Italian man tests positive for COVID, monkeypox and HIV after trip to Spain

And people say Spain has no good souvenirs anymore.

Spain, you’re embarrassing me!

I guess I shouldn't complain about my toenail fungus anymore.

Lock this guy in a room and don't let him leave because dear God if these mutate together into something more transmissible were fucking dead!

With PrEP available, no one from a first world country should be contracting HIV.

Why are so many of you boys uncontrallable sex addicts. How about respect.

Still not that many Italians on PrEP. Same thing all over Europe, actually. It'll take some time to reach US levels of uptake and the benefits that come with that.

He hit the trifecta. I hope the sex was at least mind-blowing.

Plenty of Italians also still smoke and impregnate women, despite the many proven risks associated with both.

LOL at the comparison to smoking.

His pussy must be worn out! LOL

It's unclear if he contracted HIV on the trip, or if he only became aware of his poz status after he was also tested for mpox and covid, It mentioned that his HIV viral load was high. Does that mean he likely only recently contracted it?

Yeah, R7, because the benefits of being able to be a wanton whore and helping to cause yet another viral pandemic to spread is great!

Clearly, this can all be traced back to one person….he had sex with Erna aka Mrs Patrick Cambell.

r13 The benefit is that new HIV infections are driven down to zero. Literally why HIV prevention was started in the first place.

R13 is only sour because no one wants to take him to Pound Town, with or without condoms.

To people like that, anyone who has a liberated sex life - indeed, anyone having more sex than them at all - is a "wanton whore."

R15, so it can be replaced by a new virus or some mutated version of some old virus because the only thing that can seem to keep certain gay men from being the biggest fucking disease-passing whores on the planet is the threat of quick and horrible death and, even then, there will be enough who will still fuck themselves and others to death because they can't control themselves in any way.

r16 People here fixate on the free sex part when it comes to PrEP, but the fact is there's still a huge stigma surrounding HIV in Europe. Any time gays get mentioned in a conversation with the yokels around me, AIDS invariably gets brought up as well. Imagine a world where we aren't seen as AIDS-spreading rats, it would do wonders in the fight against homophobia. PrEP currently is the best weapon we have in our arsenal. Hopefully to be joined by a vaccine and/or a gene therapy later this decade.

Certified [bold]WHORE[/bold].

r17 Science deals with existing problems. We're not going to stop malaria research just because malaria might get replaced by some other disease in the future, that's not how any of this works. We're trying to save real, actual people from infection and death in the here and the now, not in the thousands of imagined, potential futures.

R18, actually, not being fucking whores is the best weapon but we all know that will never happen. PrEP is simply going to allow another virus to take over. Maybe a nice deadly form of syphillis? Super-monkeypox? Hell, maybe even a shiny new version of HIV responding to PrEP by evolving around it. But, whatever happens, don't stop being fucking whores.

Spain is the new Gomorrah.

Well, it looks like SOMEONE enjoyed themselves!

I never understood why sexually active gay guys would throw away the condoms, even with PrEP. Sure, PrEP prevents HIV, but what about all the other nasty STDs that can really only be (partially) prevented with condom use? Not using PrEP combined with condoms seems absolutely suicidal to me.

r21 People are going to have sex, it's most natural thing in the world. The problem isn't people being whores, it's that we still haven't been able to come up with a vaccine for most STDs. That's a failure of public policy because it's been so influenced by religion up until now. But even that will be solved over the coming couple of decades because of all the accelerating advances in biomedical research. And then I really don't know what argument you'll have against people having wanton sex, if you're still alive at that point. Well, we won't solve pubic lice, so maybe that'll be the new AIDS for you people.

r24 Because it's not suicidal. Every STD under the sun can be treated, even super gonorrhea -- arguably the worst of them all -- can be tamed.

I’m not an expert, but I imagine it’d be pretty unlikely for a HIV test to return a positive result less than two weeks after being infected. The high VL would suggest that it was recently-acquired (up to two years ago?), but not at the same time as this unfortunate guy also contracted Covid and monkeypox.

r26, it is suicidal. Getting one curable STD after another wreaks havoc on the immune system. Plus, how many guys who contract syphilis or gonorrhea aren't even aware they have it until it's too late and has affected other parts of their body (e.g., the brain or eyes)? Not to mention that they are passing these other STDs on to unsuspecting sexual partners.

[quote]The benefit is that new HIV infections are driven down to zero.

New HIV infections declined 8% from 37,800 in 2015 to 34,800 in 2019.

That doesn't seem like a huge decrease to me.

Prissy frau gumming up the thread, just because no one has touched your ashy hole in decades, doesn’t mean the rest of have to wither on the vine.

Stink off!

In the other news it said he already have been HIV poz for some time and probably spread it like a gossip among bitchy queens.

Well, I need to see his face before I can throw more shit at him. Beauty is a mitigating factor here.

TYPHOID MARIO!

R32 "ITSA ME, THE CLAP!"

Olé

I can't wait to read his essay on "How I Spent My Summer Vacation."

R24, you’re a total sexless idiot.

People on Prep get tested regularly. The people spreading disease rarely get tested.

The again why am I discussing this with all the freaking gay incels on this site? Incels are pathetic. Especially gay ones who have more options than their straight counterparts.

R18 is another idiot. Any gay man that says a variation of “if only we didn’t do this thing then the homophobes would finally respect us” are idiots. Even if you are a virgin who waits until marriage, the minute you hold your partners hand you instantly become a dirty faggot to any homophobe.

[quote]Plenty of Italians also still smoke and impregnate women, despite the many proven risks associated with both.

They really should print a warning label on fertile women.

R37 And the fifth doctor is the one who spends most of his time putting babies INTO women!

Someone should be playing the lotto!

r36, do you honestly believe that all guys on PrEP, especially those on recreational or weekend PrEP, do the responsible thing and get tested regularly for all STDs? It's precious that you think that.

Quit whoring around.

Very typical of that kind.

R42 Homos, or Eye-talians?

All the above are treatable. Next.

[quote]The again why am I discussing this with all the freaking gay incels on this site? Incels are pathetic. Especially gay ones who have more options than their straight counterparts.

It's pretty homophobic to think that gay men are either whores or incels and grown adults who can control themselves and act responsibly. You seem pretty stupid, though. You are a sex addict and you don't even know it. Pathetic little whore.

This is why I just use my mouth. Pa said you can't catch anything in the mouth.

I bet this an escort that travels for clients, sadly he’s spreading disease to others and has likely destroyed his health past a point of no return now. I’m surprised that they didn’t find more diseases hiding.

Sorry but this headline made me chuckle.

R43, both. Can you sick whores stop spreading pandemics.

Of course gay men cannot not act like degenerates because that would be heteronormative.

Whoring around is one thing. Whoring around without protection in the middle of a double pandemic is quite another.

Hard to feel sorry for him. God knows how many others he infected.

Did he catch it from sitting on a tractor in his bathing suit?

There is much about being 60 that is not fun, BUT a reduced sex drive seems to be more and more a blessing. I love cooking and tending to my garden thank you🤓🤓

He won the Triple Crown of disease! Well done.

He also had Syphilis in 2019. Grand Slam winner.

From my favorite new glossy, The Journal of Infection.

What does this look like. Good gawd.Honey had one hell of a vacation.

R40, recreational or weekend Prep? The people I know on Prep take it all the time. And if someone doesn’t monitor their sexual health regularly, what makes you think they’d go on Prep (which requires regular use) in the first place. Educate yourself you idiot. New infections are occurring amongst the non-Prep crowd who never tests.

R45, You can’t read and you’re calling me stupid? This site is full of gay incels. Something I don’t encounter anywhere else. I was making fun of you and the other datalounge gay incels. I don’t think this group is representative of gay men in general. And you calling me a whore says more about you than me. In your post you have revealed you have a tiny dick, a flat sunken ass, and that you are so unattractive that you’re jealous of an anonymous poster. And newsflash, compared to your ugly ass even the Pope would be considered a whore.

