6 ms·

I’m going to be very mad if there is a resurgence in HIV because of the asinine GOP. If people have to be worried again about their next sexual contact (condoms

I’m going to be very mad if there is a resurgence in HIV because of the asinine GOP. If people have to be worried again about their next sexual contact (condoms only offer between 70-90% protection against HIV), we will return to a prudish lifestyle again at a time the west can least afford it with falling birth rates.

monlockandkey 3y ago
A prudish lifestyle means marriage instead of promiscuity, abortions will decrease and the birth rate will rise.
- RajT88 3y ago
  Not really. Most abortions are women who already have children. Once upon a time, this meant that most abortions were carried out by married women (marriage itself is less common now). The connection between marriage and abortion isn't what you think it is.
  - monlockandkey 3y ago
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/656516/abortion-distribution-united-states-by-relationship-status/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/656516/abortion-distribu... 77% of abortions done by people who are not married and 46% done by women who are not married and not even cohabiting. Abortion is a symptom of a problem which is the lack of marriage and the highly promiscuous lifestyle that is sold to us. Married people when there is a child on the way (planned or unplanned), there is little to no reason to get an abortion. Sleeping around lifestyle, of course the first thing that happens when pregnant, abortion...
    - chowells 3y ago
      Abortion is a symptom of preventing conception being too much hassle. Nothing more, nothing less. And you realize that people of every age group are having less sex than any time in the last 30 years, right? It's almost like this "promiscuous lifestyle" you're so terrified of doesn't exist.
      - RajT88 3y ago
        Not to mention a host of societal factors leading to more autonomy for women which in turn leads to (you guessed it) sex outside of marriage. To make more women married, we would have to roll back the clock on all those hard won freedoms. Let's not do that, let's maybe just make birth control more accessible, effective and affordable. Boom! Abortion problem solved. The person I was responding to initially clearly does not want to solve abortion this way.
powersnail 3y ago
Is a prudish lifestyle going to affect birth rate all that much? I can’t imagine the solution for falling birth rate to be that people need to sleep around more. If that were true, it wouldn’t have fallen in the first place.
- malux85 3y ago
  Exactly, myself, and all of my straight peers are not having children because they are expensive, for all of us it's cost of living (well, and I'm gay, but there's ways around that :P)
jimbob45 3y ago
condoms only offer between 70-90% protection against HIV PrEP offers 100% protection against HIV.
- redserk 3y ago
  At least in the US, PrEP can be very expensive.
  - jasonjei 3y ago
    If you have healthcare, I believe prep is required coverage.
  - alwa 3y ago
    Can be, and certainly is on paper, but in practice most everybody professionally involved with this problem knows that the groups at the most risk also tend to be among the most economically vulnerable. I know a lot of USians on Prep, none of whom pay out of pocket for it. It’s heavily subsidized through public health channels, manufacturer rebate programs to help with high deductibles for insured people, and grant organizations like the PAN Foundation. Truvada has a generic now. Plus, in 2019 the federal government designated it as a preventative therapy that ~all insurance plans must cover without copay or deductible [0]. Now, it’s true that not everybody is insured (though people who are economically vulnerable tend to qualify for heavily subsidized insurance under the ACA or Medicaid). Still, the costs of Prep specifically in the US, while very high, don’t tend to be borne by the patients directly. [0] [PDF] https://nastad.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/PDF-PrEP-Coverage-Brief.pdf https://nastad.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/PDF-PrEP-Cove...
    - huytersd 3y ago
      As an aside, how do you know so many people on prep? Are you gay?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- huytersd 3y ago
Throw83858 3y ago
[flagged]
- striking 3y ago
  You've got this so twisted that I'm not sure where to begin explaining. Maybe this CDC link can help you: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html A relevant quote: > Many of these state laws, then and now, criminalize actions that cannot transmit HIV – such as biting or spitting – and apply regardless of actual transmission, or intent. After more than 40 years of HIV research and significant biomedical advancements to treat and prevent HIV transmission, many state laws are now outdated and do not reflect our current understanding of HIV. In many cases, this same standard is not applied to other infectious, treatable diseases. Further, these laws have been shown to increase stigma, exacerbate disparities, and may discourage HIV testing.
  - Throw83858 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - striking 3y ago
