Online STD Risk Assessments

[Trojan Defense]

How would you feel about an online std risk assessment that quantifies sexual risk as the means of better managing it? My idea is for such an assessment that does so by summarizing results in terms of what I call an "x-factor" metric, which is the absolute maximum number of sex partners you may have, under a given set of conditions, before it is statistically inevitable that you have become infected.

So let's say the risk of you becoming infected is 1%, under a given set of conditions, and you have already had sex with 10 people under said conditions, then your "x-factor" would be 90. That is, the absolute maximum number of partners you could have based on the choices you have made, and continue to make, would be 90 before becoming infected would be statistically inevitable.

Using this "x-factor" metric you could more clearly see how certain choices impact your ability to swing safely, making trade-offs where needed as part of a safer sex strategy. Perhaps you don't care to use condoms, which would increase risk, but are willing to abstain from anal sex, which would decrease risk, or maybe you aren't willing to abstain from anal sex, but you insist all partners are tested first. Whatever the case is, you could then see how making one set of choices over another set affects your overall risk, thereby making yourself more able to effectively negotiate safer sex by knowing what is, and is not an acceptable risk, and why.

So back to my original question: How do you feel about online std risk assessments in general, and how do you feel about the idea for this one in particular? Would you use it?

[exploringRM]

How do you handle the variable of how many play parnters your play partner has had? You can't control or know that. We can play with a couple that has been monagamous for 20 years, low risk. Or we can play with a couple that has been with 10 other couples in the past year, higher risk. You can't depend or even expect the second couple to give you a complete sexual history of their encounters.

[VegasLee]

I think it would just make people freaky for no reason. There is no way that you can figure it out.

I know people that have had THOUSANDS of partners over the years and have not caught as much as a cold yet others that have stepped out once and caught an STD.

You can guess all you want but unless you tested everyone involved everyday there is now way of doing what your saying.

[Chicup]

It would be completely meaningless to the individual.

You don't get an STD from how you have sex, you get an STD from infected people.

HPV for example can't be prevented by a condom, you could have sex with 1000 people and never get it, or it could be your very first time.

So you can add all the risk factors you want, and even if 100% accurate it only at best applies to a large population.

[Trojan Defense]

I should probably preface my response by saying that my suggestion for such an assessment would naturally have some limitations, and therefore need to have some disclaimers. One is that using such a risk assessment is not a replacement for getting tested, or having a medical examination when it is needed. Two is that such a risk assessment can not guarantee your safety. No risk assessment can. No matter how safe you play it, all it takes to become infected is one person. However, such a risk assessment could give you an educated guess, or estimate as to what your risk is based upon all available data, and put things into perspective for you. What you do with this knowledge would be entirely up to you. Your choice to use, or not use it, would be at your own risk.

Originally Posted by exploringRM

How do you handle the variable of how many play partners your play partner has had?

That variable would not be used in an individual risk assessment. Instead, the variable used would be how many partners have you had, and it would be assumed that there is an equal chance that any one of your partners may have been infected in absence of any data that suggests otherwise.

However, if you are part of a couple, or group, and your partner(s) want to take this risk assessment too, I see no reason why a feature could not created to allow you to link your individual risk assessments together so that everyone linked could have a more accurate risk assessment. So in that case, how many people your partner(s) have been with would be taken into account.

And even if your partners choose not to participate, you could still have a meaningful risk assessment for yourself so long as you answered enough questions.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

I think it would just make people freaky for no reason. There is no way that you can figure it out.

Admittedly, a side effect of such a risk assessment is that it may make those who have overestimated the risk of stds to have more sex partners, but as a swinger yourself, can you really say that's a bad thing? On the flip side, those who have underestimated the risk of stds can come to terms with their behavior, and make changes where needed. Either way, I just don't see how that's a bad thing.

As for not being able to figure out what a person's risk is, if you can count it, measure it, or quantify it, then you can calculate its likelihood. While such a risk assessment may not be able to give a definitive answer to how many people a person may have sex with before becoming infected, under a given set of conditions, it can, however, provide an educated guess, or estimate of that number so that person knows that as they get closer to that number, they may need to retake the assessment to see how they can modify their behavior in such a way to make that number higher again.

