males are circumsized. The average male may have as many as 8 partners per day (what are they taking) and other STDs which damage the skin of the penis are rampant. Bathing immediately after sex may not be an option as well. (90% of males in non-muslim SE Asia are uncircumsized).

What to do? Use a condom. It will protect you from 99% of STDs and make it very unlikely you will ever contract HIV. You can still get warts and molloscum and possibly herpes, but bathing immediately after sex will help a lot. If you have the resourses to have your partner proven not to have a disease then you can go bare back. Never engage in receptive anal intercourse or IVDA.

I hope this is of some use.

Garotoz

Domino
11-25-04, 15:43
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/health/content/health/aids.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4039583.stm: Genital herpes is ok and no big deal? Would you fuck her?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4032699.stm

This HIV article has some good links for anyone interested.

Circumcision: Just to take one element. That is something that can be measured so academics write papers on that. The US has a relatively high circumcision rate so these protected morons can do lots of studies on that, comparing irrelvant group A to irrelevant group B. In Africa, some tribes are cut, others not. Muslims and Jews tend to be but both religions also have lots of laws about cleanliness. In Africa, anyway, figures and studies don't mean shit.

Bottom line: if you are cut, don't think it gives you one iota more of protection. Better sacrifice a chicken to the gods. And that is despite what any gang of libertarians such as Libertarians for Christ aka Pheonix Dave may say.

I say that as one who is currently fucking hookers in Northern Thailand who have very high HIV rates.

Garotoz
12-14-04, 20:01
I received a PM from a member about Hepatitis B. It is well documented that about 80% of native born asians are Hep B positive. They are born with the infection and they do not develop an immunity to the virus. Their viral titers are high and they may pass it to others through sexual intercourse, or through oral/fecal contamination.

There are two ways to avoid the disease. One, use a condom. And two, get immunized for the disease.

Garotoz

Domino
12-15-04, 09:07
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20041215/ap_on_he_me/aids_drug


Here is another bunch of lies from these well funded libertartians. It would make more sense to put these assholes on trial for war crimes than Saddam: they are responsible for a lot more damage. But the caravan will roll on and the parasites will continue to gorge on the Aids industry. Mistruths about Aids would be more appropriate.

Joe Zop
12-15-04, 18:18
Garotoz, while I absolutely agree with you on your recommendations regarding Hep B safety, I'm unable to track down your 80% statistic, which seems very high. Could you refer me to a source? Most things I've seen say that around 75% of those who are chronically infected (and thereby carriers) of Hep B live in Asia, but that's obviously different than sayng three-quarters of the population is infected. The CDC says that 90% of those infected at birth and not immunized become carriers, and China supposedly has the worst problem overall, as it has 100 million who are chronically infected, but that's still far less than 10% of the population. If 80% are infected at birth the chronic numbers would be much higher.

Garotoz
12-15-04, 20:34
I must stand corrected, the 80% figure is indeed incorrect it is 10% in Thailand. But remember it is 100 times as infectious as HIV and is spread in the same way as HIV.

Sorry about the percent error.

Garotoz

Garotoz
12-15-04, 23:19
I found a reliable infectious disease resource which states that in highly endemic areas such as Africa, Asia and Oceania about 20% of the general population are chronic carriers of Hep B. And about 40% of these acquired it at birth. Their immune systems failed to respond to the virus and they have no antibodies against the disease. And they have high viral titers and are infectious. The actual percentage of chronic carriers will vary from region to region. Thailand 10%, Taiwan 20%, etc.

It doesn't matter really. These are very high numbers for the general population and I expect sex workers, and IVDAs to have much higher percentages - well above 50%.

Loser
12-24-04, 07:16
Just tell me what Medical science has contributed to sex in the first place.
All they did is scare people from sex with dreaded diseases they find now and then with names like AIDS, Herpes, Hepataisis, gonnorea and may be 100 more i don't know off, these are the "stars" of medical field that make billions of dollars every year to these so called medical experts.

All they do is find diseases first, then try to find the cure so that they can in mean time suck millions from ignorent fearfull masses of the word "disease "and they don't even gaurentee your survival from the next big event.

sex is now acrynon for fear, thanks to these guys, why can't they just give clear cut answers and say once and for all that, OK so here we go, from now on no more diseases to ye people of humanity we have found the cure for all disease that incur the planet earth.

I was so scared of all the diseases on my young days after getting extra knowledge on the medical front on sex that i just shagged my way to adult hood.

you can't touch girls lips 'cos saliva may be infected, you can't do a BBBJ, as her saliva may infect your open dick head, she may have cuts in her lips from you can get infected if you let her suck it, you can't DATY as her squirt may contain harmfull bacteria to cause you gonnorea, syphllies, herpes and god knows what else and what not. we call ourself men, if we can't fuck decently.

Its like women have become some kind of a disease magnet, if you touch her you are dead. you can't do anal sex as thats more likely to contain the virus
and what else and what not, will someone give a break to what these guys have in store for us.

It took me 10 years to come out of the shakles of the medical phycomania on sex that these guys are proleferating.

wish i was in primitive times, it was really free then, no need to bother anyone just fuck fuck fuck eat eat eat sleep sleep sleep, these three words were enough for survival back then and they lived more than a century.

sex is the most wonderfull event between a man and a women created by god for us to enjoy, can you just even think, yes think of the moment that you orgasm, no one can and no will ever be untill he cums, there was never a word in dictionary to describe the true feelings that comes with orgasm with both man and women alike.

