Quote by brucieand what about anyone you would come into contact with after contracting it and before being diagnosed with it? is that something you can be 100% sure they're not really worried about either?
for the avoidance of doubt. after i tested negative i thought to myself "hmm, youre lucky. maybe use a condom from now on ".
but that doesnt change the fact that my perception now is that the risks for straight men are overcooked. ofcourse there is a risk, but smaller than getting cancer.
and we all have to die someday. im mid 40s. ive had a vasectomy after 3 kids. i really dont want to live much past 60. so hiv is not at the top of my list of worries.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
can straight men catch HIV?
last reply
105 replies
5.6k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Sex God
Fuck em all I say
~But for the love of another human ..... wear a condom
~But for the love of another human ..... wear a condom
Sex God
Quote by goodporking
Whats the date?
The date is ...........Phoenix dactylifera, commonly known as the Date Palm, is a palm in the genus Phoenix, extensively cultivated for its edible sweet fruit
Sad i know but i am without willpower
Quote by brucie
for the avoidance of doubt. after i tested negative i thought to myself "hmm, youre lucky. maybe use a condom from now on ".
but that doesnt change the fact that my perception now is that the risks for straight men are overcooked. ofcourse there is a risk, but smaller than getting cancer.
and we all have to die someday. im mid 40s. ive had a vasectomy after 3 kids. i really dont want to live much past 60. so hiv is not at the top of my list of worries.
you sound like the man who decides to pass a red light, arguing that if it has to happen it's karma...and if he runs someone over, then that was his karma too.
as long as you're doing it to yourself, frankly, who cares..I'm just appaled at the fact that you seem to be perfectly fine with putting, or having put, others at letal risk
as for the whole dying at 60..you might die by then..but why risk a painful and long drawn way to go?
yes, you're not forcing anybody, but that doesn't take away the fact that you are not helping them either...you should know better, and if you do realize how lucky you've been you might as well "spread the word", or more simply, protect them from themselves if THEY don't know better
as for your perception..is flawed because it's based on personal experience..and unless the number of your shags are such that they are statistically relevant, that's a rather limited experience. if you look at the numbers, you'll see that the risk is still there, and specifically on the rise during heterosexual intercourse. if that doesn't alter the perception..then you just don't want to change them.
Quote by brucie
Of course there is a risk, but smaller than getting cancer.
Quite. By 65 you are going to face a risk of 1 in 3 of having prostate cancer.
In many cases is will be controllable.
As are many other cancers.
And there is no risk of passing the cancer to others by having unprotected sex.
Quote by Squiffsand what about anyone you would come into contact with after contracting it and before being diagnosed with it? is that something you can be 100% sure they're not really worried about either?
for the avoidance of doubt. after i tested negative i thought to myself "hmm, youre lucky. maybe use a condom from now on ".
but that doesnt change the fact that my perception now is that the risks for straight men are overcooked. ofcourse there is a risk, but smaller than getting cancer.
and we all have to die someday. im mid 40s. ive had a vasectomy after 3 kids. i really dont want to live much past 60. so hiv is not at the top of my list of worries.
Exactly! it can take up to 3 months for the virus to present itself, by which time this guy has spread the joy.... :shock:
Quote by jaymar
Exactly! it can take up to 3 months for the virus to present itself, by which time this guy has spread the joy.... :shock:
In an individual who does not have regular testing for std it can take as long as 10 years for the disease to become symptomatic. Many patients become symptomatic with respiratory infections, which are routinely treated by antibiotics. HIV is only detected when the physician tests for causes for repeated infections. Many people do not tell their doctor about their sexually ambivalent lifestyle.
A second patient I met approximately 12 months ago was a 33 year old heterosexual female who had no history of intravenous drug use and had only had sex with 3 men in her entire life. As far as she knew none of them were bi-sexual or used intravenous drugs. I met her when she was in the hospital after having been admitted with pneumonia that failed to respond to routine antibiotics. She ultimately underwent a bronchoscopy and was found to have Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia. Subsequent HIV testing was found to be positive and her CD4 cell count was measured at 20 cells/uL. She too was devastated by the diagnosis and perplexed as to how she acquired the infection. I explained to her that in all likelihood, it was from one of her previous partners and that she probably became infected many years ago since it would have taken on average 8 to 10 years for the disease to have progressed to her current stage of immune suppression (represented by the significantly low CD4 count). Furthermore, I told her that heterosexual women represented one of the fastest growing groups of newly infected individuals.
Unlike the previous patient, she had already progressed to severe immune suppression and was in need of antiretroviral therapy. While the prognosis prior to 1995 for someone in her situation would have been poor, with currently available treatments, there was reason for optimism. Although emotionally distraught and terrified, she completely recovered from her pneumonia and ultimately started an antiretroviral regimen that included a protease inhibitor. Although she initially experienced some nausea and diarrhea, these symptoms cleared and she has tolerated the treatment very well with no missed doses during the last 8 months. Her CD4 cell count has increased to between 300 and 450 cells/uL and her viral load has remained undetectable for the last 6 months. She is seeing a therapist to help her deal with the psychological issues surrounding her new diagnosis and is feeling great. She comes in regularly for monitoring and asks me, "How am I doing and how long will I be able to stay healthy?" I always respond that she is doing great, which is true, and that while I do not have a crystal ball, my belief is that as long as she stays on her therapy, the sky's the limit.
