Jump to content

rawTOP

Administrators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,070

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by rawTOP

  1. rawTOP
    So you're not having sex on holiday? That sounds boring! The other part of the equation is how risky was the sex you had before stopping. If you put your ass up in a bathhouse and took 15 anonymous loads then you may want to take the pills longer than if you got fucked by an undetectable guy or another guy on PrEP...
  2. rawTOP
    I'm not quite sure the context of your question, but if you're thinking of starting and stopping it on a regular basis - don't. Once on PrEP stay on PrEP. Especially with the results of recent studies it's probably OK to take it just 4 times a week - that's what I do - I take it Mon, Wed, Fri & Sun (plus on "off days" if I was a slut the day before). But whatever you do - don't drop below 4 times a week - the effectiveness starts dropping pretty quickly below 4x/week.
  3. rawTOP
    Compliment him on his pic. Let's him know you saw it and liked it. Yeah, it's a bit flirty, but as long as you're completely cool with it, he will be too. Whether he then takes the next step after that is up to him.
  4. rawTOP
    There is no such thing as 0% risk in life.
  5. rawTOP
    I only wait for the required week after treatment. If I have symptoms my doc treats me immediately, so never more than a week wait. I work on the assumptions that no symptoms and no test result (yet), then I'm good to go.
  6. rawTOP
    Small claims court. I'd love to see something like that go in front of Judge Judy. I think she'd rip them a new asshole.
  7. rawTOP
    Getting back to the original subject - here's a blog post on some of the tactics being used by the anti-PrEP crowd and how they have little, if any, basis in fact… http://blogs.poz.com/peter/archives/2014/07/anti_prep_scare_tactics.html
  8. rawTOP
    Are you saying that women need men's point of view to come to the right conclusion? That they can't figure out the moral issues on their own? What exactly will men contribute to the conversation that women can't figure out on their own? How is it any of men's business? It's not their bodies. I disagree. Neg guys have a very different relationship to ARVs than poz guys. We can can skip does, etc. The poz perspective can color the discussions in ways that are unhelpful. That said there are times when the poz perspective can be useful (when the neg guy gets to the point of having side effects) or when they're the only people around who have any experience with ARVs (e.g. "don't worry - I take multiple pills and it's no big deal for me"), but I think the poz guy has to keep reminding themselves that there's a decent chance the neg guy is having a different experience with the meds - and that's not an easy thing to keep in mind.
  9. rawTOP
    I think you have grounds for a malpractice suit. Nothing motivates doctors to do the right thing more than the fear of a lawsuit. If doctors start hearing that they can be sued over it, they won't say no when guys ask to go on PrEP.
  10. rawTOP
    My doctor only did a simple rapid test before giving me PrEP as well - and he's gay and practicing in one of the biggest gay and lesbian health centers in the nation. I wouldn't worry too much about the rapid test vs the RNA test. It sounds like you're in an area where getting care will be hard and you've got someone who may not be 100% current on things, but she's willing to do research and say she was wrong. PrEP isn't that hard to monitor - personally I'd stick with her unless you think you can get better care elsewhere. Just make sure you stay informed - it's not a bad idea to know more than your NP, take her copies of new studies when you see her, etc.
  11. rawTOP
    He's been banned for a few days for this comment. It is refuted by recent scientific studies that clearly show that guys on PrEP do not have riskier sex (on average). The rates of syphilis (an indicator of bareback sex) are identical to guys who don't take PrEP. And studies are confirming the previous theories that PrEP is at least as effective as condoms at preventing HIV. Since his comment was wrong on many levels and only served to promote fear, uncertainty and doubt - he was banned.
  12. rawTOP
    Maybe you should read the statement and the clarification more closely… "Additional choice", "full range of options" - That makes it completely clear that they're recommending that they see PrEP as an alternative to condoms - or it can be used in conjunction with condoms for even greater efficacy. The comparison with birth control is right on target - Yes, you could take multiple forms of birth control, but typically one is more than sufficient.
  13. rawTOP
    Either way - it doesn't make a difference. If a condom statement is in there it's only a gesture to the traditionalists who don't like change. TasP is becoming more and more accepted as people see it work.
  14. rawTOP
    I think the CDC and and the WHO dropped the part about condoms.
  15. rawTOP
    100% within the sample. Real world experience may vary slightly - that's why statisticians have "confidence intervals". Typically statisticians look at the range of numbers where they'd be 99% or 95% confident that the real-world results fall within that range. The bigger the sample size the smaller the confidence interval. In this case you'd choose the lower limit of one of those and that's the number you discuss publicly as the effectiveness of the treatment. So even now you can't say "100% effective", but you can definitely say things like "at least as effective as condoms - probably more so". Which really is the message that needs to get out.
  16. rawTOP
    Right, reading between the lines - if skipping it completely isn't that big of a deal then taking it late is even less of a big deal. We neg guys have a completely different relationship with meds than poz guys. We can be more relaxed about them. It's only a problem when we get completely complacent that there's reason to worry.
  17. rawTOP
