HIV ("Bareback") F*cking Article...

[Bluray2]

Does the basic information in this article

seem accurate?

 

BR2

 

https://www.frontiersmedia.com/channel-my-life-on-prep/2012/11/08/learning-to-fuck-with-poz-guys/

[corndog]

The article represents an interesting point of view. However, I stopped reading when I got to "... I learned my answer to both of these questions recently, but not until my legs were already in the air." The author is basically saying that he made critical decisions about his health in the heat of a passionate moment. I can respect a wide spectrum of views about safe sex and HIV transmission, but this is the wrong time to be making these decisions. It's basically like saying "I always have safe sex, except if the guy is really hot."

[+ Funguy]

"...many poz guys are simply not interested or willing to have sex with HIV-negative guys. Why concern themselves with my limits, when they can find sex with poz guys who don’t have to worry about transmission?"

 

This is a dangerous POV. What about poz guys with a different serotype? Yep, they're both poz and one or both of them are going to wind up with be being a "double poz!" Then start off with treating all over again!

[Rudynate]

 

Then start off with treating all over again!

 

 

What if both are on HART and undetectable? POZ on POZ barebacking is extremely widespread.

[+ Funguy]

True…and if viral loads are low/undetectable, not nearly the problem as if they weren't. It was the article's/author's cavalier attitude which I quoted that bothered me.

[Rudynate]

True…and if viral loads are low/undetectable, not nearly the problem as if they weren't. It was the article's/author's cavalier attitude which I quoted that bothered me.

 

 

For that matter, POZ on NEG (with the POZ on meds and undetectable) barebacking is becoming commonplace, too. I first found out about it from my PC doc a couple of years ago. He was careful to say that he wasn't recommending it as a safe sex strategy, but let me know that there were significant numbers of sero-discordant couples who were comfortable with the risk level.

[+ stevenkesslar]

The article represents an interesting point of view. However, I stopped reading when I got to "... I learned my answer to both of these questions recently, but not until my legs were already in the air." The author is basically saying that he made critical decisions about his health in the heat of a passionate moment. I can respect a wide spectrum of views about safe sex and HIV transmission, but this is the wrong time to be making these decisions. It's basically like saying "I always have safe sex, except if the guy is really hot."

 

Actually, I thought it was useful and I didn't react that way. Here are the parts I thought hit the nail on the head:

 

This isn’t just my “opinion”: a recent study estimated that the majority of new HIV-infections in the US are the result of having sex with someone who didn’t yet know that they were poz. The CDC estimates 20% of HIV-positive people in the US don’t know they’re infected – yet it’s this 20% that researchers estimate account for between 54% and 71% of new infections.

 

The hard-to-swallow truth is that, for guys with a lot of partners (like me), fucking poz guys with undetectable viral loads is actually safer than fucking raw with guys who think they’re negative.

 

Of course, some guys out there may think PrEP and undetectable viral loads are redundant – that PrEP is really there to protect you with guys whose viral loads aren’t undetectable. Scientifically, that’s almost certainly a sound statement. But our sex lives aren’t a perfect science. They’re driven by gut, emotion, and pleasure – the kinds of things for which science can’t account.

I read the very helpful and informative comments everybody made on the post about escorts on PreP, and my takeaway from it, for me at least, is that it's the same old-same old - always wear rubbers. However, as many people have said, there really is no such thing as completely safe sex - there is only safer sex. So while all of this involves a level of risk that is greater than "totally impossible," if you assume that anybody could be HIV+, the best odds are to wear rubbers and hope the guy is either HIV- or is HIV+ and undetectable. The next best odds are to be on PreP ad fuck raw. While being on PreP and fucking raw may be desirable for all kinds of reasons, nothing I read persuaded me that it is safer than wearing rubbers. And the worst odds of all are to have sex with somebody who is HIV+ and has a viral load, probably because - as the article points out - they don't know they are HIV+. It seems quite believable to me, as the CDC estimates, that the majority of new HIV infections are from people who don't know they're infected.

 

One of my favorite books is "And The Band Played On," because it really to me captured the tragedy behind the statement "our sex lives aren't a perfect science". If everybody always did the most rational thing, the AIDS epidemic probably would have been nowhere near as bad as it was. I think the author is being honest about how a lot of people handle their sex lives. From the standpoint of an individual, I agree the author can sound cavalier, and I know how I feel in terms of my own safety and the risks I will take. But from the collective standpoint of controlling and stopping the epidemic, I think his points are right on the money. The author is taking risks, like making selective decisions about when and when not to let HIV+ guys fuck him raw, but if the CDC is right if more people think like the author - use PreP correctly and ask about viral load before you fuck - it should lead to a reduction in HIV transmission. The biggest danger with PreP is that it will simply allow people to feel they can do whatever they want, no questions asked.

 

The single best thing that could happen is everybody gets tested and everybody HIV+ gets treated, and that of course makes sense anyway, because people who are HIV+ have every reason to get treated as quickly as possible if they want to lie healthy lives. Probably the best thing that PreP could do is lead to a lot more testing and further reduce the stigma of having HIV, so that all the incentives are on knowledge and none of the incentives are on denial or inaction. Looking at it from the perspective of an escort who has had a lot of sex with clients, some of whom I knew were poz and some of whom probably were poz even if they didn't tell me, it is a game of Russian roulette, and the more people that are undetectable, the less likely I am to unhappily find one day that one of the chambers had a bullet in it - perhaps because a rubber broke, for example. And that is partly because with HART and PreP none of this feels like a fatal bullet anymore.

 

To be honest and self-critical of my line of work, another thing that science can't account for is escorting. Arguably, if everybody acted supremely rationally, all the time, and always prioritized their own safety from disease, there would be little or no business for escorts, because escorting introduces risk, not only of HIV but of other STDs that are much easier to catch. I'm fine with the idea that we are going to base public education and outreach on human nature, as it actually operates in the real world, and that has to incorporate that a lot of people are going to do things that are driven by emotion and pleasure, like hiring an escort, rather than the safest sex practices possible, which is basically no sex, particularly not with escorts. If you accept that, which anybody reading this site and hiring probably should, we want more people to think like this guy, and get educated and ask questions to minimize risk. He isn't practicing absolutely perfect prevention practices, but nobody who is having sex with escorts is, either, really.

[Guest ChrisW]

Is it worth it to write a well thought post based in sociology and psychology and try to give a reasonable analysis of this? No...probably not. That would require folks to be rational about a topic that inspires fear, anger and a myriad of other emotions and I don't think many folks on here are capable of having an objective conversation.

 

Lets just all talk about how terrible this is and get it over with because I know how much you guys on the forum like to do that

[corndog]

Is it worth it to write a well thought post based in sociology and psychology and try to give a reasonable analysis of this?

 

This is an important topic that can't be over-discussed.

 

Lets just all talk about how terrible this is and get it over with because I know how much you guys on the forum like to do that

 

Please don't assume that all people here are a of a single mind. Yes, there are some people here who respond to discussions like this in an irrational manner, but there are also many people here who make every effort to have an "objective conversation." For the foreseeable future, this topic is of great interest both on the level of public health, and on the level of our individual decisions about safety and risk. If you're not interested in this conversation, I invite you to not read these threads.

[doitb4ugo]

While I can't seem to understand it intellectually, the majority of my non-escorts sex is BB with mostly poz guys but is beginning to include a fair number of negative guys as well. Just an observation in my life.

Between on-going major studies on transmission rates for Undetectables and PreP'ed guys, much of the stigma associated with being POZ is being reduced. There are more and more places within the gay community where I am not feared or shunned. Quite an improvement.

[JDXXX]

Does anyone know if you take Truveda or any other HIV medication to keep your viral load or T-cell in order if it effects you having an erection? I do know if some people who have to take Tri-mix due to the HIV medication somehow effecting they're ability to function sexually by gaining an erection from what I've been told is why they have to inject tri-mix to get an erection.

 

This is a question to ask for those who do take Truveda in order to bareback if they're able to have a full strong erection as to if they never were on it.

 

Some HIV meds work well easily for some people when it comes to sexual ability, and some it doesn't.

 

I even heard by being on HIV medication has side-effects such as wasting, and gaining a "gut" where you look bloated. Unless that was under the old HIV meds/AZT.

[doitb4ugo]

I have found few side effects from Truvada over the last 3 years but being HIV+ requires a combo of other meds as well as Truvada to keep my viral load down. I had been on a combination of Reyataz and Norvir , along with Truvada, but the meds gave me some nausea and constant diarrhea for several years. A recent change from the Reyataz/Norvir combo to a newer drug, Tivicay seems to have fixed the problem.

 

From what I know about Truvada, there are possible liver issues and I am having some bone density issues but not sure where that is coming from - meds or HIV.

[JDXXX]

I have found few side effects from Truvada over the last 3 years but being HIV+ requires a combo of other meds as well as Truvada to keep my viral load down. I had been on a combination of Reyataz and Norvir , along with Truvada, but the meds gave me some nausea and constant diarrhea for several years. A recent change from the Reyataz/Norvir combo to a newer drug, Tivicay seems to have fixed the problem.

From what I know about Truvada, there are possible liver issues and I am having some bone density issues but not sure where that is coming from - meds or HIV.

 

Hi Doitb4ugo,

 

Great to hear from you, and Thank you very much for taking the time to respond to my question as I know it's kind of odd, but just curious to know how people with HIV are able to cope not functioning sexually. Always wondered that.

 

Has being on the HIV+ meds effected your ability to have sex or gain an erection or made any physical changes to your body?

[doitb4ugo]

Hi Doitb4ugo,

 

Has being on the HIV+ meds effected your ability to have sex or gain an erection or made any physical changes to your body?

 

Being on HIV meds has not affected my ability to have sex or gain an erection (assuming that I can get the guys securely tied down before I disclose..only kidding).

My advanced age is perhaps a bigger factor in getting and keeping an erection for as long as I want. During safer sex with someone, I usually bottom because I am not always able to stay hard with a condom - my doc believes this is not physical but "in my mind" and not related to meds or HIV.

 

I am more than pleased to answer your questions. Very few people ever ask. I am quite an open book about most things.

[JDXXX]

Being on HIV meds has not affected my ability to have sex or gain an erection (assuming that I can get the guys securely tied down before I disclose..only kidding).

My advanced age is perhaps a bigger factor in getting and keeping an erection for as long as I want. During safer sex with someone, I usually bottom because I am not always able to stay hard with a condom - my doc believes this is not physical but "in my mind" and not related to meds or HIV.

 

I am more than pleased to answer your questions. Very few people ever ask. I am quite an open book about most things.

 

Thank you for being so open regarding such questions as I always wanted to know from friends who are poz what complications they've endured from taking HIV meds, but was afraid they might take it offensively by me questioning them on they're status or seeing them as handicapped because of them being limited physically and sexually cause they're positive. I feel bad asking, but curious.

 

I have to thank you again for filling me in on what it's like as what you informed me has woke me up that my friends don't have it as bad as I thought as the media or other publications I have read made it seem people who are HIV+ have so many complications both sexually, and physically.

[doitb4ugo]

JDXXX, I remember my time when I was HIV+ and did not know it. I was very sick and in and out of the hospital. I was not diagnosed with HIV but usually treated to bring down my fevers and sent home. Being perceived as a straight/married guy precluded the docs from suggesting testing. By the time I was diagnosed in a Boston clinic, I was very sick and had full blown AIDS. The meds saved my life and I can't express how grateful I am that they exist and allow me to live a relatively normal, healthy life. Research is even beginning to show that being HIV+ is not a determining factor in how long I will live.

 

I would imagine that some guys don't have it as easy as I have had it but just in the area of meds alone. There are now so many choices that a doctor can pretty well eliminate or reduce guys reactions to a particular med. I am a member of a POZ meetup group here in Boston and most guys in the group are doing very well health-wise. A number of side effects suffered by guys in the past have almost disappeared with todays meds. I think the medical community has also changed. When I was diagnosed, there was no discussion about changing meds if the side-effects weren't too bad. "It working. We don't want to take a chance on changing it" was a common discussion with doctors.

