I was shocked after the 300 girls i caught nothing. I've tested over 8 times in the past two years since thailand.
Do you think at least 99% of sp"s and pooners have gotten a STD since working/pooning
- Thread starter kman86
- Start date
Well, according to the city of Vancouver, 1 in every 25 women in the city is an SP (their numbers couldn't possibly be wrong). Excluding those who are either two old or two young (ie in the 18-35 range), we are talking about 1 in 10. With those numbers you would think that everyone in the city would be infected if the OPs 99% assumption holds true, but the stats reported in the BC STI reports say otherwise.
So, my conclusion is that either the city of Vancouver has been smoking too much crack, or the OP is talking out his ass. And quite possibly both those things could be true
ound:
So, my conclusion is that either the city of Vancouver has been smoking too much crack, or the OP is talking out his ass. And quite possibly both those things could be true
ound:According to a good source statistics show that 99% of people that quote statistics dont have a clue about what they are talking about.
I think if one has only had sex with condoms, they are a pussy virgin.
If they also have a lot of sex, then they are considered at "high risk". But if they seldom have sex,
then they are like the "40 year old virgin".
"However, according to a study in the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Journal of the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association condoms have a breakage rate of 2.3% and a slippage rate of 1.3% which "may translate into a high risk for individuals who are very sexually active."[1] With proper knowledge and application technique—and use at every act of intercourse—women whose partners use male condoms experience a 2% per-year pregnancy rate with perfect use and a 15% per-year pregnancy rate with typical use.[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom
It seems you can add the cost of abortions or child care to the list of SPs expenses. Or yours, perhaps, if she has client info. If she's overseas, in Thailand, for example, there should be less concern for various reasons. BTW, you won't be getting many ladies pregnant from BBBJs.
------------------------------
"If a guy uses a condom, is he still a virgin?"
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080525215604AAAHrPI
That only takes into account condom breakage due to manufacturing defects, not various other
ways that condom failure can occur, as detailed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom#Causes_of_failure
Whatever number you come up with, condom use only makes people about 10 times safer than
bareback sex when it comes to HIV infection:
"According to a 2000 report by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)...consistent use of latex condoms reduces the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85% relative to risk when unprotected, putting the seroconversion rate (infection rate) at 0.9 per 100 person-years with condom, down from 6.7 per 100 person-years.[52] Analysis published in 2007 from the University of Texas Medical Branch [53] and the World Health Organization[54] found similar risk reductions of 80–95%."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom#In_preventing_STDs
"Hand out all the condoms you want, make sure they are used, and there will still be an epidemic of STDs and unplanned pregnancy. I'm old enough to recall when the pill came out. I was just a child, but I remember the stir. Reliable birth control, for the 1st time!! Condoms have been around for centuries, in one form or another. They have never been reliable...a user might have an 85% protection rate against HIV, or pregnancy. In the real world, where the users are drunk, or stoned, it's dark, and he is rushing...are you getting the picture?"
If you've actually seen recent negative test results, verified by ID that you've also seen, although
even then i'd think this would be much easier to fabricate than a passport. A more reliable way
might be to go with the SP to the clinic/hospital yourself, and see the papers when you hear
her doctor tell her what the results were. I've done this in Thailand. Of course these are ways to
reduce the probability of risk, whether one uses condoms or not. Having this info on SP's one
has sex with as a barebacker may level the risk factor with condom users who do not have a
clue re the HIV status of their SPs. IOW one can be a BBer and be as safe as a condom user.
--------------------
"Have your cake and eat it too."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Have_one's_cake_and_eat_it_too
Risk is relative and everyone tries to control for risk and weighs it against the benefits. There's also perception of risk which isn't the same as the real risk.
If risk reduction gets to the point of using dental damns for kissing, I think one might as well stay home! And it might be like that with BBBJ especially if it's without CIM.
Anyway, in my situation I do my best to stay with one girl, so who's really assuming more risk? Is it the girl, who can charge more, and if the perceived risk is higher than the actual risk, she's the one who can exploit that difference and be ahead, either on price or volume. Or is it the guy, who's exposing himself to a higher risk relative to other SPs in exchange for a better experience?
Just to throw some more fat on the fire, can anyone please tell me why o why STI are more significant than other infections or diseases?
Do tell. I've never for the life of me been able to figure that one out.
Especially when the Black Death (Yersinia pestis) wiped out 50% of all Europeans in the 1400 and 1500's. Compared to that, even HIV is a walk in the park.
Do tell. I've never for the life of me been able to figure that one out.
Especially when the Black Death (Yersinia pestis) wiped out 50% of all Europeans in the 1400 and 1500's. Compared to that, even HIV is a walk in the park.
Kman My thoughts...um.. You're a tool? An ignorant and really predictable tool? Hm yup, that sums it up quite well. In the most polite way possible! Lame.