Why are you here, r57, if you find it so objectionable?

And why do you keep shrieking about “gay incels?” You sound quite unhinged. You must be Matt A. off his meds again.

[quote]With PrEP available, no one from a first world country should be contracting HIV.

In Italy there's still shame and stigma to being gay so some people are afraid to get a PrEP prescription. I went to get blood drawn for a Covid test and the doctor (playfully) called me a "fag" when he saw I was afraid of needles. It's the culture there.

The shocking part is that he caught all 3 at the Prado.

Amateur.

Mamma mia, what a puttana!

WHOOOOOORE.

I don’t think in some countries it is as easy to get PREP as it is in the US.

As an Australian I get PREP and get tested every 3 months, but has been over a year since I have had sex. It doesn’t really bother me tbh. I am getting older. I would rather watch a good movie or read a book ,but I keep the PREP up because you never know and I know if I take it every day then it is now part of who I am so I don’t have to worry about anything.

To be honest Monkeypox has decreased my sex drive and when people say that we shouldn’t judge people who get it and we have so many drugs to fight these diseases I just think we are so lucky to live in the first world to say these things, because let’s face it , you live in the Third world you would be fucked .

"First world"??????? How the fuck are you bitches posting to the internet from 1966?

Well at least she had a good time in Barcelona.

R64 you don’t need to take PrEP everyday constantly

Condoms are for losers. Nobody wears them anymore. I'm 90% bottom, and frankly, if a top wanted to use one to fuck me, I'd show him the door. I want to feel the heat of a raw dick in me, not rubber.

Yes the Italian and the Spaniard are complete fucking whores but they both had super squeaky clean assholes. That is always the saving grace to me.....

[quote] On admission, the patient reported being treated for syphilis in 2019. In September 2021, he performed an HIV test with a negative result. He suffered from bipolar disorder, for which he regularly took carbamazepine 200 mg daily. He was vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 with two doses of Pfizer's BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (the last in December 2021) and had already contracted COVID-19 in January 2022. He also reported of having condomless intercourse with men during his stay in Spain.

[quote] Our case emphasises that sexual intercourse could be the predominant way of transmission. Therefore, complete STI screening is recommended after a diagnosis of monkeypox. In fact, our patient tested positive for HIV-1 and, given his preserved CD4 count, we could assume that the infection was relatively recent. To note, the monkeypox oropharyngeal swab was still positive after 20 days, suggesting that these individuals may still be contagious for several days after clinical remission. Consequently, physicians should encourage appropriate precautions.

r27 I agree. Recently-acquired, at least after September 2021.

R68 is a silly cunt and a disease ridden freak. Stop spreading diseases deary and keep your boihole/mancunt/bunghole/puss-he/asshole out of circulation you little fucking whore.

He's a triple threat.

He should be on Broadway

Come on now. She’s not a slut.

She’s THE slut!

Gay men need to accept reality - being a white leads to death. Grow up, settle down.

[quote] Italian man tests positive for COVID, monkeypox and HIV after trip to Spain

We always knew it

[quote] Plus, how many guys who contract syphilis or gonorrhea aren't even aware they have it until it's too late and has affected other parts of their body (e.g., the brain or eyes)?

Mmmmmmmm R28 hardly any? Like…..a negligible number? When have your ever heard anyone say “oh my friend just found out he has gonorrhea….but it was too late 😫” lmao.

[quote] do you honestly believe that all guys on PrEP, especially those on recreational or weekend PrEP, do the responsible thing and get tested regularly for all STDs? It's precious that you think that.

It’s precious, R40 that you’re so fucking clueless but generally in order to qualify to continue taking prep, one of the conditions is that you get a full round of liver/ kidney tests and bacterial / blood test for all STIs every three months. Means if you do have a STI it has a very limited amount of time in your system and the window to spread it to others is very slight. At least you know if you hook up with a guy that’s on prep that he’s been tested recently.

Feelsbadman :(

Poor guy.

Just to clear up the confusion - doctors prescribing PREP in the US require HIV and kidney function tests every 3 months.

My doctor, like others, has STI testing as part of the 3 month standing lab.

So blood drawn, urine sample, throat swab, anal swab.

PREP users likely have more knowledge about their sexual health than others...

I still have much sympathy for all of these worst-case-scenario patients. (especially the German patient who has lost his schnozz.

I think there's a real difference revelling in the schadenfreude of really despicable people, but can't see it for young oversexed irresponsible people. They didn't set out to hurt anyone. They were just having fun, and made some rather poor choices. People need to consider intent when they judge such people. Everyone makes mistakes, and hopefully many of these patients will learn to enjoy sex more safely.

Many of us have been awfully lucky, and we ought to remember that.

I don't even have snark. Poor guy. Thoughts and prayers but for real. Fucking hell.

We had been planning a trip to Spain, but decided to go elsewhere per our instinct, this was in April. Covid, then Monkeypox.

Glad we made it to Sauna Paraiso before it became the source of all this. Who knows if we'll be back, ever.

Same here, r80. Sometimes you gotta feel for a guy trying to make it through life and fucking up. The human condition.

R82 I don't think you need to write off Spain. I know a couple who just left for Spain & Portugal. I don't believe they're headed to sex-destination venues however. Spain is far too enjoyable for other reasons than sex.

Lol femmy prep hoe at r36 thinks s/he’s empowered because s/he doesn’t reject any loads. I can already smell the monkeypox and the AIDS from their dangly earrings…

R68, I’m a muscular top that always insists on condoms for fucking, with zero exceptions and I’d have no problem showing fags like you the door. Almost every bttm that has made an issue of that ends up being (a) a huge scene queen that looks the part, (b) into drugs and / or (c) so loose it’s like navigating the Lincoln Tunnel.

You guys really shouldn't be joking about this so cavalierly when there's now a shop somewhere in Italy tragically missing its bottom.

Idiot at R26 states: “Every STD under the sun can be treated, even super gonorrhea -- arguably the worst of them all -- can be tamed.”

And why do you assume that we have already discovered every STD under the sun? HIV is still relatively new in the grand scheme of things. When it was discovered — and when we became aware that raw butt fucking btwn male strangers was a most efficient way of transmitting it — it was already too late for many.

I’m pretty sure there were many men who repeated this same line prior to 1980. That didn’t work out so well, did it?

R87 Cheers for your comic relief. This topic, and the prevailing puritanical shite is very disappointing. If anything, can't we be a bit more sympathetic to our own here? I can't imagine the suffering these blokes are going through, especially considering the lack of prompt pain-relieving treatment. I've a difficult time wishing this on my worst enemies.

Came in here to say what r52 said.

Leaving satisfied.

[quote] In Italy there's still shame and stigma to being gay so some people are afraid to get a PrEP prescription.

True. I was surprised that Italian porn star who was popular here for a moment, Zander Craze, was open about being both gay and poz. That's highly atypical there.

R88 that’s insane - by that logic you should just presume another pandemic has already started and never leave the house.

Earlier poster is correct, all know. STIs can currently be treated. What’s idiotic about that? It’s the truth.

You seem like you’re willing to live your life dominated by a vague unclear medical threat, that you’re projecting into being related to gay sex for some reason. Get past it for your own good baby.

Little does he know r88 there are some STDs (not officially) that aren't available to test as a main panel. There are all sorts of things besides the big five that you can catch. Gay men are addicted to and deal with sex in the most unhealthy ways, but then pass it off as being "sex positive"

[quote] all know. STIs can currently be treated. What’s idiotic about that? It’s the truth.

What' s idiotic is these disease mutate and build resistance to the antibiotics. That is dangerous for everybody.

Look, as long as you’re not fucking in some third world country like Africa or Philadelphia, you’re probably fine.

R93 are you talking about HPV?

R94 all viruses mutate. The chance of one person going out and causing a damaging mutation via swallowing a strangers load is so teeny tiny that it’s absolutely insane to expect people to live their lives governed by that. Get a grip.

