Sexually Transmitted Disease (std) Talk

[konbini guy]

Joke:
in an isolated society of a thousand male homosexuals, how is HIV transmitted?
It is airborne

LOL

 

[PunishaSnake]

Contractions Involving Homosexual un-protected anal intercourse: 4

Shouldn't that be 4,000 instead of 4? to make the example more realistic? LOLs

That would be literally impossible. Are there even 4,000 people on this forum? lol

 

[meiji]

Follow the bouncing ball.....

It's not so much about being scientifically valid, as it is about creating a general awareness of how to regulate the issue.

Followed by.....

Contractions Involving Homosexual un-protected anal intercourse: 4

Shouldn't that be 4,000 instead of 4? to make the example more realistic? LOLs

....aaaaaaaaand this is why scientific validity is important.

 

[PunishaSnake]

Follow the bouncing ball.....



Followed by.....



....aaaaaaaaand this is why scientific validity is important.

No... he didn't read the whole post. I highly doubt there are 4,000 gay males on this site... You can't start something from the ground up that is already perfect... you have to weed out the problems as you build it. You make plans, scrap them, revise them... and eventually develop a product worth displaying to the rest of the world. Define Scientific validity so that I can develop an idea around it... lol

 

[pacocoger]

I actually have some professional expertise re HIV infection, and GD is ....... the probability per contact with an infected partner is less than 1 in a 1000 .................. Anal sex is pretty much the only reasonably common sexual activity for which protection is necessary to reduce HIV infection risk to levels that most people accept in other areas of life.

On the other hand, you would have to be an extraordinarily active monger (to put it mildly!) to see 5000 escorts in your life.

I agree with GD that other STDs are a far more logical reason to insist on protection in p4p sex and that the risk of infection with non-STD diseases (unaffected by condoms), are probably the biggest health hazard from commercial sex activities, especially in Third World countries.

-Ww

"Professional expertise"
Either you have a medical degree, you're a seasoned escort, or you stayed at a Holiday Inn.

Me think's you're provably good at googling, have a worn out library card, or lower level health aid/tech employee certificate, I either way minimizing the dangers of STDs (HIV/AIDS included) is a very dangerous way to live.... mostly because other TAG members here frequent the same services and are in theory your bed buddies by proxy.

{This is where I acknowledge some of what you said as having credibility, to show I'm not one-side }

True that: HIV/AIDS transmission via bodily fluids, for example:
<1cc blood is UNLIKELY ( 1:10, 000) but unless an individual is having soft gentle and slow sex, tears and other lympth fuilds are involved that greatly change the provability ratio.... because these studies are base on blood samples

encounter numbers are not equal to exposure numbers
ie,
1 therapist + 1 BJ = 1:1 risk potential

1 therapist + 1 BJ + kissing + 2nd encounter + (x) fingering with long nails (micro-abrasions) = 1:1:2:x risk potential

Saliva.... transmission is even less due to the quantity needed, such as drinking a gallon of someone else's spit. This approximation, although widely accepted and perpetuated by health educators, neglects to account for the effects of saliva + natural body lubricants
(and other non-natural). Saliva has digestive enzymes, which beside aiding in digestion of food also digests small weaker micro-organisms. Vaginal/ Penile lubricants offer pH protective function... which if your partner already has something (STD).... goes out the window. This is why women are encouraged to consume acid-friendly drinks like cranberry juice, "to help prevent UTIs." Prevention.... maybe not but it can be therapeutic after you get an UTI.

Vaginal/ Penile lubrication is mixture of so many elements from the circulatory system, sweat glands, the bodies normal flora, and less threatening virus.... I really can't BB-anything a good option for any service.

5000 escorts in your life... someone doesn't like math or was absent on the day they lectured on exponent

Last point, people in this community are exclusively misogynous with one business entity or therapist.... so to believe that the thirds world is a greater threat when people from all over the globe come here is magical thinking.

But I'm don't want to ruin sex for anyone, so I'm cutting this rant short before I get accused of being someone to like hear themselves speak.

 

[meiji]

Define Scientific validity so that I can develop an idea around it... lol

Your idea has two major issues that wouldn't make it scientifically valid (maybe more than 2).

First, it's a voluntary setup. You can't come to very good conclusions about anything if people are only contributing if they feel like it. Additioanlly voluntary reporting can be due to a strong feeling (ie, retribution). Someone could report a number of fake STDs that they got all from pink salons, maybe because they have a beef against a particular pink salon, or they work for a competing type of org. This would skew the danger levels of pink salons.

Secondly, the reporting population here is so small there's no way it's scientifically valid. When pollsters do phone polling for US political campaigns, they are getting well over 1000 responses in order to get a small enough margin of error. Having a few dozen responses is much closer to individual anecdotal evidence than an actual scientific study.

