7 ms·

PrEP has negative side effects (besides being quite expensive for the state), condoms on the other side, don't have side effects, and are cheap. It's a matter

by wtdata 7y ago

PrEP has negative side effects (besides being quite expensive for the state), condoms on the other side, don't have side effects, and are cheap. It's a matter of having some sense of personal responsibility really.

nerdjon 7y ago
1. Condoms break 2. Some people are allergic to them 3. There are some activities that you really don't want to do with a condom 4. How about we just don't fucking shame people for not wanting to use a condom as long as both (or all) parties agree. Especially when there is a drug like prep.
- wtdata 7y ago
  > How about we just don't fucking shame people for not wanting to use a condom as long as both (or all) parties agree. Especially when there is a drug like prep. That depends if it's those people bearing the full cost of buying PrEP, or if they expect the state/insurance companies to do it for them.
  - nerdjon 7y ago
    Why not, in most not ass backwards places you can get free condoms. Maybe it should not cost $1300 a month for no good reason in the US.
    - wtdata 7y ago
      The good reason is that PrEP has negative side effects, it's expensive, and you don't need it if you show some personal responsibility and use a condom. Nobody should be expected to be financing your personal preferences when it comes to the way you prefer to have sexual intercourse.
      - nerdjon 7y ago
        Seriously, people need to stop with this negative side effects bullshit. Yes there are side effects, there are fucking side effects to almost anything medical. The side effects are minimal at worst considering you have to go into the doctor every 3 months for testing (both for the side effects and a full STD panel). If they notice an issue they take you off of it. Condoms are not 100% though, neither is prep. Its just another option and if the US was not being gouged in the price of prep, the cost would not be much different than the cost of condoms depending on how frequently you are having sex. I am showing personal responsibility by both myself and my husband using Prep and getting tested regularly.
        wtdata 7y ago
        > I am showing personal responsibility by both myself and my husband using Prep and getting tested regularly. Can't understand why you need PrEP unless you or your husband have unprotected sex outside marriage. That's the personal responsibility needed for both you and your husband: not having unprotected sex with other partners. Again, can't see why the state or the other people paying their health insurances should have to pay for your preferences when it comes to use a condom. Nobody likes to use condoms... yet, responsible people, do.
        nerdjon 7y ago
        We are both on prep because we are in an open relationship, and yes sometimes that involves "unprotected" sex. Again though, if it was not for the fact that the US continues to charge significantly more than any other country I would happily pay for it myself. I already pay for the copay. I am not personally asking for the government or anyone else to pay for my Prep. But, as it is we offer condoms for free if you know where to look. (Ignoring the fact that this is under attack for a moment...) we offer reproductive services to woman that need it. So why the fuck is prep so different. God forbid as a society we focus on the society as a whole instead of demonizing the choices that people make.
        growlist 7y ago
    - Nuzzerino 7y ago
      Who the heck is going through $1300 worth of condoms in one month?
- sadris 7y ago
  HIV has already mutated to bypass prep. There was a case in SF about 8 months ago in the local news. Wear condoms.
  - matthewmacleod 7y ago
    Condoms are less effective against HIV than PrEP.
    - wtdata 7y ago
      That's a clear overstatement for which I can't find any evidence. Contracting HIV with unprotected sex is difficult (1/1000 for vaginal sex and insertive anal sex, 1/71 for receiving anal sex - all numbers for unprotected sex) [1], breaking a condom is also difficult (4% cases in anal sex between gay men - which is the higher number [2]). Meaning that contracting HIV while wearing a condom, is extremely difficult (0.05% in the worst hypothesis). It's up to you then, to prove that PrEP is more efficient than 99.95% of times (while still disregarding that unlike condoms, PrEP doesn't protect you in any way from other STDs... yes, those STDs that people not using condoms and that think they are entitled to have other tax/insurance payers providing PrEP for them, are spreading around). [1] https://www.catie.ca/en/pif/summer-2012/putting-number-it-risk-exposure-hiv https://www.catie.ca/en/pif/summer-2012/putting-number-it-ri... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27227161 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27227161
    - sadris 7y ago
      PrEP effectiveness against PrEP-immune HIV is zero.
agentdrtran 7y ago
> It's a matter of having some sense of personal responsibility really. This exact phrase was used to spin the deaths of thousands of gay men as a personal failing not many years ago. Stop doing it.
- wtdata 7y ago
  If anyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, in this day and age and in a developed country, catches an STD for not using condoms when they should, you can be certain it's their lack of personal responsibility.
  - matthewmacleod 7y ago
    This is a useless attitude that causes people to die. In the real world, people are exposed to various risks. It is a risk to drive a car. It is a risk to play a sport. It is a risk to drink alcohol. Every time you eat, there is a risk that you choke and die. Solving public health problems by saying “you should have take more responsibility” is not effective. But the goal is to reduce negative outcomes. We can regulate cars to make them safer. We can provide free programs to stop people smoking. And yes, we can provide alternative HIV prevention methods to people who aren’t reliably using condoms. Anyway, your underlying point is wrong in any case, for two reasons - first, PrEP is more effective at HIV prevention than condom use, which would presumably mean in your view that not using is would be irresponsible. Second, there are obvious cases when people contracting STDs because they didn’t use condoms for sex do not bear personal responsibility, such as when one of a long-term supposedly-monogamous couple contracts a STD without informing the other.
    - wtdata 7y ago
      You are totally wrong in both your assumptions about what I said: 1st) PrEP solely protects against HIV. It doesn't protect against any other kind of STDs whatsoever. What is your solution here really? 2nd) Has it was clearly stated, I claimed it was your personal responsibility if you contracted STDs for not using protection "when you should". In case it's not clear, example of situations where you should use condoms: When you pick up someone for a one night stand in a bar for instance. Yet you decided to construct a strawmen of marital infidelity to go on with your point.
cultus 7y ago
Wow, you're a homophobic bigot, and you also have no idea what you're talking about.
- nabnob 7y ago
  So much blatant homophobia in this thread wrapped up as concern for side effects.
  - cultus 7y ago
    Yeah, this dog-whistling act is getting pretty tiring.
    - nabnob 7y ago
      Of course the HN mods are warning people who are criticizing the homophobia too harshly (ha!) while leaving up the comments that amount to blaming people for contracting HIV.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
growlist 7y ago
Sad that you're downvoted for stating the truth.
- cultus 7y ago
  No, he's being downvoted for dog-whistle homophobia.
  - wtdata 7y ago
    You do realize that in the beginning I didn't even realize that the guy I was answering to is gay, right? That info doesn't show up anywhere in his comment. Also, you do realize that absolutely all that I said, applies exactly the same to any sexual preference, right? But of course, at the lack of any real argument against what I said, all that people like you can do, is to pull out some imaginary victim card. Here is an idea for you, stop playing the victim and take some responsibility for your actions.

