Safe Sex and Sex Related Discussions in Thailand

who are hetero and you know for a fact they have gotten HIV from vaginal sex. Your answer showed be zero. Are you with these dudes 24/7? No, I bet not. That is because a lot pf people lie about their sexual habits. It is estimated over 50% lie about sexual and drug use history to their doctor. Why should they tell you the truth? I can show you several studies that support this.

There are many, many, bi sexual, gay, ladyboys lovers, drug users who are in the closet. A lot who get it say they got it from hetero because they do not want the stigma or judgement of being labeled with another type of sexual orientation.

Many people I know are anti gay. If you got HIV it would be much more acceptable to tell them you dated several women and made a mistake not using a condom and caught it. They would feel sorry for your poor judgement. If you admit to gay they would judge with: Just another f-g pervert and probably avoid future contact.

Rudy Ray Moore: out of curiosity, what supplements do you take and where do you get them from? It would be nice to get a list of what you take and why, since you seem to have done some research.

I don't deny that there large numbers of people that died of diseases often labelled "AIDS", when they happened to test "HIV positive", or labelled AIDS for other reasons when not HIV tested (in Africa). It seems that AIDS is prevalent in certain risk groups that I don't typically mix with, which accounts for me not knowing or being aware of specific people that have died of "AIDS", other than one gay / gatoey Indonesian hairdresser. Scientists are disagreeing with each other on this topic or some are questioning the official stories. Dissidents exist. It seems that AIDS is not very well understood. The role of HIV is also not well understood.

AIDS patients die of a number of different diseases caused by weakened immune system, e. G. Karposi's Sarcoma, Pnemonia, etc. (I am not an expert so I won't try to list them all). Incidently more get added to the list over the years.

I don't know what causes the AIDS but seems that HIV is "the one and only cause" is not that convincing. They can define AIDS to be only when someone tested HIV + but the tests are unreliable, and it then becomes a self fullfilling prophesy that HIV is the cause in all cases. But there are other things known to weaken the immune system too, where HIV test was negative.

HIV is known to correlate with AIDS, but is it the cause or a side effect of something else?

Over history scientests have looked for bugs causing certain diseases that eventually truned out to bbe malnutrition. I simply indicate that they don't always get the story completely right and have to modify the theories.

I am sceptical person. I don't claim to know, but only to be willing to listen to various conflicting views. Its not clear to me what my risk of AIDS is, if any measurable risk at all. Its clear to me condoms will reduce the risk of catching STDs, including Syphilus, which could have some role in liklihood of catching AIDS, and may reduce risk of testing positive for HIV antibodies (although this seems to be debated by some).

One way or another, I think there are much greater risks in life than "AIDS".

I am seriously considering, not ever testing for HIV antibodies again, as tests are unreliable, likelihood of having it is very low, and its not necessarily deadly anyway. I will continue to monitor the science of AIDS understanding and debate to see what further changes occur.

[QUOTE=Rudy Ray Moore;1259597]The guy in the video won the Nobel Prize for the discovery of HIV and he's seen how the pharm industry has jumped on the opportunity. The interviewer asked, so if you have a good immune system the body can naturally get rid of HIV. His answer was one word. Yes.[/QUOTE]He got the Nobel price for discovering the HIV-virus. That is all his "claim to fame". Then he became some kind of a quack, went to work for a Chinese University and started studying "high dilution" (like in homeopathy). He is generally considered now to be well outside of the realm of real science. I would not bet my health on his arguments.

Hundreds of thousands of people in the west suddenly died in the 80s and 90s, I don't think it was from malnutrition.

The virus does work by weakening your immune system, causing you to die from other diseases. It's still the virus killing you, unless you want to play with words. Otherwise you could also say "he didn't die from getting shot but from bleeding to death". Cool, it's still the bullet who killed him, isn't it?

[QUOTE=AussieDoug; 1259345]Most of you guys would remember Starsky & Hutch TV series. Now the golly wog hair type was named Paul Michael Glasser and he married another Hollywood starlet as they usually do and had two kids. Anyhow, after about 6 years wifey comes down with HIV, she was a reformed drug user before marrying. Now the two kids are positive, that is really sad, but the husband who presumably has not spent all those years sitting on the dge of the bathtub wanking away is not positive.

Now, for all you darn yankees out there, listen to O Bummer, his everybody health care idea is a good one. The US has not free medical for social diseases, the cost of treating the clap at government level is peanuts in cost of drugs and a few dollars looking down a scope at the bug, so why have this stupidity, get the clap, and more importantly syphillis, out of your community.