Now, if you did something like stand outside love hotels and do 'exit polling' for every guy meeting a delivery health girl to get a breakdown of whether they like to come in a girl's mouth or not, you might get enough responses to be considered a relatively valid conclusion.

My point above, adding in @konbini guy's homophobic comments, was to point out that there's a TON of 'scientific' studies out there that are used as ammunition against various oppressed minorities. In this case, someone like @konbini guy could say "gay people cause all the problems -- see, the numbers show that", when really all the numbers might show is that for this small subsection of the mongering community that is voluntarily reporting, these are the results. In other words, you can't come to any conclusions from a very small amount of data, although people often do so to a dangerous extent.

 

[PunishaSnake]

Your idea has two major issues that wouldn't make it scientifically valid (maybe more than 2).

First, it's a voluntary setup. You can't come to very good conclusions about anything if people are only contributing if they feel like it. Additioanlly voluntary reporting can be due to a strong feeling (ie, retribution). Someone could report a number of fake STDs that they got all from pink salons, maybe because they have a beef against a particular pink salon, or they work for a competing type of org. This would skew the danger levels of pink salons.

Secondly, the reporting population here is so small there's no way it's scientifically valid. When pollsters do phone polling for US political campaigns, they are getting well over 1000 responses in order to get a small enough margin of error. Having a few dozen responses is much closer to individual anecdotal evidence than an actual scientific study.

Now, if you did something like stand outside love hotels and do 'exit polling' for every guy meeting a delivery health girl to get a breakdown of whether they like to come in a girl's mouth or not, you might get enough responses to be considered a relatively valid conclusion.

My point above, adding in @konbini guy's homophobic comments, was to point out that there's a TON of 'scientific' studies out there that are used as ammunition against various oppressed minorities. In this case, someone like @konbini guy could say "gay people cause all the problems -- see, the numbers show that", when really all the numbers might show is that for this small subsection of the mongering community that is voluntarily reporting, these are the results. In other words, you can't come to any conclusions from a very small amount of data, although people often do so to a dangerous extent.

Right... that's why I said a trusted and objective mod would have to be in charge of the thread. You made several points... vaild points at that... but at this stage in the evolution, we aren't so much worried about accurate results as we are worried about creating an avenue to gather data and make conclusions. For Example... In the Military we have two routes for dealing with cases of sexual assault: restrictive, and unrestrictive reporting. With restrictive reporting, everything is kept anonymous, a rape kit is performed on the survivor by a licensed nurse (so that if an STI were contracted, they could receive treatment discreetly), and the senior officer in that unit is notified that a sexual assault took place... no specifics are given. In an unrestricted report, the survivor makes an official police report, and due process is initiated. (in the meantime, both parties are sent to separate units)

It is believed that despite this over half of sexual assaults go unreported. However, that isn't a reason to abandon the whole process right? I know what you are thinking, "sexual assault is way more serious than contracting STI's from risky behavior". You're right, however even if on a small scale... this data collection would directly benefit the members and visitors of this site! You have to see the bigger picture here. An experienced hobbyist who serves as the mod for this anonymous forum would be able to notice a trend in BS messages... we refer to them as shills in regards to provider reviews correct? Like I said, it would take work from a trusted mod... but ultimately is the next step in the hobbyists world. It only makes sense. I like that you are giving it serious thought though. I really do appreciate the feedback.

 

[Wwanderer]

"Professional expertise"
Either you have a medical degree, you're a seasoned escort, or you stayed at a Holiday Inn.

Me think's you're provably good at googling, have a worn out library card, or lower level health aid/tech employee certificate,

I hope you will forgive me for declining to return to the meat of this THREE YEAR OLD discussion and post of mine, but I'm sending this quick note to let you know that each and every one of your guesses above is wrong...not even close in fact. If you'd like to continue guessing (but this thread isn't an appropriate place for it), I'll be quite impressed if you can come up with the right answer.

-Ww

 

[pacocoger]

So you've never stayed in a Holiday Inn?

Well since you admit you don't have a MD/DO/PhD..... or an Escort Union card.
I'm guess you're either a AV fluffer or the "guy"
*--when people randomly ask do you know where I can get (x,y,z service) ... then they say 'I know a guy'

Thanks for being a good sport... sorry I didn't guess correctly.
I not a fan of people whom minimize risks..... at least STD risk deniers are so outlandish most people don't think them credible

your 3 year old post still pops up under "new posts" occasionally
I guess it's true value is a PSA....keeping the risk in peoples minds

 

[Wwanderer]

So you've never stayed in a Holiday Inn?

