TRUVADA: Why are we ALL not taking this???!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dreamon

No dude this is literally a cure for HIV, the evil pharmaceutical companies just are suppressing the truth.

---

Dude, you have it backwards. The conspiracy is in Big Pharma, man.

Secretly, they are irradiating Truvada users, letting the (mostly harmless) dose build up daily- ever wonder why they're SSSSOOOOOO insistent you take it every day?- and when the radiation has built to sufficient levels and can be monitored by roving vans equipped with huge Geiger counters, they start hunting.

When they find enough "Truvada whores" (that's what the company calls them- and I say "company" but it's obviously an extension of the Illuminati) in one place, they send an extraction team.

It's efficient, they found, to go after groups. Unless you do home invasion, which has its own special risks like alarms, higher incidence of firearms, etc., snatching one person involves as many witnesses as snatching a bunch. Not to mention the economies of scale (sure, it's a global conspiracy, but these are businessmen.)

The TWs are shipped to the FEMA camps that the tin foil brigade keeps insisting exists and indoctrinated through a grueling mashup of MK Ultra tactics and Navy SEAL training. After approximately 10 weeks (nobody knows for sure- the TWs aren't talking and we can only measure when they were last seen to when they first reappear.

Buff, overconfident from the programming, completely shameless, and unable to reconcile anything that conflicts with their indoctrination, they cruise the clubs at major cities, picking up ass and proselytizing to create more TWs until the company calls them.

Once activated and given a target, they are the most ruthless and effective assassins the world has ever known. Total Weapons. They accomplish in bars and beds what the company can't in voting booths and boardrooms.

Y'all best stop fucking with Wes. That's all I'm saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tapatio

Dude, you have it backwards. The conspiracy is in Big Pharma, man.

Secretly, they are irradiating Truvada users, letting the (mostly harmless) dose build up daily- ever wonder why they're SSSSOOOOOO insistent you take it every day?- and when the radiation has built to sufficient levels and can be monitored by roving vans equipped with huge Geiger counters, they start hunting.

When they find enough "Truvada whores" (that's what the company calls them- and I say "company" but it's obviously an extension of the Illuminati) in one place, they send an extraction team.

It's efficient, they found, to go after groups. Unless you do home invasion, which has its own special risks like alarms, higher incidence of firearms, etc., snatching one person involves as many witnesses as snatching a bunch. Not to mention the economies of scale (sure, it's a global conspiracy, but these are businessmen.)

The TWs are shipped to the FEMA camps that the tin foil brigade keeps insisting exists and indoctrinated through a grueling mashup of MK Ultra tactics and Navy SEAL training. After approximately 10 weeks (nobody knows for sure- the TWs aren't talking and we can only measure when they were last seen to when they first reappear.

Buff, overconfident from the programming, completely shameless, and unable to reconcile anything that conflicts with their indoctrination, they cruise the clubs at major cities, picking up ass and proselytizing to create more TWs until the company calls them.

Once activated and given a target, they are the most ruthless and effective assassins the world has ever known. Total Weapons. They accomplish in bars and beds what the company can't in voting booths and boardrooms.

Y'all best stop fucking with Wes. That's all I'm saying.

---

And guess what? ALL THOSE TRUVADA WHORES WILL BE HIV -!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lifeisfiction

...Not every person has HIV and just because a person has HIV does not mean it can be contracted. If a person exercise(s) common sense and diligence in choosing partners, practices safe sex methods or remains in a sole relationship where neither partner has HIV, you chances of getting is extremely low to nill.....

---

Indeed. The model which I posted is in one sense a worst case scenario; i.e. someone who loves and plans to be in a long term relationship with a HIV infected partner. It uses the CDC’s maximum 92% efficiency for PrEP and assumes the same for condoms. It does not take into account the likelihood that the partner may be on medications that reduce the concentration of the HIV virus in his blood. In the chart I posted the word “exposure” means intercourse with an HIV infected person...not just a random person who may or may not have be infected with the virus. If you have sex one or two times a day with an infected partner, thats about 500 to 550 exposures a year...maybe 22000 over a lifetime. If you only ever have sex with one uninfected person, that’s zero exposures over a lifetime. A sex-worker might have 30000 to 40000 exposures in a lifetime. Your expected number of lifetime exposures to HIV is equal to your expected number of sexual encounters times the probability that any given encounter is with a HIV infected person. The latter number will vary with date and location.