      If not for your benefit, then for everyone else's; here are the DOJ's recommendations for modernization[1], from a sub-link of the above: > Generally, the best practice would be for states to reform these laws to eliminate HIV- specific criminal penalties except in two distinct circumstances. First, states may wish to retain criminal liability when a person who knows he/she is HIV positive commits a (non-HIV specific) sex crime where there is a risk of transmission (e.g., rape or other sexual assault). The second circumstance is where the individual knows he/she is HIV positive and the evidence clearly demonstrates that individual’s intent was to transmit the virus and that the behavior engaged in had a significant risk of transmission, whether or not transmission actually occurred. > For states that choose to retain HIV-specific criminal laws or penalty enhancements beyond these two limited circumstances, the best practice would be to reform and modernize them so that they accurately reflect the current science of risk and modes of transmission, the quality of life and life span of individuals who are living with HIV, account for circumstances where the failure to disclose is directly related to intimate partner violence, and ensure they are the desired vehicle to achieve the states’ intended purpose in enacting them initially or retaining them in modernized form. [The document continues with specific, scientifically backed advice that would help inform HIV-specific statutes.] 1: https://www.hivlawandpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DOj-HIV-Criminal-Law-Best-Practices-Guide.pdf https://www.hivlawandpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DOj-HIV-... --- As for you in particular, I'm not sure who's culture warring here. Maybe this discussion would be more interesting if you provided a tangible argument based in health or science rather than vague political gesturing.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
totetsu 3y ago
Not just chastity but also poverty. Imagine how much economic damage a global HIV pandemic would do that can be avoided by keeping it suppressed. What it the opposition to continuing this program thinking? The article mentions wrongly associating it with abortions, .. and maybe some support goes to at risk people which includes mentioning transgender… they would tank the global economy and ruin their own lives on this principle? I don’t get it.
- gottorf 3y ago
  > Not just chastity but also poverty. Virtually every cultural subgroup in history had their birthrates plummet once they reached a certain amount of wealth. Evidence indicates that if anything, poverty is good for population growth.
  - totetsu 3y ago
    But how does that work out in places with untreated endemic HIV?
- Tanoc 3y ago
  It's a combination of desperation, fear, and willful ignorance (one might even say self-induced stupidity). You've had forty years of propaganda at this point, and the old management who designed that propaganda for their followers are retiring or dying and being replaced by younger generations who were or are the followers of that propaganda. In essence these newer generations don't know the lies aren't real, and have been in so deep for most of their lives that they refuse to shatter their worldviews. And so when those worldviews keep being shut down or outright disproven they become more reactive, doing anything they can to keep their understanding of the world intact. They believe that their opposition are creating lies and using systems of information and governance to support those lies, and so to destroy their opposition they are willing to destroy the very systems they themselves work in and rely on to dispel the supposed lies. They believe they are the only sane men and women in a world of shadows and madness because that's the only way they can continue to function. There is no reasoning with someone who's gone that far. The veneer of egalitarianism that politics in the U.S. has prevents anyone from actually doing anything to stop this increasingly volatile group lest the intervening mediators be seen by their peers both within the volatile group and without as aggressive savages who would subvert well established conventions. The potential mediators must let themselves be stabbed and reply with "That is quite impolite" or else they lose all trust from said peers.
Grazester 3y ago
If a condom doesn't break then it's 100% effective. When a condom breaks you fails in a manner that you will know it failed and then there is PEP.
- huytersd 3y ago
  I think there’s a chance of getting it if the condom rolls/bunches up as well.
  - Grazester 3y ago
    This usually the result of poor condom use/knowledge, like condom breakage. If the condom is too big this can happen or you become flaccid(it's a thing to also check to make use that this isn't happening during intercourse), and condoms can break when you don't use lubricant or the incorrect lubricant(e.g. petroleum jelly based lubricant).
- FFP999 3y ago
  There's no such thing as "100% effective".
  - Grazester 3y ago
    Abstinence is as they like to tell you. But really most of the margin for infection for condoms is the result of poor use.
    - FFP999 3y ago