And really there are not 1 million HIV sufferers in Thailand, not in the commercial sex industry anyhow, but there are a lot of IV drug users, mostly young men who ride motor bikes, and a serious punter can spot them and their girlfriends. Most of the girls will baulk at taking an aspirin, drug taking is not that entrenched in the BG trade at all. The "HIV give us money" industry has just about run it's course, they have now seized on climate change to find another teat to feed on. Most bhuddists are not suicidal, and many bargirls fully intend to get out of the game and live happily ever after, ergo very few are into drugs.[/QUOTE]Aussie Doug has made some great points. Yes, the husband did not catch HIV (or ability to test for the anti-bodies) from his wife. Could he have? I don't know. Many studies apparently have shown zero transmission (with or without condoms) in couples with one HIV +. Is fucking a HIV+ tested person dangerous? Its not very clear. I would be more concerned fucking a person with Syphilus, or other STDs.

I would add that the "HIV sufferers" are actually not not necessarily suffering at all. They are not all destined to die of AIDS related diseases due to massively weakend immune systems. Africa also has large number of HIV+ tested people who are not sick at all. Africans are dropping like flies from same old diseases they always died of, due to malnutrition, lack of hygiene, no clean drinking water, unable to afford proper medical care, etc. Added to this are those loosing the will to live when pronounced with the "AIDS" death sentence, when immune system found to be weakened, whatever the reason might be.

Did Africans all get to be HIV +, due to fucking like rabbits? I don't know.

[QUOTE=Chill Out;1259350]Ok. You know the millions of people reported to have died of AIDS. What do you think they have actually died of?[/QUOTE]Let me tell you a short story of HIV in Australia. When it was discovered, or renamed, the state government recognised there was no economical way to keep this virus out of the blood supply, it is simply too costly to check every donor every time they donate, so instead they ask questions like "have you had hepatitus" "have you been fudgepacking the boy next door" and etc, that is the only screening done worldwide regardless of what you may be told or hope happens in your own country, added to which some fuckwit judge down here in OZ decided that to deny faggots the chance to infect the blood supply was discrimination, so the only thing left to do was keep asking the questions and tipping it down the drain. But, as we all know people lie, so the Premier (Govermor) of the state simply said to the haemophilliacs, the biggest user of blood products,"we cannot protect you, here's $250, 000, enjoy the time you have, and you can't sue us". Not long after the President of the AMA (Doctor's association) went on national TV and announced that the only way to fix the spread of HIV was to build a fence, put all the gays inside, and problem solved, it's called isolation, used many times before with many communicable diseases. He was dumped, the first leader of the doctors not to get a second term at the job, was never interviewed on TV again and completely sidelined thereadter. Then the AIDS industry got to work, you see it had to be a heterosexual disease, it had to be thought of as possibly affecting children and babies, because back 30 years ago there was simply no political or voter support for spending billions on druggies and faggots, so no governemt money for the drug company research, no conferences all over the world, no gravy train. Look what happened, still no cure, lots of "keep 'them alive" drugs at huge cost, and the heterosexual transmission rate is still low as buggery.

[QUOTE=Dash Riprock; 1257717]Pretty simple, they are here with kids with partners they probably didn't intend to spend the rest of their lives with; and they are still here years and decades later despite just planning to be here on vacation. And a lot of times, it doesn't even get that far. Not uncommon to see local women with children from multiple fathers, both local and foreign. These guys you hear about taking balcony dives aren't just distraught over the lack of world peace. These guys have burned bridges and kids that are growing and will only require more and more financial resources that all too often, they have no way of providing. Will focus on the foreign aspect as that's probably more relevant to this forum. Sure, it happens all over the world, but the problem with it happening here is there's a significant immigration and labor 'pressure' from a legal standpoint against foreigners so you end up with a lot of guys treading water, with kids, and partners that likely have a 4th or 5th grade education.

The local 'hook' that most prostitutes use is bareback sex after a whirlwind 2-3 days of 'getting to know each other. ' Non pros too (simply add on a week to a month in the time frame). Because 'you're special' 'we're in love now' 'it's just us now, we're a couple. ' etc. Etc. And well, after that it's only a matter of how healthy both of their reproductive systems are. Been through the cycle myself dozens of times, I'm just thankful for the blind luck.[/QUOTE]So you're saying guys get "stuck in Thailand because they didn't stick with safe sex" because they ended up impregnating the TGs and then felt obligated to stay & marry the TG?

As you said: "There are an awful lot of guys who are stuck in Thailand because they didn't stick with safe sex. To each his own of course."

The flip side to that is, if that will allow a guy to live in LOS (hooker / female heaven) forever, that would be a way to accomplish it.

