Posts made by MrMazda

I know this is kind of a late reply, but the short answer is NO…. Regardless of the viral load, piss is NEVER an issue. With an undetectable viral load, it's practically impossible to infect someone, even through unprotected anal sex.

I have recently noticed some issues with the chat box on the main page. Namely, that the chat box is not the size it should be, and the banner does not seem to be displaying at the same width as the box. I have attached the following just in case this is an isolated thing to one specific browser/os….

O/S: Ubuntu 14.04 LTS (x86)
Processor: Intel Core Duo CPU T2450 @ 2.00GHz × 2
RAM: 4GB (DDR II)
Browser: Mozilla Firefox 33.0 (Ubuntu Canonical 1.0)
Visual Error:

Is this supposed to happen, or is this something specific to my system or browser confifuration? Does anyone have any ideas? This only seems to be the issue for me while running Firefox and has only stated within the last couple of days. When I load the page in Google Chrome (Version 38.0.2125.122) it all seems to work fine. Any thoughts on if this is my machine or some sort of actual bug?

Quelle torrent est-ce que vous voudrais modifier? Je pouvais le faire pour vous.

Sadly, that's the state that we're in these days. We have some independent providers here, but they're just wholesale re-sellers of the same service essentially…. just at a lower price. You get far less support from the bigwig company though if something ever goes wrong.

The "closed-door meetings" they refer to in this video are what are known in Canada as CRTC meetings, and known in the USA as FCC meetings. The board of directors at the CRTC consist of some of the same board of directors as the big boy providers who collectively own the monopoly. Can we say "Conflict of Interest" ? LOL :crazy2:

I stumbled across this on Facebook of all places the other day. I thought it was so true that I just had to Youtube the bitch and share it here

Check this out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r-ee5FAINc

What's that cock doing not caged up?

The general rule on this is that if the aspect of being LTBTQ is somehow depicted, even if just in general, then it is considered gay themed. The only problem is there are some films that need to be avoided for legal reasons.

I feel your pain as well…. I was a size 28 when I went into jail last year.... Sadly, due to a number of factors, including a med switch up, I have gone up to a size 40. I now have the same problem.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but due to the nature of the enzymes found in saliva, the risk of contracting anything, including HIV, is actually not what you would think… That being said, just about everything that you could possibly catch from sucking dick and/or eating cum is easily and discreetly curable, so eat away!

Yes… "Forced Vacation"... That's what we'll call it lol

I'll still be fighting the legal system to have certain laws changed, but at least I'm not in jail having to do IT work and such for free in order to keep myself somewhere that I'd be safe.

I am still getting used to life in freedom again.

Well… As some of you may know, on May 7, 2013, I was sent to jail for something that I did not do.

Well.... 1 year and 2 days later, and I'M BACK!!

Thank you to the people who were keeping my accounts up and running.

Call me crazy if you must, but wouldn't the better term be "cross-generation"?

So according to the laws in Canada, an accused person is allegedly supposed to be considered "innocent until proven guilty", however I believe this to be a myth. All it takes is ONE person to step forward with an allegation that holds absolutely NO truth to it to get you arrested, sent to jail, and then have the next 3+ years of your life forever fucked up and taken away from you. Here's the worst part… Because of a biased jury, it is very well possible that I could end up going back to jail over something that I didn't do. The reason is quite simple... The reality is that in today's world, it is guilty until proven innocent. Check it out:

Here's the reference to the condensed "Reader's Digest" version of how things went down in court at the trial:
hxxp://www.aidsactionnow.org/?p=1057

And now, for the piece to make things even more "heated"... The petition. PLEASE!! If you're reading this, PLEASE sign it! It's about time that we all stood up for human rights. Here's the petition that I created as the result of the trial:
hxxp://www.change.org/petitions/the-government-of-canada-ban-the-use-of-the-criminal-code-for-prosecuting-an-sti

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!! If you're reading this, SIGN THE PETITION!! I beg of you!

What rolls down stairs, alone or in pairs, and makes a buzzady sound?

It's a great slinky song parody.

It's also done by a group of film students looking to get a little extra credit for doing a hilarious parody project.

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zP55ugFoDk

This is what happens when you have too much time on your hands as a group of film students doing a video project on homophobia.
hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t35GTsTBFnE

I'm a little skeptical on the concept of HAART having an impact on someone of such an age. What it doesn't mention is which tests were run to confirm the absence. This is a critical key in being able to determine whether or not this is possible. Also, it doesn't take into account that some people are what is known as an "elite controller", whereas even without treatment, they will remain at an undetectable viral load. Also, for the ELISA test, it doesn't mention anything about the number of bands that they looked for, as there are actually 8 of them that can come back reactive.

