OR OR no longer scared of AIDs

[Ree]

man,the son of the lake picked up a slay queen and hit it raw,

looked at her in the morning and man i know this is very unscientific ,but she looked like she might have aids,

no,her eyes werent yellow ,she didnt have rashes or anyhting,but...

you know those girls so fly that you cant even imagine that they ever go to the toilet?

this particular lightskin didnt fall into that category,

she just had a look like if aids ever caught someone it would be her,she looked like that kind of average person you went to school with and havent had from in a while,and when you met a schoolmate they told you that ""remember so and so,they died" and you say thats sad,but its not really sad,you just say that because it seems approppriate.

i decided to go to the westlands health center to take PEPS,

now i havent ever taken peps before,but i heard heard the horror tales,

I was told that one PEP tablet is as big as an apple,I was told that when u go for a dosage of PEPs they give it to you in a small sack,i was told that PEPs is not the sort of medication you take before a meal,or after a meal,I was told that the tablets were so big you take them as the meal.

so after a long queue,I was pleasantly suprised to find that a PEp dosage consist of 48 regular looking white pills,i was supposed to take two a day.



I went home got a glass of water and looked at the pills in my hand.

the mystique surrounding these pills was legendary.

I was nervous because i had heard of the potency of this pills.

aids defaetaed wamalwa,Are you joking with something that can defeat aids?

various mechanics had told me a pep pill ca jumpstart a car with a discharged battery



i had heard horror stories about the sideffects of these pills.sideeffects ranging ,from nausea to rashes to hair growing on your eyeballs.

credible sources had warned me that the sideeffects are so bad that some people stop the dosage halfway and say they would rather just get aids.

i canceled all my appointments,took a sick leave,said a prayer(out desperation, because i am infact an atheist).

i pooped the pill.

i have been taking them for 4 days now,and i have gotten absolutely no sideefefcts.

i am glad of this experience tho,

once a man surpasses a certain laycount .condoms just dont do it for you anymore,

in a country with an AIDS prevalence rate of 8 percent,(roughly 1 in 12 people have aids)how to not get aids and still hit it raw has been a real dilemna for me,

i have sufferend absolutely no sideffects from pep,but the doctors told me that PEP shouldnt be taken more than twice an year,if i like it raw they recomend PREp,a preventive pill.

man i cant wait to finish my dosage so that they give me PREP,fucking raw with no fear here i come.

"what about if a girl gets pregnant you ask?" well if shes fly ill keeep it,

if not......there is always the obado option

 

[trashKENNUT]

Ree,

DAMN. HAHAHA! i had a chat with Chase on AIDS and what the human body can do.

Crazy stuff. We found interesting things that i share on the GC post. I bump it up.

But to say a disclaimer here for Chase and GC, because i put a sentence above, about or related to him. "My opinion does not necessarily translate agreement of the owner or author of GC."

Have to do it. Society is sensitive. (manipulation/control)

Zac

 

[ThePhoenix]

Ree,

Well, you just answered a question I was wondering recently: if I walk into a clinic and tell them I just slept with a girl from Africa without a condom, would they give me PEP.

You live in Nairobi, right?  Been thinking of moving there for a while.. either there or Kampala.  Cuz I'd prolly hit on way, way more women than I do here.  (I only have eyes for black women... African especially!  And especially those elegant tall darkskin South Sudanese ones I figure are also hanging out in Uganda & Kenya right now.)

I've also thought about sometimes skipping the condom, for a few reasons including a big boost in motivation.  Of course, combining the two would be a little reckless!  Heck, even here, black women are a higher STI risk than the general population, but fuck it, I love 'em.  So I can sure see where you're coming from!  I've done all sorts of calculations to try to make intelligent choices about who, when, where, and how.

Have you thought about considering raw sex as a treat you will only do occasionally, rather than having an all-or-nothing approach?  Kind of like occasionally giving yourself some ice cream doesn't have the same health impacts as eating it every damn day.  That's my thinking.  I really can't afford to do it all the time, it's just too risky.  But at the same time I'd miss out from never doing it.  So a reasonable compromise seems, only do it very occasionally, and only if it's a girl you really like.  And maybe get her tested before doing it too many times.

