A credit score for having sex?

[LikeMinds321]

Trojan ~

The bottom line is, we're not buying what you have to sell.

You can push all you want, but if what you have to market isn't of interest to the public, you have to face that.

R.I.P.

LM

[Coupleerotic22]

Originally Posted by Trojan Defense

Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking your personal approach to risk assessment. I actually like it, and think it is a bit more well thought out that some of the other answers that I've heard. Nor is this to personally single you out, as I am confident you are not the only one that does it this way.

Its just that I find the attack here on my approach a little like the kettle calling the pot black. That's because if we go back to what your answer was how to assess std risk, you said (without me paraphrasing it)...



And now you are trying to downplay this answer by saying you only rely on test results, which I might add is still a matter or probability not just because it only shows a person's condition at one point in time, but also as a result of false positives, and false negatives that can occur with these tests. But anyway, I digress...

What you were just saying was...



It doesn't? But what did you just say in the previous quote? You said, "Are they a member of a high risk group?" Okay, well that would be ascribing risk in populations to individuals. And furthermore, to say differences within high risk groups are irrelevant I believe is incorrect too. In terms of risk in a partner, the only thing worse than having one major risk factor is - having several! So a distinction is to be made there.

"Are they a member of a high risk group?" was a rhetorical question in a separate post. It is rhetorical because we are swingers - by definition a high risk group. So I rely on test because I am a swinger and having sex with other swingers. Test are as close to accurate as you can get, and they are not fail-safe. If I simply decided not to have sex with swingers based on the fact they are high risk, swinging wouldn't be much fun, because we are all in a high risk category.

To use your credit score analogy, if I walk into a swingers social and try to use this assessment, then no one in the room is going to have a very high credit score, unless they are brand new to swinging.

You are also mixing scoring and actuarial data. My credit score is a measure of my actions and how they were reported. My life insurance is based on the risk groups I fall into, many based on things outside my control.

I may fall into the risk group of heart disease, but that is not a predictor of a heart attack, only the potential.

A credit score is a predictor because it is based on MY behavior not the some group I belong to.

So unless you are proposing the everyone sign on tho a database and report who they had sex with and under what conditions, then it is not much of an individual predictor. Good luck on the reporting mechanism.

To answer your original "Polling Question: Would you find this useful, not necessarily as a swinger per se, but as a sexually active person?" NO

[appliancesex]

i keep reading this and all your fatal replies to this idea and all i can think about is this short from amazon women on the moon.

[good times]

+1 to what Chicup, VegasLee and Likeminds said. I know you have yourself convinced that these ideas of yours are good ones, and you obviously believe they have merit. Good for you, as for me, they are the most ridiculous proposals I have ever heard regarding std/sti risk reduction, mitigation, or awareness.

Bottom line, as I pointed out in your other thread. Their is currently no way to come up with such a rating. It is absolutely impossible, the necessary data does not exist, nor will it in our lifetimes.

Once someone gets the tri-coder developed so we can scan a potential mate for all possible diseases, then it will be possible. Until then, you takes your chances, or you self satisfy.

[socolais]

Let's try this from a different perspective. Let's assume you already have your infaliable data store, refined query set, and impressive GUI. What are your instructions for the customer wanting to utilize this application at the next swingers party? What need does this tool satisfy? What value does the customer percieve from its response?

[sweet_tna]

Originally Posted by appliancesex

i keep reading this and all your fatal replies to this idea and all i can think about is this short from amazon women on the moon.

LMAO!! Love that movie! Can you imagine having reading that printout while on a date with another couple? "It says here you asked 7 play partners about playing solo, and 12 times you neglected to warn a woman giving you oral that you were about to come and 'accidentally' came in her mouth."

=)

[highlander]

Originally Posted by VegasLee

Any person that has sex with someone other then their spouse is a member of a high risk group.

How high is the risk? There is no real way of knowing no matter how many numbers are crunched. Rating will mean nothing at all. Tests mean nothing either. That test is good at the moment it is taken only. As soon as someone has contact with another human after taking the test, the results will mean nothing.

