HIV in A Grindr Age

[+ Lucky]

A Writer for Gawker takes a look at the various discussions he has had with men on Grindr. He covers it all, from the guy who turns down anyone with HIV, to the guy who is sure he can't get infected by someone with a low viral load.

 

Part of the dilemma becomes clear(er):

[say] one profile says nothing about status, another says he's negative, another says he's positive and undetectable, etc. As a thought experiment, let's imagine that what people say online about themselves is always true - which is a stretch to begin with, but let's go with it for now. The guy whose viral load is undetectable might be the better choice for reducing the chance of transmission; he knows his status, he takes his meds, he has no measurable HIV in his blood. The other guys don't say their status or they say they're negative. The unknown status guy could have HIV but not want to say anything about it…Then there's the negative guy. He's either truly negative or he just thinks he's negative; if it's the latter, then in all likelihood his viral load is more of a transmission risk than the guy who knows his status and has undetectable viral load. Based on counseling NYC men testing for HIV, plenty of "negative" guys fuck without a condom and naively think they and the guy they just fucked is negative - so what they say about being negative is true, but it isn't accurate since a guy's HIV status is subject to change before he knows it has changed.

So of those three choices, the guy who's willing to be out about his status might seem like the easier one to trust. Of course, it's so much more complicated - who wants to think about HIV during sex when it's hard enough to contemplate it after sex?

 

 

 

http://gawker.com/5935651/please-dont-infect-me-im-sorry

[Jaker27]

That makes allot of sense. If they aren't truthful or just don't know then their transmission risk is potentially allot more then someone who's at least honest with their status and treating it to undetectable levels. In other words, it's the ones that say their negative that you just might have more to fear from.

[wnybear]

Kind of timely, since I just went for testing on Tuesday and am negative. Does that mean I will forgo condom use? Absolutely not. Quite honestly I would be most suspicious of guys who want to bareback. I practice safe sex no matter what. Anyone who does not want that, I don't want to have sex with. I'm 54 and HIV Negative, I plan to stay that way.

[uwsman2]

I'm with wnybear.

 

I get tested annually as part of my routine physical. I've been doing HIV testing since the late 1980s and have always tested negative, and never allow myself to be fucked without a condom. So if I tell somebody that I believe I am negative, it's because based on my tests and my strict practices, I truly believe I am negative. Is it possible that I'm positive and don't know it? Of course it's possible, just highly unlikely.

 

So how is the gawker guy going to deal with somebody like me? Paranoia.