2 ms·

I'm also gay - and know that gay men can also have prejudices against gay people. The study you link to does not back up the claim in your original comment. It

by foldr 7y ago

I'm also gay - and know that gay men can also have prejudices against gay people. The study you link to does not back up the claim in your original comment. It will take a great real more work to discover the overall health impact of PrEP. It helps no-one to spread unevidenced claims based on anecdata and prejudice. We currently have no clear picture of the effect of PrEP on condom use. It's extremely difficult to get reliable data on that kind of thing. And note that some increase in the spread of treatable and relatively trivial STDs is absolutely a price worth paying, if it comes to that. There's probably a paralell universe where PrEP was invented before condoms, and people like you are complaining about the fall in PrEP uptake caused by the availability of condoms...

azinman2 7y ago
I don’t even know how to respond to your assertion that my personal experience is invalid because of.. prejudice? I’ve literally witnessed dozens and dozens of times people pressuring myself or my friends (or my friends pressuring others) into condomless sex because of PReP. That’s... invalid? Do I need to submit grindr screenshots, lol?! What’s not backing it up? From the study’s abstract: Pre-exposure prophylaxis use was associated with a significant increase in rectal chlamydia (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-2.13) and an increase in any STI diagnosis (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, .99-1.54). The association of PrEP use with STI diagnoses was stronger in later studies. Most studies showed evidence of an increase in condomless sex among PrEP users.
- foldr 7y ago
  It's not invalid, but it's only your personal experience, not necessarily indicative of broader trends. Grindr itself is a tiny slice of the MSM population. There are lots of studies. The overall picture is unclear. And some increase in condomless sex combined with a wide uptake of PrEP could be a net positive.
  - azinman2 7y ago
    My experience shows it’s far from non-zero, as does the meta analysis I linked. Your net positive would only be until a new virus comes along that creates a new epidemic. And that’s my point.

by foldr 7y ago

azinman2 7y ago

I don’t even know how to respond to your assertion that my personal experience is invalid because of.. prejudice? I’ve literally witnessed dozens and dozens of times people pressuring myself or my friends (or my friends pressuring others) into condomless sex because of PReP. That’s... invalid? Do I need to submit grindr screenshots, lol?! What’s not backing it up? From the study’s abstract: Pre-exposure prophylaxis use was associated with a significant increase in rectal chlamydia (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-2.13) and an increase in any STI diagnosis (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, .99-1.54). The association of PrEP use with STI diagnoses was stronger in later studies. Most studies showed evidence of an increase in condomless sex among PrEP users.

foldr 7y ago
It's not invalid, but it's only your personal experience, not necessarily indicative of broader trends. Grindr itself is a tiny slice of the MSM population. There are lots of studies. The overall picture is unclear. And some increase in condomless sex combined with a wide uptake of PrEP could be a net positive.
- azinman2 7y ago
  My experience shows it’s far from non-zero, as does the meta analysis I linked. Your net positive would only be until a new virus comes along that creates a new epidemic. And that’s my point.