Just sayin'… I can't say for sure what exactly went down as I wasn't there, however from what I do know of the subject (and from living with it for just over 4 years now that I know of), without further explanation of the case and what exactly was tested, which ARV's were used, etc. it's quite hard to say as to whether or not this would actually work. The reason for this is primarily because if HAART can accomplish this in such a young person, why does it not yield the same result in an adult? Curious minds can't help but wonder.

@uicuic:

Are you saying that you actually do bareback with your hiv negative partner? Sorry if I misunderstood. How is working so far? I'm not judging.

Yes… Some may call me strange for where my mind is at... More particularly that I believe in the right to freedom of choice. This includes the freedom to choose what level of risk (if any) that you are willing to take. That being said though, if the risk a partner wishes to take is to engage in unprotected sex with a known HIV+ partner, I am very well known for making damn sure that they FULLY understand ALL of the consequences before making such a choice, as that goes to their right to make an educated and informed choice.

The answer to that question is dependent on a number of things, including your own body chemistry balancing, and the emotional and sexual chemistry between you and the person you're with. Depending on the person, it is possible for me to do such things, however it requires the right kind of connection with the person.

In short, it's mostly a matter of genetics, not training.

From the perspective of someone who was well educated on the subject when they found out, I can tell you this for sure. No matter how well educated you are on the subject, there is absolutely NOTHING that can prepare you for finding out you're HIV+. It's also a proven fact that the majority of people who discover their status end up going on a mental break that in a lot of cases, without the right people being around IMMEDIATELY to give them the proverbial slap across the face that they will need, they would go suicidal. I know this for fact… I was one of them.

While the concept of such a test does seem like a great idea, I cannot stress enough that they have great potential to become a home suicide kit real fast, especially for people who engage in random sexual acts with partners of an unknown status. It has also been scientifically proven that a person can have contracted HIV and be infectious to others, but not show a positive test result. This "problem" comes directly from how the test works. The test in itself has the unique flaw that it tests for the anti-bodies that the body produces when it becomes infected. These antibodies however are not produced in the body until the virus breaks the system down to this critical "rock bottom" point, at which point the body begins the process of seroconversion, which generates these anti-bodies. In most cases, this can take 2 - 3 weeks, however this is not a concrete time frame. The body can begin seroconversion in as much as 3 months...

In other words... If a person engages in more than 1 sexual fling every 3 months, there is potential for this test to render a false negative, thereby potentially resulting in the transmission of HIV without the knowledge of either person. The sad reality is, this is a common occurrence that happens far too frequently... More frequently than you might expect. Don't let that get you bogged down though. Medical research has proven that the risk of HIV transmission for someone who is on antiretrovirals and has a viral load below 1500 (preferably closer to undetectable) engaging in bareback sex where ejaculation occurs is actually lower than the risk of engaging in protected sex with an HIV+ partner with a high viral load (such as 60,000) and no antiretrovirals. What a lot of the tests and other publications fail to take into account when examining risk assessment is simply this:

Nowadays HIV is a lot like TB… It's only infectious if left untreated!

All in all, it is also proven that the average risk factor for unprotected receptive anal sex where ejaculation DOES occur only constitutes approximately a 1% risk of infection (or 1 in 100). These numbers are based on a viral load of approximately 57,000 and no antiretrovirals. The only time that the risk becomes damn near absolute certainty is in a case where either the top's dick has a sore that exposes a bloody discharge, or if any of the lining of the rectum walls are torn or otherwise aggravated sufficiently to present an abrasion of some sort. These cases are not as common as you may think, and generally only occur when either insufficient lube is used, or when doing something stupid like being the virgin to try and take a 13" and thick cock. Don't fool yourself though because a person's highest transmission potential actually comes BEFORE the point of seroconversion, and generally lasts until a couple of months after they begin antiretrovirals. This directly means that regardless of any test and regardless of any medication, it is always safer to either pull out to bust a nut, or to otherwise wrap it up.

As for the proposed concept behind the test, I must say that I do much prefer the concept of the test from a public health stand point. My reason for this is quite simple really… When going to a doctor's office or to a public health office, once a test result comes back positive, there is a government mandate within North America that requires that the attending medical staff (doctor, nurse, etc) report the results of the test to the public health officer. From my own personal experience, these "public health officers" do not have a sufficient understanding of STI's, and as such, they like to push their own stupid ways onto the person, trying to force them into a number of things (some of which they actually legally can). From this stand point alone, I completely agree with implementing a way to by-pass this Public Health BS, and deal with it under your own terms. It's great to see that there actually are some people out there in the medical field who actually may believe that Public Health has no business in our bedrooms.