8%, are you sure?  Figures I've seen for Kenya from UNAIDS and NACC, are 4.8% ~ 5.9%, and for women aged ≤ 24 in Nairobi County, 3.2%.

HIV isn't actually that contagious.  For high-income countries, if the girl has it, you've only got a 1 : 2,500 chance of getting it from a single act of unprotected PIV.  But African studies have put that at 1 : 263 .. I guess from less access to treatment.  Buuuut, you're 26 times more likely to catch it during the very contagious first 12 weeks she's infected.

So, a 24 year old girl from Nairobi County, unknown HIV status... let me crunch the #s... somewhat simplistic odds of catching HIV off a single unprotected act with her are 1 : 1,896.  (But I assumed a uniform likelihood of an HIV+ girl having caught it anywhere from age 17 to her current age, which is not realistic and means that it's probably a little more risky than that figure would suggest, because the odds of her being in the deadly 12 weeks were underestimated in my calculation.)

But of course the chances go up as you keep rolling the dice.  10 rolls, it's 1 : 190.  50 rolls, 1 : 38.  100 rolls, 1 : 19.  200 rolls, 1 : 9.  500 rolls, 1 : 4.

Daily PrEP would cut the chances of getting HIV from a single PIV act with that 24 year old down to 1 : 23,707 (subject to the same simplifications).  Roll 200 times and that goes up to 1 : 119.  Roll 500 times and it's 1 : 47.  But if she's over 24, or from certain higher-risk populations, the risk could be a lot higher.

Interestingly, condom use without PrEP has around the same HIV risk reduction as daily PrEP without condoms, and possibly less, depending on whose numbers you go by.  (I've seen the relative risk reduction of condoms cited anywhere from 80% to 95%, and PrEP at 92%.)

However, PrEP will not protect you from any other STIs!  While most of the other STIs probably won't kill you, some are becoming drug-resistant.  And catching another STI could increase your HIV risk significantly!

Pregnancy is a lot more probable than getting HIV.  A single act without any contraception... it's actually not so easy to find figures, but so far my research and simulating has said about 1 : 14 to 1 : 17, assuming she's not in menses, and assuming fertility doesn't change her and/or your behaviour.  I'm still working on simulator models for psychological effects, unknown birth control, and multiple encounters with the same woman.

I actually want to knock up a honey sooner or later, and I'm now a pretty firm monogamy non-believer so I fully expect my baby to come out of a casual or semi-casual sort of thing.  With that said, I'm pretty picky about just what my baby comes out of, so for me, she has to be pretty fly before I'm pumping my load into her... cuz once it's in her, it's outta your hands, and I just can't go the Obado route!!

Even pull-out is somewhat risky, so I gotta like her a lot even for that!

I do see myself possibly needing PEP/PrEP sooner or later, so good to hear no side effects.  The jumpstarting a car bit is laughable!  No science to that at all.  LOL.

For me, I think in Africa I'd go on PrEP but still use condoms with most women, mainly due to the risk of other STIs and pregnancy, and rely on the PrEP alone for the girls I really like.

Just whatever you do, stay out of the back door!!  lol

Cheers,
Phoenix

 

[Seppuku]

hey Phoenix,

It's a nice piece of analysis that you did put here . Very interesting. Yes, even if odds are low, they eventually stack up to a non negligible likelihood if you multiply the unprotected encounters. Lots of food for thought for us seducers.

By the way, do you have some references to share regarding your data? The 3.2% prevalence for girls of Nairobi county? The 1:2500 odds of catching it in one act? And the 1:263? And the 26 factor in the 12 weeks after infection? I would be interested to dig into this.

Thank you!
Seppuku

 

[ThePhoenix]

Ree,

I just want to mention another thing I forgot.  There is as I mentioned still some mild chance you could catch HIV while taking PrEP properly.  But if you do still catch it, it may at least in principle be more likely to be a particular strain that responds less to antiretroviral therapy (I believe PrEP is based on similar drugs as ART).  So, while you're less likely to catch it, you may be more likely to die from it if you still do happen to catch it.  I haven't actually seen any data on that, it's only educated speculation, but is worth considering anyway.

