Odds of getting HIV through unprotected sex?

[CostaRicaBill]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't worry Billy just cause u got hiv doesnt mean u will get full blown aids.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh ok, great, now I'm not worried anymore.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been with my girl now 2 year, we have both been check and plan to be married. I still wrap it.

[/ QUOTE ]

-PV

NT

[Skipbidder]

Archives of Internal Medicine, January 2004
These are estimates from the paper (which actually focuses on cost-effectiveness of post-exposure treatment prophylaxis).

With a known postive partner, chance of transmission via:

unprotected receptive anal sex, 2%
unprotected receptive vaginal sex, 0.1%
unprotected insertive anal or vaginal sex 0.06% (this one surprised me, that there wasn't a difference)
receptive oral fellatio, 0.04%

The chances of a partner being positive of course varies considerably according to risk factors.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
so what are you saying wacki, that the 1/300 figure might really be more like 1/100 or 1/600? or are you saying that the 1/300 figure might really be more like 1/30?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying there are way to many confounding factors for me to attempt to say 1/30 or 1/500. There are many cases where someone had sex with an HIV+ once and got it (And I've met/talked to dozens of people that claim this), there are also many cases that someone had sex with an HIV+ for years and never got it. With the latency period of HIV detection, I simply think it's too difficult to give a reasonably accurate approximation.

Whether it's 1/30 or 1/300 or 1/500, I don't know. Another factor that many studies don't take into account is the various strains. There are many people that seem to be resistant to many strains, there are other strains that seem to be much more contagious then others. Still, I don't know enough to go into detail about those stats. 1/500 is on the far end of my optimism. If you believe the 1/2,000 statistics, you should see the HIV projections on the NIH website. HIV is projected to become histories worst epidemic well within our lifetime. It's supposed to be even worse then the flu and the black plague. If those projections are correct, then how the hell could the 1/2,00 0 be correct? I honestly think we will be able to combat HIV in America before it gets that bad though.

Almost all statistical methods use mathematical methods that require assumptions. Many of the statistical analysis employed by staticians working for pharmaceutical companies, politicians, and newspapers have assumptions that are beyond pathetic. A very well known pharmaceutical company in the US has well over 200 full time staticians but still has to hire university professors for counseling on a routine basis because their entire staff can't get the job right. I could go into much more detail about this, but I don't have the time. Very busy right now....

Here is a neat tidbit:

The inner surface of the foreskin -- but not any other outside part of the penis -- is rich in a type of cell that carries HIV directly to the T cells, the cells in which the virus replicates itself. There are currently 37 studies that show a huge difference risk of contracting for these two people.

Now, knowing that fact alone, do you think it's proper to include circumcised and noncircumcised people in the same risk group when giving the odds? Very few studies take this factor into account. In fact this info is almost totally ignored.

What about people with herpes and other STDs?

What about various strains of HIV?

What about different races of people? There is tons of evidence that blacks/Hispanics/whites contract at different rates.

What I'm saying is you can't simplify it into one single number. There is just way too much variance among people/strains/conditions. I'm also saying there isn't enough information right now to make a solid guess. Still, things look very good for circumcised males without any other STDs. (I have no problem accepting 1/500 here) They also look very bad for .... well you know the rest.

I need a nap

The very tired,

wacki

[Riskwise]

i dont wanna come off like im making fun of your friend or anything, but your friend is [censored] retarded.

[wacki]

Interesting information about a lot of this statistical crap:

http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_..._7_97/bob1.htm

"The shared secret of psychological researchers is that we don't take our own data too seriously when reaching theoretical judgments," contends John E. Richters, head of the disruptive disorders program at
the National Institute of Mental Health in Rockville, Md.

"Even the brightest people use empirical research mainly to keep their careers going. When I talk to them in private, they express much more sophisticated views about mental functioning than what you see in their published reports."

Like I said, a lot of papers that flaunt statistics are basically being used as opium for the feeble minded.

[AffleckKGB]

[ QUOTE ]

Does anyone actually know someone who has contracted HIV through normal heterosexual intercourse?


[/ QUOTE ]

Since nobody has answered this question, I'll assume it's no. I've never even heard of anyone in America who contracted HIV this way, (be careful of citing Magic),and yet hetero guys still fear it more than driving home drunk.

[BusterStacks]

I don't wear condoms.

I have had lots of sex with many partners.

That is all.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Does anyone actually know someone who has contracted HIV through normal heterosexual intercourse?


[/ QUOTE ]

Since nobody has answered this question, I'll assume it's no. I've never even heard of anyone in America who contracted HIV this way, (be careful of citing Magic),and yet hetero guys still fear it more than driving home drunk.

[/ QUOTE ]

I take it you completely skipped my posts and InchoateHands.

[slickpoppa]

Having sex with a virgin cures AIDS anyways