Poz1956

The Global Commission on HIV and the Law recommends “Repeal punitive laws” and “Enact no laws that explicitly criminalise HIV transmission, exposure or non-disclosure of HIV status” as they are counterproductive in the global fight against HIV.

The evangelical Christian would scream "You are all going to burn in hell."Eternal damnation for a homophobic Christian would be chained naked and doggy style, with his mouth to a glory hole, and ass available for constant use by Monster dicked S_atin and his well hung minions. I remember an episode of Night Gallery where the devil says, "The funny thing is, there is a room just like this up in Heaven." How's that as an eternal reward for a good little piggy? Why does the message board software replace that S_ word with *****?

According the the Canadian "Male Call" survey (45 minute telephone interviews): 56.2% want to know when they first meet Because 49% agree with the statement "I would never have sex with a man who is HIV Positive, even if I am very attracted to him." 84.5% expect a casual sexual partner to reveal his status if he is Poz 87.4% agreed with the statement "In order to know a partner's status for certain, it is an individual's responsibility to ask his partner's status." If they feel that strongly, why don't THEY bring up the topic? I love the word "certain" in that question. Like it even crosses the mind of any "Neg" guy, that he is actually "Serostatus Unknown!" Yet 98.4% agreed that both sexual partners are EQUALLY responsible for preventing HIV transmission. Guys feel it is important to know their partner's status when engaging in: 43.3% before Mutual Masturbation (Zero risk) 75.4% before Oral Sex (Getting Sucked: Zero risk. Sucker: With no oral health care issues = Negligible risk.) 84.4% before Protected Anal Sex (Undetectable = Negligible risk. Surostatus or VL Unknown = Low risk ) 96.3% before Unprotected Anal Sex (Depending on position, knowledge of your actual surostatus, and viral load: risk ranges from Negligible, to High) Most guys have an urgency to know someone's status, that is WAY out of proportion with the actual risk of exposure. Do they make Glow in the Dark Tattoo ink?

Firstly, recognize that you've been feeling under a lot of stress lately. Your other, most recent thread is a testament to that. And under stress people are more susceptible to little bugs, so maybe you are coming down with something. Or you could just be feeling crappy because of the stress. And of course there's the "every cough means it's something serious" worries of a newly diagnosed guy always has. Secondly, your body is working very hard right now, at fighting off the virus. There are literally billions of HIV copies being made every day. Your CD4 count of 700 is good, and right in the normal "healthy" person range. But of course since a lot of CD4s are being consumed and destroyed during viral replication, your your system is working overtime making new CD4s to keep your counts as high as they are. All that takes a lot of energy. A 70K viral load is smack dab in the middle of the classic 30,000 to 120,000 rage of a chronic stage person. You are past the astronomical levels of primary/acute phase. So your body is doing pretty good at fighting HIV, even without the meds. The first few weeks on the ARVs may take some getting used to. You might feels some headaches, nausea, upset stomach, and diarrhea. As I said of "When does it become normal" thread, it doesn't hurt to have some generic Imodium, an extra package of toilet paper, and a bottle of your preferred tummy grumble reliever (Pepto, Malox, etc) on hand. Better to have them and not need them, then need them and not have them. I'm cautious and do the Boy Scout "be prepared" thing, because I come from the old days when new meds took quite a toll. Most people I talk to say they have no issued with current generation drugs, so I'm sure you'll be just fine. Once your body gets used to the drugs, I'm sure your energy levels will return to near normal. Then charge on the Undetectable, though it may take you a few months to get there. Some people get there in the first month, others take up to six. Most are UD in 3 months. Then start looking forward to that magic "UD for 6 Months" point! That will be "Yeeee - Hawww & Yaaaa - Hooo" ride em cowboy time. Sex is the best stress reliever ever invented!

From the point of view for a theoretical risk of catching HIV, Swallow is better than Spit. The most likely place for oral health issues, is around the gum line. Cum shots generally happen behind the teeth. When you swallow, it's gone. When you spit, you move the splooge all around your mouth first. I've been told I had the sweetest cum guys have ever tasted. My morning smoothies must have that additional "health" benefit. Fructose is a major component of Jiz.