AIDS is pretty serious, especially in Africa... and the majority of transmissions do come from sex.  I wouldn't be reckless with it.


Seppuku,

Thanks!  Yes, it's good to know these things.  Life is about balance.  If you avoid all risks, really you don't live, so it's more a matter of understanding risk so you can take only the risk you believe is right for you.

Regarding the risk accumulation, I was calculating those based on independent probabilities (the formula Pt = 1 - (1 - P)ⁿ, where Pt is total probability if you repeat an act of probability P over n times).  It's important to point out that probabilities in real life are often not independent.  So, the numbers I gave are probably fairly reflective of the situation if you sleep with n different girls, but sleeping with the same girl n times can be a different situation.

Typically, for catching a disease, the real risk may be lower for n times on the same girl, although the difference looks to be modest up to around n=100, unless of course you get her tested.  For getting her pregnant, the real probability is likely higher than independent probability would suggest, since inherently each sex act occurs at a different time and so if the first one didn't hit the fertile window, that elevates the chances the next one will beyond random, if we're talking a few days.  (That's why I'm working out simulations, because it becomes hard to calculate things like this based on simple odds.)

Also, you're well aware of this with physics background, but for others, it's easy to forget that probability is not a guarantee, so just because odds are 1:1800 doesn't mean it won't happen your very first time!

Regarding the 3.2% in Nairobi County...

First, just to reiterate, that is only for women 24 and under.  The general rate in that county is much higher.  The chances a given person has an infection tend to go up with age, because it's largely a function of cumulative exposure.  Females also apparently are getting infected faster, so it's also not guaranteed that figure stays put in the long run, although generally the HIV prevalence in Kenya has dropped over the last couple decades.

You can see a time series of prevalence for various countries, here for female 15-24, or here for total population 15-49.  Note how prevalence in Kenya exceeded 11% in the mid 1990's, so a lady who may have been sexually active at that time would today be a much higher risk than a 24 year old.  (Mind you if she is still alive because she's on treatment, it's possible she's a lower risk, as successful treatment may make the transmission rate negligible.)

(I should mention for readers in general doing research, keep in mind the difference between "incidence" and "prevalence".  How likely a person you randomly encounter at a given moment is to have the infection is prevalence, whereas incidence is how many new infections occur over a given time period.)

The 3.2% figure I actually had to synthesize from other data in Kenya HIV County Profiles 2016 from the National AIDS Control Council of Kenya's Ministry of Health.  (Total population of Nairobi County is given as 4,232,087, with youth 15-24 constituting 18% of the population.  (This isn't an entirely useful age bracket for our purposes, but unfortunately that seems to be the common breakdown in epidemiological studies.)  From that we can see there are 761,776 youths there.  HIV burden in youths in that county is estimated at 23,671 for 2015, so we can calculate 23,671 / 761,776 ≈ 3.11%; I rounded up to be safe.)

EDIT: Since that figure is using an age bracket going all the way down to 15, it's not entirely accurate for 24 year olds. Most 15 year old girls are not liable to be that sexually experienced or have had partners with high partner counts, so they may pull that figure down quite a bit. It's probably safer to blend that figure with the wider 7.6% for women in general in Nairobi County, though I'm not sure off hand what formula would be appropriate.. ideally might need calculus and lots of assumptions, lol.

The epidemic isn't homogeneous in the country.  If she's from Homa Bay County (near Lake Victoria, near Uganda), the general prevalence there is 26%!  (It's also not homogeneous throughout Africa.  It gets worse as you move south, with Swaziland and Lesotho being 27.2% and 25%, respectively!)

Odds of catching in one act...

First, I should caution that single-act odds are generally obtained by following serodiscordant married couples over a long period of time, so they contain a few inherent assumptions, such as, the negative partner isn't sleeping with anyone else on the side.  It's also worth noting that these studies may unintentionally select for low transmissivity, since they generally follow couples that may have already been together for some time and already didn't communicate the infection over that prior, unaccounted-for period; this may cause some such studies to underestimate the risk for randomly selected individuals.  And generally there are many complex and time-varying factors involved in disease transmission which it's hard for studies to account for, so it has to be taken with a grain of salt.  With that said, it's better than taking a wild guess, I suppose!

