Safe Sex and Sex Related Discussions in Thailand

[QUOTE=Bowerboy; 1289734]Over the last 6 to 9 months I have engaged in very foolish and extremely high risk sexual practices. I have probably slept with around 25 to 30 women without wearing a condom and some of those women were in the high risk category (prostitutes). Worryingly none of them were concerned about condom use and in many cases we engaged in both vaginal and anal sex.

I took my HIV test today and thank goodness it came back all clear.

But this now leaves me in an odd predicament. On the one hand I thank the lord that I have "dodged a bullet" and feel that I should swear to never be so foolish again but on the other hand I think that maybe there is not that much to worry about after all and why not carry on bare backing?

Of course I think common sense will prevail but in some ways it has made me less worried about the chances of catching HIV.[/QUOTE]To your credit BB you got yourself tested. Of course a negative HIV test result does not necessarily indicate that a person has not contracted the HIV virus.

As to "not much to worry about", it seems HIV is what mainly concerns most people. You've been lucky so far not to get the disease, although the odds were quite high you wouldn't from so few BBFS sex sessions. But continue that behaviour over a period of years or decades and your risk obviously goes way up. (This assumes you are not one of the few immune to the virus, for which, as far as I know, testing is not available to the public).

Other than that, your post seems severely conflicted, reading like a confession at an AA meeting. On the one hand you condemn your behaviour and on the other hand try to rationalize it. I think the latter is the addict in you speaking, as you recently admitted to being addicted to bareback sex (BBFS). This is very much the same as being addicted to other self destructive behaviours and substances, like alcohol and heroin. So perhaps you'd find a professional counselor or meetings such as these more helpful than a site full of wh*remongers:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Or maybe you just need to read up on the effects HIV can have on your life and those of the girls and others you may directly or indirectly infect. Keeping that in mind every day instead of being obsessed with pussy could help steer the brain in the right direction. So I'd suggest doing some serious indepth research on HIV and what those with the disease have to live with everyday.

"In the absence of HAART, progression from HIV infection to AIDS has been observed to occur at a median of between nine to ten years and the median survival time after developing AIDS is only 9. 2 months. [16] However, HAART sometimes achieves far less than optimal results, in some circumstances being effective in less than fifty percent of patients. [citation needed] This is due to a variety of reasons such as medication intolerance / side effects, prior ineffective antiretroviral therapy and infection with a drug-resistant strain of HIV. However, non-adherence and non-persistence with antiretroviral therapy is the major reason most individuals fail to benefit from HAART. [159]"

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

Alternately, if you can afford and somehow get & take the preexposure meds that stop HIV infection, they have been stated to be 90% or more effective, if used as instructed, so similar to condoms in that regard.

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

If you contact "good" TGs via online dating sites for hookups, maybe force yourself to post on your profile page some basic "safer sex" info, such as the following link, as well as that you have recently tested negative for HIV & only wish to meet up with those who can & will prove or document the same.

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

With only a bit of effort one, who is not addicted to having unsafe BBFS sex with many partners of unknown HIV status or HIV test status, can enjoy both the benefits of bareback sex (BBFS) and relative safety at the same time.

Drug-Resistant Gonorrhea: WHO Agrees It's An Emergency.

[url]http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/resistant-gonorrhea-who/[/url]

If interested.

Slim

[QUOTE=Bowerboy; 1289734]Over the last 6 to 9 months I have engaged in very foolish and extremely high risk sexual practices. .

Of course I think common sense will prevail but in some ways it has made me less worried about the chances of catching HIV.[/QUOTE]To the best of my knowledge, HIV antibodies cannot be detected within the period of less than three months since the contact. At least that's what the folks at the government-run AIDS clinic in Hong Kong told me. They insisted that I wait three months before being tested. (Now, I have had continuous sex more than three months out, so in a sense I'm accounting that activity further past, but for sex within that three month period, well.) Then again, perhaps it is a cheaper test they offer. Now, I'm no doctor, but I'm afraid a lot of guys may be lulled into thinking they are safe.

I have never engaged in bareback sex, though there have been close calls as condoms are not 100 percent failsafe.

Any doctors want to provide an answer on the tests?

[QUOTE=Wildhawk;1290542]HIV antibodies cannot be detected within the period of less than three months since the contact.[/QUOTE]The waiting period is generally 3 to 6 months for HIV to show up. Although the lab specialist once told me it can take a year in some cases (that really had me being a good boy for a long while I recall) But there are host of other things you can still catch. My advise to reduce the risks, use a condom!

