Ugosample:



what does sickle cell have to do with HIV,?

Read through the thread. I cannot do that for you. You’ll understand my treatise better.

peteruuu:
I honestly don't know what to type.
But seriously, this one is strong o.

There's really nothing strong about it. HIV is no longer as deadly as it used to be. Drugs are now available to manage it, and frankly, most physicians theorise that HIV positive patients actually live longer than their negative counterparts because they basically nip whatever illness they might have in the bud, due to their regular hospital checkups.

They can also have perfectly safe raw sex. There's really nothing scarry about it these days, other than the publics ignorance.

Even common Typhoid and Malaria still kills. Magic Johnson has been positive since 1991 and he's still alive and kicking.

The most important thing is to get tested regularly so as to catch the virus early on before irreparable damage is done (that is, if positive) and get on medication immediately, which are absolutely free.

Sex not the only way people are infected. Even Abokis wey dey cut nails are responsible.

You people should grab a book and grow the Bleep up.

MrDoGood:


So, all you're saying is that he can't go raw with the wife?

if no, then what's now the need ?

Yes. He can go raw with his wife. As long as she is on drugs, she can't infect anyone. Positive people are not the one spreading the virus. It's usually naive people who don't know their status. Because there's no way someone would know his status and not get treatment, unless he wishes to die.

Go get tested folks.

madridsta007:



LOL. See the complex solutions. When it could have been entirely avoided.
Why complicate ones life when there are billions of females and billions of other males in the world?
This is the crux of my argument. Why?

Dude you are just illiterate. The world have moved on. Genetic surgery is the new gold. Things have never been this easier medically.

The whole point is, if you truly love someone, you'll find a way. And in this modern age, options abound. Get orientated and be open minded.

This is 2019, not 1921.

alezzy13:


Stop spreading falsehood. As long as she adhere to her medication, the chances of infectioning her husband or even her child is near zero. Confirm by research

Actually ZERO

Undetectable means Untransmitable.

MrBrownJay1:


bro, as much as i understand that it wouldnt be easy, they can still be happy together, for the rest of their natural lives... if that is indeed the reason why they wanted to get married at the 1st place.

in today HIV+ world, she can take ARV's and live a "seemingly" normal life.... and the day they want to have children, she can get inseminated with his sperm (or do it homemade with a syringe) and possibly have healthy kids. et voila!

but i also fully understand that, if the man wants to leave and forget about this lady, he has all the rights to do so.

am really finding it hard to understand you. what happiness are u talking about. except both are cariers of the virus, only then can they go ahead and marry but even at that the quest for wanting to know who infected who will still be there.

NoContract:


Yes. He can go raw with his wife. As long as she is on drugs, she can't infect anyone. Positive people are not the one spreading the virus. It's usually naive people who don't know their status. Because there's no way someone would know his status and not get treatment, unless he wishes to die.

Go get tested folks.

Nice one bro.

Thanks for the clarification

NoContract:


Dude you are just illiterate. The world have moved on. Genetic surgery is the new gold. Things have never been this easier medically.

The whole point is, if you truly love someone, you'll find a way. And in this modern age, options abound. Get orientated and be open minded.

This is 2019, not 1921.

OK.
The "educated" one stoops down in the mud to throw insults because someone has a different opinion. You see how obscene that sounds?
The painful and self-deprecating irony.

madridsta007:




OK.
The "educated" one stoops down in the mud to throw insults because someone has a different opinion. You see how obscene that sounds?
The painful and self-deprecating irony.

If you consider the word illiterate to be an insult, then I'm sorry, your ego controls your thinking.

MrBrownJay1:


bro, as much as i understand that it wouldnt be easy, they can still be happy together, for the rest of their natural lives... if that is indeed the reason why they wanted to get married at the 1st place.

in today HIV+ world, she can take ARV's and live a "seemingly" normal life.... and the day they want to have children, she can get inseminated with his sperm (or do it homemade with a syringe) and possibly have healthy kids. et voila!

but i also fully understand that, if the man wants to leave and forget about this lady, he has all the rights to do so.

There's nothing seemingly about living as a poz person. Once undetectable (on drugs), which usually takes an average of 3-6 months, they can live normal lives. There's nothing seemingly about the living standards or status of a poz person, other than the routine blood work and the inconviniences of restocking drugs, and a bit lifestyle changes.

