1 minute ago, Swimfan said:

It available on the PBS under the following criteria

The treatment must be for patients at medium to high risk of HIV infection, as defined by the Australasian Society for HIV, Viral Hepatitis and Sexual Health Medicine (ASHM) HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis: clinical guidelines.  The patient must have a negative HIV test result prior to treatment with PBS-subsidised PrEP therapy.  The patient must be 18 years or older.

The medium/high risk criteria is mostly (but not always) seen as being MSM. 

As the article says though most heterosexually identified men do not see themselves as at risk, or would seek advice from the treating doctor and many do not have regular sexual health checks

5 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

It was a post exposure

one of her patner don't use a condom by surprise

Post exposure is different medication

 

4 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

The medium/high risk criteria is mostly (but not always) seen as being MSM. 

As the article says though most heterosexually identified men do not see themselves as at risk, or would seek advice from the treating doctor and many do not have regular sexual health checks

Men who have sex with female sex workers seem to be an ignored group

2 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

As the article says though most heterosexually identified men do not see themselves as at risk, or would seek advice from the treating doctor and many do not have regular sexual health checks

True and the regular sexual health checks should be blood test AND urine analysis

some of the STI are detected only in the p i s s, and unfortunately not a lot of men know that.

4 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Post exposure is different medication

 

Ok thank you for the answer

could explain she was so bad

probably the medication is stronger

4 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

True and the regular sexual health checks should be blood test AND urine analysis

some of the STI are detected only in the p i s s, and unfortunately not a lot of men know that.

Not just urine and blood, a throat swab may be required to pickup throat gonorrhea

4 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Men who have sex with female sex workers seem to be an ignored group

They have not figured significantly in the data for HIV previously, and the rate of female sex workers with HIV is statistically insignificant across Australia

3 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

They have not figured significantly in the data for HIV previously, and the rate of female sex workers with HIV is statistically insignificant across Australia

They were ignoring those who go abroad for sex workers, same in the UK and probably all countries, it's an ignored group

1 hour ago, Pravda said:

He must have gotten it years ago

They said he may have been undiagnosed for 13 years.

He had never previously been tested as he didn't see himself as being in an 'at risk' group.

 

1 hour ago, Pravda said:

Perhaps it's time for Sheryl to start deleting posts like yours who throughout years dangerously claimed what you spew. 

Kinda makes me angry as I actually believed this nonsense and took some risks. 

Me too ........ it's put me right off since my pal died.

14 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

They said he may have been undiagnosed for 13 years.

He had never previously been tested as he didn't see himself as being in an 'at risk' group.

 

Sorry for your pal

but come in my mind how many partners he has probably infected

just because he was not tested on a regular basis, If you don't use condom

and if you have multiples sex partners, you are automaticaly ''at risk''

so he was very wrong with his ''see''

44 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

They were ignoring those who go abroad for sex workers, same in the UK and probably all countries, it's an ignored group

They fund the most "at risk:" groups who figure in the data, and in UK, Oz, NZ, they have not been significant in the data. Health promotion funding is geared to get the best impact for the money, that is the problem with "at risk" categories   

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

My pal got it banging Bar and Massage girls in Chiang Mai.

Diagnosed in the UK last June, died this June after spending almost the entire year in a London hospital.

 

It's still a killer ... although I keep reading that there is a new cocktail of drugs that removes any trace of it ... although it is still there. Perhaps your friend left his diagnosis too late?

 

 

 

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

Not just urine and blood, a throat swab may be required to pickup throat gonorrhea

 

... too much information! lol.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

I take PrEP and what I don't understand is you are meant to take it daily for insertive vaginal\frontal sex, but insertive anal sex only 4 days a week is required. So insertive anal sex is less risky than insertive vaginal sex, doesn't make any sense to me but I've read it in many places.

 

Is there a doctor in the house?

I think the recommendations are based upon study data available.

It is more about what is an effective treatment regime as opposed to which is more risk.

All and  any of this is a facet  of a contrived  failed experiment which  has  spawned a lucrative opportunist dependency in an equally  contrived market.

Bottom line?

What  better  than a  contagious element  that provides  a market  in  sustaining the  demise  of the population it was designed  to target at a profit in the interim?

10 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

I take PrEP and what I don't understand is you are meant to take it daily for insertive vaginal\frontal sex, but insertive anal sex only 4 days a week is required. So insertive anal sex is less risky than insertive vaginal sex, doesn't make any sense to me but I've read it in many places.

 

Is there a doctor in the house?

Read exactly the same thing.

9 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

@Sheryl what's your view on the above? I can't see the logic of it

 

9 hours ago, Pravda said:

 

Except..... With some men like myself putting on a condom has a devastating effect. It simply won't work. 

 

I am now super worried. Time to get tested. 

Same as you,put prep into Google and get your results from there,too many know all " experts" on these type of forumns.

4 hours ago, kingdong said:

 

Same as you,put prep into Google and get your results from there,too many know all " experts" on these type of forumns.

