|
jess
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12039614/Would you risk infection for this study? This is crazy. Eventually it would have to be tested on humans or course, but I hope they are pretty damn confident in these drugs. EDIT: After watching 'Philadelphia' this would be a no no for me.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2006-03-28, 07:16 by jess »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
"If I thought there was a fallback parachute, a preventative, I would definitely want to add that." Barring getting an infection from a tainted transfusion or open wound of some kind, there is a 100% effective way to avoid getting aids. KEEP YOUR PANTS ON! A faithful, monagamous union with testing ahead of time is the only "safe" form of sex. I'm not even talking about religious or moral considerations here, I'm talking about strict avoidance of disease. No sex until marriage, and no cheating DURING marriage. I know, I'm asking the impossible here. 
Now someone will come back "but gays can't marry!" Fine, if you're gay make some kind of contract, a commitment that works to the same effect. Whatever! And gay or hetero, If the other person isn't willing to commit, drop them like a hot potato, it's not worth your life. The point is that faithful monogamy is the safest way to have sex and avoid diseases. The only 100% certain way to avoid diseases (barring a tainted transfusion or, God forbid, rape) is to remain a virgin, and I doubt too many humans have that as their life's goal.
As for condoms being a "protection" for a promiscuous lifestyle, consider this little scenario. You're wearing a bullet-resistant vest and hand a complete stranger a gun, which may or may not be loaded, then asking them to shoot you. Perhaps nothing happens, perhaps the gun fires. Perhaps the vest stops it, perhaps this time it finds a weakness and gets through. Perhaps their aim is bad and they miss the vest and shoot you in the face. Perhaps the shoot you in the face on purpose. Now who in their right mind would play that kind of Russian roulette? Then why the hell would anyone bet their life, or worse - someone else's life - on a thin piece of RUBBER?
To me there's no excuse. If someone is educated about STD's, and willingly engages in promiscuity and gets an infection, sorry for being heartless, but you deserve whatever you catch and I have no sympathy for you. The only people I have sympathy for are the children born to infected parents, people who do not have access to the educational resources to guard against infection, and those who are unwittingly infected by unfaithful and deceptive mates whom they thought were being faithful to them. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2006-03-28, 15:22 by Phoenix »
|
Logged
|
  I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Kajet
|
A more than valid point pho, but what about those who've found someone to be monagamous with yet already has aids? And I mean a lifetime commitment not just screwing one person for however long.
Yeah this drug will probably be over used for like one night stands ect. but I think it'll do the most good with people who actually want to live with and love one person the rest of their life.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
Team Member
Elite (3k+)
   
Posts: 3330
|
Comparing kevlar with rubber without making the proper translation from bullets to semen is not really cutting it (nor does a kevlar vest have bullet-killing lubrication added to it - ofcourse, that doesn't apply in the infection-question, but I thought it was funny nonetheless). Also, there's a bigger chance of the average gun being loaded and usable than there is for an individual having a (lethal) STD and of transmitting it, too.
I agree however that it's silly to risk your life for a good time, no matter how good that is. I don't agree on the marriage thing - it could be a nice solution, if there was such a thing as guaranteed fidelity. As there is not, it's an arbitrary line to draw - a matter of increasing or decreasing risk. Me, I like to cut my risks, but if someone else values their activities in life differently, I won't be harsh on them when it back-fires. I once thought 'laying off' the sex was easy, since I have no difficulties with that myself, but I found it wasn't for a great many people - smart, trustworthy and kind people, at that.
I'm not about to slap them in the face when they catch something horrible. I will still be there for them, and reserve my sword of righteouness for other things - such as marketeers.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2006-03-28, 17:06 by Tabun »
|
Logged
|
| Tabun |
?Morituri Nolumus Mori? |
| |
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
I'm not as forgiving of humanity for its behavior. I understand humans are imperfect creatures, I am also an imperfect creature. However, I will hold any species capable of sending space ships to the moon to account for its actions. If you're smart enough to do that, you should have enough sense by now to understand what instincts are, how they work, and how to avoid completely avoidable diseases. Lack of guarantee is no reason to not try to be faithful in the first place. I have no sympathy for people who gamble all their money away in blatant stupidity and unnecessary and avoidable risk, why should I have sympathy when someone gets a disease from indiscriminantly satisfying their lusts?
