Does HIV infection increase male sexual behavior?

[tboyer]

Not certain were to put this article, it could go in Sexual Health, but I find it very horny 

[think before following links] https://academic.oup.com/emph/article/2020/1/174/5906510?login=false

[gingerdaddyG]

Never has science been so horny!

[Tanbbottom]

Haven't read the article, but from personal experience I would say  ... it has mine. 

[leatherpunk16]

It just confirms what many of us have known for a while. And I suspect that a few eager chasers would certainly volunteer for the study part where they need a control group, but can't implement one for "obvious ethical reasons". 

[Pozme1981]

Hope so as when I get it hope it does 

[hntnhole]

18 hours ago, tboyer said:

[think before following links] https://academic.oup.com/emph/article/2020/1/174/5906510?login=false

from the article linked above:

"Lay Summary In 2000, Starks and colleagues speculated that HIV infection could alter host behavior in a manner that facilitated the spread of the virus".  

While brief, the key descriptor, mentioned more than once, is the word "behavior".  Not once was there any hint that the actual virus increased wanton sexual behavior, it references more than once a behavioral result of the hiv virus.  I take that to mean that the actual virus is not at all inducive to wanton raw sex with countless men.  The presence of the virus only induces different modalities in how the pozzed guy thinks about wanton raw sex.  

I well understand how some men need some kind of reason to be the men they were born to be, particularly given the cultural repressions most of us face at one time or another, and becoming positive may well do that for them.  I'm no clinician, but it seems to me that one way or another, and despite all the repressive messages we receive from our earliest days, one of two things will happen: 

1).  We will intellectually/emotionally/spiritually come to the understanding that we are fundamentally different sexually, and the repressions simply don't apply to us. 

2).  We will not find the strength within ourselves to reject the cultural bullshit, and thus, suffer all kinds of mental/emotional anguish throughout our lives.  That kind of repression can get internalized, and we wind up not living up to our potential in all the other facets of our lives.  In other words, we surrender to the cultural/religious pressures, and become lesser, more stunted men than we could have been.

I have yet to hear/read or otherwise run across any input from any source (meaning outside of the institutions that offer only repressions), that the second option above is more uplifting, more fulfilling, induces more happiness, more well-being, a richer life.  We must make the effort to examine ourselves, quietly and soberly, and actively search ourselves for the answers to who we are.  Only then do we find the the inner strength to flaunt convention, spit in the eye of those who would judge us, and live our lives joyfully, express our wanton sexual behavior exuberantly, and as often, with as many partners in that joyful mating, as we need.  

[billy88666]

I have read a few studies on the subject but most of the thing they are saying is pure speculation. Without long and extensive clinical studies that would take years, it is very difficult to come up with any meaningful data. Does a virus have any sort of intelligence... I think not; however it could have some chemical inbuilt, that when it is secreted into it's host may have the capacity to reduce inhibitions or to make the host made ill informed decisions. Will it induce us to transform into self absorbed sexual predators... no.. as a virus does not have intelligence or the capacity to have emotional responses.

[viking8x6]

On 6/15/2023 at 2:03 PM, hntnhole said:

While brief, the key descriptor, mentioned more than once, is the word "behavior".  Not once was there any hint that the actual virus increased wanton sexual behavior, it references more than once a behavioral result of the hiv virus.  I take that to mean that the actual virus is not at all inducive to wanton raw sex with countless men.  The presence of the virus only induces different modalities in how the pozzed guy thinks about wanton raw sex.  

That's not correct. The new article states quite explicitly that the data they have support the hypothesis that high viral load of HIV has an effect on the host that increases their sexual activity. Whether their interpretation of the data is correct can be argues (and no doubt will, given the controversial nature of the subject). But that's definitely what they are saying. Of course they don't have any idea how such an effect comes about.

[RubberAustria]

It is the aim of every virus to spread himself and infect as many people as possible. So it makes sense. Would be interesting if the sex drive is extra high with a High Viral Load. 

[BootmanLA]

On 6/16/2023 at 3:09 PM, viking8x6 said:

That's not correct. The new article states quite explicitly that the data they have support the hypothesis that high viral load of HIV has an effect on the host that increases their sexual activity. Whether their interpretation of the data is correct can be argues (and no doubt will, given the controversial nature of the subject). But that's definitely what they are saying. Of course they don't have any idea how such an effect comes about.

