Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Swingers Chat |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No not offended but even if they had them there's still no guarantee as they may have played since they got the results " Fair point | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not even worth the paper it’s written. Simple get out to it is play safe every time until you trust them. " I always play safe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not even worth the paper it’s written. " It is if you understand the concept of probability | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What proof? We both get tested regularly but have never received any 'Proof' that we have. Are we missing something?? " I believe you can request a certificate! I get my kit sent through the post and send it back to them I then get a text with the results giving me the all clear. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does anyone ask for this before they play? " Yes " Would you be offended if someone asked? " No " Taking someone's word isn't really a reliable method, people can lie. " Can doesn't mean they will. Even asking is a filter, although asking for proof is better " I ask because I am considering adding this to my pre meet requirements, however it is going to limit the amount of people willing to meet drastically. Just wanted to get people's thoughts. Thanks And yes I get tested regularly." Not really hard to get meets though is it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does anyone ask for this before they play? Would you be offended if someone asked? Taking someone's word isn't really a reliable method, people can lie. I ask because I am considering adding this to my pre meet requirements, however it is going to limit the amount of people willing to meet drastically. Just wanted to get people's thoughts. Thanks And yes I get tested regularly." I would be offended | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What proof? We both get tested regularly but have never received any 'Proof' that we have. Are we missing something?? I believe you can request a certificate! I get my kit sent through the post and send it back to them I then get a text with the results giving me the all clear." Well I never knew that. We always go to the clinic together and in fact are going Tuesday. Will ask for certs lol! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The latency period for some infections is three months, so a result provided today is indicative of your health three months ago, not today. I've never been asked and I've never asked any one for a "clean bill of health". If someone asked to see one, I'd decline and move - it's none of their business. " The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business? 
" It's my business to look after my health and I take steps to do that. Other people can look after theirs. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do they give you a certificate when you’re all clear ?" No it’s like a coffee card. The more stamps representing different infections you have, the better | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business?
"My personal health data is my business. I don't ask to see anyone else's because it is none of my business. I don't know anyone else's sexual history, only my own. I don't know anyone else's sexual health, only my own. I take steps to protect my health from the scenario you describe without resorting to seeking proof of someone's health, not least because results today are already three months out of date. What steps other people take to protect theirs is their business. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business?
My personal health data is my business.
I don't ask to see anyone else's because it is none of my business.
I don't know anyone else's sexual history, only my own. I don't know anyone else's sexual health, only my own.
I take steps to protect my health from the scenario you describe without resorting to seeking proof of someone's health, not least because results today are already three months out of date.
What steps other people take to protect theirs is their business.
"There's only one reason I can think that someone would have an attitude like that. Condoms go from 99% to 0% when they break or come off, which they do on a regular enough basis. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business?
My personal health data is my business.
I don't ask to see anyone else's because it is none of my business.
I don't know anyone else's sexual history, only my own. I don't know anyone else's sexual health, only my own.
I take steps to protect my health from the scenario you describe without resorting to seeking proof of someone's health, not least because results today are already three months out of date.
What steps other people take to protect theirs is their business.
There's only one reason I can think that someone would have an attitude like that. Condoms go from 99% to 0% when they break or come off, which they do on a regular enough basis. "I've never had a condom break or come off! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business?
My personal health data is my business.
I don't ask to see anyone else's because it is none of my business.
I don't know anyone else's sexual history, only my own. I don't know anyone else's sexual health, only my own.
I take steps to protect my health from the scenario you describe without resorting to seeking proof of someone's health, not least because results today are already three months out of date.
What steps other people take to protect theirs is their business.
There's only one reason I can think that someone would have an attitude like that. Condoms go from 99% to 0% when they break or come off, which they do on a regular enough basis.
I've never had a condom break or come off! "Me neither! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business?
My personal health data is my business.
I don't ask to see anyone else's because it is none of my business.
I don't know anyone else's sexual history, only my own. I don't know anyone else's sexual health, only my own.
I take steps to protect my health from the scenario you describe without resorting to seeking proof of someone's health, not least because results today are already three months out of date.
What steps other people take to protect theirs is their business.
There's only one reason I can think that someone would have an attitude like that. Condoms go from 99% to 0% when they break or come off, which they do on a regular enough basis.
I've never had a condom break or come off!
Me neither!"Copied and pasted: While perfect condom use has a 98 percent success rate at preventingpregnancy, errors can increase the risk of breakage, slippage or other condom failure. Here are the rates for those problems: Breakage: In various studies, between 0.8 percent and 40.7 percent of participants reported the experience of a broken condom. In some studies, the rates of sex with a broken condom were as high as 32.8 percent. Slippage: Between 13.1 percent and 19.3 percent of participants reported condom slippage. Leakage: Condoms leaked in between 0.4 percent and 6.5 percent of sexual encounters studied, with 7.6 percent of men and 12.5 percent of women reporting an experience with a leaky condom. If you're happy with those odds, then that's up to you. I'm not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No not offended but even if they had them there's still no guarantee as they may have played since they got the results " Exactly, trust no one especially if it's your health involved. I once asked a new gf that wanted to stop using rubbers because she was on the pill if she had ever been tested. Answer was no but she expected me to trust her that much I did but her past partners and theirs I did not. Trust is good. Control is better! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not even worth the paper it’s written. It is if you understand the concept of probability " The concept of common sense wins the day for me, because that individual could have unprotected sex after the tests and I’d also argue those after the information will ‘probably’ not bother going to lengths to have that information verified. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, let me present this in a different way, then. I have sex with strangers. That carries risks. One of those risks is that he transmits a STD. I believe my sexual health is clean. So I take steps to protect myself from that risk. The other person is responsible for their sexual health, I am responsible for mine. " So what's the disadvantage of mitigating that risk further by asking about their sexual health testing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not even worth the paper it’s written. It is if you understand the concept of probability The concept of common sense wins the day for me, because that individual could have unprotected sex after the tests and I’d also argue those after the information will ‘probably’ not bother going to lengths to have that information verified. " Which are factors all dealt with by probability. Unless you believe that 100% of people asked about sexual health testing proof will respond with either a clean genuine test or a convincing fake results then every thing you just said is irrelevant. