|
Although the writer does not bet the horses if a state Off Track Betting Agency was pawning
off 700 % payoffs on winning 70 to 1 odds horses there would be public indignation. The rule of caveat
emptor applies in medicine also. If you do not believe it you will be stewed in the politicians cannibal kettle.
Most HIV prevention research is much too economical given that it suggests that the chance of being HIV infected is
higher with a common venereal disease sore or infected tissue debility present for HIV virus to more easily invade or there
may be an 800% greater or higher chance of infection per intercourse with this situation - and leaves it at
that. These studies do not factor out mathematical "skewness" (which is expensive to do) and go against the grain of
the laws of research to save the dollar. That is, is not a published 800% higher chance of becoming HIV infected having
sex with an uncured venereal disease about as good as publishing the real 7,000% higher chance given
the same circumstances with mathematical skewness accounted for in the research - considering theoretically the
saved dollars can be applied to finding the cure? Are not condoms a compensating safeguard for this gap in the laws of
research? (They are not to any acceptable extent. They were meant for birth control at which they are much more effective).
It is up to the general population to be cognizant in terms of what is correct as to how expenditures are apportioned
in terms of their rational and who is bully in making the choices. Also go to my main page http://www.nylicsocialworkeramazonas.com/ .
Condoms provide an extra increment of protection from HIV. They were meant for birth control and not venereal diseases
such as HIV, but one can say under certain circumstances it is excellent advice to use them as an additional increment
of protection. The danger with condoms is not so much breakage but the fact that in erotic heterosexual intercourse
there is much near unconcious touch and touch and touch, and one partner touches the other and then himself
or herself and doing so smotes himself or herself with a venereal infective disease. And in anal intercourse, heterosexual
or homosexual, if you are not certain of your partner then always use condoms.
HIV does not infect easily in oral intercourse because of digestive natural body chemicals, and by the time HIV
has reached the small intestines it is all dead. Thus what passes down and through is dead and non infective HIV virus. Thus
God and evolution have never seen need to defend the anal route against HIV. It does not matter if it is heterosexual
anal intercourse or homosexual anal intercourse. HIV infects with equal ease in both cases when using the anal
route for sexual intercourse. As an example even in a modern nation like Spain one in six homosexuals is HIV
infected on the average and only one in three thousand run of mill heterosexuals are infected on the average. Spain has
been suffering a serious drug problem and dirty needles problem, considerably worse than any nation in the
Americas, and the rate of HIV infection in Spain of drug addicts like the rate of HIV infection in Spain of homosexuals, is
very high.
If you are in good sexual health (do not have a venereal sexual parts sore/sexual parts sore or venereal sexual parts
tissue debility/sexual parts tissue debility) then per intercourse with an HIV infected partner in heterosexual vaginal intercourse
and not using a condom you are 99.9% protected per intercourse with that partner. The natural healthy human body is the best
defense by far against HIV. Or to put it another way it takes 1,850 intercourses on an average in heterosexual vaginal
intercourse for an HIV infected partner to infect a sexually healthy non HIV infected partner (half will be
infected before 1,850 intercourses and half after 1,850 intercourses). However it only takes on average only 30 intercourses in
heterosexual vaginal intercourse for an HIV infected partner to infect a non infected HIV partner who has an unhealed common
venereal disease sore (half will be infected before 30 intercourses and half will be infected after 30 intercourses). The
sore or tissue debility is the route HIV invades by. Seldom in heterosexual vaginal intercourse does HIV invade
without present this sore or tissue debility lesion route as the heterosexual parts of the body are highly defended by God
and evolution against HIV.
And covering tissue debility and HIV invasion, prolonged use of Spermatocides (which kill both sperm cells and body tissue
cells, it can not be otherwise) will cause a tissue debility that HIV can invade. African HIV study trustable prostitutes
who faithfully require men to use condoms and at the same time use vaginal spermatocides in case of condom
breakage have found out they are at much higher risk of HIV infection than prostitutes who faithfully require the use
of a condom at the identical levels of caution but do not use vaginal spermatocides.
Despite their high frequency of sex the prostitute general groups with a rate of less than one prostitute
HIV infected per hundred do not rely on condoms but instead do not have sex when they have a common venereal infection which
they first get healed medically.
It goes without saying then that the sexual revolution does not belong in a nation that does not have good a good state
of Medicine (this has been the problem in Africa).
And if you have a serious question about your partner it is easy for him or her to get tested for HIV.
James Franklin Lawton (Santiago Lawton Ponce de Leon Cortes Van Buren)
|
