Barebacking and boundaries

[+ sniper]

What evidence do you have that only a "fraction" are taking PreP consistently?

 

And I'm at a complete loss to understand the second part of your post. If they're in the MSM category, how can they not need to be talking PreP?

 

Finally, if barebacking concerns you, don't do it.

https://www.poz.com/article/estimated-136000-people-prep-us

 

Math. 136,000 people on PreP. Most of them white men over the age of 25, one of the lower risk subgroups.

[bnm73]

https://www.poz.com/article/estimated-136000-people-prep-us

 

Math. 136,000 people on PreP. Most of them white men over the age of 25, one of the lower risk subgroups.

 

Yeah...white gay men over 25 never fuck bareback or contract HIV. And black men under 25 either have great health insurance to make the drugs affordable or can afford the $25k/year that the drugs cost. /end sarcasm

[+ sniper]

Yeah...white gay men over 25 never fuck bareback or contract HIV. And black men under 25 either have great health insurance to make the drugs affordable or can afford the $25k/year that the drugs cost. /end sarcasm

 

I'm saying statistically they're less likely, if you're over 25 and been fucking bareback odds are you've already got it...it would make more sense to put everyone under 30 on it.

 

And I said nothing about affordability, and I'm not blaming people who can't afford it for not being on it. I'm just saying that some people seem to be acting like everyone is on PreP when the truth is the vast majority of MSM aren't.

 

I know people who are on PreP who, frankly, I doubt have sex more than once a year. It would be more cost-effective for them to go on PEP after each sex act.

[+ sam.fitzpatrick]

I know people who are on PreP who, frankly, I doubt have sex more than once a year. It would be more cost-effective for them to go on PEP after each sex act.

 

Perhaps it would be more cost-effective, but having the physician's appointments and regular panel of tests helps detect any adverse reactions to the meds.

[Rudynate]

Perhaps it would be more cost-effective, but having the physician's appointments and regular panel of tests helps detect any adverse reactions to the meds.

 

 

How does it do that? In my initial screen, I didn't have any test that would have revealed a sensitivity to the medication.

[MikeBiDude]

Yeah...white gay men over 25 never fuck bareback or contract HIV. And black men under 25 either have great health insurance to make the drugs affordable or can afford the $25k/year that the drugs cost. /end sarcasm

I researched 4-5 sites and Truvada without insurance runs about $1300/month in the USA. Not sure where the $25k annual number is you’re mentioning?

Edited August 20, 2018 by MikeBiDude

[Rudynate]

Yeah...white gay men over 25 never fuck bareback or contract HIV. And black men under 25 either have great health insurance to make the drugs affordable or can afford the $25k/year that the drugs cost. /end

sarcasm

 

I had the idea that insurance carriers not covering truvada had become unusual. I know it was common when truvada was first approved for PrEP.

[+ sam.fitzpatrick]

How does it do that? In my initial screen, I didn't have any test that would have revealed a sensitivity to the medication.

 

Good point.

[Rudynate]

I had the idea that insurance carriers not covering truvada had become unusual. I know it was common when truvada was first approved for PrEP.

 

 

I juts read that the manufacturer will help anyone denied coverage appeal the denial.

[bnm73]

I researched 4-5 sites and Truvada without insurance runs about $1300/month in the USA. Not sure where the $25k annual number is you’re mentioning?

 

I've seen prices of just over $2,000/month. See https://www.healthline.com/health/hiv-aids/cost-of-treatment#current-drug-costs, for example, which gives costs up to just under $2,000/month (30 pills = $1,672–$1,913 for Truvada) on the first link that came up a couple of days ago. Other links gave higher prices. (https://www.goodrx.com/truvada?kw=price&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=truvada%20cost%7ce&utm_campaign=truvada&utm_content=ad-group_price&msclkid=0bb756ffb395185fb7940d859be5a7be for example gives costs well over $2,000/month from some places without "coupons") I'm wiling to grant that other sites might quote lower prices, though.

 

But even if we go by your figures, that's still $15,600...awfully expensive out of the price range for your average middle class unless your insurance covers it (and, as discussed above, not all do).

[Wolfer]

Wow, seeing you guys talk about healthcare and PrEP makes my eyes cross a little... In Belgium when it's decided that a drug is covered by healthcare it becomes a nationwide standard and all healthcare companies are required by law to provide the exact copay or benefits or whatever the term would be.

Getting PrEP in Belgium is making an appointment in one of the specialized STI clinics here and you pay around 15 euro (20 dollars) a month for a bottle. All the testing and consultations are covered by healthcare, as far as I know. Or at least the biggest chunk of it.

