4 ms·

I think in addition to the stigma, there will always be a matter of trust. If someone claims to be undetectable, at what point do you believe them? Right away,

by hughes 7y ago

I think in addition to the stigma, there will always be a matter of trust. If someone claims to be undetectable, at what point do you believe them? Right away, no questions asked? What level of trust is required to be sure they ever were, or still are, undetectable? Has the source of their medicine changed? How secure is their access to it? Any financial stresses or other factors that would affect their medicine's availability? It's a lot to ask of someone - on both sides. How do you think someone could approach this in a way that preserves your humanity and your privacy?

lazzlazzlazz 7y ago
A very similar kind of trust is required in general for any sexual contact: if someone claims to have been tested, at what point do you believe them? Has that changed? How reliable is their access to testing? Could they have contracted something recently, and it is simply incubating with no symptoms? It's not exactly the same, but it's not entirely different.
- Loq 7y ago
  The demand for Levonorgestrel (aka Plan B, or morning-after pill), abortion, not to mention other STDs, can be seen as indicating that that trust is not always warranted.
  - celticninja 7y ago
    I'm not sure what contraception has to do with trust.
    - Loq 7y ago
      Clearly A's statement I'm using contraception method X could be true or false. If you are not verifying the truth of this statement, and have heterosexual intercourse with A, you are trusting A. How do you verify such a statement in practise?
  - Broken_Hippo 7y ago
    These aren't indicators of lack of trust, merely that things happen. Even with testing, not all STD's show up on tests - this is why folks get tested regularly. Many folks won't know they have an STD (think HPV). Condoms break, get forgotten, and so on. People do stuff when they are drunk. Rape happens (rape isn't a lack of trust but rather something else entirely).
    - Loq 7y ago
      These aren't indicators of lack of trust I disagree. There are multiple levels of trust: - Your partner that they don't lie about taking contraception, that they have taken it as required. - The medical sciences and medical regulatory authorities that the contraception works as expected. - Pharmacist that they don't sell counterfeit medicine and many others. Society is largely based on trust.
      - rmellow 7y ago
        Condoms break, despite whatever trust I have in them. That's when it's time for Plan B.
      - emiliobumachar 7y ago
        If The System tells me that contraceptions are X% effective, and I believe them, and it's true, the problem remains of the failure rate. That's unrelated to trust.
        YorkshireSeason 7y ago
        That's maybe mostly a semantic quibble about the precise meaning of trust. I don't think it's considered absurd to say "I trust that my plane won't crash" when flying. Maybe it's more usual to say "I hope that my plane won't crash". It appears to be the case that we "hope" if we don't see the social dimension of the phenomenon we are referring to, while "trust" is also communicates a stronger social dimension. Note also that in interactions with humans, we generally don't have a precise probabilities.
      - 7y ago
shaki-dora 7y ago
In a Bayesian framework, a person telling you they are HIV+ would seem to serve to establish some trust. Why admit to to that, but then lie about viral load? On a more practical level, I would probably go on PreP if I regularly had hookups with men. I’m actually somewhat envious of the gay scene in that regard. The option just doesn’t meaningfully exist at the mostly-hetero sex parties I’ve been at.
- allendoerfer 7y ago
  Why don't you go to gay sex parties, if you want to have sex with men? scnr
- jliptzin 7y ago
  Why can’t you go on prep?
- arcticfox 7y ago
  > Why admit to to that, but then lie about viral load? I mean I'd worry that they were being honest, but mistaken. I'd have to do a lot of research on the efficacy and frequency of testing beforehand (e.g. it's possible that it might be calibrated to be frequent enough to provide proper care for the patient, but not to guarantee to protect partners).
  - mdhen 7y ago
    Your worries are misplaced. Three drugs are what keep them undetectable. And once you are there for a period of time (3 months to be safe) you stay that way forever as long as you take your medication as prescribed. Once they are at that point they will be getting blood tests every 6 months. So really you need to be trusting that they are responsible enough to take their drugs every day. These days that is pretty easy, most people take 1 pill in the morning and that's it.
- peterwwillis 7y ago
  What option doesn't exist? You can take PreP regardless of what kind of sex party you go to.
gambiting 7y ago
Especially since we live in a fucked up world where there are people who spread HIV on purpose as some sort of sick goal. I wouldn't trust someone I don't have a lot of history with about something like this.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- nkingsy 7y ago
  I don’t think they would tell you they were HIV positive if their goal was to infect you.

by hughes 7y ago

lazzlazzlazz 7y ago

A very similar kind of trust is required in general for any sexual contact: if someone claims to have been tested, at what point do you believe them? Has that changed? How reliable is their access to testing? Could they have contracted something recently, and it is simply incubating with no symptoms? It's not exactly the same, but it's not entirely different.