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, let me present this in a different way, then. I have sex with strangers. That carries risks. One of those risks is that he transmits a STD. I believe my sexual health is clean. So I take steps to protect myself from that risk. The other person is responsible for their sexual health, I am responsible for mine. So what's the disadvantage of mitigating that risk further by asking about their sexual health testing? " Their response does nothing to reduce my risk, because I cannot tell if the person is telling the truth or not. And in any event, it offers no assurance, because of the latency period of some infections. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, let me present this in a different way, then. I have sex with strangers. That carries risks. One of those risks is that he transmits a STD. I believe my sexual health is clean. So I take steps to protect myself from that risk. The other person is responsible for their sexual health, I am responsible for mine. So what's the disadvantage of mitigating that risk further by asking about their sexual health testing? Their response does nothing to reduce my risk, because I cannot tell if the person is telling the truth or not. " Sorry but that's entirely false and illogical. You are making an implicit assumption that 100% of people with infections will lie and you will detect 0% of their lies. Explicitly there's no way you believe that. I hear that line of argument a lot, i can only presume people who use it never bother to ask. If you ask just a small sample then you'll realise how many people will outright refuse to answer. I speculate that those are the highest risk group. The number of people that would go to the lengths to even try and fake a clean set of results is tiny. " And in any event, it offers no assurance, because of the latency period of some infections. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does anyone ask for this before they play? Would you be offended if someone asked? Taking someone's word isn't really a reliable method, people can lie. I ask because I am considering adding this to my pre meet requirements, however it is going to limit the amount of people willing to meet drastically. Just wanted to get people's thoughts. Thanks And yes I get tested regularly." If you’re playing bareback you should ask and if they get offended do not go ahead. If you’re playing safe and he looks healthy too there's not much to worry about really | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. " At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy" 
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV? "The only safe sex is cyber sex (still condoms on of course)  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV? "Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It just beggers belief how ignorant some people on this site are about sti's and testing!! " Doesnt it just!?! Scary | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it. "You are scarily very ill informed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed. "This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed."This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed.
This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website"I'm not here to teach you or inform you but you are horrendously wrong and it's people like you that spread these diseases. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it. "HPV is ONLY spread through contact with semen. 95 per cent of sexually active adults come into contact with it at some point in their lives. ( unless they are lesbian of course) Many people have it and dont even know. The body's immune system usually deals with it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does anyone ask for this before they play? Would you be offended if someone asked? Taking someone's word isn't really a reliable method, people can lie. I ask because I am considering adding this to my pre meet requirements, however it is going to limit the amount of people willing to meet drastically. Just wanted to get people's thoughts. Thanks And yes I get tested regularly." I wouldn't be offended but also couldn't give any. As my clinic only texts if there is a problem. Plus it makes no difference as only proves someone was clean when they got tested. And I'm still going to take precautions | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed.
This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website
I'm not here to teach you or inform you but you are horrendously wrong and it's people like you that spread these diseases. "Im very serious about my health. How dare you accuse me of spreading disease. If I believed that I was carrying something, I would get checked and not sleep with anyone until the matter had been resolved. I am going off the facts which I had been taught. I was simply sharing what I was taught. If I was wrong, please, tell me the best way. But Im going off what is supplied on GOVERNMENT websites. Condoms are not 100%, but help prevent the spread. I never said they prevented the spread completely. As with herpes, my mistake earlier was saying that you cannot catch it if there is an open sore. What I meant was, the risk is significantly decreased by there being no sore present. Also, the vaccine for HPV is being placed in males now, and young females for years have been recieving it. This is what has been taught to me, and has been confirmed by nurses. So thank you and good bye | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy" So you don't get tested? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy So you don't get tested? " I never said that. I do get tested, but was simply adding in that safe sex is a help for preventing the spread | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy So you don't get tested? I never said that. I do get tested, but was simply adding in that safe sex is a help for preventing the spread" then that's fine. There are an awful lot of people including on here that think that only those that go without should get tested. I don't use condoms for oral because the risks are much lower but I know condoms aren't 100% effective. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy So you don't get tested? I never said that. I do get tested, but was simply adding in that safe sex is a help for preventing the spread then that's fine. There are an awful lot of people including on here that think that only those that go without should get tested. I don't use condoms for oral because the risks are much lower but I know condoms aren't 100% effective. " Always make sure the condom is in date, never keep it in a wallet, and always make sure it's on properly. And always carry a condom (as a female) just in case someone you meet in a club doesnt have one | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OK, let me present this in a different way, then. I have sex with strangers. That carries risks. One of those risks is that he transmits a STD. I believe my sexual health is clean. So I take steps to protect myself from that risk. The other person is responsible for their sexual health, I am responsible for mine. " But, if someone never gets tested they will never know if they are carrying something. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
If that is not bad enough, why would you want to meet them sexualy?
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed.
This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website
I'm not here to teach you or inform you but you are horrendously wrong and it's people like you that spread these diseases.
Im very serious about my health. How dare you accuse me of spreading disease. If I believed that I was carrying something, I would get checked and not sleep with anyone until the matter had been resolved. I am going off the facts which I had been taught. I was simply sharing what I was taught. If I was wrong, please, tell me the best way. But Im going off what is supplied on GOVERNMENT websites. Condoms are not 100%, but help prevent the spread. I never said they prevented the spread completely. As with herpes, my mistake earlier was saying that you cannot catch it if there is an open sore. What I meant was, the risk is significantly decreased by there being no sore present.
Also, the vaccine for HPV is being placed in males now, and young females for years have been recieving it. This is what has been taught to me, and has been confirmed by nurses. So thank you and good bye"Your information on herpes is way off! Ignorance is no excuse neither is relying on out of date information. Ignorance is what spreads these diseases. You can carry herpes without showing any signs ever. The infection is spread when it is shed, not only when there are sores present. You can get genital herpes pretty much anywhere on the lower half of your body. Around the bum and down the thighs, so you don't even have to have sex to catch it. Would you know exactly what a herpes sore looks like? Could you tell it apart from a spot or shaving rash? Hpv vaccine, nobody really knows how effective it will be. The first round of vaccines where given her a few years ago. These girls are still five years away from being able to have a cervical smear test. Only then will they start to know how effective it is. It's also only given to prevent cervical cancer and nothing to do with preventing sti's! Your bodies own immune system gets rid of hpv. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed.
This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website
I'm not here to teach you or inform you but you are horrendously wrong and it's people like you that spread these diseases.