*viruses and bacterial infections

R27 if he had it for two years - how many men did he pass HIV on to? Irresponsabile not to get tested more often. My pity for him is limited.

Sorry fellow gays, but based on my experience living in NYC and Fort Lauderdale for many years, I concluded that most (not all) gay men have an unhealthy attitude when it comes to sex. Often they are obsessed, relentlessly pursuing the next conquest. Add substance and alcohol abuse along with the gay quack MDs pushing prep as if it a panacea, and you end up with walking Petri dishes. Growing up in the age of AIDS has really done a number on us psychologically! AIDS burnout is real, so many middle aged gays putting themselves at insane levels of health risk, hoping Prep with shield them from everything!

It hard to deny Monkeypox is predominately spread by gay men, and how fast and aggressive the spread is.

Calling it out as “stigmatizing” or “marginalizing” gay men is only causing people to deny or turn away from the facts. Straights are going to form their own opinions- which become hardened and worse if you try to shove this while issue under the carpet, defer responsibility of Men That Have Sex With Men. Men that are on the down low, gay teens and those that don’t have access to proper health coverage are going to be greatly affected, but at the end of the day, gay men need to be accountable and OWN THEIR ACTIONS.

Unlike AIDS, innocent children and those that had blood transfusions and drug addicts aren’t afflicted. Just MSMs!.

THIS is the disease that will define gay men’s response to it in THIS era, we need another Larry Kramer to spell this out! There’s a real possibility it could mutate into more virulent strain that kills and/or migrate into the general population.

Shouldn't the illustrating photo have been a gay hustler?

R101 truth hurts

Ugh. This is why they hate us.

[quote] Lady Kay, a transgender woman who asked to go by the pseudonym that she uses for sex work.

r101 Well this person is no different from other men who make up 99% of the cases because this person's sex work involves with his own dick and ass + other men.

[quote]in order to qualify to continue taking prep, one of the conditions is that you get a full round of liver/ kidney tests and bacterial / blood test for all STIs every three months.

I don't know if it's still true, but they're used to be a thriving black market for PrEP. Guys were getting it and taking it without ever seeing a doctor.

In 2020, Gilead – maker of PrEP - sued 50 Florida healthcare clinics for recruiting homeless or low-income people to seek fraudulent preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prescriptions through the company's free-drug access program. Then the participating clinics pocketed reimbursement payments and took the medicines back to repackage them and sell them on the black market.

Gilead settled the case for $33 million earlier this year.

Anyone know what Spanish town he went to?

Can we just put all queers on an island and just let them kill each other off with there sex diseases. Call it AIDS Island. How many more deadly diseases are they going to spread before someone puts PC aside and finely says enough is enough, queers. Filthy queers.

This isn't a trifecta because COVID isn't much of a diagnosis nowadays. Monkeypox, HIV and Hep C,

or West Nile,

or Lyme.

Also there is no reporting that he CAUGHT HIV in Spain. Just that he tested + with it.

He might have been positive for years, now.

Like the filthy German whore whose nose fell off since he has (until now) undetected HIV progressed to AIDS, no immunity, and got Monkeypox.

[quote]This isn't a trifecta because COVID isn't much of a diagnosis nowadays. Monkeypox, HIV and Hep C, or West Nile, or Lyme.

Covid still kills 500 Americans each week. Which is about 500x what the latter five put together does.

OP and a LOT of other posters on this thread (you know who you are) seem to be even cuntier than this “God” person who supposedly visited these infections upon this man.

r105 So the actions of a criminal medicak group reflect all gay men on Prep?

How's that for a gay mab stereotyping all gays on Prep due to one small group, who may or may not even be gay.

Truvada has been around since 2004 and none of this superAIDS the AIDS-PTSD crowd long for has not even made any inkling of coming about.

Instead, HIV infections are dropping.

And no super gonorrhea, super chlamyidia, etc.

Please.

R107 is very rude.

R107 would appear to be visiting us from Breitshart.

Oh honey, don't worry. We won't tell your sisterwife that you're trolling a website chock full of [bold]HOMOSEXSHUALS[/bold].

It’s the MSMs that will swear up and down they NOT GAY and must’ve caught it from a toilet seat, subway rail, or sweaty bowling shoes- but have weeping sores all over their CHIN and ASS…

SURE, Jan!

The sores on these wanton whores take the pattern of where the jizz came on. Just what I always wanted...a pearl necklace of oozing pus-filled sores. God, what whores!

R111: “ And no super gonorrhea, super chlamyidia, etc.”

Are you retarded? Chlamydia has now become so difficult to treat that (at least within the US) the standard protocol has now become almost TEN DAYS worth of Doxy. It used to be just a shot in the ass and one’s day worth of oral pills.

I really don’t understand this cavalier attitude toward antibiotics. Even putting aside the potential mutation and broader public health issues, doing almost 2 weeks worth of antibiotics every year or so just because you don’t want to wrap up the dick isn’t good for your health.

Sheesh, a simple case of clap every year or so and MARY! has a grand mal seizure!

R92: “ that’s insane - by that logic you should just presume another pandemic has already started and never leave the house.”

Yes, because something as simple, convenient, unobtrusive and easy as wearing a condom during sex is equivalent to “never leaving the house” .

Tell us, do you usually require assistance tying your shoes in the morning? How stupid are you?

According to STI cesspool at R92 taking a simple prophylactic measure as wearing condoms during sex is the same as “[living] your life dominated by a vague unclear medical threat.”

R199 you’re too stupid to understand my point - you’re making life decisions based on a mystery as of yet undiscovered and non-existent illness, and suggesting others do too. Get a grip honestly you’re so deluded. Let others make their own reality based risk analysis and live their lives that way, and you can live in a fantasyland of disease hanging around every corner.

Wear condoms if you want, don’t if you don’t. Use prep if you can and get frequently, don’t listen to the anti-scientific bitter incels of DL.

Are you dizzy bitches actually still talking about condoms? Honey, you're really irrelevant. I mean, REALLY irrelevant. I haven't used a condom in ages, and neither have my friends or my FBs. If you're having a conversation about condoms, it must mean you're old and unfuckable, so the whole conversation is mute anyway. But have your silly little conversation about condoms, while the rest of us are out there fucking as nature intended. Life's a banquet.

R120, people that aren’t retarded like you take reasonable precautions every day to protect against possible unknowns. I’m sorry the monkeypox and syph have infested your demented twink head to the point that you can’t comprehend that.

And sorry to burst your bubble, but I am far from old (mid 30s), look great, have more muscle than I’m sure you do and OH guess what - get laid almost whenever I want. And not just on Grindr. Literally every time I’ve gone out to a gay bar in the last 2 months I’ve brought someone home.

Maybe if you stepped out of your queeny HK circle full of prep’ed faggoty gurlZzzz you’d realize that a lot of hot masculine men want sex but also value their health. Shocking concept huh?!

Enjoy your next visit at the free clinic in a few days for that torn and diseased rectum 🕳

"Literally every time I’ve gone out to a gay bar in the last 2 months I’ve brought someone home."

You sound like a real quality catch, r122.

I already know I am, but thanks, r123! 😉

R124 Don't be bothered. Some of us like sluts ;)

R122 I didn’t say anything about your age (can you read?).

Surprised you’d be lecturing ppl on taking care of their sexual health while bringing a bunch of casual partners home during the monkeypox outbreak. I did take precautions for the duration by not having sex with casual partners, funny it seems like you’re more reckless than I am lol.

And just FYI I’m on prep, had my full testing round last week and everything came back negative. So worry about yourself baby seems like you’re more at risk than I am. I’m also in good shape and in my 30s but I’m not so weak as to have to fall back on that as a virtue.

