HIV transmission rate could be 25 times higher than previously thought

[Londoner2000]

 So I just replied to an old thread  involving  sex parties in Germany, where one of the posters on this forum said the transmission rate was 1 in 2500 for vaginal  and that HIV was hard to catch.  Strictly speaking that’s true, but we don’t know a great deal about HIV, and in the initial stages the transmission rate is higher.  I’m a scientist, and was quite surprised that this article didn’t get more debate -  The current statistics and knowledge say that the transmission rate for receptive anal sex is only 2% ie 1 in 50. However during the early stages of infection it could be much higher - This guy bummed  10 dudes and Half got HIV so it’s a lot higher than 1 in 50 i.e. it’s not 2% it’s 50%.   It’s a small sample and we don’t have any stats for vaginal transmission during initial stages of infection ( ironically when you may test negative)  but based on this article transmission rates could be 25 times what they are quoted as.   So boys, wear a coat it’s cold outside. 🤣

External Link/Members Only

[Hobbit]

 Seriously, what’s your point? Just fuck off.

[Kev40ish]

Your appearing more and more like a troll

[jeanphillipe]

...another reason to stay away from anal sex, anal sex without a condom  .... and with a dude ,  the ultimate death sentence.

[Jonestown]

...another reason to stay away from anal sex, anal sex without a condom  .... and with a dude ,  the ultimate death sentence.

And with the currently fashionable TS scene.

[Londoner2000]

Seriously, what’s your point? Just fuck off.

Your appearing more and more like a troll

You don’t understand my point or you don’t like it?   To anyone medical, this is groundbreaking as it turns the established knowledge over on its head.  That HIV transmission rate was 50%, in a sample of 10 people, when the scientific literature states it is 2%.

My point was  this means HIV transmission rates across the board (oral etc) could be higher than previously believed.  While I thought oral sex was effectively zero chance of transmission  if there was no cuts/blood, oral sores, perhaps that’s not strictly true within a specific phase of the infection regardless of CD4 count or viral load.

The point is extremely relevant I think, as it discusses sexual transmission rates on a forum for sex and WGs.

However, if people think it’s against posting guidelines my apologies please delete this thread.

[whiskyfan]

You don’t understand my point or you don’t like it?   To anyone medical, this is groundbreaking as it turns the established knowledge over on its head.  That HIV transmission rate was 50%, in a sample of 10 people, when the scientific literature states it is 2%.

My point was  this means HIV transmission rates across the board (oral etc) could be higher than previously believed.  While I thought oral sex was effectively zero chance of transmission  if there was no cuts/blood, oral sores, perhaps that’s not strictly true within a specific phase of the infection regardless of CD4 count or viral load.

The point is extremely relevant I think, as it discusses sexual transmission rates on a forum for sex and WGs.

However, if people think it’s against posting guidelines my apologies please delete this thread.

No it's not because the article doesn't say how many times he had sex with each individual.

[smiths]

And my uncle could be my auntie. Lots of things could be the case. Personally with sex I take the risks I am prepared to take for the rewards on offer as I see them, backed up by going to the GUM and on a reg basis.

When I punt with a WG or fuck a civvy I don't know I have no idea what they may of done and with whom, that's sex for you. The only safe way is stick to wanking.

[Colston36]

You don’t understand my point or you don’t like it?   To anyone medical, this is groundbreaking as it turns the established knowledge over on its head.  That HIV transmission rate was 50%, in a sample of 10 people, when the scientific literature states it is 2%.

My point was  this means HIV transmission rates across the board (oral etc) could be higher than previously believed.  While I thought oral sex was effectively zero chance of transmission  if there was no cuts/blood, oral sores, perhaps that’s not strictly true within a specific phase of the infection regardless of CD4 count or viral load.

The point is extremely relevant I think, as it discusses sexual transmission rates on a forum for sex and WGs.

However, if people think it’s against posting guidelines my apologies please delete this thread.

A sample of 10 in such an untypical environment is, to say the least of it, wildly unreliable.

[daviemac]

You don’t understand my point or you don’t like it?   To anyone medical, this is groundbreaking as it turns the established knowledge over on its head.  That HIV transmission rate was 50%, in a sample of 10 people, when the scientific literature states it is 2%.

My point was  this means HIV transmission rates across the board (oral etc) could be higher than previously believed.  While I thought oral sex was effectively zero chance of transmission  if there was no cuts/blood, oral sores, perhaps that’s not strictly true within a specific phase of the infection regardless of CD4 count or viral load.

The point is extremely relevant I think, as it discusses sexual transmission rates on a forum for sex and WGs.

