HIV+ Celebrities

[genericuser]

Well I still feel the need to apologise, so tough shit!

You have no idea of the relief it gives me to hear someone else refer to "HIV unknown" - you simply can't prove a negative! I wrote my first giftgiving bit of fiction yesterday (Pozdaddy) and all through it is the question "do you really want this?". I admit that as a pozman I was immensely turned on by writing the story, even though I've never tried before to eroticise HIV.

And I'm with you on rape/deception being the only reason for HIV's presence in a courtroom...

Thanks.

Well HIV Unknown is the actual status of every sexually active person who barebacks-- unless two guys are in a relationship where they have been monogamous for circa 6 months (and after four months of monogamy both guys get tested and results show they are HIV-).

Otherwise science proves that if you've been sexually active and barebacking in the past 90 days then your status is HIV Unknown; that's a fact.

I've always loved bb and I didn't chase but didn't avoid exposure, I knew the risks and the eventual outcome; I'm cool with my decision.

What I absolutely hate is people who choose ignorance, people who made a decision and knew the risks but after the outcome decide they're a "victim" and most of all people who can't imagine that someone would lie about their status (or lie about anything) just to get laid.

I always share my status when I hookup but don't judge people who choose the 'don't ask, don't tell' route prior to bb sex.

Maybe I'm sick of the endless mainstream media stories about HIV focusing on Porn performers getting HIV or some guy being criminally prosecuted for violating antiquated HIV laws and the person exposed (who in almost all of the cases chose to have bb sex w/the defendant) being labeled a "victim".

It would be nice to have another Magic Johnson-type make an HIV revelation because it certainly has the potential to help alter people's perceptions...

[Scandbro]

Well HIV Unknown is the actual status of every sexually active person who barebacks-- unless two guys are in a relationship where they have been monogamous for circa 6 months (and after four months of monogamy both guys get tested and results show they are HIV-).

Otherwise science proves that if you've been sexually active and barebacking in the past 90 days then your status is HIV Unknown; that's a fact.

I've always loved bb and I didn't chase but didn't avoid exposure, I knew the risks and the eventual outcome; I'm cool with my decision.

What I absolutely hate is people who choose ignorance, people who made a decision and knew the risks but after the outcome decide they're a "victim" and most of all people who can't imagine that someone would lie about their status (or lie about anything) just to get laid.

I always share my status when I hookup but don't judge people who choose the 'don't ask, don't tell' route prior to bb sex.

Maybe I'm sick of the endless mainstream media stories about HIV focusing on Porn performers getting HIV or some guy being criminally prosecuted for violating antiquated HIV laws and the person exposed (who in almost all of the cases chose to have bb sex w/the defendant) being labeled a "victim".

It would be nice to have another Magic Johnson-type make an HIV revelation because it certainly has the potential to help alter people's perceptions...

This is where I think PrEP will play an important role, at least here in the U.S. We are only just starting to change the conversation about HIV here. Funding started shifting into new prevention and awareness campaigns around the beginning of this year.

I think too, we are talking about 2 different points. You seem to concerned with living with HIV and whats that like, and public perception of us. But I don't agree that a celeb coming out as POZ will have a positive impact for us necessarily.

I do think a celeb coming as someone taking PrEP would make a difference because it continues to change the conversation about HIV. It actually addresses personal responsibility of the 'neg' partner engaging in bareback sex. The public or our sensationalist media could then point to the 'victim' who agreed to bareback in the criminal issues you mentioned and ask, why weren't you taking PrEP if you wanted to have bareback sex. Right now ALL the responsibility is left up to us. Until the conversation changes its still our responsibility.

I really do appreciate the some of the new ads out. The Puppet Service Announcements by Logo TV and Avenue Q are great, the tag line is "its time to rethink HIV, spread the word, not the virus!" But again, this kind of conversation changer is only just happening this year...It could take another year or 2 before a celeb would come and participate on the same level. My understanding is that the public in the U.S. and other western countries is not completely ready to take a pill for prevention purposes. It will take time to open that dialogue with the public, which is why I think a neg celeb taking PrEP would more valuable than a POZ celeb IMO...I just really think POZ celebs are risky to the conversation because there are too many variables the media could pick apart. Again, I would be especially concerned with the topic of how that celeb became infected, and the public would want to know too.