And while it is important to keep in mind that, no matter how safe you play it, all it takes to become infected is just one person, there is an important distinction to be made between someone with an x-factor of 2, and someone with an x-factor of 1 million. If you have an x-factor of 2, then the odds that the next person you get with will infect you are comparable to that of heads coming up on a two-sided coin toss. If you have an x-factor of 1 million, then the odds that the next person you get with will infect you are comparable to that of winning the lottery. That's not to say that it couldn't happen, but that there's a significant difference in what is likely to happen in these two scenarios, and that one of the aims of such an assessment is to help the user make that distinction (in regard to sexual risks).

[VegasLee]

As I stated in my first post:

"I know people that have had THOUSANDS of partners over the years and have not caught as much as a cold yet others that have stepped out once and caught an STD."

I have been "playing" for 40 years of my life and I have never caught anything. I also know of 15 year olds that ended up with an STD the first time they played with someone. I also know a elderly couple that can attest that they have probably played with no less then 8000 people in their lifetyle and they have never had a STD of any type.

Due to just those FACTS alone pretty much all "educated" guesses go right out the window.

All the stats in the world is not going to give anyone any idea if they may or may not catch a STD. As you have stated and we all know, it only takes once.

Give people false information is more dangerous then anything I can think of. Telling people that since you have only played with one person in your life you can probably play with 90 more and still be safe. (just as an example)

Unless you have a very high powered crystal ball that knows all then there is no real way of doing what your stating here.

[exploringRM]

To the original question, I would find no benefit from an online risk assessment. I think the numbers would be meaningless, other than stay monagamous = no risk.

[Trojan Defense]

Originally Posted by VegasLee

I have been "playing" for 40 years of my life and I have never caught anything. I also know of 15 year olds that ended up with an STD the first time they played with someone. I also know a elderly couple that can attest that they have probably played with no less then 8000 people in their lifetyle and they have never had a STD of any type.

I'm going to go out on a limb, and say that most people who catch stds do so sometime after their first partner, but before their 8,000th partner, (assuming they ever have that many partners to start with). So if I'm right, the people you describe, would be not be of the norm, but rather the exception to the rule. In statistics, we'd call these people outliers, (or an extreme deviation from the mean).

Outliers, by definition, when used to describe the members of a population, do not constitute a majority. So even though you may be right that there is a problem in cases where someone is infected from their very first partner, that outcome is not the most probable outcome for most people using such an assessment.

So we may disagree on the application of this information, but you do not have to look very far to find people who are concerned about their std risks, on the internet, and even on this website, that would like to know how they could better manage it, which would be the goal of such an assessment.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

Give people false information is more dangerous then anything I can think of.

While I would agree with that statement in general, I would not agree that is what this risk assessment would do. If all the scientific data out there points to a particular outcome, or conclusion, and this is reflected in the risk assessment, and this is what one person tells another, then where is the dishonesty there? It is what it is (referring to the situation). At best, all you could say is that it might be misleading in how that information is presented because some people may mistakenly believe they can actually have the maximum number of partners and not catch anything, but there are ways to remedy that problem.

One way is to have disclaimers prominently attached to any risk assessments given. So if you take the risk assessment, when you get the results back, you are told that it is possible that your next partner could infect you, and you go ahead and have sex anyway, and get infected, then that's your fault. Nobody made you do anything. It was your choice, despite having been warned.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

Unless you have a very high powered crystal ball that knows all then there is no real way of doing what your stating here.

Actually my idea of a very high powered crystal ball would be what is known as an epidemiological surveillance system, a system that becomes increasingly accurate at predicting risk as it collects more, and more data, correlating risk factors with outcomes, but enough about that. I am curious as to what is your crystal ball. How do you, or others, manage to have so many sex partners and never catch any stds? What is your secret? What is the alternative to the idea that I have presented?

[good times]

I agree with the others, what you propose would be totally meaningless. Statistics, as you have proposed here, would only work when dealing with a large group of people. Individually they would have no meaning, and be highly inaccurate and missleading.