Did a 2 week trip to LOS. Below are my BB stats. I had many more covered sex acts but I don't regard them as a risk here.

2-3 days after I was back home I had a little bit sore throat and looked at my throat in the mirror with a flashlight and unfortunately noticed many white spots on tonsils and some redness. Then I immediately took 2 grams of Zithromax I had bought in a pharmacy there. The white spots disappeared little by little and totally after about a week. Don't know what that was. Maybe chlamydia or gonorrhea in my throat from DATY? I was also starting to feel a little bit burning at the tip of my penis but did not really have it (maybe I would have had it if I had not taken early Zithromax).

What do you think about other risks? I think HIV is always a possibility. IS the risk bigger if some of the girls had other STDs? (And the seemed to have). With the first girl (Bangkok Nana) I couldn't come with a condom when being drunk and then I had BB sex with her many times and she said that "sometimes you do that when you are drunk that you don't use condom". Then I told her afterwards I was worried about HIV and she said she is also worried and she has a child (she was 30 plus) and cannot get sick cause she has to take care of her. I asked her about testing and she said "ok lets go to the doctor tomorrow if you are worried". The Pattaya bargirl was old (40+) and told that she did not have many customers (might be true due to her age) and she was not sick. She dis not like to pay 600 bath for a doctor sticking a needle cause she did not have many customers. Pattaya freelancer was joking about HIV in a way that seemed to point out that she didn't have it (but she had previously been working in soi 6). Now she went back to her family to Isan after we had met. With the last one,"the good girl" I didn't feel like talking about STDs. I don't think she regularly goes with customers (but I can't be sure) as she was a waitress in a foreign hotel restaurant (just wanted to go to disco or was looking for boyfriend) but it was still "ok" to come inside her in the morning after we had protected sex in the night.

One thing worries me is that I had some symptoms, which I cured with antibiotics. Since then I have had no symptoms. It is now 1 month after I came back from my trip. I soon plan to go to a full STD testing. I am just waiting more because HIV antibodies might be still negative even if I had caught it.

What do you think about my risk? Especilla HIV? Given the stories (if they have any effect).

Were there risks worth taking? Maybe not. Was I drunk? Yes. BB is just so much better than condom (and cannot sometimes come with condom when drunk).

Bangkok Nana bar girl:

BB sex 3-4 times (1 night 1 morning after)

Pattaya bar girl.

BB sex 2-3 times plus DATY (1 night 1 morning after)

Pattaya "freelancer" from DIA.

BB sex 1 time plus DATY.

Pattaya "good girl", a waitress from a real restaurant.

BB sex 2 times plus DATY (1 night 1 morning)

[QUOTE=Pekkakoo;1290615]Did a 2 week trip to LOS. Below are my BB stats. I had many more covered sex acts but I don't regard them as a risk[/QUOTE]As Bob Dylan sang, the answers are blowing in the Wind. I respect your worries and honestly nobody can give you an answer even slightly cose to realty. You did the deeds, you felt something, you "cured" it your self. There is not much left than crossing fingers. You can always share your worries, but what can a reasonable person say other than go and visit a doctor, in person.

[QUOTE=Wildhawk;1290542]To the best of my knowledge, HIV antibodies cannot be detected within the period of less than three months since the contact.[/QUOTE]They can be detected much earlier than that with an antibody test. There are also other tests for HIV that can detect HIV even earlier than the antibody test, such as the p24 antigen and NAT tests for HIV.

"The 'window period' for current HIV tests is 3 months. This means that it can take up to 3 months for a HIV test to show positive. It is always a good idea to get a HIV test at least 3 months after a risk to know for sure but the current tests pick up most people well before the 3 months. Currently with the latest antibody test in Canada 95% of people who test positive will do so within 34 days of exposure to HIV."

"At our Vancouver STI clinic we currently have a new HIV test for men as part of a study. It is 90% accurate by 10 days after exposure."

"The HIV DNA PCR (NAAT test) 90% of people would test positive by 10-12 days after being infected and 95-98% of people would test positive 4-6 weeks after being infected."

[url]http://perb.ca/vbulletin/showthread.php?134988-HIV-Symtoms-Worries&highlight=antigen[/url]

"Since routine HIV antibody tests yield negative results during the first four to five weeks of HIV infection, acute infections can be diagnosed during this period only with the use of tests for viral antigens, nucleic acids, or both.