Such a sorry state of affairs that we have come that even we had conquered the moon we ain't close to conquering the so called diseases, isn't that odd, the more humanity progresses the more chained we seems to become.

Be free from all the negative energies, practive yoga(pranayama) and I challenge if there was any disease on this planet earth, that connot be cured by constant yoga practice. well if you do yoga, you won't fall sick at the first place.

Believe in prevention better than cure and get a sex life thats like in KAMA-SUTRA.

PsyberZombie
12-28-04, 13:36
Loser =

You actually believe that fricken YOGA will keep you from getting VD ??

Well , I guess it might help = if your Yoga style's Lotus Position involves wearing a Condom

You also wrote =


Such a sorry state of affairs that we have come that even we had conquered the moon we ain't close to conquering the so called diseases, isn't that odd, the more humanity progresses the more chained we seems to become.

The Situation is much , much Worse than even you imagine , Loser =

Man·kind is currently in a losing War against microbes of all sorts ; and it's only a matter of time before either sexually transmitted diseases or the emergence of a Flu Virus there's no vaccine for , wipes out most if not all of Humanity

If Horror Stories are your 'thing' , I'd suggest you put down your Stephen King novel and pick up
a copy of Laurie Gann's The Coming Plague

This book is non·fiction , and will leave you sleep·less for weeks

It's available from amazon.com =

http://*******.com/6kuav

Rock Dog
12-29-04, 03:14
Here it is,

HIV causes AIDS.
There is no cure.
There's no vaccine (not one that works worth a damn anyways).
There will be no cure or vaccine anytime soon.
Those who carry the virus live in virtually every country on earth.
Most of them (millions and millions) will die from it.
If you come into intimate physical contact with them YOU may get it.
For many people, being on anti-retrovirals is almost as bad as having AIDS itself.
If you don't want to get it, stick with a safe partner and/or wear protection.

Anyone who tells you otherwise (with regards to the above statements) is full of shit.

Rock

GettingTang
12-30-04, 02:43
Here it is,

HIV causes AIDS.
There is no cure.
There's no vaccine (not one that works worth a damn anyways).
There will be no cure or vaccine anytime soon.
Those who carry the virus live in virtually every country on earth.
Most of them (millions and millions) will die from it.
If you come into intimate physical contact with them YOU may get it.
For many people, being on anti-retrovirals is almost as bad as having AIDS itself.
If you don't want to get it, stick with a safe partner and/or wear protection.

Anyone who tells you otherwise (with regards to the above statements) is full of shit.

Rock

Actually I agree with what you posted here, but on the brighter side of things, a cure for HIV is coming soon.

There have been 5 breakthroughs in the past 6 months regarding scientific studies on treating HIV. The latest promising venture is from Israel where they used a vaccine to block HIV from connecting to uninfected cells, they then combines this with current inhibitor treatments, they were able to eradicate HIV from monkeys using this method. Looks real promising for people too, although those studies are still about a year away in people.

In France, they treated 80 patients with nothing but a single dose vaccine injection recently designed, from just one injection, they were able to reduce the viral load BY 90%, or greater in 78 of the 80 volunteers! Most have sustained the 90% plus reduction for going on 18 months. Some are still seeing the virus be reduced even at 18 months out. Several are now at undetectable levels, or less then 50 parts per sample! This is not a cure, but if this procedure holds in the pattern it is, it would mean a once per three year, maybe even only once per five year vaccine injection and this would be able to suppress the virus indefinitely.

There are scores of promising studies from the USA too, these are more aimed at long term treatment and suppression through single dosing, eventually the goal is to reduce dosing to a once per month pill or injection.

I read an article last month, that most HIV top scientist estimate a cure, or long term, easy treatment will be widely available in the next 5 years or less.

However, all this being said, it's still best to keep it covered. Until they have a proven affective cure, or vaccine, my schlong wears the raincoat for everything but a BJ and so should you!

TANG~!

Rock Dog
12-30-04, 07:40
Tang,

I read your post with a great deal of pleasure. It's nice to see that promising new treatments are on the horizon. The key point is that these are still just treatments, not a cure.

As such, you would be dependant on them for the rest of your life.

You would still be stuck with the status of "HIV positive" with all the social implications that this status carries with it.

You'd still be facing the very real possibility that the treatments effectiveness may decrease over time as the virus continues to adapt and evolve.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for better treatments... even a cure. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for either though.

Rock

ps. Even without HIV there's still be hepatitis, herpes, drug resistant syphillis, chlamydia, venereal warts etc. etc. I doubt things will ever change that much. Someday I think we will all look back on the post-antibiotic/pre-herpes era as the Golden Age of risk free sex.

Loser
12-30-04, 12:25
PsyberZombie, Rock Dog

Buddy,

We have not come to Planet earth thinking its all bed of roses.

Lets just put things in perspective, think about the thousands dead in Psunami, some describe it as a worst form of death that could come in way, without warning, taking there loved ones away in a flash, think about the thousand's of children dead before reaching adult hood, on estimate there will be 100,000 thousand dead . Thats just mother natures "ONE" way of reminding, you can't beat me up. I'm like that "infinitum pain", if you look back to history, no century was bed of roses, every one had to go throw misery and pain, no century was bloodier than the last one, the more we seem to know nature the more she strikes with pain. Even as you say we find the cure for AIDS tomarrow, can anyone give me gaurentee that a killer disease won't emerge again more powerfull than aids itself, none, as the case is it would be more deadlier one.