Furthermore, Like Lee indicated, it would have the effect of giving folks a false sense of security, or an equally false sense of anxiety. The best analogy is the way most people view condoms. It never ceases to amaze me how many people think that once they slip on that condom they are safe. When in reality, for the types of std's/sti's we are most likely to run into in the lifestyle, condom users are at best very marginally more safe with a condom than they would be without. For all of the std's/sti's that are contact spread, they are really almost useless. Yet, with all of the "safe sex" hype out there, many believe they are safe as long as they cover up.

With this, if widely used, we would have people with "good numbers" thinking that their risk is comfortably low. The reality is that on an individual level, it really does only take just one sexual partner to catch something. You can do all the research and crunch the numbers all you want, but what it boils down to in the end is, "do you feel lucky?"

[Trojan Defense]

Originally Posted by good times

Statistics, as you have proposed here, would only work when dealing with a large group of people.

That would be the idea.

Originally Posted by good times

Individually they would have no meaning, and be highly inaccurate and missleading.

The extent to which such a risk assessment would be inaccurate, its implications, and whether or not they could be rectified, would probably be a theoretical discussion best saved for an epidemiologist, or some other medical scientist who specializes in studying this kind of thing. The purpose of me posting my question on a swingers board wasn't really to go into the exact mechanics of that, but to see how some swingers would react to the idea, on the assumption that the details of it could be worked out. In other words, if it did work, would it even matter? If there was a "crystal ball" for avoiding stds, would you even care to use it?

Originally Posted by good times

Furthermore, Like Lee indicated, it would have the effect of giving folks a false sense of security, or an equally false sense of anxiety.

If the risk assessment was accurate enough, would the emotional reaction to it really be unjustified? Would it be a false sense of security, or anxiety if the numbers were actually correct?

Originally Posted by good times

for the types of std's/sti's we are most likely to run into in the lifestyle, condom users are at best very marginally more safe with a condom than they would be without.

Not to dispute your comment, but is your assessment of condom usage not based on the same fundamental principles of statistics and probability that I've been talking about, that is, what are the odds of something happening?

Yet, what I'm getting here is that we can not use the principles of statistics & probability to manage risk.

Originally Posted by good times

With this, if widely used, we would have people with "good numbers" thinking that their risk is comfortably low. The reality is that on an individual level, it really does only take just one sexual partner to catch something. You can do all the research and crunch the numbers all you want, but what it boils down to in the end is, "do you feel lucky?"

I would agree with that. Hence the point of having disclaimers.

[sweet_tna]

If you need all those disclaimers about how the data isn't completely reliable, then there really isn't a point to doing that risk assessment. That would be like trying to predict the odds of getting hit by bus while crossing the street. Yes, it could happen, so we all look both ways before crossing the street. Same goes for swinging.

=)

[Trojan Defense]

Originally Posted by sweet_tna

If you need all those disclaimers about how the data isn't completely reliable, then there really isn't a point to doing that risk assessment.

Well, based on the discussion or debate that we've been having so far, all we're really talking about is just one disclaimer for the most part, and that is the statistical concept of odds for those who are not well educated enough to already know. Otherwise, it'd be self explanatory.

As for it not being 100% reliable or accurate, neither is the weather forecast, but it doesn't stop people from using it.

Originally Posted by sweet_tna

That would be like trying to predict the odds of getting hit by bus while crossing the street. Yes, it could happen, so we all look both ways before crossing the street. Same goes for swinging.

Yes, and no. Yes, we are talking about the odds of a particular outcome happening, but to compare it to the odds of getting hit by a bus like you are may be bit of an oversimplification of the problem. If you are going to have sex with several people, avoiding stds isn't as necessarily simple as looking both ways before you cross the street.

[VegasLee]

It is simple really.

If you want a 100% guarantee of not getting an STD you only have sex with one person your whole life that has not and is not having sex with anyone else.

ANYTHING outside of what I just posted gives you some chance of catching an STD. You might get one the first time out, you might have sex with 10,000 others and never get one.

There is no magic formula that is going to tell you IF you are going to catch an STD.

You could use stats and say that in general that people that have sex with 50 people catch an STD. That would be very general and of no real use to anyone.

As stated before, I know 15 year olds with STD's. I also know people that are in their 50's, 60's, 70's and even 80's that have had sex with Hundreds if not Thousands of people that have not caught anything.

You can argue it all you want but there is no real way of saying you are going to catch a STD. No facts to back up the argument.

