Is Prep the solution to Bareback porn?

[gb2000ie]

But you have to have your kidneys checked once a year if you take it. And this cannot be a good sign (source: site of the german AIDS Health service).

edit: The Health Service also writes that you have to testing all three months. If you take PREP when you're HIV positive new resistant virus-family could come up and PREP becomes useless.
You have to be under constant medical supervision because it's risky they also say.

Given that the drug is new, that is all very sensible

This is normal for new drugs. It's not evidence that the drug is dangerous, just that we don't know that it's definitely safe.

Like I said, if I was working in a high-risk job, I think I'd balance the risks and decide that PrEP makes sense. I don't think anyone should take it just because they want bareback sex with strangers!

I'm certainly not rushing out to get my prescription

B.

 

[gb2000ie]

Good on you if you think the CDC really made those recommendations because they thought they were scientifically/factually sound "at the time"; instead of for religious and political reasons.

If you find it reassuring the CDC recommended against the efficacy of condoms, promoted abstinence instead, and held up HIV funding for anti-abortion pledges, Because, "science", well no amount of facts is going to change your mind.

Have a great one...

Being run by humans, I doubt the CDC is saintly. I'm sure they have a scandal or two in their past. There could of course also be some political interference from time to time too.

That doesn't mean that everything they say is wrong though.

Like with everything else, best to get advice from a few sources. The CDC do a lot of good work, and are trusted by many, so they seemed like a good citation to provide here. If you don't trust the US CDC, then check out other scientific institutions around the world.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) seems to be on the same page as the US CDC. The EU CDC's line is more cautious ATM. The EU have a history of being slower to adopt new things, so I'm not sure how much weight to put in that.

The most recent studies from the top medical journals line up with the US CDC and WHO's advice, so that's reasuring.

B.

 

[tonka]

Those of us who were around in the 80s are very serious about protecting ourselves. Our less serious brothers died of aids long ago.

But many young gays guys have bareback, casual sex. They are not interested in condoms.

Is prep THE answer for them? Of course not. The lack of protection from other stds is a major drawback. The long term effects are unknown.

But it is an answer. It's pretty effective against hiv.

It also gets these guys thinking about their sexual health.You need to talk to your doctor to get a prep scrip. It will require a real, maybe even honest, talk. That matters.

I think prep is a step forward.

 

[amiriot]

It seems they also have a problem getting a control group in a controlled environment to take Prep while engaging in unprotected sex. Like some people take it just once a week which decreases the effectiveness of the drug and others at most 4 times a week.

Also:

It isn't immediate either. It takes seven days to build up the full level of protection of the drug in the immune system, and Daskalakis recommends patients continue taking the prescription for 28 days after the risk has subsided.

Source

 

[Spartacus_x]

I dunno. It seems to me that if someone doesn't want to use condoms, it's more than likely they wouldn't bother taking this thing regularly and properly either.
I could be wrong, of course, but I definitely wouldn't take any chances.