      Ok sure, abstinence, but talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - Gibbon1 3y ago
      Yes the quoted effectiveness is based on the average in practice. Anecdotally what I've seen is the failure of condoms is usually got drunk and didn't use one. In particular substance abuse is highly correlated with unsafe sex and HIV infection. I'm pretty sure it's also correlated with birth control failure.
missedthecue 3y ago
Birth rates were higher back when lifestyles were more prudish. Hypergamy seems to have very little positive affect on the production and growth of healthy families and children.
- John23832 3y ago
  Birthrates have been falling ever since the invention of the pill. Children (often multiple) could no longer be forced upon women. This, along with women becoming their own economic units meant that they no longer have to risk their life and bodies in return for food and shelter from a man.
  - xienze 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - John23832 3y ago
      It has not. Not providing a society the cultivates the families that create and cultivate children has. Providing a system that helps parents raise children rather than be wage slaves makes people want to have kids.
      - HideousKojima 3y ago
        >Providing a system that helps parents raise children rather than be wage slaves makes people want to have kids. Cool, I take it you'll join my anti-immigration and anti-women-in-the-workforce rally then? It's my simple solution to raise wages so that families are affordable on a single income.
        fzeroracer 3y ago
        You have a very literal example in Japan and last I checked I don't think they were doing very well either. I don't think your simple solution is quite so simple.
bakugo 3y ago
> If people have to be worried again about their next sexual contact (condoms only offer between 70-90% protection against HIV), we will return to a prudish lifestyle again at a time the west can least afford it with falling birth rates. Are you really trying to imply that a "prudish lifestyle" where people actually have long-term relationships and marry is bad for birthrates, and more casual sex is good?
- amanaplanacanal 3y ago
  Ok I’ll bite. Yes. Forcing people to marry early and stay in abusive relationships is bad. Having options is good.
  - huytersd 3y ago
    Abusive is too wide of term that covers too many things. Marriages can be hard if it’s a partnership of equals. It needs to move back to the paradigm where the husband is the primary dominant and makes all the decisions. The wife needs to be submissive. Marriages of this variety are easy. We already have domestic violence laws in place so there are safeguards in place against actual abuse.
    - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
      Good god no. That kind is patriarchal bullshit is on its way out, and good riddance. I kind of suspect you are just trolling here.
      - bakugo 3y ago
        > That kind is patriarchal bullshit is on its way out And so are birthrates, as a result.
      - huytersd 3y ago
        I wasn’t trolling. It’s probably my least progressive viewpoint but honestly I don’t see a society that can continue to make technological progress without it. The patriarchy isn’t going anywhere, if anything it is only growing in the US GOP, East Asia, South Asia, Eastern Europe and Russia, the Middle East, Australia, Africa and Latin America.
dudul 3y ago
I dont think promiscuous lifestyle translates into more babies. Sorry, but this is a plain stupid assertion.
faeriechangling 3y ago
PrEP exists and is 99% effective. I've absolutely heard of people who use PrEP and have sex with people with HIV/AIDS bareback. Not sure if I'd recommend doing that, but people will find a way to screw if they can.
- huytersd 3y ago
  PrEP takes preplanning and atleast several hours before someone can have sex even if they have the pills on them. That’s not really going to work for casual hookups.
  - ProfessorLayton 3y ago
    No it doesn't. Other than the first few days after getting a prescription where one needs to wait for it to build up in the body, it's 1 pill/day with no further planning.
    - huytersd 3y ago
      Well that’s even worse. You have to be on it continuously? I thought it was just before any planned sexual encounters? They’re basically ARTs and wreak havoc on the body (10x increase in cancers- that’s a 1000%, neurological damage etc.) over time.
      - ProfessorLayton 3y ago
        Nope, prep is well tolerated by the vast majority of individuals, although in rare cases it can reduce kidney function and bone density — However, the prescription requires regular lab testing (Where they also run STI tests as well), and if issues are found, there's two options: 1: Getting off prep, in which case kidney/bones should return to normal. 2: Switching to a newer version of prep called Descovy (in the US), which is has less of the aforementioned side effects, but is more expensive because there is no generic for it yet, and may not be covered by some insurances. Although technically not sanctioned in the US (IIRC), the 2-1-1 method can also be an option for planned encounters: 2 pills 24hrs before the encounter, and 1/day for 2 days after the encounter.