The instances of HIV and AIDS in Europe are comparatively low because of the general dilligent use of protection, and because of needle exchange schemes for intravenous drug-users. To keep these figures at an acceptable level, we must continue to be as safe as possible. If you stop treading water, you'll drown eventually.
Sex God
I wish people would stop going on about HIV. The priority given to this particular disease is attributable to what was once a high fatality rate, and the fact it started to kill middle-class white men. Prior to this the disease went happily along killing other people of much less importance.
However there are many other diseases out there, many of which are many times more contagious than HIV, with varying degree of debilitation, some even still causing fatalities.
So being safe means being safe from all diseases not just HIV.
However there are many other diseases out there, many of which are many times more contagious than HIV, with varying degree of debilitation, some even still causing fatalities.
So being safe means being safe from all diseases not just HIV.
Quote by JTS
stuff
I'm very happy that the lady seems to be holding up quite well even though, in the long run she will eventually die of AIDS (unless a cure is finally found)..
I'm also quite happy that she wasn't a swinger and wasn't having unprotected sex...can you picture the devastation she could have brought about in 10 years of random sex?
I ride motorbikes too
But i ride sensibly...with a helmet...
Your choice is admirable Brucie tho a little ignorant..I take it you don't have a test for STD's after every bareback encounter so you are the one putting others at risk whixh quite frankly is more scary...
You don't appear to care only for your own gratification and whats worse after all the discussion on here in what is a very liberal environment you still won't budge...
May you get what you deserve nothin more nothin less.
Wonder if you would still be posting if you got herpes???lol
But i ride sensibly...with a helmet...
Your choice is admirable Brucie tho a little ignorant..I take it you don't have a test for STD's after every bareback encounter so you are the one putting others at risk whixh quite frankly is more scary...
You don't appear to care only for your own gratification and whats worse after all the discussion on here in what is a very liberal environment you still won't budge...
May you get what you deserve nothin more nothin less.
Wonder if you would still be posting if you got herpes???lol
Quote by essex34m
Wonder if you would still be posting if you got herpes???lol
To my knowledge, Herpes doesn't affect the fingers.
According to the medical books it doesn't, but the herpes virus isn't as fragile as HIV, your fingers can become a vehicle after contact with an infected area. So if you do touch someone with herpes (while they are having an attack, remember that is the only time it is infective), then ffs wash your hands with something antiseptic, because if you touch any mucus membrane area like your eyes, inside your nose or mouth, and of course your genitals, you could still be infecting yourself.
Quote by BrightonGeezer
Wonder if you would still be posting if you got herpes???lol
To my knowledge, Herpes doesn't affect the fingers.
According to the medical books it doesn't, but the herpes virus isn't as fragile as HIV, your fingers can become a vehicle after contact with an infected area. So if you do touch someone with herpes (while they are having an attack, remember that is the only time it is infective), then ffs wash your hands with something antiseptic, because if you touch any mucus membrane area like your eyes, inside your nose or mouth, and of course your genitals, you could still be infecting yourself.
Thank you for that, as usual, I was being a smartarse, my reply was given with no previous knowledge or research.
Quote by BrightonGeezer
Wonder if you would still be posting if you got herpes???lol
To my knowledge, Herpes doesn't affect the fingers.
According to the medical books it doesn't, but the herpes virus isn't as fragile as HIV, your fingers can become a vehicle after contact with an infected area. So if you do touch someone with herpes (while they are having an attack, remember that is the only time it is infective), then ffs wash your hands with something antiseptic, because if you touch any mucus membrane area like your eyes, inside your nose or mouth, and of course your genitals, you could still be infecting yourself.
Scary when you think about it....
I always remember the so called joke going around at one time: What lasts longer than Love - Herpes
Quote by essex34m
Wonder if you would still be posting if you got herpes???lol
To my knowledge, Herpes doesn't affect the fingers.
According to the medical books it doesn't, but the herpes virus isn't as fragile as HIV, your fingers can become a vehicle after contact with an infected area. So if you do touch someone with herpes (while they are having an attack, remember that is the only time it is infective), then ffs wash your hands with something antiseptic, because if you touch any mucus membrane area like your eyes, inside your nose or mouth, and of course your genitals, you could still be infecting yourself.
Thank you for that, as usual, I was being a smartarse, my reply was given with no previous knowledge or research.
Know your enemy!
When I first inflicted myself on the lovely seaside town of Brighton back in the early 80's, they had just started talking about AIDS in the newspapers. I was only a teenager and it shit me up totally, especially later when they were reporting that Brighton had the highest infection rate and that young, straight, promiscuous types were also at risk. Herpes was also extremely prevalent back in the 1980's, (god I feel old), and there was a great deal of scaremongering. Also a local group of pisshead builders started a campaign to save the local "clap clinic" that was due to be closed entitled "SOS - Save Our Shed". It was a parody of a recent Save The Whale campaign that had caused some commotion here. I was talking to someone wearing one of their t-shirts, and was surprised to learn how many std's there actually was.