Self-control was once considered an asset, and lack of guarantee is no reason to not try to be faithful in the first place. No, you can't control what the other person does, but you can choose not to engage in infidelity yourself. Yes, there are no guarantees in life except death, but I thought that humanity was supposed to try to better itself as time went on, or has that fallen completely by the wayside in favor of sinking to the lowest common denominator? "It's too hard to be faithful, so why bother! People won't do it anyway, so why expect it! Why should I be faithful when I know the other person won't be!" Sounds like making up lame excuses to me. Why try when it's so much easier to just give up and fail? After all, anybody can be a loser. It takes hard work and effort to uphold a vow.
Like I said, I know I ask the impossible, but when it comes to a mate, and maintaining that commitment, I set the absolute highest standards for myself and for her. I expect no less than perfect commitment on my part. In fact, I demand it of myself, I would be much more forgiving and understanding of infidelity on her part than mine, but she feels the same toward me. This is why my mate and I love each other as deeply as we do, why we have maintained our commitment over all this time, even though we can never meet, nor touch, nor see each other in the flesh until this age is finished and my time here comes to an end. We may not have sexual pleasure, nor closeness of body, but we give of ourselves to each other in a way that transcends all of that. Mankind could learn something from this, that is, if it weren't for your bloody "reasoned" minds forgetting the value of the lessons that myths and legends used to impart. Perhaps I fail in that I expect people to understand this, but I still try to maintain some hope that somebody learns from our example.
As for comparing kevlar to rubber, think about this. Kevlar is basically woven nylon cord. Not such a "stretch" of a comparison after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
shambler
|
Evolution in action.
but maybe not.
Helen the goth and I have been together and faithful for 17 and a half years, but before that it was different. I can understand both points of view here.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
McDeth
|
I'm not as forgiving of humanity for its behavior. I understand humans are imperfect creatures, I am also an imperfect creature. However, I will hold any species capable of sending space ships to the moon to account for its actions. If you're smart enough to do that, you should have enough sense by now to understand what instincts are, how they work, and how to avoid completely avoidable diseases. Lack of guarantee is no reason to not try to be faithful in the first place. I have no sympathy for people who gamble all their money away in blatant stupidity and unnecessary and avoidable risk, why should I have sympathy when someone gets a disease from indiscriminantly satisfying their lusts?
Self-control was once considered an asset, and lack of guarantee is no reason to not try to be faithful in the first place. No, you can't control what the other person does, but you can choose not to engage in infidelity yourself. Yes, there are no guarantees in life except death, but I thought that humanity was supposed to try to better itself as time went on, or has that fallen completely by the wayside in favor of sinking to the lowest common denominator? "It's too hard to be faithful, so why bother! People won't do it anyway, so why expect it! Why should I be faithful when I know the other person won't be!" Sounds like making up lame excuses to me. Why try when it's so much easier to just give up and fail? After all, anybody can be a loser. It takes hard work and effort to uphold a vow.
Like I said, I know I ask the impossible, but when it comes to a mate, and maintaining that commitment, I set the absolute highest standards for myself and for her. I expect no less than perfect commitment on my part. In fact, I demand it of myself, I would be much more forgiving and understanding of infidelity on her part than mine, but she feels the same toward me. This is why my mate and I love each other as deeply as we do, why we have maintained our commitment over all this time, even though we can never meet, nor touch, nor see each other in the flesh until this age is finished and my time here comes to an end. We may not have sexual pleasure, nor closeness of body, but we give of ourselves to each other in a way that transcends all of that. Mankind could learn something from this, that is, if it weren't for your bloody "reasoned" minds forgetting the value of the lessons that myths and legends used to impart. Perhaps I fail in that I expect people to understand this, but I still try to maintain some hope that somebody learns from our example.