What you describe is a classic case of suroguessing. Based actions (or doing nothing) people assume the other guy has the same status as themselves. You think he must be Poz because he didn't ask, or pull out a condom. Poz guys think that if their status was important to him, the other guy would ask. The other guy thinks you must be Neg, because you didn't disclose your status, or pull out a condom. Most Neg guys think it is the Pozzie's job to start that conversation. In an ideal world we could easily have a nonjudgmental open conversation about about status, last test date, testing frequency, and for Poz guys, their viral load. But we don't live that fairy tale land. In the real world we are treated like we're radioactive. The nelly little faggot goes screaming from the room, with his wrists flapping faster than a humming bird's wings. Guys who claim to want Honesty, Truth, and Sincerity, immediately punish the Poz guy when he gives them exactly what they asked for. Neg guys continually give us "Negative Reinforcement." I may sound poetic, but it's not justice. Is it any wonder we retreat to "Don't Ask - Don't Tell." It may not be morally correct, but neither is continual bashing, judgment, and Stigma that "Think they're Clean" guys level at all Pozzies. Somehow we need to educate the "Serostatus Unknown" guys, that catching HIV from a Poz undetectable is extremely unlikely. If they contract HIV, it will be from a "D & D Free" guy, who isn't quite as "D Free" as he thought. Most research is saying that at least 50% of new infections are from guys in the Primary/Acute phase, who don't even know they are Poz. Most of the rest are from chronic phase guys unaware of their HIV status. Estimates are that 10% are from guys who know they are Poz, but not on treatment. I saw a guy on BBRT the other night, who says he's on PrEP. Perhaps I'm confused, but I would think a Canadian guy, who had to work at getting on PrEP, would actually know something about HIV transmission. But he advertises Neg on PrEP, for Neg only. I want to say to him "Dude, you're serosorting to the wrong guys!"

I'm not going to say that it's a must, but it's pretty important. It starts the passion, the heat, and the desire. "The act" usually starts there, before the clothes even come off. It elevates a mechanical fuck to something much more satisfying. Without some face to face time, I feel like I'm just a hole being used (or using his hole), without regard for me and my pleasure. I have noticed that the majority of married Bi guys do not want to kiss. Perhaps they find it to "faggy." I find it funny that they'll suck dick, or lick ass, but won't touch the other guy's tongue. Maybe it's the ONE thing they reserve for their spouse (cuz most of them are cheating on the down low).

Talking with a guy about how recently he had a full screening for all STIs is important. I don't mean to lessen that.But the long held opinion that an STI might make the ARVs less effective, heighten the Pozzies viral load making him more infectious, may well be a red herring. In the preliminary report from the Partner study 16% of the gay couples got STIs. That was about 1/2 of the ones that barebacked with others outside their primary relationship. (No details if that was threesomes, Open Relationship, or "Oppps - He was just so cute") For the straights Pozzies it was 5% for the men, and 4% for the women. The STIs didn't affect their viral loads, or cause the Neg partners to catch HIV. An STI might cause a blip, but most blips are below the viral load of 200, that Partner used for its definition of Undetectable. Current thinking is that the minimum viral load that can cause transmission is 1,000. Of course we'll have to wait until 2017 for the final reports from both Partner and Opposites Attract to have a better answer on that. I can see were a Neg guy with an STI would be more susceptible to HIV, when playing with a "Clean" guy, who wasn't as clean as he thought. That guy would have a high viral load. I don't know about Neg guy on PrEP. There must have been STIs in the PrEP studies. I haven't looked into it. Maybe one of our PrEP experts can do that. Should we call the PrEPxsperts?

