Quote:
|
Originally Posted by good times I have been watching these discussions with interest because it points out something that I have observed that many people do that totally skews their perception of the statistics that they read on the internet. That is that even if one makes the assumption (not supported by real evidence, in my opinion) that the "statistics" are correct, and 25% of the US population has Herpes, that doesn't mean that 25% of the people you encounter in swinging are infected. Most of us, as long time married couples, are in an extremely low risk group for having STD's. Other demographic groups have STD's approaching 100%. This means to me that not necessarily that many swingers are lying or unaware that they don't have genital Herpes, as I believe very few do. So, to say that swingers in general are going to run into a play partner that have Herpes, Whether they know or not, is not as factual a statement as the broad based "statistics" would indicate. |
Goodtimes, you make two points. First, you don’t (want to) believe the statistics for the general population. Second, you (want to) believe that the swinger demographic is less likely to be at risk than the general population. Maybe you are right. But, I think you are simply deluding yourself.
As to your first point, there is no question that medical science has not developed a fulsome understanding of the disease, principally because it is not viewed as a public health risk. To qualify as a public health risk, the disease must present some serious and long lasting threat to general or reproductive health. As with cold sores in the mouth, the disease can be an annoyance. But, generally, it provides no long lasting injury (in contrast to syphilis or gonorrhea). It is for this reason that most medical services do not even include blood anti-body testing in a normal STD screen. If you are not symptomatic, there is absolutely no medical need to diagnose or treat the condition.
As a result, almost all studies of the disease are anecdotal, at best. Nonetheless, the Center for Disease Control reports the following:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CDC Results of a nationally representative study show that genital herpes infection is common in the United States. Nationwide, at least 45 million people ages 12 and older, or one out of five adolescents and adults, have had genital HSV infection. Between the late 1970s and the early 1990s, the number of Americans with genital herpes infection increased 30 percent.
Genital HSV-2 infection is more common in women (approximately one out of four women) than in men (almost one out of five). This may be due to male-to-female transmissions being more likely than female-to-male transmission.
See http://www.cdc.gov/std/Herpes/STDFact-Herpes.htm#common |
As to your second point, I have heard and read this particular argument from a number of sources. So, you are not alone in your views. Yet, I find it somewhat counter-intuitive to believe that lifestyle couples (couples who routinely engage in sexual contact outside of a committed long-term relationship) are somehow less likely to be infected than the general population (the majority of whom are involved in some form or monogamous behavior).
I suspect that your view of the relative reproductive health of swingers is clouded (somewhat) by your experience. My bet is that no one with whom you have ever played has ever disclosed to you a herpes infection. What does this mean? That the community of swingers is generally less infected than the rest of society? Or, that the swingers who have the disease are not talking? You apparently presume the former. I, frankly, think you are greatly mistaken in that belief.
The interesting thing is that, like any condition giving rise to a stigma within a society, those who have the condition are generally aware of the others around them in a similar situation. It is only those who do not think they have the condition who are blissfully ignorant of how pervasive it is.
However, I think I now understand why this self delusional behavior exists. Many of you clearly believe that the risk of having protected intercourse with someone who knows that they have the disease is too great to contemplate. If you were each to seriously consider the facts regarding this disease, you would each reach the inescapable conclusion that, statistically, the risk of contracting the disease is far greater from intercourse with someone who doesn’t think they have the disease (or claims that they don’t). So, if your conduct was governed solely by your fair and impartial assessment of the risk, you would end up not playing with anyone. And, of course, that is an unacceptable result. Accordingly, you must delude yourself into believing what you each choose to believe.
That having been said, I completely understand that psychologically there is a big, big difference between knowingly playing with someone who is infected and merely risking the possibility of that being the case. But, the difference has nothing to do with the relative risk of contracting the disease. Rather, it has everything to do with the psychological aspects of knowing that you are playing with fire.
I don’t want to play with anyone who does not want to play with me. But, neither do I think that this society should continue to stigmatize people with the disease. So long as there is a stigma attached to the condition, you can expect that couples with the condition, with no outbreak and on suppressive therapy will describe themselves as "disease free" and that no one will talk openly and honestly about their conditions.
The next time you go to a club or a meet and greet, you should consider the odds. In each room, one in every four or five people have the disease. Even if you believe the statistics are skewed, at least one in every seven or eight people will have the disease. If the thought of playing with someone with the disease is truly unacceptable, how acceptable can the thought of continuing to play really be?