    For a while now Google has judged sites on the question "Would you trust this site with your life or your money?" And based on recent changes to the guidelines they've given their site reviewers, questions like that are becoming an even bigger factor in how they rank websites. (Yes, Google manually reviews sites). So I figured I'd create a thread that will be stickied in the root of the Sexual Health section where people can state ways in which they'd be considered an expert on sexual health. While this is inspired by Google's guidelines it will also be useful to average visitors who come to the site. A lot of you have backgrounds in public health, counseling, and medical care. So I'd like to show off your credentials by formally listing them. This thread is only for listing credentials, not discussing them. So don't post replies. But if you have credentials that would make you something of an expert in some aspect of sexual health, and you contribute to the sexual health discussions on this site - please take the time to list them. Examples would be: Licensed doctors, nurses and counselors/therapists who have experience with sexual health issues. People with degrees in public health. People who've been formally trained to work hotlines that dealt with sexual health issues. People who have leadership roles in community organizations that deal with sexual health. Researchers who work on projects related to HIV/AIDS or other sexual health issues. You don't have to be too detailed - feel free to keep your identity private. Things like "Licensed physician in a mid-western state", or "Sexual Health Policy Coordinator for a community organization with 2,000 active clients" are completely sufficient.
  18. rawTOP
    The guy in question isn't wanting to see more HIV infections. It's more a case that's he's generally a bit bitter and always sees the glass half empty. I'm completely just speculating, but I'm guessing there's a little bitterness that he got pozzed before PrEP was available - so he's trying to find something wrong with PrEP - maybe that makes him feel better somehow. But if a lot of poz guys expressed the same opinion it would make neg guys less likely to see PrEP in the positive light it deserves. So him expressing his opinion (multiplied by the number of guys who feel like he does) ultimately leads to more infections, which is why I don't really think the nay sayers should be given platforms to express their FUD.
  19. rawTOP
    See, I would disagree. Maybe it's because in undergrad and grad school I had some pretty strident feminists teach me that men really should have no voice in the discussion of abortion - it's not their bodies, hence it's none of their business. So right to you're opinion? Sure. But right to express it - not so much. I think they should stay out of the discussion. I should probably explain that the guy I was arguing with was doing a "Well, PrEP may not actually be 99% effective like they say". It was a clear case of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt) designed to make people think PrEP may not actually be all that effective. He was citing this article in the NY Times… http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/17/upshot/is-truvada-the-pill-to-prevent-hiv-99-percent-effective-dont-be-so-sure.html Towards the end of the article they do state that whether it's 99% effective or 92% effective really doesn't make a difference from a public policy perspective. Which begs the question - why exactly did they title the article "Is Truvada 99% Effective? Don't Be So Sure…" I mean that's a total FUD way of wording it. So it's not like he was making up untrue statements as much as ignorantly questioning the scientific and statistical conclusions in a way that made the general conclusions about PrEP sound questionable.
  20. rawTOP
    Today, on a gay webmaster board a poz guy started bashing PrEP. As I was responding to him it struck me that a poz guy talking trash about PrEP is pretty much the same as a guy talking trash about abortion - it's really none of their business. At one point he tried to say he knew what he was talking about because he took Truvada - to which I said, "So, if you take Viagra, does that mean you understand what it's like for a women to take Viagra?" So do you guys agree with me? What do you think is an appropriate role for poz guys in the discussion of PrEP? Personally I think it's appropriate for them to make sure neg guys are aware of PrEP, and encourage neg guys to look into it, but I think that's where they should stop. And if they want to play a supportive role in marketing PrEP - I'm fine with that too. But, IMHO, neg guys should be out in front shaping the policy and opinions on PrEP. Agree? Disagree?
  21. rawTOP
    This is just sad… The EU apparently isn't convinced about PrEP… http://www.aidsmap.com/European-CDC-cautious-about-PrEP/page/2891977/ I wonder if it's because if they back it the governments have to pay for it. Someone needs to show them that PrEP is cheaper than having guys become poz. But cost-effectiveness may only be achieved if the price of PrEP goes down.
  22. rawTOP
    Here's more info as various sites report on the findings… http://betablog.org/prep-works-despite-missed-doses/ And another page discussing the results - http://www.aidsmap.com/Overall-PrEP-effectiveness-in-iPrEx-OLE-study-50-but-100-in-those-taking-four-or-more-doses-a-week/page/2892435/ That last bit is quite important - In other words if you want guys to take PrEP you need to get the word out that it works. Messages that make it seem less effective will reduce the number of people who take their meds consistently and put guys at risk.
  23. rawTOP
    No, it's not necessary to stop sex before taking PrEP. If recent infection is a real concern then they can do a different type of test that can detect infection more quickly. The worst case scenario is that you're poz and develop a resistance to Truvada. That's not the end of the world. Since recent infection is not likely in most cases, and the worst case scenario isn't all that horrible - doctors don't worry too much about it. (And neither should you).
  24. rawTOP
    With kids the issue is when they're coerced into things. Coercion is the reason why we have age of consent laws. Doesn't sound like you were coerced, so I see no problem with your starting young.
  25. rawTOP
    So it seems 4+ per week is the goal, and at 2-3 per week you get about the same protection as sloppy condom usage. Personally, I take PrEP Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays plus any off day when I'm planning to be a slut or was a slut the day before. I'm pretty religious about taking my pills since I've been taking daily meds for blood pressure for years now - it's no big deal.

Other #BBBH Sites…

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Top Bareback Porn Sites…

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.