wood

Yup, anyone who isn't on medication today and knows they are HIV+ is a damn IDIOT in my opinion. Almost everywhere around the world there are programs for free or low cost treatment, and the med's today have few side effects for most people. Want to live and fuck more? get on the damn med's. Untreated HIV kills fast or slow. period.

yeah okay. Oh btw, there really isnt such a thing as no meds and healthy for the vast majority of people. HIV is already damaging your body.

Couldn't have said it better myself, and fully agree with the last statement too. While I don't condone it, If a undetectable guy lied about his status, and had condomless sex, the end risk is still quite low, as new research is showing. For a person not on med's, its the exact opposite. Doing things like what Pozside905 is doing only compounds the stigma of HIV.

If you have been on it for 4 months whats another 7 days to make sure? Personally I wouldn't do just three days even if experts told me too. Its just the cautious side of me. With that said make sure you take the medication at least 7 days prior to a risky encounter if you start it again. Also remind yourself that you are NOT on PrEP, and that you shouldn't have risky sex while on your PrEP holiday. Nothing would suck more than seroconverting while being off PrEP when you still have access to it.

well that's pretty awesome.

Im just very open about being on it, and when any kind of sexual health discussion come up, and mention it, and strongly recommend anyone at risk go on it. I feel for your friend. I had the exact same experience with a guy I chatted with back in October of last year. He was neg at the time, and really wanted to go on PrEP. He missed his first appointment for it, then the holidays came, and he didn't get around to it until February, at which point he tested poz. He had just been tested in September before, and I guess he took a few dicks in late December at a party, and he was 99% sure thats what did it because he got sick in January. My main advice would be to keep reminding people to do it. PrEP only works if you take it.

HAHAHA this is actually what my ex told me before, and one of the reasons our relationship could never go long term. He wanted an ONLY top guy. Which is really ironic considering since we broke up he is topping more than ever. In fact we just flip fucked today, lol. IMO vers guys get a bad rap. Im literally 50/50 vers, even in practice, yet so many guys (including my ex) told me i was just a bottom. Dont get me wrong I love taking dick, but i love giving it too, and I cant just take it though and be satisfied like a true bottom.

well thanks for being an asshole. Honestly its people like you that give responsible HIV+ people a bad reputation. People on meds are highly unlikely to infect others, yet you are, and lie about taking medication.

This is Correct. In the IPrEX study people did convert, but no one who had the proper levels of the drug in their system did. Additionally "high levels" does not mean correct levels.

HAHAHA, well it doesnt work exactly that way, but yeah obviouly some things come over. A guy I used to see has been quite the cum dump bottom recently and has averaged 20 or so men a weekend for the past month. He is mostly a bottom but will top too. When we get together now I will sometime pump a load into a his usually cummy hole then he will pump about 3-4 in me because he can nut multiple times. Pretty hot scene. Hes poz undetectable already, and I'm on PrEP, so the big one is out of the way. I guess mostly because I saw him before (we were actually monogamous) It doesnt really bother me. Im glad he's honest about it, and it does make it a bit of a turn on.

IM active in advocating for PrEP, and so far there has been ZERO documented conversions while taking PrEP correctly as directed.

ehhh especially in anger I would be really pissed if someone used that towards me. Im white, and have been in mostly interracial relationships for years, and have never once used the n word outside of conversation where I was directly quoting someone, and even then I rarely do that. Its not that hard to eliminate it from your vocabulary.

IT was over 30 people telling roughly the same story. If it was 4 or 5 friends I could see your point, but are too many confidences to say the guy didn't do what has be purported. ANd you are right if the victims never asked, or even believed him when he said it was neg its partially their fault too. But its kind of the a 75/25 situation. Yes they can take 25% of the blame, but that doesn't excuse mr "mandingos" behavior.

how is it extreme? People take TONS of medications all the time for all sorts of conditions. Truvada is very well tolerated, and has a VERY low side effect profile, even lower than tylenol. so why not? I understand you are not young but HIV complications just increase as you get older.

Well if it was a few weeks ago you are well within the window period, so you are not exactly out of the woods yet. you really need PrEP, and there is some evidence that some doctors in canada will prescribe it. http://www.catie.ca/en/catienews/2014-06-10/uptake-prep-united-states?utm_source=tce&utm_medium=email&utm_content=en&utm_campaign=061114 If I were you I would try and find a doctor who will give you PrEP. You really should try and stay neg. IMO that would mean curtailing your activities a bit until you can get on it.

While I believe you anecdotal evidence is just that. Statistics and facts tell a more realistic story. Right now it seems like the rate of HCV infections that are sexually transmitted is rising. The rate of new infections in the US is about 17k last year, with an estimated 15-20% of those attributed to sexual acts. So we are talking roughly 3,000 infections, which I bet most are gay men. Now obviously thats nothing compared to the 50,000 new HIV infections yearly, but HCV is a real bitch, and while its "curable" now. Its not easy or cheap.

