411 Anthonydane NYC

[DMICS]

29 minutes ago, Coolwave35 said:

Lol I had to check my cc. The blue store!  

 

Hahahahaha love that place. I'm guessing because you went in the morning you didn't bother checking out the booths? lol.

[+ Coolwave35]

56 minutes ago, DMICS said:

 

Hahahahaha love that place. I'm guessing because you went in the morning you didn't bother checking out the booths? lol.

I was walking with a buddy who didn’t want to go in haha. I’m definitely curious though and it’s on my list of places to visit. He was the one who told me about back there. I would have had no idea. He called then arcades. 

[Lazarus]

Don’t waste your time checking out the arcade at the Blue Store. 

[DMICS]

2 hours ago, Coolwave35 said:

I was walking with a buddy who didn’t want to go in haha. I’m definitely curious though and it’s on my list of places to visit. He was the one who told me about back there. I would have had no idea. He called then arcades. 

When you have free time try it once. Whenever I'm in town I always try and make time to stop by. Time of the day is important. 

[wsc]

On 2/12/2023 at 12:04 PM, JUWS said:

 Would make a great screenplay! 👏😁😂

We could call it Jiffy Lube: The Movie!

[CuriousByNature]

16 hours ago, Coolwave35 said:

I’m on prep and tested every three months. I now have to abstain from sexual activity for a month which sucks because I have a big trip planned for colombia in 5 weeks. 

Excuse my ignorance, but if you are on PrEP, why would you still need to abstain?  Is it because it's not 100% effective?  If that is the case, shouldn't people abstain like that after every encounter?

[pubic_assistance]

Prep is never 100% effective and it's only 97% effective IF you take it 100% perfectly on schedule ( which virtually NO ONE does ).  So yeah...if you KNOW someone is HIV positive and they just shot a load in your ass..you should probably wait to see if you got the bullet in your game of Russian PreP Roulette

[LookingAround]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

Prep is never 100% effective and it's only 97% effective IF you take it 100% perfectly on schedule ( which virtually NO ONE does ).  So yeah...if you KNOW someone is HIV positive and they just shot a load in your ass..you should probably wait to see if you got the bullet in your game of Russian PreP Roulette

Misinformation. It’s more than 97% effective — it’s about 99% effective. And I for one am completely adherent to the dosing schedule so don’t say almost no one is. You’re wrong in both your comments. 

[+ Coolwave35]

I haven’t missed a dose since I started. Literally. Never missed a dose. I’m VERY unconcerned but couldn’t live with myself if by some off chance I became a super spreader knowing there was an exposure risk. 

The facts are:

I had a clean STD  test 3 weeks ago. 
I topped and didn’t cum inside him. 
I haven’t missed a dose of prep since August.

In this situation, abstinence is right for me today. 

[pubic_assistance]

11 minutes ago, Coolwave35 said:

I haven’t missed a dose since I started. Literally. Never missed a dose.

From ALL the reading I've done the efficacy that the pharmaceutical companies taut is ONLY valid IF you never miss a single dose. Then the range is 97% to 99 % . ( Pharmaceutical company claims 99% while independent studies show 97% ). You need to dig a bit to find the independent studies  because big pharma spends a lot to keep their data coming up first when you research. To me, 3% risk is still a risk. However topping as opposed to bottoming also reduces your risk.

[+ Lucky]

3 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

From ALL the reading I've done the efficacy that the pharmaceutical companies taut is ONLY valid IF you never miss a single dose. Then the range is 97% to 99 % . ( Pharmaceutical company claims 99% while independent studies show 97% ). You need to dig a bit to find the independent studies  because big pharma spends a lot to keep their data coming up first when you research. To me, 3% risk is still a risk. However topping as opposed to bottoming also reduces your risk.

Could you back up your statements with links? Name ALL the reading you have done, whether medical journals or Mickey Mouse comics.

What is the link to your statistics showing the difference between the pharmaceutical companies and independent studies?

You love to make statements that hint at having a background, but you don't back them up with evidence.

[pubic_assistance]

6 minutes ago, Lucky said:

You love to make statements that hint at having a background, but you don't back them up with evidence.

Again...this is a discussion board, and not my college dissertation.  I didn't include a bibliography.

My comment stated clearly that this was my conclusion "from all the reading I've done". I didn't just read it today, so I don't have the articles at my finger tips, but I can say that I am not inclined to believe puff pieces. I also don't believe articles that are sponsored by the Pharmaceutical Industry. So you DO need to do some digging. If I have a minute, I will look to see if I did save any of the articles.  Right now, I'm at work and just taking a lunch break.

[+ Lucky]

8 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

Again...this is a discussion board, and not my college dissertation.  I didn't include a bibliography.

My comment stated clearly that this was my conclusion "from all the reading I've done". I didn't just read it today, so I don't have the articles at my finger tips, but I can say that I am not inclined to believe puff pieces. I also don't believe articles that are sponsored by the Pharmaceutical Industry. So you DO need to do some digging. If I have a minute, I will look to see if I did save any of the articles.  Right now, I'm at work and just taking a lunch break.

I don't need to do anything. You are the one pretending to have facts to support your statements.

And you have a job??? How do you post here  from morning to night and still work and have a family?