Its all in priorities, In every generation the mother nature comes up with some shit, earlier it was Maleria, TB, Plague, cancer etc, just when we thought yeah alright we conquered that all and now we can live in paradise, there was more on offer, now its aids, hapatatis, sars etc, give me a break, can't you see the game here, whats hapenning, will the earth ever be a paradise, will they ever allow us to lead a normal life, the truth is this world was horrible thousand of years ago and it still is, inspite of people and goverments trying to make it look all good and trying there best to do so, we all are still stuck up in this horrible planet we call earth, the same pain, the same fear lurks each one of us, its a vicious circle, at best being called a tantalus hell.

Even if one is 100 percent healthy, still he got to die one day buddy, even if you get cure for all the diseases in the world, still you got to die , even if you don't fuck and become a father, you got to die still, like homer would say if lincolm was soo smart why did he die.

Death is the only reality in this world and no matter how you try to improve, it become more bloodier, its like chronic rheomatism, you take it out from head it goes to your heart, you take it out from your heart, it goes to your legs, its like never ending vicious circle. the best "law of average at work", you ain'tgot more than your neighbor's share.

Its just a big picture i'm trying to project, I mean to say don't we die anyway more horribly than any diseases thats could come. why so much attention to AIDS, Do you think the whole of humanity will become extinct, if we do not propogate whats in it and whats not, give me a break. Its just one way to your death. thats all. even if you don't die of AIDS, you die :)

you do or not do, you be the nicest guy in town, or the villian in society, like who cares, you fuck or not fuck, She does not care at all "when your time comes you got to go", no matter how good the person you are, you might have donated 1000's to charity and may not have told one single lie all your life, but still you got to go, why mother, i being the best guy, i went to church every day, i never told a lie all my life, i never fucked anybody, i did my best to be the best, but why me, why i have to die like the bad guys, why the bad as well as the good die, why no concession there, infact the good dies much earlier than the baddies, why mother why yours ways are soo horrible to comprehend, why you keep on playing with me, why can't you just leave me alone, and allow me to make this earth heaven by my good work,
thats what you want right ??, thats what everyone taught me from my parents to teacher, that be good be good and now i hear that, even the good guy dies, why the hell you cheated me, i was doing all the good work to this world by charity, protecting your environment from bad guys, being a good citizen, finding cure for diseases, building for better tommarow, then why me, i'm doing all good to you then why i have to die.

Why you come in between, who the hell are you to take my life away, WHY CAN'T I CHOOSE THE DAY, TIME AND PLACE OF MY DEATH.

I being the nice guy that i'm and what she does, she don't give a damm, no matter what i do. and its true with all the inhabitants of planet earth and the one and only way of getting out of this horrible mess is "spiritualism", going to god in a practical way, no medicines can save you from death save god.

'MAN IS INDEED SPIRITUAL", no man was ever born and no man will ever die, thats why we found out re-births, there got to be some explanation of being doing good to others and thats what we call "karma". the theory of re-incarnation, of ghost and of spirits, of being in the shadow of "god" and becoming god itself, thats practical vedanta and thats eastern philosophy of life, and the first step is yoga( joining with god).

Hatha yoga, the lotus position you described is the first step on the long journey were you will be the master of your self.

One and the only "permanent solution" to day to day misery that we call life.

Death is nothing now, its just a change of state, you die and get birth again and the cycle continous, and when you realises you are not the miserable body but the spirit itself you get liberated.

There is more to what meets the eyes, practice "raja yoga", and be free forever..

Joe Zop
12-30-04, 17:45
Yes, we all gotta die someday, but that's hardly a good argument for playing in heavy traffic.

As to why so much attention gets paid to AIDS -- ever watched someone die from it? I have and it ain't fun. And saying that millions of people are gonna go that way is legitimate cause for concern, in the same way all the other nasties you mention were causes for concern.

It's beyond ironic to hear you tout a lifestyle as "the answer" and yet say that being careful (a lifestyle adjustment) is somehow foolish. Bravo for yoga or whatever else floats your philosophical or spiritual boat but slap on a condom and get your hepatitis vaccinations as well.

Rock Dog
12-31-04, 06:07
Loser,

I read slowly through your post so I could know where you're coming from. I can see your point and I agree that we all gotta go sometime.

You seem to have restated some points that I'd made in my last post. Even if there was no such thing as AIDS, there's still all kinds of other nasty things out there waiting for us. Your attitude regarding these things seems to be "whatever happens, happens".

However, I feel that it's possible to protect oneself against certain things that are avoidable. It follows that this would be the smart thing to do. Many of us don't share your somewhat fatalistic attitude. If we've got to die eventually, let it be from something we can't control, avoid or escape.... not from taking a stupid chance for a brief moment of pleasure.

One last thing. To answer one of your questions, I think one of the reasons why AIDS gets so much attention is that many of us can remember a time when you could enjoy a good fuck and the worst thing you had to worry about was catching the clap ( and that some of your friends might find out). You didn't have to worry about dying. Sex is a part of everyones life. Nobody wants to die. With AIDS, there becomes a connection between sex and death and this is kind of disturbing when you think about it.

