A. 1. What are the failure rates for condoms?...

2. for so called safer sex practices?...


B. What is the failure rate for the strategy get tested together before you have sex?...




See also
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...ilure+rates%22
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...ailure+rate%22




Collaborative weblog
The strategy. Get tested together before you have sex.
http://NotB4WeKnow.EditThisPage.com

Don Saklad <dsaklad@nestle.ai.mit.edu> wrote in
news:y44znjrjyft.fsf@nestle.ai.mit.edu:

Would somebody please fix the skipping record?

Thank you.



--
"The reason we went into Iraq (Sumer, the cradle of civilization)
was not because of oil, not because of genocide, not because of
Weapons of Mass Destruction, but because there's a Stargate there."
-- Daniel M. Salter, NewAge Idiot Award Winner, 7/2003

Asmodeus <bondc@entfernensiemichinsightbb.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93B0A2C7AAB87bondcinsightbb@204.127.199.17 ...

Asmodeus wrote:
Skipping records cannot be fixed to my knowledge. There are only two
options, move it (the needle) along (it won't happen) or (I never
condone violence) smash the record! By the time a record skips the
damage has been done!

On 06 Jul 2003 14:35:18 -0400, Don Saklad <dsaklad@nestle.ai.mit.edu>
wrote:

Good questions. Answers beginning in the original thread. Used
correctly and consistently, they CLEARLY have slowed the spread of HIV
in many communities.

Your the proponent--provide the data.
George M. Carter

Another good article that discusses the "condom failure rate" and why
Don and I had differing opinions as to what that meant.
http://www.neahin.org/programs/reproductive/condoms.htm

George M. Carter

There is no evidence of any failure of the strategy get tested together before
you have sex. There is evidence for the failure of so called safer sex practices
and condoms and there is evidence for the failure to even use so called safer
sex practices and condoms.

Potential sex partners who do the strategy get tested together before sex
could get test results that detect infection and decide to have sex anyway.
Safer sex practices and condoms could fail or they could fail to use safer
sex practices and condoms diligently every single time from beginning to end
with never ever an exception.




Collaborative weblog
The strategy. Get tested together before you have sex.
http://NotB4WeKnow.EditThisPage.com

Sex partners often do not agree on what are safer sex practices.

Having more multiple sex partners is not considered to be a safer sex practice.




Collaborative weblog
The strategy. Get tested together before you have sex.
http://NotB4WeKnow.EditThisPage.com

Don Saklad <dsaklad@nestle.ai.mit.edu> writes:
However, there's clearly a failure of the AI lab at MIT
because this AI doesn't grok basic scientific inquiry
principles. Baldly asserting a proposition does not provide
evidence for the proposition or support its assertions, or
make a case for the proposition at all. The Don AI provides
a classic example: a proposition with no supporting
evidence; trivially dismissible until such evidence is
presented. Which it hasn't, thankfully since the proposition
is also logically flawed and irresponsibly dangerous for
human experimentation.
--
Michael Thomas (mike@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)

It's ironic: these old people are being kept alive by the
organs of the people they run over.

*Chief Wiggums*

On 07 Jul 2003 08:15:34 -0400, Don Saklad <dsaklad@nestle.ai.mit.edu>
wrote:


LOL--that's because this strategy, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't
been studied. That doesn't mean the strategy is foolproof. Just
another POSSIBLE means for reducing risk, but only under certain
circumstances.

To wit. You two get tested. You wait at least three days for results.
A lot can happen in 3 days....

Yes. Condoms are not 100% guarantee of anything. Not using them
dramatically increases risks.

Agreed.

Agreed. The real world works a little differently, of course.
Exceptions can and do happen. Slippages and breaks do not mean 100%
infection--they may still help reduce risk.

Sex, like it or not, bears certain risks. Life bears certain risks.

The only thing that is 100% is that we will die.

George M. Carter

GMCarter wrote:

Over and over again

What about taxes?

B/

Like testing for tb, it isn't perfect and nobody over here has
made that claim.

EXACTLY !

You mean like tb in the schools? Only under certain
circumstances should we test children for tb in the schools?
Is that what you mean? What would be an example of
"certain circumstances" under which we would not test children
before they enter the school system? Oh, wait, if they were
cryogenically frozen.




For example...




Could you describe a dramatic way in which they could be used?