Im very serious about my health. How dare you accuse me of spreading disease. If I believed that I was carrying something, I would get checked and not sleep with anyone until the matter had been resolved. I am going off the facts which I had been taught. I was simply sharing what I was taught. If I was wrong, please, tell me the best way. But Im going off what is supplied on GOVERNMENT websites. Condoms are not 100%, but help prevent the spread. I never said they prevented the spread completely. As with herpes, my mistake earlier was saying that you cannot catch it if there is an open sore. What I meant was, the risk is significantly decreased by there being no sore present.
Also, the vaccine for HPV is being placed in males now, and young females for years have been recieving it. This is what has been taught to me, and has been confirmed by nurses. So thank you and good bye
Your information on herpes is way off!
Ignorance is no excuse neither is relying on out of date information.
Ignorance is what spreads these diseases.
You can carry herpes without showing any signs ever. The infection is spread when it is shed, not only when there are sores present.
You can get genital herpes pretty much anywhere on the lower half of your body. Around the bum and down the thighs, so you don't even have to have sex to catch it.
Would you know exactly what a herpes sore looks like? Could you tell it apart from a spot or shaving rash?
Hpv vaccine, nobody really knows how effective it will be. The first round of vaccines where given her a few years ago. These girls are still five years away from being able to have a cervical smear test. Only then will they start to know how effective it is. It's also only given to prevent cervical cancer and nothing to do with preventing sti's! Your bodies own immune system gets rid of hpv. "He's also wrong about HPV
Fuck knows what website he thinks he's reading. HPV is spread skin to skin contact which is usually the entire genital area. Hence condoms do pretty much fuck all to stop it. No idea where the idea that spunk needs to be involved comes from. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed.
This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website
I'm not here to teach you or inform you but you are horrendously wrong and it's people like you that spread these diseases.
Im very serious about my health. How dare you accuse me of spreading disease. If I believed that I was carrying something, I would get checked and not sleep with anyone until the matter had been resolved. I am going off the facts which I had been taught. I was simply sharing what I was taught. If I was wrong, please, tell me the best way. But Im going off what is supplied on GOVERNMENT websites. Condoms are not 100%, but help prevent the spread. I never said they prevented the spread completely. As with herpes, my mistake earlier was saying that you cannot catch it if there is an open sore. What I meant was, the risk is significantly decreased by there being no sore present.
Also, the vaccine for HPV is being placed in males now, and young females for years have been recieving it. This is what has been taught to me, and has been confirmed by nurses. So thank you and good bye
Your information on herpes is way off!
Ignorance is no excuse neither is relying on out of date information.
Ignorance is what spreads these diseases.
You can carry herpes without showing any signs ever. The infection is spread when it is shed, not only when there are sores present.
You can get genital herpes pretty much anywhere on the lower half of your body. Around the bum and down the thighs, so you don't even have to have sex to catch it.
Would you know exactly what a herpes sore looks like? Could you tell it apart from a spot or shaving rash?
Hpv vaccine, nobody really knows how effective it will be. The first round of vaccines where given her a few years ago. These girls are still five years away from being able to have a cervical smear test. Only then will they start to know how effective it is. It's also only given to prevent cervical cancer and nothing to do with preventing sti's! Your bodies own immune system gets rid of hpv.
He's also wrong about HPV
Fuck knows what website he thinks he's reading. HPV is spread skin to skin contact which is usually the entire genital area. Hence condoms do pretty much fuck all to stop it. No idea where the idea that spunk needs to be involved comes from. "There's a vaccine for it so it doesn't matter!! He probably is unaware that they do not test for it at the clinic either. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. " Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. I'm open about the fact I get tested regularly and wouldn't have an issue showing someone my results if asked but they are effectively worthless if I've had sex since that test - although the fact I have results going back over a year does show a level of responsibility to getting tested - nothing more. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. " Sorry to be pedantic but the probability someone has contracted an STD in the last 3 months (B) is less than the probability they've ever contracted something (A). The original comment was that asking questions doesn't reduce the risk, it does. " I'm open about the fact I get tested regularly and wouldn't have an issue showing someone my results if asked but they are effectively worthless if I've had sex since that test - although the fact I have results going back over a year does show a level of responsibility to getting tested - nothing more. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The fact that you (or anyone else) might infect someone with a life changing disease is none of their business?
My personal health data is my business.
I don't ask to see anyone else's because it is none of my business.
I don't know anyone else's sexual history, only my own. I don't know anyone else's sexual health, only my own.
I take steps to protect my health from the scenario you describe without resorting to seeking proof of someone's health, not least because results today are already three months out of date.
What steps other people take to protect theirs is their business.
There's only one reason I can think that someone would have an attitude like that. Condoms go from 99% to 0% when they break or come off, which they do on a regular enough basis.
I've never had a condom break or come off!
Me neither!"I haven't either | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
HPV is ONLY spread through contact with semen. 95 per cent of sexually active adults come into contact with it at some point in their lives.
( unless they are lesbian of course)
Many people have it and dont even know.
The body's immune system usually deals with it"HPV IS SPREAD THROUGH SKIN TO SKIN CONTACT! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. Sorry to be pedantic but the probability someone has contracted an STD in the last 3 months (B) is less than the probability they've ever contracted something (A). The original comment was that asking questions doesn't reduce the risk, it does. " If (A) has never been tested then you're correct - but the original comment was about someone who says "it's none of your business" so you don't *know* whether they have been or not - so it's down to risk assessment more than pure probability if you don't have the factual data available to be able to compare the two, and that's before you even get into the relative sexual activity of (A) and (B) - for example if (A) had protected sex once a year but (B) had sex with a different person every day then the probability swings somewhat (and before you say it I know you said "all things being equal" but it illustrates a point about probability and science not always being exact) Regardless of semantics though - my point still stands that proof of a test is absolutely worthless unless the person concerned can also prove no sexual activity since their test. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
HPV is ONLY spread through contact with semen. 95 per cent of sexually active adults come into contact with it at some point in their lives.
( unless they are lesbian of course)
Many people have it and dont even know.