No insults intended. I am only trying to clarify.

Emmymarvel:


am really finding it hard to understand you. what happiness are u talking about. except both are cariers of the virus, only then can they go ahead and marry but even at that the quest for wanting to know who infected who will still be there.

People like you usually learn the hard way.

.

NoContract:


If you consider the word illiterate to be an insult, then I'm sorry, your ego controls your thinking.

LOL. Mate, you are hilarious
Of course, it is implied as an insult.
We can pretend about this, but this is fine. Clinical psychologists will tell you that self-deceit is quite prevalent amongst humans these days.

It is quite sad that your supposed education does not inform you that people can hold distinctly different views and the presence of one does not invalidate the other —nor should the other be demonised as "illiterate". One can suggest the "love" argument and another can suggest the "logic" argument. They are both mutually exclusive and should mutually exist as opinions.

Sadly, your vaunted "education" -or should I say, "literacy"- seem not to have taught you this.

lefulefu:
so true. Many of these married men wey dey play away matches dey carry HIV come house take infect their wives. Come and see in govt hospitals were pregnant wives dey do compuslory hiv screening and u will understand wat iyam talking about. In short ehn sometimes i feel sorry for married nigerian women whose husbands flirt around.any married woman whose husband is faithful to her no know how God take bless her.

my bro a lot cassonova married husband r walking HIV carriers.most of dem don't even know because dey r afraid to go for test.

[quote author=Michelle55 post=77017459]
Yeah.. So long I ain't gonna be infected.. And he will be on his drugs. Let's stop making small things look like a big stuff [/quote

How do you know that you are not going to be infected? What if he doesn't have money for Anti retroviral drug? Except you are not going to be having it raw (skin - skin). To me, it's a risk adventure

NoContract:


There's nothing seemingly about living as a poz person. Once undetectable (on drugs), which usually takes an average of 3-6 months, they can live normal lives. There's nothing seemingly about the living standards or status of a poz person, other than the routine blood work and the inconviniences of restocking drugs, and a bit lifestyle changes.

No insults intended. I am only trying to clarify.

bro, you have to be practical here, and as much as you can have a great life living with someone who is infected, you would take necessary precautions, in order to minimize YOU and/or your kids getting in contact with her blood etc.
i cant sit here and pretend that the mere fact that you know that she is hiv+, wont make you be careful around that babe.... that would be a lie, and very irresponsible too.

as much as a person on ARVs could have no symptoms whatsoever (thus living a normal life), they would still technically be HIV+

MrDoGood:

So, all you're saying is that he can't go raw with the wife?
if no, then what's now the need ?

if your sole need for a woman is to have raw sex then you sir DONT need a woman/spouse/companion, you only need serious professional help.

NoContract:


Yes. He can go raw with his wife. As long as she is on drugs, she can't infect anyone. Positive people are not the one spreading the virus. It's usually naive people who don't know their status. Because there's no way someone would know his status and not get treatment, unless he wishes to die.

Go get tested folks.

i beg to differ, although taking ARVs reduces considerably the chances for an infected person to infect his/her partner, there is still about a 5% chance to get infected.... and as little as it may be, people should be careful!

MrBrownJay1:






if your sole need for a woman is to have raw sex then you sir DONT need a woman/spouse/companion, you only need serious professional help.

Sir please read what you wrote again.
So you get married and don't touch your wife? If you decide to use condom which isn't 100% safe, which is why they still preach abstinence.
If you don't and won't have sex with your wife, why marry her in the first place?

Talking about professional help, you sure need it now.

MrDoGood:


Sir please read what you wrote again.
So you get married and don't touch your wife? If you decide to use condom which isn't 100% safe, which is why they still preach abstinence.
If you don't and won't have sex with your wife, why marry her in the first place?

Talking about professional help, you sure need it now.

what wrong with condoms now...?

MrBrownJay1:


what wrong with condoms now...?

Congratulations sir!!!

Please carry on with your life. I'm done with this fruitless conversation.

MrBrownJay1:


i beg to differ, although taking ARVs reduces considerably the chances for an infected person to infect his/her partner, there is still about a 5% chance to get infected.... and as little as it may be, people should be careful!