by wtdata 7y ago

nerdjon 7y ago

1. Condoms break 2. Some people are allergic to them 3. There are some activities that you really don't want to do with a condom 4. How about we just don't fucking shame people for not wanting to use a condom as long as both (or all) parties agree. Especially when there is a drug like prep.

wtdata 7y ago
> How about we just don't fucking shame people for not wanting to use a condom as long as both (or all) parties agree. Especially when there is a drug like prep. That depends if it's those people bearing the full cost of buying PrEP, or if they expect the state/insurance companies to do it for them.
- nerdjon 7y ago
  Why not, in most not ass backwards places you can get free condoms. Maybe it should not cost $1300 a month for no good reason in the US.
  - wtdata 7y ago
    The good reason is that PrEP has negative side effects, it's expensive, and you don't need it if you show some personal responsibility and use a condom. Nobody should be expected to be financing your personal preferences when it comes to the way you prefer to have sexual intercourse.
    - nerdjon 7y ago
      Seriously, people need to stop with this negative side effects bullshit. Yes there are side effects, there are fucking side effects to almost anything medical. The side effects are minimal at worst considering you have to go into the doctor every 3 months for testing (both for the side effects and a full STD panel). If they notice an issue they take you off of it. Condoms are not 100% though, neither is prep. Its just another option and if the US was not being gouged in the price of prep, the cost would not be much different than the cost of condoms depending on how frequently you are having sex. I am showing personal responsibility by both myself and my husband using Prep and getting tested regularly.
      - wtdata 7y ago
        > I am showing personal responsibility by both myself and my husband using Prep and getting tested regularly. Can't understand why you need PrEP unless you or your husband have unprotected sex outside marriage. That's the personal responsibility needed for both you and your husband: not having unprotected sex with other partners. Again, can't see why the state or the other people paying their health insurances should have to pay for your preferences when it comes to use a condom. Nobody likes to use condoms... yet, responsible people, do.
        nerdjon 7y ago
        We are both on prep because we are in an open relationship, and yes sometimes that involves "unprotected" sex. Again though, if it was not for the fact that the US continues to charge significantly more than any other country I would happily pay for it myself. I already pay for the copay. I am not personally asking for the government or anyone else to pay for my Prep. But, as it is we offer condoms for free if you know where to look. (Ignoring the fact that this is under attack for a moment...) we offer reproductive services to woman that need it. So why the fuck is prep so different. God forbid as a society we focus on the society as a whole instead of demonizing the choices that people make.
        growlist 7y ago
  - Nuzzerino 7y ago
    Who the heck is going through $1300 worth of condoms in one month?
sadris 7y ago
HIV has already mutated to bypass prep. There was a case in SF about 8 months ago in the local news. Wear condoms.
- matthewmacleod 7y ago
  Condoms are less effective against HIV than PrEP.
  - wtdata 7y ago
    That's a clear overstatement for which I can't find any evidence. Contracting HIV with unprotected sex is difficult (1/1000 for vaginal sex and insertive anal sex, 1/71 for receiving anal sex - all numbers for unprotected sex) [1], breaking a condom is also difficult (4% cases in anal sex between gay men - which is the higher number [2]). Meaning that contracting HIV while wearing a condom, is extremely difficult (0.05% in the worst hypothesis). It's up to you then, to prove that PrEP is more efficient than 99.95% of times (while still disregarding that unlike condoms, PrEP doesn't protect you in any way from other STDs... yes, those STDs that people not using condoms and that think they are entitled to have other tax/insurance payers providing PrEP for them, are spreading around). [1] https://www.catie.ca/en/pif/summer-2012/putting-number-it-risk-exposure-hiv https://www.catie.ca/en/pif/summer-2012/putting-number-it-ri... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27227161 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27227161
  - sadris 7y ago
    PrEP effectiveness against PrEP-immune HIV is zero.