[url]http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa042291[/url]

"The p24 antigen test detects actual HIV viral protein in blood. The test is generally positive from about one week to 3-4 weeks after infection with HIV.

[url]http://labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/p24/tab/test[/url]

"Fourth generation tests

"Some of the most modern HIV tests combine P24 antigen tests with standard antibody tests to reduce the 'diagnostic window'. Testing for antibodies and P24 antigen simultaneously has the advantage of enabling earlier and more accurate HIV detection.

"In the UK, fourth generation tests are the primary recommendation for HIV testing among individuals, but are not offered by all testing sites. 1 During June 2010, the FDA approved the first fourth generation test in the United States. 2"

[url]http://www.avert.org/testing.htm[/url]

These tests are useful to identify an infection of HIV in the early "acute" stage of HIV so it can be treated more effetively and when it is the most infectious.

". The HIV antibody test will not detect a recently infected donor, so some blood banks use a p24 antigen or HIV nucleic acid test in addition to the basic antibody test to detect infected donors during that period."

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

"In 2009 blood screened for HIV in Greater Accra, Ghana amounted to 33, 294 units of blood, of which 3. 68 percent was found to be HIV positive. 45 Ghana tests 100 percent of its blood donations, however this is done using only antibody tests. Therefore the window period remains a significant interval, which suggests some units may continue to pass through screening undetected.

"In October 2005, South Africa introduced NAT testing and as a result there were no cases of HIV transmission by blood transfusion reported to the haemovigilance programme, a transfusion surveillance system. 46 47

"The availability of nucleic acid tests (NAT) , which reduces the window period and makes testing much more accurate, helped to support the argument for a change in the ban against MSM donating. These tests have been found to almost eliminate the possibility that HIV infected blood will pass through the testing stage, even in countries with high prevalence. 33"

"If a person receives a blood transfusion with HIV-infected blood, there is a 95 percent risk they will become infected with the virus. 4 However the chances of becoming infected with HIV through a blood transfusion varies between countries depending on the level of safety precautions in place, and there is a notable difference between high and low-income countries. In the UK, the risk is now 1 in 5 million. 5"

[url]http://www.avert.org/blood-safety-hiv.htm[/url]

One in 5 million. This gives some idea of the HIV risk in having one act of bareback sex with an individual (aged 17 to 65) who has just had this NAT test & donated blood. Certainly it would be riskier with a FT gogo girl or streetwalker in Bangkok, but the million dollar question is, by how much. Note also that recieving HIV in blood as a donor will almost surely infect you (95 percent of the time, as stated) , whereas one act of BB sex with an infected lady is very unlikely to cause you harm (maybe 1 in 1000 chance of getting HIV). Which means the risk for HIV would be more like 1 in 5 million X 1000 = 5, 000, 000, 000 or 5 billion. Especially if she also tested negative for other STI's & abrasians, as they can increase the rate of infectability of HIV.

So it seems there is a miniscule chance a sex worker who recently tested negative for HIV & STIs / abrasians (using antigen or NAT & antibody tests) would be HIV positive. Your odds of getting HIV from bareback sex (BBFS) with her are extremely low, such as with consistently perfect use of condoms with sex workers whose HIV / STI status you have no clue about.

In Bangkok you can get both antigen and antibody testing done, for example at Bumrungrad hospital. For the NAT test:

"Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing (NAT) is the newest technology available at Anonymous Clinic to determine your HIV status after only 5 days of possible exposure to the infection. New, safe and extremely accurate, with NAT you can now know your status much earlier, shortening the window period between the infection and detectability of disease."

"HIV can be detected on after only 5 days of exposure, average 2 weeks"

[url]http://www.adamslove.org/en-d.php?id=70[/url]

I feel certain that Gays, Drug Users and Bi Sexuals are by far the highest risk group and account for the majority of new cases.

If you had unprotected sex and there were no open lesions on you or the girl and no blood of any kind and you are circumsized then the chances of transmission are low. And that is assuming the girl has HIV anyway. Then you have to factor in the likelihood of a girl having HIV which is probably in the order of 2% for working girls who service foreigners.

I am still certain that for vaginal sex with no other STD's present then the risk is low. But still not worth taking.

