HIV positive Thai prostitute had sex with “dozens of men”

[OldSiamHand]

Just now, mommysboy said:

Not if I'd used condoms.  Because I know that they are very effective and that hiv is a weak virus that is not easily caught anyway.  It is also a one off event.

 

But it's not a real question is it?  You are very unlikely to get to know the bar girl is infected! Hypothetical.

It is a real question, as that was what the original post was about.  This girl went to Taiwan, had sex with a lot of punters, presumably they did not know she had HIV, and now they do (assuming they can make out the blurred images) or suspect that they may have.

[HooHaa]

one does wonder how often the converse is true - HIV positive punter enjoys unprotected sex with multiple prostitutes.

I think in either case, the reality would prove an unpleasant surprise to many 

[mommysboy]

14 minutes ago, OldSiamHand said:

It is a real question, as that was what the original post was about.  This girl went to Taiwan, had sex with a lot of punters, presumably they did not know she had HIV, and now they do (assuming they can make out the blurred images) or suspect that they may have.

Ah, ok, I apologize.

 

No, I don't think I would bother if I wore a condom.  The risk of contracting hiv was very, very small.  If you applied the same criteria to daily life, you'd be a nervous wreck.

[scubascuba3]

It is a real question, as that was what the original post was about.  This girl went to Taiwan, had sex with a lot of punters, presumably they did not know she had HIV, and now they do (assuming they can make out the blurred images) or suspect that they may have.

I had a chat to a Doctor in my local UK STI clinic, she said now even if a guy comes in after having sex with an HIV+ woman they wouldn't recommend taking PEP. Risk is so low

[Bluespunk]

57 minutes ago, OldSiamHand said:

you can as well, for you it may be peace of mind.  for others (if they have an ounce of reason) you'd still get checked.

Where did I say they shouldn't get checked if they are worried about an incorrectly used condom ?

 

However, if they used a condom correctly, they will be fine.

 

Anyone with a milligram of reason knows that.

 

I wouldn't get a check, because I know condoms prevent HIV.

[OldSiamHand]

21 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Where did I say they shouldn't get checked if they are worried about an incorrectly used condom ?

 

However, if they used a condom correctly, they will be fine.

 

Anyone with a milligram of reason knows that.

 

I wouldn't get a check, because I know condoms prevent HIV.

Where did i quote you as saying they shouldn't get checked if they are worried about an incorrectly used condom?

 

Using a condom correctly does not reduce the risk to zero.  Your own sources state as much.  I know condoms can prevent HIV as well, but there is no way to know for sure that the condom has no defects, that the virus may have found a way in despite my best efforts to use it correctly.  The risk may be somewhere from 1 in 16 to 1 in 250 based on your statistics.

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, OldSiamHand said:

Where did i quote you as saying they shouldn't get checked if they are worried about an incorrectly used condom?

 

Using a condom correctly does not reduce the risk to zero.  Your own sources state as much.  I know condoms can prevent HIV as well, but there is no way to know for sure that the condom has no defects, that the virus may have found a way in despite my best efforts to use it correctly.  The risk may be somewhere from 1 in 16 to 1 in 250 based on your statistics.

As HIV cannot penetrate a condom, using one correctly means you are safe. 

[Tilacme]

Hey, monogamy, try it, it works and is the best sex with no monkey diseases.

[OldSiamHand]

36 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

As HIV cannot penetrate a condom, using one correctly means you are safe. 

You like the word "safe", and I wonder if you have your own personal definition of this (like you do for "anecdotal"), but to quote (again) from your source:

 

In studies of condom breakage, slippage and leakage, it was not possible to know how many participants were actually using condoms correctly. However, research suggests that rates of condom failure decrease with more frequent condom use and more experiences of previous failure. This evidence all points to the conclusion that over time people learn to use condoms correctly and this reduces failure rates. However, failure is never reduced to zero, even for experienced condom users who use condoms consistently and correctly.

[scubascuba3]

Hey, monogamy, try it, it works and is the best sex with no monkey diseases.

Maybe you are the 1 in 100 that's satisfied with that, but don't forget the secret thai boyfriend so could easily be 3+ in a relationship

[Seanbhoy]

On 4/4/2018 at 2:38 PM, sanemax said:

Although that was just when she got tested , she was probably HIV+ before then

pretty sure takes a while to get detected once contracted, the test itself is fast though

[Bluespunk]

58 minutes ago, OldSiamHand said:

You like the word "safe", and I wonder if you have your own personal definition of this (like you do for "anecdotal"), but to quote (again) from your source:

 

In studies of condom breakage, slippage and leakage, it was not possible to know how many participants were actually using condoms correctly. However, research suggests that rates of condom failure decrease with more frequent condom use and more experiences of previous failure. This evidence all points to the conclusion that over time people learn to use condoms correctly and this reduces failure rates. However, failure is never reduced to zero, even for experienced condom users who use condoms consistently and correctly.

Already answered this when you highlighted this one sentence in a previous post. 

[Tilacme]

47 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

1 hour ago, Tilacme said:

Hey, monogamy, try it, it works and is the best sex with no monkey diseases.

