thesak wrote...
> Have you and your potential sex partner got tested TOGETHER BEFORE
> having sex?... emphasis on BEFORE
But as I've pointed out repeatedly, this only works *** IF *** the
potential sex partners abstained from sex with anyone from the
moment of testing to receiving the test results to the time they
reach the bedroom.
For certain high-risk groups, the probability of all this occurring
is almost nil, and you would also have to include several weeks of
abstinence before the test, as the test can't detect the virus
until several weeks after infection. This would work if the
potential partners were physically confined on a desert island or
in a prison camp or somewhere, but since that isn't going to happen
this idea is just a waste of time and money and actually makes
things worse by provding the testees with a false sense of security.
Don Saklad - 07 Jun 2007 18:04 GMT
Is that false sense of security the same as the false sense
of security that hemophiliacs have about blood transfusions?
Or anyone who needs a transfusion?
Is it comparable to the false sense of security that a TB
test gives parents when they send their kids to a public
school?
Is it anything like the false sense of security one gets from
wearing a seatbelt while riding in a car?
No wonder people everywhere are all jittery. We are all
surrounded by false senses of security!
Help! Somebody is going to get fuming mad at my
response and I'm going to suffer a false sense of
security for another 60+ years waiting for that person
to die of old age--or become too infirm to make me
feel insecure! HELP!!
| But as I've pointed out repeatedly, this only works *** IF *** the
| potential sex partners abstained from sex with anyone from the
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
| this idea is just a waste of time and money and actually makes
| things worse by provding the testees with a false sense of security.
Have you and your potential sex partner got tested TOGETHER BEFORE
having sex?... emphasis on BEFORE