Obviously there was quite a bit of negative feed back about this question.  Would providers feel this way about this test if it was accurate and immediate. Just curious.  Everything would still be covered but you would know 99% if your partner was a carrier of AIDS.  It could be closer then you think.  Maybe in a couple years.
Doc

-- Modified on 4/14/2010 11:48:54 PM

I personally have been going to the same Dr for 25 years tested regularly and he knows what I do.I wouldn't trust anyone other than him and certainly not a hobbiest with a do it yourself std kit.

A persons health is very personal and should remain private,and as someone else brought up ...if someone were to test positive,that would not be the setting that they should find out in.
They should be with a competent medical professional who can explain things to them and if god forbid it's necessary..treat them.


The other concern here is ..would he expecting the provider to participate in unsafe sex if his little magic test is negative?

And posting it up again for discussion proves my point.

The negative responses come from an underlying exhausted and repeated topic that comes up once a week. That is SEX in the Hobby and risk of STD's.

Think of this fact; Your audience here in the hobby and more particular the GD board is not made up of students in a junior high school sex education class.

Most members here understand the risks, they have overcome the thought of all the "Chicken Little", "The sky is falling" attitudes of others who insist on bringing the topic up over and over again.

For me personally, I been banging HO's for years (well since being divorced 25 years ago), I do not do unprotected FS, but enjoy BBBJ's to the exclusion of all other offerings of CBJ's. So what, am I alone? You bet your ass I AM NOT ALONE.

As for the moron recommending to others that the "greatest thing since sliced bread" is to do oral swabs of providers, what cloud did he come out from under? I say get out of the hobby if you cannot get past the risk factors involved. The vast majority of providers are tested regularly and hobbyist do the same, if they are serious hobbyist.

I'll jump down from my soap box now if everyone one else on here Mangina's included jump off their  "Sky is falling" box. You are creating a really huge bummer for me.

I'm going to go out today and get fucked (helping in the absence of MP67), get my dick sucked bare back and have a great time. Ya'll can keep talking about this shit till the cows come home... or until you finally get a positive oral swab result, which ever occurs first.

We are All Enjoying the hobby of SEX...Bottom Line...I do get tested...but the OP was leaving way to many doors open with to many unanswered questions...and the biggest one was...because we are both negative...why can't we engage in unprotective sex...I am in this for the Pleasure..Passion..Fun..Enjoyment..and I could go on and on...taking a test and sitting there waiting for the results...I Personally do Not see any Pleasure or Fun in that...ugh

the potential of a false positive result.

What would happen next?  I would be a basket case until I got to a real doctor, the hobbyist would tell the freaking world and my reputation would be ruined all for a lie!  

My mental state, my reputation, and my safety are best left with the doctors office and myself.  

What if somebody got a false positive result and they went off the deep end and did something really drastic like "shooting up a public area" or committed suicide?  All for a lie?  Anyone's HIV status is nothing to play around with a Dr Magoo test kit with.  

There has to be some level of trust or we shouldn't be meeting.
Thanks

Actually Smarty if you'll get off you soapbox for a second you will see that my intention was not to post that the sky was falling.  It was simply to ask if a test was available like next to the condoms in the store, and was quick and accurate(plus inexpensive) would it still be received so negatively.   It is a hypothetical question since it does not exist yet.  And yes the oral test is crap, but that is not what I am asking about is it. Have fun today
Doc

more comprehensive, and I don't see that happening anytime soon. What about hepatitis A, B, and C; herpes; syphilis; gonorrhea, genital warts; HPV (the virus that leads to cervical cancer); and on and on? Anyone who contemplates BBFS is insane, IMHO. Whatever the statistics say about the risk, why risk your life, and that of everyone who touches yours? HDDOC96, I realize you are not advocating BBFS, but I know there are many men and women who still think it's okay. They have that teenage mentality - "It can't happen to me. I am invincible." Get a female condom. Get a barrier. Be happy; live long.

I can understand why some might not think an instant test is worthwhile but what I don't understand is all the anger the subject has caused. I don't know why, but this has seemed to hit a nerve on some people.

Honestly, if there was something out there that would make your hobby less risky, wouldn't you even consider it? I'm wondering when air bags where invented if you people rejected them saying "I'm already safe enough with my seat belt on. If you can't accept the inherit risk, maybe you shouldn't be driving a car."

I personally think the instant oral test is wonderful and I've already had a provider who was perfectly happy to agree to it (and she was happy she got proof I was negative too).

Whether you think it is worth the money or not is not the point. Figuring you are spending an average of $300 or so per encounter, what is another $20 or test for a test.

The oral test is not crap. Here are the statistics:

In an accuracy studied of 3917 individuals they performed oral tests and found 834 positives when 840 were known to be HIV+. This is a 99.3% accuracy rate. A traditional blood test gave 838 positives, although one of those was a false positive (99.4% accuracy).

A specificity study showed 6 false positives in a trial of 3674 known negatives. That's a less than 0.2% false positives rate. The traditional test showed 5 false positives. All of those false positives were from subjects considered to be high-risk. There were no false positives in the low risk group.

The most interesting study was the untrained user study. They took 100 volunteers and provided them only with written test instructions (no other kind of instruction or medical training was given). Of the 600 exams they had the participants give, there were 10 inaccurate results. That's 98.3% accuracy for untrained users. Furthermore, 5 of those 10 inaccurate results were attributed to a single user. All the tests were repeated, and the second trial gave only 2 inaccurate results, both attributed to the same user. Operator error including mixing up which specimens were with which subject were the cause of the errors.

HIV is by far the worst of the STDs.

Hepatitis C can be nasty but is far harder to get through sexual activity than HIV (and HIV is pretty difficult). Hepatitis A is more likely to be gotten from contaminated food and usually goes away on it's own. There is also a vaccine for it.
Herpes can be annoying but no one has ever died from it. An incredible number of people are already infected with it and never have an outbreak (roughyl 20% have HSV-2 and 60% have HSV-1). Syphilis can be cured with a single injection of penicillin. Gonorrhea and Chlamydia are also treated with antibiotics.

Basically, I am saying that you should always always wear a condom and get yourself tested regularly so you can treat any of the other STDs as soon as you know.

I don't care that herpes won't kill me, I don't want broken out blisters on my cooter!

Jeez, so many people act like any STD other than HIV/AIDS is just a minor annoyance.

I understand your frustration as a medical professional.  I wanted to ask if you would take the test if it was perfect.  Not real world.  I agree why bring up other std's that can be solved with antibiotic or don't KILL YOU.  Is it really that far at of our grasp that we would have a instant AIDS test. Investors welcome.
Doc

Fair enough. I don't want any STDs either and I'd test for them all if I could. Up until relatively recently though, HIV was a death sentence, and not a pleasant one at that. You can see why I put it in another league as herpes, then right?

Especially when transmitted from mother to child, herpes can be devastating -- even causing death. (1)

But even in adults, it can cause HSVE and brain damage. (2) Furthermore, infection with HSV, for people with certain genetic makeup, can predispose Alzheimer's. (3)

In other words, that there is some nasty-assed shit.




(1) Herpes Simplex Virus Infections of the Newborn
Seminars in Perinatology, Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 19-25

(2) http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/130/4/1138

(3) Dobson CB, Itzhaki RF (1999). "Herpes simplex virus type 1 and Alzheimer's disease". Neurobiol. Aging 20 (4): 457–65.

the result is 'out of sight and out of mind? LOL

In over 90% of cases Herpes encephalitis and keratitis is due to the oral herpes virus and not related to genital herpes virus (Up to 80 % of us are already infected with oral herpes). Both herpes encephalitis and keratitis are considered rare complication affecting 1 in 2million and 1/200,000 people yearly. About 95% of herpes keratitis can be cured with appropriate therapy. Nevertheless, herpes keratitis, is the most frequent cause of corneal blindness in the United States.  IMO the biggest hobby risk resulting from genital herpes is infecting a faithful SO and having to explain it.

Gonnorhea is 10 to 100 times more infectious through heterosexual contact than HIV . 600,000 to 800,000 (half are thought to undiagnosed ) are infected with Gonorrhea every year where less than 15,000 are infected with HIV as a result of heterosexual sex.  

HIV can be managed with antiviral therapy and no one should die from it if diagnosed and treated early. Over the years, gonorrhea has become resistant to a number of antibiotic classes (sulfa, penicillin and tetracyclines) and now the fluoroquinolones. Since 2003 an increase percentage from 2 to 15% of cases of Ciprofloxacin and other fluoroquinolones resistant gonorrhea has been reported in west coast port cites. This is largely as results of in-migration of these fluoroquinolones resistant gonorrhea strains from Asia and Pacific Islands where it has a high prevalence. Some local Public Health Departments recommend doctors stop using fluoroquinolones (ex. Cipro) to treat gonorrhea instead use a cephalosporin (ceftriaxone), which is given by injection and is now our last line of defense. It is inevitable a cephalosporin resistant gonorrhea will develop. For now, gonorrhea is still a curable STD but it may not be in the future.


-- Modified on 4/17/2010 6:25:09 PM