can u help me??

I read on a website that if the HIV blood goes orally inside the duct, it can penetrate thru the micro cuts in the duct...is it true?? and I live in London and the ppl here cannot get any medicine without the doctor's prescription so obviously whoever gets ARS symptoms shud be diagnosed as to whether he has HIV or not...then how come there are 20 thousand out of 80 thousand who dont that they have HIV...

[mike_no]

Firstly, you should not read about HIV because that's the worst thing to do when you're anxious. Secondly, even if you read always prefer to fetch information from a good recognized site and not from "HIV Blogs" and the similar.

What was your risk ?

[meworried]

Little Girl ! Either stop worrying about HIV or stop having sex. Doing either of the two will give you peace of mind. You never shared your risk or exposure,,, It might be too small to consider a risk in real terms.

[scaredgirl123]

I just came to London and made friends with a guy..frankly speaking I am too much into sex and I am afraid of the ppl around...what I dont understand is that ppl here cannot get any medicine without the doctor's prescription so obviously whoever gets ARS symptoms shud be diagnosed as to whether he has HIV or not...then how come there are 20 thousand out of 80 thousand who dont that they have HIV....plzz answer me this...and yes one more thing...is HIV in UK more into professionals or is it in prostitutes or blue collar ppl..I am worried plzz someone help me on these things and get me aquainted to London...

[scaredgirl123]

plzz help

[Teak]

HIV, doesn't know the different of anyone’s color, race, gender or job description. Always use condoms and you won't have anything to worry about.

[meworried]

Take what is advised by Teak, if you can not refrain from being "too much" into sex. There is no gadget invented yet, which could instantly tell you the status of the person, about to "enter" you.  

Condoms are 100% safe and protect you from HIV and other STD's as long as your partner used em correctly and the damn thing doesn't break during the "main course". A drunk partner can stupidly and easily screw the latex and subsequently can screw himself or his partner depending on who is "positive".

[regularjoey]

That is not the case, unfortunately - most people who have ARS are actually not diagnosed, because doctors often fail to consider HIV as a possible cause and do not test them for HIV.  ARS is too similar to other more common conditions such as flu, mono, strep and others.  Besides many infected people don't ever get ARS.  

While Teak gave you a nice PC answer, in reality HIV does discriminate.  Gay men, IV drug users, blacks and those of lower socioeconomic status are far more likely to have HIV than others.  That does not mean that the others can't get it - there are heterosexual white middle-class people that have HIV, but that is rare.

[sparkley]

once again., your homophobic tendencies are shining through.

Now,..where is that CSW ?

[regularjoey]

go away troll

[scaredgirl123]

thanks regularjoey really appreciate it...

[Daveansh]

for me hiv does not discriminate in terms of professional life..for sure it is more common among iv drug users..but anyone can be an iv drug user...among homosexuals...and sex workers....and stupid people..who knows what should not be done to have hiv and still do it...i went to the local aids unit last week to collect my 7 weeks result..and the people i found there were mostly if not all of them iv drug users...some of them its just wriiten on theire forehead that they are iv drug users..but others seem fine..u wont say they have hiv...u cannit see..if u look at me..well u will never be able to say hat i may be at risk...i dont think anyone in my locality/relatives/friends in their weirdest nitemare would see me at risk for hiv...for me its just about the choice u make..u make the good choice ur fine..u take the wrong path...then life tends to complicate...why to give away that wonderful life of urs..for a few minutes of pleasure and which later will give u a lifetime of trouble..its just sad that myslef m thinking like that now and not at the time of the risk..but those of u who still has the chance to choose..make the best of it..cheers..god bless us all

[dumbo]

Regularjoey is not a homophobe and he is 100% correct.  Do some research for yourself rather than jumping on teak's deflection bandwagon.

[Teak]

It is rare for white middle class people to have HIV? You have got to be kidding. It's not rare at all. Nor is it rare for a white upper class person to contract HIV. dumbo as normal spouts off and doesn't know what he's talking about. But that is norm for him.

[Teak]

Just because you don't hear about them and they don't go to websites doesn't not mean that some don't have HIV. It wouldn't be a concern of yours as long as you weren't having unprotected sex with them.

[guiltnworry]

It is rare for white middle/upper class people to have HIV, Dr. HHH has said so many times.  I don't think anyone here is saying go out and do whoever you want, as long as they are white.  Certainly, upper middle class white people can have HIV, but it is rare in that population, especially when compared to populations like homosexual men and IV drug users.  HIV is not a disease of the lower socioeconomic classes, but it certainly is seen much more frequently there.  Teak, how can you say it isnt rare?  About 1,000,000 people in the US have HIV.  Over 75% of them are gay men, another 18-20% of them are IV drug users.  That leaves 10% maybe who would fall into the heterosexual, non-IV drug user class.  Even within that class, African American women have much higher rates of AIDS/HIV.  So that leaves maybe, what, 5% max out of 1,000,000 people who fall into the middle class white group?  Thats 50,000 people.  Out of a country of about 2.6 billion, thats pretty rare.  I know you want everyone to be safe and consider that anyone can have HIV, which is true, but it is definitely far more likely in some populations than others.  Nice job regularjoey and chrisneedshelp...its nice to have some realists...and yes, politicians do screw all the time, but probably upscale escorts?  (who Dr.HHH says get tested regularly and usually dont have any STDs)

[Teak]

Only people with blinders on, thinks that. What do you call rare? Do you think 10,000 (which is a low number) newly infected people a year that is heterosexual is rare? Now if it was one or two people per year, it would be rare which it's not.

[guiltnworry]

I was referring to the white, non-homosexual part of the population, which is the category that the original post falls into...

[Teak]

The US is the only place that gays have the high precentage of HIV infections. Now take a look at all the other contries. They are heterosexuals.

[guiltnworry]

Actually, in the UK specifically, HIV is predominantly in gays still.  Only 22% of HIV infections resulted from heterosexual contact.  The other 78% were homosexual and IV drug use.  In the under-developed countries, like Africa and India, heterosexual sex is the main vector for HIV transmission, which is what people mean when they say most countries have heterosexual transmission.  So, the US is not the only place where gays have the highest rates.      

[Teak]

Guess you should do some more research of HIV in the UK.The number of heterosexually acquired HIV infections diagnosed in the UK has risen hugely over the last 15 years. In 1999, for the first time, the rate of heterosexually acquired HIV diagnoses overtook the rate of diagnoses in men who have sex with men. During 2006, there were 3,430 reports of heterosexually acquired HIV, and a total of 36,603 had been reported by the end of June 2007.

Most of the new diagnoses are in people who probably acquired HIV in other countries, particularly in Africa. However, the number of infections probably acquired from heterosexual sex within the UK has soared from 183 in 1998 to 549 in 2006.

[regularjoey]

I don't know if those numbers are correct - but if they are, it only shows how small a problem HIV is in the heterosexual population.  "Soared from 183 to 549".  549!  SOARED!  That's less than 2 people a day.  In the UK - a huge country, almost 100 million people...

If a few hundred people were getting HIV each year in the US, we wouldn't even know what HIV is, nobody would care... But we get tens of thousands, unfortunately.

[Teak]

To be exact the US gets around 40,000 new cases a year. Out of 300 million population. If you want to check on the UK numbers they are listed on Avert.Org. . As for your guessing the UK's population, it is only 60,587,300 as of 2006.

[guiltnworry]

You just shot yourself with your own statistics.  The number of heterosexual infections is increasing, but overall, there are more homosexual men with HIV.  I agree with regularjoey, 183 to 549 may be a huge margin of increase (i.e. over 300%) but as far as absolute numbers go, 183 to 549 is still extremely low.  As for your correction of the population of UK, its still a huge population.  For there to only be an increase of 183 to 549 over SEVEN years shows that this is not an epidemic.  Whether or not you want to admit it, in industrialized countries (such as the US/UK), homosexual transmission is a huge problem. In third world countries, such as many in Africa, and India, route of exposure is heterosexual.  Those were poor statistics that you cited to prove you point.  549 infections is virtually nothing.  Go by the percentages of people living with HIV.  I dont know if you ever took statistics, but the RATE of increase doesnt say anything about the overall number of people with the disease.  More homosexuals and IV drug users in UK have HIV than heterosexuals, regardless of whether the rates of heterosexual incidences are rising.  Rate is different than number.

[regularjoey]

Right on, G'n'W.  In the US, HIV prevalence among hetero men is probably a THOUSAND times lower than it is among gay men.  A giant difference in rates.

[Teak]

Whether one is gay or straight, HIV affect the infected the same and the only way to know ones status is by testing. Not by statistics or odds.