^ Trish, that's the first sensible thing you've said ;)

Lol...I'm 100% anal insertive lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

^ Trish, that's the first sensible thing you've said ;)

---

It's not contrary to what I've said before. Notice the chart is the same. I'm simply giving more context to help people apply the chart to their own situations.

^ That's my point. In the past you've used the chart to scare people from taking truvada. Now, it seems as though you're back tracking like everyone else does when they find out that this drug actually works!!!!

Bullshit Wes. I never said don't take truvada or use a PrEP. From the charts alone it would appear my message was for the most efficient protection use a PrEP together with Condoms.

If a person feels their risk is such that it's worth looking into using a PrEP, then that person should be aware that 1) condoms (if used consistently) have about the same efficiency against the transmission of HIV as do PrEPs; 2) condoms protect against a multitude of other STDs; 3) PrEPs have side effects that users should keep an eye on; 4) if you suspect you have a high exposure rate, then PrEP and Condoms Together give significantly better protection (see the chart in post #403 http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...&postcount=403 ) than either method of protection alone.

None of these points should dissuade anyone from using trying PrEPs. Just, if you use a PrEP, use it as directed, use it with caution (get regular check ups to keep an eye out for possible unwanted effects of longterm use), and consider whether your rate of exposure to HIV and to other STDs are high enough to warrant the use of a condom as well.

^ PrEP alone is more effective than condoms alone. Also, if you are on the medication you are REQUIRED to take an HIV test every three months.

http://www.towleroad.com/2014/11/res...g-forward.html


^ Soon, PrEP will be a long lasting injectable!

I'd like to point out again that the effectiveness number Wes is holding onto is based on PERFECT treatment with the drug.

Used imperfectly, Truvada is much less effective than condoms and (given the bias toward high risk partners- why else bother with Truvada?) counting on this pill alone to take care of your health is pretty stupid.

That just simply isn't true. Even people who only took the drug four times a week never became infected. Your statements only reiterate the stupidity of arguments against Truvada but for condoms. You expect people to put a piece of rubber on their dick every time they have sex but not to take a pill every day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

That just simply isn't true. Even people who only took the drug four times a week never became infected. Your statements only reiterate the stupidity of arguments against Truvada but for condoms. You expect people to put a piece of rubber on their dick every time they have sex but not to take a pill every day?

---

Fun fact about condoms, they protect against other stds. While you may think there is nothing to worry about there is such a thing as super gonorrhea an almost near impossible disease to cure.

And by the way, a drug is not effective enough if you do not have the proper dosage in your system. So when you miss taking the drug you increase risk. The drug with condoms provides ease and peace of mind.

But according to West, condoms are the most evil device in the world. It takes away all the pleasure. I really wonder West why so against condoms. I mean can't you enjoy sex with a condom?

Pray tell West, are you advocating that we can all start having tons of bareback sex with strangers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

That just simply isn't true. Even people who only took the drug four times a week never became infected.

---

You find 47% effectiveness acceptable? That is the number I read for the "less than perfect" group.

No. I do not enjoy sex with condoms.

BRING BACK BATH HOUSE CULTURE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

No. I do not enjoy sex with condoms.

---

We did divine this, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

No. I do not enjoy sex with condoms.

BRING BACK BATH HOUSE CULTURE

---

So you go to bath houses, hmmmm its finally starting to make sense.

^ No I don't, actually. They aren't fun nowadays. I'm really just trolling with the last post ;)

So if you aren't going there where is the action? Of course I know you were attempting to troll my last post, but you left yourself wide open.