Peace,

Rock

PsyberZombie
01-01-05, 15:25
Loser writes =


WHY CAN'T I CHOOSE THE DAY, TIME AND PLACE OF MY DEATH.

You can choose the day , time , place , and even the Cause and Manner of your Death , Loser

It's called Suicide . Some people would say that having bare·back Sex with
a Prostitute is Suicidal Behavior [ although I've done it twice in my mongering career ,
and I'm still here ]

You also write =


Death is nothing now, its just a change of state, you die and get birth again and the cycle continous, and when you realises you are not the miserable body but the spirit itself you get liberated.

This 'Eternal Return' Theory on the Fate of the Universe [ and YOU with·in it ] is based entirely on the empirical observations of the Cyclicity of some aspects of Life

Fer ex = day becomes night becomes day ; the Seasons are cyclical ; as are the phases of the Moon ; the motion of the visible Planets ; etc ; etc . The wholly un·supported Leap in Logic you Zen guys then make is = Why shouldn't the Human Soul also be cyclical in nature ??

What you guys for·get is that all this cyclicity is just part of a big 'winding down' of the Universe that will ultimately result in its 'Heat Death' [ a/k/a Entropy a/k/a The Second Law of Thermo·Dynamics , expressed mathematically as :
dS = dQ / T ]

If you believe in Entropy , as I do , then the most rational behavior is to try to extend your Life Forces as much as possible ; whether that means throwing another log on the fire , or wearing Condoms and getting the Hep·B Vaccine

Speaking of the Hep·B vaccine = it's a series of three injections , although two will be protective for over 95 % of people . After my second injection , my fricken arm almost fell off from the reaction , so I never bothered to get the third one

I never had my anti·bodies checked , either . I guess that I like to live dangerously just like you do , Loser... just not to the Same Degree

Loser
01-03-05, 08:31
Hello All,

Wishing you the best of the best for this year :)

During my educating days, we were overly educated on sex and its negative aspects, it reached such a point that we were made to believe that sex is not a good thing to do, whats with AIDS, Hepatasis, Herpes, gonoreaa et all, they picturised in every details the horrer's of sex without protection, far from telling the beauty of what sex is all about ( which i had to find out on my later stages of life), they focussed on after effects of sex to the extent that we were made to believe that sex is indeed not a natural instinct in human beings and it has to be avoided.

I was 16 then, and somehow it gotten to me to the extent that i made lot of researching to find out what its all about, and to my horrer, even outsiders give 90 percent thumbs down to sex, mostly everyone seems to project sex in negative and horrible way, even with "CONDOM", some write that there are chances of getting STD's.

Sex was one of the four horseman of the apoclypse, considering the sexual instinct we have in teens with no pressures of earning it was good life with no sex.

I shagged my way to adulthood, fearing for the worse, with whats if's and what not, i choose to be safe than sorry, and swallowed my sexual urges for one decade.

Then the internet hapenned and found that there are scores of people like me who are equally horrified with the evils of sex yet taking risk with "condom" and I mean haven't they learned or read even in this forum itself that there are chances of getting STD even with condom and what if it broke.

And moreoever what more you do anyway, rather than being mecahnical, like you can't do BJ, as her cuts in mouth or lips may infect your dick or worse her saliva may contain Hep. virus, you can't do DATY as her vaginal fluids may contain viruses that may cause herpes etc, you can't suck her as her fluids there are found to contain viruses, and whats else and what not, you know better, TELL ME , you call this sex, all you can do is to be on the safer side, is just touch your dick and her pussy with two coats for protection or lest her body may infect you for ever. Judge yourself, was the cave man ever better than the times you live in.

The only way for me to get rid of this hugomonastic-Zombaderie of mental torture by the so called "Medical experts", media and the society was to "GET OUT" and find your own way attitude.

Instead of focussing on myself i focussed on the society, media and the Medical experts them self's and after my studies "IT AIN"T lOOKED GOOD FOR THEM TOO", all they did was to make us live on limited scope that they call life.

life is much much much bigger than anyone can even get words for it to describe, our life is universe itself, its beyond any diseases or social customes, its infinite, for one its even beyond your bodily existence.

Now for day to day survival, what they call life is no life at all, were is the freedom, society wants you to believe in whatever they percieve it to be true and we believe it blindly and as a result we remain in the "Law of averages" like blind leading the blind, we remain in the mesh of illusion.

As i wrote earlier, if you look at the lifes facts, its indeed a horrible planet to live on, at best a "tantalus hell", we get food, clothing and shelter and remain satisfied, thinking that we achieved alot in relation to society and in the mean time we take a lot of crap from it too, in short whoever follow social norms he is bound to remain slave from the contradicting forces of nature which will always have negative and positive impact on the life. the positive ones that you feel good about -- the negative ones, even if you don't want, you get the complete package :)

Thats why there is a cry for spirituality, some one to take you away from both good and bad and make you in a state of bliss,

Thats why jesus the christ, budda, allah, shiva came into existence, there main job was to take you away from the clutches from contradicting forces that some call hypocrisy, irony, evil, death, birth, life, diseases etc to a place were there is no misery.

