Aa
A
A
A
Close
HIV Prevention Community
52.8k Members
Avatar universal

Statistics Don't Tell The Whole Story

If anyone has been reading thebody.com lately, they've noticed that Dr. Bob has had several posts lately about the dangers of realying on statiscs driven for a population as a way to estimate ones own risk.  

The Dr. here does a diservice to all by dealing with "probabilities" when talking about test results, lets face it either you have HIV or you don't the test does not give it to you, your actions are what determine your status.

Therefore I don't buy this 4-6 6-8 week stuff, if you want to follow Mass and the doctor get tested at 6 weeks and move on, if that is not enough or if you want to be extra safe get the 13 week test.  Don't try to calculate the probablities by combining statistics, its not correct...just wait and get tested, I know its hard I'm there too.
8 Responses
Avatar universal

Ah, HIV testing, thy name is uncertainty. The doctor here, and Mass., are a bit unconventional in their advice. If you've read much of what they have to say about testing, though, well, to me the advice makes sense. In the end, everyone has to do what they feel comfortable doing. In other words, test out as long as you like until you feel comfortable with the result. Of course, if you're still testing at the 2,003rd week, you might want to see someone about that.
Avatar universal
[Of course, if you're still testing at the 2,003rd week, you might want to see someone about that.]

ROFL, you think. :)
Avatar universal
I started a thread about those stats also, my point was that if someone rely too much on those stats they can be in for a big trouble. If you go to the Hiv safe sex forum, there is a thread in which this guy said he had plenty of unprotected sex with girls at bars, and bc of the stats, he seems to think that it is so low that he will engage in unprotected sex again(probably), and talk about choose the girl wisely and not have sex with CSWs. How can u choose a girl wisely, u cant tell if someone have hiv or not. People who does not know how the CDC calculate these odds, please get inform before trying to rely on numbers. Stay safe everyone.
Avatar universal
You're correct, numbers don't get HIV, people do.
Avatar universal
I can't believe you idiots.  The tides have sure changed in the last few days even....almost like everyone is angry at Dr.H.

then get the fuc* off this site and go to Dr Bob or aidsmeds fr Christ sakes......who the f*c do yo uthink you guys are?  Dr.H is a far more credible source than someone who creates fear and simply has hiv....dipshits all of you.

I am .........

amazed.
Avatar universal
People want facts. They don't want "odds and statistics form a WW that doesn't know anything about HIV or AIDS. People don't like to be baffled with inconsistencies and numbers that are worthless to people that have a risk or worried that they are infected. You have nothing to offer the people here. You have no experience with dealing with anyone with HIV or AIDS. You would like for these people to leave because they don't agree with you? How about you taking a hike, I'll invite anyone here to go to AidsMeds or The Body. Neither place will try to use "Odds or Statistics" on them, because that, is just meaningless numbers.
Avatar universal
Dumbo when you gonna grow up?
Avatar universal

Still and all, let's not bad mouth statistics and probablilities. We use them in our everyday life for all sorts of things. For instance, why am I not so worried about flying? If stats and/or probability have no meaning, then shouldn't I be freaked about stepping into an airplane or even driving on the highway? Well, I'm not because I know that odds are with me that I'll be just fine. By the same token, I don't spend much time in casinos hoping to get rich because I know the odds are not really stacked in my favor their. OK, I do spend all of my time in casinos, and I do lose all of my money, but who are you to judge me? Ah, sorry, got a little carried away.

Same goes for HIV. Should one go out and have all sorts of unprotected anal and vaginal sex based on odds or stats? Heck no. Should someone sell their homes, shave their heads and contemplate jumping off of a bridge because they had one incident of unprotected vaginal? Heck no. Sure, it *could* have infected you, but, say it with me now, the odds are against it.

Am I saying not to go get tested? Not at all. As we all know, someone who is sexually active should endeavor to both use condoms for anal and vaginal sex and be tested for ALL STDs at *least* once a year. All I am saying is this: a majority of the people who come in here, completely freaked, don't really need to be so freaked. In other words, chill man, the odds are with you. Sure, get a test if you feel you need it, but don't go shaving your head just yet.
Have an Answer?
Top HIV Answerers
366749 tn?1544698865
Karachi, Pakistan
370181 tn?1428180348
Arlington, WA
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
These tips can help HIV-positive women live a long, healthy life.
Despite the drop in new infections, black women are still at a high risk for HIV, the virus that causes Aids.
What are your HIV treatment options, and how do you choose the right one? Our panel of experts weighs in.
Learn the truth behind 14 common misconceptions about HIV.
Can HIV be transmitted through this sexual activity? Dr. Jose Gonzalez-Garcia answers this commonly-asked question.
A breakthrough study discovers how to reduce risk of HIV transmission by 95 percent.