This simply isn't true. Porn actors under AIM's testing protocol have a lower rate of STD's than the general population. That makes them by statistical definition a lower risk population-unless you are saying AIM's figures are false.

This idea that tests mean "nothing" except at the time of test is BAD statistics. I know you heard it from an MD someplace-and most of those folks have _minimal_ statistical training compared to economists or statisticians(yes, I did take the kinds of statistics courses where those kinds of guys are too damned scared to show their faces). The _right_ way to think of it is the test means the _most_ right after the test and then gradually degrades(and just how much it means at the time of the test depends on what kind of demographic group we are talking about). Condoms aren't 100% either. One source at UCSF put their effectiveness at about 90%.


The impression of monogamy isn't really protection either. Most women that get HIV get it from a partner whose risk factor wasn't promiscuity but IV drug use. Most gay men that get HIV get it from a regular partner-and I bet a lot of those folks thought that guy was monogamous.


Anyhow, I think AIM has it pretty much right requiring monthly testing for porn actors for multiple STD's. My personal math suggest that approach is at least as effective as condoms alone for that community we are talking about. It isn't foolproof-but nothing is. If someone wants the ultimate in safety, they can be celibate.

[appliancesex]

Originally Posted by highlander

That makes them by statistical definition a lower risk population-unless you are saying AIM's figures are false.

i was under the impression that porn actors are only tested for hiv. if this is correct, i wouldn't go around saying that they are the lower risk population.

instead of all this high tech statistical stuff, why don't we just ask people to wear an arm band? that would be so much easier.

omg. it can be color coded too! sort of like a security level. then when, at the club we could look over at a chart and be like, 'hmm, what's pink again?'

[socolais]

Originally Posted by highlander

.... Most women that get HIV get it from a partner whose risk factor wasn't promiscuity but IV drug use. Most gay men that get HIV get it from a regular partner-and I bet a lot of those folks thought that guy was monogamous.

How can we be confident of the infection source?

[slevin]

Originally Posted by appliancesex

i was under the impression that porn actors are only tested for hiv. if this is correct, i wouldn't go around saying that they are the lower risk population.

instead of all this high tech statistical stuff, why don't we just ask people to wear an arm band? that would be so much easier.

omg. it can be color coded too! sort of like a security level. then when, at the club we could look over at a chart and be like, 'hmm, what's pink again?'

They publicize the HIV testing, but they also test for chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis. I don't believe they test for herpes.

[highlander]

Originally Posted by appliancesex

i was under the impression that porn actors are only tested for hiv. if this is correct, i wouldn't go around saying that they are the lower risk population.'

That is not correct. In studios following the AIM testing protocol, actors are tested for HIV, Gonorrhea, and Chlamydia every month-and in addition, HSV(1 and 2), Syphilis, Hep A/B/C every 6 months. They also receive some basic education on how to spot other STD's like BV, crabs and trich.

They do have some incidence of Gonorrhea and Chlamydia-it is just lower than that for the general population. I personally think the reason their program works as well as it does in their population(which has some behaviors that are considered high risk) is because the typical duration of a case of treatable STD's among porn actors is going to be low compared to the generational population. That also means that HIV is going to be less transmissible per act than the general population.

[highlander]

Originally Posted by socolais

How can we be confident of the infection source?

There are DNA tests that can trace source of infection. As I understand it, HIV mutates slightly each time it is passed from one person to another-and the HIV viruses in each person aren't entirely uniform. I've seen folks talk about using this to do things like trace the course of infection.

[appliancesex]

Originally Posted by highlander

That is not correct. In studios following the AIM testing protocol, actors are tested for HIV, Gonorrhea, and Chlamydia every month-and in addition, HSV(1 and 2), Syphilis, Hep A/B/C every 6 months. They also receive some basic education on how to spot other STD's like BV, crabs and trich.

hmm. i did not know that. maybe we should only swing with people who do porn?

[highlander]

Originally Posted by appliancesex

hmm. i did not know that. maybe we should only swing with people who do porn?