I dared myself for sexual freedom, I took the courage to suck, to lick, to fuck and BECOME A MAN, and i see many thousands in every corner of the world who are so scared like i was to even venture once with condom for sex, they can't, they are too tied down by society, by so called "EXPERTS", you read these forums and you can yourself gauge the extent of fear phycosis that has gotten into once called man.
Even if you have sex with condom, we are so scared about the after effects that we have read in books, we just wait for it to happen and if not, we get some relief till the next adventure.

I call upon each and every individual who was too scared to monger for sex fearing all those diseases that society thrust upon you, for starts take a pack of condom and just FUCK, suck and lick, nothing will happen to you, stand up for your life and be free.

I want these "experts" to give back my 10 years of youthfull life, when my libido was ooozzzziiigggg, and i had everything except sex the way it should have being, i mean i cry for the oppourtunities i missed by passing women, i was young and restless, I never dared casual sex or one nighters fearing for the worse or like they say "think about the future pal", Now what !! I'm in my 30's and i cry for the oppourtunites lost 'cos of sexual misconceptions.

I just want young and teen guys to know that sex ain't that bad as society, media had made out to be, change your mental set up by having sex "Atleast with condom".

Psyber,

In spirituality, entropy theory may be called "MAYA", its meta-physical and interesting, its like action has equal and opposite reaction :)

Rock,

Not only AIds, we fear about there are scores of diseases that make you not to come closer to women, I request you to search for "raja yoga" in google and read some topic, hope it may be usefull, i think we need complete "New set of mind " to be free.

Rock Dog
01-04-05, 06:03
Rock here,

Just read through your latest post. I get the feeling that you have a few issues.... especially regarding sex. That's not hard to understand. I myself can remember the good old days when sex and death were 2 completely unrelated topics. It's a horrible idea and it really sucks whenever I see a hot chick and I start wondering what are the chances she "has something". I think this has really affected you in a deeply personal way.

What you are doing now is kind of like a counterattack against your fear. Just like WWII bomber crews or seamen on the Uboats. They lived with the knowlege that many of them would die, so they really cut loose with the partying. It almost seems like you're doing the same thing.

Loser, you can go on the path you've chosen. Hump as many different women as you want, wherever and whenever with whoever. It's all up to you. I guarantee you that someday, sooner or later, you're gonna get something you can't get rid of. If and when that day comes, don't go crying for everyone to feel sorry for you. Just remember that it was your choice to take such a chance.

As for the rest of us, we'll take whatever level of precautions we see fit. Personally, I think going bareback is great, but only when it's with someone special who has earned my trust.

Just sharing my thoughts,

Rock

Travis Bickle 2
01-04-05, 06:30
I'm going to try to respond in part to your posts. This may prove difficult as they are long and a tad difficult to digest. I might have to break it into smaller chunks.

You say that all the discussion of disease, etc., we were led to believe that sex was not a good thing to do and that sex was not a natural instinct in human beings and thus to be avoided.

I say, speak for yourself. That doesn't sound like me, my friends, and most of the mongers on this board. I've never avoided sex out of fear of a disease. Sure, I usually put on a condom to have FS with a SW, that's only common sense. I've also been vacinated against Hep A & B, which I feel is common sense as well.

That being said, I've performed DATY countless times on hookers and don't worry about bbbj. I just make sure I'm their first customer of the day and that they're freshly showered.

I don't think that exhibiting common sense and taking a few precautions is tantamount to avoiding sex. I think maybe you had or have some neurosis which caused you to have an excessive fear of disease at one point.

Some of the stuff you say frankly doesn't make much sense. A few posts ago you talked about ancient societies that only had to eat, sleep, and fuck. I've studied anthropology quite extensively and have never heard of such a culture. Disease has always been prevalent, and they've always had to hunt, forage, provide shelter and fire. I think back then sex was secondary to survival and then more for propagation rather than pure physical pleasure.

You also mentioned that since TB, Malaria, and Cancer have been conquered that now AIDS comes upon the scene. Since when? Malaria still kills 2 million people a year and cancer scores more. AIDS doesn't even come close.

So, my advice to you is do like I do. Suck, fuck, DATY, bbbj, with all the SW's you can. But use common sense and take a few precautions. You'll have fun and probably not die prematurely. You do look both ways when crossing the street don't you? This is kind of the same thing.

Civ2000

Joe Zop
01-04-05, 16:07
Well said, Civ2000. While I agree with Loser that sex education tends to focus on the negative aspects (pregnancy, disease) as opposed to positive, the idea that most people are overly educated on sex is rather laughable. Education certainly isn't keeping kids from having sex, and teenage pregnancy rates in the US make clear that condom use is far from universal.

There's a risk to walking across the street, but we still do it. There's a risk to just about everything, but life goes on. That doesn't mean it's not sensible to look both ways before walking, and it doesn't mean you should willfully ignore risks because it might crimp your style. It means you need to use good judgement and make your own choices.

I came of age during the pre-AIDS era, and I've changed my behavior accordingly in light of the disease. It hasn't changed how I think about sex, only my risk-analysis and thereby behavior. Like Civ2k, I still enjoy BBBJ and DATY, but I am more aware of the risks I'm taking (and I feel the risk of AIDS there is so low as to not be worth a lot of worry) and so it's a specific choice made with a clear understanding of the risks involved and not one I always make, as I also use condoms and dental dams at times.

