Baumgartner could survive and be injured (see my earlier post). If these guys make a mistake it doesn't necessarily mean certain death. The risk they take is higher, and they are lauded for it.
GUM is fine, and people are definitely right to take their opinion over a poster on here. However, their evidence is unreliable if you want truly robust evidence. They do the best they can with the evidence they have. However, I have had bad advice at a GUM clinic. And I have had bad advice at my GPs. And I have had bad advice from NHS on-the-phone. Don't take it as definite.
I honestly believe all of this boils down to risk and what risk you are willing to take. I also believe that the risk, in this situation, is based on shaky evidence.
I like the original post and it's certainly extreme. My post, in response, was not meant to come across as criticising you. It was simply a post around the issues your post raised.
I did't take your post as a criticism. In fairness I can handle criticism some of it can be constructive.
For me the "evidence" isn't shaky. I can't ever see a situation where the medical profession would ever perform the sort of tests you describe in order to produce "robust evidence".
I know it's the NHS and we're supposed to have faith in them but I also know that they make mistakes so I apply my own common sense to what anyone tells me.
If the GUM told me "You can catch an STI off the toilet seat" (well I guess you can if you sit down before the other bloke stands up
) I'd say hang on what if you used a seat liner of a steam steriliser?
When they say you have a higher risk of infection with BB anal that makes sense to me (bacteria in the bowel, lack of natural lubrication possibly causing slight bleeding or irritation etc) then BB vaginal because of increased contact with seminal vaginal secretions, then performing OWO again because of the contact with ejectile or vaginal secretions, and then receiving OWO. I see how some carry higher risks than others.
I follow the logic in that without having to know the exact % of risk, because at the end of the day 0% risk is the best in which case we'd all be doing the five knuckle shuffle wearing a fresh pair of marigold gloves each time!
I don't think anyone can argue that sloppy seconds or tenth's!! with someone who roams the country offering BB to all comers (no pun intended) over the age of 24 is pretty "up there" in the risk stakes!!!
When someone jumps out of a plane or helicopter there's ALWAYS an element of training and planning involved and they may not die if it goes tits up BUT primarily it's themselves they're putting at risk, yes they may land on some unfortunate souls head and take them out too. Jump out of aircraft wear a parachute!
When it comes to BB sex I love it, you can't beat it. BUT only with a partner who you trust and who trusts you.
For me it's about enjoying the punt while minimising the risk. If I was a fan of BB outside a committed relationship (and I'm NOT) I'd sooner stick pins in my eyes than indulge myself as irresponsibly as the FR poster.
Anyway.... to the barebackers I say good luck it's your choice...and if you come across someone doing it and not advertising the fact give the punting population the heads up. That way if BB is your thing you'll be able to book the lady and if it isn't you'll know to give them a miss!