I think something else which could help would be more talk about sero-discordant relationships. Maybe instead of just having gay characters on TV or in movies or books, we meet their HIV + new boyfriend..

[genericuser]

This is where I think PrEP will play an important role, at least here in the U.S. We are only just starting to change the conversation about HIV here. Funding started shifting into new prevention and awareness campaigns around the beginning of this year.

I'd encourage you to do some deeper research into PrEP; studies have demonstrated that it is not the be all end all that it is purported to be. It also requires the individual to diligently take the medication in order to be effective and insurance covering it is not a given in many cases. You'll find that a lot of media reports the same statistics from one study while ignoring the meat of that study and every other dissenting study of the effectiveness of PrEP-- read the studies, not just the media reports and learn the whole story.

[bearbandit]

I'd encourage you to do some deeper research into PrEP; studies have demonstrated that it is not the be all end all that it is purported to be. It also requires the individual to diligently take the medication in order to be effective and insurance covering it is not a given in many cases. You'll find that a lot of media reports the same statistics from one study while ignoring the meat of that study and every other dissenting study of the effectiveness of PrEP-- read the studies, not just the media reports and learn the whole story.

Total agreement here: I read a number of studies as part of my voluntary work and they way facts are cherry-picked.

Absolute adherence to the prescription is vital: no "I've got flu and won't be getting laid for the next week so why bother?" It's difficult enough for those of us on HAART to adhere to the prescription. I can't imagine how much more difficult it must be to take it "just in case".

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

As one of the few ON PeEP here.... Agree adherence is essential much as HIV med adherence is necessary to control. I am getting the impression here that we are already slamming PrEP. Is it perfect? No. But strongly rivals condoms and research continues. The notion that gay men need barrier sex while straight people are free to enjoy skin on skin sex is not a sustainable model.

If we shift the conversation with PrEP to personal responsibility for ones own health, we will substantially change the HIV dialogue. So ease up on throwing PrEP out the window for a better option...

[genericuser]

Total agreement here: I read a number of studies as part of my voluntary work and they way facts are cherry-picked.

Absolute adherence to the prescription is vital: no "I've got flu and won't be getting laid for the next week so why bother?" It's difficult enough for those of us on HAART to adhere to the prescription. I can't imagine how much more difficult it must be to take it "just in case".

Noting that you have a deeper knowledge of HIV research than most and that you seem to make it a priority to maintain an understanding of the latest HIV/AIDS developments, your analysis is definitely something to pay attention to.

[genericuser]

As one of the few ON PeEP here.... Agree adherence is essential much as HIV med adherence is necessary to control. I am getting the impression here that we are already slamming PrEP. Is it perfect? No. But strongly rivals condoms and research continues. The notion that gay men need barrier sex while straight people are free to enjoy skin on skin sex is not a sustainable model.

If we shift the conversation with PrEP to personal responsibility for ones own health, we will substantially change the HIV dialogue. So ease up on throwing PrEP out the window for a better option...

I'm not writing that PrEP is completely ineffective, I am highlighting the fact that the results of studies analyzing the effectiveness of PrEP vary significantly. If one is considering PrEP they should read and analyze the actual studies themselves and not just rely on one impressive statistic from one study. The fact that human nature demonstrates someone is less likely to strictly adhere to taking a preventative supplement must be considered. Also, the coverage of PrEP by insurance companies is not universal.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

dshanebb, please don't ASSUME that is what I did... Effectiveness varies in a not unsurprising way. If one is inconsistent it doesn't work. Really nothing new there. At the moment there isn't a "morning after" version; so if one chooses PrEP they are either in it all the way, or no point in using it at all. PrEP is not a "supplement". PrEP is 2/3 of Atrypla The effectiveness variation is nearly identical to the effect on "undetectible" for HIV meds. Catch an STI and effectiveness will drop. But otherwise, compliance results in typically excellent outcomes.