You want to have condomless sex fairly safely? The answer isn't yoga -- it's a mutually monogamous relationship. You want to have condomless sex in general? That's your call, but please don't pretend you're doing anything but engaging in high-risk behavior. Belief if Jesus or Buddha or yoga or whatever is fine, but those beliefs don't automatically provide a pass for stupid behavior.

My Alias
01-05-05, 15:33
If you plan to monger, be safe. And to help you out, Consumer Reports recently tested and rated the performance of condoms. Here's a link to a story about the top performers, http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/01/04/best.condoms.reut/index.html

Loser
01-09-05, 08:34
rock, joe , civ2000, psyber zombie,

ok,

i just want others to realize what game is going on here.

for a minute just "think for yourself" the "facts", forget about what you learned from outside, just be yourself for sometime.

just see the game here, first the mother nature gave you the greastest stimulent ever for sex the man has ever seen, the "v" and then what she do she in turn gave us the biggest threat to human existance itself "aids". i mean is this a joke or what. what fun is left of now if you pop the pill and put on two coats to be "safe". ha ha. gotcha, thats what i'm trying to figure out all along, why is there always tremendous contradiction in whatever we seem to do.

its being couple of years i being banging with "v" and with two coats , and i never tasted pussy with my dick, i mean whats the point in saying that we progessed a lot in science, when all we do is go in a vicious circle.

just think for yourself, why the heck this viagra thing did not come into existence even a decade earlier, forget about what others think or write, why did this has to come when the threat to sexual intercourse is at its peak. why? now don't counter argue with medical science progress takes time crap, then why the heck, they did not exterminate all diseases by this time , why the heck each day diseases keep on increasing as civ2000 said even today we die of maleria.

why the f**k i cannot enjoy the full pleasure of "v", in my opinion the greatest gift to "mankind", give me an answer, we are no better than the cave man, with all this [CodeWord116] (http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord116)-pah over develpment, we are still the same, the more we seem connected to other countries for pussies the more diseases come into existence. i know development is not only for sex, yet its a indicator for everything thats happening around, think for yourself.

is our life any better now, we are as helpless as were our medivel brothers, we may conquer moon and everest but there seems to be tons of more problems to get in with, its all ultimately comes to "law of averages", you ain't no better than your neighbor.

consider this, we take most of the thing for granted or just do it, take for instance, we eat thrice a day, then it goes down the drain in the morning , again we eat and again it goes down the drain, i mean hello, were you going with all this, ( its a low topic, but its what we call living life) i have eaten once, then why the heck i need to eat again and again, yes to live your life otherwise you die, yeah yeah, mother, i know even if i eat to full stomach, i will die anyway, and more over in the last 100 years of so called development, our average life expectancy is 74 years still, when will they make it 100-200-300 and so on, i mean why moore law does't hold good for human life. why with all this vitamins and protiens i become old and even if i "be safe", life doesn't seems to move forward same old ego that makes me feel accoumplished.

just take asian psunami for instance, first she made a man fall in love with the most beautiful girl in town, he is being the best sincere guy in town, never did no harm to no one, they got married, they had two cute twins, all wells till three years later they went to thailand for vacation, on 26 december, they were in phi=phi island, they saw the huge wave and were soo scared were stunned to the ground, all four were swept by the waves, only the girl survived, her hubby and children were taken by the sea, never ever to see even the body.

now were is the justice and logic tell me guys !!, why the heck mother nature first made them fall in love, why did she gave them cute twins when all her motive was too take them away so ruthlessly, can you now imagine the pain she going through right now, joe said that dying of aids is the most painfull thing to do, can anyone now go and tell the mother of two, who has lost her two babies and hubby in psunami that its nothing, we have seen more tragedy than this. she will rather have aids ten times then being in this condition rest of her life, and if you ask her choice, she would probably ask give me aids if you can give my love and babies back, i know its too freaky talk, my whole point is, aids or no aids, life's like that the cycle won't stop, its a ruthless world, the more we propagate aids and negative things, you making life more difficult.

why the heck she gave me dick when i can't use it properly, is this a joke or what, why did she gave it to me in the first place, when all she did was to scare me away from the horrible diseases, whats in her mind, i fail to understand, she is not mother nature, yeah she is a *****, yeah now i feel good by calling her by what she is, *****, live me alone, let me live my own life, i won't follow your dictat, i will do as i wish, as when i follow your life, anyway you don't do much, all you say is be safe, look left and right to live or else i will kill you, hahaahahaha, now u wont fool me again...

the first sign itself is here, there is no topic in wsgforum itself for positive aspects of sex and life, there must be a thread for "the most beautifull way to have sex" along with american women (-ve one) truth about aids(-ve one), the whole mentality is now of negative energy.

to my finding, to get out of this contradiction and irony and being free
for ever is "yoga", man has to be indeed spiritual, thats why jesus the chirst came in and showed the way, thats why allah, shiva and buddha came in and showed us the way to get out of this hell, that we call planet earth.

guys, no amount of so called research and development or progress of humanity crap will save us, only god and being god is the one and only way out and the practical way to do is "yoga".

millions have taken the challenge to "improve" this world to make this world a better place, hahaha, what a joke, guys this world is as it is, with a mixture of good and bad, they both are contradictory in word itself so our life is, there can never ever be any more good added or subtracted to this world nor more evil added, it is as it is, the ***** won't let this world take away from her, only god, god and god can save us and who say's sex is not part of it, even with sex the most beautful way for expresing love can be used as a tool for being free and thats called tantra.

go for yoga, tantra, mantra et all and save yourself and others...

loser

Rock Dog
01-15-05, 07:55
Loser,

first off I want to say that your posts are getting better each time. You have a good point. It is ironic that we have a cock, but mother nature won't let us use them properly. By that, I take it you mean going bareback. Not just that, but going bareback with whatever willing woman who crosses your path.