That is why I wouldn't go bareback with anyone I wasn't 100% sure I trusted, and why I have done a lot of research on std's over the years.
Quote by JTS
Exactly! it can take up to 3 months for the virus to present itself, by which time this guy has spread the joy.... :shock:
In an individual who does not have regular testing for std it can take as long as 10 years for the disease to become symptomatic.
Yeah I know, I wasn't talking about Chlamydia or Gonor.
As I said, it can take up to 3 months for the Anti-b's or gen's of the HIV virus to manifest themselves.
Thanks for your link, it was quite interesting
Going back to the original thread- the likelihood of a hetrosexual male acquiring HIV.
According to the government facts there were 84 women for every 100,000 women in this country with HIV. Let us assume that a similar number have HIV but do not yet know. Lets call it 1500 women per million or per cent or 1.5 in a thousand.
Assume that you always acquire HIV if you have unprotected sex if your partner has HIV. Assume also that every one with HIV knowingly has unprotected sex. On that basis if you have sex with a different woman every day it would take you 300 encounters before it became more likely than not that you acquire HIV.
Makes ya think dont it.
Oh and all the headlines in the lobby group articles are of course the usual distortions of fact. For example the headline "heterosexual hiv cases increase" could also be the headline "blood transfusion hiv cases decrease" The base data can be accessed here.
According to the government facts there were 84 women for every 100,000 women in this country with HIV. Let us assume that a similar number have HIV but do not yet know. Lets call it 1500 women per million or per cent or 1.5 in a thousand.
Assume that you always acquire HIV if you have unprotected sex if your partner has HIV. Assume also that every one with HIV knowingly has unprotected sex. On that basis if you have sex with a different woman every day it would take you 300 encounters before it became more likely than not that you acquire HIV.
Makes ya think dont it.
Oh and all the headlines in the lobby group articles are of course the usual distortions of fact. For example the headline "heterosexual hiv cases increase" could also be the headline "blood transfusion hiv cases decrease" The base data can be accessed here.
So getting back to the point. Does anyone feel that they are more or less worried about their sexual activities than say 10 years ago?
Because if they are increasingly worried then perhaps its time to reconsider whether or not a lot of adventurous sex is actually doing you any good. Might it be better to call it a day?
Because if they are increasingly worried then perhaps its time to reconsider whether or not a lot of adventurous sex is actually doing you any good. Might it be better to call it a day?
Sex God
Acquire HIV? 
What an odd word to use.
That is all.
What an odd word to use.
That is all.
to me the question is very much reduced to a simple reasoning
AIDS is out there. is there a possibility, however small, that unprotected sex can expose me to it? yes there is.
random sex (or swinging) means I probably don't know the girl all that well, and on top of that she's probably promiscuous as well with other men and/or women.
is there a cure for AIDS? nope
I don't think I'll manage to find 300 girls in a year..but in the end, it only takes one.
statistics are all very well, but it's the individual that counts.
all in all I'll play it safe and use a condom.
AIDS is out there. is there a possibility, however small, that unprotected sex can expose me to it? yes there is.
random sex (or swinging) means I probably don't know the girl all that well, and on top of that she's probably promiscuous as well with other men and/or women.
is there a cure for AIDS? nope
I don't think I'll manage to find 300 girls in a year..but in the end, it only takes one.
statistics are all very well, but it's the individual that counts.
all in all I'll play it safe and use a condom.
Quote by Melting_pot
to me the question is very much reduced to a simple reasoning
AIDS is out there. is there a possibility, however small, that unprotected sex can expose me to it? yes there is.
random sex (or swinging) means I probably don't know the girl all that well, and on top of that she's probably promiscuous as well with other men and/or women.
is there a cure for AIDS? nope
I don't think I'll manage to find 300 girls in a year..but in the end, it only takes one.
statistics are all very well, but it's the individual that counts.
all in all I'll play it safe and use a condom.
The above in bold says it all really :thumbup:
Quote by Melting_pot
to me the question is very much reduced to a simple reasoning
AIDS is out there. is there a possibility, however small, that unprotected sex can expose me to it? yes there is.
random sex (or swinging) means I probably don't know the girl all that well, and on top of that she's probably promiscuous as well with other men and/or women.
is there a cure for AIDS? nope
I don't think I'll manage to find 300 girls in a year..but in the end, it only takes one.
statistics are all very well, but it's the individual that counts.
all in all I'll play it safe and use a condom.
true. and the whole thing about 1.5 people in every thousand is bollocks, that's just assuming it's only that figure, the point of not knowing is that we DON'T KNOW. and the fact is being promiscuous you're more likely to move in sexual circles where it's far more prevalent because more sex is being had, swingers are just as if not more at risk as anyone else.
Sex God
Quote by Dirtygirly
Acquire HIV?
What an odd word to use.
That is all.
Maybe it was a reference to the A in AIDS