Do you suppose this would explain the epidemic wherein many
highly educated knowledgeable people have become infected and
died even after knowing these things after two decades
now? Why this would almost make you think that this way of
doing things isn't working!




Here's a sex rule for you:
Sex is more important than dying. You're going to die anyway,
so why not go ahead and have sex even if it kills you.




The Three Sex Rules:
Sex Rule No. 1
Sex is more important than dying

Sex Rule No. 2
Sex is more important then murdering somebody.

Sex Rule No. 3
If people could change their sexual behavior we wouldn't be here.

http://notb4weknow.editthispage.com/discuss/msgReader$6

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:32:44 -0700, Brian Mailman
<bmailman@sfo.invalid> wrote:

Well!! My virgin eyes have been fucked again!!!

Only if you're poor. If you're rich, Ken Lay, George Bush, Dick
Cheney, Congress, corporate, etc., ad nauseam, you can avoid paying
any taxes, screw the populace, take over the government, kill people,
lie, cheat, steal--it's a free-for-all!!

George M. Carter

On 08 Jul 2003 13:07:37 -0400, Don Saklad <dsaklad@nestle.ai.mit.edu>
wrote:
TB is NOT HIV or STDs. TB is transmitted through the air, especially
in a situation like being in a school room for several hours with a
bunch of kids.

HIV is spread through sexual acts.

For TB, it depends on the endemic situation. Kids with suppressed
immune systems due to AIDS may not have a complete response to a
Mantoux test (PPD), so there is a limitation to interpreting the test
here. Would you say every child should have a complete battery of all
tests to eliminate the possibility of even latent TB? Please describe
those diagnostics.

One or both partners could have sex with someone else.

You want a porn story? What?

Ah--it's not working 100%. It depends on where you look. Rates of new
infections have dropped in some communities in some locations. Having
sex is a powerful drive for many people (I'd say the majority).

Don, you're really becoming idiotic. So what is your problem? There is
something else you're not discussing and I don't get. There is some
hurt in you that you are coming up with all this bitter, screwy shit.

Sex is a primal, natural human urge. Disease is a FACT of life. One
can try to reduce exposure to disease. One can refuse to have sex.
This is perfectly acceptable. Many will not choose to do this.

Let's try to distinguish here between the individual, personal
decisions that people may make, and the general view that looks at
society and develops public policy. Yes, your testing idea can work
for a subset of the population--those couples that indeed wish to
engage in a loving, monogamous relationship that are honest with each
other.

Many people do not adhere to this notion or do so only hypocritically
(i.e., they lie). Therefore, it will not, from a public policy
perspective, be an adequate methodology. Therefore, use of condoms can
help substantially reduce risk among those who wish to engage in
sexual activity.

Whether you have HIV or not, a parasite or not, sex or not--we all
will die. So we have choices we can make in life. Individuals make
choices. Societies can help shape public policies that foster making
choices that limit exposure to infections and thus reduce subsequent
pain and suffering.

But pain and suffering are part of life. It's the first Noble Truth in
the buddhist tradition--and just a simple fact of life. There is also
joy in life. Same coin.

George M. Carter

gmc0@ix.netcom.com (GMCarter) writes:
Your tense pains me.
--
Michael Thomas (mike@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)

It's ironic: these old people are being kept alive by the
organs of the people they run over.

*Chief Wiggums*

It's obvious that children should have a complete battery of
tests because children being who they are are likely to have
every kind of contact short of sexual contact. They stick their
fingers into every possible orifice, they stick them in their
mouths, into the mouths of other children and so on.

Ask pediatricians about the usual tests standard for routine
physicals for children.




While this is true I suspect that doing this procedure would
certainly influence the mind set of the people involved and
make them more conscious of what they are doing.




And like you I would not claim 100% success for the strategy
get tested together before you have sex. But then it would have
to be tried to some extent to see how effective it is as a
strategy for coping with the aids epidemic.




What is the that hurts in you that causes you to see another
human being this way?...

Are you familiar with the psychological phenomenon of
projection?...

Are you familiar with Montaigne's quote about this is a case of
the kettle calling the pot black?...




I see we both agree on that.




Disease is another organism's way of taking advantage of an
ecological niche. We try to cure diseases by removing the niche
or making it an unpleasant environment for that organism to
live in.




Are you sure they can really choose not to live out their
sexual urges?...

