8 big names speak out of abuse from christian

[filghy2]

The probability according to the cdc of contracting hiv from insertive anal is 11 per 10,000. This is a little bit more likely than 1 in a 1000.

To put it simply, that means that if you had unprotected sex 1000 times then on average you could expect to contract hiv. The probability for receptive sex is much higher at 138 per 10,000. That means that if you had unprotected sex only 72 times then on average you could expect to contract hiv.

To be clear, though, these statistics are based on averages across the population sample, so they are equivalent to the situation where you know nothing about the other person. If you know your partner has recently tested negative then the risks would be much lower. Of course, there could be other factors that go the other way.

[dreamon]

In my own life I practice safe sex. However, if others are comfortable with unprotected sex, it doesn't really matter what the likelihood of disease or wanted pregnancy is- that is their choice, and I can respect that. That is my issue right there - it is someone's choice to have protected or unprotected sex. Pressuring or harassing someone to do something they are not comfortable with is inappropriate in my opinion, particularly when it is in relation to something as intimate as sex.

[trish]

In my own life I practice safe sex. However, if others are comfortable with unprotected sex, it doesn't really matter what the likelihood of disease or wanted pregnancy is- that is their choice, and I can respect that. That is my issue right there - it is someone's choice to have protected or unprotected sex. Pressuring or harassing someone to do something they are not comfortable with is inappropriate in my opinion, particularly when it is in relation to something as intimate as sex.

I would think this is not just your choice but also something you have to decide along with your partner, or partners. No matter how independent and individual we think we are, the consequences of our actions connect us to others. I do agree that there’s no point in badgering anyone who is fully aware of the risks that they and their partners are taking...but I do think it’s appropriate to inform anyone of those risks if there’s reason to believe they are unaware of them.

To put it simply, that means that if you had unprotected sex 1000 times then on average you could expect to contract hiv. The probability for receptive sex is much higher at 138 per 10,000. That means that if you had unprotected sex only 72 times then on average you could expect to contract hiv.

To be clear, though, these statistics are based on averages across the population sample, so they are equivalent to the situation where you know nothing about the other person. If you know your partner has recently tested negative then the risks would be much lower. Of course, there could be other factors that go the other way.

Roughly correct. Please allow me to tweak it a bit. If 1000 uninfected people had unprotected sex with an infected partner, the statistic predicts 1.1 people (on average) will contract the infection. On average means that we imagine the experiment (involving a different set 1001 people each time) is performed N times and the results averaged. The probability of one person becoming infected.
The figure 11/10000 is taken to be the independent probability that you will contract the HIV virus if you have one unprotected sexual encounter with an HIV infected partner. The probability of not acquiring the virus is 1-11/10000 = 9989/10000. This is the q I referred to in post #92. So the probability that you will acquire the virus after having 1000 unprotected encounters is (1-(9989/10000)^1000). This works out to be a little more than 0.667 ; i.e. there’s a 66.7% chance you’ll be infected.

[Ts RedVeX]

Hey, let's come back to our tables for a second It says in this one: https://www.aidsmap.com/Estimated-ri...8/#item1324093

Receptive anal sex amongst gay men, partner HIV positive

0.82% (1:123)

This means that you need to multiply that 0.0082 by the chance of actually encountering an HIV-positive person. If I am to believe this: https://www.hiv.gov/hiv-basics/overv...bal-statistics The probability of encountering someone who has HIV is roughly 0.00734 (considering a very bad case with population of only 7 billion and 51.6 million infected people)
All in all, the probability of encountering and contracting HIV is 0.006% so 6 in 100000 xd I think that table is part of some sort of anti-gay propaganda, because right above the 0.82% it says:

Receptive anal sex amongst gay men, partner unknown status

0.27% (1:370)

Which would suggest that pretty much only gay men have HIV... Let's see then. if half of the population are men and 4% of them are gay and all the 51 million HIV positive are within that group, then the probability of encountering an HIV positive gay man is 0.367. multiply that my the 0.82% and you get 0.3% That is just too damn close to the 0.27%... Especially that if you instead apply the current population of 7.6billion to that very anti-gay way of calculating the probability, you get exactly 0.27%.

Perfect example of homophobic communist propaganda.

[KelliBlueEyes]

I would think this is not just your choice but also something you have to decide along with your partner, or partners. No matter how independent and individual we think we are, the consequences of our actions connect us to others. I do agree that there’s no point in badgering anyone who is fully aware of the risks that they and their partners are taking...but I do think it’s appropriate to inform anyone of those risks if there’s reason to believe they are unaware of them.




Roughly correct. Please allow me to tweak it a bit. If 1000 uninfected people had unprotected sex with an infected partner, the statistic predicts 1.1 people (on average) will contract the infection. On average means that we imagine the experiment (involving a different set 1001 people each time) is performed N times and the results averaged. The probability of one person becoming infected.
The figure 11/10000 is taken to be the independent probability that you will contract the HIV virus if you have one unprotected sexual encounter with an HIV infected partner. The probability of not acquiring the virus is 1-11/10000 = 9989/10000. This is the q I referred to in post #92. So the probability that you will acquire the virus after having 1000 unprotected encounters is (1-(9989/10000)^1000). This works out to be a little more than 0.667 ; i.e. there’s a 66.7% chance you’ll be infected.

Those numbers work well for calculating the risk of hiv infection in any random encounter, or cumulatively with multiple random partners. But aren't we really talking about sex with trans people? Among whom the CDC claims 22% are HIV+

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/gender...der/index.html

Probably the percentage of trans sex workers who are HIV+ is higher than this.

[trish]

I’ll be brief as this thread is already way off track. The independent probability of you in particular acquiring the HIV virus via a single sexual encounter depends on you, your sexual behaviors and those of your pool of partners. The formula in post #92 shows that however small that probability is, all things being equal over time, the probability that you will acquire the virus rises with the number of your sexual encounters and asymptotically approaches certainty. The CDC stats are objective and as accurate as possible. Were they attempting to spread homophobia and communism there would be more effective methods than posting charts, numbers and graphs on an obscure government website. Their concern is to provide researchers and policy makers agencies accurate epidemiological data.
Now back to the relevant topic: Christian, his accusers and his defenders. Please.

[LittleGuy]

Not related to this thread but I sexually harass my penis several times a week

[Gillian]

... the probability that you will acquire the virus rises with the number of your sexual encounters and asymptotically approaches certainty.

I love a girl who knows her asymptotes from her tangents ...

[trish]

Not related to this thread but I sexually harass my penis several times a week

Poor thing. You're lucky it hasn't leaked to the media, adding to the daily drip, drip, drip of these horrid stories. On the other hand, maybe it's your penis that sexually harassing you. These things are sticky you know - oops! - I mean tricky - eww - gotta go.

[smalltownguy]

Not related to this thread but I sexually harass my penis several times a week

great...