Of course, the data raises other questions. Presumably, the way they know which guys have become HIV+ is that they've been tested and confirmed to be poz. It's not inconceivable that, as hntnhole suggests, realizing that "the worst" that could happen already has might well release some guys' inhibitions about fucking a lot more regularly.

After all, as someone who's been out and about since before the first HIV deaths were reported, I can confirm that indeed a lot of guys' response to HIV's entry into the STI universe was to restrict how much sex they had and who they had it with, in the hope that by reducing and narrowing contacts they might escape infection. That's not a bad strategy as long as a particular STI is not widespread, but it becomes a lot less useful if even one guy among these small circles or chains of guys having sex with each other gets infected.

Once one has HIV, there certainly COULD be a realization that having more sex (with more partners) is now an option.

In other words: the question is whether an increased sex life after infection is because of some internal biochemical change brought about by the infection itself, or is it a more or less conscious choice we make, even if we don't really think about it that much?

[ErosWired]

Color me skeptical. Yes, viruses do spread by manipulating the behavior of the host organism - it’s why we sneeze when we have a cold virus. The virus is trying to spread itself. But there’s a great deal of difference between triggering an autonomous reflex reaction and triggering a man to go cumdump at a bathhouse. I’m wondering how much they’re attributing causality to correlation.

There are a number of psychological factors that come into play when a person gets an HIV diagnosis, and people behave differently, and differently over time. When I was first diagnosed (after I survived trying to die) I essentially thought sex was over for me for about a year. That’s when my viral load was at its highest. It’s never been as high since, and durably Undetectable in the years in which I’ve gotten slutty.

The reason for my rapid uptick in sexual exploration wasn’t the virus whispering in my ear, it was the fact that I didn’t even have my first same-sex experience till I was 37, was now in my fucking 40s, and feeling like time was rapidly running out.

I don’t doubt that some men’s increase has to do with the relief that they feel that if they have to have HIV, at least they don’t have to live - and fuck - in fear of getting it anymore. It is liberating, to that degree. I don’t think the viruses are sitting in their little virus War Room plotting that out, though.

[funpozbottom]

I am by no means an expert or even follow the subject closely, but, HIV does cross the blood-brain barrier in the early stages of infection and causes permanent changes in the brain. I suppose it's possible that in at least some people, changes to certain areas could increase libido and/or decrease risk aversion.  More research into the type of changes the virus makes would have to be done in order to show more than a casual correlation.  I only skimmed through the article, and while the results may be statistically significant, the means fell well within a standard deviation of each other. Therefore, (as they say in politics) I think the race is too close to call at this time. 

[hntnhole]

On 6/15/2023 at 2:03 PM, hntnhole said:

The presence of the virus only induces different modalities in how the pozzed guy thinks about wanton raw sex.  

I've read and re-read the article;  I don't see anything suggesting that the actual virus - in and of itself - carries any physical power to induce, influence, expand, or otherwise affect or create a deeper lust for wanton sex than existed prior.  

What I do see is that becoming hiv positive can alter the behavior, meaning that something like "it's already happened, so I might as well get as much as I can" type of outlook. 

That is easy to understand.  

[cockfun69]

Just as going on PreP has allowed many guys to advertise their change to bb sex, there are many newly poz (maybe biassed sample on here) who do seem (at least say) to ramp up sexual encounters.

[viking8x6]

20 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

Of course, the data raises other questions. Presumably, the way they know which guys have become HIV+ is that they've been tested and confirmed to be poz. It's not inconceivable that, as hntnhole suggests, realizing that "the worst" that could happen already has might well release some guys' inhibitions about fucking a lot more regularly.

In other words: the question is whether an increased sex life after infection is because of some internal biochemical change brought about by the infection itself, or is it a more or less conscious choice we make, even if we don't really think about it that much?

They actually did control the study for this effect and ruled out this potential explanation (or seem to think they have).

They did it by comparing specifically the newly diagnosed HVL patients against the newly diagnosed patients who did not have a high viral load. The former group had signficantly higher sexual behavior in the 1 month after diagnosis than did the latter group. My understanding (not having picked it apart too carefully) is that this is the main point upon which their claim that HIV specifically influences sexual behavior is based.