R126. I’ve been vaccinated for over 2 months and specifically ask about the dude’s vaccination status too. I also use condoms any time my dick goes into a butthole (I’m also a top so I don’t bttm), thereby substantially mitigating risks against the most efficient way of acquiring STIs. You can do all the mental gymnastics you’d like, but the fact remains you prep-addicted / BB-only hoes are practically disease vectors.

[quote]Italian man tests positive for COVID, monkeypox and HIV after trip to Spain

But no Ebola? Better luck next time.

[quote]I’ve been vaccinated for over 2 months and specifically ask about the dude’s vaccination status too.

Open your eye sheep! Who makes prep? Gilead does. Do you think that company name is a mere coincidence?

The Republic of Gilead is a totalitarian theocratic country in the place of a former part of the US in the Margaret Atwood novel The Handmaid's Tale, the television series based on it, and Atwood's sequel novel, The Testaments.

BB the only way to have sex !

R127 if you don’t use a condom for oral then you’re still a ‘disease vector’ sorry - I notice you didn’t say anything about your fucking up the age comment lmao. FWIW I also ask peoples status and get that info so I take care of myself too. Prep is a failsafe for me for HIV not the only care I take, I’m also a top so less of a risk. So calm down with the judgment.

R131, unprotected anal sex is a way more efficient a mechanism of disease transmission than unprotected oral, on a scale of multiple magnitude. To try equating the two in terms of risk is an exercise in being intellectually obtuse (or just willfully dumb). It’s like comparing someone who goes sky diving to a commercial plane passenger.

Ask any ID doctor that studies STIs about the real, actual risks involved - it is comparatively rare for a male to acquire an STI from JUST oral and be asymptomatic.

^ or like telling someone “well even though you refuse to ride motorcycles, you still drive a car - sooo same shit, you’re a hypocrite!”

“I have repented. All Maldivian citizens, please forgive me,” he says. The man in the video is M.D. Alamgiri, a trafficked Bangladeshi sex worker who has been accused of filming, blackmailing and engaging in same-sex relations with politicians and officials of the Maldivian government.

Since June, several leaked videos of people engaging in same-sex relations with Alamgiri have gone viral on Maldivian social media. These include videos of a police officer, a former journalist, and former President Mohamed Nasheed's brother.

Alamgiri’s case has metastasized into a widespread homophobic outcry on social media, with many expressing disgust, ridicule and outright anger at Alamgiri and the men featured in the videos. Many have demanded their arrests under local laws criminalizing homosexuality. The penalties for homosexuality in the country can range to up to eight years’ imprisonment and 100 lashes.

The case is also being used in conjunction with the global monkeypox outbreak, further stigmatising the country’s vulnerable LGBTQ community, most of whom live closeted lives for their safety. Politician Ahmed Shiyam has spearheaded a call for monkeypox contact tracing to be carried out on Alamgiri and his clients after one suspected case was reported in the country in July.

“It is important for authorities to look into this matter because there was one suspected case of monkeypox but the results came out as negative. However, the concern is still there, since monkeypox is spreading everywhere in the world,” Ahmed Shiyam told VICE World News.

R132 Sure it’s a little more risky for anal than oral (I believe the scale is closer than you think (approx 1:1.35see link), do you have a source other than “ask any doctor”?) but to describe someone that has unprotected sex as a disease vector and wave away your own risk for bacterial STDs for oral sex is just dumb. It’s just silly embarrassing judgment trip on your part. You’re actually misreading your own risk. Enjoy.

I like sluts.

Don’t blame the minkees.

Lol r135 it’s not just a little more; it’s much more. You can use a little common sense when you consider basic anatomy.

As for a source: Dr. Handsfield, a renowned ID specialist with over 50 years clinical, practical experience (Google his name if you wish):

“I received unprotected oral sex. can i have an std? (i'm a male)

Only slight risk: Oral sex is safe sex, with low risk for all STDs and virtually zero risk for some, including HIV. Main risks are nongonococcal urethritis (NGU) due to normal oral bacteria (and probably harmless); gonorrhea; and herpes due to HSV1. All these are uncommon and would cause obvious symptoms. Syphilis possible but rare, but higher risk if your partner also is male. No testing needed if no symptoms.”

^ to add to the above: there is a reason why few informed MDs or medical practitioners will bother ordering labs for someone who comes and says “I had unprotected oral sex” (and asymptomatic), assuming no other important risk factors at play (eg received oral with existing oral trauma or bleeding etc), v someone who comes in and says “I had unprotected anal sex) and is asymptomatic. The risk profile is not nearly the same, as politically incorrect as that might be to say.

Sounds like she partied a bit too hard.

Messy!

[quote] What' s idiotic is these disease mutate and build resistance to the antibiotics.

Alanis warned us to get off them in the 90s. Why didn't we listen?

I don’t think the circuit party organizers are gonna give him a refund.

[quote] In a Seattle clinic, the proportion of MSM with pharyngeal gonorrhea was 6.5%, rectal gonorrhea 9.7%, and urethral gonorrhea 5.5% (7). Almost all urethral infections were symptomatic (96%), but most pharyngeal and rectal infections were asymptomatic.

I’m sorry R138 what about this is unclear to you. A sample set, and the results show that in that sample set (all tested the same with same numbers) the amount of throat gonorrhea was higher than penile gonnorheq and only slightly lower than anal. How can it be any more clear lol. Also your example is not necessarily a man that has sex with men. It’s a straight guy, and idk if you can understand this but their infection paths differ. Get a clue?

Also for yourself if you don’t top then that info shows that you’re more at risk from throat gonnorhea than in your dick (cases are greater). So your idea that you’re protected bc of your condom use is just woefully incorrect.

Dr. to this patient following tests: "First the good news. You didn't get polio."

R139 To add to the above:

“ Pharyngeal infections with gonorrhea or chlamydia might be a principal source of urethral infections (209–211).”

R138 you might find this part interesting too, in that the required quarterly screening in order to be on prep benefits the main population of msm and reduces the prevalence of other STIs including bacterial STIs in the general population because of the quick treatment for anyone that gets infected. So….you can thank prep users for reducing your overall risk.

You’ve been wrong on almost every one of your positions and assertions on this thread. It might be time to re-evaluate your position on your own sexual health, stop spreading judgment and misinformation, and turn the lens on yourself. Maybe get on prep, you’d be doing yourself (and everyone else it seems) a favour.

“In an MSM transmission model that explored the impact of HIV PrEP use on STI prevalence, quarterly chlamydia and gonorrhea screening was associated with an 83% reduction in incidence (205). The only empiric data available that examined the impact of screening frequency come from an observational cohort of MSM using HIV PrEP in which quarterly screening identified more bacterial STIs, and semiannual screening would have resulted in delayed treatment of 35% of total identified STI infections (206). In addition, quarterly screening was reported to have prevented STI exposure in a median of three sex partners per STI infection (206). On the basis of available evidence, quarterly screening for gonorrhea, chlamydia, and syphilis for certain sexually active MSM can improve case finding, which can reduce the duration of infection at the population level, reduce ongoing transmission and, ultimately, prevalence among this population (228).”

^ … have you ever stopped to think WHY the protocol for prep users is full STI testing every 3 months? Hint. It’s because the medical community (correctly) expected that many MSM taking prep will likely disregard the protocol for using condoms in addition to prep (yes, read that again) and are overall a much higher risk population for spreading STIs. .

And yes, you’re still a fucking moron to even contest the basic fact that unprotected anal sex is much riskier (not “just a little”) than unprotected oral sex. You cited one particular study specific to one patient population (relying Fyi on patient reported data on specific sexual practices, which is never reliable). Cite or maybe talk to an actual practitioner in the field who diagnoses this shit on a daily basis and come back to me.

You’re also quite selective with your sources and data. There have been multiple studies showing exactly the opposite - that prep use IS linked with higher incidence of STIs. Eg:

From just last month.

