Comments on: What They Don’t Tell You About STDs and Non-Monogamy

By: bokomaru4

bokomaru4 — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 23:02:30 +0000

Well, actually, there *is* evidence that yeast infections can be passed back and forth through sexual contact (so says the CDC). It isn’t very common, but it does happen, so women with recurrent infections are often told that their partners should also be treated to help prevent them. Likewise, BV shouldn’t be sexually transmissible, either, as it is caused by an overgrowth of bacteria normally found in the vagina. Nonetheless, there is evidence that women whose female partners have it are more likely to get it, themselves, and it is currently considered to be a sexually transmissible disease.

By: Fred

Fred — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 16:35:54 +0000

I love the mild rant by anonymous. I’m tired of all the hand-wringing. Why do we have it? It’s all due to society’s moral condemnation of sexual activity. When have you ever heard some fundie christian say “They got tb - serves them right for flying in an airplane, the sinners”. Let’s just stop talking about it so much. We only bolster that fundie nonsense.

I also love the posts by Mary Adde and Radagast97. If you want to avoid disease you should stop thinking in terms of germs anyway. The presence/absence of microbes is a very minor factor when it comes to disease causation. If I were to somehow magically learn that during the unprotected sex I just had, some Chlamydia germs swam up my urethra, I wouldn’t be the least bit worried. I take care of myself - I’m healthy as a horse - and my immune system would kick their ass. Germs are around, and they’re for the most part beneficial. To quibble with Radagast97 who writes that yeast can occasionally be normally found in the vagina without being pathogenic - I’d say that means it’s NEVER pathogenic. When you do have a so-called yeast infection, something else has gone wrong. Don’t blame the yeast. I would never damage my liver to kill yeast in my body. I think Mary Adde and Radagast97 are presuming a commensal relationship between Homo sapiens and Candida albicans, but maybe it’s symbiotic. Perhaps the yeast provide some as yet undiscovered benefit to us, like the E. coli in our guts that make vitamin K for us. Is asthma caused by having lungs? Yes and no - capiche? Germ theory of disease isn’t 100% useless, but it’s greatly exaggerated. Read For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Expert’s Advice to Women (by Barbara Ehrenreich & Dierdre English) for a good history about how this theory rose to prominence by being good for the pecuniary needs of the medical profession.

Enjoy it with a nice piece of sourdough bread and appreciate your yeast.

By: DDA

DDA — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:13:13 +0000

To Anonymous about the mild rant:

The reason to talk about sexually-transmitted diseases is because the differences between poly and a “close social network” is…sex. Monogamous people with close social networks get the flu and common colds, etc. but they have much less risk (assuming honesty) for the other diseases mentioned here. So it makes perfect sense to talk about the *extra* exposure that poly people have over and above a “close social network.”

To John Kelly:
The problem with talking about HPVs is that a *huge* percent of the population is already infected (I’ve heard rates as high as 90%) so trying to keep it out of a poly group might only be possible by not sleeping with *anyone*. The new vaccine isn’t approved for men or for women over a certain age so that doesn’t really help everyone. And lots of people get it and their immune system kills it and all is (temporarily) well. Periodic testing for those at risk seems a smarter policy to me.

By: John Kelly

John Kelly — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 04:56:53 +0000

There’s some basic truth here — contagion thrives on contact, and sexually transmitted diseases are apt to be transmitted among people who have sex with various subsets of each other. (Wow, who’d have guessed?) But candida’s a very poor choice to prove the point — I have a monogamous friend who’s been afflicted with it for months, maybe years, and my wife had it when we were monogamous. And the author gets through the whole article without mentioning Human Papilloma Virus, which is very contagious — and some types seem to be enablers for cervical cancer. A good argument from the standpoint of epidemiology would omit candida and include HPV.

And a more honest argument would mention that these cautions apply also to those who practice serial monogamy and those whose “monogamous” partners are not quite honest.

By: -the redhead-

-the redhead- — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:51:59 +0000

Wow. What an unfortunate article, by an ill-informed person. I’m disappointed.

-the redhead-

By: Alan

Alan — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:50:08 +0000

…to think about the risks and make the decisions… /without even realising how many other people will be affected/ by those choices.

Amen.

A huge amount of work has been done on the mathematics of epidemiology. What it comes down to is, the spread of communicable disease is an exponential function. If the exponent is even slightly above some critical value, transmission starts to take off like a rocket and you get a general epidemic. If the exponent is held even slightly below that value, the disease remains confined to relatively few people in small, isolated clusters — in a steady state that never takes off.

This is why having a culture of rigorous condom use and STD testing is SO IMPORTANT if polyamory is going to survive and spread. STD transmission rates really must be held below some critical exponent, and we don’t really know what it is. The crucial thing to know is that even a SMALL change in the exponent — for instance, a small change in the culture of condom use or lack thereof — can tip the balance from a low-grade steady state of occasional infections to a runaway epidemic affecting tens of millions. Or vice versa: from an epidemic back to a low-grade steady state that will affect only a few.

(My wife Sparkler was trained in biostatistics; we talk about this kind of stuff over the dinner table.)

By: Radagast97

Radagast97 — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:23:22 +0000

I STRONGLY agree with Mary Adde, Candida is a NORMAL component of body flora, only overgrowing when conditions in the body change. Super-infections are common in people who’ve been given long-term antibiotics because it kills off the bacterial competition and allows Candida to overgrow in the bowels.

I am a ASCP registered Medical Technologists who’s worked in the field for over 7 years and has worked in Microbiology labs of several hospitals.

Candida isn’t communicated like most infections - it’s a normal component in the throat, gut, and occasional normally found in the vagina without being pathogenic.

By: Sheye

Sheye — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:12:53 +0000

Actually, on the Herpes front, it’s not true that location makes the diagnosis of what kind of Herpes. They are indeed two different strains, HSV-1 and HSV-2. You can get HSV-1 in your mouth and on your genitals. The same with HSV-2. While they are indeed similar, they are not the same. There are blood tests that can tell the difference between the two strains. In fact, on that front, Chicken Pox are also a form of Herpes.

By: Mary Adde

Mary Adde — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:24:28 +0000

Give me a freaking break. Candida is a NORMAL component of our bodies flora. You can’t quarantine it away. You can get an infection spontaneously when the flora gets a bit out of hand from taking antibiotics for an ear infection or simply from stress. You can give it to another person by giving them a high dose of it. But when it comes down to it, it’s just yeast.

If you have a normal immune system, it’s almost never a great issue.

Way to fearmonger.

By: Longhairedweirdo

Longhairedweirdo — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:02:30 +0000

One thing about the “liver blasting” tablets…livers regenerate pretty well. That’s why live liver transplants work. Of course, you should make sure a doctor knows how often you’ve had to take these tablets (and when the last time you needed them was) to make a sound judgment, but my non-professional understanding is that it’s nothing to worry too much about if this is a relatively infrequent occurrence.