The body's immune system usually deals with it
HPV IS SPREAD THROUGH SKIN TO SKIN CONTACT! "There are clearly lots of doctors giving people completely false information then Probably explains why everyone is so confused | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. Sorry to be pedantic but the probability someone has contracted an STD in the last 3 months (B) is less than the probability they've ever contracted something (A). The original comment was that asking questions doesn't reduce the risk, it does. If (A) has never been tested then you're correct - but the original comment was about someone who says "it's none of your business" so you don't *know* whether they have been or not - so it's down to risk assessment more than pure probability if you don't have the factual data available to be able to compare the two, and that's before you even get into the relative sexual activity of (A) and (B) - for example if (A) had protected sex once a year but (B) had sex with a different person every day then the probability swings somewhat (and before you say it I know you said "all things being equal" but it illustrates a point about probability and science not always being exact) Regardless of semantics though - my point still stands that proof of a test is absolutely worthless unless the person concerned can also prove no sexual activity since their test." Probability is a fundamental part of risk assessment. You can't really talk about probability and then in the next statement use phrases like "absolutely worthless", it's obviously not worthless since you've eliminated that vast majority of their life from the timeframe they could have been infected. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
HPV is ONLY spread through contact with semen. 95 per cent of sexually active adults come into contact with it at some point in their lives.
( unless they are lesbian of course)
Many people have it and dont even know.
The body's immune system usually deals with it
HPV IS SPREAD THROUGH SKIN TO SKIN CONTACT!
There are clearly lots of doctors giving people completely false information then
Probably explains why everyone is so confused"Websites, leaflets and medical professionals will all be singing from the same hymn sheet, try google I'm confident it will say exactly what I've said | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. Sorry to be pedantic but the probability someone has contracted an STD in the last 3 months (B) is less than the probability they've ever contracted something (A). The original comment was that asking questions doesn't reduce the risk, it does. If (A) has never been tested then you're correct - but the original comment was about someone who says "it's none of your business" so you don't *know* whether they have been or not - so it's down to risk assessment more than pure probability if you don't have the factual data available to be able to compare the two, and that's before you even get into the relative sexual activity of (A) and (B) - for example if (A) had protected sex once a year but (B) had sex with a different person every day then the probability swings somewhat (and before you say it I know you said "all things being equal" but it illustrates a point about probability and science not always being exact) Regardless of semantics though - my point still stands that proof of a test is absolutely worthless unless the person concerned can also prove no sexual activity since their test. Probability is a fundamental part of risk assessment. You can't really talk about probability and then in the next statement use phrases like "absolutely worthless", it's obviously not worthless since you've eliminated that vast majority of their life from the timeframe they could have been infected. " I can and I have
Risk assessment is about using the facts that are to hand to make a judgement call - yes probability comes into it but it's not an exact or complete science in your, or many other, examples.
And the last test result is for sure "absolutely worthless" when it comes to proving someone who has had sex since that test is clean at the moment you ask them - now THAT is plain and simple undeniable fact. It's only worth is in showing that someone has been responsible about their sexual health.
Ultimately, and to come back to the original post, we are all as individuals responsible for our own sexual health and taking precautions to protect it - you cannot 100% guarantee the sexual health of others you play with, without very stringent checks in place so we all have to make our own risk assessment and take safeguards to protect ourselves such as regular screening.
I've never asked to see a potential partners test results, and probably wouldn't, but am completely open to discussing it if someone asks and have occasionally mentioned to a potential meet if I've been going for a test. Beyond that I make my own risk assessment which includes getting regularly tested and playing as safely as I feel necessary to protect both my partners and myself. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do they give you a certificate when you’re all clear ?" And a rossette | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. Sorry to be pedantic but the probability someone has contracted an STD in the last 3 months (B) is less than the probability they've ever contracted something (A). The original comment was that asking questions doesn't reduce the risk, it does. If (A) has never been tested then you're correct - but the original comment was about someone who says "it's none of your business" so you don't *know* whether they have been or not - so it's down to risk assessment more than pure probability if you don't have the factual data available to be able to compare the two, and that's before you even get into the relative sexual activity of (A) and (B) - for example if (A) had protected sex once a year but (B) had sex with a different person every day then the probability swings somewhat (and before you say it I know you said "all things being equal" but it illustrates a point about probability and science not always being exact) Regardless of semantics though - my point still stands that proof of a test is absolutely worthless unless the person concerned can also prove no sexual activity since their test. Probability is a fundamental part of risk assessment. You can't really talk about probability and then in the next statement use phrases like "absolutely worthless", it's obviously not worthless since you've eliminated that vast majority of their life from the timeframe they could have been infected. I can and I have
Risk assessment is about using the facts that are to hand to make a judgement call - yes probability comes into it but it's not an exact or complete science in your, or many other, examples.
And the last test result is for sure "absolutely worthless" when it comes to proving someone who has had sex since that test is clean at the moment you ask them - now THAT is plain and simple undeniable fact. It's only worth is in showing that someone has been responsible about their sexual health.
Ultimately, and to come back to the original post, we are all as individuals responsible for our own sexual health and taking precautions to protect it - you cannot 100% guarantee the sexual health of others you play with, without very stringent checks in place so we all have to make our own risk assessment and take safeguards to protect ourselves such as regular screening.
I've never asked to see a potential partners test results, and probably wouldn't, but am completely open to discussing it if someone asks and have occasionally mentioned to a potential meet if I've been going for a test. Beyond that I make my own risk assessment which includes getting regularly tested and playing as safely as I feel necessary to protect both my partners and myself."There's a saying that the lawyer whose case rests on the jury understanding probability, is the one who will lose. I honestly don't know why you don't see you're wrong but i give up trying to explain at this point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. At the end of the day, you can decide your own risk profile and that doesn't bother me. But I'm talking about probability which is a matter of black and white fact. If you ask two guys you are thinking of meeting "do you have a recent sexual health test?" And they reply: A) that's none of your business B) yes, it's on my phone if you'd like to see it. All other things being equal, it is a statement of undeniable fact that the probably B will infect you with something is lower than A. So it is patently false to say that asking the question does nothing to alter the probability. Whilst I see where you're coming from - your tenuous probability argument (just because person A says it's none of your business doesn't *mean* they've not been tested and are just as "clean" as person B - although I agree given a straight choice between the two I'd most likely pick B all other things being equal) only holds good if person B can also prove they've not had any kind of sex (protected or unprotected) for the 3 months since that test was done. Sorry to be pedantic but the probability someone has contracted an STD in the last 3 months (B) is less than the probability they've ever contracted something (A). The original comment was that asking questions doesn't reduce the risk, it does. If (A) has never been tested then you're correct - but the original comment was about someone who says "it's none of your business" so you don't *know* whether they have been or not - so it's down to risk assessment more than pure probability if you don't have the factual data available to be able to compare the two, and that's before you even get into the relative sexual activity of (A) and (B) - for example if (A) had protected sex once a year but (B) had sex with a different person every day then the probability swings somewhat (and before you say it I know you said "all things being equal" but it illustrates a point about probability and science not always being exact) Regardless of semantics though - my point still stands that proof of a test is absolutely worthless unless the person concerned can also prove no sexual activity since their test. Probability is a fundamental part of risk assessment. You can't really talk about probability and then in the next statement use phrases like "absolutely worthless", it's obviously not worthless since you've eliminated that vast majority of their life from the timeframe they could have been infected. I can and I have
Risk assessment is about using the facts that are to hand to make a judgement call - yes probability comes into it but it's not an exact or complete science in your, or many other, examples.