Loq 7y ago
The demand for Levonorgestrel (aka Plan B, or morning-after pill), abortion, not to mention other STDs, can be seen as indicating that that trust is not always warranted.
- celticninja 7y ago
  I'm not sure what contraception has to do with trust.
  - Loq 7y ago
    Clearly A's statement I'm using contraception method X could be true or false. If you are not verifying the truth of this statement, and have heterosexual intercourse with A, you are trusting A. How do you verify such a statement in practise?
- Broken_Hippo 7y ago
  These aren't indicators of lack of trust, merely that things happen. Even with testing, not all STD's show up on tests - this is why folks get tested regularly. Many folks won't know they have an STD (think HPV). Condoms break, get forgotten, and so on. People do stuff when they are drunk. Rape happens (rape isn't a lack of trust but rather something else entirely).
  - Loq 7y ago
    These aren't indicators of lack of trust I disagree. There are multiple levels of trust: - Your partner that they don't lie about taking contraception, that they have taken it as required. - The medical sciences and medical regulatory authorities that the contraception works as expected. - Pharmacist that they don't sell counterfeit medicine and many others. Society is largely based on trust.
    - rmellow 7y ago
      Condoms break, despite whatever trust I have in them. That's when it's time for Plan B.
    - emiliobumachar 7y ago
      If The System tells me that contraceptions are X% effective, and I believe them, and it's true, the problem remains of the failure rate. That's unrelated to trust.
      - YorkshireSeason 7y ago
        That's maybe mostly a semantic quibble about the precise meaning of trust. I don't think it's considered absurd to say "I trust that my plane won't crash" when flying. Maybe it's more usual to say "I hope that my plane won't crash". It appears to be the case that we "hope" if we don't see the social dimension of the phenomenon we are referring to, while "trust" is also communicates a stronger social dimension. Note also that in interactions with humans, we generally don't have a precise probabilities.
    - 7y ago

shaki-dora 7y ago

In a Bayesian framework, a person telling you they are HIV+ would seem to serve to establish some trust. Why admit to to that, but then lie about viral load? On a more practical level, I would probably go on PreP if I regularly had hookups with men. I’m actually somewhat envious of the gay scene in that regard. The option just doesn’t meaningfully exist at the mostly-hetero sex parties I’ve been at.

allendoerfer 7y ago
Why don't you go to gay sex parties, if you want to have sex with men? scnr
jliptzin 7y ago
Why can’t you go on prep?
arcticfox 7y ago
> Why admit to to that, but then lie about viral load? I mean I'd worry that they were being honest, but mistaken. I'd have to do a lot of research on the efficacy and frequency of testing beforehand (e.g. it's possible that it might be calibrated to be frequent enough to provide proper care for the patient, but not to guarantee to protect partners).
- mdhen 7y ago
  Your worries are misplaced. Three drugs are what keep them undetectable. And once you are there for a period of time (3 months to be safe) you stay that way forever as long as you take your medication as prescribed. Once they are at that point they will be getting blood tests every 6 months. So really you need to be trusting that they are responsible enough to take their drugs every day. These days that is pretty easy, most people take 1 pill in the morning and that's it.
peterwwillis 7y ago
What option doesn't exist? You can take PreP regardless of what kind of sex party you go to.

gambiting 7y ago

Especially since we live in a fucked up world where there are people who spread HIV on purpose as some sort of sick goal. I wouldn't trust someone I don't have a lot of history with about something like this.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
nkingsy 7y ago
I don’t think they would tell you they were HIV positive if their goal was to infect you.