STD Question

[Wobblier]

we should be responsible for ourselves and practice safe sex all the time.

I completely agree and am normally always safe, I don't know why I wasn't that time. heat of the moment, no condoms at hand. Stupid. Crazy I know. People are human, no one is perfect

Best not to regret too much or it eats you whole. I think being positive and sharing information and helping others is a good way to go

Gonorrhea will spread elsewhere and cause other systemic infection signs, like boils, pustules, and if it gets into your eyes it can cause blindness.

same with herpes http://www.herpes.com/images/eye-herpes.jpg

 

[Foreigner]

If these plant medicines are so effective, why were sexually transmitted diseases such a scourge before penicillin, and why has the pharmaceutical industry not used these lead compounds?

You can still see a professional herbalist to have STDs treated now. The reason why they were a scourge back then was not because of the treatment modality, but because of the lack of diagnostic technology. Without symptoms it was impossible to know if a person was infected, and asymptomatic individuals went on to infect others.

The pharmaceutical industry evolved as a direct competitor of herbal medicine. To understand this you have to understand the early formation of the AMA and bio-medicine in the United States. They cannot profit on herbal medicine because you can't patent something in nature; you have to invent a compound before you can patent it.

Regardless if you use herbal medicine or antibiotics, early detection increases the success rate. Arguably, herbal medicine is more effective for STDs now because of earlier detection rates. Keep in mind gonorrhea and chlamydia are usually self-limiting infections, but treatment is sought to avoid permanent damage to the body. If you can't get treated you can still survive if you're healthy.

Just a side note, I personally would not use herbal medicine to treat an STD because I don't have enough experience with using plants to do so, and I haven't come across other herbalists who do either. But if berberines can be used to treat staph infections then I don't doubt their efficacy.

 

[rm-rf]

antibiotics are making gonorrhea more and more difficult to treat: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-sty...gs-deemed-urgent-threat-cdc-article-1.1458729

soon enough, most likely in my generation's lifetime, we may see an end to all antibiotic use as the pathogens we use them for mutate beyond any ability to treat them.

 

[ilikestims]

Thats right! Always get get tested we should also be very cautious with sex and this may sound harsh but partners should also get tested before unprotected sex happens. This has always been my rule and it is better to be safe than sorry.

disagreed.

i don't understand why you "zomg wear a condom" folks are so militant and absolute. different strokes for different folks.

in reality the infection rates are very low. and much lower if you're not partaking in sex with druggies.

 

[Maya]

disagreed.

i don't understand why you "zomg wear a condom" folks are so militant and absolute. different strokes for different folks.

in reality the infection rates are very low. and much lower if you're not partaking in sex with druggies.

As I have mentioned I am promoting safety for everyone you can't always assume that who you are having sex with is clean as Wobblier said on his post it was a one time thing that he did not use protection and acquired the std. It's really up to you if you are going to protect yourself or not. You can't just rely on someone saying "don't worry I am clean" whether the person is using drugs or not.

 

[ilikestims]

"safety for everyone" is like saying "don't do drugs." this is a harm reduction forum. if someone will refuse to wear a condom, least you can do is inform them of the facts.

as Wobblier said on his post it was a one time thing that he did not use protection and acquired the std.

the infection rate for that, according to the CDC, is around .04%. it's not 0%, it's just very low. he got extremely unlucky. those are the breaks.

educate people and let them make their own decision. no one "should" do anything.

 

[Foreigner]

"safety for everyone" is like saying "don't do drugs." this is a harm reduction forum. if someone will refuse to wear a condom, least you can do is inform them of the facts.

the infection rate for that, according to the CDC, is around .04%. it's not 0%, it's just very low. he got extremely unlucky. those are the breaks.

educate people and let them make their own decision. no one "should" do anything.

Please provide a source to backup the part in bold.

Secondly, you can't just look at a statistic and declare that you're safe. The variance in susceptibility depends on where you are located and other demographics. If you're in an area where there are more outbreaks, that percentage will go way up.

Third, the reason why infection rates are less than they used to be is because of mass education programs to advise people to use condoms. What you're advocating is the equivalent of telling people to not bother getting vaccines anymore since infection rates are so low for those diseases. A population that practices safer sex IS the prevention. If we reverse that policy and say, "Ok everyone, the rate is low, so feel free to bareback whenever you want!" then the rate will go up again. Cause and effect.

Last, and most important, yes, people "should" practice safer sex if they are not in long-term monogamous relationships. All the data points to increased risk across the board for people who don't do this. No one can force you to wear a condom but public health policy SHOULD remain what it is. Obviously people can make their own informed choices based on their personal relationships, and weighing the risk factors, but health policy shouldn't bring that up because there are too many stupid people out there who will take it as the go-ahead to engage in risky behavior.