 

Having learned the hard way, my most important lesson for others is GET TESTED. I was quite a danger to men I was having sex with even though I was always safe (except for the guy who infected me) when having sex.

[Guest ChrisW]

I

This is an important topic that can't be over-discussed.

 

 

 

Please don't assume that all people here are a of a single mind. Yes, there are some people here who respond to discussions like this in an irrational manner, but there are also many people here who make every effort to have an "objective conversation." For the foreseeable future, this topic is of great interest both on the level of public health, and on the level of our individual decisions about safety and risk. If you're not interested in this conversation, I invite you to not read these threads.

I am getting a degree in social work and spent the last 3 months researching HIV so this is very much a topic of interest but you can't educate the unwilling and I am not about to get ripped a new one again because people are closeted, traumatized from living through the plague or general lack of sexual experience. Escorts on here sugar coat things for the folks on this forum because it nets them business which is a tremendous disservice to the people who need to be educated the most. I have done MORE than my part if you have ever read any of my posts on HIV. My point of my initial post is that this is loaded topic and few people want to have a candid conversation about sex because we are on a forum were people pay for sexual fantasies and sti's aren't sexy.

 

Now lets go back to pretending that only bad people bareback and pull out our pitch forks and light the torches

[+ stevenkesslar]

Now lets go back to pretending that only bad people bareback and pull out our pitch forks and light the torches

 

Great idea!

 

[Nvr2Thick]

"The hard-to-swallow truth is that, for guys with a lot of partners (like me), fucking poz guys with undetectable viral loads is actually safer than fucking raw with guys who think they’re negative."

 

One of the problems with the author's position is that he's not necessarily fucking poz guys with undetectable viral loads; he's fucking guys that say they have undetectable viral loads. It's just a checkbox on someone's A4A or Manhunt profile. It doesn't take into account whether a potential partner is not telling the truth, or is not reporting up to date information. It's the same as believing some is HIV negative based on his profile. He might be telling the truth or lying, or he might not have been tested recently or tested ever.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Escorts on here sugar coat things for the folks on this forum

 

Another great idea!

 

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51jdaOiibVL._SY355_.jpg

[Steven_Draker]

... but just curious to know how people with HIV are able to cope not functioning sexually.

 

... or seeing them as handicapped because of them being limited physically and sexually cause they're positive.

 

I have many POZ friends. Being undetectable on HAART treatment today doesn't carry the same burden as a decade or two ago.

POZ folks have great sexual lives and function normally: just like you and me. Many people with HIV live long and productive lives.

 

The ED problem you're referring to may be caused by a different factor. I'm not aware that HIV drugs cause erectile dysfunction. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[+ Funguy]

First of all my little tiger….those Cola Cocks - do you lick them or suck them, or slurp them or what?

 

Now to a serious topic:

We have been devoting a lot of time here to HIV (which it certainly deserves!) The fact that people are living longer and healthier lives is a testament to the discussions and medical progress.

 

i don't know if I'm hijacking and if this needs to be in a different thread but we are talking about STD's.

 

We do, however, need to remember about other STD's, some are curable, some not. Curable - syphillis, GC, chlamydia. Hepatitis B - nope; Hepatits C - at least treatable like HIV. None of these are exactly rare. Untreatable: HPV. At least there is an vaccine at the present time and a newer version which has just come out. The virus causes a number of annoying, mostly non-life threatening conditions which i will not list (and also 98%+ of cervical cancer in women. I mention this because some of you guys out there are married/having unprotected sex with women also.) Has anybody seen really gross anal warts from this - awful, can be removed, grow back. It isn't even from not wearing a condom when penetrating. There is a lot of genital rubbing going on before the condom is put on. It is silent, you don't know if you are a carrier. You can always be tested and if susceptible, get the vaccine. Although officially the vaccine is only cleared for up to 26 year olds, I recommend EVERY sexually active man and woman at least be tested be tested; if negative, get the vaccine. And I know a lot of you are NOT doing this.