I know a woman who has HIV all her life, and she has healthy children, and none of her baby daddies caught the virus. It's all about medication, and being aware

Guest007:


I know a woman who has HIV all her life, and she has healthy children, and none of her baby daddies caught the virus. It's all about medication, and being aware

i understand and they are lucky, but we have to stick to the facts... taking ARVs does not mean they cant infect people (far from it).

MrBrownJay1:


i understand and they are lucky, but we have to stick to the facts... taking ARVs does not mean they cant infect people (far from it).

We were chatting about sex only... that's my context

MrBrownJay1:


i beg to differ, although taking ARVs reduces considerably the chances for an infected person to infect his/her partner, there is still about a 5% chance to get infected.... and as little as it may be, people should be careful!

Is there a particular link or proof to support your statement, or is this just a paranoia stemming from ignorance?

I honestly did not intend to insult you, should you ever translate this comment to be so.

Please check this links.

http://www.unaids.org/en/resources/presscentre/featurestories/2018/july/undetectable-untransmittable

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/science-clear-hiv-undetectable-equals-untransmittable

madridsta007:


LOL. Mate, you are hilarious
Of course, it is implied as an insult.
We can pretend about this, but this is fine. Clinical psychologists will tell you that self-deceit is quite prevalent amongst humans these days.

It is quite sad that your supposed education does not inform you that people can hold distinctly different views and the presence of one does not invalidate the other —nor should the other be demonised as "illiterate". One can suggest the "love" argument and another can suggest the "logic" argument. They are both mutually exclusive and should mutually exist as opinions.

Sadly, your vaunted "education" -or should I say, "literacy"- seem not to have taught you this.

Well then.

highbee02:
How do you know that you are not going to be infected? What if he doesn't have money for Antiretroviral drug? Except you are not going to be having it raw (skin - skin). To me, it's a risk adventure

ARVs are free. Go and get tested.

NoContract:


Is there a particular link or proof to support your statement, or is this just a paranoia stemming from ignorance?

I honestly did not intend to insult you, should you ever translate this comment to be so.

Please check this links.

http://www.unaids.org/en/resources/presscentre/featurestories/2018/july/undetectable-untransmittable

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/science-clear-hiv-undetectable-equals-untransmittable

let me educate you on the subject so you dont get fooled by the "Undetectable Equals Untransmittable" BS...

A) not everyone on ARVs have undetectable viral load. FACT!
B) you must have undetectable viral load during AT LEAST 6 months and always take your meds ON TIME... before an infected person on ARVs can consider themselves safe during "sex". FACT!
C) even if someone has undetectable viral load, it only means that SEXUAL transmission is impossible (AKA during SEX), but if you share needles OR have direct blood contact with them, a person with undetectable viral load can still infect you. FACT!
D) just because someone has undetectable viral load today, does not mean that this will be their status for the rest of their natural life. if they miss to take their meds ONE TIME and/or if they fail to take their drugs ON TIME and/or if HIV in their system develop resistance to the drug (like many do), their viral load will change.FACT!
E) during pregnancy/labor/delivery, the chances for an infected mother on ARVs to infect her unborn child is about 1%, and certainly not impossible. FACT!
F) During breastfeeding, having undetectable viral load "greatly reduces" the risk of passing HIV to a child, although it DOES NOT completely eliminate this possibility. any woman on ARVs with undetectable viral load should use milk formula instead. FACT!

SO AGAIN, as much as taking ARVs considerably reduces the chance for a HIV+ person to infect others, people must take NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS. not doing so would not only be foolish, but also very dangerous!

EDUCATE YOURSELF ON THE ISSUE SO I DONT HAVE TO DO IT FOR YOU

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/art/index.html

engrelvis:
my bro a lot cassonova married husband r walking HIV carriers.most of dem don't even know because dey r afraid to go for test.

thats it. A lot of these married men refuse or are afraid to go for test and in turn they infect or get infected by their mistresses and they come home to infect their wives... Their mistresses in turn will infect their other boyfriends and those boyfriends will infect their other side girlfriends and the thing keeps spreading. Ask some of these single ladies who date married men and they will tell u a lot of their married clients refuse using condoms with them.

lefulefu:
thats it. A lot of these married men refuse or are afraid to go for test and in turn they infect or get infected by their mistresses and they come home to infect their wives... Their mistresses in turn will infect their other boyfriends and those boyfriends will infect their other side girlfriends and the thing keeps spreading. Ask some of these single ladies who date married men and they will tell u a lot of their married clients refuse using condoms with them.

if a wife want to really know if his hubby is a flirt outside she shud tell him dey shud go for HIV test.my brother DAT hubby go give one or two excuses for nt going .in fact he might suddenly v an important trip he is going

MrBrownJay1:


let me educate you on the subject so you dont get fooled by the "Undetectable Equals Untransmittable" BS.