monlockandkey 3y ago

A prudish lifestyle means marriage instead of promiscuity, abortions will decrease and the birth rate will rise.

RajT88 3y ago
Not really. Most abortions are women who already have children. Once upon a time, this meant that most abortions were carried out by married women (marriage itself is less common now). The connection between marriage and abortion isn't what you think it is.
- monlockandkey 3y ago
  https://www.statista.com/statistics/656516/abortion-distribution-united-states-by-relationship-status/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/656516/abortion-distribu... 77% of abortions done by people who are not married and 46% done by women who are not married and not even cohabiting. Abortion is a symptom of a problem which is the lack of marriage and the highly promiscuous lifestyle that is sold to us. Married people when there is a child on the way (planned or unplanned), there is little to no reason to get an abortion. Sleeping around lifestyle, of course the first thing that happens when pregnant, abortion...
  - chowells 3y ago
    Abortion is a symptom of preventing conception being too much hassle. Nothing more, nothing less. And you realize that people of every age group are having less sex than any time in the last 30 years, right? It's almost like this "promiscuous lifestyle" you're so terrified of doesn't exist.
    - RajT88 3y ago
      Not to mention a host of societal factors leading to more autonomy for women which in turn leads to (you guessed it) sex outside of marriage. To make more women married, we would have to roll back the clock on all those hard won freedoms. Let's not do that, let's maybe just make birth control more accessible, effective and affordable. Boom! Abortion problem solved. The person I was responding to initially clearly does not want to solve abortion this way.

powersnail 3y ago

Is a prudish lifestyle going to affect birth rate all that much? I can’t imagine the solution for falling birth rate to be that people need to sleep around more. If that were true, it wouldn’t have fallen in the first place.

malux85 3y ago
Exactly, myself, and all of my straight peers are not having children because they are expensive, for all of us it's cost of living (well, and I'm gay, but there's ways around that :P)

jimbob45 3y ago

condoms only offer between 70-90% protection against HIV PrEP offers 100% protection against HIV.

redserk 3y ago
At least in the US, PrEP can be very expensive.
- jasonjei 3y ago
  If you have healthcare, I believe prep is required coverage.
- alwa 3y ago
  Can be, and certainly is on paper, but in practice most everybody professionally involved with this problem knows that the groups at the most risk also tend to be among the most economically vulnerable. I know a lot of USians on Prep, none of whom pay out of pocket for it. It’s heavily subsidized through public health channels, manufacturer rebate programs to help with high deductibles for insured people, and grant organizations like the PAN Foundation. Truvada has a generic now. Plus, in 2019 the federal government designated it as a preventative therapy that ~all insurance plans must cover without copay or deductible [0]. Now, it’s true that not everybody is insured (though people who are economically vulnerable tend to qualify for heavily subsidized insurance under the ACA or Medicaid). Still, the costs of Prep specifically in the US, while very high, don’t tend to be borne by the patients directly. [0] [PDF] https://nastad.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/PDF-PrEP-Coverage-Brief.pdf https://nastad.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/PDF-PrEP-Cove...
  - huytersd 3y ago
    As an aside, how do you know so many people on prep? Are you gay?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
huytersd 3y ago

Throw83858 3y ago

[flagged]

striking 3y ago
You've got this so twisted that I'm not sure where to begin explaining. Maybe this CDC link can help you: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html A relevant quote: > Many of these state laws, then and now, criminalize actions that cannot transmit HIV – such as biting or spitting – and apply regardless of actual transmission, or intent. After more than 40 years of HIV research and significant biomedical advancements to treat and prevent HIV transmission, many state laws are now outdated and do not reflect our current understanding of HIV. In many cases, this same standard is not applied to other infectious, treatable diseases. Further, these laws have been shown to increase stigma, exacerbate disparities, and may discourage HIV testing.
- Throw83858 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - striking 3y ago
    If not for your benefit, then for everyone else's; here are the DOJ's recommendations for modernization[1], from a sub-link of the above: > Generally, the best practice would be for states to reform these laws to eliminate HIV- specific criminal penalties except in two distinct circumstances. First, states may wish to retain criminal liability when a person who knows he/she is HIV positive commits a (non-HIV specific) sex crime where there is a risk of transmission (e.g., rape or other sexual assault). The second circumstance is where the individual knows he/she is HIV positive and the evidence clearly demonstrates that individual’s intent was to transmit the virus and that the behavior engaged in had a significant risk of transmission, whether or not transmission actually occurred. > For states that choose to retain HIV-specific criminal laws or penalty enhancements beyond these two limited circumstances, the best practice would be to reform and modernize them so that they accurately reflect the current science of risk and modes of transmission, the quality of life and life span of individuals who are living with HIV, account for circumstances where the failure to disclose is directly related to intimate partner violence, and ensure they are the desired vehicle to achieve the states’ intended purpose in enacting them initially or retaining them in modernized form. [The document continues with specific, scientifically backed advice that would help inform HIV-specific statutes.] 1: https://www.hivlawandpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DOj-HIV-Criminal-Law-Best-Practices-Guide.pdf https://www.hivlawandpolicy.org/sites/default/files/DOj-HIV-... --- As for you in particular, I'm not sure who's culture warring here. Maybe this discussion would be more interesting if you provided a tangible argument based in health or science rather than vague political gesturing.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

totetsu 3y ago

Not just chastity but also poverty. Imagine how much economic damage a global HIV pandemic would do that can be avoided by keeping it suppressed. What it the opposition to continuing this program thinking? The article mentions wrongly associating it with abortions, .. and maybe some support goes to at risk people which includes mentioning transgender… they would tank the global economy and ruin their own lives on this principle? I don’t get it.

gottorf 3y ago
> Not just chastity but also poverty. Virtually every cultural subgroup in history had their birthrates plummet once they reached a certain amount of wealth. Evidence indicates that if anything, poverty is good for population growth.
- totetsu 3y ago
  But how does that work out in places with untreated endemic HIV?
Tanoc 3y ago
It's a combination of desperation, fear, and willful ignorance (one might even say self-induced stupidity). You've had forty years of propaganda at this point, and the old management who designed that propaganda for their followers are retiring or dying and being replaced by younger generations who were or are the followers of that propaganda. In essence these newer generations don't know the lies aren't real, and have been in so deep for most of their lives that they refuse to shatter their worldviews. And so when those worldviews keep being shut down or outright disproven they become more reactive, doing anything they can to keep their understanding of the world intact. They believe that their opposition are creating lies and using systems of information and governance to support those lies, and so to destroy their opposition they are willing to destroy the very systems they themselves work in and rely on to dispel the supposed lies. They believe they are the only sane men and women in a world of shadows and madness because that's the only way they can continue to function. There is no reasoning with someone who's gone that far. The veneer of egalitarianism that politics in the U.S. has prevents anyone from actually doing anything to stop this increasingly volatile group lest the intervening mediators be seen by their peers both within the volatile group and without as aggressive savages who would subvert well established conventions. The potential mediators must let themselves be stabbed and reply with "That is quite impolite" or else they lose all trust from said peers.

Grazester 3y ago

If a condom doesn't break then it's 100% effective. When a condom breaks you fails in a manner that you will know it failed and then there is PEP.

huytersd 3y ago
I think there’s a chance of getting it if the condom rolls/bunches up as well.
- Grazester 3y ago
  This usually the result of poor condom use/knowledge, like condom breakage. If the condom is too big this can happen or you become flaccid(it's a thing to also check to make use that this isn't happening during intercourse), and condoms can break when you don't use lubricant or the incorrect lubricant(e.g. petroleum jelly based lubricant).
FFP999 3y ago
There's no such thing as "100% effective".
- Grazester 3y ago
  Abstinence is as they like to tell you. But really most of the margin for infection for condoms is the result of poor use.
  - FFP999 3y ago
    Ok sure, abstinence, but talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - Gibbon1 3y ago
    Yes the quoted effectiveness is based on the average in practice. Anecdotally what I've seen is the failure of condoms is usually got drunk and didn't use one. In particular substance abuse is highly correlated with unsafe sex and HIV infection. I'm pretty sure it's also correlated with birth control failure.

missedthecue 3y ago

Birth rates were higher back when lifestyles were more prudish. Hypergamy seems to have very little positive affect on the production and growth of healthy families and children.