 

Sorry - I was in office mode this morning.

[+ Gar1eth]

First of all my little tiger….those Cola Cocks - do you lick them or suck them, or slurp them or what?

 

Now to a serious topic:

We have been devoting a lot of time here to HIV (which it certainly deserves!) The fact that people are living longer and healthier lives is a testament to the discussions and medical progress.

 

i don't know if I'm hijacking and if this needs to be in a different thread but we are talking about STD's.

 

We do, however, need to remember about other STD's, some are curable, some not. Curable - syphillis, GC, chlamydia. Hepatitis B - nope; Hepatits C - at least treatable like HIV. None of these are exactly rare. Untreatable: HPV. At least there is an vaccine at the present time and a newer version which has just come out. The virus causes a number of annoying, mostly non-life threatening conditions which i will not list (and also 98%+ of cervical cancer in women. I mention this because some of you guys out there are married/having unprotected sex with women also.) Has anybody seen really gross anal warts from this - awful, can be removed, grow back. It isn't even from not wearing a condom when penetrating. There is a lot of genital rubbing going on before the condom is put on. It is silent, you don't know if you are a carrier. You can always be tested and if susceptible, get the vaccine. Although officially the vaccine is only cleared for up to 26 year olds, I recommend EVERY sexually active man and woman at least be tested be tested; if negative, get the vaccine. And I know a lot of you are NOT doing this.

 

Sorry - I was in office mode this morning.

 

 

Just as an FYI- there is a new HPV Vaccine( the virus that causes genital warts) -Gardasil 9 which covers 9 strains as opposed to Gardasil which only covered 4. The downside is it's only approved for males up to age 15. But I'm sure most gay friendly health care providers would give it to those of us older. The problem is insurance might not cover it. Also I'm not sure there are guidelines on what to do if you have received the earlier vaccines.

 

This is an important vaccine. In addition to genuinely warts it can cause cancer-particularly of the cervix for those of you who are bisexual and have female partners.

 

But it also causes other types of cancers. You may remember Michael Douglas having throat cancer. I believe there was an article where he blamed oral sex-this is most likely the virus that caused it.

 

And even more important to us here-and I can't name names-but I am aware of a former escort here who was extremely popular who died from complications of rectal cancer. He first developed it around 2003 or 2004 and ultimately died in 2013.

 

Gman

[+ Funguy]

Gman is right.

 

We are now using Gardasil 9 as soon as we finish our stock of Gardasil 4. We also ignore the age issue EXCEPT as how it pertains to Insurance and there is a question as to coverage. The age limits are arbitrary due to the fact that this is the age group it has been tested on. With G-4 and the 26 y. limit it was tested only to age 26 AND it has was originally felt (erroneously) that people older than 26 have already been exposed by now to HPV and that it is of limited value. That it why you can get tested and if negative get the vaccine. Insurance may then cover with proof that you were susceptible.

 

The cancer issues are important. It is also why I brought up that it is not the penetration but all of the fun play sans condom leading up to penetration that also counts.

[m4hotness]

I

 

I am getting a degree in social work and spent the last 3 months researching HIV so this is very much a topic of interest but you can't educate the unwilling and I am not about to get ripped a new one again because people are closeted, traumatized from living through the plague or general lack of sexual experience. Escorts on here sugar coat things for the folks on this forum because it nets them business which is a tremendous disservice to the people who need to be educated the most. I have done MORE than my part if you have ever read any of my posts on HIV. My point of my initial post is that this is loaded topic and few people want to have a candid conversation about sex because we are on a forum were people pay for sexual fantasies and sti's aren't sexy.

 

Now lets go back to pretending that only bad people bareback and pull out our pitch forks and light the torches

Hi Chris!

 

I always enjoy reading what you write. I have noticed when this topic comes up, both sides of the spectrum are passionate about the discussion. Please continue to share your knowledge and not be discouraged by those with opposing opinions.

I am thinking about Prep but not sure if I would be a good candidate as I only have one kidney. I guess I would have to discuss that with my doctor.

P.S. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.