What isn't getting mentioned here, and should, is how PrEP is a definite game changer. I fear YOU are not recognizing that. PrEP is in fact altering the HIV conversation from blame to personal responsibility. And for this reason, rather than looking for movie stars to change the conversation; is what we should collectively be seeking.

I agree with Scandbro that we would do well to have a celeb on PrEP. And as far as effectiveness, it will continue to improve as research continues along this path.

We're not "done". PrEP will continue to evolve. And IMO we should be celebrating the new direction from just treating HIV, to solutions that allow all of use who strongly prefer skin on skin sex to give prevention options to those not yet poz.

[genericuser]

dshanebb, please don't ASSUME that is what I did... Effectiveness varies in a not unsurprising way. If one is inconsistent it doesn't work. Really nothing new there. At the moment there isn't a "morning after" version; so if one chooses PrEP they are either in it all the way, or no point in using it at all. PrEP is not a "supplement". PrEP is 2/3 of Atrypla The effectiveness variation is nearly identical to the effect on "undetectible" for HIV meds. Catch an STI and effectiveness will drop. But otherwise, compliance results in typically excellent outcomes.

What isn't getting mentioned here, and should, is how PrEP is a definite game changer. I fear YOU are not recognizing that. PrEP is in fact altering the HIV conversation from blame to personal responsibility. And for this reason, rather than looking for movie stars to change the conversation; is what we should collectively be seeking.

I agree with Scandbro that we would do well to have a celeb on PrEP. And as far as effectiveness, it will continue to improve as research continues along this path.

We're not "done". PrEP will continue to evolve. And IMO we should be celebrating the new direction from just treating HIV, to solutions that allow all of use who strongly prefer skin on skin sex to give prevention options to those not yet poz.

I apologize if you perceived my words to be solely directed at you or to be making any sort of assumption about you; that was not my intention. Frankly it was not aimed at you because it was clear to me that you definitely did your research before choosing PrEP and that you understand the importance of diligently taking the supplement; which is awesome.

That being said, there is a great deal of conflicting data on the effectiveness of PrEP. I agree that it has the POTENTIAL to be a game-changer but there is still a long way to go for it to reach its potential. I'm sure you can agree that a major hurdle to clear is gaining the buy-in from all insurance companies. After gaining that buy-in so it's covered, the even bigger hurdle to clear is to produce an effective public relations and advertising campaign that alters the mindset of the public so they will recognize the benefits of using such a supplement and, more importantly, the need to be diligent about making it a part of their life every day.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

Thanks. True, a lot of misinformation that might lead one to conclude that PrEP is minimally effective. And on the surface, that is false. But indeed, when one takes all the collected data, and looks at only results without understanding (of compliance); it would appear minimally effective.

Potential game changer? Absolutely. But isn't this the direction we need to be taking? We don't need a poster boy so much as an information advocate. We've subtly demonized poz guys. Time to stop that; not just because too many of my close friends are poz, but because a virus doesn't make an individual bad. Cripes we've seen near leper reactions!

While the message of condom sex was to take personal responsibility, the fallacy was expecting generations of people to subscribe to barrier sex. While barrier sex is similar to skin on skin; all of us here know that it isn't the same. And all of us here would prefer to have our sex with people with whom we have an attraction to without having to edit out for presence of a virus (which, as has already been stated, is a point in time snapshot that has little relevance to the time of sex). So, PrEP allows someone to enjoy skin on skin sex without becoming knocked up, much the same as birth control works (although with an entirely different method of acthion).

I think PrEP is where we need a poster boy (or poster girl).

True, PrEP does nothing for the host of STI's that are about save for HIV (which from my POV is oddly over demonized). Ideally we'll see antiviral/antibiotic progress that covers more than HIV; but let's celebrate what we CAN do, and keep up pressure to improve. Makes sense?

[genericuser]

@JizzDumpWI I think the biggest game changer on every level would be a universal push to get tested. If the number of people (gay, lesbian, heterosexual, transgender) that actually get tested significantly increases, I have zero doubt that the amount of HIV+ people would dramatically increase. Such an occurrence would shatter people's perceptions of HIV as it would be viewed as a more common ailment (like cancer, diabetes and similar potentially life-long medical issues) and less taboo in the eyes of so many.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

I do agree. You are aware I am sure that no ID doc is going to prescribe PrEP without testing.