In all honesty if I picked up an STD then I would be more worried about the HIV likliehood purely because I would assume the girl didn't take good care of herself (plus open lesions etc). Still probably a low chance though.

[QUOTE=Bowerboy;1290692]I feel certain that Gays, Drug Users and Bi Sexuals are by far the highest risk group and account for the majority of new cases.[/QUOTE]Homosexuals will have higher rates of HIV if they engage in riskier sex behaviour than heterosexuals. For example, anal sex, especially without a condom, is much more dangerous than vaginal sex. Since you have been engaging in uncovered anal sex with females, this is practicing the same high risk behaviour that leads "gays" to have high HIV rates. Also, who can say these 25-30 females you've recently barebacked were not previously having bareback sex directly or indirectly with those in these 3 "highest risk groups" or be drug users themselves?

[QUOTE=Bowerboy; 1290692]If you had unprotected sex and there were no open lesions on you or the girl and no blood of any kind and you are circumsized then the chances of transmission are low. And that is assuming the girl has HIV anyway.

I am still certain that for vaginal sex with no other STD's present then the risk is low. But still not worth taking.[/QUOTE]Circumcision will help & cut your HIV risk by about 1/2 or 50 percent.

But if there was blood inside her, due to her period or something else, you may not know about it till it was too late and you were already exposed. The fragile anal tissues are easily damaged & bleed, blood being a carrier of HIV to transmit the disease.

Genital ulcers inside a ladies' vagina increase your HIV risk about 5 times. Unless the lady has been professionally checked for those, you won't be aware that she has them.

"Risk increases in the presence of many sexually transmitted infections[96] and genital ulcers. [92] Genital ulcers increase the risk approximately five fold[92] and there is a lesser increase in risk from STIs such as gonorrhea, chlamydia, trichomoniasis, and bacterial vaginosis. [94]Rough sex also appears to increase the risk. [97]"

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

As for "other STD's", how are you going to know none are present unless she's been tested? It's questionable the 25-30 girls you barebacked were ever tested for anything since, as you say,"none of them were concerned about condom use and in many cases we engaged in both vaginal and anal sex". So either (1) they are ignorant re basic safer sex matters & just want to have fun (sanook) , or (2) they know they are acting foolishly but don't care to take good care of themselves, and / or figure they'll leave it up to fate or karma if they get HIV or not, or (3) maybe they already have HIV &/or are imitating a German who purposely infected many TGs. There have been reports of FSW in BKK who know they are HIV positive yet still choosing to work & even have BBFS with customers.

Comparing your 25-30 (mostly non P4P TGs) who never used condoms & often even had receptive BB anal sex with you to Thai female sex workers (FSW) in venues who reported using condoms about 95% of the time, and I have to wonder, which group is higher risk.

Another point to consider is that if your sex sessions are an average of 60 minutes long each time, then your exposure to an HIV infected woman would be 10 times as long as the guy who's finished in 6 minutes.

[QUOTE=Bowerboy;1290692]Then you have to factor in the likelihood of a girl having HIV which is probably in the order of 2% for working girls who service foreigners.[/QUOTE]From recent Thai studies the 2% figure for FSW in Thailand was for those in venues only (e. G. Gogos, MP's) , but would certainly be higher for the subset of that group who often go without condoms, since BBFS is much more risky behaviour than using condoms consistently. (Which BTW is why I recommend a safer BBFS, or SBBFS, for those who wish to forgoe the use of condoms.) The HIV rate for BKK freelancers, e. G. Streetwalkers & FSW at places like Beergarden & Thermae, at 19% was much higher, probably because they use condoms much less frequently than venue based sex workers and can't be bothered with other safe sex practices like regular STI testing.

So I think it would be reasonable to conclude that a random Thai FSW or non P4P TG who regularly engages in BBFS with any customer or sex partner who requests it is going to be in a much higher percentage HIV risk category, not a lower percentage group.

[QUOTE=Bowerboy;1290692]In all honesty if I picked up an STD then I would be more worried about the HIV likliehood purely because I would assume the girl didn't take good care of herself (plus open lesions etc). Still probably a low chance though.[/QUOTE]What's a "low chance" for HIV infection per act? One in a thousand? Ten thousand? 100K? Half a milion? A trillion?

Or when you calculate it over a few years or decades? One percent? 20, 50, 80, 99% of becoming HIV infected?