And the last test result is for sure "absolutely worthless" when it comes to proving someone who has had sex since that test is clean at the moment you ask them - now THAT is plain and simple undeniable fact. It's only worth is in showing that someone has been responsible about their sexual health.
Ultimately, and to come back to the original post, we are all as individuals responsible for our own sexual health and taking precautions to protect it - you cannot 100% guarantee the sexual health of others you play with, without very stringent checks in place so we all have to make our own risk assessment and take safeguards to protect ourselves such as regular screening.
I've never asked to see a potential partners test results, and probably wouldn't, but am completely open to discussing it if someone asks and have occasionally mentioned to a potential meet if I've been going for a test. Beyond that I make my own risk assessment which includes getting regularly tested and playing as safely as I feel necessary to protect both my partners and myself.
There's a saying that the lawyer whose case rests on the jury understanding probability, is the one who will lose. I honestly don't know why you don't see you're wrong but i give up trying to explain at this point. "It's quite simple - I don't see I'm wrong because I'm not. There's no denying that the results from sexual health testing are only 100% good until the next time you have sex after that test (unless of course it's the ONLY person you have sex with and that person also ONLY HAS sex with you) - therefore asking to see someone's test results when that person can't prove they've not had sex for three months since those tests is effectively pointless for the purposes of confirming that person is clean. The ONLY thing it proves is they have been responsible about their sexual health at least once. A simple matter of undeniable fact that doesn't rely on probability | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It's quite simple - I don't see I'm wrong because I'm not. There's no denying that the results from sexual health testing are only 100% good until the next time you have sex after that test (unless of course it's the ONLY person you have sex with and that person also ONLY HAS sex with you) - therefore asking to see someone's test results when that person can't prove they've not had sex for three months since those tests is effectively pointless for the purposes of confirming that person is clean. The ONLY thing it proves is they have been responsible about their sexual health at least once. A simple matter of undeniable fact that doesn't rely on probability "You've just shown that you don't really understand what probability is. You're thinking of events that could happen and assuming they will, with no consideration of how likely they are. You aren't calculating a probability! A person with a clean test 3 months ago has less probability of an infection than a person with a clean test 6 months ago, all other things being equal. They both have less probability of an infection than a person who doesn't have any test. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Personally I do not think it is an issue. Depends really on what you are looking for. Long term regular meets, or one offs. It would reduce your pool size of it was for one offs. But if someome is serious about being regular then surely they would do it with no issues." Yes for a longer term f/b both of us have done and shared text messages but totally ridiculous for casual meets. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It's quite simple - I don't see I'm wrong because I'm not. There's no denying that the results from sexual health testing are only 100% good until the next time you have sex after that test (unless of course it's the ONLY person you have sex with and that person also ONLY HAS sex with you) - therefore asking to see someone's test results when that person can't prove they've not had sex for three months since those tests is effectively pointless for the purposes of confirming that person is clean. The ONLY thing it proves is they have been responsible about their sexual health at least once. A simple matter of undeniable fact that doesn't rely on probability
You've just shown that you don't really understand what probability is. You're thinking of events that could happen and assuming they will, with no consideration of how likely they are. You aren't calculating a probability!
A person with a clean test 3 months ago has less probability of an infection than a person with a clean test 6 months ago, all other things being equal. They both have less probability of an infection than a person who doesn't have any test. "Who said anything about "calculating a probability"? I'm dealing in hard cold facts and those facts are that regardless of when you were tested - the results of that test are ONLY as good as the moment right before you had sex with another person after those tests. Nothing to do with probability, risk assessment or any other kind of pseudo intellectual mumbo jumo you might want to try and dress it up in. Anyone that believes they, or anyone else, is guaranteed to be clean because tests said so, when they've had sex since those tests (unless it's ONLY been with one other person tested at the same time who has also ONLY had sex that person), is sadly mistaken - nothing to do with probability at all - cold hard fact. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Only people that bareback catch nasty stuff. Genuine Swingers are clean. " So any swinger that barebacks isn't genuine? That's well over half this site then | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
I don't mind if someone asks for test results, I've got them via text message. I think some clinics just send messages asking you to contact them, so text messages may not state the result in all instances. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It's quite simple - I don't see I'm wrong because I'm not. There's no denying that the results from sexual health testing are only 100% good until the next time you have sex after that test (unless of course it's the ONLY person you have sex with and that person also ONLY HAS sex with you) - therefore asking to see someone's test results when that person can't prove they've not had sex for three months since those tests is effectively pointless for the purposes of confirming that person is clean. The ONLY thing it proves is they have been responsible about their sexual health at least once. A simple matter of undeniable fact that doesn't rely on probability
You've just shown that you don't really understand what probability is. You're thinking of events that could happen and assuming they will, with no consideration of how likely they are. You aren't calculating a probability!
A person with a clean test 3 months ago has less probability of an infection than a person with a clean test 6 months ago, all other things being equal. They both have less probability of an infection than a person who doesn't have any test.
Who said anything about "calculating a probability"? I'm dealing in hard cold facts and those facts are that regardless of when you were tested - the results of that test are ONLY as good as the moment right before you had sex with another person after those tests.
Nothing to do with probability, risk assessment or any other kind of pseudo intellectual mumbo jumo you might want to try and dress it up in.