 

But like the OP, the pleasure was so fantastic and the guy was absolutely my type, that I didn't stop him. I let him ride away until he shot all over my chest and I really enjoyed watching him (and of course the amazing sensation of raw sex).

I know it's my responsibility to "be the adult in the room" and ensure I adhere to safer sex practices, but I completely empathize with the OP's struggle.

Thanks for sharing. I've not personally seen such a dramatic shift to barebacking here in Europe, even though PrEP is relatively easy to come by. But since my personal experience is very limited, I can't really make a statement either way.

But I have heard stories about Berlin, for instance, where barebacking seems to be on the rise.

 

I know it's easy to say that if you're worried about barebacking, don't do it, but when you're in the heat of the moment and your dick gets engulfed by that utter pleasure (because for instance, the bottom just slides it in without saying or asking)... It's very hard to snap out of it.

 

That's why I've made an appointment to go on PReP. Still wanna use condoms, but I want to have that extra protection for when I find myself in a situation similar to the one described above and in my original post.

 

I know people who are on PreP who, frankly, I doubt have sex more than once a year. It would be more cost-effective for them to go on PEP after each sex act.

The specialist I consulted about PrEP and PEP said that in a situation like that it would still be better to be on PrEP, but use it event-driven, meaning only take it when you know you're going to have sex (or there's a chance there will be). And not take it the rest of the time.

He said that one PEP treatment equalled ten event-driven uses of PrEP so you'd get more mileage out of your PrEP bottle (I mean have sex more times).

[+ OliverSaks]

How does it do that? In my initial screen, I didn't have any test that would have revealed a sensitivity to the medication.

They test for kidney and liver function among other things in the initial PreP visits, which could suggest a patient might not tolerate the medicine well. They continue these tests while taking the med to monitor for possible harm to the kidneys, which may develop over time, in addition to the HIV test at each PreP visit.

[Rudynate]

Wow, seeing you guys talk about healthcare and PrEP makes my eyes cross a little... In Belgium when it's decided that a drug is covered by healthcare it becomes a nationwide standard and all healthcare companies are required by law to provide the exact copay or benefits or whatever the term would b

Getting PrEP in Belgium is making an appointment in one of the specialized STI clinics here and you pay around 15 euro (20 dollars) a month for a bottle.

 

American healthcare may well be the best in the world. Our system of healthcare financing may well be the worst in the world.

[Wolfer]

American healthcare may well be the best in the world. Our system of healthcare financing may well be the worst in the world.

To me that feels a bit like a contradiction in terms? Healthcare to me means making medical care available to everyone regardless of their income. Which is how it works in Belgium. You pay 9 dollars a month and you are covered for everything that relates to mainstream medicine. For alternative medicine each healthcare company is allowed to come with its own payouts.

If you are unable to pay the 9 dollars a month I think our social services pay it for you... But I'm not completely sure about that.

 

There still is a "personal part" in medical costs here in Belgium. For instance, a visit to the GP costs 25 euro, but healthcare pays back 20 euro. The 5 euro is known as the "personal part".

For more serious ailments (like cancer, for instance) the personal part is waived and everything is covered completely by healthcare (including consultations, treatments, medications, doctors and even psychotherapy during cancer treatment).

(Incidentally a friend of mine had to see a GP in the US when she was travelling there. My eyes bulged when she said she had to pay 200 dollars for the consultation.)

 

If the financing is that bad in the US, to me that's not a good system of healthcare...

 

By the way, I'm not glorifying or flaunting the system in Belgium. I'm genuinely enjoying the discussion and hearing how it is over there and share information.

[maninsoma]

Calling one's insurance company to ask whether a specific treatment is "covered" is probably not the best way to approach the issue. First of all, having worked at an insurance company many years ago, I can tell you that plans can be very complicated and the phone representative might not fully understand your plan. Secondly, someone else's post above pointed out the problem with asking if something is covered. If your doctor prescribes it because it's medically necessary and there is no generic available, then your insurance company will probably cover it; if they don't, there is an appeals process. But if you just call a phone rep to ask, in essence, "Will you pay for this expensive brand name drug?" don't be surprised if the boilerplate answer is no. It would be more accurate for them to say, "maybe."

 

Even though I am in a high risk group for colon cancer, Blue Shield once denied a preauthorization request for a colonoscopy. When I called them and asked why they were indicating they wouldn't pay for this screening when my doctor ordered it due to my high risk status, the phone representative acknowledged the medical necessity for me and changed the preauthorization status. Remember that a lot of insurance companies' M.O. is to deny as much as they can in order to maximize profits and, thus, salaries for higher level executives and stock prices for investors. Therefore a first "no" should never be taken at face value unless it's something that clearly won't be covered (e.g., purely cosmetic surgery).