Have an HIV test and full sexual health check

14 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

I take PrEP and what I don't understand is you are meant to take it daily for insertive vaginal\frontal sex, but insertive anal sex only 4 days a week is required. So insertive anal sex is less risky than insertive vaginal sex, doesn't make any sense to me but I've read it in many places

i called Terrance Higgins trust yesterday to discuss the above, the person i spoke to (who isn't a doctor) said the vaginal recommendation i.e. daily dosing is meant for women although when she double checked on the iwantprepnow website (which they use and is well respected) it didn't differentiate between women\men\receptive\insertive so the recommendation applies to both men and women. She suggested i email them and ask the same question which i did. She also said she thinks it's because of lack of data on insertive vaginal.

 

22 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

I take PrEP and what I don't understand is you are meant to take it daily for insertive vaginal\frontal sex, but insertive anal sex only 4 days a week is required. So insertive anal sex is less risky than insertive vaginal sex, doesn't make any sense to me but I've read it in many places.

 

Is there a doctor in the house?

 

I don't know where you heard that but it is a daily dose for everyone in all protocols I am familiar with.

 

The only thing that might vary with type of exposure is choice of drug but even there,  most clinicians would use same combined drug for all, exceptions being pregnant women, people with hepatitis/liver disease etc

 

PrEP is far from a simple matter and NO ONE should self prescribe it. There are a number of health checks that need to be made before starting it .

 

It is no substitute for condom use.

 

3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

I don't know where you heard that but it is a daily dose for everyone in all protocols I am familiar with.

 

The only thing that might vary with type of exposure is choice of drug but even there,  most clinicians would use same combined drug for all, exceptions being pregnant women, people with hepatitis/liver disease etc

 

PrEP is far from a simple matter and NO ONE should self prescribe it. There are a number of health checks that need to be made before starting it .

 

It is no substitute for condom use.

 

iwantprepnow seems to be a well respected website. Mentions all you need to know about taking 4 days a week and other methods.

 

https://www.iwantprepnow.co.uk/

 

 

Know a woman in Devon who has had it since the mid 80's caught doing charity work in Africa, soppy liberal type but still alive and well. Another I Knew caught it in Pattaya in the late 90's from a b girl, died years ago and went through hell, it's not predictable what will happen to you if you get it. It's insane and highly irresponsible to be shagging prostitutes without protection.

8 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

i called Terrance Higgins trust yesterday to discuss the above, the person i spoke to (who isn't a doctor) said the vaginal recommendation i.e. daily dosing is meant for women although when she double checked on the iwantprepnow website (which they use and is well respected) it didn't differentiate between women\men\receptive\insertive so the recommendation applies to both men and women. She suggested i email them and ask the same question which i did. She also said she thinks it's because of lack of data on insertive vaginal.

 

There was an Iprex study to determine the effectiveness of Prep. 

The trial/study enrolled men and transgender woman who had sex with men.

It was claimed this trial supported that prep taking 4 or more times a week resulted in no infections

2 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

There was an Iprex study to determine the effectiveness of Prep. 

The trial/study enrolled men and transgender woman who had sex with men.

It was claimed this trial supported that prep taking 4 or more times a week resulted in no infections

Yes so it may just come down to no\not enough data on men who have sex with women.

 

I can't see how insertive anal sex is safer than insertive vagina sex

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

iwantprepnow seems to be a well respected website. Mentions all you need to know about taking 4 days a week and other methods.

 

https://www.iwantprepnow.co.uk/

 

 

I would definitely not call what this site is saying "reputable".  Telling people "how you take PrEP is your choice" is highly irresponsible. There are clear, evidence based protocols and anyone deviating from them does so against the advice of health experts and at their own risk. Unfortunately risk may extend to others as well especially if erratic use comboned with unprotected sex leads to resistant strain of HIV.

19 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

I would definitely not call what this site is saying "reputable".  Telling people "how you take PrEP is your choice" is highly irresponsible. There are clear, evidence based protocols and anyone deviating from them does so against the advice of health experts and at their own risk. Unfortunately risk may extend to others as well especially if erratic use comboned with unprotected sex leads to resistant strain of HIV.

It looks like it's connected to \ owned by Terrance Higgins trust, which is a charity. I only know about it because a doctor in a UK STI clinic recommended them for PrEP and info. ibase is another useful website for PrEP info and the different ways to take it.

 

http://i-base.info/

 

Taking PrEP is better than those guys who claim to use condoms and then don't bother once they've drunk too much.

 

As i said further up PrEP is more effective than condoms according to CDC.gov

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

Yes so it may just come down to no\not enough data on men who have sex with women.

 

I can't see how insertive anal sex is safer than insertive vagina sex

You may find this statement from CDC on 2 other studies of interest

https://aidsinfo.nih.gov/news/1541/cdc-statement-on-ipergay-trial-of-pre-exposure-prophylaxis--prep--for-hiv-prevention-among-men-who-have-sex-with-men

I think the IPREX study found that 4 days was sufficient but maximum protection from daily dose preferred.

Ithink the largest numbver of heterosexual sero discordinate couples in the Swiss arm was 96 couples

8 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Yes so it may just come down to no\not enough data on men who have sex with women.

 

I can't see how insertive anal sex is safer than insertive vagina sex

Neither do i,still at least you won,t have to worry about sticking a bun in the oven.