However, if people think it’s against posting guidelines my apologies please delete this thread.

If you're this obsessed with STIs I would suggest you find another hobby, in fact as all your reviews are negs I would definitely say this hobby isn't for you.
 

[Belgarion]

So I just replied to an old thread  involving  sex parties in Germany, where one of the posters on this forum said the transmission rate was 1 in 2500 for vaginal  and that HIV was hard to catch.  Strictly speaking that’s true, but we don’t know a great deal about HIV, and in the initial stages the transmission rate is higher.  I’m a scientist, and was quite surprised that this article didn’t get more debate -  The current statistics and knowledge say that the transmission rate for receptive anal sex is only 2% ie 1 in 50. However during the early stages of infection it could be much higher - This guy bummed  10 dudes and Half got HIV so it’s a lot higher than 1 in 50 i.e. it’s not 2% it’s 50%.   It’s a small sample and we don’t have any stats for vaginal transmission during initial stages of infection ( ironically when you may test negative)  but based on this article transmission rates could be 25 times what they are quoted as.   So boys, wear a coat it’s cold outside. 🤣

External Link/Members Only

Did you get your science degree from Trump University? What is the baseline? Control? Circumstances around transmission?

Were the infected parties also engaged in sexual relationships with others, etc.

[Tricky Dickie]

Did you get your science degree from Trump University? What is the baseline? Control? Circumstances around transmission?

Were the infected parties also engaged in sexual relationships with others, etc.

Plus of course incidence. So did he have sex with each guy once or many times? Plus a sample size of 10 is worthless. Perhaps if he’d had sex with 1000 guys then only 10 would still be infected. Perhaps his numbers are an outlier. You can tell nothing from a small sample study. But news organisations love ‘em. They never check the facts. The standard of science reporting is woeful.

Here’s a bit of background reading if you’re interested:

External Link/Members Only

[winkywanky]

If you're this obsessed with STIs I would suggest you find another hobby, in fact as all your reviews are negs I would definitely say this hobby isn't for you.

Indeed, FIVE reviews and he didn't actually get to boff ANY of them, he made his excuses and left.

Not only that, he specifically went to one because she offered anal and OWO. And then he goes and posts this (but it's OK, he's a scientist  ).

[fedor]

So I just replied to an old thread  involving  sex parties in Germany, where one of the posters on this forum said the transmission rate was 1 in 2500 for vaginal  and that HIV was hard to catch.  Strictly speaking that’s true, but we don’t know a great deal about HIV, and in the initial stages the transmission rate is higher.  I’m a scientist, and was quite surprised that this article didn’t get more debate -  The current statistics and knowledge say that the transmission rate for receptive anal sex is only 2% ie 1 in 50. However during the early stages of infection it could be much higher - This guy bummed  10 dudes and Half got HIV so it’s a lot higher than 1 in 50 i.e. it’s not 2% it’s 50%.   It’s a small sample and we don’t have any stats for vaginal transmission during initial stages of infection ( ironically when you may test negative)  but based on this article transmission rates could be 25 times what they are quoted as.   So boys, wear a coat it’s cold outside. 🤣

External Link/Members Only

You're a scientist and you cite the BBC? 

[Kev40ish]

You're a scientist and you cite the BBC? 

So he’s a scientist now...

The only thing I can say about him looking at his previous posts, is I wouldn’t believe a word he says..

He is obviously a fantasist who hasn’t got a clue how to make sure all his stories add up.

I am looking forward to his banning as he adds nothing to this forum what so ever..

Obviously the moderators are allowing him to contribute for entertainment value, every post he makes gets challenged...

[Plan R]

I’m a scientist

Madam! I am a graduate of the University of Rangoon !

Hidden Image/Members Only

[SlamBoy]

. . . I’m a scientist . . . The current statistics and knowledge say that the transmission rate for receptive anal sex is only 2% ie 1 in 50. However during the early stages of infection it could be much higher - This guy bummed 10 dudes and Half got HIV so it’s a lot higher than 1 in 50 i.e. it’s not 2% it’s 50% . . .

Oh Jesus.

If you really are a scientist, how is it you are so bad at mathematics? Specifically probability?

I cannot be bothered to explain to you why your mathematical analysis is incorrect. But this should help you work out why you have got it wrong: let's just say, if you flipped a coin 10 times and 10 times it lands on heads, it still means the probability of it being heads is 50% and not 100% even though it landed on heads 10 consecutive times (i.e. in 100% of cases).