You can say that a certain percentage of all people will catch a STD at some point in their life by using stats from this country or around the world but you can not state because you have X number of partners you are going to catch something. Just does not work that way.

You could also state that by having more partners your chances are higher but no way of selecting the number of people.

Since you are new here I would be interested in knowing your experience in the Lifestyle along with your education or experience that would give you the knowledge to argue this matter?

[Trojan Defense]

Originally Posted by VegasLee

It is simple really.

If you want a 100% guarantee of not getting an STD you only have sex with one person your whole life that has not and is not having sex with anyone else.

I would agree with that.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

There is no magic formula that is going to tell you IF you are going to catch an STD.

I would agree with that as well, but that is not what I claim such an assessment would do. What I claim it would do is tell you how probable infection is based on available data.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

You could use stats and say that in general that people that have sex with 50 people catch an STD. That would be very general and of no real use to anyone.

That is not what I suggest doing. What I suggest doing is looking at your personal situation, that is your demographics, sexual history, sexual preferences, medical condition, drug addictions, etc. and comparing that to people who are similar to you as the means of determining what is likely to happen. If you and others like you, have been doing what you do for a long time, and you really do not have any stds (as opposed to just thinking you don't), then you'd probably be okay doing things as you always have, even though that is not guaranteed, and that is what the risk assessment should reflect.

So the comparison being made wouldn't be an apples to oranges comparison as you make it sound. Your risk profile would not be compared to, say, a 15 year-old white girl living in the ghetto, who was infected by her first partner because her first partner was a 40 year old, bisexual, black male with hiv, that raped her, and didn't use protection. Those would be two totally different scenarios.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

You can argue it all you want but there is no real way of saying you are going to catch a STD. No facts to back up the argument

.

That is not the arguement that is being made.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

You can say that a certain percentage of all people will catch a STD at some point in their life by using stats from this country or around the world but you can not state because you have X number of partners you are going to catch something. Just does not work that way.

You could also state that by having more partners your chances are higher but no way of selecting the number of people.

You are right, you can not conclusively state what will, or will not happen under a given set of conditions, but you can state what is likely to happen. That is what statistics, and probability is all about.

If we are able to determine the risk of infection for a person is 50% (and I'm just picking these numbers to keep the math simple), can a person do anything with that information? Can you have sex with 50% of a person? No, you can't, but what we can do with that statistic is state it in the form of odds - that is, the odds of infection are 1 in 2. Now, can you have sex with 1 or 2 people? Yes, you can, because now we are putting that statistic in terms of whole numbers, which is a form people can work with.

Originally Posted by VegasLee

Since you are new here I would be interested in knowing your experience in the Lifestyle along with your education or experience that would give you the knowledge to argue this matter?

I am a psychology student, who coincidentally, has an interest in epidemiology. I do not see how my experience, or lack thereof, as a swinger is relevant to the discussion at hand.

[VegasLee]

Originally Posted by Trojan Defense

I am a psychology student, who coincidentally, has an interest in epidemiology. I do not see how my experience, or lack thereof, as a swinger is relevant to the discussion at hand.

I do though.

I am mid 50's. Been in this "Lifestyle" since I was a teenager. Know people that have been in it even longer than I have.

So if we use facts. You can say that someone that has had sex for 40 years, 99.9% unprotected with 100's of people and has never caught anything can be the sample set. Since I did it, then everyone must be able to do it?

I think education is a great thing. In many ways wish I had more of it but instead I have lived well over a half century of life and used common sense to live my life by. Something they don't give degrees in.

I am not picking on you here. Just stating that facts and common sense say that no set of numbers can tell you if you are going to catch something no matter who you are.

That 15 year old girl came from a rich, clean, church going family in a high end neighborhood. To bad the 17 year old male she hooked up with has been out playing on the wrong side of the tracks!

Just the example you used shows that years of experience and common sense can some times make for a better argument then stereotyping of others.

Books and studies provide stats. Life and experience provides facts. When learned from and used they can be turned into common sense.


Edit: Useful information about using stats for sex. 15 year old girl. She died of AIDS. Now in reviewing AIDS stats she did not fit the profile in any form or manner. The guy that infected her did not fit the stats either. According to the stats she should not have caught a STD or Aids and she diffidently should not have died.