What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
78 Comments
- uptwolait, on 02/09/2009, -1/+29Only 30% less likely? That's like taking two bullets out of a revolver and playing Russian roulette with four still in.
- Octanum, on 02/10/2009, -1/+25How do you test this? o.O
- nomadofthehills, on 02/10/2009, -0/+14"while the finding didn’t pass a test for statistical significance"
I stopped reading after that. - khyberkitsune, on 02/10/2009, -1/+13Okay, so HOW do they find people willing to infect themselves for this test?
Wanted: HIV- female to test anti-HIV vaginal Lube. Must be willing to have sex with HIV+ people. - IRaphy, on 02/10/2009, -0/+12LoL, God this is stupid. Just use some f*cking condoms...stop trying to find ways around it when you're banging strangers.
Someone slow the world down, i need to get off. - L4WL3RS34L, on 02/10/2009, -2/+12But it feels a lot better to shoot.
- inactive, on 02/10/2009, -0/+9No seriously, how can you test this? Did they advocate to some women sleep without a condom and try our gel then measure the results?!
That isn't very ethical, but there has to be more to it. - asnider, on 02/10/2009, -1/+930% is not good odds. Wear a condom.
- mrsteveman1, on 02/10/2009, -0/+8Or like playing Russian roulette with a dick....
- UberNick, on 02/10/2009, -0/+8Nah, they just found a group of already high-risk women. Say they had 60 in the study, and told half to just keep on doing what they were doing. The other half were given the gel and told to continue their habits (i.e. use condoms if they already were). After a period of time, they measured both groups-- the control group had 3 HIV+ women, the second had just one. I'm making up numbers here, and would like to see the actual study publication and details, but it's pretty standard as far as medical studies go. Science, it works!
- clumsytime, on 02/11/2009, -0/+8Whoa, hold on buddy, that's not right. It means your chances went down by 30%. So, say that a sexual encounter carries a 1% chance you'll get AIDS (making it up here, it varies based on risk factors but you get the idea) ... then with this cream your chances would be down to 0.7%.
It does NOT mean you have a 70% chance of getting AIDS. Even by having sex with someone with HIV, your odds of contracting it are not 100%.
Reducing odds by any means is good. Of course, safe sex is the best bet, but if people are going to follow a certain lifestyle no matter what, something like this would be beneficial in that case. - Frixionburne, on 02/10/2009, -0/+8what else is there aside from protection and prevention? Kill everyone with AIDS?
- asnider, on 02/10/2009, -0/+71. Your word play wasn't as clever as you think it was.
2. It's actually easier to transmit most STDs through anal sex than through vaginal or oral sex. - and303, on 02/10/2009, -1/+8Far less than 30% of us will laugh at that clever word play of yours.
- jcaino, on 02/10/2009, -5/+12Butt what about anal?
- Ne007, on 02/10/2009, -0/+6Slather some of this on my penis and I swear you will not get my AIDS.
- sgvprelude, on 02/10/2009, -0/+630%....I can't take that bet. Survival.
- Jabertsohn, on 02/10/2009, -0/+6Are you advocating some kind of... final solution.
- fluxion, on 02/11/2009, -0/+6you dont think eliminating the need for condoms would be the absolute most badass invention of the decade? with adequate distribution, AIDS would be non-existent, unplanned births would virtually disappear, and casual sex would be the bees knees again.
obviously, this is far from such an awesome product, but its certainly worth working toward for moral, health, and financial reasons. - FuzzyBunny, on 02/10/2009, -0/+6This was my thought. You can't exactly force a test group to sleep with men who have AIDS. My guess is that they simply polled women who were using the gel over a period of time. Still, that brings up the question, how did they get these women to start using it in the 1st place. If they told them it would help reduce STD transmission it's still pretty unethical.
- pintocat, on 02/10/2009, -0/+5It's the only solution we have.
- stevensj2, on 02/11/2009, -0/+5There's no profits in cures.
Treatment of the symptoms, and delaying the inevitable however, offer huge returns for pharmaceutical companies (the average patient undergoing HIV treatment spends about $2,100 monthly, totalling over $600,000 over their HIV+ lifespan).