Maybe you are the 1 in 100 that's satisfied with that, but don't forget the secret thai boyfriend so could easily be 3+ in a relationship

You might want to make cheap comments about monogamy but it is as it says on the can.  All the fun and no risk whatsoever. 

[metisdead]

Some off topic posts about pork have been removed. 

[lamyai3]

3 hours ago, OldSiamHand said:

You like the word "safe", and I wonder if you have your own personal definition of this (like you do for "anecdotal"), but to quote (again) from your source:

 

In studies of condom breakage, slippage and leakage, it was not possible to know how many participants were actually using condoms correctly. However, research suggests that rates of condom failure decrease with more frequent condom use and more experiences of previous failure. This evidence all points to the conclusion that over time people learn to use condoms correctly and this reduces failure rates. However, failure is never reduced to zero, even for experienced condom users who use condoms consistently and correctly.

Here's an excerpt from my earlier reply to you (post 219) which addresses this point directly, and explains why the argument doesn't make sense. It's absurd to conflate breakage, slippage and leakage into a single cause of failure:

 

"Aside from the fact that the chances of finding out someone you had casual sex with in the past turned out to be HIV positive are extremely unlikely, the figure of condom failure you're quoting is a muddle, since it throws breakage, slippage and leakage into a single category. Breakage and slippage are certainly a risk. Slippage would be a risk in a place like Thailand where the local men are often too small for the condoms. For most foreigners the biggest problem is likely to be breakage due to incorrect usage, for instance vigorous sex after getting air trapped in the end, or perhaps using the wrong kind of lubricant. Huge amount of misinformation on this - anything oil based, from baby oil to body lotion will break down and destroy the latex within a few minutes.

 

The good news is, if condom failure occurs in either of the above ways you'll know about it right away. If you don't feel the difference, you'll see it as soon as you withdraw.

 

The third possible failure quoted, due to leakage is pretty much nonsense. This was a possibility in the case when natural membranes were used, but latex properly used isn't porous. Read here how this myth came into being, by mixing up data from latex gloves with that of latex condoms which are manufactured in a different way. Bottom line is condoms are considered safe when properly used, by every authority on the subject:"

 

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Q199734.html

[mommysboy]

The trouble is when someone argues absolute safety they win the argument.

 

But condoms are safe in the sense that most people relate to.

Edited April 9, 2018 by mommysboy

[bkk6060]

5 hours ago, Tilacme said:

Hey, monogamy, try it, it works and is the best sex with no monkey diseases.

Yeah well, if you want to talk about stats the majority of people do not stick to that.

Hope your other half has the same thinking.

I found it boring and unnatural.

Monogamy=Monotony...

[mommysboy]

5 minutes ago, bkk6060 said:

Yeah well, if you want to talk about stats the majority of people do not stick to that.

Hope your other half has the same thinking.

I found it boring and unnatural.

Monogamy=Monotony...

Actually if the long term partner unknowingly has hiv, then the other partner is at a more significant risk than the one night stander.

 

Viruses do not make moral choices.

Edited April 9, 2018 by mommysboy

[scubascuba3]

Slippage would be a risk in a place like Thailand where the local men are often too small for the condoms.

Nonsense, you realise condoms come in different sizes here?

As for slippage, breakage, leakage, its more like stealthage

[lamyai3]

18 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Nonsense, you realise condoms come in different sizes here?

Of course I do, but do the locals? Most packets on the shelves in the usual outlets such as 7-11 are medium in any event. 

 

18 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

As for slippage, breakage, leakage, its more like stealthage

This makes no sense at all. Slippage and breakage are certainly possible, but are mostly due to unskilful use, and failure in this manner would become evident right away. Leakage implies a passive failure of the condom and falsely suggests that latex condoms are porous. 

Edited April 9, 2018 by lamyai3

[balo]

20 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Of course I do, but do the locals? Most packets on the shelves in the usual outlets such as 7-11 are medium in any event. 

Actually Durex is very popular in Thailand , lots of TV ads and information available online , most sizes available if you look for them . 

 

 

[lamyai3]

5 hours ago, balo said:

Actually Durex is very popular in Thailand , lots of TV ads and information available online , most sizes available if you look for them . 

While this is true, they're often double the price of local brands. Heavily featured on the packets are selling points such as ribbed, dotted, flavour etc - much less heavily featured is size. You need good eyesight to be able to read the size information, if you're able to intrrpret it at all. I very much doubt this means anything to the locals anyway, and this is who I'm talking about, not the average Westerner for whom slippage wouldn't usually be an issue. Finally there's the issue of seeking out small size condoms, I could well imagine people being embarrassed to do so.

 

The problem with studies that quote condom failure rates is a lack of definition of what they mean by "failure", and the admitted vagueness of the information they obtain. This even includes couples who regularly use condoms but occasionally forget. If forgetting to use a condom is included in studies of failure, the figures start to become almost meaningless. From the CDC:

 

"The studies do not agree on an exact rate of breakage. Many studies of condom effectiveness have counted how often women whose partners used condoms for birth control have gotten pregnant. This "failure rate" includes cases where the couple did not use a condom every time they had sex or used the condoms incorrectly."