Just realized above link was paywalled -

July 21, 2022

Use of PrEP Among MSM Associated with Increased Risk for Bacterial STIs

Keith Henry, MD, reviewing Hart TA et al. Sex Transm Infect 2022 Jun 14

In a Canadian study, PrEP was associated with more sexual partners and condomless anal sex as well as excess risk for bacterial STIs.

Growing use of preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among gay and bisexual men who have sex with men (MSM) has been associated with an increase in bacterial STIs. Is this because confidence in PrEP enables sexual behaviors? Investigators evaluated the direct and indirect linkages between PrEP use and bacterial STIs (Neisseria gonorrhea, Chlamydia trachomatis, and syphilis) in a cohort of MSM in three Canadian cities. Participants with HIV-negative or unknown status at baseline underwent testing for HIV and other STIs, determination of PrEP use, and assessment of sexual behaviors (e.g., number of partners, engagement in condomless anal sex [CAS] and oral sex).

During the preceding 6 months among 2009 participants, 97% reported engaging in oral sex, 69% reported CAS, median number of anal sex partners was 3, and 18% reported PrEP use. For PrEP users compared with nonusers, prevalence of CAS (93% vs. 64%), STIs identified at study visit (17% vs. 8%), and median number of anal sex partners (10 vs. 2) were all significantly higher. Likelihood of oral sex did not differ between groups. In a model controlling for number of sex partners and CAS, PrEP was not directly associated with bacterial STIs, but was indirectly significantly associated with bacterial STIs as a result of those two behavioral factors.

COMMENT These data provide further support for the view that, in some populations, use of PrEP allays fears about acquisition of HIV, in turn leading to behavioral disinhibition and high-risk sexual activities with attendant higher rates of bacterial STIs. This chain of events supports the recommendation for frequent STI testing among MSM on PrEP, and it also underscores the need for more effective preventive strategies for STIs other than HIV.

From a few years ago

R146, look, if you wanna be a filthy no-loads-rejected whore, more power to you. Just don’t get all cunty because the truth offends you or isn’t politically correct.

From Germany. Note the phrase that begins with “especially”:

“Conclusions

We found a high STI-prevalence in MSM in Germany, especially in PrEP users, frequently being asymptomatic. “

And with this news I now will sink into obscurity!! He beat my personal best !!!

From Australia 2 years ago

^ from the Australian study: “ Conclusions and Relevance Among gay and bisexual men using PrEP, STIs were highly concentrated among a subset, and receipt of PrEP after study enrollment was associated with an increased incidence of STIs compared with preenrollment. These findings highlight the importance of frequent STI testing among gay and bisexual men using PrEP.”

“Results: Sixteen observational studies and 1 open-label trial met selection criteria. Eight studies with a total of 4388 participants reported STI prevalence, and 13 studies with a total of 5008 participants reported change in condom use. Pre-exposure prophylaxis use was associated with a significant increase in rectal chlamydia (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-2.13) and an increase in any STI diagnosis (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, .99-1.54). The association of PrEP use with STI diagnoses was stronger in later studies. Most studies showed evidence of an increase in condomless sex among PrEP users.”

R147 lol no it wasn’t relying on self reported data it was data from a clinic you absolute dickhead. “In a Seattle clinic” isn’t patient self reporting. They checked patients and they reported data.

We can’t keep going over the throat / anal / penile thing the numbers are there you keep ignoring them, for bacterial STIs. You don’t want to accept reality and accept because you’ve got your own ideas about your own respectfulness to protect so it’s in your interest to ignore facts in order to preserve it.

I’m not denying that gay men on prep will probably be more casual about condom usage and therefore be more likely to contract bacterial STIs, but they’ll be less likely to pass them on or to have them develop in their systems because of the testing regimen, which most men not on prep do not adhere to.

Therefore its more effective towards general public health.

You personally are at risk of contracting oral or penile bacterial STIs with your sexual behaviour but you’re denying it so that you can pass judgement on strangers on the internet, it’s loser behaviour. I can feel the ‘masc for masc’ incel vibes lifting off the page lol. It also tracks with your persisting in accusing me of ‘taking loads’ even tho that’s 1) none of your business and 2) not true i said that I top already. But I get why you’re doing that.

I’ll trust the CDC link with the information regarding prep users and public health. All of your links treat it as an individual basis without talking about testing windows etc so it’s largely unhelpful.

From the UK

“Conclusion Rising numbers of STI diagnoses among MSM/TPSM are not attributable to increased testing alone. Increased CAI and number of partners may be attributable to evolving sexual decision making among PrEP users and their partners. Proportionally, bisexual/other MSM/TPSM have the steepest increase in STI diagnoses.”

[quote] In a cross-sectional sample of MSM in the United States, approximately one third reported not having had an STI test during the previous 3 years, and MSM with multiple sex partners reported less frequent screening (221).

Users not on prep being rl responsible lol 😭

@ R147

"lol no it wasn’t relying on self reported data it was data from a clinic you absolute dickhead. “In a Seattle clinic” isn’t patient self reporting. They checked patients and they reported data.:

You aren't understanding. I was referring to the actual sexual acts (i.e., oral/anal/etc.) that patients engaged in, which obviously are self-reported (if reported at all). To take a step back -- and something I should've mentioned from the beginning -- this study doesn't definitively prove anything at all about the comparative riskiness of unprotected anal sex v. unprotected oral sex. It just shows infection rates per anatomical sites for a given STI -- and if anything, only supports my position (see below).

On the contrary, I cited an actual practitioner, who is basically one of the world's leading who's-who on STI/HIV research and trends, and who reaffirms the *point I was making*.

"We can’t keep going over the throat / anal / penile thing the numbers are there you keep ignoring them, for bacterial STIs. You don’t want to accept reality and accept because you’ve got your own ideas about your own respectfulness to protect so it’s in your interest to ignore facts in order to preserve it."

Ok so how does this study even support your position (that unprotected oral sex is just a "little less" risky than unprotected anal sex)? If you're using rates of gonorrheal infection per anatomical site from one study involving a Seattle cohort as some type of proxy for comparative riskiness of a given sexual act (i.e., anal, oral, etc.), then it does not help you. At all. "pharyngeal gonorrhea was 6.5%, rectal gonorrhea 9.7%". The latter is a near 50% increase from the former. Again how does this help your position? Do you know how to do math, or are you just slow?

Why would anyone waste time reasoning with and informing the Maiden Aunt Anti-PREP Brigade? These attitudes are hard-wired in the brain and NOTHING will change. Keep in mind as well many DL SLUT SHAMERS are cyptkeeping shut-in fantasists who haven't had much of a sex life since 1982, if ever.

@ R147

"I’m not denying that gay men on prep will probably be more casual about condom usage and therefore be more likely to contract bacterial STIs, ~but they’ll be less likely to pass them~ on or to have them develop in their systems because of the testing regimen, which most men not on prep do not adhere to."

The bit in ~ marks is a factual assertion, which you have not proven, whatsoever. In fact, the weight of all current evidence suggests exactly the opposite. See above for the multiple studies from around the world in just the last few years. If the prep testing regime -- which has been around for almost 10 years, at least in the US when it was FDA approved for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis -- is helping prevent STI carriers from passing them on, then that is in sharp contradiction to the current trends being seen almost everywhere, including within the last few years.

With respect to the CDC excerpt (re: one transmission model, the actual citation of which is missing I should add), you are extrapolating without justification from what is actually stated --

"I’ll trust the CDC link with the information regarding prep users and public health. All of your links treat it as an individual basis without talking about testing windows etc so it’s largely unhelpful."

Here is the one sentence you are relying upon for dear life: "In an MSM transmission model that explored the impact of HIV PrEP use on STI prevalence, quarterly chlamydia and gonorrhea screening was associated with an 83% reduction in incidence (205)."

So, tell me: is it referring to a reduction in STI incidence among *the entire MSM population generally* or among *specifically MSM prep users*? It's not clear at all, but you're just assuming the former. (Also interestingly enough, I cannot find anything online supporting this statistic generally; not accusing the CDC of anything nefarious, but still, that is bizarre).