As for comparing kevlar to rubber, think about this. Kevlar is basically woven nylon cord. Not such a "stretch" of a comparison after all. Well, what if one doesn't believe in marriage. I for one am happily monagamous without marriage. I'm sorry, marriage and abstainence are not the only solutions to this problem. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Beer? I'm down.
|
|
|
|
Woodsman
|
abstainence sounds much more apealing when you say masturbation. Safe sex is in the palm of your hand.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
McDeth:
make some kind of contract, a commitment that works to the same effect. Whatever! I'm not as concerned about the vocabulary here as the end result, it's just easier to say "marriage" than "a monogamous union between two consenting individuals that lasts indefinitely and maintains fidelity during the duration". I hate it when some of you have to get technical when you know full well what I mean, and I get extremely annoyed when I have to spell it out, at length, as a result. Quit splitting hairs and annoying the bird. Woodsman: You are correct, and I certainly agree with you. Nobody ever got a disease (that I know of) by playing with themselves. An injury, perhaps, but not a disease.[/color] 
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2006-03-28, 19:44 by Phoenix »
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Thomas Mink
|
I agree with Pho 100%.. especially the last paragraph of his first post.
...that is all.
(sorry no rants or bias opinions.. it's really all been said)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2006-03-28, 23:25 by ~SpAwN~ »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lopson
Elite
Posts: 1133
Still Going In Circles
|
You are correct, and I certainly agree with you. Nobody ever got a disease (that I know of) by playing with themselves. An injury, perhaps, but not a disease. Well that coming from a bird is... OK, I'll say it out loud : EEEEEEEWWWWW!!!!!
But anyways, Chemical Industry better present solutions in this decade for this problem, otherwise they'll lose quite some credibility. Also, I will add no comments on this marriage thing, have no expirience, ya know.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Mink
|
You don't need experience...
Is this how people think now? No wonder marriages never last any more. Marry some schmo as a trial run for experience.. then go after a real catch.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McDeth
|
McDeth:
I'm not as concerned about the vocabulary here as the end result, it's just easier to say "marriage" than "a monogamous union between two consenting individuals that lasts indefinitely and maintains fidelity during the duration". I hate it when some of you have to get technical when you know full well what I mean, and I get extremely annoyed when I have to spell it out, at length, as a result. Quit splitting hairs and annoying the bird.
Woodsman: You are correct, and I certainly agree with you. Nobody ever got a disease (that I know of) by playing with themselves. An injury, perhaps, but not a disease. You used the term "marriage". You know damn well that term is denotative for a "legal union". Excuse us for being "limited humans". |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Beer? I'm down.
|
|
|
|
BiGRoB85
|
You don't need experience...
Is this how people think now? No wonder marriages never last any more. Marry some schmo as a trial run for experience.. then go after a real catch. Yeah, wouldn't it be easier to date the person first before marrying them? I mean, it's less hassle to break up with them at that stage than to go through the process of getting a divorce, right? Yes, I know, there are complexities involved here, but I won't go into them here. Now, if only I could...   <-- Me |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
-BigRob85
(Not so) Proudly turning dual gats into BFGs since 2004!
|
|
|
SIN Plague
Lost Soul
Posts: 12
|
I have had unprotected sex with many women... and I've never once gotten an STD of any kind...
I do, however, have a son... so I guess that means I can't be perfect...
For me, the big thing has always been can I trust the person I'm with? I know I don't have anything because I get tested regularly... so... does my partner do the same? can I trust what they tell me?
You have to answer those questions for yourself...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Mink
|
If you love the person you're with, you should be able to trust what they say... if you can't, then you're making a mistake.. and I hope you get bitten.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
scalliano
Elite
Posts: 1095
Yup, that's me
|
As for comparing kevlar to rubber, think about this. Kevlar is basically woven nylon cord. Not such a "stretch" of a comparison after all. Hmm ... armour-plated jubes ... Anyone got the number of a patent office?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
PSN ID: scalliano
The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
|
|
|
|
shambler
|
For me, the big thing has always been can I trust the person I'm with? Its not the person you're with you need to trust, but the last person (or the one before that) that they did it with. Or the person that that person trusted. I have two sons. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Kajet
|
truth is you can't always trust someone not cause they might be embarrased or something similar but they don't know...
in all honesty i think in today's world it might not be considered to be in poor taste to ask some one for a blood test especially if this person you plan on staying with forever, and of course keeping your pants on at least long enough for that test.
Of course there might be some one with some disease that you want to stay with but then you're screwed for help at that point don't ask me for an answer to such a hard question...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