Moreover, if a barebacker does knock up a TG, he is not obligated legally to either stay in the Kingdom or support the mother.

Even in the unlikely event paternity can be proven, child support sought, the father be known and found, it isn't going to cost much:

"Regarding maintenance payment, Thai law doesn't know alimoney, but it does know child support. Although it is normally not more than about 6, 000 baht a month. There is an international agreement on child support and there are not many countries where you can hide to avoid paying."

[url]http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/383900-child-custody/[/url]

Of course even practising safe sex or condom sex can lead to a pregnancy, since such methods often fail.

"Hand out all the condoms you want, make sure they are used, and there will still be an epidemic of STDs and unplanned pregnancy. I'm old enough to recall when the pill came out. I was just a child, but I remember the stir. Reliable birth control, for the 1st time! Condoms have been around for centuries, in one form or another. They have never been reliable. A user might have an 85% protection rate against HIV, or pregnancy. In the real world, where the users are drunk, or stoned, it's dark, and he is rushing. Are you getting the picture?"

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_sex[/url]

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom[/url]

#Causes_of_failure

[QUOTE=Syzygies; 1257621]okay from niaid. Nih. Gov:

"There is demonstrated exposure to HIV / AIDS through sexual intercourse with a regular partner (with an absence of other HIV / AIDS risk factors). Longitudinal studies of HIV- sexual partners of HIV+ infected cases allow for the estimation of HIV / AIDS incidence among condom users and condom non-users. From the two incidence estimates, consistent condom use decreased the risk of HIV / AIDS transmission by approximately 85."

Does consistent use mean 100% with same long term partner? Probably the figures are including anal sex between males which is quite risky for the receiver, and bound to have a condom malfunction sooner or later. I believe the safety percentage of condom for normal sex with a girl would be likely to be better. I would like to see a better breakdown of the figures between females, males, and the practices they engage in.[/QUOTE]According to a note on a NIH study that speaks of the 85 percent reduced risk for HIV with condom use relative to bareback sex:

[quote]1 The focus on the latex male condom for the prevention of HIV / AIDS and STDs during penile-vaginal intercourse reflected the predominance of the latex male condom in current condom usage, its FDA labeling for this purpose, and the preponderance of available effectiveness literature. The focus was not intended to diminish the need for research on other forms of male condoms, on female condoms, and on prevention of HIV / AIDS and STDs associated with other forms of sexual activity, such as oral or anal intercourse.

[url]http://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/organization/dmid/documents/condomreport.pdf[/url]

"Analysis published in 2007 from the University of Texas Medical Branch [52] and the World Health Organization[53] found similar risk reductions of 80–95" per cent.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom[/url]

"A 1999 meta-analysis of studies of condom use showed that the consistent use of latex condoms reduces the risk of sexual transmission of HIV by about 85 [45]" percent.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV[/url]

"While the use of condoms can reduce transmission of HIV and other infectious agents, it does not do so completely. One study has suggested condoms might reduce HIV transmission by 85% to 95%; effectiveness beyond 95% was deemed unlikely because of slippage, breakage, and incorrect use. [27] It also said,"In practice, inconsistent use may reduce the overall effectiveness of condoms to as low as 60–70%". [27]p. 40.

"During each act of anal intercourse, the risk of the receptive partner acquiring HIV from HIV seropositive partners not using condoms is about 1 in 120. Among people using condoms, the receptive partner's risk declines to 1 in 550, a four- to fivefold reduction. [5][/quote][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_sex[/url]

[QUOTE=PinkPearl; 1259912]So you're saying guys get "stuck in Thailand because they didn't stick with safe sex" because they ended up impregnating the TGs and then felt obligated to stay & marry the TG?

As you said: "There are an awful lot of guys who are stuck in Thailand because they didn't stick with safe sex. To each his own of course."

The flip side to that is, if that will allow a guy to live in LOS (hooker / female heaven) forever, that would be a way to accomplish it.

Moreover, if a barebacker does knock up a TG, he is not obligated legally to either stay in the Kingdom or support the mother.

Even in the unlikely event paternity can be proven, child support sought, the father be known and found, it isn't going to cost much:

"Regarding maintenance payment, Thai law doesn't know alimoney, but it does know child support. Although it is normally not more than about 6, 000 baht a month. There is an international agreement on child support and there are not many countries where you can hide to avoid paying."[/QUOTE]From what I can see. Most aren't 'stuck' here because they feel they are legally obligated (as they aren't). Most seem to be stuck here because of personal moral issues. A lot don't get married, but they'll stick around and try to support their kids, often taking on the task of raising them. And a lot of these guys are already in their late 50's and 60's (and no, by no means are most even in the comfortably well off group that has no money worries). Probably a time when they should be enjoying their retirement as opposed to starting 2nd families.