Funny you also completed ignored the underlying rationale for requiring quarterly STI testing for prep users in the first place lol

"You personally are at risk of contracting oral or penile bacterial STIs with your sexual behaviour but you’re denying it so that you can pass judgement on strangers on the internet, it’s loser behaviour."

Did I ever deny that risk? Please quote me where I did, retard. Perhaps if you weren't so fucking stupid and had an IQ above a single digit, you'd understand the concept of "comparative risk."

"I can feel the ‘masc for masc’ incel vibes lifting off the page lol."

Well that's cute you feel the need to project. Again, I have no issue with you being a load-taking whore, but no need to distort or misrepresent the truth to justify your lifestyle.

Dat’s da suck job!

R162 is the slut side's answer to all the scientific evidence provided by numerous prior posters. And he calls them fantasists? Okay.

DL doesn't LOL. Knock it off STI Queens.

[quote] The latter is a near 50% increase from the former. Again how does this help your position? Do you know how to do math, or are you just slow?

Ummm you said earlier that it was several orders of magnitude more risky so I was contradicting that. I can’t keep going round in circles with you, you can’t even keep track of comments. And your formatting.

You also don’t understand the concept of locations implying a specific act. You can’t give someone rectal gonorrhea via dimming, so it has to be penile penetration. And vice versa. So it’s not self reporting at all.

Again you keep falling back on this ‘load taking’ concept. You’re just as much a whore as anyone you say it to, just be comfortable with that, you seem massively insecure with yourself, and facts, and reality. Your need to call others whores to make yourself feel better strikes as incel that’s why I said so, and I think it’s clear.

[quote] Did I ever deny that risk?

[quote] it is comparatively rare for a male to acquire an STI from JUST oral and be asymptomatic.

You did deny it in that you massively underplayed it. It’s been shown in this thread to be untrue. You just woke up and wanted to call someone a whore to get a kick out of it and lied through your teeth to do it.

You’ve decided in your head that a pattern of behaviour that you follow is virtuous and other peoples are not. When confronted with the reality that the lines are blurred you panic and call people retard. Loser behaviour.

Ok ENOUGH with the bashing ! Society’s rejection has turned gay men into self loathing own worst enemies of each other.

If you are young and horny try to behave responsibly, but also respect your elders counsel. Remember they were young and horny once too.

If you are older and more seasoned try to let those younger enjoy their time in the sun. Hopefully we all get our 15 minutes !

Seems like this little tramp had it coming. You reap what you sow, I always say. Hmmm, how do I put this without sounding judgmental, but why do gay men lack any bit of impulse control when it comes to sex?

^ the prep-addicted twink is hard at work we see!

British retard at r167 and r168 continues to post for the sake of posting but disregards literally all factual evidence that has proven them wrong, over and over.

Said British retard also claims to follow CDC “guidance” (though what the retard posted is a page on screening recommendations to healthcare care providers in the US, and nonetheless doesn’t prove anything it asserted) Lolololol

You really can’t reason with a meth-addled bareback whore.

Closeted gay men from all over Europe travel to gay accepting areas for vacation, of course.

I wish everyone knew that, even if they weren’t taking daily PrEP at home, they could at least take short term PrEP while on vacation.

They can buy it in Spain without a prescription at the pharmacy. One has to be up on the latest gay-sex-related medicines to know that, I guess

[Quote] why do gay men lack any bit of impulse control when it comes to sex?

um, anyone can get any of these diseases even by having sex with one person

Most gay men will risk getting STIs, none of which will kill you, for the sake of having bareback sex.

No one is going back to condoms. NO ONE

R172 I’m not British and I live in the US. Smdh you’re stupid as fuck. I get it - you’re upset because certain ideas you had about yourself have been proven to be untrue and its fucking with your judgment kick. Maybe get a better hold on your knowledge of sexual health and go from there?

Your hold on ‘factual’ evidence is subjective and you’re reading things in a way to fulfill objectives you have. It’s not good science.

[quote] Funny you also completed ignored the underlying rationale for requiring quarterly STI testing for prep users in the first place lol

The final thing I’ll say on this R163 is that the quarterly rationale for testing for people on prep is to keep track of their liver and kidney function. Prep use can affect this so if it is affecting you negatively you discontinue use. They lump in bacterial and blood STI testing at these stages for better public health management. As has been showed earlier, men not on prep often go years without testing, so it’s much more effective for the general population to keep STIs lower this way through treatment. Why you think this is a negative thing, or an opportunity to slight someone about progressive public health, is just so stupid it’s shocking. But then you don’t seem to have a good grasp on facts so I suppose unsurprising from someone like you. Be better babe xoxo

These types of gay men creep me out. The ones I always hung around with from work just enjoyed gossiping, talking about fashion, and hanging out at gay bars. The subject of sex hardly ever came up. Just a little creepy.

"Your hold on ‘factual’ evidence is subjective and you’re reading things in a way to fulfill objectives you have. It’s not good science."

I literally posted multiple factual sources from around the world showing an objective casual link between prep usage and an increase in non-HIV STIs. And within the last few years, many years later after prep and its attendant testing regimes were implemented. And you haven't refuted a single one of them. Meanwhile, you completely misrepresented one line from a CDC webpage on screening recommendations to US healthcare practitioners. I'm still waiting for your evidence for your (completely unsubstantiated claim) that prep users are "less likely to pass [STIs]" on.

You're that mad that I bursted your bubble so you keep posting to get the last word as if you're right. It's kind of cute lolololol

"The final thing I’ll say on this [R163] is that the quarterly rationale for testing for people on prep is to keep track of their liver and kidney function. Prep use can affect this so if it is affecting you negatively you discontinue use. They lump in bacterial and blood STI testing at these stages for better public health management. "

Ya, no shit, you fucking retard. No one disputed that quarterly testing is necessary to check LFTs and renal function, etc. I never contested that. As for the STI testing component, the reason for "better public health management" is because the medical community (correctly) assumed that prep users would generally engage in higher risk sexual behaviors (for instance, foregoing the additional protocol on condom usage) and thus at higher risk of STI acquisition and transmission. I'm sorry you're too stupid to comprehend something so basic as this. Best of luck getting through your day.

[quote] Funny you also completed ignored the underlying rationale for requiring quarterly STI testing for prep users in the first place lol

[quote] No one disputed that quarterly testing is necessary to check LFTs and renal function, etc. I never contested that.

Both of these are you correct R180? You see you keep contradicting yourself - you were attempting to catch me out on saying that the quarterly testing was required because of elevated sti risk but then you also knew that it was because of the kidney and liver testing. You’re a whole mess babe.

Transmission is not dependent on incidence. It’s massively to do with the amount of time a person is infected. Since people on prep are tested quarterly, and persons not on prep are tested (?) much less regularly (if at all) transmission is only quantifiable for a person on prep because the behaviors of people not on prep are totally random and up to the person. Your understanding of transmission as if it depends on incidence is just wrong sorry.

[quote] in the United States, approximately one third reported not having had an STI test during the previous 3 years, and MSM with multiple sex partners reported less frequent screening (221).

MSM with multiple partners reported less frequent screening than every three years. Lol and you think prep users are whores? My main issue is this. Your attitude that prep users are irresponsible because they may or may not use condoms, but we have a huge group of non prep users (like you) running around maybe never having an sti test. Now consider the implications of that for transmission and think which group is riskier. As with all sti control, knowledge is power and control, and prep users are definitely in some sort of control, it’s not perfect, but it’s better than not getting tested in 36+ months. Also calling people disease vectors when they engage in very similar behaviour to you regarding bacterial STIs is just embarrassing. So don’t worry you didn’t bursted (sic) any bubble 😂.

"Both of these are you correct [R180]? You see you keep contradicting yourself - you were attempting to catch me out on saying that the quarterly testing was required because of elevated sti risk but then you also knew that it was because of the kidney and liver testing. You’re a whole mess babe."