 

[Londoner2000]

Plus of course incidence. So did he have sex with each guy once or many times? Plus a sample size of 10 is worthless. Perhaps if he’d had sex with 1000 guys then only 10 would still be infected. Perhaps his numbers are an outlier. You can tell nothing from a small sample study. But news organisations love ‘em. They never check the facts. The standard of science reporting is woeful.

Here’s a bit of background reading if you’re interested:

External Link/Members Only

Granted all my reviews were negative  and the only reason is they all seemed like bait and switch. Also accepted I’m looking at the bottom end of the market.
 Two good points are that they could’ve been previously infected -  but the article seems to suggest otherwise.  Yes it’s the number of times matters but as I recall he  would meet them on grinder and text them after.  Even if he is Superman, and did each one 5 times numbers still don’t add up.  I’m quoting the BBC because that’s my source.
 Also accepted about sample size but I did mention that in my post.

Oh Jesus.

If you really are a scientist, how is it you are so bad at mathematics? Specifically probability?

I cannot be bothered to explain to you why your mathematical analysis is incorrect. But this should help you work out why you have got it wrong: let's just say, if you flipped a coin 10 times and 10 times it lands on heads, it still means the probability of it being heads is 50% and not 100% even though it landed on heads 10 consecutive times (i.e. in 100% of cases).

 

 The issue of contention is the definition of probability.  However  The reason I used the word probability,  is that in medicine infection rates,  or probability of an infection  is constantly  evolving, unlike a coin. 

Of course the probability remains 50%  for a coin flip But 1)  after a few hundred or thousand flips of only heads, perhaps  you would consider the coin was  not equally weighted, and therefore change the probability.

2) this isn’t a perfectly weighted coin it’s biology.  The  probabilities of HIV infection are based on sample data  and estimates.  The probability keeps changing and evolving.

 If you took penicillin 30 years ago, it would most likely cure your pneumonia.  In some parts of the world today it’s now less than 50%  because of multiple factors one of which is drug resistance due to bacteria evolving. 

So that’s changed completely, but a coin toss still has the same probability as 30 years ago.

[Happyjose]

I’m a scientist...

External Link/Members Only

 

[winkywanky]

You're a scientist and you cite the BBC? 

The BBC report is merely coverage of what happened in court. Or perhaps they just made it all up, just like Climate Change? 

[dude86]

What a crock of shit. We don't know how many guys he fucked who haven't come forward and were non the wiser about his skullduggery (skullbuggery? ). For a scientist you don't seem too concerned about the reliability of your samples/evidence. IF he had only ever fucked those ten men, each once, then you may be on to something. But you're not IMO.

[Londoner2000]

What a crock of shit. We don't know how many guys he fucked who haven't come forward and were non the wiser about his skullduggery (skullbuggery? ). For a scientist you don't seem too concerned about the reliability of your samples/evidence. IF he had only ever fucked those ten men, each once, then you may be on to something. But you're not IMO.

 I’m not claiming this as my research lol.  Look at my post I said “could”.  It’s not solid evidence at all.  Yes he could have fucked other guys  that didn’t come forward, but I’m assuming the police had a thorough run through  of his phone and call records. He could have used a burner  but he doesn’t seem to have been smart enough.

 My point wasn’t that it is, my point was it could be.  You would normally expect if he slept with 10 people once each that none of them would have HIV.   a 2010 article shows a transmission rate of 1.4%, and you would expect to require 70 sexual encounters for one transmission.  So if he fucked those five guys 70 times each  that’s the only time I would expect that,  but he didn’t do that  from what I can tell.  Which therefore makes it quite unexpected.

External Link/Members Only

[daviemac]

I’m not claiming this as my research lol.  Look at my post I said “could”.  It’s not solid evidence at all.  Yes he could have fucked other guys  that didn’t come forward, but I’m assuming the police had a thorough run through  of his phone and call records. He could have used a burner  but he doesn’t seem to have been smart enough.

 My point wasn’t that it is, my point was it could be.  You would normally expect if he slept with 10 people once each that none of them would have HIV.   a 2010 article shows a transmission rate of 1.4%, and you would expect to require 70 sexual encounters for one transmission.  So if he fucked those five guys 70 times each  that’s the only time I would expect that,  but he didn’t do that  from what I can tell.  Which therefore makes it quite unexpected.

External Link/Members Only

One simple question - what has this got to do with punting, you seem to be quoting homosexual activities.   

[Londoner2000]

 You’re right maybe it doesn’t   It’s a report about Receptive anal,  but the  normal transmission Rates  are for anal regardless of orientation.

 So this is what I think it has to do with punting.... I like owo  where the transmission rate has traditionally been known to be low, but not zero ( there’s a discussion about this in the  paper above]   But now  because of this  I realize  it could be higher than previously thought,  and will probably take more precautions that I did with OWO in the past.

