... a client asked for you to take an instant HIV test at the start of your session?

I'm talking about the kind that doesn't require to draw any blood (you simply rub it inside your mouth along your gums) and gives a result in 15 min. (See the link below for actual example of such a test).

Assuming the client would take one too to prove he is clean, would you be willing? Or would it just be creepy and kill the mood?

I've known of some providers who don't get tested for HIV. They rather just not know. In my opinion that is irresponsible and both providers and clients should get tested regularly for their own safety and the safety of those they do business with. So from that perspective, I think it is reasonable. The big issue is that your HIV status is a private matter, and I'd guess that most providers would not want to share that with a complete stranger.

Of all the ones you've seen and reviewed...what do you think they would say?

If you're that uptight that this would even cross your mind...this may not be the hobby for you.
Think about that as you go back to the church or squadroom you came from.

Just sayin'

ok, there is a HUGE difference between being uptight or prudish and being cautious, even if some feel it is overly so. People have different tolerances for risk.

HIV risk through vaginal sex with an HIV-infected partner is roughly 1 in a 1000 for a male. There are studies that imply the risk is likely less, especially if you have no other STDs. Yet, most of us would still wear condoms for vaginal intercourse. It's all about the risk you are willing to tolerate. I always wear my seatbelt in a car because it is a huge benefit if there is a crash and only a very slight inconvenience. I don't bother wearing a helmet though unless I have to because I am racing.

An instant HIV test is painless and quick and gives you at least some degrees of reassurance regarding the possible biggest risk there is in this hobby. It would be nice if this sort of test was the norm rather than the exception.

Good question from OP, I wonder what the ladies will say.

no points to bash the OP, not everyone has the same level of risk tolerance, I bet you wont go bbfs either.

that you were collecting cells from their cheek to use in your cloning experiments to create your army of sexy women that you would then use to overthrow the governments of the world and install yourself as Emperor of Earth.


I know that's what I would think.

Oh crap....I had that dream too!  Then they suck your brains out through a straw and put them in your dick.  Then you think even more with your dick.    Can you imagine anything worse?

So the lady tests negative for HIV. What about the rest of the stds, are you bringing an entire test kit with you?

What if the person before you infected her, is the test that accurate?

The one thing you can do is cover EVERYTHING, this alone would save you a headache.

and just who would YOU clone, Webbie? As if i couldn;t guess :P lolol

make an appointment...do You say it's based on the contingency of the results of Your test...also is the time waiting for the results part of the time of the appointment...and one last...why would You wait until You arrived to the appointment to say this...why Not say what we will be doing the first 15 minutes when You set the appointment up...inquiring minds want to know

however, protection would still be a must regardless of his/our results. I would like to think that people wouldn't go around using these tests as a way to get providers to not use protection.

But let's turn the question really back to you.

YOU obviously have concerns about being with a provider that might be HIV positive.

Considering even a 20 minute oral swab HIV test may not pop positive if enough antibodies are not present, and may not test positive until 6 months after an HIV infection, perhaps YOU should look at what risks you are and are not willing to take in this activity.

Practicing safer sex during your sessions and avoiding fluid exchange is a pretty good way to avoid HIV infection.

I get tested regularly, and help facilitate testing to others, but I would NEVER agree to such a request from a client.  

Think about this: what would happen if a girl agreed, and then tested positive?  Or if you tested positive?  Is that the environment you want to be in when finding something like that out??  Is that the person you want knowing your personal and confidential medical information??

Certainly I would walk away from the simple fact of the client trying to manipulate me, as forcing someone to do an HIV test in order to have the date go through as planned is really crappy.

If you are educated about HIV, you understand that HIV is not that easy to get if you are mindful of the risks and take proper precautions.  If you are still nervous about it after that...you should consider another activity to partake in if this one makes you that nervous.  

And IMO, you should be more worried about herpes then HIV.

Happy humping,

xoMegan

I'd be thinking that he'd be wanting to go bareback if we both tested negative. Which would instantly kill the mood for me.

And as the previous poster said, if you were infected yesterday, it's not likely gonna show up in a test today. She could have seen a client the day before who infected her. The results aren't going to show up the next day. And I agree, there's lots more STDs than just HIV that you gotta worry about.

Everyone should get tested on a regular basis.

Planned Parenthood and many free HIV clinics have this test, but they always re-test with a blood test if it gives a positive reading.  It apparently gives false positives quite often, but not false negatives.  I have done some grantwriting for a local clinic and found this when doing research for the grant.

