HELP!! Risks of sex with HIV positive, undetectable on ART

[BuffaloKyle]

HIV: Can You Spread It With an Undetectable Viral Load?

WWW.WEBMD.COM

---

If you have HIV and your viral load becomes undetectable, can you still spread the virus? Get the facts.

 

[+ PhileasFogg]

1 hour ago, CuriousByNature said:

Any idea what the HIV infection risk would be if a person is on PreP and using condoms?

Estimated HIV risk per exposure | aidsmap

WWW.AIDSMAP.COM

---

What are chances of getting HIV? This page gives HIV transmission rates associated with vaginal, anal...

 

[+ purplekow]

On 8/27/2025 at 6:04 PM, Luv2play said:

Don’t consult this forum. Go to trustworthy medical authorities like the CDC . This information is readily available on the Internet. Check the sources though and use your intelligence. 

Assuming the CDC is now trustworthy and giving out such information.   These days one can never be too sure about the reliability of government advice.    

[pubic_assistance]

4 hours ago, purplekow said:

  These days one can never be too sure about the reliability of government advice.    

More like Pharmaceutical Company advice if you're believing the CDC. 

[+ SirBillybob]

Aidsmap’s Pebody and I share the same fault, that of incorrectly stating that the risk metrics are predicated on the assumption of an HIV-positive partner. In fact, the risk estimates data are limited by the fact that infectivity is unknown due to already existing modifying factors. The fault on my part is more grievous because I had already been aware of the distortion. Therefore, because variables such as per act seronegative status of both partners; per act HIV-negative status of one partner in tandem with close to negative status equivalency of the other partner due to extant infectivity modification; non-ejaculation; and circumcision are baked into the risk metrics at unknown proportions, my examples based on the assumption of poz partner with unsuppressed viral burden are underestimated, but to unquantifiable degrees, in the context of absence of TasP, PrEP, and condom use. The reason that factors that inflate risk and attenuate risk are presented separately is that one cannot easily mash them up with values in which the mix of infectivity is unknown. 

Edited August 30 by SirBillybob

[+ PhileasFogg]

8 hours ago, purplekow said:

Assuming the CDC is now trustworthy and giving out such information.   These days one can never be too sure about the reliability of government advice.    

I believe much of the data I posted is ‘23 and sooner.  Looking forward to seeing you tonight for drinks 😉

[+ purplekow]

2 hours ago, PhileasFogg said:

I believe much of the data I posted is ‘23 and sooner.  Looking forward to seeing you tonight for drinks 😉

I agree that is the case now, but things are changing.

[Colton]

On 8/27/2025 at 9:04 PM, Luv2play said:

Go to trustworthy medical authorities like the CDC .

This sentence hasn’t aged well over the past few days.  Ex-CDC ex-vaccine chief told the NYT to trust your doctor over the CDC going forward.  

[BuffaloKyle]

I'm not going to name names but there are multiple porn stars on RM that list themselves as HIV+ Undetectable that I see do BB porn with negative men. So all the articles that state it truly is impossible to contract HIV from someone who is undetectable are true and backed up by science and research. I'm sure though beforehand they get their blood tested multiple times to be as accurate on that as possible.

Edited August 29 by BuffaloKyle

[Luv2play]

25 minutes ago, BuffaloKyle said:

I'm not going to name names but there are multiple porn stars on RM that list themselves as HIV+ Undetectable that I see do BB porn with negative men. So all the articles that state it truly is impossible to contract HIV from someone who is undetectable are true and backed up by science and research. I'm sure though beforehand they get their blood tested multiple times to be as accurate on that as possible.

I’m assuming the negative men are on Prep and get tested regularly as do the ones on ART. Without regular testing either routine becomes less reliable. 
It’s like Ronald Reagan’s dictum “trust (the regime) but verify (the results). Sorry it had to be Reagan who coined the phrase. Lol

[Luv2play]

29 minutes ago, BuffaloKyle said:

I'm not going to name names but there are multiple porn stars on RM that list themselves as HIV+ Undetectable that I see do BB porn with negative men. So all the articles that state it truly is impossible to contract HIV from someone who is undetectable are true and backed up by science and research. I'm sure though beforehand they get their blood tested multiple times to be as accurate on that as possible.

I understand why you didn’t want to single out any of these pornstars on RM but I say “good on them” about being upfront about their sero status. They are helping to reduce the stigma that still attaches to HIV. 

[NJF]

12 hours ago, purplekow said:

Assuming the CDC is now trustworthy and giving out such information.   These days one can never be too sure about the reliability of government advice.    

 

[+ PhileasFogg]

On 8/29/2025 at 12:35 PM, BuffaloKyle said:

I'm not going to name names but there are multiple porn stars on RM that list themselves as HIV+ Undetectable that I see do BB porn with negative men. So all the articles that state it truly is impossible to contract HIV from someone who is undetectable are true and backed up by science and research. I'm sure though beforehand they get their blood tested multiple times to be as accurate on that as possible.

I know guys who do porn and they are tested before each shoot. 

[BuffaloKyle]

2 hours ago, PhileasFogg said:

I know guys who do porn and they are tested before each shoot. 

Any major studio tests everyone for sure as it's the right thing to do.

I'm just stating for the context of the thread that the risk is so low with hiv+ undetectable that it happens in porn everyday that neg guys will have bb sex with them. You just have to make sure I'm sure through multiple tests right before a shoot that they are still indeed undetectable.

[pubic_assistance]

10 hours ago, BuffaloKyle said:

the risk is so low with hiv+ undetectable 

The risk is low with an hiv+ undetectable top as long as the bottom is consistent about his PreP medications. 

I would NEVER let ANYONE fuck me without a condom. I dont care what your paperwork says  

[+ PhileasFogg]

On 9/1/2025 at 9:55 AM, pubic_assistance said:

The risk is low with an hiv+ undetectable top as long as the bottom is consistent about his PreP medications. 

I would NEVER let ANYONE fuck me without a condom. I dont care what your paperwork says  

The risk is low with an undetectable top even if the bottom is not on prep.  U=U

But then, I’m a top

[+ SirBillybob]

14 hours ago, PhileasFogg said:

The risk is low with an undetectable top even if the bottom is not on prep.  U=U

But then, I’m a top

U=U, true.

There would be no clinical reason to self-describe as being predominantly or exclusively insertive in anal intercourse unless you were implying that sexual position determines the legitimacy of U=U. Or if you simply wished to emphasize that sexual position is not a factor, but I didn’t read it that way.

In contrast, sexual position is a determinant of risk where one partner is HIV+ with unsuppressed viral load. 

Edited September 3 by SirBillybob