[Hobbit]

You’re right maybe it doesn’t   It’s a report about Receptive anal,  but the  normal transmission Rates  are for anal regardless of orientation.

 So this is what I think it has to do with punting.... I like owo  where the transmission rate has traditionally been known to be low, but not zero ( there’s a discussion about this in the  paper above]   But now  because of this  I realize  it could be higher than previously thought,  and will probably take more precautions that I did with OWO in the past.

This business has risks! If you don’t like it, get out of the fucking kitchen!  I think I was right the first time when I said this but seriously, do fuck off. 

[king tarzan]

young lady.. short service list.. in it  to get the money quickly and quickly get out.. independent ...
luckily nothing has happened to me so far..

I have no issue with them checking that rubber john is still on, that irritation i take as an assurance that my health is safe too!!!

[maxxblue]

Granted all my reviews were negative  and the only reason is they all seemed like bait and switch. Also accepted I’m looking at the bottom end of the market.
 Two good points are that they could’ve been previously infected -  but the article seems to suggest otherwise.  Yes it’s the number of times matters but as I recall he  would meet them on grinder and text them after.  Even if he is Superman, and did each one 5 times numbers still don’t add up.  I’m quoting the BBC because that’s my source.
 Also accepted about sample size but I did mention that in my post.

 The issue of contention is the definition of probability.  However  The reason I used the word probability,  is that in medicine infection rates,  or probability of an infection  is constantly  evolving, unlike a coin. 

Of course the probability remains 50%  for a coin flip But 1)  after a few hundred or thousand flips of only heads, perhaps  you would consider the coin was  not equally weighted, and therefore change the probability.

2) this isn’t a perfectly weighted coin it’s biology.  The  probabilities of HIV infection are based on sample data  and estimates.  The probability keeps changing and evolving.

 If you took penicillin 30 years ago, it would most likely cure your pneumonia.  In some parts of the world today it’s now less than 50%  because of multiple factors one of which is drug resistance due to bacteria evolving. 

So that’s changed completely, but a coin toss still has the same probability as 30 years ago.

This particular post (along with your other posts  ), is compelling evidence that you are not a scientist, and, in fact, suggests that you are what scientists commonly refer to as a 'fuckwit'. 

[PepeMAGA]

 and that HIV was hard to catch. yes
  but we don’t know a great deal about HIV, HIV researchers do
 and in the initial stages the transmission rate is higher. yes
 I’m a scientist nope
 However during the early stages of infection it could be much higher been known for a long time
- This guy bummed  10 dudes and Half got HIV so it’s a lot higher than 1 in 50 i.e. it’s not 2% it’s 50%. this is one guy and has no impact on the statistics. he likely has a high titre of the virus and isnt on medication for it
  It’s a small sample and we don’t have any stats for vaginal transmission during initial stages of infection its well established that people are more infectious in the first few months

[Londoner2000]

This particular post (along with your other posts  ), is compelling evidence that you are not a scientist, and, in fact, suggests that you are what scientists commonly refer to as a 'fuckwit'. 

 Why would I say I’m a scientist when I’m not? 🤣  you’ve said “this proves…“ without proving anything.  Explain why you think it proves anything.

[maxxblue]

Why would I say I’m a scientist when I’m not? 🤣  you’ve said “this proves…“ without proving anything.  Explain why you think it proves anything.

[Why would I say I’m a scientist when I’m not? 🤣]
There's some strange people on here, Walter

[you’ve said “this proves…“ without proving anything.]

Anyone who understands research or epidemiology will instantly realise the flaws in your statements - based on what you state here, you do not seem to understand even the basics.

[Londoner2000]

HIV researchers do -  by we I meant the scientific community which includes HIV researchers.  Even you can learn as much as any HIV researcher by reading the academic literature.
I’m a scientist - yes
been known for a long time - The earliest paper  about this is from 2005.  But it’s not common knowledge even amongst GPs  and other  medical specialties.  I teach clinical medicine to med students as part of my job. At medical school the quoted transmission rates are still taught, and it’s not in medical textbooks that the transmission rate is higher initially.
-he likely has a high titre of the virus and isnt on medication for it[/b].  so would everyone initially, but the variation is still way more than expected. Of course he’s not on medication  he was trying to infect people.  But the point is none of the other people in the statistics are On meds.  The transmission rate is without meds anyway so your point is moot.

[Londoner2000]

[Why would I say I’m a scientist when I’m not? 🤣]
There's some strange people on here, Walter

[you’ve said “this proves…“ without proving anything.]