Anyone that believes they, or anyone else, is guaranteed to be clean because tests said so, when they've had sex since those tests (unless it's ONLY been with one other person tested at the same time who has also ONLY had sex that person), is sadly mistaken - nothing to do with probability at all - cold hard fact.
"You said that a test is invalid, or worthless in your words, the moment someone has a new partner. That's a matter of probability. They may catch something from the new partner, they may not. Whether you like it or not, that's precisely what probability deals with. A 3 month old test is worth more than a 6 month old test and a 6 month old test is worth more than no test, all other things being equal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn’t be offended if someone asked me for test results .. but I would wonder about the person asking... I would think they wanted to bareback or have just recently caught a sti...." You wouldn't assume they don't want to catch an STI because condoms can break or slip off? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Clinics don't test for every STI, so some people who believe they've never caught anything won't even know if they have or haven't in reality - whatever their 'proof' states. As others point out, the test result is valid for the date that an infection would potentially show from, which could mean someone showing as HIV negative for 3 months when they've been HIV positive, for example. Also, if someone gives you a confirmation of test results, how will you know that it even was them who had the tests? Some might wish to visit clinics together but it sounds an extraordinary over-complex operation. And this is just to have safer-sex. Live each day as if it's your last but also so that you can expect to have many more.
I don't mind if someone asks for test results, I've got them via text message. I think some clinics just send messages asking you to contact them, so text messages may not state the result in all instances."Exactly this  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn’t be offended if someone asked me for test results .. but I would wonder about the person asking... I would think they wanted to bareback or have just recently caught a sti.... You wouldn't assume they don't want to catch an STI because condoms can break or slip off? " Good point...... I never thought of this because I buy condoms that fit...! I honestly never had this problem of condoms breaking or slipping off... I’m more afraid of children that Sti’s... Child support isn’t cheap.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn’t be offended if someone asked me for test results .. but I would wonder about the person asking... I would think they wanted to bareback or have just recently caught a sti.... You wouldn't assume they don't want to catch an STI because condoms can break or slip off? Good point...... I never thought of this because I buy condoms that fit...! I honestly never had this problem of condoms breaking or slipping off... I’m more afraid of children that Sti’s... Child support isn’t cheap...." A lot of swingers don't test because it appears they would rather not know. I guess as long as puss isn't running out their fanny then they can live in denial a bit longer. I find that if you ask people if they test around a third will refuse to answer ('the riddled' as we call them), a third will say they don't test but they would it it's an issue and the remaining third say they test and may or may not use a clinic that provides proof. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn’t be offended if someone asked me for test results .. but I would wonder about the person asking... I would think they wanted to bareback or have just recently caught a sti.... You wouldn't assume they don't want to catch an STI because condoms can break or slip off? Good point...... I never thought of this because I buy condoms that fit...! I honestly never had this problem of condoms breaking or slipping off... I’m more afraid of children that Sti’s... Child support isn’t cheap.... A lot of swingers don't test because it appears they would rather not know. I guess as long as puss isn't running out their fanny then they can live in denial a bit longer. I find that if you ask people if they test around a third will refuse to answer ('the riddled' as we call them), a third will say they don't test but they would it it's an issue and the remaining third say they test and may or may not use a clinic that provides proof. " Do men not get STIs? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn’t be offended if someone asked me for test results .. but I would wonder about the person asking... I would think they wanted to bareback or have just recently caught a sti.... You wouldn't assume they don't want to catch an STI because condoms can break or slip off? Good point...... I never thought of this because I buy condoms that fit...! I honestly never had this problem of condoms breaking or slipping off... I’m more afraid of children that Sti’s... Child support isn’t cheap.... A lot of swingers don't test because it appears they would rather not know. I guess as long as puss isn't running out their fanny then they can live in denial a bit longer. I find that if you ask people if they test around a third will refuse to answer ('the riddled' as we call them), a third will say they don't test but they would it it's an issue and the remaining third say they test and may or may not use a clinic that provides proof. Do men not get STIs? " Yes, in fact most people are so ignorant of STDs that many times you can get on the top page of men's fanned pictures with warts on or near your cock!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It's quite simple - I don't see I'm wrong because I'm not. There's no denying that the results from sexual health testing are only 100% good until the next time you have sex after that test (unless of course it's the ONLY person you have sex with and that person also ONLY HAS sex with you) - therefore asking to see someone's test results when that person can't prove they've not had sex for three months since those tests is effectively pointless for the purposes of confirming that person is clean. The ONLY thing it proves is they have been responsible about their sexual health at least once. A simple matter of undeniable fact that doesn't rely on probability
You've just shown that you don't really understand what probability is. You're thinking of events that could happen and assuming they will, with no consideration of how likely they are. You aren't calculating a probability!
A person with a clean test 3 months ago has less probability of an infection than a person with a clean test 6 months ago, all other things being equal. They both have less probability of an infection than a person who doesn't have any test.
Who said anything about "calculating a probability"? I'm dealing in hard cold facts and those facts are that regardless of when you were tested - the results of that test are ONLY as good as the moment right before you had sex with another person after those tests.
Nothing to do with probability, risk assessment or any other kind of pseudo intellectual mumbo jumo you might want to try and dress it up in.
Anyone that believes they, or anyone else, is guaranteed to be clean because tests said so, when they've had sex since those tests (unless it's ONLY been with one other person tested at the same time who has also ONLY had sex that person), is sadly mistaken - nothing to do with probability at all - cold hard fact.
