Many People with Drug-Resistant HIV Having Unprotected "Sex"

Bill Weintraub

Bill Weintraub

Many People with Drug-Resistant HIV Having Unprotected "Sex"


Just when I think I'm perhaps being too harsh, along comes a report like this one from AIDS Map, and I realize I'm not being harsh enough.

The article is reporting on research by the estimable Dr. Chin-Hong and colleagues, who produced the truly eye-opening data on the prevalence of anal HPV among gay men.

This time they've looked at the number of people who carry drug-resistant HIV and are having unprotected "sex" -- that is, who are brutally, thuggishly, and in my view criminally penetrating their fellows anally without a condom.

Here are some excerpts:

Many People with Drug-Resistant HIV Having Unprotected Sex

Michael Carter, Wednesday, November 30, 2005

A substantial number of HIV-positive individuals with proven resistance to antiretroviral drugs had unprotected sex with a partner to whom they could have transmitted drug-resistant HIV, according to a study from United States, published in the December 1st edition of the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes.

"Our study demonstrates that among HIV-infected men and women harboring genotypically proven antiretroviral viremia [mutant HIV], there is a substantial prevalence of high-risk sexual behaviour", write the investigators who calculated that the 25 individuals with resistance and reporting risky sex could have infected as many as 72 people with drug-resistant HIV.

Evidence from the United States and United Kingdom suggests that the proportion of people being newly infected with drug resistant HIV is increasing. Although HIV prevention has increasingly focused on the behaviours of individuals who already know they have HIV, little is known about the risk behaviours of individuals who have drug-resistant HIV.


Of the 287 individuals included in the investigators’ analysis, a total of 219 individuals identified as gay or bisexual, the median age was 45 years, 88% were men and 168 (58%) had a viral load above 100 copies/ml and genotypically proven resistance.

Unprotected anal sex was reported by 36 (27%) of the 133 gay or bisexual men with confirmed drug resistance, and 23 (17%) said that they had had unprotected sex with a partner who was HIV-negative or whose HIV status they did not know. Among the heterosexual men and women with resistance, four (11%) said that they had had unprotected sex and two (6%) said that this was with an individual who was either HIV-negative or of unknown HIV status.


25% reported three or more partners. The investigators therefore calculated "summing the number of sexual partners per person reporting unsafe sex, as many as 72 previously HIV-uninfected or status unknown partners were exposed to and could have acquired drug-resistant HIV infection".

Data were obtained on the spectrum of resistance mutations in individuals engaging in high-risk sex. Resistance to a single class of antiretrovirals was seen in 8% of patients, 44% had resistance to drugs from two classes of antiretroviral drugs, and 48% had resistance to drugs from all three main classes of anti-HIV drugs.


"We estimated that approximately one in four men or women with drug resistance in our clinic-based population engaged in unprotected intercourse in the past four months, including 15% with partners who were known to be HIV-uninfected or whose HIV status was unknown", write the investigators.

They also comment, "we found no evidence that persons with drug resistance have been effectively targeted to reduce their practice of unprotected sex."


Chin-Hong PV et al. High-risk sexual behavior in adults with genotypically proven antiretroviral-resistant HIV infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 40: 463-471, 2005.

[emphases mine]

Let's see what's going on here.

The survey looked at 287 people who are carrying drug-resistant HIV.

What the researchers term "resistance mutations."

219 of the 287 were gay or bi men.

That's about 76%.

But 92% of those reporting unprotected "sex" with a vulnerable partner were gay or bi men.

So as usual, what I call the "depravity level" -- the level of depraved contempt for the welfare of one's sexual partners -- is higher among the gay and bi men.

It's appalling -- but it's reality.

These guys had managed to infect "as many as 72 previously HIV-uninfected or status unknown partners" with DRUG-RESISTANT HIV.

So we started out with 287 people infected with mutant HIV.

And we ended up with 359 people infected with mutant HIV.

That's an increase of 25%.

How mutant was the HIV?

"44% had resistance to drugs from two classes of antiretroviral drugs, and 48% had resistance to drugs from all three main classes of anti-HIV drugs.

Very mutant.

And how long did it take for our drug-resistant bunnies to do the damage?

Four months.

You see the problem.

In four months, we've gone from 287 to 359 people with mutant HIV.

Which means that in eight months, assuming that rate holds steady, we'll have 448 people with mutant HIV.

And in a year, 560.

Close to double.

That is, as I said, assuming no increase in the rate of infection -- which is probably not a safe assumption.

Almost certainly the rate will increase, and in a year's time there'll be at least double if not triple the number of people walking around with mutant HIV merrily replicating in their blood.

And ready to inject that HIV directly into the blood vessels in your ass the first time you're stupid enough to bend over.

Please note: If you get infected by someone from that 44% whose HIV has resistance "to drugs from all three main classes of anti-HIV drugs" -- you're up shit creek, as it were, without a paddle.

You don't just have HIV; you've got untreatable HIV.

Doesn't that sound like fun?

I have a friend at the moment who's run through all the treatment options.

Doesn't that sound fabulous?

You can imagine how pleased he and his lover are.

What is AIDS Inc and the AIDS Service Organizations, who are charged with preventing new HIV infections, doing about this?

Chin-Hong et al:

"we found no evidence that persons with drug resistance have been effectively targeted to reduce their practice of unprotected sex."


"no evidence that persons with drug resistance have been effectively targeted"

"No evidence."

That means no evidence.

By the way, the study also found that younger guys were more likely to be out there infecting.

Which means, since young guys tend to sleep with other young guys, that gay youth are at particular risk.

Once again, what are the agencies charged with preventing HIV infection doing about this clear and present danger to our futurity, our gay kids?


"no evidence that persons with drug resistance have been effectively targeted"


At least nothing "effective."

What they have been doing is giving out condoms, lube, and "safer-sex" literature, and devising packs of obscene playing cards while putting together bath-house tours for virgins.

Hasn't worked.


Because what you're actually doing, when you give out condoms and lube and literature on how to use them, and distribute playing cards depicting felching, and take guys on bath-house tours, is you're encouraging men to do anal and be promiscuous.

That's what you're actually doing.


And then you're shocked, shocked, when guys go out and do promiscuous anal.

Of course in San Francisco, we know from the New Yorker, a gay psychotherapist has stepped, if not manfully, at least into the breach by donning a wig and running something called "Tina's Cafe," which is supposed to discourage drug use.

Of course, if I were a gay man who was told that the best I could do in life was be an ugly drag queen, I might do drugs too.

And then do anal.

That's what Jedi was talking about when he said

I remember when i was still a teenager...

and i was looking for gay identification figures or stories...

all i found was aids /disease stories

drag queens

promiscuitive/anal/bodybuilder pussies

well in general

broken spirit/life persons or stories

everything black/grey

no heroes...

no happy ends...

as if everything had to be or had to end bad.

"Had to end bad."

That's the message these people, no matter what their intention, are promulgating.

If you're gay, it has to end bad.

That's also, as Don Frazer pointed out, the Brokeback message.

It's the analist message:

Life consists of a lot of anal penetration, promiscuity, and effeminacy, and then you die.

"drag queens promiscuitive/anal/bodybuilder pussies"

Is there an alternative?


There's a way for guys to have truly hot, truly intense, truly spectacular full-body fully-phallic fully-mutual man2man SEX that's 100% HIV SAFE.

Now -- is there anything in my last sentence that's a lie?

Anything untrue?

Is Frot not hot, or intense, or fully-phallic, or fully-mutual, or man2man?

No -- it's all of those things.

Maybe it's not 100% HIV safe.

Well, there's never been a documented case of HIV transmission through Frot.

That's out of 65 million HIV / AIDS infections globally.

Sixty-five million.

So why aren't the AIDS Service Organizations pushing Frot?


If they pushed Fidelity too -- it would be 100% win-win.

You'd think, after 21 years, and 25 million dead and 40 million infected, if might be time to try something new.

Guess not.

Guys, you need to understand how very poorly you and everyone else on earth is served by AIDS Inc. and the AIDS Service Organizations.


still i dont understand


obviously weak analist bitch pussies

can grow so strong

is it really them? that achieve this all by themself????

or are other powers behind

establishing this degenerative anal culture

to weaken human civilisation in spirit and soul

in order to make humans

better dumb and controllable???

Good question.

I'm going to repeat here what I said at the end of my last Brokeback post -- because not everyone reads every post, and it bears repeating:

What's the motive?

Here's what one researcher said to me:

This is what happens to every new official put in charge of AIDS money (PEPFAR, Global Fund, the UNAIDS Ambassador, head of WHO...). The formula is simple: take a guy with zero AIDS background, then feed condoms-only and analist propaganda into his tabula rasa mind, and Presto: a new defender of the old paradigm! Keep the industry going.

You can't really blame the indoctrinated officials. Everyone makes a buck and people keep dying. As more die, AIDS Inc. can ask for ever-greater amounts of money and can always say its not enough because ....Look, people are still dying! Isn't that proof that we deserve vastly more money?

Could it be that simple?


The sums of money involved are not small.

You look at the money the bureaucrats and field workers make;

you consider the investment by big pharma -- the big drug companies -- which can only pay off if there are lots of HIV poz people in this world to take their pills;

you add in the people whose academic careers have been built on gender feminism and pansexualism;

and of course there's the porn industry and the sex tourism industry and the gay glossies;

the condom and lube manufacturers;

and now even Hollywood's involved --

you add that all up, and what you've got is a huge vested interest -- which needs to maintain the anal status quo.

By contrast:


You don't need devices, you don't need condoms, you don't need lube, you don't need virologists or microbiologists or geneticists or pharmacologists, you don't need academics and their bizarre gender theories.

And you certainly don't need AIDS Service Organizations and their "safer-sex" counselors.

All you need, as I've said, is two hard dicks and a smile.

And HIV goes away, hep B and C go away, anal HPV, LGV -- all the anally-vectored diseases vanish.

You get rid of the promiscuity and effeminacy, and guess what?

The therapists -- guys like Walter Odets -- lose.

Because the suicide and substance abuse and depression and anxiety -- they go away too.



And that's another aspect.


are other powers behind

establishing this degenerative anal culture

to weaken human civilisation in spirit and soul

in order to make humans

better dumb and controllable???


Analism is a system of social control.

It takes homosex, which, because it doesn't result in pregnancy, should be the freest form of sex, and hems it in with a complex of rules and regulations.

It turns something very simple and joyous into something very complicated and dangerous.

Quite an accomplishment.

The Greeks viewed Warrior Homosex as inimical to tyrants.

They were right.


Add a reply to this discussion

Back to Personal Stories


Warriors Speak is presented by The Man2Man Alliance, an organization of men into Frot

To learn more about Frot, ck out What's Hot About Frot

Or visit our FAQs page.

Warriors Speak Home

Cockrub Warriors Site Guide

The Man2Man Alliance

Heroic Homosex

Frot Men


Frot Club

Personal Stories

| What's Hot About Frot | Hyacinthine Love | THE FIGHT | Kevin! | Cockrub Warriors of Mars | The Avenger | Antagony | TUFF GUYZ | Musings of a BGM into Frot | Warriors Speak | Ask Sensei Patrick | Warrior Fiction | Frot: The Next Sexual Revolution |
| Heroes Site Guide | Toward a New Concept of M2M | What Sex Is |In Search of an Heroic Friend | Masculinity and Spirit |
| Jocks and Cocks | Gilgamesh | The Greeks | Hoplites! | The Warrior Bond | Nude Combat | Phallic, Masculine, Heroic | Reading |
| Heroic Homosex Home | Cockrub Warriors Home | Heroes Home | Story of Bill and Brett Home | Frot Club Home |
| Definitions | FAQs | Join Us | Contact Us | Tell Your Story |

© All material on this site Copyright 2001 - 2010 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.