But yes, why as a group we don't test quarterly is a mystery to me. Not just for HIV (which one can do reasonably well at home with Oraquik) but for a full STI panel. By outward appearances a huge number of BZ members are active chasers. I am sure some amount of this is false bravado; not unlike young straight guys getting together talking about their conquests. Some amount of this is resignation to the outcome since they're committed to bare only sex. And some amount of this are true chasers, who differ only by method of destruction from suicide bomers.

Nothing is going to counter the subset of people bent on self destruction. There is treatment; but only if/when they've come to a place where they're ready for it. For many that never happens. And it doesn't matter whether they're bug chasing, drug addicts, thrill addicts...

The rest, I think we're on exactly the same page. Get tested. Treat what shows up. Realize that any test is a snapshot of a prior point in time (favored timeframe is 90 days since nearly all HIV will show up in that timeframe; but often earlier). I love the HIV Unknown status. The "honest" one. That would apply equally to all STI's though, not to single out HIV as the only game in town. One can get an STI panel, but if they were infected the day before with ghono; it might not show up that fast. And whatever the result; the first bare encounter afterwards returns one to "unknown".

At this point in history though, I really doubt universal HIV testing would shatter people's perceptions of HIV. It is "the boogeyman" and that is a long held habit. So the results would be a larger pool of maligned people. Please understand when I write this that I'm not reflecting my own beliefs. From my personal POV, HIV is like any other disease. It becomes emotionally charged in the minds of the broader public though because one typically gets it from sex; and at least as a nation; sex gets more reaction. As a nation, sex is wanton. Sex is just pleasure and somehow is worse than gluttony. As a result, illnesses from sex are presently treated differently.

[genericuser]

At this point in history though, I really doubt universal HIV testing would shatter people's perceptions of HIV. It is "the boogeyman" and that is a long held habit. So the results would be a larger pool of maligned people. Please understand when I write this that I'm not reflecting my own beliefs. From my personal POV, HIV is like any other disease. It becomes emotionally charged in the minds of the broader public though because one typically gets it from sex; and at least as a nation; sex gets more reaction. As a nation, sex is wanton. Sex is just pleasure and somehow is worse than gluttony. As a result, illnesses from sex are presently treated differently.

If one considers the diseases in the last 50 years that went from being the "boogeyman" or a definite death sentence that today are widely viewed as common/manageable, it is clear that people's notions about certain ailments can completely change with time and knowledge. That understanding provides hope that HIV can/will someday be thought of in a new light.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

If one considers the diseases in the last 50 years that went from being the "boogeyman" or a definite death sentence that today are widely viewed as common/manageable, it is clear that people's notions about certain ailments can completely change with time and knowledge. That understanding provides hope that HIV can/will someday be thought of in a new light.

For the portion of population who are thinking people, we're already there. Even time won't cure the Tea Party of their delusions.

[Rawdad4sons]

most of us live in a culture/society which is Puritan in nature and "sex " is evil and anything to do with sex is dirty....Unfortunately the only celebrities/ public figures who are going to step forward are in the adult entertainment field. HIV is just one of many STI's out there but it being the newest kid on the block (outside of HPV, which has been around for a long time but we just started talking more about it) has been stigmatized and beaten up, demonized because of the community in which it first surfaced, I am sure it was around long before it was "discovered" in a less lethal mutation and people died of complications of compromised immune systems long before the "gay cancer" began occurring. My main point here is discussion like this are a necessary evil that needs to be taken outside into a larger circle but it is highly unlikely we will begin to see anyone (public figure) stepping forth to admit they have sex, i mean look at the backlash with Miley Cyrus at the MTV awards and she just wiggled her ass. on a lighter note, not only did George Washington grow Hemp, (rumors have he smoked it too) but he also lost all his teeth ( why he had wooden ones) and suffered heart problems due to syphilis and gono. We can only guess what diseases he passed onto his wife and kids