You said that a test is invalid, or worthless in your words, the moment someone has a new partner. That's a matter of probability. They may catch something from the new partner, they may not. Whether you like it or not, that's precisely what probability deals with. A 3 month old test is worth more than a 6 month old test and a 6 month old test is worth more than no test, all other things being equal. "You're mixing up two things to try and prove a point though - the probability of catching an STI and the reliability of a clean test if requested to "prove" someone is clean. The first does indeed have an element of probability (all things being equal) - the second is unequivocal fact - a clean test is only good up to the moment you have sex with another partner and is worthless as "proof of cleanliness" after that point - indisputable fact!! And throwing "all things being equal" in there is pointless also - because they rarely are and it totally ignores the scenario of Person A being tested 6 months ago but only having had one partner since and Person B being tested 3 months ago and having twelve partners since - which screws up your probability theory completely!! Simple fact of the matter is we all hold a responsibility to not only get regularly tested but to be aware of the facts and those facts include knowing that a set of clean test results actually proves nothing other than the person was clean at the time of the tests. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I’m more afraid of children that Sti’s... Child support isn’t cheap...." I remember listening to a lady being interviewed on BBC Radio Scotland five or six years ago. She'd been widowed, hadn't been with another man and some years later was persuaded to go on a holiday to Spain. She met a man there and they had sex. Some while later she was diagnosed with HIV. The lady had agreed to speak up as part of a campaign by the NHS to raise awareness of STD among older generations. She had only ever thought of protection in the context of not falling pregnant. She was beyond the menopause and therefore did not think there was any reason to insist on a condom. I thought she was very brave speaking up. Her story was powerful. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I’m more afraid of children that Sti’s... Child support isn’t cheap.... I remember listening to a lady being interviewed on BBC Radio Scotland five or six years ago. She'd been widowed, hadn't been with another man and some years later was persuaded to go on a holiday to Spain. She met a man there and they had sex. Some while later she was diagnosed with HIV. The lady had agreed to speak up as part of a campaign by the NHS to raise awareness of STD among older generations. She had only ever thought of protection in the context of not falling pregnant. She was beyond the menopause and therefore did not think there was any reason to insist on a condom. I thought she was very brave speaking up. Her story was powerful. " She should have asked to see a test from him really... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get tested every 3 months and their policy is if you don't hear anything within 2 weeks, then you're all clear. So how would I prove to to someone I'm tested and clear when the clinic doesn't send a written confirmation. " I was beginning to think I was the only one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get tested every 3 months and their policy is if you don't hear anything within 2 weeks, then you're all clear. So how would I prove to to someone I'm tested and clear when the clinic doesn't send a written confirmation. I was beginning to think I was the only one. " I think it depends on which county you are in, I can request a written confirmation but I would have to pay for it, same as a doctor's letter. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doesnt offend me . I can prove via text my last set of results. I don't bareback so it's of little odds but I still get checked every 8-12 weeks for my own peace of mind " If you don’t do bareback then why the checks every 8-12 weeks ??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doesnt offend me . I can prove via text my last set of results. I don't bareback so it's of little odds but I still get checked every 8-12 weeks for my own peace of mind If you don’t do bareback then why the checks every 8-12 weeks ???" Probably because HPV is transferred skin on skin contact | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doesnt offend me . I can prove via text my last set of results. I don't bareback so it's of little odds but I still get checked every 8-12 weeks for my own peace of mind If you don’t do bareback then why the checks every 8-12 weeks ???" Because there are a number of STIs that can be transmitted even if you are wearing a condom or activities where a condom isn't used (e.g oral) that STIs can be transmitted. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" She should have asked to see a test from him really... " That's the point of the story - a certain generation thinks protection is about unwanted pregnancy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" She should have asked to see a test from him really... That's the point of the story - a certain generation thinks protection is about unwanted pregnancy. " Sounds like an alternative ending to shirley valentine only found in the DVD extras! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just to be clear..... I always play safe. I have never bare backed! Each to their own on that matter.....frankly I don't play russian roulette when it comes to sex. I think this is definitely an informative thread. Thank you all for your input. " Russian Roulette..... Bingo!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not false to me. My health is very real. The steps I take to protect it would not change irrespective of any information he provided. I use the Terence Higgins Trust, which works with the NHS to test for five different diseases. I cannot recall ever receiving or being offered the results in writing. It is enough for me to be told I am clear. " Reading your many replies I had to comment. If somebody wants to be invited into another's sex life for casual sex then either or has every right to ask for a cert. There's no reason to be offended, you will either be happy to oblige or not. If the latter move on. By your own admition you can't trust what anyone says on here, you don't know them and in some instances probably will never see them again. So with that in mind it some people may want a little more reassurance than their word. Will it stop people wanting to meet them for asking? It will certainly reduce the number. To say a person's sexual health has nothing to do with the person you are potentially going to meet is naive and ignorant in my opinion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To say a person's sexual health has nothing to do with the person you are potentially going to meet is naive and ignorant in my opinion." To be clear, I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health, and vice versa. Therefore I take steps to protect myself. That is something in my control. To me, that is the safest practice. It has not let me down. There are too many unknowns, as illustrated throughout this thread, to do anything else than put your own health first. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To say a person's sexual health has nothing to do with the person you are potentially going to meet is naive and ignorant in my opinion. To be clear, I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health, and vice versa. Therefore I take steps to protect myself. That is something in my control. To me, that is the safest practice. It has not let me down. There are too many unknowns, as illustrated throughout this thread, to do anything else than put your own health first. " Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What proof? We both get tested regularly but have never received any 'Proof' that we have. Are we missing something?? I believe you can request a certificate! I get my kit sent through the post and send it back to them I then get a text with the results giving me the all clear." We always keep the most recent text with the results giving our all clear . But we’ve never been asked for it . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is??? "You are correct - there are people out there carrying infections, some knowingly, some unknowingly, and engaged in casual and unprotected sex. That is why I take steps to ensure they do not infect me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is???
You are correct - there are people out there carrying infections, some knowingly, some unknowingly, and engaged in casual and unprotected sex.
That is why I take steps to ensure they do not infect me.
"But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is???
You are correct - there are people out there carrying infections, some knowingly, some unknowingly, and engaged in casual and unprotected sex.
That is why I take steps to ensure they do not infect me.
But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? "If Person A "knowingly" infects Person B by deliberately not making them aware of their condition and taking precautions to prevent infection, then of course they're responsible (and that has resulted in convictions under the law of the land). However I think you're deliberately twisting Sara J's words (as seems to be your wont) - no-one can take absolute responsibility for the sexual health of another, other than encouraging them to take responsibility, and acting responsibly themselves. All an individual can do is take responsibility and control of their own sexual health taking the necessary precautions to protect it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is???
You are correct - there are people out there carrying infections, some knowingly, some unknowingly, and engaged in casual and unprotected sex.
That is why I take steps to ensure they do not infect me.
But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? "Not at all, every individual is responsible for their own sexual health | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is???
You are correct - there are people out there carrying infections, some knowingly, some unknowingly, and engaged in casual and unprotected sex.
That is why I take steps to ensure they do not infect me.