I have...but the relevant pop-culture reference is "a Holiday Inn Express last night"!

Well since you admit you don't have a MD/DO/PhD

I didn't say that; I said that I don't have a medical degree...in response to your guess.

Thanks for being a good sport... sorry I didn't guess correctly.

No worries; the large majority of people have never in their lives met a member of my profession...nor is the connection of my profession to HIV/AIDS epidemiology particularly direct.

I not a fan of people whom minimize risks.....

OK...and I am definitely not a fan of people who vastly exaggerate risks and ignore the fact that unjustified levels of fear have very negative consequences for people's lives and health. For example, the fear of radioactive material released at Fukushima appears to have killed well in excess of 1000 people (via stress) while the radiation effects probably killed no one or VERY few at all. For another, many Americans who previously enjoyed vacationing in Europe will no longer go there for fear of terrorism despite the fact that the risk of being killed in a traffic accident is enormously higher and has been dropping steadily for over a decade (due to an aggressive EU-wide traffic safety program); in other words one is safer from sudden violent death and injury in Europe now than was the case a decade ago despite the increase in incidents of terrorism. Irrational levels of risk aversion are NOT good for individuals or societies imo.

at least STD risk deniers are so outlandish most people don't think them credible

As implied by my comments just above, I am not denying that STDs in general and HIV/AIDS in particular are a risk; they certainly are. Rather I am pointing out that a lot of people are irrationally fearful of and worried about them while thoughtlessly tolerating much larger dangers in their daily lives. In other words the time, effort and attention many people in Tokyo give to protecting themselves from STDs would benefit them much more if it were directed toward a healthier life style or earthquake/tsunami safety preparations or not looking at their smartphones while crossing busy streets etc.

-Ww

 

[Torky]

That's Wwanderer, always the math and stats guy. While I do agree that there is a degree of 'irrational fear', most commonly exacerbated by the media, in some things and I personally believe in a conspiracy that fear mongering is a tactic that pharm companies use to sometimes sell their stock of vaccines, there are a few things I'd like to give opinion to:

Fear of hiv/hepb (and even maybe hpv) may be disproportionate but I believe the reason why there is particular fear in such stds is because of the 'permanence' of it all and the potential stigma once you get it rather than the risk itself being lower in comparison to other stds or other hazards.

Living with HIV is for life. You pay through your nose for HAART. Socially and culturally, there is stigma.
Acquired, life long disease with labelled stigma is something that I highly doubt anyone wants, hence I do not believe the fear is really that irrational.
In contrast, other STDs like gonorrhoea or syphillis or trichonomiasis can be fixed with limited burn to your wallet or your social dignity,

In response to the Fukushima controversy, Although, the fear of radiation is yet again abit exagerrated. It is likely from history (perhaps lack of) that people are overly concerned. Just say Chernobyl and you can send everyone running. If I'm not mistaken, there have already been reports of people in direct contact and working with the radiation outbreak that have been compensated due to being diagnosed with leukemia.
Leukemia, Thyroid Cancer, most people see cancer as a slow permanent death sentence. Thus again, I am not so sure whether the fear is really truly irrational there either.

What I am trying to say is, it's not the fact that the risk is small and thus we shouldn't really have to worry about it, It's the idea that the risk is increased, and if you DO get it, can you accept it?

 

[Wwanderer]

That's Wwanderer, always the math and stats guy...

I'll very happily accept that description.

More to the substance of your comments, I entirely agree that one should consider not only the probability of some consequence but also its significance/impact. In fact, that is a standard part of decision theory. In other words, a small probability of something extremely bad (or good) can be far more important than a high probability of something of only modest consequence happening.

That said, one can often compare risks where the consequence is the same (e.g., death) but in which people are far more fearful of and careful about the vastly less probable one.

And yeah, to a large extent we worry about things the media tell us are dangerous.

-Ww

 

[MikeH]

If I'm not mistaken, there have already been reports of people in direct contact and working with the radiation outbreak that have been compensated due to being diagnosed with leukemia.

You are not mistaken but still misleading; one person diagnosed with leukemia has been compensated even while his exposure is nowhere near what would be considered a risk. Basically he got twice the amount what commercial airline pilots get per year.

While I agree with several of your points I would still side with our beloved "the math and stats" guy, though I would strongly emphasise logical thinking being a big part of that, in that the fear in most cases is irrational. If we were equally scared of everything then how could we go out of the house as getting hit by a car is so much more likely? And as has been pointed out stress is much more likely to kill you than STDs or radiation.

So let's be careful out there and get protected and tested but try to have fun and not freak out!

