Comment

Comment on sus

i know. i used that exact example previously.
like i said before:
i’m not saying risky things aren’t worth doing. i’m saying this is not without risks.
“getting tested” doesn’t cover most STI’s unless you’re symptomatic… you can’t go to the doctor and say “test me for every STI”… that’s not an option.
HPV, Herpes, and many others are diseases for life. you can take medicine that makes most people asymptomatic for most of their life… but it’s not just fixed.

people on here are acting like you can just trust everyone you date, and everyone they date, and everyone those people date, and everyone those people date, out to infinity and it’s totally safe and fine and the only issue is skill in knowing who to trust…
or you can just make sure everybody “gets tested” but that’s not how getting tested works.

and many diseases are evolving resistance to current treatments… it’s a lot of risk that is worth considering before making an informed decision

source

Sort:hotnew top

Tiger@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
I don’t know why you’ve gotten downvoted up and down this thread. People seem oblivious to the reality of risks and the imperfection of trusting people in the aggregate.

source
pupbiru@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

it’s a lot of risk that is worth considering before making an informed decision

i would agree that there is some risk and it’s always worth being educated but stigma and FUD contribute to people not wanting to talk about sex

“getting tested” doesn’t cover most STI’s unless you’re symptomatic

patently untrue. a standard STI screen covers HIV, chlamydia, and gonorrhea

these are by far the most common STIs that’s cause anyone issues without other complications, and tests accurately catch them within weeks. standard public health advice is STI tests every 3mo for sexually active individuals (and in fact if you’re on PrEP to cover you against HIV, you get a 3 month script so it’s pretty much ensured)

HPV, Herpes, and many others are diseases for life

the HPV vaccine is very effective, herpes i’d agree with but causes minimal issues for the enormous majority of people without complications, and i don’t know what you mean by “many other”. if you can list them, id be happy to engage but otherwise the rest of that is more FUD

skill in knowing who to trust…

nope not at all! it’s public health. it has very little to do with trust, other than trying to limit as much as possible to people who know that telling their sexual partners when they get a positive test result is a healthy thing to do, and they won’t be berated for it… the main thing here is that you should feel confident that your sexual partners are going to tell you ASAP when you’ve been exposed, and that more than anything reduces that 3mo timeline and keeps everyone safe… but that only happens when people don’t stigmatise and fear the outcome

or you can just make sure everybody “gets tested” but that’s not how getting tested works.

as i’ve stated previously, it is with PrEP and with gay men - i don’t know much about the heterosexual community, but we have very active sexual health campaigns and they work

source
- xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
  oh the gymnastics….
  
  “screens for everything”.
  “screens for three diseases”.
  
  caution information and talking about sex is not FUD… don’t try to make everything that disagrees with you “FUD”.
  FUD is a psyop tactic, this is a talk about “completely safe” vs “risky”.
  
  i’m all about taking that risk… personally… but it’s evil to pretend like it’s all figured out and fine.
  it is not.
  if you… i dunno, drive on the freeway you need to understand common and uncommon risks in order to not crash. I think it’s quite similar to sex.
  i’m not saying don’t drive, im saying wear a seatbelt and be aware of shitty drivers… and potholes… and all that shit.
  
  mitigate risks, don’t pretend like they’re irrelevant.
  
  source
  - pupbiru@aussie.zone ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    
    “screens for everything”.
    “screens for three diseases”.
    
    you never answered my question about what other diseases are relevant to the conversation
    
    these are the STDs that are actually relevant to talk about. there are no others, unless you have some information on some novel new STD, in which case i’d love to hear about it
    
    caution information and talking about sex is not FUD
    
    i agree! what is FUD is overstating the risks with statements like “pustules on your genitals” and suggesting that there are relevant STDs that aren’t well tested/treated/prevented
    
    there are risks, but the risk of contracting STDs if using condoms is very low. the risk of contracting antibiotic resistant STDs is also incredibly low
    
    there is, however, and actual risk in stigmatising these things so that people don’t talk about them and educate themselves
    
    getting an STD is absolutely fine! get tested, get treated, tell sexual partners, no drama… that’s exactly what the public health messaging is because that’s what works to keep people healthy
    
    mitigate risks, don’t pretend like they’re irrelevant.
    
    of course: you should always mitigate risks… but don’t act like something is more dangerous than it is… you’re making out here like having sex is as dangerous and base jumping, and that’s such an unhelpful position to take that it is actually dangerous to people’s health
    
    source
    xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago
    you’re crazy
    
    source