But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B?
If Person A "knowingly" infects Person B by deliberately not making them aware of their condition and taking precautions to prevent infection, then of course they're responsible (and that has resulted in convictions under the law of the land).
"Isn't that exactly what happened in the case we were discussing? " However I think you're deliberately twisting Sara J's words (as seems to be your wont) - no-one can take absolute responsibility for the sexual health of another, other than encouraging them to take responsibility, and acting responsibly themselves. All an individual can do is take responsibility and control of their own sexual health taking the necessary precautions to protect it." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Don't you see the flaw in your logic. Imagine everyone repeated those words you said. Some people are out there infecting others. Imagine if they said "I have no knowledge, control or responsibility for anyone else's sexual health", well if the person infecting others isn't responsible then i don't know who is???
You are correct - there are people out there carrying infections, some knowingly, some unknowingly, and engaged in casual and unprotected sex.
That is why I take steps to ensure they do not infect me.
But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B?
If Person A "knowingly" infects Person B by deliberately not making them aware of their condition and taking precautions to prevent infection, then of course they're responsible (and that has resulted in convictions under the law of the land).
Isn't that exactly what happened in the case we were discussing?
"We don't know as we don't know if the person in that case knew he was infected and therefore deliberately passed it on, or did so unknowingly because he was unaware he had HIV. Whatever the answer and incredibly sad though the story is - had the lady in question been aware of the risks she was taking and had done what Sara J and others (myself included) do and taken responsibility for her own sexual health then whilst not completely eliminated the risks would have been significantly reduced. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? " Let me rewind your narrative a bit. Person A is responsible for the sexual health of Person A, and Person B is responsible for the sexual health of Person B. Do you agree? Person A and Person B begin to get a bit friendly. Does Person A know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Does Person B know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Your question doesn't divulge the answer. How many permutations are there above? Does Person A think about protecting Person A from being infected by Person B, and does Person B think about protecting Person B from being protected from being infected by Person A? Does one discard precaution, or do they both? Does your probability risk assessment model compute? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? Let me rewind your narrative a bit. Person A is responsible for the sexual health of Person A, and Person B is responsible for the sexual health of Person B. Do you agree? Person A and Person B begin to get a bit friendly. Does Person A know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Does Person B know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Your question doesn't divulge the answer. How many permutations are there above? Does Person A think about protecting Person A from being infected by Person B, and does Person B think about protecting Person B from being protected from being infected by Person A? Does one discard precaution, or do they both? Does your probability risk assessment model compute? " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? Let me rewind your narrative a bit. Person A is responsible for the sexual health of Person A, and Person B is responsible for the sexual health of Person B. Do you agree? Person A and Person B begin to get a bit friendly. Does Person A know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Does Person B know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Your question doesn't divulge the answer. How many permutations are there above? Does Person A think about protecting Person A from being infected by Person B, and does Person B think about protecting Person B from being protected from being infected by Person A? Does one discard precaution, or do they both? Does your probability risk assessment model compute? " Love it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I haven’t read all the replies above, but I’m response to OPs question... I would have absolutely no issue in being asked, however I wouldn’t have a way of proving it as not kept the text message from when I was last tested. But would be happy to get retested, but would expect the same. Nothing is 100% safe in life, but obviously things we can do to reduce unnecessary risks. x " This. I was just about to write something similar. I delete the text after I've read it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" But you agree that if person A infects person B, then person A was responsible for damaging the health of person B? Let me rewind your narrative a bit. Person A is responsible for the sexual health of Person A, and Person B is responsible for the sexual health of Person B. Do you agree? Person A and Person B begin to get a bit friendly. Does Person A know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Does Person B know they are carrying a disease, or do they think they are clean? Your question doesn't divulge the answer. How many permutations are there above? Does Person A think about protecting Person A from being infected by Person B, and does Person B think about protecting Person B from being protected from being infected by Person A? Does one discard precaution, or do they both? Does your probability risk assessment model compute? " In the eyes of the law if Person A knowingly infects Person B with HIV then they’ve committed an offence. In which case Person A is not just responsible for Person A | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn’t be offended and would happily hand over the log in details for my test results I genuinely don’t get those people who have said they wouldn’t play with someone who asked ! Showing you care about your sexual health is now something to be stigmatised for??" Yeah that's why I wouldn't fuck them. Because they 'care' about their sexual health. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only thing a clear STI result proves is that you were clear at the date of the test. You could have worked your way bare back through the whole of the Conservative party in the interim.... " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In the eyes of the law if Person A knowingly infects Person B with HIV then they’ve committed an offence. In which case Person A is not just responsible for Person A " Indeed. They are guilty of causing intentional harm. Reckless behaviour. That's pretty clear. Rape would be pretty black and white, too. The last case like that I saw involved the Edinburgh hairdresser with HIV who received a life sentence for deliberately setting out to infect others with HIV. In that case, he persuaded his victims to refrain from protection or tampered with the condom when the victim refused to do bareback. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it.
You are scarily very ill informed.
This is what we were taught in sex ed at school. And what is on the CDC website"Sorry but try reading what the CDC website actually says as you could misinform others "This can lower your chances of getting HPV. But HPV can infect areas not covered by a condom – so condoms may not fully protect against getting HPV;" Condoms only help to protect. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No not offended but even if they had them there's still no guarantee as they may have played since they got the results " This really! When I get my results I send them to any regular play-partners - and vice versa! It obviously no guarantee but it gives a level of peace of mind! There’s no substitute for a good old fashioned condom though! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I only practice safe sex, so the issue isn't there for me. Don't be silly, wrap your willy
Since when did condoms protect against herpes and HPV?
Herpes is only contracted with skin on skin contact while there is an open sore. If there is no sore, you cannot catch it, so always check. HPV is spread through the bodily fluids (e.g. semen), so wearing a Latex condom actually helps prevent the spread of it. "I'm sorry but you are very much wrong... Herpes is contagious days before the sore breaks out... the patient experiences a tingle as the virus is shedding...YOU would never know Also ..if you research .the virus can be shed with no outbreak and no symptoms ...... In America the percentage of herpes sufferers are sooo high..almosy 70% if I remember correctly There is no protection against it ...condoms..no.... at vest the sufferer can take a suppressant every day which reduces the risk if virus shedding bit it doesn't prevent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