I myself do it the natural way quite often. Usually once a day on average. The thing is that I have this awesome woman who I am with. She's as close to 100% trustworthy as you can get. So it's ok, the risk there is virtually zero. My girl is 15 years younger than me, with a beautiful face and a near-perfect body (no BS I swear!) So, I don't really feel like I'm missing out on anything at all. In fact, I would have to say that mother nature (in the form of my woman) has treated me just fine.

If and when the time ever comes to do it with someone else I'm going with a combination of protection and careful selection of my new partner. You might be able to hump 10, 20, 50 or even a 100 different chicks bareback and not catch anything. But someday you're gonna go one time too many and that's gonna be it for you..... never mind yoga tantra etc.

I'll play it safe. Who knows? Maybe I'll have a heart attack, or get cancer or even die in a car accident. You might catch HIV and still outlive me, it's all one big crap shoot when you get right down to it. As for me, I'll still do what any smart gambler does and try and give myself the best odds I can.

Rock

Starchild2012
03-24-05, 08:20
To many things happened since the last massages, couldn't be in touch.

Rock,

The problem is our society concentrates only on development, development and still more development, we define the world by third world or first world thats it.

Has any country or society ever put its whole energy on finding the truth of this universe none. only some few groups tried it and they really found some wonderfull truths but it still has to be known to the whole wide world. we only concentrated on progress of society, no one ever told you to think on yourself, say about bang-bang theory :), about the orgin of this universe, we in school took it on face value that our universe was created by big ball of explosion and now its expanding and all that crap, now as i come to think about my self, just for a moment close your eyes and imagine the explosion and the big ball, on the face of it, its crap, how can it explode without space, the moment you close your eyes, you see the circular space and the ball, then the obious question is from were did the space surrounding the big ball come from to expand and the biggest blunder is how can you create something outof nothing, its a big joke, even a primary kid, if he is made to think of himself would ask similier questions.

The scientific society just wants you to believe what ever crap they tell you, thats it and if you are a lawyer, docter, taxi driver or a monger, they tell you don't put your head into these things, they are meant to be for Ph'ds and its there "scientific studies" the same goes with docter who every day seems to develop new diseases and tell you its curable - uncurable and no medicine are yet born to kill that virus and you got to take it from us, don't put your head in finding a cure for diseases thats our job, you be what you are or best climb mount everest to show the world an ordinary guy can get his addreline rush going on.

No one will ever tell you the truth, "YOU" got to find it for yourself, the whole society just seems to be on development not on the truth about this world.

Just go on a mission to find the truth for yourself, with a regular job or work or mongering, in few weeks you will know who you are and whats its all about.

This whole world is a big humbug and an ocean of lies onto lies, a big cover up, a massive contradiction in living itself, just live by patch work, thats what they tell you, those who believe in progress of society.

You have no diseases, the only disease the whole world seems to have is that of hunger, that feelin of thrist and hunger, three times a day, from the past 30 years i have being taking food non stop and it does not seems to go anytime soon. Mother! why is it that i feel hungry again and again, I have being eating from the past 30 years, Stupid: If you don't eat you will die, don't ask questions like a kid, be mature, then mother !! you mean to say if i eat i will live forever, No son !! you still gonna die, what !! even if i eat with all calories and protiens calculated i will eventually die, yes son !!!!, You are 30 now and soon by 40's and 50's you will have what i call ageing, yeah yeah don't bull shit me, i know your whole crap even if i live to the best with all luxiries you won't let me live in peacefully, some were or the other ways, you come with all scary things that i don't wanna talk about, why can't you let me live alone and just give me only the wonderfull things in life with all creapy things negated.

Mother !!, why is so much suffering in this world, you are the biggest hypocrite, condradictory, humbug women in the whole wide world, on one side you give us the most beautiful babes in town and on other side you tell me no no don't fuck bare back with this beautiful lady you might catch some dreaded STD's and you be sorry forever. yeah yeah, i know your whole crap, you give me viagra and tell me not to fuck with it bareback, means you take away the 50 percent fun out of it, then why the fuck you give "v" and AIDS at the same time, why the fuck are you after me, i have being the nicest guy in town, the most charitable, i just go mongering, but never disrespect women and i pay them fine, then why me. why the fuck you gave us beautiful beaches and kill us all of sudden by your psunamis, why the fuck yee::: you mother nature !! you give and take it all away in such a horrible manner, what's wroung with you ***** !!, first you give me love of my life, then why you take it away, you give me stomach and then tell me to go and find your ways to feed it or else you die, why the fuck you gave me stomach in the first place, if it ain't for this fucking stomach, you won't find no more hookers in street, no more pain in this world, just take this fuckin stomach out of me and let me live peacefully , no you won't let me live that way, you are just jealous of my freedom, i'm just sandwitched between good and bad thats all, either i have to live by telling all lies and lead a hypocritical life and even if i do that too, you say that god will punish me if i commit sin.