It's important to remember that pharmacological based prevention techniques are also behavioural based. It's as much a habit to take your ARVs or PrEP every day, as it is to put on a rubber. I have no problem with condoms being part of the strategy. They work well for some.The lost child in the "condoms" message is PEP. While inappropriate in the context of BBing, it is important, when the messaging is around condoms. In other words, if they fuck up it won't ruin their life. I sort of like Sean Strub's idea of issuing three day "starter kits." They give guys a buffer, so they have time to make it through the administrative/insurance hassles of getting the other 25 days worth of drugs. Let's face it the broken condom, or "Oh Fuck, what did we just do" moments happen at 3:00 AM. Not exactly a time when you can easily call your doctor. And Hospital Emergency Departments / Urgent Care facilities are a zoo after bars close. Or maybe it's the next morning after some PnP, when there was a little more unwrapped penetration then he's planned. He brought the condoms -- they just didn't get used. Or after the wild night of drunken debauchery, taking any and all loads at the tubs. (Note, I'm talking about guys for whom condoms are the norm). We know PEP works best if you start it ASAP. Having his own little three day supply means as soon as he has the clear headed "Oh Fuck" panic moment, he can pop the first pill. A Washington DC HIV clinic, actually has a "red carpet" program for guys who want PEP. They get priority treatment, rush them in the door, counsel them, assess the risk and get them on treatment. PEP is featured prominently in most of the Australian prevention campaigns. They even have toll free(1-800) numbers to evaluate the risk, and direct you where to go. Bear will have to correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the UK has good PEP programs too. A very few HIV service organizations are reality based enough to go beyond the "Condoms Only" model. The AIDS Committee of Toronto authored a piece titled Bareback Sex: What you need to know. ACT and the Gay Men's Sexual Health Alliance Produced a sex positive, non-judgemental website The Sex You Want. Daily Xtra published an article For bareback, how to fuck more safely. (Xtra owns Squirt) I've always been quite impressed with the campaigns from ACON (formerly the AIDS Council of NSW). they haven't shied away drugs, bareaback, and do good post-mortem analysis of each campaign. And they frequently include PEP. Their Know the Risk site is a visually appealing and information dense and a good example of what a gay men's health site should be. The Risk Calculator Includes viral load, and sero-positioning. If you drill down into the Q & A they are the first site I've seen that called undetectable Pozzies Low Risk. For an ASO - that's bold. And that was well before Partner came out. Q: I did your risk calculator and it told me that as a negative bottom I was taking a "low risk" if my positive partner was on top, didn't use a condom, came inside me, but was undetectable. Are you fucking serious? A: Are we serious? Yes we are. We base this strategy as a medium to low risk and this was based on research findings from both the HPTN052 and iprex studies, as well as consultation with research institutes here in NSW and clinical guidance and consultation from leading clinicians in the HIV field. They support the case for sustained (over more than 6 months) undetectable viral load (UDVL) offering a very significant protective benefit against HIV. Positive Life NSW has great work as well. I liked their "SEX PIGS: Dark and dirty sex and managing your health" campaign on Adveturous Sex. The visuals with infoblurbs are great. It was produced from interviews with real guys. Ultimately it didn't go over well because people didn't perceive it as credible, because most pages mentioned condoms. Pigs & Condoms don't mix. They learned from that and built the Wrapped or Raw campaign, with real people and videos.

Mandatory testing is worse than laws that criminalize a Pozzie spitting.People will go to extraordinary lengths to avoid mandatory testing. It would heighten the Stigma level to the outer reaches of the universe. Look at how people try to avoid drug testing now -- carrying a bag of somebody else's wiz, with a hose under their dick. People will go to extraordinary lengths to avid testing. How well green cards have been at preventing undocumented immigrants from finding work? Have you ever seen "Gattica?" A utopian/distopian future where parents select their children's genes, and people are judged by their genetic potential. Natural born children are shunned and only allowed menial jobs. Genetic purity tests are routine. It's a story about a guy made the old fashioned way, who bucks the system, and through a deal with a genetically pure but disabled man, manages to fool his way past all the tests. It's worth downloading. HIV tests need more carrot than stick. If we could drive down Stigma, it might be possible. Hopefully final results from the Partner study, and Opposites Attract will give the Big Gun ammunition needed to do that. We must make testing NORMAL, and easy. Rapid tests at all clinics, so they don't stress waiting for the results. Make it something a person does for themselves -- their own health, and for their community. The people who haven't been tested in over six months should be frowned upon. While perhaps over the top, I picture something like the early days of China's one child policy. Women would ask each other "Have you had your pill today?" That's not unlike "When was your last test?" But guys never ask when - only the results. Like I've said before, the new message needs to the "Testing, Testing, Testing" not "Condoms, Condoms, Condoms!" Last night a guy wanted to hook up. He was professing about being disease free, and wanted to fuck me raw. I asked when was his last test. It was the classic "over over a year," but partially mitigated by only one fuck. He'd mostly done oral over that time. I tried to defer to doing it safely. I finally gave up and came "clean" about my status. (See guys, I actually used that word in a correct context.) I told him all about the latest research, links to back it up. Of course he said "Ummm, I'll give it a pass tonight." It's a good thing I started the email repeating all the links, because he came back a short while later and blocked me. The email went through. Hopefully he'll at least read some of it. Yet another example that makes me think honest may not be the best policy. I also have a 27 year old Bi guy harassing me about my having been Risky, Dangerous, and Stupid Stupid Stupid. Drive by shaming. Saw the status and just had to trash me. I retorted that I caught HIV before safe sex was invented. He came back with "How to Have Sex in an Epidemic" having been written in 1982, so I should have known better, and was therefore Stupid. I sent him back the copyright page from HHSE showing it had been published in May 1983, with an initial run of 5,000 copies. That was at least four months after my suroconversion symptoms. I doubt a single copy from that initial printing of HHSE ever made it to Calgary. The "kid" is dishing me for something that happened five years before he was born! If he comes back again, I'll point out how Risky, Dangerous, and Stupid Stupid Stupid he's being for allowing his weight to reach the maximum you can post on the hook-up site. He'll probably be dead before he's my age. In my very worst moments of anger, for a few seconds, I hope he becomes Poz. Of course I correct myself, and feel guilty for thinking it. How do you fight against that kind of ignorance?

