Negative reaction to STD testing

[dr_pepper]

I was surprised (sort of) when my ex, who is a nurse in a family practice clinic, was telling me how the staff (all women) were putting down a guy who comes in every 6 months or so for STD testing. She said that they always advise him about condom use but he rejects that since his partners don't like them. Her feeling is that why would anyone want to have sex with him without protection. She said that he is viewed as a real sleaze ball, by her and the rest of the staff. I mentioned that at least he is having himself tested, rather than going along ignoring the possibilities of problems. She didn't budge on her feelings.
She is one who is totally against the lifestyle or anything like it.

[bbarnsworth]

Originally Posted by dr_pepper

I was surprised (sort of) when my ex, who is a nurse in a family practice clinic, was telling me how the staff (all women) were putting down a guy who comes in every 6 months or so for STD testing. She said that they always advise him about condom use but he rejects that since his partners don't like them. Her feeling is that why would anyone want to have sex with him without protection. She said that he is viewed as a real sleaze ball, by her and the rest of the staff. I mentioned that at least he is having himself tested, rather than going along ignoring the possibilities of problems. She didn't budge on her feelings.
She is one who is totally against the lifestyle or anything like it.

Sad, but true. There's a general societal outlook that people who are sexually promiscuous are sleezeballs.

Hospital/medical staff see every oddity society has to offer. There isn't anything they haven't seen. The vast, vast majority of them are not going to freak out if a Martian walks in speaking their language and complaining of a pain in their third lung. Weirdness is normal. That said, they can and will gossip about the latest oddity to walk in the door. Happens all the time.

The important thing is; does he get the STD testing regardless of what they think of him and are they giving him competent medical attention in doing so? If the answer is "yes', then it doesn't matter what they think. They're compelled by law not to discuss patients medical histories anyway.

[SecretAsianMan]

Yes... despite ACTING professional throughout the visit, even medical professionals are people & a part of society. And western society has never truly embraced a healthy sexual attitude.

As long as they act professional & he continues to get tested... who cares what they think, eh?

[Chicup]

Originally Posted by SecretAsianMan

Yes... despite ACTING professional throughout the visit, even medical professionals are people & a part of society. And western society has never truly embraced a healthy sexual attitude.

As long as they act professional & he continues to get tested... who cares what they think, eh?

They talk after.

I know of a local dentist with HPV from my dentist who heard it from a nurse where the HPV dentist is a patient.

I know the HPV guy is a long divorced player, so I'm not surprised, but I was surprised how I found out (hes not a swinger as far as I know).

[SW_PA_Couple]

Originally Posted by Chicup

They talk after.

I know of a local dentist with HPV from my dentist who heard it from a nurse where the HPV dentist is a patient.

A coincidence that HPV and dentists receive mention together. My wife and I go to the same dental office. Each of us, upon our most recent visit, was given a sales pitch on having this inspection done with ultraviolet light (I only know about the light because I went for the scheme and had the examination). Later I find out that the medical insurance does not pay for this. Not too bad, though. About $150.

Remember the old home hair coloring kit. Is she or isn't she? Only her hair dresser knows. Now it will be Does he or doesn't he? Only the dental hygienist knows.

[highlander]

The basic problem is this:
Cuban Public health relied on mandatory nationwide testing and quarantine and today claims an HIV rate of 0.1% This was in rather poor country that takes public health seriously.


US public health obsessed on condoms as their protective measure-and hundreds of thousands of Americans(mostly black or gay) needlessly died.

Here is a academic article that compares haphazard serosorting in the US with condoms in an empirical study. In a high risk population like young, MSM on the west coast, neither haphazard serosorting or condoms by themselves are "safe" in my book for higher risk populations(i.e. 26% risk reduction for haphazard serosorting vs. 57% reduction of risk for condoms vs. 3.5% rate of conversion in a population that did _neither_). The haphazard serosorting practiced in that study has _VERY_ little to do with what Cuba did-or what AIM has been doing more recently in the Porn business. If you want any real safety in higher risk populations, I really think you'll have to both promote condoms _and_ move them towards a testing regime closer to what AIM is doing than what they are doing now(i.e. that _might_ move us from 1.5% annual conversion rates to .65% annual conversion rates among the most careful aspect of that population if things went well).