A) not everyone on ARVs have undetectable viral load. FACT! True.
B) you must have undetectable viral load during AT LEAST 6 months and always take your meds ON TIME... before an infected person on ARVs can consider themselves safe during "sex". FACT! True
C) Even if someone has undetectable viral load, it only means that SEXUAL transmission is impossible (AKA during SEX), but if you share needles OR have direct blood contact with them, a person with undetectable viral load can still infect you. FACT!

This is a lie. Undectectable means not being able to transfer copies of the virus. Virus that is no longer in the blood. What, then, is there to be transmitted? I don't believe you have a firm grasp of how the HIV virus, or the ARVs work.

HIV medicine is called antiretroviral therapy, or ART. If taken as prescribed, HIV medicine reduces the amount of HIV in the body (viral load) to a very low level, which keeps the immune system working and prevents illness. This is called viral suppression—defined as having less than 200 copies of HIV per milliliter of blood. HIV medicine can even make the viral load so low that a test can’t detect it. This is called an undetectable viral load.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323874.php
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/art/index.html

D) Just because someone has undetectable viral load today, does not mean that this will be their status for the rest of their natural life. if they miss to take their meds ONE TIME and/or if they fail to take their drugs ON TIME and/or if HIV in their system develop resistance to the drug (like many do), their viral load will change.FACT![/b]This is true. However, the current regimen of drugs available now has a very low chance of the virus developing ressistance, that is, if taken according to prescription.

[b]E) During pregnancy/labor/delivery, the chances for an infected mother on ARVs to infect her unborn child is about 1%, and certainly not impossible. FACT!

Again, science has shown that as long as adherence is constant, there is no risk whatsoever. Maylasia is a prime example. This is blatant fear mongering.The 1% is probably for those who do not take adherence seriously. And you might argue the possibility in Nigeria, as this a third world country unlike Malaysia, though. But we're talking about the overrall science here, not about particular countries.

https://www.who.int/westernpacific/news/detail/08-10-2018-malaysia-eliminates-mother-to-child-transmission-of-hiv-and-syphilis

F) During breastfeeding, having undetectable viral load "greatly reduces" the risk of passing HIV to a child, although it DOES NOT completely eliminate this possibility. any woman on ARVs with undetectable viral load should use milk formula instead. FACT!

I suppose this is true to a degree.

SO AGAIN, as much as taking ARVs considerably reduces the chance for a HIV+ person to infect others, people must take NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS. not doing so would not only be foolish, but also very dangerous!

Well, since it appears you aren't aware, partners of HIV positive persons can always take PrEP which is an added security, even if the HIV partner is still detectable. PrEP stands for pre-exposure prophylaxis. It’s a daily pill that can help prevent HIV. If you don’t have HIV, taking PrEP every day can lower your chances of getting HIV from sex by more than 90%. PrEP is also known by the brand name Truvada.

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/stds-hiv-safer-sex/hiv-aids/prep
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/prep.html

I AM SORRY BUT YOUR COMMENT IS LITTERED WITH UNNECESSARY MISINFORMATION AND FEAR MONGERING. I DO BELIEVE YOU SHOULD BE THE ONE EDUCATING YOUR SELF BETTER. TIMES HAVE CHANGED AND THIS IS 2019, NOT 1991.

U equals U is not a bullshit theory. It's real and backed up by over 20 years of evidential science. You are just spreading jumbled misinformation. Please stop it. Also, go get tested, and make sure you share the information, dear.

https://www.preventionaccess.org/
http://i-base.info/u-equals-u-qa/
http://i-base.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/A5-factsheet-UU.pdf
http://i-base.info/htb/32308

NoContract:
This is a lie. Undectectable means not being able to transfer copies of the virus. Virus that is no longer in the blood. What, then, is there to be transmitted? I don't believe you have a firm grasp of how the HIV virus, or the ARVs work.

just because the virus is so low in the system, that it cant be detected, DOES NOT mean the virus isnt there, FACT!
here is a simple question for you: can that person go to a blood bank and give blood transfusion (since you believe they are virus free)?!

This is true. However, the current regimen of drugs available now has a very low chance of the virus developing ressistance, that is, if taken according to prescription.

thats a damn lie...

FIRST there are many people on ARVs who have to change the drug they take due to virus building resistance...it can simply be because a person caught a sti/std etc. FACT!
SECOND if a person fail taking their meds ONCE, then their virus load will go right back to level that they can infect their SEXUAL partner. FACT!
BTW: do you know what BLIPS are? google it so i wont have to educate you on the subject again

Again, science has shown that as long as adherence is constant, there is no risk whatsoever. Maylasia is a prime example. This is blatant fear mongering.The 1% is probably for those who do not take adherence seriously. And you might argue the possibility in Nigeria, as this a third world country unlike Malaysia, though. But we're talking about the overrall science here, not about particular countries.

so are you saying that it is safe for drug users to share needles with a person on ARVs?!
are you saying it is safe for anyone to be in direct blood contact with someone on ARVs?

pls educate yourself on the subject so i dont have to do it for you!!!!

I suppose this is true to a degree.

finally!!!! then ask yourself this simple question... how can a nursing mother infect a child through breastfeeding, if "supposedly" she is virus free (as you claim)?!

pls educate yourself on the subject so i dont have to do it for you!!!!

Well, since it appears you aren't aware, partners of HIV positive persons can always take PrEP which is an added security, even if the HIV partner is still detectable. PrEP stands for pre-exposure prophylaxis. It’s a daily pill that can help prevent HIV. If you don’t have HIV, taking PrEP every day can lower your chances of getting HIV from sex by more than 90%. PrEP is also known by the brand name Truvada.

the fact that you believe that PrEP is for people having sex with infected people, is your 1st mistake of the day. EDUCATE YOURSELF pls!!!
PrEP is meant for people who work in such fields (aka hospitals, police etc) that are in contact with different people and their blood.
now ask yourself this simple question: if PrEP was so safe then why dont they give it to EVERYBODY then?! that would be the end of AIDS isnt it?! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

as written from your link, PrEP reduces the risk by 70%, and certainly isnt 100% safe.... people on PrEP can STILL get the virus. FACT!

I AM SORRY BUT YOUR COMMENT IS LITTERED WITH UNNECESSARY MISINFORMATION AND FEAR MONGERING. I DO BELIEVE YOU SHOULD BE THE ONE EDUCATING YOUR SELF BETTER. TIMES HAVE CHANGED AND THIS IS 2019, NOT 1991.

U equals U is not a bullshit theory. It's real and backed up by over 20 years of evidential science. You are just spreading jumbled misinformation. Please stop it. Also, go get tested, and make sure you share the information, dear.

U equals U is only about "sexual" partners, thus it is BS if you want to talk about sharing needles, blood contact, nursing mothers etc
all the links you bring to this discussion are talking about SEXUAL partners, and NONE WHATSOEVER are saying that direct contact with blood is safe. show me just ONE that says that its safe to have direct blood contact with someone on ARVs....just one!

the reality is that, the minute someone is diagnosed as HIV+, then the virus is in their blood/system, and as much as taking ARVs can reduce the level to minimal %age, the virus is STILL in their blood. if that blood comes in contact with another person's blood then that person will therefore be infected with blood that has minimal %age of the virus, THUS if they dont start to take ARVs themselves, then the virus will now grow to level that will show the deadly symptoms of AIDS. FACT!

sadly, the reason why the AIDS virus keeps on spreading is due to misinformation, like the deadly stuff you write here. foolish people will believe they "cant" infect others (because they are on ARVs) and thus keep on spreading the virus. as much as its ok for people on ARV to have sex with others (so long as their viral load is low), it certainly does NOT mean that other form of spreading the virus (aka sharing needles, direct blood contact, mother to infant etc) is safe!

I DARE YOU TO SHOW ME ONE LINK (OUT OF ALL YOUR ABOVE BS LINK) THAT SAYS THAT ITS 100% SAFE TO SHARE NEEDLES AND/OR TO HAVE DIRECT BLOOD CONTACT, WITH PEOPLE ON ARVs.