^ Craigslist. It's still a great place to find some very well known TS porn stars. So is facebook!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

^ Craigslist. It's still a great place to find some very well known TS porn stars. So is facebook!

---

whats the point of promoting safer sex if you engage in these activities

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrBest

whats the point of promoting safer sex if you engage in these activities

---

To end HIV. DUH

Such confidence with other people's lives! Don't you ever worry that perhaps your advice might get a lot of people incurably sick? A true believer is conscious-free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Such confidence with other people's lives! Don't you ever worry that perhaps your advice might get a lot of people incurably sick? A true believer is conscious-free.

---

Truer words were never spoken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Such confidence with other people's lives! Don't you ever worry that perhaps your advice might get a lot of people incurably sick? A true believer is conscious-free.

---

No, I don't think that at all. I look at the failures of the anti-HIV community (as valiant as they are) and see 50k new infections a year in the USA. There is no way Truvada can make this worse. BUT we can end this by 2020. The only people with blood on their hands are people like the AHF who are spreading nonsense about Truvada in favor of the tried and true condom only approach.

But you tell people that with PrEP's they can throw their condoms away. Really? You've seen the charts showing the probability of infection against exposure on PrEP alone and on PrEP + Condoms. Yet your confidence with other people's lives remains undaunted. Incredible!

People like yourself West do not want to use condoms. How can it be effective if people similar to you are willing to forgo the necessary protection provided. Condoms work, but it is those who have disdain for it or feel that is its too cumbersome or impractical to use that increases the risk of getting and spreading the disease. If the average user of condoms was rapidly getting HIV due to its failure then you would be correct. The majority of people who are obtaining HIV through sexual activity are engaging in high risk sexual activities. Activities such as bareback sex.

Remember Truvada is not magical blue pill. Even in its own studies the majority of people failed to take the proper dosage. There is a strong chance people who really on this pill will forget to take it. And unlike condoms that is effective on purchase. The dosage of Truvada in the blood stream has to be maintained.

Look at me rehashing what has been said before.

People please use common sense.

People, please use common sense. Get on Truvada and use it. The end.

Trish, your graphs are BULLSHIT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

People, please use common sense. Get on Truvada and use it. The end.

Trish, your graphs are BULLSHIT

---

Ahhh foul language, the refuge of the scoundrel and the classic defence of ignorance when battled with science and knowledge, classy.

Common sense would be condoms + truvada, simples.

A big thank you from me to all the people that have contributed to this topic. I know it can be boring and repetitive arguing with someone who wont listen but it has to be done to ensure people dont listen to him and put their sexual health and the communities and their life at risk for a bit of increased pleasure. Well done to all who have fought the good fight against crazy selfish hedonistic fuck society as a large its all about me me me and my pleasure West.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

Trish, your graphs are BULLSHIT

---

Good, then you can tell me exactly where my calculations go wrong. To make it easy for you I'll give you my sources and I'll make a complete list of my underlying assumptions:

1) Sources: one CDC chart, one CDC outreach page

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/risk.html
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/prep.html

the NCBI publication
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9141163

and five Assumptions:

2) The probability of HIV transmission via one exposure of a type that carries R risk per ten thousand exposures is simply equal to R/10000; i.e. R is simply the expected number of transmissions out of 10000 exposures. So when the chart says that 138 is the risk out of ten thousand unprotected exposures to receptive anal intercourse with an HIV infected partner, then the probability of transmission through one such exposure is 138/10000.

3) The effectiveness of a preventative strategy is the percentage by which it lowers the risk. (This definition is inherent in the second link above wherein we’re informed “In several studies of PrEP, the risk of getting HIV infection was much lower—up to 92% lower—for those who took the medicines consistently than for those who didn’t take the medicines.”)
So if p is the probability of transmission through one unprotected exposure (of a specified type) with an HIV infected partner, and if E is the effectiveness of a particular preventative measure (usually expressed as a percent), then P=p-(E/100)*p is the probability of transmission using that particular measure via one exposure.