Private organizations like AIM Health Care Foundation that aren't following the party line in the US have gotten seriously harassed by government authorities that were basically using public funds to lie about what AIM was doing--and in doing so make it harder for AIM to operate and publish valid literature on their results.

What pisses me off personally:
the overall quality of statistical analysis in US articles on HIV is often rather low. The authoritarian, centralized obsession with how to handle research in this topic in the US has seriously held back research in this area. Just Obamas's rather timid move to decrease the number of people who are HIV+ and don't know it is surrounded by some real stupid political posturing.

I've also heard serious accusations of high level political harassment of private biotech companies trying to bring much lower cost home STD testing to the US market.

Nurses and doctors aren't typically aware of these scientific and political issues. Generally what they are trained to do is to follow the rules mandated from above-and that is what they _have_ to do if they want things like a stable livelihood. The thing you need to ask yourself is just where are these attitudes coming from.

The funny thing is:
I bet you'd be surprised at just how many nurses/docs have sex without condoms even with fairly casual partners(i.e. if those partners are REALLY hot)--they just do it rather discreetly-and/or agonize over it later.
Part of what is bugging these folks so much is this guy is at least trying to do something more than what they(or their spouses) are in many cases.

Honestly, I don't think testing every 6 months is often enough except for a pretty low risk population, if that is all they are doing. Right now, you won't see much in the way of papers that look at why for example AIM and Cuba report rather different results than the Rajneesh community did or haphazard gay serosorters are--and there is minimal public support for this kind of research. I honestly think if anyone does anything real researc like this they will have to be operating outside the system-because if they depended on things like federal grants, they'd fine themselves out in the cold real fast.

I DO NOT think this is any kind of grand conspiracy. It is more an example of mass hysteria with some religious overtones. I think we might be as the cusp of serious containment of STD's. Containment of HIV is also going to mean addressing stuff like HSV, HPV and a bunch of other stuff. That kind of change seriously scares some folks.

My great grandfather was an herbalist that used to treat STD's back in the days when the best conventional medicine did was stuff like mercury pellets under the skin(a lot of what he did is still taught at places like naturopathic colleges-it wasn't antibiotics-but that wasn't an option in the 1890's). This whole STD issue has been a huge trauma that has lasted centuries. Even the current situation with HIV is a still _cakewalk_ compared to what my grandfather told me about(he grew up in a situation where a typical sunday morning was waking up a long line of rather frantic men waiting to get treatment from his father).

Originally Posted by dr_pepper

I was surprised (sort of) when my ex, who is a nurse in a family practice clinic, was telling me how the staff (all women) were putting down a guy who comes in every 6 months or so for STD testing. She said that they always advise him about condom use but he rejects that since his partners don't like them. Her feeling is that why would anyone want to have sex with him without protection. She said that he is viewed as a real sleaze ball, by her and the rest of the staff. I mentioned that at least he is having himself tested, rather than going along ignoring the possibilities of problems. She didn't budge on her feelings.
She is one who is totally against the lifestyle or anything like it.

[dr_pepper]

Kind of a side note that shows the feelings of medical staff. Over 30 years ago, I did volunteer work in the ER of a local hospital and this is before AIDS or HIV. STD's were the issue and the staff had a kit all packaged up to do the testing and treatment for this. The sides of this kit, in large letters was the name "Clapp & Treat", which coincidentally was the name of a now closed retail store that was nearby.

A sad thing happened at this same facility with a STD patient, who had no idea he was allergic to penicillin. At a family clinic down the street, this patient was seen for a STD and given the standard 1.4 million units of penicillin(in the late 70's) and he arrived at the ER in full arrest. Bottom line, he was dead before the needle was taken out of his arm. The staff worked for a long time trying to revive him but were not successful.