There is no contradiction in anything I have stated thus far, retard. I never once mentioned the LFT/renal testing component of the quarterly testing regime because uh it is completely irrelevant to this discussion (this entire discussion is with respect to only STIs -- liver and kidney impairment issues are relevant to this discussion why?). You're grasping at straws so much now it's ridiculous. That said, my point still stands, which is that the quarterly STI testing component was and still is required because of the comparative risks involved from a public health perspective (i.e., infection and transmissibility rates as between average prep v. non-prep patients).

You also display an insane, almost laughable ignorance of public health issues to imply that a required 4x/year full STI blood and urine panel would be just for basic "health management" (as if public health authorities would implement a 4x/year testing protocol for just shits and giggles, or simply to collect more data points for research). Any protocol like that puts a massive strain on societal resources and facilities, and is undertaken only for a very legitimate concern as it relates to public health -- in this case, the impact of prep usage on sexual behaviors (that in turn, affect the infection and transmissibility of STIs).

"Your understanding of transmission as if it depends on incidence is just wrong sorry."

I don't think you understand how transmission and testing work. Just because a person gets tested quarterly, that doesn't mean he may've not *already* transmitted an STI before that quarterly test. Especially so in the case of many prep users, who (as the data has shown) generally have a higher number of sexual partners. And even more so when you consider how many prep users regularly engage in bareback sex (which again, is the most efficient way of transmitting STIs -- by a factor of 50% more than oral if you want to use your own data lol).

Again, the prep testing regime has been around for almost a decade. If that testing regime helps stop non-HIV STI transmission, then why are still seeing consistent increases in non-HIV STI infections rates even within the last year from around the world?

"My main issue is this. Your attitude that prep users are irresponsible because they may or may not use condoms, but we have a huge group of non prep users (like you) running around maybe never having an sti test."

Who cares about my attitude. The data shows that prep users are, on the whole, generally more uninhibited when it comes to sexual behaviors and partners. That is a fact. And it's lovely if you get tested every 3 months, but if within those 3 months you're banging 3-4 guys bareback every week (which is not that uncommon from many of the guys I know here in NYC), then I don't see why you think you're being more "responsible" than say a non-prep user that doesn't have a high number of sexual partners and wraps it up each and every time.

Again, it's comparative risk assessment. The same reason why a person with no existing GI issues, under 45, no family history of colon cancer, etc. wouldn't be recommended to get a preventative colonoscopy (even if he or she may, in fact, actually have colon cancer, of course unbeknownst to anyone) than someone that is say 60, has a family history, has IBS or Crohn's, etc. The latter simply has many more risk factors necessitating the need for a colonoscopy + additional regular screening and testing.

[quote] I never once mentioned the LFT/renal testing component of the quarterly testing regime because uh it is completely irrelevant to this discussion

R182 You never mentioned it because it's inconvenient to your argument, not because it's not relevant. I can't believe we're doing this again but the primary reason you go in quarterly is because they need to check your liver / kidney function. Since you're there already health authorities have decided it's progressive action to test you at the same time. It makes sense in from a economics of scale / expediency standpoint. This is a universal concept. It's not a massive strain on clinics either, this is why they exist. And it's much easier to treat one person than it is to treat multiple people after (how long is it again that your crowd go without testing...3+ years?) they've gone around infecting people over years of not being tested.

[quote] Just because a person gets tested quarterly, that doesn't mean he may've not *already* transmitted an STI before that quarterly test.

No it doesn't mean they haven't infected anyone, but considering the incubation periods of gonorrhea and chlamydia, the window is much tighter for being infectious over someone that isn't tested regularly. We covered all this with covid dickhead. Transmission is not just related to one vector (being infected). It's also primarily related to and a function of time infected and the amount (and type) of exposure to others. With more routine testing comes lower transmission. Ask anyone with HIV and they'll tell you that it's the people that say 'oh I'm negative but I haven't been tested in 4 years' that you should be wary of.

[quote] The data shows that prep users are, on the whole, generally more uninhibited when it comes to sexual behaviors and partners

Yes because they can be. You're acting as if HIV doesn't exist and is still not a massive problem. Prep is better than condoms for protecting against HIV and many users are most concerned about protecting against HIV so after that they can decide for themselves if they want to discontinue condom use. With the fact that they are getting tested regularly they are armed with the knowledge that if they get infected with a bacterial std it will be short lived, taken care of promptly and they won't be passing it on for months at end.

[quote] by a factor of 50% more than oral if you want to use your own data lol).

actually lol you probably already forgot because your brain is like a sieve but oral is more effective than anal for passing gonnorhea to a penis. So have fun with that one lmao.

[quote] I don't see why you think you're being more "responsible" than say a non-prep user that doesn't have a high number of sexual partners and wraps it up each and every time.

you're comparing apples and oranges. I could compare a non prep user that sometimes uses condoms and never does for oral and has sex 10 times a week versus a person on prep that doesn't use condoms but has sex once a month with a regular partner and they share their recent sti results and try and make some silly little value judgment but it's entirely pointless. What I'm getting at here (and what you can't seem to comprehend) is that responsibility in relationship to your sexual habits is not just decided by 'oh I use condoms therefore I'm a good boy'. It comes down to tons of factors. Testing, medication, prophylactic use, conversations with partners, the type of sex you engage in, drug use et. etc. No sex is ever fully 'safe' and that word can carry different meaning for different people. For you to get up and call someone a whore because they engage with their sex lives differently than you do is just the stupidest fucking loser behaviour and I can't believe someone in this day and age is still doing it. As I said before you're just an angry little man that projects some sort of self confidence issue onto others calling them 'whore' or 'retard' or 'british' (lol). You're a loser.

Unless he is a modern day Job, he should buy a lottery ticket, I’m sure his bad luck must be used up!

@ R183 Jesus Christ, you are not only retarded, but really pedantic and pathetic.

"You never mentioned it because it's inconvenient to your argument, not because it's not relevant. I can't believe we're doing this again but the primary reason you go in quarterly is because they need to check your liver / kidney function."

LFTs AND RENAL FUNCTIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS DISCUSSION. WHATSOEVER.

And no, that is NOT the PRIMARY reason prep users need to be tested quarterly. You are beyond retarded. According to the CDC minimum guidelines: liver and renal functions should be tested "at least every 12 months." The only group that needs needs testing more frequently (BUT NOT NECESSARILY QUARTERLY) are those over the age of 50 or have other comorbidities. See the link posted here.

The PRIMARY reason for QUARTERLY testing is STIs. You literally have no idea what you're saying (or know you're lying but can't admit it).

"No it doesn't mean they haven't infected anyone, but considering the incubation periods of gonorrhea and chlamydia, the window is much tighter for being infectious over someone that isn't tested regularly."

The average incubation period for chlamydia is around one to three weeks, and for gonorrhea from ONE DAY to 14 days. You could easily pass along an infection asymptomatically to someone else within that 3 month timeframe, especially if you have lot of sexual partners and aren't using protection. A lot can happen within 3 months. You're making a ridiculous and unfounded assumption that anyone on prep that is infected with a given STI will only only catch it at the testing window.

How you say....PUTTANA!

[quote] men who have sex with men - Every 3 to 6 months if at increased risk (i.e., MSM on PrEP, with HIV infection, or if they or their sex partners have multiple partners)

R185 So actually the CDC makes no distinction between men on prep or those not on prep with multiple partners for testing (most gay men). So your point fails sorry. There is no elevated testing suggested regimen for men on prep that have multiple parters versus men not on prep with multiple partners (both whores in your speak)). Prep providers have decided to err on the side of caution, which is beneficial for public health (I'm sure you'll try to deny this because you live in an upside down world).

Regarding incubation periods - a three week incubation period does actually mean that within a 3 month window you're unlikely to pass it on. Let's take gonorrhea. If there is a 5 - 9% incidence per general population based on earlier stats, and if you have sex with a partner that has it you're also not 100% guaranteed to catch it on one encounter so you'd have to have sex with on average let's say 30 guys before you'd get it based on odds.