One of the items you must add into the discussion is viral load. Is there a realistic possibility of transmission? The Poz guy with an undetectable viral load has very little chance of passing on the virus, in all those situations. It's not zero risk, but minuscule compared to a "Clean" guy, who isn't quite a clean a he thought. Now a guy who isn't on treatment, and who knows he has a high viral load, is a different kettle of fish. There IS a realistic possibility of him transmitting HIV. Just as we see "condom fatigue" leading to bareback, I think we are also seeing "disclosure fatigue, for Poz men. Since revealing status is usually followed by anger, judgment,and nasty assertions as to the Pozzie's moral character. (and no sex of course). Both parties share equal responsibility to discuss HIV status. What about a pure anonymous encounter? Don'tAsk -- Don't Tell is the norm? is that stealthing? Most people use Stealthing to imply a deliberate intention to infect someone with HIV. It is much more difficult for viral transmission from the bottom to the top (even with a high viral load it's 1 in 909). Since the transmission risk is low, is that Stealthing? Is failing to withdraw a stealth.? If the top was planning seed straight from the beginning, that might be. Promised to, and meant it, but got carried away in the moment - well an awful lot of babies came into the world like that. Sabotaged condom is a definite stealth There is also a broader possible meaning too. A Neg may use Stealth with all the nasty ways, but the goal is to deposit his DNA not HIV

I'm going to have to slightly disagree with your friend.I think we Poz guys DO have some responsibility to protect the Neg guys. Being on ARVs and getting to a low viral load (ideally undetectable) IS being responsible, and IS protecting the Neg guys. I think the risk of my bottoming raw is also very low. I haven't gone there with a Neg guy yet, but I think I'm willing to do it. In my gut I still feel I should always disclose when doing it BB, but bottoming it's going to be a case by case decision. For the moment I am not willing to cross the serostatus divide when topping raw. I know the risk is minimal, but it's still questionable enough that I'm not comfortable. Maybe when we see final results from the Partner and Opposites Attract studies I might change my mind. I suppose if there's full disclosure, and he still says "seed me" I'd go for it. As for oral sex, I won't disclose either giving or receiving. Undetectable, there really is zero risk. Even with a high viral load, it's extremely low risk. I just about went Nuclear when I saw the new provincial gay men's health website. In their piece on oral sex, they actually said there is a little bit of catching HIV for the guy RECEIVING a blow job!!!!!! On the Spit/Swallow question, the page said that it's impolite to cum in someone's mouth without asking. Was this written by a school marm? No discussion on spitting being higher risk than swallowing. The rest of that site is a useless waste of bandwith too. Clearly they didn't look at any other gay men's health site, or read the research about the kind of visuals and language are needed to engage gay men. Boy am I going to give them a piece of my mind. Where I don't feel we bare responsibility is to always be the one who starts the conversation around status. If guys are too scared to talk about HIV, to chicken to mention the word "status," how the hell can we get anywhere in combating it. If they can't even say the words, it's a pretty good bet that they aren't getting tested either. Too scared for testing, too stressed waiting for the outcome, and terrified of the results. "Clean" isn't a shield that provides any protection. There have been studies that showed a slight reduction in risk, as compared to no questions asked hook-ups. Other studies showed the opposite. That they increased the likelihood of exposure. How do we educate people who can't even say HIV?

Generally what happens is companies produce a slightly re-formulated version that is "better" then the previous. New combination = new patent & doctors choose "New and Improved" over the old one.

Six months of playing with "Alternative Therapies" made all the difference. The cancer grew to inoperable proportions while his sister enforced quackery. He'd probably still be alive if he'd had the colostomy. I miss Dave!