agentdrtran 7y ago

> It's a matter of having some sense of personal responsibility really. This exact phrase was used to spin the deaths of thousands of gay men as a personal failing not many years ago. Stop doing it.

wtdata 7y ago
If anyone, regardless of their sexual orientation, in this day and age and in a developed country, catches an STD for not using condoms when they should, you can be certain it's their lack of personal responsibility.
- matthewmacleod 7y ago
  This is a useless attitude that causes people to die. In the real world, people are exposed to various risks. It is a risk to drive a car. It is a risk to play a sport. It is a risk to drink alcohol. Every time you eat, there is a risk that you choke and die. Solving public health problems by saying “you should have take more responsibility” is not effective. But the goal is to reduce negative outcomes. We can regulate cars to make them safer. We can provide free programs to stop people smoking. And yes, we can provide alternative HIV prevention methods to people who aren’t reliably using condoms. Anyway, your underlying point is wrong in any case, for two reasons - first, PrEP is more effective at HIV prevention than condom use, which would presumably mean in your view that not using is would be irresponsible. Second, there are obvious cases when people contracting STDs because they didn’t use condoms for sex do not bear personal responsibility, such as when one of a long-term supposedly-monogamous couple contracts a STD without informing the other.
  - wtdata 7y ago
    You are totally wrong in both your assumptions about what I said: 1st) PrEP solely protects against HIV. It doesn't protect against any other kind of STDs whatsoever. What is your solution here really? 2nd) Has it was clearly stated, I claimed it was your personal responsibility if you contracted STDs for not using protection "when you should". In case it's not clear, example of situations where you should use condoms: When you pick up someone for a one night stand in a bar for instance. Yet you decided to construct a strawmen of marital infidelity to go on with your point.

cultus 7y ago

Wow, you're a homophobic bigot, and you also have no idea what you're talking about.

nabnob 7y ago
So much blatant homophobia in this thread wrapped up as concern for side effects.
- cultus 7y ago
  Yeah, this dog-whistling act is getting pretty tiring.
  - nabnob 7y ago
    Of course the HN mods are warning people who are criticizing the homophobia too harshly (ha!) while leaving up the comments that amount to blaming people for contracting HIV.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]

growlist 7y ago

Sad that you're downvoted for stating the truth.

cultus 7y ago
No, he's being downvoted for dog-whistle homophobia.
- wtdata 7y ago
  You do realize that in the beginning I didn't even realize that the guy I was answering to is gay, right? That info doesn't show up anywhere in his comment. Also, you do realize that absolutely all that I said, applies exactly the same to any sexual preference, right? But of course, at the lack of any real argument against what I said, all that people like you can do, is to pull out some imaginary victim card. Here is an idea for you, stop playing the victim and take some responsibility for your actions.