What the fucking fuck, either way, i'm dead, if i being nice, then too you are after me and if I being bad you tell me god will punish me. what's wroung you.

In short, I'm in your play, you just playing with this world, as shakespere rightly said, now I understand what he really meant, you and your ways, only you know, we are just fucking tools in your hand, right, Not any more *****, I will now find the truth and be free, no more in your web, you just kept me in this tantulas hell, giving me candies with one hand and a big stick right up in my ass with other:). No more cheating, I'm FED UP !!, yeah really FED FED the fucking up with you ***** nature, you ***** !!, I have found the way out of your web, no more of your ways, now its my way and I will do whatever I wish to do freely with none of your fucking things attached!

All i want is freedom and sexual freedom too, the days of pure bliss, which can only began by spirituality, don't believe any crap who says, you can't be spiritual if you have sex. Don't belive in anything unless you find it out for yourself. thats freedom, these scientific asshole's have given us only pain and misery, with there so called findings, all they do is fucking find the mystries of this mother nature !! hahaha what is joke. will there be any truth in these finding's when you know what she does all along and all these scientific guys just do to approve what she does and we know she is just a bunch of lies lies and still more lies.

How can ever ever, some truth come out of these so called scientific findings when they are all after the wroung facts at the first place.

Its out of this world, not into this world, we need a path away from this world, not to intensify this world, by so called "findings" that these Phd's and docter's propose. thats the reason, why from the past millions of years, our world is still the same, same amount of misery, same amount of happiness, no one was ever being able to add even one inch of more happiness to this world, both good and bad seems to go in equal proportion in this fucking world, what we all do is just find some facts facts and more facts and make some more development on it.

Guys, believe onto yourself, don't fucking believe what even these docters and Phds say or even you mamma, its difficult, cos we have being programmed this way from our childhood and this fucking society is like that, can't help it, help yourself and be free.

Those who does not believe in the powers of yoga and meditaion, mantras and tantras, just, if you have any minor problems of health, try it out and see the results for yourselfs. in days you will see changes, then you will slowly climb the ladder up and be free.

The issue is whole society should adapt itself to truth instead of mindless development and then we will have a safe and better society, its when few tries to do it and others don't that we get these diseases, if everyone starts doing yoga and meditation and follows the path of truth, then really the human kind will be free and it will usher in the era of golden age.

Play2
03-31-05, 04:32
"No one will ever tell you the truth, "YOU" got to find it for yourself, the whole society just seems to be on development not on the truth about this world."


Indeed ... the truth is out there, and much of it is on this board. Excellent post, BL5. Life is hypocrisy, but I prefer to simply enjoy it to the fullest. If I were to 'think too much,' I wouldn't have it within me to keep my perpetual hard on for ladies of all shapes and colors.

Domino
03-31-05, 05:52
As, like the gallant Indians who survived the massacres of Wounded Knee, I look back at the credits and debits of my long dying life, I find such a static analysis has limited appeal. I think of my first girlfriend, the one who broke my heart and later died from Aids and I know I would gladly trade everything since her for her. I think of her and other great women I have been with and I can recall fragments, the fragmentary insights that make the other 99% of life livable. I remember that great movie love story, Dracula, the love Dracula and Elisabeth shared, and Dracula’s diamonded tears of love for her, the one love in his unfortunate eternity. I empathize with him.

And now, as death draws nearer, I while away some time reading posts here and wonder why you all bother. Some of you are manic depressives and fuck so you may alleviate your dark demons. Others of you fuck because you are stressed, just as the stressed out Nazis in the bunker with Hitler fucked as the Soviets drew the noose around them. (Make love, not war:)) More of you fuck simply to put the time in. Most probably fuck simply to forget the unforgettable. Few of you fuck for the right reasons.

My mind, or what is left of it, often wanders to the many issues HIV gives rise to. Viagra is, of course, unnatural and it has to be a debit. The gay community engage in unnatural acts; man was not built to have 3,000 different sex partners a month. But what about the Africans and Golden Triangle hordes. One seldom sees them in the flesh. Are they and their afflictions real? Is something else afoot? And does it really matter to us now as we prepare to embrace the void.

Sex is like alcohol. A little is designed to go a long way. And young women are designed a certain way to make young men horny so that the entire circus of life may be endlessly but not pointlessly repeated.

Even though we here drink the world’s sexual dregs we should, whenever possible, keep our eyes on the stars. We should also read TS Elliot. And, of course, the love songs of the Navajo

In beauty, happily I walk.
With beauty, before me I walk.
With beauty, behind me I walk.
With beauty, above me I walk.
With beauty, all around me I walk.

May there be happiness.
May there be success.
May there be good health.
May there be well-being
……………………..
And may there always be Navajo! And Buffy St Marie - man, how I lusted after that vampire slayer:)

Freeler: if you are reading this garbage, I would love those tracks again. But, like so much else, it is not important. Not now.

Cork Sucker
04-16-05, 06:18
Having sex knowingly that you have deadly or damaging STD for prostitutes or mongers must be interpreted by Law as All out assault with a deadly weapon. This will make *****s more responsible and place these dirty mongers who have no respect for other people's health behind bars.