A large portion of news stories, YouTube videos, FaceBook pages, and just about anyplace discussing HIV, that allows comments is littered with HIV denialists. It's probably the same few dozen people using a million different names. I just hope there aren't too many people with HIV that take it seriously. I had a Poz friend who was diagnosed with HPV caused rectal cancer. The doctor recommended operating, removing it, and doing a colostomy (poop re-routed to a bag in your pants). He allowed his sister to talk him into "alternative therapies." One was such obvious pure quackery I can't see how anyone would fall for it. Long story short, when the alternatives didn't work, the cancer had progressed too far for an operation. He died with a fist size hole of rotting flesh in his ass. It was a worse than the rectal cancer picture shown for five frames in the NYC Health "It's Never Just HIV" ad campaign. (A horrible example of "modern" fear based HIV prevention campaigns.) I remember Poppers being theorized as a cause for GRID (Gay Related Immune Deficiency). It was a reasonable suspect, because it as something that a lot of Gay men used, and straight people didn't. But it was ruled out very quickly. Poptronic: Gift suggestion for your friend next Christmas -- a tin foil lined baseball cap! Tiger: Shame on you for staying up all night Christmas Eve, with your naked lubed butt pointed at the fireplace! Errr, ummmm, ahhhh. I guess Santa would consider it a real change of pace from the usual cookies everyone leaves out. Milking him, instead of a glass of Moo beside the biscuits. XMas must be such a stressful time for that unaging guy. It's good that you helped him relax, before getting on with the rest of his rounds. Is the jolly old elf a power top? How's he hung? Cut or Uncut? Big cummer? Did he leave you other presents, or just coal in your stocking, and a load in your ass? Am I going to get on the "Naughty" list for even thinking these questions?

Xtra Magazine produced a four part video series on PrEP. It presents a fairly well balanced view of all sides of the issue. Part 1: Part 2: Part 3: Part 4: This page lists the full interviews with the people featured throughout the series. Just as an aside, Xtra owns Squirt.

That looks to be a good resource. In the top search box type "Top Prescribers of TRUVADA in (YOUR STATE)" Zero in on anyone with "Family Medicine" or "Nurse Practitioner"

So this Poz guy did all the leg work for you. Remember this the next time someone makes nasty comments about Pozzies trying to infect Neggies. Here is the full package of documents from Gilead. If you walk in to your doctor with these, he/she really can't say "I don't know enough about it." https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Training_Guide_for_Healthcare_Providers.pdf (Training Guide for Healthcare Providers) https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Checklist_for_Prescribers.pdf (Checklist for Prescribers) https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Important_Safety_Information_for_Healthcare_Providers.pdf (Important Safety Information for Healthcare Providers) https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Safety_Information_Fact_Sheet.pdf (Safety Information Fact Sheet) https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Agreement_Form.pdf (Agreement Form) https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Important_Safety_Information_for_Uninfected_Individuals.pdf (Important Safety Information for Uninfected Individuals) https://start.truvada.com/content/pdf/Prescriber_Educational_Slide_Deck.pdf (Power Point Slide from PrEP Training Presentations) http://www.gilead.com/pdf/truvada_pi.pdf (Full Prescribing Information) This document is probably overkill, but pages 5 through 11 contain useful information I'm not in a medial prefession, but the documents seem to suggest these are the appropriate blood tests to order: HIV test Hepatitis B (While not required I'd recommend a Hep C test) If you haven't already received a Hepatitis A & B vaccination, request it. (Only Hep B vaccinations are noted in the documents. Rimming poses a risk of catching Hep A, so the AB combination vaccine is recommended for all gay men) Creatinine Clearance Serum Phosphorus Urine Glucose Urine Protein Gilead's Copay Assistance Program covers up to $200 per month http://www.gileadcopay.com/ And here is application for the Medication Assistance Program form (If you're uninsured or have a low income) https://start.truvada.com/Content/pdf/Medication_Assistance_Program.pdf Did you guys already on PrEP have to sign the agreement form? I do get a laugh out of some of the warnings in the Gilad documents. Don't take Truvada for PrEP if your taking drugs you would only be prescribed if you already had HIV. Probably cut and paste from their warning when taking Truvada as part of HAART (Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy). It just seems so out of place in the information about Pre Exposure to HIV.

