Extra Sauce
Member
How can you say you lover her.jpg
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Charlie Sheen is HIV+
- Thread starter LQX
- Start date
- Status
How can you say you lover her.jpg
Sunset Samurai
Member
What's love got to do with it?
It has been explained a hundred times in this thread alone. On that same page even.
Just reading these last couple of pages... holy shit what is wrong with some of you people?
I just... I can't...
AnthonyNYC said:
As someone who is HIV+ and believes strongly in disclosure, these are the kind of posts that annoy me. People advocating for disclosure are in the right, IMO.
However, when there are people in here, claiming that anyone that dates an HIV+ person is crazy I take issue with that. Was my last long-term boyfriend of three years that was HIV- and never contracted the virus crazy? Just with me to prove something? He couldn't possibly have actually have wanted to be with me because obviously being with someone who is HIV+ is so beyond the pale that it requires reactions like the above.
Frankly, fuck you. I've been in relationships since being HIV+ and to have people in here say that anyone that wants to be in a relationship with me is crazy or mentally deranged is insulting to the nth degree. This is the kind of attitude in here that is intolerable, not those that are advocating for responsible disclosure and openness. Claiming you have to be mentally challenged to proceed in a relationship knowing another person's positives status is what is insulting.
perfectchaos007
Member
If he had HIV and claims he no longer has HIV, doesn't that mean he was cured from HIV? And I thought there was no known cure for HIV.
So either he still has HIV OR he is the first person I know to be cured of HIV
So either he still has HIV OR he is the first person I know to be cured of HIV
Mammoth Jones
Member
No offense but it doesn't matter if it rubs you the wrong way. It doesn't matter if that person JUST had an orgy with 20 people fucking and sucking every which way....when it comes to my turn and I know I have [insert any STD here] I have a moral obligation to disclose that fact. Not just say "Oh well, guess she don't mind!" and go for dat ass.
I can agree with this. Absolutely. If someone wants to be in a relationship with someone that's HIV+ then that their choice. Absolutely.
They should be aware of the risks and make their decision either way. Won't claim they're wrong for doing so. People should make informed choices.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
The thing is.. Not many people are born with HIV and mostly get infected by another person. If some people in this thread thinks that the person who contacted it wouldn't have appreciated if their partner who did have it, did disclose it before they even had sex... And doesn't deserve that? Well then that's really fucked up.
No one wants to have a disease period and actively stopping it is by simple things like disclosure. Shit spreads if people are purposely neglectful of their issue and willfully passing it along ruining someone else's lives who now also has to live amongst a huge stigma.
Like it's really that simple. More people would appreciate it and it can eventually curb the stigma all together... Maybe damn near end the fucking disease head on.
Im not seeing it. Can u point me
I never said you shouldn't disclose. I believe people should disclose.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Ah, gotcha. Understood.
titiklabingapat
Member
I probably worded it all wrong, but I was referring not just to this thread but the general reactions of everyone else to this event. I think Father_Brain summed it up way better than I could have, especially the bolded:
Most people get infect by people who are not aware of their status.
Homework:
http://www.aidsmap.com/No-one-with-...first-two-years-of-PARTNER-study/page/2832748
http://www.catie.ca/en/catienews/20...en-viral-load-undetectable-and-no-condom-used
gutter_trash
Banned
just listen to a Hollywood gossiper, says that Sheen can be sentenced to 8 years of prison for knowingly infected people
Church
Whom_Gods_Annoy
Banned
Where did I ever say in my post that dating someone with an STD is crazy? Please tell me. I am mad at not disclosing such things. I fully believe you can still be in a happy and healthy relationship even with a partner that has STD, so long as you both have full knowledge of the others health problems. That shows honesty and courtesy, two of the most paramount aspects of a relationship.
Please don't put words in my mouth.
You posted a Larry David collapsing in confusion gif in response to a quote about dating someone because you love them that was in response to the following post:
implies to me that you agree with the above. And the above says that love cannot enter the equation when dating someone positive because of their HIV status and that anyone who dates someone with HIV must be trying to prove something.
I was thinking the same. So much over reaction, blaming and pointing at nothing.
Whom_Gods_Annoy
Banned
Then that is my fault. I had thought he was saying, "Um. Because you love them?" in response to asking why someone would not disclose their STD to their partner.
My apologies.
I'll edit my post accordingly though the damage has already been done and that is my responsibility.
I'm surprised those things have been said here, I expected better out of GAF. I'm flabbergasted that 'those with HIV are people too' needs to be said and I'm sorry. Sigh.