[snogaholic]

>> Remember that a lot of insurance companies' M.O. is to deny as much as they can in order to maximize profits and, thus, salaries for higher level executives and stock prices for investors. Therefore a first "no" should never be taken at face value unless it's something that clearly won't be covered (e.g., purely cosmetic surgery).

 

Yup, as Michael Moore dramatised so memorably onscreen. We're all doomed.

[Rudynate]

To me that feels a bit like a contradiction in terms.

 

Of course it's a contradiction. What good is the best healthcare in the world if it is unavailable to a large segment of the populace?

[muscmtl]

So strange to read about people discovering barebacking now, in 2018. I have been barebacking since ever, having bareback orgies for over 30 years, which means that like me thousands and thousands of gay guys have have been doing the same. Within a month of its launch around 2000, BBRT had reached 100,000 members.

My problem as a client is that there too few escorts that bb to bother (anything goes). It's, 2018 and 'safe only" escort should be such a rarity that you have to pay extra if you want "unatural sex'

[+ OliverSaks]

So strange to read about people discovering barebacking now, in 2018. I have been barebacking since ever, having bareback orgies for over 30 years, which means that like me thousands and thousands of gay guys have have been doing the same. Within a month of its launch around 2000, BBRT had reached 100,000 members.

My problem as a client is that there too few escorts that bb to bother (anything goes). It's, 2018 and 'safe only" escort should be such a rarity that you have to pay extra if you want "unatural sex'

Ah yes... escorts - people having a large number of partners - should not do everything they can to protect themselves so that you can enjoy yourself a little more... okayyyyy, that must be really tough on you

[Wolfer]

So strange to read about people discovering barebacking now, in 2018. I have been barebacking since ever, having bareback orgies for over 30 years, which means that like me thousands and thousands of gay guys have have been doing the same. Within a month of its launch around 2000, BBRT had reached 100,000 members.

My problem as a client is that there too few escorts that bb to bother (anything goes). It's, 2018 and 'safe only" escort should be such a rarity that you have to pay extra if you want "unatural sex'

It's not that barebacking is new, obviously, it's that now that PrEP is an option, more people are open to the idea of barebacking.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Wolfer

[LookingAround]

Self report of cognitive functioning has little statistical relationship with actual cognitive tests. It relates more to level of depression as shown in multiple studies. HIV can affect the brain but studies show improved cognitive functioning in persons on combination therapy.

 

Be careful folks in drawing conclusions from persons writing on an anonymous internet board.

[Wolfer]

W

Self report of cognitive functioning has little statistical relationship with actual cognitive tests. It relates more to level of depression as shown in multiple studies. HIV can affect the brain but studies show improved cognitive functioning in persons on combination therapy.

 

Be careful folks in drawing conclusions from persons writing on an anonymous internet board.

Well that shut me up.

 

I assumed that the men participating in the study on the effects of HIV drugs were not going to self-report on cognitive functions.

 

I'm gonna keep quiet now because I don't have enough knowledge on this particular subject to really engage in the discussion.

[maninsoma]

Self report of cognitive functioning has little statistical relationship with actual cognitive tests. It relates more to level of depression as shown in multiple studies. HIV can affect the brain but studies show improved cognitive functioning in persons on combination therapy.

 

Be careful folks in drawing conclusions from persons writing on an anonymous internet board.

 

Wouldn't that also apply to what you wrote?

[LookingAround]

Wouldn't that also apply to what you wrote?

No. The studies showing beneficial effects of HAART and combination antiretroviral therapy didn’t ask people to estimate their cognitive functioning. They administered validated neuropsychological tests to actually measure their cognitive functioning.

 

And you don’t have to take it from an anonymous poster. Look at the research yourself.

 

In 2 minutes a google search pulled up some articles:

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18510891/

 

 

https://aidsrestherapy.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12981-016-0104-0

[maninsoma]

No. The studies showing beneficial effects of HAART and combination antiretroviral therapy didn’t ask people to estimate their cognitive functioning. They administered validated neuropsychological tests to actually measure their cognitive functioning.

 

And you don’t have to take it from an anonymous poster. Look at the research yourself.

 

In 2 minutes a google search pulled up some articles:

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18510891/

 

 

https://aidsrestherapy.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12981-016-0104-0

 

You missed my point -- a point I probably wouldn't have made had you linked to some research in your first post. As it stood, however, your previous post was simply an anonymous person on the internet claiming something is true. Was just having a little fun pointing out the irony, not trying to challenge the actual merit of your argument.