4) If PrEP and used in conjunction with Condoms, then the probability of no transmission via one exposure (of a specified type) is the product of the probability that there is no transmission using PrEP alone with the probability of no transmission using a Condom alone; i.e. transmission requires the simultaneous independent failure of both preventative measures.

5) Transmission over a run of N exposures is a sequence of N independent events. So if P is the probability of acquiring an infection through one exposure (of a given type and using a specified strategy of prevention) with an HIV infected partner, then the probability Q no transmission through that one exposure is 1-P. The probability of no transmission after a run of N exposures is Q to the Nth power (denoted by Q^N). The the probability of at least on transmission after N exposures is 1-Q^N, equivalently 1-(1-P)^N.

6) The rest is arithmetic, which I assume I did correctly.

I think the take away moral of the this model is how well condoms amplify the effectiveness of a PrEP. The amplification effect is not an artifact of the particular numbers used but is stable; e.g. even if PrEP were 99% effective and condoms only 90% effective, the charts wouldn't look all that different qualitatively.

It would be helpful to the discussion, if you specify which of these items each of your criticisms is addressing.

Y'all might as well be arguing with a conservative Republican about abortion or birth control or anything really. No amount of logic, science or math is going to change their minds ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

Trish, your graphs are BULLSHIT

---

They arent. Unlike your nonexisting understanding of math...


Or common sense

Use truvada

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

Use truvada

---

Billions of people say "no."

Out of curiosity, did you know that many companies pay internet shills for this kind of thread?

^ Billions of people have no idea it exists. I'd be very curious to see a poll (I'm sure we will see it soon) of young gay men and transfolk to see how many of them even know what Truvada is. Also, those who do know what it is, what is their understanding of it? Is it factual in any way?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1WsKvPPZjQ

^I'm just as worried about this happening. If the AHF and other groups like it are sooooo concerned that people aren't going to use Truvada correctly, then why not actually educate them about it rather than spreading lies and disinformation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Westheangelino

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1WsKvPPZjQ

^I'm just as worried about this happening. If the AHF and other groups like it are sooooo concerned that people aren't going to use Truvada correctly, then why not actually educate them about it rather than spreading lies and disinformation?

---

What are you talking about? You think Gilead would not want people know of their product. Ever since Pharmaceutical companies are allowed to advertise to the public directly they are just going to simply throw out their cash cow product without any information. You've got to be kidding me. They have gone to work and in fact I saw this as my YouTube commercial (YouTube stop with all the commercials) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odzW...Olmtn2oejnWIOw.

In addition, how will people know that a person is using a product correctly. At least with condoms and Truvada you have knowledge that a least one of them will be used correctly.

To the ones attacking the porn industry when is the last time you had a full panel std test including hepc/a/b etc???

Yawn...people talk a whole bunch of shit yet probably have one night stands on the regular, cheat on their wives/gfs, and maybe test when their scared, once a year, or NEVER due to being scared of what it will say...

As far as Truvada goes it is approved by the FDA as are many drugs that have serious side effects on certain people that take them.

What we should be happy about though is we are getting closer to preventing/curing HIV and someone mentioned the new Hep C drug Sovaldi that cures over 89% of patients...we are getting closer to attacking these STDS and turning them into the chlamydia and ghonnera or maybe even some day have a vaccine we take...

However truvada does seem still like a risky drug to take especially for transsexuals who pump hormones into their body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KellyShore

As far as Truvada goes it is approved by the FDA as are many drugs that have serious side effects on certain people that take them.

What we should be happy about though is we are getting closer to preventing/curing HIV and someone mentioned the new Hep C drug Sovaldi that cures over 89% of patients...we are getting closer to attacking these STDS and turning them into the chlamydia and ghonnera or maybe even some day have a vaccine we take...

However truvada does seem still like a risky drug to take especially for transsexuals who pump hormones into their body.

---

There is no evidence that Truvada in conjunction with hormones would have any ill effect.