I think the multi-million population bases are a special case. Most of them the Gay specific medical infrastructure. So PrEP is not a unique concept for them. In fact it's routine. A GP can order blood tests and check the results. Your GP can discuss your sex life, and remind you to use condoms. Your GP can write a three month prescription, and make you book an appointment just before the three months is up. To the best of my knowledge, that's the whole protocol. None of it is beyond the capabilities of a GP. The whole mindset of "Oh - I'ts about HIV. You must go to an infectious disease specialist," just creates another barrier for people wanting to go on PrEP. It also shows that the doctor doesn't really know much about PrEP. You don't have HIV, and that's the point of PrEP. Because you DON'T have a disease, you NEED to see an Infectious Disease specialist? Again, that's a waste of resources. Imagine if we get 10% or more of the gay population on PrEP. Most of the ID specialist's time will be taken up writing PrEP prescriptions, for people who don't have any of the diseases he was trained to treat. Hell, it could lead to the Pozzies having more trouble getting in to see him/her, because it's all booked up with PrEP clients. That would be especially bad for newly diagnosed Poz guys, who should get on the meds ASAP. (I know a bit of hyperbole) There must be an Introduction to PrEP pamphlet for doctors, that outlines what initial questions they should ask. There must be an info sheet on what blood tests to order, and what specific things to look for. Let's find that stuff, and have guys who want PrEP take it in to their doctor. Rawfuckr: Kaiser is really up on this stuff. I've been watching presentations at various conferences. If there's a Q&A at the end, there always seems to be a Kaiser rep asking a question.

Guys seem to forget that it's our most personal, private piece of medical information. I can't think of any other health related data that people are expected to put on public display. If you want to understand the level of vulnerability we feel, think about this. Bi guys, post your wife's cell number in your profile. The rest of you, list you social security number and bank card PIN. Maybe add your home address too.

I'm seeing comments like this more an more. Why waste a specialist's time, on someone who doesn't have an infectious disease? If you end up seeing the ID doc, ask him to educate your GP on what blood tests to order, and what things to look for. Sending everyone who want's PrEP to an ID doc is just a waste of resources, and an unneeded stress on the medical system.

Jake Sobo discusses this exact effect in his piece titled "Wishing and Hoping and Praying—How Not to Prevent HIV" over on the Beta Blog. It makes an interesting read. Actually all his stuff does. He's generally finding that men looking for "safe guys" (as opposed to "safe sex") are more likely to engage in BB, but will immediately reject you when you specify you want raw sex. Many will start off with a condom to show that they are a "good boy," but will very quickly change to bb, once they decide that you are also a "good boy." All I can say is that after 28+ years of being a Pozzie, I can attest to the fact the peoples brains do not think logically when it comes to HIV.

I actually know someone who caught HIV in that exact scenario. He is a welder, so he always has little small cuts and burns on his hands.I played with him in January. We had a lot of fun!

I think you should put a condom on while masturbating, and try to break it while jerking off. They don't break that easily. Try blowing one up like a balloon, and see how big they get before they burst.The most common cause of condoms breaking is inexperience with condoms. Second is not putting it on properly. Third is not using a condom safe lube. Personally I've never had one break, and I've been using them since Safer Sex was invented in 1984. I do know a few people who have had one break, but it's not common. If a condom broke, if it broke when he came, and if the guy who was fucking you was Poz, and if he wasn't on treatment, and if he didn't know he was Poz, and if he was recently infected and had a high viral load, then you'd still have to actually catch HIV. Not every exposure to HIV results in you to becoming Poz. That's an awful lot of "Ifs" that would ALL have to line up exactly correctly for your worst fear to come true, assuming you choose to play safely. If you play bare, take out the first two ifs. That still a lot of ifs. I'm guessing that with a very conservative family, you got "abstinence only" sex ed, or abstinence is the family value you've been taught. So you're falling back on that. You're not going to stay celebrate for the rest of your life. You will eventually give in to the natural urges. Spend some time on the web and learn about sex, STIs, and HIV. If you've got a family that snoops at browser history, use "private browsing mode" (usually under the File menu), so no history is tracked and they won't see anything. If you already know that you are gay, do not get forced into a straight marriage because that's what your family expects. Generally that plays out this way. You will end up cheating on your wife with guys, feel horribly guilty about it every time, swear off it, the urge comes back, and the cycle repeats. Eventually come out in your 40's, which usually results in a nasty divorce.

HPTN 052, the study that said Pozzies on treatment were 96% less likely to transmit HIV, than those not on treatment, used six months undetectable as it's benchmark. That's the study that spawned the Swiss Statement, and is the most often cited in info on the web.Most people reach undetectable within three months of starting treatment. Some get there in the first month. There are a few that take up to six months, and of course some that never reach undetectable. Undetectable for six months is probably a good place to set the bar.