Anyone who understands research or epidemiology will instantly realise the flaws in your statements - based on what you state here, you do not seem to understand even the basics.

OK there’s a lot of people here  saying I’m not a scientist / fantasist /  don’t understand statistics or  probability or epidemiology lol 🤣  when the people saying this seem to have the least idea. so I have a degree in maths, masters in engineering  and a medical degree ie  Bachelor of medicine bachelor of  surgery,  and published research in academic journals.  Also I studied at Oxford.  Prepared to prove it to mods if that will help dogs stop barking.

[BigD77]

I hate it when medics try and claim they're scientists, they are at best statisticians.

If your talking probabilities then it simply cannot be a scientific fact (or law).

Medical advice, as we see here, constantly changes.

Good science does not.

[whiskyfan]

OK there’s a lot of people here  saying I’m not a scientist / fantasist /  don’t understand statistics or  probability or epidemiology lol 🤣  when the people saying this seem to have the least idea. so I have a degree in maths, masters in engineering  and a medical degree ie  Bachelor of medicine bachelor of  surgery,  and published research in academic journals.  Also I studied at Oxford.  Prepared to prove it to mods if that will help dogs stop barking.

If you're a typical example then degrees these days obviously aren't worth the paper they're written on and education standards will be heading further downhill if you're doing the teaching now.

[SlamBoy]

OK there’s a lot of people here  saying I’m not a scientist / fantasist /  don’t understand statistics or  probability or epidemiology lol 🤣  when the people saying this seem to have the least idea. so I have a degree in maths, masters in engineering  and a medical degree ie  Bachelor of medicine bachelor of  surgery,  and published research in academic journals.  Also I studied at Oxford.  Prepared to prove it to mods if that will help dogs stop barking.

Prove it to me. PM me your documents and I'll back you up if you are for real.

[DrConners]

OK there’s a lot of people here  saying I’m not a scientist / fantasist /  don’t understand statistics or  probability or epidemiology lol 🤣  when the people saying this seem to have the least idea. so I have a degree in maths, masters in engineering  and a medical degree ie  Bachelor of medicine bachelor of  surgery,  and published research in academic journals.  Also I studied at Oxford.  Prepared to prove it to mods if that will help dogs stop barking.

I'm not saying you are anything - other than some prick who is obsessed with picking up streetwalkers & paying as little as possible to risk your sexual health :

So we went  to Budapest for a stag do in December.  I’ve been a couple of times before and I picked up a local girl but I got lucky.  I also picked up a couple of Gypsy Street walkers for 3000huf ( about £8) for OWO + CIM  but I bargained hard  she wanted three times that before.  I don’t recommend it to anyone except seasoned veterans like me

I’ve literally wasted four days of my life trying to meet a cheap reliable British working girl in london on aw.  It really shouldn’t take this long, it never did back in the day.

To me that’s insane. I had a limit of €100 per half an hour because that’s what I would pay in London. and in my mind it should be €10 because that’s what these girls used to charge 10 years ago.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=253797.0

Is that it was a street punt in Tenerife  and I’m not sure if we can supposed to post reviews of street girls?  If yes I’m happy to post it in the international section but very briefly I have attached the area where you can pick up the street walkers  as a Google Maps photograph and link.

So I’m attaching where the street walkers were in Tenerife  this was in playa Americas and the street names are in  The attachments and I’ve highlighted the areas to pick up, it’s all the same area. The vast majority were Romanians and West Africans. There were probably about six or seven girls out on the street at 3 AM,

Even as recently as 3 years ago  I picked up a stunning French brunette in east london -  was £20 for everything inc owo cim etc she told me she charges £300 an hour on aw  and has a couple of bookings a day  but some people don’t turn up and she needed the money.  I have a sense of pity from everyone here

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=253021.0

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=253172.0

but not that long ago there were normal girls doing it. As recently as 2009/10 (the last time I went out to red light districts) there were nice girls in their 20s who would do everything owo cim etc for £20-30, and some were hot young English girls - not hardened crackwhores. Even at a budget of £100 per 30 min can’t find anything similar.

And so it goes on ................ and on

1.  Double anal ( but need a friend lol)

Yeah I'm guessing you don't have any, your over exposure to 'Rocco' porn will have destroyed your social skills & negated your empathy 

I have a sense of pity from everyone here

I think you meant to say 'for', the fact of the matter is I'm guessing most members here wouldn't pity you but be disgusted by you.

And you reckon you're some sort of scientist/healthcare professional ?       

I think meter maid in the hospital cark park is closer to the truth David