Are these STD numbers correct?

[foozballnow]

Hi everyone. I have been reading the posts on here for some time. Lately i have seen a few people post about being "send man in" and "creampie" and such and I know that there are people with very strong views on STD's. I was curious about the numbers when I read an article about syphilis on on Yahoo. These are the numbers I came up with. I must say it makes me think they do make it seem worse than it is. These statistics are from the CDC's website under the facts section if you wish to disagree with me. We use condoms but I was just amazed at the numbers here.

PID 1,000,000
Trichomoniasis 7,500,000
Syphilis 36,935
Chlamydia 1,100,000
Gonorrhea 358,366
Herpes 50,000,000
HIV/AIDS 1,300,000

Now the cdc does not differentiate between the types of Herpes virus so it is unclear if it is necessarily genital or not, as it can manifest in either form.

total infections 61,295,301

US population 304,000,000

This makes the infection rate of some form of STD in the US to 20%. Though if you really look at it, since all herpes infections are not necessarily genital herpes, if you take that of of the equation that brings total infections to 3.7%


3% really does not seem like that much when you think about it. At least to me it doesn't. Im not advocating anyone stop wearing condoms, I just thought numbers were a lot higher.

[sexcupid]

According to the Herpes information page, 45-50 million is a correct number for genital herpes.

The thing is...while most STDs can be cured with a quick bout of antibiotics, the 2 biggies on the list are HIV/AIDS and Herpes. I guess my thinking is...I'm more likely to have a partner that has herpes than HIV...why on earth would I want to take the chance of getting something that I can never get rid of or die from?

Sure the chances are small...but so is the chance of being hit by a semi. That chance is greater if I walk down the center lane of the interstate...why take it?

Nothing is fool proof and many folks just consider condoms false security...but most of us still insist on using them because of some semblance of piece of mind.

[VegasLee]

The week on the NBC news and on the today show they talked about a current report that 25% of all teenage girls in the United States have some sort of STD.

I am betting that is a wake up call to many of the younger generation. I am thinking that the younger group is also skewing the over all numbers because of high percentages like that.

This is a lifestyle/hobby that you have to understand and weigh the risks. Only you can decide if it is worth the risk in your life.

I am wondering what the death rate is of people that jump out of perfectly good planes for fun.

[knb2004]

I read somewhere that the version of Herpes that causes mouth sores (probably Herpes Simplex 3.5.1024) is nearly universal by the age of 40 or 50. Speaking for myself, I've had periodic mouth cold sores (which is, I think, this version of herpes being symptomatic) since before the first time I had sex of any kind.

I think worse than cold sores, the fact that I call it a "version" says way too much about my geekiness.

Mr. Knb2004

PS... Lee, if you listened carefully to their story, it was 25% of SEXUALLY ACTIVE teens. They were kind of downplaying that, and I'm not sure what ratio of the general population that translates to, but was a bit disingenuous if you ask me. Though even with that stipulation it's a big number.

[VegasLee]

Here is the article http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...h/5611747.html


At least one in four teenage American girls has a sexually transmitted disease, suggests a first-of-its-kind federal study that startled some adolescent-health experts.

Among those who admitted having sex, the rate was even more disturbing — 40 percent had an STD.

[foozballnow]

Hi Vegaslee,

you can also find the article herehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080312...bgk8rN9rvrSLYF

This was one of the articles that I was reading that had me start looking at the numbers. But like I said, I am not advocating for anyone to change their ways.

Like sexcupid said, a lot of people seem to wear condoms for a false sense of security. I mean herpes can be transfered if wearing a condom and the outbreak is somewhere other than the condom protects. Which is probably where most of the outbreaks are anyways. False sense of security? probably

[good times]

Originally Posted by foozballnow

Like sexcupid said, a lot of people seem to wear condoms for a false sense of security. I mean herpes can be transfered if wearing a condom and the outbreak is somewhere other than the condom protects. Which is probably where most of the outbreaks are anyways. False sense of security? probably

It is actually even more complicated than that. Herpes and HPV, the two most common incurable std's, are transfered by contact. So, for example, if a man has active herpes on his penis shaft, and he touches that area when putting on his condom, then either touches the woman or the outside of the condom, he just transfered it as if no condom was used. that is why most respected researchers consider condoms ineffective at preventing the transfer of Herpes or HPV.

[Wildthingplus]

I have been in the lifestyle for 10 years. I enjoy unprotected sex with multiple men every time I attend a club. I encourage men to cum inside me. I enjoy the feeling. I check the men out to make sure the look clean and healthy. Maybe I am very fortunate but I have never contracted anything in my 10 years. I get tested every year. I personally do not see condoms as STD protection since they still allow contact.