The 1:2500 and 1:263 come from a 2009 meta-analysis of 43 publications, compiled by Boily et al., which also has a wealth of information and analysis on specific risk factors and limitations in the studies.  Just a small correction, the 1:263 is not just from Africa, it's Africa, Asia, and Haiti.  The 1:263 estimate showed greater heterogeneity than the 1:2500, so it's possible that it is an overestimation due to under-reporting of risky behaviour, or other factors.  Personally, for Africa I'd go with the higher probability just to be safer, but if you use the more stable 1:2500 figure, the odds I calculated for the example Nairobi girl would have been remarkably lower.

The acute infectious phase...

See HIV-1 Transmission, by Stage of Infection, Hollingsworth et al., The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Volume 198, Issue 5, 1 September 2008.  Actually, that gives the primary infection period as ~3 months.

In my example, I was calculating under the assumption that the 26 factor applied against the 1:263 transmission probability, but at least in principle, that's a bit defensive because the transmission probability would be randomly distributed for infection phase of the index case, in which case the 26 factor would already be built into the 1:263 figure.  In reality, that would depend on the study design.  1:263 was actually a composite from multiple studies.  Studies where the index case's infection occurred during the partnership would have that built in fully, whereas other studies might tend to underrepresent it due to the very long asymptomatic phase, although the actual difference might not be huge because the acute phase is so short in comparison.  Well, epidemiology gets pretty complicated!  

Cheers,
Phoenix

 

[Seppuku]

Hey Phoenix,

Thank you for this, it is extremely useful.

Just on a technical note (because I'm a geek too!):

Total population of Nairobi County is given as 4,232,087, with youth 15-24 constituting 18% of the population.  (This isn't an entirely useful age bracket for our purposes, but unfortunately that seems to be the common breakdown in epidemiological studies.)  From that we can see there are 761,776 youths there.  HIV burden in youths in that county is estimated at 23,671 for 2015, so we can calculate 23,671 / 761,776 ≈ 3.11%; I rounded up to be safe.

the reasoning is correct for the overall male + female 15-24 age tranche. Since it's seems in general the prevalence is higher for females (because of higher male-to-female transmission likelihood) it means the odds of any 15-24 female being positive, is higher than 3.2%. Assuming 2:1 female / male prevalence, we would get something like 4.2%.

But well, it's just a detail and doesn't change the overall conclusion (and message) of your post.

Thanks again, great research!

Seppuku

 

[ThePhoenix]

Hey Seppuku,

Since it's seem in general the prevalence is higher for females (because of higher male-to-female transmission likelihood) it means the odds of any 15-24 female being positive, is higher than 3.2%. Assuming 2:1 female / male prevalence, we would get something like 4.2%.

Thank you for pointing that out! It's a good point.

From the same source, it looks like female:male prevalence for HIV in that county is actually around 1.62:1. That puts the female 15-24 prevalence at about 3.8% (corrected for population sex ratio). This does assume that both the population sex ratio and the HIV prevalence sex ratio don't vary between that tranche and the total population.

A possibly bigger source of error, as I noted in the edit, is that the tranche extends down to 15 year olds, who I would somewhat guess pull the figure down substantially. (Vertical transmission cases are not that likely to survive this long without treatment, though some do.) So considering this, I'd expect females 21-24 to be a fair bit higher than the 3.8%, but correcting for that isn't trivial. Would be nice if there were more fine-grained stats available.

And lets not get into women lying about their age, compounded by black women not aging!

Cheers,
Phoenix

 

[ThePhoenix]

Ree,

Another thing occurred to me.

You should go back to all those people who told you horror stories about the PEPs and tell them all they're full of shit.

Scaring people out of taking a medication that could save their life and/or reduce the spread of AIDS is extremely irresponsible. These sorts of "urban legends" / "old wives tales" could even be part of the problem.