There are plenty of ways to 'stay in the Kingdom' that IMO are more productive than knocking up a bargirl. Building a successful business for example and then dabbling in as many bargirls (or for myself, massage parlour girls) as they want without getting any of them knocked up either. Not a safe sex preacher by any means, I take my risks from time to time. Just keeping it real and saying what often happens when guys play the GFE bareback game.

[QUOTE=Syzygies;1257621]Your other 7 precautions are all very good but not always practical with a girl you don't know very well. If a Pro is willing to go bareback with you, then she is willing with others too. But why do you care since you claim condoms weren't that effective anyway.[/QUOTE]Don't get me wrong, condoms are a very effective method of protection against STI's for people who are not nuns, but I just don't like them anymore. I used to, but now I'd rather watch online porn while giving myself a bareback handjob than have intercourse with a piece of latex. As for pros willing to go bareback with me, I believe they are not all made equal. For example, some are extremely reluctant to go BB, though with the proper incentive they would be with one special individual, such as a BF.

[QUOTE=Syzygies; 1257621]I only go bareback with GF (who is trustworthy and always used to insist on condoms) , since I can't afford to catch STDs easily. Mongering for a few days after departing from GF is also a good strategy, as if should catch something despite precautions, can get plenty of time to treat it before resuming with GF.[/QUOTE]What happens if you catch herpes with visible sores & your GF sees those?

[QUOTE=PinkPearl;1260536]What happens if you catch herpes with visible sores & your GF sees those?[/QUOTE]Only have sex in the dark for a while?

[QUOTE=Wolvenvacht;1260680]Only have sex in the dark for a while?[/QUOTE]LOL. Is this a serious gameplan for punters with a GF, wife or other SO?

Thankfully I don't have anything to worry about in that regard.

Just wondering.

[url]http://www.coconut-oil-central.com/coconut-oil-skin.html[/url]

"It has been common knowledge for several decades within the research community that it contains mostly Medium Chain Triglycerides (MCT) or Medium Chain Fatty Acids (MCFA). MCFAs such as Caprylic acid (C-8) , Capric acid (C-10) , and Lauric acid (C-12) destroy bacteria, fungi, viruses, parasites, yeast, etc. Fortifying your skin with "antimicrobial" MCFAs is one of the most effortless ways to guarding against infection."

It forms a waterproof barrier on the skin to repel foreign body fluids.

[url]http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/nutrition/coconut.htm[/url]

"Approximately 50 percent of the fatty acids in coconut fat are lauric acid. Lauric acid is a medium chain fatty acid, which has the additional beneficial function of being formed into monolaurin in the human or animal body. Monolaurin is the antiviral, antibacterial, and antiprotozoal monoglyceride used by the human or animal to destroy lipid coated viruses such as HIV, herpes, cytomegalovirus, influenza, various pathogenic bacteria including listeria monocytogenes and heliobacter pylori, and protozoa such as giardia lamblia. Some studies have also shown some antimicrobial effects of the free lauric acid."

[QUOTE=John Dough; 1261015][url]http://www.coconut-oil-central.com/coconut-oil-skin.html[/url]

"It has been common knowledge for several decades within the research community that it contains mostly Medium Chain Triglycerides (MCT) or Medium Chain Fatty Acids (MCFA). MCFAs such as Caprylic acid (C-8) , Capric acid (C-10) , and Lauric acid (C-12) destroy bacteria, fungi, viruses, parasites, yeast, etc. Fortifying your skin with "antimicrobial" MCFAs is one of the most effortless ways to guarding against infection."

It forms a waterproof barrier on the skin to repel foreign body fluids.

[url]http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/nutrition/coconut.htm[/url]

"Approximately 50 percent of the fatty acids in coconut fat are lauric acid. Lauric acid is a medium chain fatty acid, which has the additional beneficial function of being formed into monolaurin in the human or animal body. Monolaurin is the antiviral, antibacterial, and antiprotozoal monoglyceride used by the human or animal to destroy lipid coated viruses such as HIV, herpes, cytomegalovirus, influenza, various pathogenic bacteria including listeria monocytogenes and heliobacter pylori, and protozoa such as giardia lamblia. Some studies have also shown some antimicrobial effects of the free lauric acid."[/QUOTE]How you going to get these fatty acid molecules in to male urethra, where mos of pathogenic viral and bacterial load attaches and causes systematic infections, condoms are the only way of preventing STIS