[celtic239]

Are there numbers for the US or the entire North American continent? On a side note, prior to the discovery of penicilin, the VD infection rate in most industrialized countries was astronomical. I sometimes ponder if Victorian morality was aimed more at stopping syphilis (Winston Churchill's father died from the disease) than protection the virginity of rich maidens.

[foozballnow]

these are the numbers for the united states. At least thats what the CDC website says

[ross_sally]

Are those STD numbers correct? Fooz, I'm sure they are, but applying them is the difficult part.

Using the US population of 304,000,000 to get to 20% is not very accurate for the context of this forum / community.

Doesn't that number include millions of people under 14 and over 70, people in monogamous marriages, and so on?

Should you include a person with a total of 10 sexual partners in a category with
a person who has had 200 sexual partners?

That would be like looking at the risk of cancer and putting a smoker in the same bucket as a non smoker, (just dividing the # of cancer deaths by total population) OR ...

Like saying your odds of losing money at a casino are 1 to 1 (50%) because you include millions of people that NEVER actually gamble.

The odds of losing money for many people is 0 because they don't gamble and for others it's maybe 1.5 to 1 because they do.

Also, we talked about HPV here earlier and I thought the percent of woman having it at this point in their lives, (over 30 yo) was over 50%?

Is HPV on that CDC list? Under another name? And if it is, I thought it was more common to get than Herpes? Which is at 50,000,000.

-------------------------------------------------------------

And Condoms, false sense of protection? STDs can be transmitted by other skin contact?

If a condom covers 70% (use whatever figure you want) of the contact area, then it will reduce the risk of an STD by roughly 70%. (less than 70%, they sometimes break/come off)

Simply put, it's not 100% protection, but it's much better than 0% protection.

Insurance companies are experts at evaluating risk. How do you think they would rate the risk of this lifestyle and not using condoms?

My guess is, that you could multiply your CDC figure of 20% by a factor of 3 or 4!

So Wildthingplus, if you have gone 10 years and are D free? Amazing, you are very lucky, that's like winning the lottery kind of lucky!

Having said all that, I'm still interested

[Wildthingplus]

Perhaps I am lucky; however, I don’t think it’s just luck. Although I probably have more partners than the average person in the lifestyle, I happen to be in the category of “more than 200” sexual partners. I have observed at least 60% of swingers having unprotected sex. Perhaps those who attend swing clubs are lower risk than the general public. I have also read articles that have expressed that heterosexual intercourse is a lot less likely to spread STD’s. If someone sneezes on me a little or a lot I am still likely to catch their cold. I don’t think a little contact or complete contact makes much of a difference. Trying to observe if the person is clean and healthy is probably a good start. I think it’s helped in my case.

[ross_sally]

Well your method is apparently working, which is great.

Is the detraction and feeling loss of wearing a condom worth the perceived risk reduction of an STD? That's obviously a personal choice.

And don't get me wrong, I HATE condoms, but I don't want a 'never gone' STD, and you have to believe that 'Ladies of the night' require the use of condoms for some reason.

[Wildthingplus]

I am allergic to latex. The polyurethane condoms are too small for allot of men. The point of sex for me is the enjoyment and condoms don’t feel good. I really don’t think a condom gives much protection so I don’t think that my risk is necessarily greater. I believe the risk is greater when you think you are protected and don’t screen the men you are with. I turn down probably 1/3 of the men that approach me when I am not comfortable with what I see.

As far as ‘Ladies of the night’ I don’t think we are talking about the same people that attend swing clubs. I also don’t think they can pick and choose the men.

[austxmark]

Interesting thread. I worked in immunology for 15 years and was in the field back when (HTLVIII) HIV came out. The stats that are given are general stats and have nearly no relavence to a specific person or situation. If you really want to evaluate your risk you have to consider your own situation.

I will use mine to demonstrate the point. I am male and the risk of contracting HIV from a single act of intercourse with an HIV positive female is less than 1%.

The number of americans with HIV is about 1 million (known positive around 500k) which is about 1/3 of a percent out of total population. The percent out of that total between 35 and 55 (my target age group) that have HIV is 25%. This equals 25% of 1/3 of a percent which is about 1/12 of a percent. This means that 1/12 of 1% of the total population is positive that I can possibly sexually interact with. Now even if I do run into the HIV positive person I only have a 1% risk as stated above. So for an act of sex, generally, its 1% of 1/12 of 1% risk out of your population group.

Now Austin has 5000 HIV postive out of 1.3 million people. So my starting number is around the same as the national average of 1/3 of a percent. If you city has less or more you can recalulate. Denver has about a 1/6 of a percent starting point, which is better than Austin. Hope this helps everyone.