I actually think nearly everyone in hear agrees with that. There has been a semantics-ish based back and forth regarding disclosure.
Those links are talking on getting it below 200, with perpetual treatment. Not complete removal from blood.
Sorry to derail.
No, I think you need treatment for life.
titiklabingapat
Member
It comes back, yes. At present, you need to be on medication for life*. It's one pill a day for a lot of people. Although there are injectibles at Phase II or Phase III trial that can be given every two to three months so you only potentially need to take medication 4 times a year in the future.
I don't agree at all with the moral high horse people have put themselves on regarding someone's HIV status.
Having an undetectable viral load means just what it says, it is undetectable by current viral load testing methods. For the studies that was defined as below 200 copies/ml, and that was the benchmark the studies used, and I think is generally the level used for studies of this nature since that used to be the most common minimum a viral load test could detect.
Going undetectable within a number of weeks of starting treatment is a prime measure for determining treatment success. When I first started treatment if I wasn't undetectable within 6 weeks then a change in treatment would have been warranted. Note that any doctor worth his salts will do a resistance test before choosing an initial treatment (I believe I had a genotype assay) which tells you if you have a strain that is resistant to any of the current drugs and which ones won't work against it.
However, viral load tests are actually currently more sensitive than 200copies/ml and I believe last time I checked they could detect all the way down to 50 copies/ml. So technically a patient only knows that they're outside the range of the viral load test, but the terminology all comes from the statistical analysis anyway.
I inquired to my infectious disease doctor once about what would happen if viral load tests got so good that they actually could detect all the way down to zero copies/ml? Would using "undetectable" as a benchmark have to change to an actual number like the study uses (ie. as long as you're below 200copies/ml) because I'm not sure the studies have been done to show the long-term effects beyond having below 200 copies/ml.
dream
Member
Fox News (I know, I know) is reporting that Charlie may not be entirely truthful about disclosing his status to partners:
Black-Wind
Member
Oh WOW!!!
you young as shit
I think the corey at 14 event was different, because both coreys talked about the young boy casting couches that existed in Hollywood, and that Haim had gotten abused.
Wow in all caps with 3 exclamation points? C'mon I don't buy that for a second. If something happened to Haim during the filming of the movie, wouldn't it be more likely that it was due to some pervy casting director or a producer with the power to intimidate? In fact I think Feldman alluded to that being the case in Hollywood.
Edit: Seeing the clip, now a bit more doubtful? Said something about the guy being best friends with Feldman and doing cocaine. Hmm.
He should go to prison if he had sex with people knowing he was HIV+ and purposefully didn't disclose. In fact - I'll be shocked if he doesn't have a few lawsuits after this announcement.
Agent Icebeezy
Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
In my class that I teach for college healthcare courses, I asked my class if he should have to state this publicly due to his stature of being in the public eye. Mixture of yes and no answers. For the record, for the safety of his sexual partners, the outreach of doing this publicly will help.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
And that's also because the cycle of not telling their partners their status is causing this. People would know if they knew.
SpaceBridge
Member
Like that's the only two options available? Talk about extremes.
I will say; I wouldn't trust a random square on a hook up app claiming he was a) undetectable or b) on PrEP and negative to do any barebacking.
And trust me; in the small gay world; word gets around as to who's being a "piggy" "cum dump" at the bathouse on a Sunday morning.
What I am saying is that if you don't say to your partner that you have HIV, even if it is 0,00000002% of risk of transmitting it, you are and idiot.
I am not saying that a person that chooses to have sex with an hiv positive person is an idiot.
It seems to me the disease is so taboo people are not really up to the most recent medical treatments. They are really good, your viral count gets so low you can pass as HIV negative, but that doesn't mean you are cured. You cannot stop the treatment, it goes on for life.
Yes, he has HIV.
Yes, while he remains an optimally medicated and treated human, his viral load is currently and will likely remain undetectable.
He still has HIV.
There's still a chance he could spread it through unprotected activity. It's a very, very small chance, but it's still a chance nonetheless.
All of this is, of course, predicated on his continuing to take his medicine daily.
I think one of two things will happen here with Charlie.
My personal opinion is that he is now on a clock, it will come out as this article is leaning to that there are many he did NOT tell and he will start having many people start firing lawsuits at him and he will crack sooner than later.
There is an off chance in todays...society being what it is that he will somehow turn this into some media darling pity me new leaf type run and come out ok but I am leaning toward the former.
It wasn't meant to be serious. Just a bit of fun.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked