Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So all these people saying Female to Male doesn't happen... You also are saying Magic Johnson was lying back in 1991?

Yes.

+1,000,000

Anonymous wrote:So all these people saying Female to Male doesn't happen... You also are saying Magic Johnson was lying back in 1991?

Yes.

So all these people saying Female to Male doesn't happen... You also are saying Magic Johnson was lying back in 1991?

He should have come out before paying any blackmail $$$.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

Wow, this is a dangerously ignorant statement, PP.

+1000 People are so gullible.

Actually you are the gullible one. Take a look at statistics. Men contracting hiv through vaginal intercourse pretty much doesn't happen. The "We're all at risk" campaign of the 90's was sheer propoganda.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

I don't think that's right...

Actually, it is.

http://www.hudsonvalleycs.org/calculating-your-hiv-risk-by-the-numbers/

Chances of infection in high income country, to male with HIV positive female partner, one instance: 1 in 2,500

He got it from needles, I'd bet

Are you trying to say that female to male transmission is rare?

Yes. It is extremely rare. With the exception of anal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

I don't think that's right...

Actually, it is.

http://www.hudsonvalleycs.org/calculating-your-hiv-risk-by-the-numbers/

Chances of infection in high income country, to male with HIV positive female partner, one instance: 1 in 2,500

He got it from needles, I'd bet

Are you trying to say that female to male transmission is rare?

Why would a person who was neither a bodybuilder nor trans take steroids? I don't get it. Just to make him have crazy but interesting tiger blood rants? Strange.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

I would stop short of saying extremely difficult. It's less likely to be contracted than through IV drugs or anal sex. However, anytime there are bodily fluids and even slightly broken skin (you know that happens), the risk of transmission is there.

FYI - anal sex can be heterosexual sex. I think you meant vaginal intercourse? (And I am so turned off by the idea I can't believe I'm writing this. As it turns out, I'm more turned off by imprecise language.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

I don't think that's right...

Actually, it is.

http://www.hudsonvalleycs.org/calculating-your-hiv-risk-by-the-numbers/

Chances of infection in high income country, to male with HIV positive female partner, one instance: 1 in 2,500

He got it from needles, I'd bet

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

That's a very misleading myth.

https://www.aidstruth.org/misuse-of-studies/padian/

HIV is unquestionably transmitted through heterosexual intercourse. Indeed, heterosexual intercourse is now responsible for 70-80% of all HIV transmissions worldwide (2).

No, PP's phrasing was imprecise, but they are actually correct. HIV is not easy to get that way. Studies have estimated that if you have unprotected vaginal sex once with an asymptomatic infected partner, your odds of getting HIV from that encounter are somewhere between 0.7-1.3%. Probably even lower if the person is on antivirals. The 70-80% number is just looking at the slice of the "already infected" pie attributable to a particular transmission method, not the actual odds of getting infected that way. Having heterosexual sex with an infected partner will not give you HIV anywhere near 80% of the time. It's still not a risk you'd want to take knowingly, but HIV is surprisingly hard to transmit, not at all like herpes.

But I have no sympathy for Charlie Sheen and he's no victim here. Around 80% of hemophiliacs in the US who were alive in the 1980s are now dead because of contaminated blood products they had to take to keep from bleeding to death or being crippled. Those are victims. Not Charlie Sheen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

THANK YOU.

He got it through booty sex.

I had a 1 year old screaming at me, so maybe I misheard, but I'm pretty sure he said he has NOT used condoms every single time afterward.

And what is this bullshit about the tiger blood meltdown not being related? That sounds like debating the meaning of the word "is"

My DH reports that Bree Olson told Howard Stern this morning that Sheen is full of shit and they were having lots of unprotected sex and he never told her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brooke mueller and their twin sons have it?

Highly unlikely. It's extremely difficult for hiv to be transmitted through heterosexual sex.

That's a very misleading myth.

https://www.aidstruth.org/misuse-of-studies/padian/

HIV is unquestionably transmitted through heterosexual intercourse. Indeed, heterosexual intercourse is now responsible for 70-80% of all HIV transmissions worldwide (2).

The speech/paper linked cites a source from 1996. I'd think that today's rates are even higher for heterosexual transmission, though I have no data to support that claim.

Also in the paper (same paragraph as the 70-80% figure):

The current likelihood of male to female infection after a single exposure to HIV is 0.01-0.32% (2, 3), and the current likelihood of female to male infection after a single exposure is 0.01-0.1% (2).

So, while it is unlikely for a person to be infected on a single exposure, the virus is more likely to be transmitted from male to female, rather than female to male. I remember hearing this years ago just based on the nature of heterosexual intercourse... there is minor tearing, etc. in the woman which allows for easier transmission.