Would if asked take a quick HIV test before have fun.

[Bwccummer]

Would if asked take a quick HIV test before have fun. Also what about test first and use condom? Or just use condom and not test. Ask for can be stressful going just by one say are clean when not know for sure or not in test later on. Also who agree to buy test kit or kits? Ideally both test so know. 

The person not want to take test even though said negative. My guess is negative as said and not want to take test as delay fun. Or not open, or know own status. I would prefer to know before playing. 

Topic may create a debate but do wonder if one agree to test before fun. Or just go to next person?

[cumbaby]

I like the idea of that ,if both would be willing to test. But i don't think ,that it would work in practice as it would totally kill the mood having to take a test just before the play. Imagine this scenario: You come to his house ,get all horny ,naked, ready to service him and the guy would pull out the test kit and say."Let's make sure that you are not contaminated you little slut".  Yeah no tnx.

[Cutedelicategay]

To get laid most of the guys lie about their status, especially if it is a random hookup. There is no consideration for other person in such situation. This is also common in a bathhouse wherein by virtue of entry it is assumed the person is either HIV poz or a backbacker or a prepster.

I so much wish courts would rule on test kits like they did on declaring status and consent. The society collectively should stand against the spread of HIV.

[Bwccummer]

I can see point of ruin mood if take test. However, person declined before arrived so would know if agreed or decline.

The courts may in test rule on testing. Again will share stress can wear more if take the risk bareback. 

 

[drscorpio]

Until/unless we have an HIV test that is 100% accurate as soon as someone is exposed, you cannot "know before playing."

Yes, your method would catch people who were intentionally lying about their status or unaware of their true status as long as they converted 6 weeks ago or more. 

It would not catch the person who is most likely to infect you - a person who has contracted HIV since their last test but who is not yet showing antibodies. This person is usually highly infectious, and no home HIV test can protect you from him. 

Asking every partner to take a home HIV Test would be expensive. It would also be off-putting to some. But most importantly, it will do nothing to protect you from the most infectious people you are likely to hook up with. 

Here are your realistic options for protecting yourself with today's medical technology:

• Assume all your partners are poz and proceed with whatever activities you would feel comfortable doing with a poz partner. If that means sex with a condom, remember that condoms can and do break. 
• Get on PrEP yourself. Then you do not have to worry about anyone else's status. 

[Bwccummer]

I hope to try to get on prep. However, find process not user friendly and costly. Heard generic version of prep released next year so maybe easier then to get on prep.

[wood]

On 9/10/2019 at 4:36 PM, Bwccummer said:

I hope to try to get on prep. However, find process not user friendly and costly. Heard generic version of prep released next year so maybe easier then to get on prep.

Where are you located? There are now online resources in the US where you can get it 

[Bwccummer]

One online source required a credit card. I would prefer to pay using PayPal or mail in a payment. I am not exactly in position to visit a clinic easily. Just seemed as look into not practical to get at moment.

[Pozlover1]

On 7/24/2019 at 1:00 PM, drscorpio said:

Until/unless we have an HIV test that is 100% accurate as soon as someone is exposed, you cannot "know before playing."

Yes, your method would catch people who were intentionally lying about their status or unaware of their true status as long as they converted 6 weeks ago or more. 

It would not catch the person who is most likely to infect you - a person who has contracted HIV since their last test but who is not yet showing antibodies. This person is usually highly infectious, and no home HIV test can protect you from him. 

Asking every partner to take a home HIV Test would be expensive. It would also be off-putting to some. But most importantly, it will do nothing to protect you from the most infectious people you are likely to hook up with. 

Here are your realistic options for protecting yourself with today's medical technology:

• Assume all your partners are poz and proceed with whatever activities you would feel comfortable doing with a poz partner. If that means sex with a condom, remember that condoms can and do break. 
• Get on PrEP yourself. Then you do not have to worry about anyone else's status. 

THIS^^^^^^^

[tallslenderguy]

i wonder what the cost difference is between PrEP and two HIV tests?  Depending on how often you fuck, PrEP might be cheaper, as well as more protective.

[garsento]

The problem with this is that quick HIV tests would not identify the people most at risk of transmitting the virus, newly infected people who are not under any medication and are experiencing peaks in viral production. 

[garsento]

Now that I have thought some more about the idea, this would be deeply concerning. It would suggest to me that the person suggesting this simply did not know enough about how HIV is actually transmitted, indeed that they knew just enough about HIV to be confused. A test that would lead someone to turn down perfectly safe undetectable partners in exchange for people who have not tested positive yet because they have just become infected is a terrible idea.

I would only have sex with this person if condoms were involved; bareback is simply not an option.

[Guest]

I think it depends, of your drunk and horny I don’t think I’d ask or tell, if I wanted a man to fuck me I’d let him. If its a sober thing then if its easy to do then maybe, but, if your super horny knowing a bare dick is about to fuck me there is a bit of a thrill element i think, so, its a tricky subject.

[wood]

I'm a huge proponent of prevention and health and I wouldn't do this. The main reason is that its illogical.  If someone has been having tons of sex, oraquick tests are usually about 6 weeks away from conversion to detection.  So you have a 6 week window?? Silly

And really lets use a simple analogy, "If you don't want to play ball don't step up to the plate"  Don't have sex if you don't want to assume some risk.  Nothing in life is fool proof, and while a test might make you feel better, use a condom if you are that scared or don't have sex.