Phoenix

 

[Ree]

hey phoenix,yeah i live in nairobi,nice analysis you got there,
welcome here
seppuku can tell u how beautiful our women are

 

[Seppuku]

@Ree,

seppuku can tell u how beautiful our women are

He knows that already! And by the way Ree, your original post is hilarious! I do stand with Phoenix with everything he said though. Nice analysis of him.

@Phoenix
I'd like to answer here about your post on the other thread - enough feeding our troll friend Space. I'm glad that my post there was useful to you at least, because our friend seems completely closed to any argument from us anyway.

About making the move to Africa. What I'd advise you, instead of taking an abrupt leap into the unknown (with potential consequences for your business I think), is to continue to learn game in your current city, but allow yourself to open up your target market. Just don't let yourself domesticated by the first woman you eventually get a hold on (which is the case with guys here more often than not)! You could, for example, open up to tourist girls (whatever skin color) - which are usually very open to casual encounters. Or whatever. But open up!

From all your posts, you have the right way of thinking - although not internalized yet. What you absolutely need is much more dates. So you need to multiply the opportunities by any means you can.

For now, just view all this as a learning experience, and put aside the goal of going for your ideal target woman. Getting your target woman type will be for stage two of your learning. It is at this stage counterproductive to limit yourself to a small target segment. Since there are few of them, you are putting yourself into a frame of scarcity - which is the number one killer.

The reason to learn getting girls where you are, is this. In an African country, you will certainly gather a lot of attention as a middle aged white man, but you will still absolutely need a strong frame - or else a strong African mama will catch you, lock you and make you bleed your money. Don't laugh it off! They are very good at that, they know what they are doing, and they are also used to deal with strong dominant males - much more than our western white ladies. Your best antidote to that is a very strong frame.

Another reason is, if you can get somewhat good in a hard place like where you are, you will have it easy anywhere else. But the opposite is not true.

And yes, in the meantime, please get yourself some short vacations there to feel the place and see if you can live there, and get a try at the local girls.

Seppuku

 

[ThePhoenix]

Ree,

Thanks!

Yup, truss me I kno, mad cuties in Kenya...    although your troubled neighbours to the northwest, God I'm especially in love with some of those ones!  

Thank you for the welcome!  I appreciate it!  Well, actually I'm not certain of what city I'll likely go to yet, it's mostly between there or Kampala, which is more or less a coin toss right now but hopefully as I do more research I will be able to decide.  Have you been to Uganda?

Keep an eye out for questions I might put up re. Nairobi or Kenya.

And I'm actually kinda curious if these PEP horror stories were for our entertainmnet or if people actually say that stuff!  I took your post literally, but hopefully I was wrong!!!

Cheers!


Seppuku,

Well, black girls are gonna make me take a signal from space on this one.  XD

Basically, all of the less extreme options look to be either (i) not efficacious, or otherwise (ii) not tolerable for me.  And the most serious drawbacks to Africa are either (i) strongly mitigated in my overall disposition and plans, or (ii) can't be avoided anyway even if I don't go.  Well, I don't wanna totally hijack Ree's simultaneously hilarious and poignant report, so I've disclosed the more in-depth analysis here.

Cheers,

Phoenix

 

[Space]

From here:

I normally avoid to involve myself into this kind of discussion. But I'd like to give you a couple of thoughts on what you said here. Well, I'm not adding up to the heat you are getting from other guys. It's just my candid feedback to your post.

@Phoenix
I'd like to answer here about your post on the other thread - enough feeding our troll friend Space. I'm glad that my post there was useful to you at least, because our friend seems completely closed to any argument from us anyway.

I see a little contradiction in your words, my friend. That I have a different personality or view on life doesn't make me feel like I'm a troll. I'm doing fine, by the way, thanks!

I wrote what I consider a proper reply to your post in the other thread (which I wouldn't consider useless if it were on topic about logistics, instead it went to all directions), and I'm still thinking about our differences on the hobby issue but you are perfectly right on that I don't want to derail Ree's thread with something off-topic either, so we may continue this elsewhere (that logistics topic turned more or less off-topic from where I see it, but whatever).