As far as how it would make me feel.... What's the point?  Are you looking for BB service?  I know there is a risk of getting HIV even with condoms but the HIV test 'on demand' seems to indicate that you want something that would increase your risk, like service without a condom.  No way Jose!  You would have just paid me for getting kicked out of my place.  

Also, who's to say that you didn't alter the test before arriving so that yours or both of ours give negative results?  How do I know you're not some crazy Christian fundamentalist creep with HIV trying to giving the test, fixing the results to prove we're both 'clean,' offering me 3 or 4 tmes my regular rate for BBFS, and then giving me the virus during the session as "punishment for being a whore"?

Okay, I know.... watching too much CSI and L&O lately... but I'm a creative thinker, so who's to say that wound't be some jack-off's MO?

Food for thought....  Alex

that would be a huge mood killer and I wouldn't want to meet with someone who thinks I'm dirty and carrying a disease.  

And to top it off I would be pissed that you've wasted my time because your scared of your own shadow.  

I think goseph and Joyful1 would make a perfect couple.

“HIV risk through vaginal sex with an HIV-infected partner is roughly 1 in a 1000 for a male. There are studies that imply the risk is likely less, especially if you have no other STDs. Yet, most of us would still wear condoms for vaginal intercourse. It's all about the risk you are willing to tolerate. I always wear my seatbelt in a car because it is a huge benefit if there is a crash and only a very slight inconvenience. I don't bother wearing a helmet though unless I have to because I am racing.  “

HIV compared to other STDs is very hard to contract sexually.  The 1 in 1000 is for UNPROTECTED sex with and HIV partner.  To get HIV you must have sex with HIV partner. Only 1.1 million out 330 million are HIV positive.  Assuming 1/100 hobbyist are HIV positive the probability a Provider  contracting HIV from having unprotected sex with and client of unknown HIV status is (1/1000)X(1/100) = 1/100,000. With protection the risk reduces to 1 in 2 million.  

The oral test has not been approved for home use and will not detect recent HIV infection (up to six months) when the client is in most infectious state. The manufacture of oral test indicates a false positive of 2/1000 or 4000 in 2 million when the test is done by TRAINED individuals.  That means for every HIV infection prevented by doing oral test a Provider will tell at least 4000 clients falsely they are HIV positive.  The oral test is not intended to be an authoritative result but an indication that another more definitive test should be conducted.  Monetarily assuming the test cost $25-50 it will cost the hobby community $50 to $100 million for each HIV infection prevented beyond the current risk of  1  in 2 million currently achieved with the use of condoms and no oral test. I can say more but I think this should be enough.


-- Modified on 4/14/2010 11:37:18 AM

Dear Megan:
Why don't we just act like we are adult cinematic thespians and carry our latest results with us? Make sure that we get tested every 30 days and then fax the results to you before we come to visit and then you can verify that with the hematologist that administered the test. We could ask the same of you likewise and everyone can just get along.

um, wow, you're deviously clever. Maybe it is too much CSI and L&O.

I would ask (or want, for that matter) to have unprotected sex with a provider. I'd make that very clear.

The oral tests do give the occasional false positives, but it is pretty rare (about 1%). Regardless of the outcome of the test, I would still pay the same amount. It would just restrict what I would be comfortable doing with the girl during the session.

I'm not saying I do this. I'm mostly interested in opinions, and they do see to vary quite widely.

There are some STDs I worry about more than others. The other ones are not life threatening or can be cured. No one ever died from herpes and the others can be treated with antibiotics. I do not have sexual contact that often (less than once a year) so there is no risk of me spreading the STDs to others.

I appreciate your opinion, Megan and I understand your point and I suspect that many providers would likely feel the same way.

I agree that it is very low risk if you are careful, but the fact is that there is a risk at all. There is no risk in the alternative, which is abstinence. I get STD tests with the girls I have dated and have had sex with in the past too. So I'm not passing any judgement on providers. I am simply acknowledging that there is a risk and I'm trying to minimize it.

Yes, I agree, no girl would agree to take one if they didn't already get regularly tested. But would a client really want to be with a provider that didn't get tested regularly. A refusal is probably a win-win situation there. And I'm not saying I would skip out on paying for the providers time. I would do that regardless of the result or whether she agreed to get tested or not.

it's not manipulation at all. If the girl says no, perhaps enjoy something extremely low risk such as CBJ or HJ even and forgo sex. Same if the girl says yes and tests positive. And finally, if she says yes and both test negative, you both get a little peace of mind. And once again, the result would have no bearing on the compensation.