[pubic_assistance]

9 minutes ago, Lucky said:

You are the one pretending to have facts to support your statements.

I fail to see why you immediately assume I am "pretending".

I am hardly here "from morning until night". I take mental breaks during the day to get away from paperwork, so I check various online chats that I participate in.  It's five minutes here and there.

[BtmBearDad]

FWIW, the 97-99% range @pubic_assistance references is in line with what I’ve been told by my doctor, and what I have read in the past. 

Same with @Coolwave35’s statements. Every 3 months my doctor does emphasise the importance of adherence to the medication schedule, and quizzes me on my own adherence: 

• take daily
• if you miss a dose, refrain from sexual activity until “X” days (can’t recall the number) of being back on the daily regiment 
• if you’ve had, or believe you’ve had an exposure to HIV, call immediately to get a prescription for PEP

While I haven’t missed a day, my doctor did take me off PrEP for 3 months to monitor another condition/medication (totally unrelated) to ensure the PrEP wasn’t having any negative impacts. Fortunately this was during covid, and while the lockdowns were more or less lifted, I wasn’t looking to hook up at the time. Once back on though, I believe I was told to wait 2 weeks before engaging in any sexual activity. 

Yes, it’s not 100% effective, but everyone needs to assess their own comfort level with that fact. I don’t think it matters what role you take, or whether it’s with a provider, a f-buddy, a hookup, or even a bf/partner if you’re in an open relationship. 

Just my tuppence.
BBD  

 

[LookingAround]

51 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

From ALL the reading I've done the efficacy that the pharmaceutical companies taut is ONLY valid IF you never miss a single dose. Then the range is 97% to 99 % . ( Pharmaceutical company claims 99% while independent studies show 97% ). You need to dig a bit to find the independent studies  because big pharma spends a lot to keep their data coming up first when you research. To me, 3% risk is still a risk. However topping as opposed to bottoming also reduces your risk.

You’re wrong plain and simple. You’re spreading misinformation. 

[pubic_assistance]

16 minutes ago, LookingAround said:

You’re wrong plain and simple.

Then why did @BtmBearDad just indicate that both his doctor and his reading agrees with my statement ?

So clearly I am NOT "spreading misinformation". You may be reading misinformation because the pharmaceutical industry likes to paint a rosier picture of their product.

[LookingAround]

4 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

Then why did @BtmBearDad just indicate that both his doctor and his reading agrees with my statement ?

So clearly I am NOT "spreading misinformation". You may be reading misinformation because the pharmaceutical industry likes to paint a rosier picture of their product.

The numbers you cite are wrong. The data indicate that prep is 99% effective. You are making up your own numbers and you cannot cite authoritative sources because there are none. You are left to make it up and rely on BtmBearDad as your source. 
 

I rest my case. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by LookingAround

[pubic_assistance]

23 minutes ago, LookingAround said:

The data indicate that prep is 99% effective.

The data that indicate(s) prep is 99% effective is the data sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry

Independent organizations come up with a different number.

But as always...people will believe what make them happiest...so you do you. I will stick with the actual research numbers.

[BtmBearDad]

33 minutes ago, LookingAround said:

You are left to make it up and rely on BtmBearDad as your source. 

I have not, and do not, present myself as any type of “source” here. I only offered by own concurrence with the 97-99% range previously cited upthread based on my conversations with my doctor, and what reading I did on PrEP when I started on it however many years ago it was, however anecdotal it may be. 

[LookingAround]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

The data that indicate(s) prep is 99% effective is the data sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry

Independent organizations come up with a different number.

But as always...people will believe what make them happiest...so you do you. I will stick with the actual research numbers.

I don’t believe what makes me happiest. I believe the science and data. You believe in fantasy and your own numbers that exist between your ears that you make up in your mind and present here as fact. 

[DWnyc]

Hey guys this is an interesting and important discussion … let’s not get it shut down by the moderators so let’s keep it civil please! 

[pubic_assistance]

4 hours ago, Lucky said:

Could you back up your statements with links?

I came across this article that I had saved. Obviously I don't save everything I read.

HIV combination prevention strategies consisting of condom use, access to HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), postexposure prophylaxis and treatment-as-prevention with antiretroviral treatment (ART), contributed to the fall in new HIV diagnoses in men having sex with men (MSM) reported globally ^[1–3].

Oral PrEP as tenofovir disoproxil-fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC) has been approved for a daily or ‘event-based’ dosing (EBD) around the time of a potential exposure to HIV. Its effectiveness in preventing HIV has been attested at 86% in trials ^[4,5] and as high as 95% when adherence is optimal

Shover CL, Shoptaw S, Javanbakht M, Lee SJ, Bolan R, Cunningham N, et al. Mind the gaps: Prescription Coverage and HIV incidence among patients receiving PreP. AIDS Behav 2019; 23:2730–2740.

Edited February 14, 2023 by pubic_assistance

[LookingAround]

From the CDC:

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/prep/prep-effectiveness.html
“PrEP reduces the risk of getting HIV from sex by about 99% when taken as prescribed.”

 

[BtmBearDad]

97%, 98%, or 99% - you’re both summa cum laud - time to put this debate to rest.