Well ANYONE can use AIM's services. They charged $410 for a comprehensive test last time I checked--and $195 for their monthly panel(Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, HIV). Tests for the same diseases are available from Home Bio test for $95--but the home bio tests aren't as sensitive(I'd figure the cheaper test are about half as effective the first 30 days-but that difference is quite a bit less if we are talking a longer testing interval)

I haven't seen a good published study on just how testing compares to condoms. My personal calculations suggest that what AIM is doing is more effective than condoms alone--and that even quarterly testing does something similar in lower risk groups. If folks want a more safety, they can use testing in conjunction with condoms-because they work differently and are more effective together than either alone. Condoms may also provide protection against diseases that we don't understand well(or that aren't tested for in men like HPV).

A lot of insurance plans will cover annual STD checks. I personally don't think the additional cost of $285/year for quarterly testing beyond that is any big deal. For that matter, $1045/year or even $2145/year wouldn't be a big deal if it were something that gave someone entre to an appreciative safer pool of partners. Hell, I know a disabled lady on SSI that manages to get quarterly testing done. I think it would work a lot better if it were done in a club situation where there was a mutual partner notification agreement.

The big omission I personally think that AIM has made is not including testing for drugs that are popular with IV drug users-but that may be because of cultural considerations.

Is all this stuff perfect? Maybe not. However, I think if there were a move towards periodic testing, sharing results upon request with partners and partner notification, and having test results witnessed by other folks well known in the community if folks are using the instant tests, the swing community could move towards demonstrating a rate of STD's that would be substantially lower than the rate for people who tell their partners they are monogamous.

What the AIM experience shows is that a very sexually active group can reduce its STD rate substantially by partner notification and rapid treatment of those diseases that can be treated.

[Trojan Defense]

Originally Posted by socolais

What are your instructions for the customer wanting to utilize this application at the next swingers party?

This idea was not conceived with swingers specifically in mind. As a result, this idea is not applicable to swinger parties. Instead the application is to random offline encounters, which would be more geared to serial daters, than swingers, though that's not to say a person couldn't be both. Another possible application is to high end escorts, and their clients, of which again, a swinger could be either or.

So in a way, this could be thought of as a risk disclosure mechanism for illicit sexual encounters, where discretion and confidentiality is a must.

Originally Posted by socolais

What need does this tool satisfy? What value does the customer perceive from its response?

The perceived value is disclosure with confidentiality.

It allows two random strangers in an offline environment to quickly and effectively evaluate one another's position on std risk in terms of "compatible" or "not compatible", before developing an invested interest in one another. Secondly, in the event that two people are not compatible, another compatibility rule could be used to see if their differences can't be worked out in terms of "negotiable" or "non-negotiable".

Let's say you get off work one day, and you head to an upscale club. Sitting at the bar all by herself is an attractive woman wearing a flashy red dress, while sipping on a martini. Real classy lady. She catches your eye, and you're feeling rather confident in yourself, so you approach her. Before becoming too invested in the interaction with her, you ask her what her risk type is. She tells you, and you mentally run that number against the compatibility rule of your risk type. Turns out your position on std risk is compatible with hers, so you continue to get to know her, and eventually close the deal without ever having a really awkward conversation. Good for you.

Little did you know that she had herpes, but since it does not matter to people of your risk profile, your risk type and accompanying compatibility rule did not disqualify her. However, if she had AIDs, then it might have. Using this system she doesn't know your exact criteria for sex, nor do you know her condition, if she even has one to start with. All you know is, are you, or are you not compatible with one another based on how you feel about std risk. That's because built into these risk types is the concept of plausible deniability, meaning if you are not compatible with someone then it could be for any given number of reasons. Neither you, nor her, need concern yourself with the exact reasons as the bottom line has already been determined. If it is discovered that you are not compatible with someone, then you can then direct your attention to someone who is before investing too much in the interaction of the person you weren't compatible with.

Also worth noting is that I refer to this number as a "risk type" because the word "type" connotates compatibility, which is in terms that I think people should be thinking about these things. The question of "What's your risk type?" could be thought of as comparable to "What's your phone number?", "What's your sign?", "What's your type?", etc. - sort of like a pick up line.