John23832 3y ago
Birthrates have been falling ever since the invention of the pill. Children (often multiple) could no longer be forced upon women. This, along with women becoming their own economic units meant that they no longer have to risk their life and bodies in return for food and shelter from a man.
- xienze 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - John23832 3y ago
    It has not. Not providing a society the cultivates the families that create and cultivate children has. Providing a system that helps parents raise children rather than be wage slaves makes people want to have kids.
    - HideousKojima 3y ago
      >Providing a system that helps parents raise children rather than be wage slaves makes people want to have kids. Cool, I take it you'll join my anti-immigration and anti-women-in-the-workforce rally then? It's my simple solution to raise wages so that families are affordable on a single income.
      - fzeroracer 3y ago
        You have a very literal example in Japan and last I checked I don't think they were doing very well either. I don't think your simple solution is quite so simple.

bakugo 3y ago

> If people have to be worried again about their next sexual contact (condoms only offer between 70-90% protection against HIV), we will return to a prudish lifestyle again at a time the west can least afford it with falling birth rates. Are you really trying to imply that a "prudish lifestyle" where people actually have long-term relationships and marry is bad for birthrates, and more casual sex is good?

amanaplanacanal 3y ago
Ok I’ll bite. Yes. Forcing people to marry early and stay in abusive relationships is bad. Having options is good.
- huytersd 3y ago
  Abusive is too wide of term that covers too many things. Marriages can be hard if it’s a partnership of equals. It needs to move back to the paradigm where the husband is the primary dominant and makes all the decisions. The wife needs to be submissive. Marriages of this variety are easy. We already have domestic violence laws in place so there are safeguards in place against actual abuse.
  - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
    Good god no. That kind is patriarchal bullshit is on its way out, and good riddance. I kind of suspect you are just trolling here.
    - bakugo 3y ago
      > That kind is patriarchal bullshit is on its way out And so are birthrates, as a result.
    - huytersd 3y ago
      I wasn’t trolling. It’s probably my least progressive viewpoint but honestly I don’t see a society that can continue to make technological progress without it. The patriarchy isn’t going anywhere, if anything it is only growing in the US GOP, East Asia, South Asia, Eastern Europe and Russia, the Middle East, Australia, Africa and Latin America.

dudul 3y ago

I dont think promiscuous lifestyle translates into more babies. Sorry, but this is a plain stupid assertion.

faeriechangling 3y ago

PrEP exists and is 99% effective. I've absolutely heard of people who use PrEP and have sex with people with HIV/AIDS bareback. Not sure if I'd recommend doing that, but people will find a way to screw if they can.

huytersd 3y ago
PrEP takes preplanning and atleast several hours before someone can have sex even if they have the pills on them. That’s not really going to work for casual hookups.
- ProfessorLayton 3y ago
  No it doesn't. Other than the first few days after getting a prescription where one needs to wait for it to build up in the body, it's 1 pill/day with no further planning.
  - huytersd 3y ago
    Well that’s even worse. You have to be on it continuously? I thought it was just before any planned sexual encounters? They’re basically ARTs and wreak havoc on the body (10x increase in cancers- that’s a 1000%, neurological damage etc.) over time.
    - ProfessorLayton 3y ago
      Nope, prep is well tolerated by the vast majority of individuals, although in rare cases it can reduce kidney function and bone density — However, the prescription requires regular lab testing (Where they also run STI tests as well), and if issues are found, there's two options: 1: Getting off prep, in which case kidney/bones should return to normal. 2: Switching to a newer version of prep called Descovy (in the US), which is has less of the aforementioned side effects, but is more expensive because there is no generic for it yet, and may not be covered by some insurances. Although technically not sanctioned in the US (IIRC), the 2-1-1 method can also be an option for planned encounters: 2 pills 24hrs before the encounter, and 1/day for 2 days after the encounter.