Some scientist in a remote lab might find (or already have found) a real cure, but it will never see the light of day. - d3dm, on 02/10/2009, -1/+6The double-blind phase III clinical trial procedure is described here:
http://www.lifesciencesworld.com/life-science-news ... - TheWhiteOtter, on 02/10/2009, -0/+5Wonder where the submitter found this...
http://digg.com/health/Drugs_Are_Found_to_Block_HI ...
Less than 12 hours ago! - jerrolds, on 02/10/2009, -0/+5But the 30%? *thumbs up*!
- Fishn2, on 02/10/2009, -1/+6Step 1. Get 3 Women
Step 2. Give them vag gel
Step 3. Sex
Step 4. ????????
Step 5. Profit! - AntFoolish, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Mmmm...Sex gel...graaaghhgagaghh
- TyIzaeL, on 02/10/2009, -1/+5Wasn't there a story about this earlier today?
- CyclonusRIP, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Ya it was probably like 2/100 with the gel vs 3/100 without so who really cares.
- adamdigg, on 02/11/2009, -1/+5Of all of the types of contraceptive, only a female condom "hangs out". A diaphragm is inserted in the vagina and covers the cervix. I'm getting sick of living in an ignorant country :-(. Did you get abstinence-only education or something?
- techdever, on 02/11/2009, -1/+5mass murder is the total cure
- Nosferotu, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Probably through survey method.
Do you use this product?
Have you contracted HIV?
Have you slept with people that had it?
etc. etc.
Be tough, but I'm sure they didn't just have AIDS-infected people sex up non-infected people. I'd be interested to see what their population is in this study. - hughesj919, on 02/10/2009, -0/+4Yeah, it was monkeys this morning. Talk about quick turn around.
- 6oo63D, on 02/09/2009, -1/+5it's even more like playing russian roulette with a semi-automatic.
- JackPence7788, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3Yes.
Yes, there was. - inactive, on 02/10/2009, -1/+4diggers will use it as lube
- importfr87, on 02/10/2009, -1/+4That sucks for 70% of the women they tested this on...
- kingmanic, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3AIDS transmission is moderately low even for women. So it's like 24% instead of 36%. Beats the hell out of using nothing.
- inactive, on 02/10/2009, -2/+5*HIV virus. Eh.. I'm such an *****.
- Medicamusic, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3Sucks for the test subjects...
"I dont know how to tel you Mrs. Duvanni, so I'll let these guys do it!"
*cue barbershop quartet* - danrez06, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3I think the actual percentage for is less than 1% per sexual encounter. Even less if they are taking anti-retroviral therapy.
Either way I say find a new partner. He isn't worth it. - Tyrghast, on 02/11/2009, -0/+3Why is it always violence? What I meant was a cure... not mass murder.
- asnider, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3Dude, I have no idea what that hell you're talking about. But, for what it's worth, I'm not suggesting that people avoid anal sex. Anal is fun times. And, why would I quote the Bible?
- Nosferotu, on 02/10/2009, -0/+3This amused me.
- inactive, on 02/11/2009, -1/+3Aye.
You truly have not experienced love until you've felt all 98.6 degrees of your partner's ***** with your penis. - barno42, on 02/11/2009, -0/+2“Now we need a trial that’s big enough to show whether this is a statistically significant effect.”
This is not news. If they end up doing a larger study and find statistically significant results, we're approaching a newsworthy story. If they give this gel away for free (which is the only price that is affordable enough for the people who need it most), that will be a great story.
I'm not holding my breath. - inactive, on 02/11/2009, -0/+2But death is slow and agonizing.
- asnider, on 02/11/2009, -0/+2Until we can develop a cure, prevention is the only reasonable solution.
- NewBrunswickMan, on 07/12/2009, -0/+2Dude, i just *****. the natural way, lol
- Yage2006, on 02/11/2009, -0/+2Ummm 30% is not that great. Even 50% is not that great.
Not enough to take a chance on. -
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is