The point is that you don't know if the provider actually gets tested regularly. I know of one who admits that she never gets tested.

Finally, I agree that the risk of testing positive, especially a false positive would be the biggest thing that would prevent a provider from agreeing. Like I said originally, even providers who do regularly get tested would like to keep their medical information private and certainly not be sharing it with a client.

“The oral tests do give the occasional false positives, but it is pretty rare (about 1%). “

Boy are you dunce? The use condom and the low prevalence of HIV in the US hobby population reduce the risk to about 1 in 2 million.  Since you will be testing every time you have sexual intercourse 1,999,999 out of 2 million times it will be unnecessary if you use a condom. However with your 1% false positive rate you will get 20,000 false positive test for every HIV infection you prevent beyond the use condoms with the addition of the oral test.  The law of diminishing return beyond the use of condoms also applies to HIV protection.

The same studies show that condoms are only 85% effective. I don't know how you get from 1/100,000 to 1 in 2 million with that. Yes, much of that is due to user error but there is a significant risk of condom failure too.

Also, I believe it is naive to believe that the HIV percentage of providers is only 1%. There are studies that say it is 10-50% depending on the city (I don't believe them and feel it is much lower). Certainly it is high amongst providers who are also IV drug users (and how can you tell which ones those are?).

The test is ridiculously easy to perform. It is not approved for home use (although I feel it should be) because there are plenty of idiots out there who will mess it up. You don't need a medical degree to perform it. If you read the studies on the oral test, pretty much all of the false positives can be accounted for by user error. And in most cases it was the same user that messed up multiple times and accounted for the false positives. The test is also not that expensive. It is well under $20 per test.

FYI, I saw a provider and I asked her to take the test and she was more than willing to. We both came up negative and proceeded to have good time together. It might not turn out that way all the time but this time it went well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YFC0O393DQ

A while ago, I wrote a response to an individual who wanted to know how to determine if a lady is "clean." By an large, my response there works just as well for a post to this OP, but for the sake of brevity, I will just post the last half. The link to the full post is at the bottom.

"Now, everyone's terrified of HIV, but if you wrap it up and play right, it's really hard to catch. Nevada has a whole host of legalized prostitutes that are required to use condoms and receive regular medical checkups. In the last article I read (admittedly written in 2005 or '06), in all of the years of this legalized prostitution with all of these ladies rotating through, not once did a lady end up as HIV positive.

"So, what sort of diseases should you be worried about? Mostly the curable stuff that will completely and permanently destroy your bodily systems if left undetected and untreated. I've attached a photo of a mould of a patient's head in the tertiary stage of syphilis. Know what could have saved this sucker from looking like a poor imitation of the elephant man? Testing, and a shot of penicillin. That's it.

"So, what's the moral of this story? While it's completely understandable that you want to play with clean partners (I mean, really, don't we all?), your best (only) bet understand the risks, play safe, and get tested regularly. As much as some guys seem to wish and bank on it, you don't get to abdicate responsibility for your health by putting the responsibility solely on providers to be clean. I can absolutely guarantee you that the ethical lot in here do our best (refer back to the part about our health being our business), but even in the civilian world, intimacy is never 100% guaranteed safe, and we can only do so much if the hobbyist side of the hobby isn't picking up their slack."

Personally, I would not allow a patron to test me for HIV not because I am concerned about a positive result, but because I refuse to instill such a naive and utterly uneducated sense of security in anyone with such a silly little strip. Let me ask you-do you concern yourself at all with Hepatitis C? Do you know that it is difficult to test for and something most clinics and physicians do not test, and can sit in the body for quite literally decades before cirrhosis of the liver or other compilations cause medical professionals to start seeking out the problem? Do you know that this is the one disease that actually increases it's likelihood of infection with multiple partners? (That is to say-sexual intercourse with a Hep C person with 100 partners is far liker to spread the disease than the same Hep C person having repeated intercourse 100 times with the same person.

Quite honestly, I am well and truly tired of people treating HIV as both the cure all and the end all. Get educated.

-- Modified on 4/15/2010 12:15:07 AM

What study are you referring to that show condom effectives is 85% for HIV?  I suspect studies showing 85% effective are referring to numerous repeated sexual contacts between discordant HIV couples. Assuming 95% effectiveness, the risk for two sexual contact  is (0.95)(0.95)= 0.90, the risk for 3 sexual contact is (0.95)(0.95)(0.95)=0.86 and so on.  Since these HIV discordant couple presumably had many more  than 3 sexual contact the effectiveness of condoms per single coital act must have be>>>99% in theses studies.