That's (based on averages) unlikely to happen early on after your testing as a mean. Public health is not about impossible goals of cutting off all transmissions but doing it in an economic way that can lessen them by the largest degree. Especially then if you need mean 1 week before you're infectious yourself, and you get tested every 3 months, the likelihood of you passing it on is much lower than someone that does not get tested for years (people not on prep). You gonna pretend this isn't the reality again? Chill out with the ALL CAPS (!!1) btw, your BP must be skyrocketing.

Finally I think we've gone around on this enough. Nobody is benefitting from you spewing half truths, bending facts and making a fool of yourself. I think we can leave it here. Go stretch in your tiny apartment x.

Is Matt A psycho posting on this thread?

Because it smells like him.

Not surprised.

@ R183

"Yes because they can be."

Then please tell us why counseling on regular condom usage is still officially a condition of being prescribed prep?

"You're acting as if HIV doesn't exist and is still not a massive problem. Prep is better than condoms for protecting against HIV and many users are most concerned about protecting against HIV so after that they can decide for themselves if they want to discontinue condom use."

Nice strawman, but we're not talking about HIV. I very specifically stated non-HIV STI transmission. Please quote where I stated anything about condoms v. prep with respect to *HIV* transmission?

"actually lol you probably already forgot because your brain is like a sieve but oral is more effective than anal for passing gonnorhea to a penis. So have fun with that one lmao.

You type like a Gen Z bottom.

Where is your evidence that "oral is more effective than anal for passing gonorrhea to a penis"?

"Studies suggest that urethral infection is largely acquired from unprotected anal sex, with perhaps one third of cases acquired by receiving oral sex (Technical Appendix Table)."

"Probabilities of per-condomless act transmission during oral (63% urethral-to-pharyngeal and 9% pharyngeal-to-urethral) and anal sex (84% urethral-to-rectal and 2% rectal-to-urethral) have been estimated from mathematical models."

"you're comparing apples and oranges. I could compare a non prep user that sometimes uses condoms and never does for oral and has sex 10 times a week versus a person on prep that doesn't use condoms but has sex once a month with a regular partner and they share their recent sti results and try and make some silly little value judgment but it's entirely pointless."

That comparison was made in the context of public health screening recommendations, which need to make certain assumptions based on averages and trends, etc. involving particular demographics. Which brings me back to the original point that is supported by the data: prep users are, on the whole, more likely to engage in risker sexual behaviors, have more partners, and transmit non-HIV STIs. Hence the rationale from a public health perspective to require quarterly STI screens for prep users. I'm sorry you are too mentally deficient to understand this.

"behaviour"

But you're "American." lol yeah ooooookkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

[quote] prep users are, on the whole, more likely to engage in risker sexual behaviors, have more partners, and transmit non-HIV STIs.

R190 Not true. Non prep users are far more likely to engage in risky behaviours as regards HIV. You’re approaching these concepts from your own limited standpoint. They’re also not more likely to transmit STIs because of the testing windows. Sigh you’re just so fucking stupid. Again transmission is a function of infectivity with time infected and partners while infected all together. So an untested non prep user is more likely to transmit than a tested prep user.

I never said I was American I said I live there. Your 350 sq ft apartment is causing you to develop brain problems go get yourself checked out - oh wait you don’t do that lol.

Again we can leave this here x.

@ R187

"[R185] So actually the CDC makes no distinction between men on prep or those not on prep with multiple partners for testing (most gay men). So your point fails sorry."

Jesus Christ, you are truly the queen of creating strawmen. It's mindboggling. Are you the homo version of Kellyanne Conway? Let me break this down for you:

1. The issue of quarterly testing for prep users was raised. 2. I mentioned that the underlying rationale for requiring such quarterly testing is because, from a public health perspective, prep usage has facilitated risker sexual behaviors that in turn have impacted non-HIV STI infection and transmission. 3. You then brought up the (completely irrelevant) issue of liver and renal function testing, claiming that the *primary* purpose for requiring quarterly testing of *prep users* is to check just that, and not for STIs. 4. I then very clearly proved you wrong, per the CDC's own screening recommendations for prep users, which very clearly state that: (i) STIs should be screened quarterly and (ii) liver and renal functions should be tested "at least every 12 months" (and that the only group that requires more frequent testing -- but not necessarily quarterly -- are those over the age of 50 or those who have certain preexisting conditions etc). 5. You now create a strawmen about STI testing among *MSM generally*, which was never at issue or discussed.

Again: your claim that the primary purpose of required quarterly testing for prep users being renal/liver function testing is 100% incorrect.

"Not true. Non prep users are far more likely to engage in risky behaviours as regards HIV."

Oh look, ANOTHER strawman! Where was HIV transmission ever discussed or at issue? From the outset, the discussion has been about non-HIV STIs.

"They’re also not more likely to transmit STIs because of the testing windows. "

Then please go ahead and refute all of the data posted above that suggests exactly the opposite, from all over the world.

"I never said I was American I said I live there. Your 350 sq ft apartment is causing you to develop brain problems go get yourself checked out - oh wait you don’t do that lol."

1. I actually take great care of my health. That's why in addition to regular screenings (where did I say I don't, btw?), and exercising overall discernment when choosing sex partners, not using drugs, having a good diet and working out at least 4-5x a week, I also use condoms when butt fucking with other men. Unlike delusional morons like yourself. 2. I don't live in a "350 sq ft apartment". I actually make a comfortable low-mid six figure salary and live in midtown Manhattan. I'm sorry you probably live in some shithole and are just resentful that I mentioned I live in NYC lolol. 3. Speaking of shitholes - do us a favor go back to whichever one you came from. Oh and here's a cute little x for ya too xxxxx

Gay whores.

I'd call his Whore Tour a smashing success.

^ AND, the claim that the CDC doesn't distinguish between prep v. non-prep using MSM, as far as frequency of STI screening, is also incorrect. Per the CDC website, the minimum guidelines for MSM generally, and *all other things equal* (i.e., no other particular risky behaviors) is ANNUALLY. Not quarterly: "Preventive screening for common STIs is indicated for all MSM. The following screening recommendations summarize published federal agency and USPSTF clinical prevention guidelines for MSM and should be performed at least annually."

I suspect you read the following sentence out of context. It is contained in the section on PREP - not for MSM screening generally: "Screening for bacterial STIs should occur at least every 6 months for all sexually active patients and every 3 months among MSM or among patients with ongoing risk behaviors. " You failed to read the guidelines in their entirety (or did and either failed to interpret them correctly, or are just blatantly misrepresenting them).

R193 is so pathetic. He keeps defending himself against anonymous accusations.

Someone accuses you of living in a small apt and you decide you need to prove them wrong? Why? Would not proving you are successful somehow prove you’re not wrong about everything else?

You’re the guy who brags about taking strangers home from bars and trusting what they’re horny asses have to say? And then you. Ash others for being slutty and irresponsible?

You’re a rich macho top and you have to rely on strangers at bars to get laid via one night stands? Sure Jan!

^ looks like the ugly prep troll is back lmao

That’s ok r198. At least I’m not an incel with a tiny dick.

Incels think calling someone a whore is the worst insult ever! It’s not my fault you’re so disgusting even the sultriest men out there won’t sleep w you.

Please keep projecting all of your insecurities on me. It’s actually hilarious (though sad) how much you want to get the last word here despite being proven wrong, almost every time lol

The truth is no one wants to fuck your femmy, obese, purple-haired “sex-pOsITiVe” ass, even if you offer it bareback. Now go get ready for your 3rd shift at the local Forever21.

Go back to the incel boards! You can tell your buds how mean people are on datalounge! They’ll all die to lick your dirty ass clean! Not literally since none of you have sex but figuratively. Have fun calling anyone who has more sex than you whores!

^ triggered