From what you have said so far, it would seem like someone who fucked you had a dick that was bleeding or had open sores. HCV is sometimes in semen, but not like HIV is. Heres another article about HCV transmission. Based on this it would seem like many men would be infected, reagrdless of HIV status, but who knows. Not gonna lie, it scares me a bit that you got it and you are HIV- I guess I will keep the idea of sex parties on the back burner. http://www.hcvadvocate.org/hcsp/articles/Donovan-1.html

Really interesting. So you are HIV- (as of your last test) but contracted HCV. If you dont mind my asking, did you ever have bleeding during or after sex? Also did you do any other activity like extensive fingering, or fisting? Obviously taking all loads in a bathhouse is a recipe for all sorts of stuff, but from what I read transmission to an HIV- person through sex is somewhat rare. One thing I have also noticed is that people in the UK seem to be more aware of their HCV status than guys in the US. I have noticed many profiles and ads before that will say things like undetectable, but only HCV neg guys.

http://www.poz.com/articles/sexual_transmission_HCV_401_25673.shtml It is an issue, but much more so for HIV+ people. Sexual transmission can occur, but its not as common as you may think. What you really need for sexual transmission is blood to blood contact. It can definitely happen but HCV is much harder to transmit than HEP B, and even more so than HIV. HCV is a big issue, and curing it is not easy. However normal bareback sex with enough lube is unlikely to cause transmission. Activities like fisting, and anything involving blood or injections drugs are however much more likely to cause transmission. Also unlike HIV. HCV does survive for a long time outside of the body so even things like dried blood can pose a risk. I know a family friend whose straight father contracted it in late 80's from using the same bills while snorting cocaine. So it transmission is both more difficult in some ways and easier than others than HIV.

Emtricitabine! Most drug names are actually spelled phonetically, so if you can pronounce it correctly, you will probably be able to spell it. And yes, way too many people around the world, and in the US go way too long without seeing a doctor. Its especially prevalent in black communities in the US, because of distrust of the medical establishment. not surprisingly, black people in the US have some of the highest rates of medical issues partially because of this.

Theres about a .01% chance it will come back neg. Its tough but you got to face up to things. Its almost certain you are HIV+ now. You will be fine as long as you get the proper care, and take care of yourself. Find a decent doctor, get on medication, etc, etc. You still control your life, and it will be a long and full one as long as you take care of things starting now. Your best bet at a healthy life is to start treatment almost immediately.

I like to advocate full disclosure, and I still agree with the first part 100%. I don't think the guy was right, but I would say what you did is MUCH more wrong that what he did, especially if he is on treatment which is likely given that you accessed health records. Additionally you freaked out because you knew, who knows how many HIV+ loads you have already taken that you DON'T know about, or that the person who gave it to you doesn't even know. You like bare sex, fine, but at least get on PrEP if you want to stay HIV-.

http://www.webmd.com/hiv-aids/news/20081027/earlier-hiv-treatment-boosts-survival http://www.aidsmeds.com/articles/WhenToStart_7512.shtml http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/IAS/40268 http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/ah/early-hiv-treatment-brochure.pdf Basically with the medications we have today there is no good reason not to start treatment early. The articles above summarize why. Basically what they say is that by starting treatment early, the person has far less "viral reservoirs" in their body, or places where it is difficult for medication to treat. Additionally starting treatment earlier keeps the immune system much more intact than it would be otherwise. While the immune system generally rebuilds itself in some cases it doesn't happen very easily. Some people who delay the start of treatment never get their CD4 counts back up where they were prior to infection, even with a consistent undetectable viral load. I posted this a while back. https://breeding.zone/threads/26212-consistently-low-CD4-count-but-undetectable-any-insight For some people, who would be considered "healthy" HIV still affects them. I asked an expert later about the guy i posted about above, and he pretty much said that some people's immune system just doesn't function the same after infection. Earlier treatment prevents a large amount of the damage that the unchecked virus can do. VERY few people can control HIV on their own, and the virus still does a lot of damage without symptoms. Think about other virus's, HPV for example even when latent can eventually cause cancer. Herpes zoster, aka chicken pox can flare up into shingles, etc, etc. HIV is the same. It is damaging and changing a persons body from the moment of infection. There is no "safe time" to have the virus. With that said, because the body adapts, it can rebuild itself with help later, but some damage is irreversible, or can take an extremely long time to reverse. Another analogy is to make it akin to smoking. A person can be "healthy" and be a smoker, but that doesn't mean that smoking isn't harming them. The same goes for HIV. While the damage may not be immediately apparent, it may become more apparent later in life, in in another time of immune system stress. I really don't think you will find a drug company agenda in when to start treatment, when people need it, they will get it. and I haven't heard of any drug company pushing for immediate treatment. In fact, even the advertisements usually say things like, "Is your CD4 low or dropping, maybe its time for treatment"

someone is probably flagging your posts. Some people just like to act like online police.

I have to say I disagree with you about the push towards treatment. Treating people as soon as they are infecting is good for the individual, and the general population. If helps prevent new infections, and keep the infected individual healthier in the long run. While it is up to the individual, its much better for them too. I get distrust of the medical establishment, however most medications today are well tolerated, and it makes sense to find out sooner rather than later what works for a person. I wouldnt say the "onus" is on poz guys to reduce infection rates, but it is EVERYONES responsibility to know their status, and hopefully take care of themselves, and thus others.