 

[ilikestims]

Please provide a source to backup the part in bold.

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

Secondly, you can't just look at a statistic and declare that you're safe. The variance in susceptibility depends on where you are located and other demographics. If you're in an area where there are more outbreaks, that percentage will go way up.

well, duh. I trust modern medical statistics about as far as I can throw them. I'd want to see the abstract, see the demographic they did the study on, and as much transparency as possible.

Third, the reason why infection rates are less than they used to be is because of mass education programs to advise people to use condoms.

i am primarily talking about hiv, and for hiv that is not true at all. oh yeah: source?

What you're advocating is the equivalent of telling people to not bother getting vaccines anymore since infection rates are so low for those diseases.

for one, no i'm not; two, it's funny you mention vaccines, considering all the controversy about them

A population that practices safer sex IS the prevention. If we reverse that policy and say, "Ok everyone, the rate is low, so feel free to bareback whenever you want!" then the rate will go up again. Cause and effect.

you're missing the point. i am getting on maya for her "everyone should." i'm not saying it's bad to use condoms. i'm actually saying that, because most people actually behave like maya and are super risk-averse, there's a market inefficiency, so to speak, that can be exploited by using condoms judiciously rather than militantly.

Last, and most important, yes, people "should" practice safer sex if they are not in long-term monogamous relationships. All the data points to increased risk across the board for people who don't do this. No one can force you to wear a condom but public health policy SHOULD remain what it is. Obviously people can make their own informed choices based on their personal relationships, and weighing the risk factors, but health policy shouldn't bring that up because there are too many stupid people out there who will take it as the go-ahead to engage in risky behavior.

imo policy should transparently arm you with information and allow you to make the decision yourself. i don't agree with "should" do anything. i don't agree you "should" meditate, you "Should" work out, you "should" believe in god, or a bunch of other things that i strongly believe are extremely healthful and that i do regularly. why? because free will and knowledge >>>>> propaganda and subversion of free will

 

[laugh]

disagreed.

i don't understand why you "zomg wear a condom" folks are so militant and absolute. different strokes for different folks.

in reality the infection rates are very low. and much lower if you're not partaking in sex with druggies.

one size fits all blanket approach to the masses is easier. never mind common sense.

 

[Foreigner]

All I'm saying is that there is a difference between personal, free will and government health policy. Of course you have free will and of course you can choose at your discretion to ditch the condoms or not. I believe that as a matter of health policy, things should stay the way they are, advising people to use condoms. That approach has lead to improvements in the epidemiology.

Do what you want, but this is a harm reduction forum so the mods here are always going to err on the side of caution. *shrug*

 

[Wobblier]

^makes sense

I think I know what might have happened here, miscommunication due to this being a thread and one can't 'get' the feeling of words and phrases sometimes as we are not face to face or can't hear the tone of each others voice in our comments.

Mayas comment might have seemed judgmental and dogmatic even though I strongly doubt that was her intention and she is only doing her job by promoting harm reduction.

we should be responsible for ourselves and practice safe sex all the time.

Which resulted in ilikestims response:

educate people and let them make their own decision. no one "should" do anything.

(I personally think people are human and are not perfect and shouldn’t be judged. '...Safe sex all the time' is the correct response but it is a strong response and sometimes not a viable answer for a lot of individuals)


I'd like to see the stats of lets say the older generation who have went through their entire life and never had sex without using a condom. I'm thinking the numbers are going to be pretty low.

Get tested or don’t OP it is your choice, it doesn't affect my life, it is also other peoples choice to have unsafe sex with you. (HIV and or HCV infected babies is another sad story, or ones which have gone blind due to their mothers having herpes or whatever, sorry I digress)

Personally I’d like to get tested, to know. You will be fine as you know the chances are low.
Even keep some condoms and even some PEP drugs at hand if you can, whats the harm? But I am not preaching and telling you what to do, sometimes its risk what make you feel alive.

However, you might want to ask yourself whether your energetic previous posts were purely just to make your point or to maybe mask some small fear or a seed of doubt you have, maybe even subconscieously - I don't know, what do I know?


Take it easy

Good luck - it's all good


p.s I wont comment on your comment regarding 'as long you're not partaking in sex with druggies' as you seem a lot more intelligent than that and I feel it was posted in the heat of the moment.

 

[puffingBlue]

Bacterial STDs are easier to threat, so going on a doctor and asking for a medicine will fix your problems very well. It's a one time coming and if you feel better after taking the course of treatment, then you're all good. By the way, bluntly speaking, if you're not changing partners and your girlfriend did 100% because both of those 2 can only be transferred through sex.

 

[pmoseman]

Did she give you a yeast infection?