Given all of human history and literature, do you actually
believe people have free will, especially with regards to
sexual behavior?...




Agreed. And if more people would simply try it, there would
likely be some further reduction hiv and std rates.




It is probably also possible for people to lie and cheat even
while they are in a loving relationship. And evolution tells us
why this might be so. Namely, diversity of offspring increases
probability of survival. So that liars and cheater are more
likely to pass on their lying cheating genes.


How is it that you know this would not be an adequate
methodology?...

Have you conducted a large scale test of individuals using the
strategy get tested together before you have sex along with a
control group not using the strategy?...

Is this the basis for your conclusion?...

Or did you actually try the strategy get tested together before
you have sex yourself and discover it made no difference
whatsoever?..




Where is the evidence of "substantially" ?...

Or do you mean "substantially" if the participants use
100% reliable condoms 100% of the time.




Why do you have such a negative view of life?...




The strategy get tested together before you have sex is, you
would agree, one of those choices. It is not something that
happens by chance. You have to consciously and actively pursue
it in opposition to the normal natural powerful forces that
drive us to just go ahead and " DO IT !! "




The strategy get tested together before you have sex is one of
several policies that can be suggested to the public.




The strategy get tested together before you have sex would
eliminate some infections because some people would decide not
to go ahead with the sexual relationship with an infected
person. Or they might wait until that particular thing
syphilis, chlamydia, etc. was cured.




But pain and suffering are part of life.

And with the strategy get tested together before you have sex,
some people could eliminate some of that pain. Others might
decide not to eliminate that pain and suffering or death. But
if they knew the other person's status, they could make a more
informed choice.




Thank you, no, but I will not be relying on
any Buddhist science for my medical care.




Collaborative weblog
The strategy. Get tested together before you have sex.
http://NotB4WeKnow.EditThisPage.com

On 09 Jul 2003 11:25:21 -0400, Don Saklad wrote:

Since it has not stopped the aids epidemic yet, by your logic it has
clearly failed: it has not been used by many people, even though the
notion is wellknown: I've known a number of gay men who, as their
romantic involvement deepened, decided to be tested together. The gay
advice columnist, Dan Savage, has advocated testing for couples. So, by
your logic, even though many people know "the strategy," they have not
used it, and it's a failure -- just as, you claim, condom use and safer
sex education have failed.

What you advocate, with robotic insistence, just will not work as a way
to stop AIDS, since so much sexual activity occurs between partners who
are not committed, monogamous couples. As a "strategy" it can *only* be
useful to such couples. When this is pointed out to you, you tend to
back down, scaling back your grandiose claims, admitting that testing is
just *one* strategy instead of THE STRATEGY. If you would acknowledge
that from the beginning, you wouldn't make such a fool of yourself on
this matter. Instead you imply that condoms and safer sex education
have failed, and are useless; which is false.

Few if any AIDS educators would deny that testing, used intelligently,
can be useful. But it is not a cure-all, not THE strategy. It is
irrelevant, for instance, to couples who know from the beginning that
they are serodiscordant; or to antibody-positive people in general. One
issue that you have not addressed (that I've seen -- I don't bother
following up your postings most of the time) is what a couple is
supposed to do if, on testing, they discover that one or both is
antibody-positive. The only sexual options such people would have would
be condoms and safer sex -- the "strategy" you are busily denying has
any value.

Don Saklad <dsaklad@nestle.ai.mit.edu> wrote in
news:y4465mbyb6m.fsf@nestle.ai.mit.edu:

Wow. Where have I seen this before?

There's this id on ssbb called Lady Sun who is doing the same
Eliza routine you are here. You two must be the same AI program.

--
"The reason we went into Iraq (Sumer, the cradle of civilization)
was not because of oil, not because of genocide, not because of
Weapons of Mass Destruction, but because there's a Stargate there."
-- Daniel M. Salter, NewAge Idiot Award Winner, 7/2003

The same idea as the strategy did stop the smallpox epidemic.




Collaborative weblog
The strategy. Get tested together before you have sex.
http://NotB4WeKnow.EditThisPage.com

Don Saklad wrote:
As usual, apples and horseapples.

Tell that to the Native Americans.... and even if it were true, smallpox
isn't transmitted the same way. Just like TB isn't sexually transmitted
for the most part, etc. etc. etc.

B?