[OldSiamHand]

On 4/9/2018 at 8:26 PM, lamyai3 said:

Here's an excerpt from my earlier reply to you (post 219) which addresses this point directly, and explains why the argument doesn't make sense. It's absurd to conflate breakage, slippage and leakage into a single cause of failure:

 

"Aside from the fact that the chances of finding out someone you had casual sex with in the past turned out to be HIV positive are extremely unlikely, the figure of condom failure you're quoting is a muddle, since it throws breakage, slippage and leakage into a single category. Breakage and slippage are certainly a risk. Slippage would be a risk in a place like Thailand where the local men are often too small for the condoms. For most foreigners the biggest problem is likely to be breakage due to incorrect usage, for instance vigorous sex after getting air trapped in the end, or perhaps using the wrong kind of lubricant. Huge amount of misinformation on this - anything oil based, from baby oil to body lotion will break down and destroy the latex within a few minutes.

 

The good news is, if condom failure occurs in either of the above ways you'll know about it right away. If you don't feel the difference, you'll see it as soon as you withdraw.

 

The third possible failure quoted, due to leakage is pretty much nonsense. This was a possibility in the case when natural membranes were used, but latex properly used isn't porous. Read here how this myth came into being, by mixing up data from latex gloves with that of latex condoms which are manufactured in a different way. Bottom line is condoms are considered safe when properly used, by every authority on the subject:"

 

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Q199734.html

You're missing the point of the other poster, and these are figures from his source, not mine. 

 

As long as you use a condom correctly, you don't need to worry about these risks.  You will be safe.  If it breaks, leaks or slips, it didn't really happen, as long as you are sure you used it correctly.

[OldSiamHand]

On 4/9/2018 at 9:49 PM, mommysboy said:

The trouble is when someone argues absolute safety they win the argument.

 

But condoms are safe in the sense that most people relate to.

absolute safety, meaning no risk at all, doesn't exist.  it would be a silly argument for anyone to make.  there's a risk that I could accidentally kill myself while brushing my teeth, however infinitesimal. 

[mommysboy]

7 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Finally we agree.

 

HIV does not penetrate condoms [I assumed anyone with an ounce of common sense knew that was the condom type I referred to]

 

Use them correctly and you can rest easy.

That is the consensus view.  I suppose if it were different then contraction rates would be similar to those who don't use condoms.

 

Somewhat begs the question: if the virus is not small enough to penetrate, then how come it still can't be viewed by conventional means? ... I mean just from a pure sample of sperm.  Maybe sperm is very, very much bigger. 

Edited April 11, 2018 by mommysboy

[lamyai3]

9 hours ago, OldSiamHand said:

You're missing the point of the other poster, and these are figures from his source, not mine. 

 

As long as you use a condom correctly, you don't need to worry about these risks.  You will be safe.  If it breaks, leaks or slips, it didn't really happen, as long as you are sure you used it correctly.

As far as I can see I'm in complete agreement with him on the subject of condoms being safe.

Your second paragraph hints at an attempt at sarcasm - of course if a condom breaks or slips off this would constitute failure, but then it would also come under the category of not using them properly. Buying the wrong size, attempting to put the condom on without being properly erect (too much alcohol for instance), failing to use lubrication if necessary, using the wrong type of lubricant (anything oil based), puncturing the condom while putting it on, getting air trapped in the end... all are possible if someone is unconfident or inexperienced. These would all be possible causes of failure through not using them properly.

To have any meaningful discussion on this subject, it's necessary to pin down what is meant by condom failure. Some studies measure condom failure as failure to stop pregnancy, rather than looking at the prevention of disease. As mentioned previously, some include occasions where regular condom using couples didn't use one! Add to that the conflating of data from other countries which may include local condoms that don't meet worldwide standards, are expired or improperly stored etc, and the figures become too vague to draw any meaningful conclusions. But one thing that is widely agreed on is that latex condoms are not porous. The whole implication of condom failure suggests they somehow leak - they don't. There's no safer way to have sex than using condoms, other than avoiding people altogether, and staying at home and using your old siam hand. 

[mommysboy]

22 hours ago, OldSiamHand said:

absolute safety, meaning no risk at all, doesn't exist.  it would be a silly argument for anyone to make.  there's a risk that I could accidentally kill myself while brushing my teeth, however infinitesimal. 

That's the argument I was making,

[sklmeeera]

What % of Thai women are prostitutes ? I said about 80 my mate said closer to 95 . Who can tell ?

Furthermore what % of western men in thailand expat or tourist are johns . Id say this is closer to 100%.

Edited April 12, 2018 by sklmeeera

[metisdead]

Another bickering session has been removed. 

[bkk6060]

17 hours ago, sklmeeera said:

What % of Thai women are prostitutes ? I said about 80 my mate said closer to 95 . Who can tell ?

Furthermore what % of western men in thailand expat or tourist are johns . Id say this is closer to 100%.

Some of the most ridiculous untrue  naive comments ever.