 

[Wwanderer]

So let's be careful out there and get protected and tested but try to have fun and not freak out!

And do keep in mind, Valar Morghulis...no matter how careful you are!

-Ww

 

[Torky]

MikeH
oh, perhaps I'm mistaken, but I rememebr reading the news on this this year.... I think it was this article. Are we talking about the same person? It looks like it was a more confirmed case of occupational hazard and compensation than the other previous 20 mSV one.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201608200036.html

Valar Morghulis!

 

[MikeH]

oh, perhaps I'm mistaken, but I rememebr reading the news on this this year....

I stand corrected; I was aware only about the first case. But still even this guy received just about half what is normally linked to increased cancer risk.

The 5 mS they site there is less what people get naturally in some parts of Europe... Winter is coming.

 

[User#8628]

So let's be careful out there and get protected and tested but try to have fun and not freak out!

This is the essence of the whole thead

 

[hambeefchicken]

Hello everyone I made an account just to post this as I have been lurking for a while and had my first BBBJ experience at Happy Hinomaru [Mimi] The next night after I had an itch on my testicles and gave it a solid scratch. This resulted in an immediate inflammation or red puffiness in that area. I thought it was just a normal inflamed area but the next day after I found red round dots under my shaft. I am extremely worried and am having anxiety attacks as I am worried if I have genital herpes.

My symptoms are within 5 days:
-inflamed red area, puffiness on testicles
-itchiness, but no pain
-no lesions or injuries
-urine with bubbles
-red dots under shaft, no pain

I visited a clinic today and paid 250 to get a diagnosis that they are not entirely sure as they say it is too early and instead think it is due to an allergic reaction because I used an alcoholic wipe before [the one HH provides]. I am taking anti allergy medication and have to come back in a week to see. The doctor said since I dont have pain or exploded lesions he could not get a herpes test but I do notice the red area gets slightly moist at times. I am deep anxiety and worry as I am thinking it is genital herpes but 2 main symptoms that I do not think it so are liquid filled dots and severe pain [doctor said it should be so painful when you touch you will cry] but I can slap my dick around without caring. If anyone knows what this may be please let me know as I am desperate to seek reassurance and may even get a 2nd opinion. Other places might cost more? Not sure.

 

[hambeefchicken]

Also has anyone ever contracted anything from Hinomaru? I have been completely clean until now, really need to grab a drink to think I am an idiot for doing this...

 

[scorpioni6ths]

if you've carefully read most of the comments you'll understand that STDs have an incubation period.

https://smartsexresource.com/sites/default/files/Smartsex_SUPERCHART_2014_v2.png

testing will be inconclusive until after several weeks or even months. the thing you should do now is to avoid sexual contact with anyone. most STDs are curable! herpes has meds that shorten the outbreaks.

return to the clinic as your doctor requires, get the tests, prepare to buy medicines.

 

[hambeefchicken]

Thanks for the reply, this freaks me out even more because my symptoms are similar to herpes but I dont have any pain or white liquid dots. I know testing cant be conclusive but if herpes says 6 days average, cant I test for this now?

I am just praying to god this is an allergic reaction. Does anyone know if herpes cannot hurt?

 

[Hofmeyer]

Allergic reactions can look a lot like some STD's. Trust me I know. Before I'd had sex for the first time, I got one and the doctor gave me the "the look" when I told him and sent me for blood tests.

 

[hambeefchicken]

I did not know that and I think I pestered the doctor with more questions because when I entered the clinic I was having a panic attack and got the attention of everyone there. I'm really hoping this is the case because I feel like the doctor should be right but I can't help but question his analysis.

Anyways, I hope these dots don't turn into white liquid or hurt. Then I will seriously have a panic attack.

 

[Hofmeyer]

It could be a normal bacterial infection too. On another occasion a girl pinched me through the condom where it was folded somehow and it tore the skin a tiny amount. One day of not washing properly because I was in a hurry and bam, back for more tests.

 

[impish]

In the area I live we have one doctor who speaks english. I have gone to him a couple times for colds etc.., but always walk out asking myself why? He's older and seems like a quack.

About a month ago I was having pain going from my arm pit to my elbow on my left arm. Now I'm a programmer, so I would not be surprised if it was a pinched nerve, or carpletunel. However I went to the doctor to get some muscle relaxers to try and dull the pain. When I got there he told me to pull up my shirt to see the lesions. I was really confused. When he saw nothing he said that it was early and that the herpes virus would form lesions within 2-3 days. Then I was really confused. This guy went form pain in my arm to herpes with no tests. Just assumed that's what it was. What the fuck kind of doctor does that?

Needless to say the pain went away within a week and no lesions ever showed up. I won't be going back to him for anything...