A condom that is 95% effective mean the risk 100 infection without condom use can be reduce to risk of 5 infection if condoms are used. To get 1 in 2 million from 1/100,000

(1/100000)(5/100)= 5/10,000,000=1 in 2 million


1.1 million out 330 million (0.3%) are HIV positive. Over half of  HIV positive are Gay that means less than 0.15% of no gay population is HIV positive.  Assuming a 1% was a very conservative estimate. Again what studies that even you don’t believe are you referring to that show 10 to 50% of provider are HIV positive.


The manufacture doing it own testing indicates a false positive of 2/1000 or 4000 in 2 million . Test done in clinical center in NYC reported even greater false positive results with the oral test and resorted back to doing the test with blood.  These were trained professional not idiots as you claim. You obvious have no clinical chemistry background to assume the false positive test are due to user errors. You indicate in a post below that the false positive may be as high as 1%. This would result in 20,000 false positive test for every HIV infection you prevent beyond the use condoms with the addition of the oral test. The test kit now cost $8 to $20 when purchase in large quantities by clinics.  It certainly will cost more if it was ever available over the counter. Even at $8 to $20 it will cost 16 to 40 million dollars for each HIV infection prevented beyond the current risk of  1  in 2 million currently achieved with the use of condoms and no oral test. Now add in the cost of retesting and emotional toll of the 20,000 false positive test that will result and only and idiot would think it a good idea.

Like a girl would want to continue the date with just a hand job or other low risk activity if she just found out she had HIV... (yes, I'm rolling my eyes when I write this)  

And RIGHT that you would still be turned on or that your dick would get hard for ANYTHING if a girl just tested positive...  I'm calling BULLSHIT on that.    

You really have no clue what you are talking about or requesting.

Again, you should be more worried about HERPES then HIV.  Haven't you heard??  HIV is no longer a death sentence...just something you have to live with and treat the rest of your life, just like *herpes*, although herpes is easier to catch...  I have one friend that is celebrating his 25th anniversary being positive this year.  2 other friends that are 15 years positive and still happy and healthy.  And let's not forget Magic Johnson...

BTW-these friends of mine still have sex with others and have not infected anyone else to date.  One in particular regularly has sex with multiple, random, anonymous partners. He has a cross that covers his entire back that announces his HIV status, although he tells people before they get in a position of taking clothes off so it is not a surprise...  He practices safer sex, and in 25 years has not infected any of the hundreds of men he has slept with. No, he is not a sex worker, he just loves sex and is educated about how to keep his partners safe.

HERPES, on the other hand, is something that can be transmitted even when one is wearing a condom correctly and consistently...

Funny that the risk you focus on minimizing is the least likely thing you are going to pick up if you are engaging in safer sex practices with your casual sex partners.  What's that about??  You have so much more likelihood of getting something else, yet you focus on HIV?  Come out of the ignorant 80's man...we've learned so much since then...

Regards,

Megan

“Let me ask you-do you concern yourself at all with Hepatitis C? “

Hepatitis C is a blood-borne virus. It is spread when blood from an infected person gets into the bloodstream of another and sexual contact is not a big vehicle for transmission of Hep C. There is still debate about whether sexual transmission of HCV occurs.  In any case, Hep C via sexual activity can be decreased by common-sense behaviors such as avoiding sex when either partner is bleeding and avoiding rough sex and unprotected anal sex that may lead to bleeding. In theory you can also get Hep C from DFK, especially if you have bleeding gums or even sharing a razor or tooth brush.  15 to 40% Hep C infection are cleared by the body.  Drugs can cure 50% of the remaining Hep C infections. Hep B is more of a problem than Hep C for the hobby .  Unlike Hep C, in the United States, sexual contact is the most common means of transmission of Hep B. There is a vaccination for Hep B

“Do you know that it is difficult to test for and something most clinics and physicians do not test, and can sit in the body for quite literally decades before cirrhosis of the liver or other compilations cause medical professionals to start seeking out the problem? “

Test for Hep C is not that difficult.  Persistent elevated liver enzyme (AST, GPT) levels tested on annual exam should trigger a test for Hep A, B, and C long before cirrhosis sets in.


“Do you know that this is the one disease that actually increases it's likelihood of infection with multiple partners? (That is to say-sexual intercourse with a Hep C person with 100 partners is far liker to spread the disease than the same Hep C person having repeated intercourse 100 times with the same person.”

That is also true for STDs like HIV when the prevalence in the population is higher than transmission rate.  It just another indication that the probability of being infected by having sex with Hep C positive partner is very low.