At the risk of one in a 100 trillion chance per act I'd happily bareback any & every hot thing with a pussy. But at a 1 in 1, 000 chance, forget it. Since I'd probably be HIV infected within a few years, let alone decades.

Hi,

I feel the discussed problems have become more overwhelming.

Did you notice the recent WHO declaration about gonorrhea, the resistance of the bacteria against cephalosporine antibiotics and the growing incurability of the disease?

Rather bad aspects fpr tha future. And even a simple bare blow job can infect you when the girl keeps those bacteria chronically in her mouth or throat.

Enjoy but be careful!

FV

Does having a herpes either active or inactive on your penis increase the risk of catching HIV?

The good news is that a Finnish company is very far in developing a HIV vacionation. They are now testing it and it will be ready for human use withinin 5 years. In addition to protecting you from getting HIV they say it either eliminates HIV totally from those who are already infected or at least stops it from proceeding so it should not do any harm anymore.

Therefore if you catch HIV today you will probably never die from it.

[QUOTE=Pekkakoo;1290958]Therefore if you catch HIV today you will probably never die from it.[/QUOTE]Never a joking subject but it is inevitable to ask: "any volunteer?"

[QUOTE=FlyingVisitor; 1290783]Hi,

I feel the discussed problems have become more overwhelming.

Did you notice the recent WHO declaration about gonorrhea, the resistance of the bacteria against cephalosporine antibiotics and the growing incurability of the disease?

Rather bad aspects fpr tha future. And even a simple bare blow job can infect you when the girl keeps those bacteria chronically in her mouth or throat.

Enjoy but be careful!

FV[/QUOTE]Some STI's are incurable. Gonorrhea is not one of them. Gono is curable. So no need to feel "overwhelmed" or cry.

The bottom line: gonorrhea is still easily curable in 100% of cases, so there is no need ATM to have a panic attack about it.

Maybe in about 5 years we'll hear of the first case of "incurable" clap, or they'll have developed a vaccine or new antibiotics by then.

Meanwhile, what you can do now to prevent easily curable gono is:

1. Learn to use a condom correctly & pray it doesn't fail you or you fail it.

2. Have your playgirl playmate gono tested before you have sex, rather than after she gives it to you.

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

3. All of the above.

4. Only have sex with yourself, the ultimate "cheap Charlie" solution.

5. Join a monastery or become a monk, or other forms of do-it-yourself mental / physical castration.

"Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, can reduce the risk of getting or giving gonorrhea. The most certain way to avoid gonorrhea is to not have sex or to be in a long-term, mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and is known to be uninfected."

[url]http://www.cdc.gov/std/Gonorrhea/STDFact-gonorrhea.htm[/url]

[QUOTE=Nvslim; 1290524]Drug-Resistant Gonorrhea: WHO Agrees It's An Emergency.

[url]http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/06/resistant-gonorrhea-who/[/url]

If interested.

Slim[/QUOTE]Sure thing. I'm headed out the door to the hospital "emergency" room right now. LOL.

I'll take the "scenic route". And get a few thousand BBBJ's & SBBFS's on the way!

Of course nothing is 100% certain in this world but given the current research a cure for AIDS is around the corner. If you are 30 now and catch HIV you probably live until 60-70 years at least with medication. What do you think, what is that probability that in 30-40 years there will be a cure for AIDS? I honestly think it is almost 100. Because this one company I talked about promised it in 5 years, max 10. You can live 10 years almost certainly with HIV. Plus there are many more companies researching and looking for a cure, one of them must succeed in let's say 2-10 years certainly.

What if there won't be a cure in 30-40 years? Well, then you still live until 60-70.

Of course I am not saying that anyone should be taking risks but the odds for a cure soon are good and hope is not lost for those who are or get infected.

[QUOTE=Pekkakoo;]Of course I am not saying that anyone should be taking risks but the odds for a cure soon are good and hope is not lost for those who are or get infected.[/QUOTE]In a pinch you are right, talking extreme. Leaving side effects and collateral damages, ie infecting other people, say you are fifty and you have HIV sexually contracted you might have good chances, probably, to die for other health causes, befor HIV itself damages your body bringing it to death. I say sexually in the sense you are not a druggie (that itself represents a huge risk as the body is affected by the effects of drugs) or something similar. Probably if you get some sort of "virus" desease by itself, pneumonia, etc, not as a consequence of HIV, HIV might still play a role as it generates a reduction of self immunity and defenses. Just a personal and non qualified thought.