Summary of my work for a gay dating website

I found a new causal factor for HIV spread. The current theories are good and valid but
cannot fully explain the disproportionate spread in southern Africa and in us. Buv and
Laga wrote:

We still do not fully understand why the spread of HIV has been (and still is) so
different in sub-Saharan Africa compared with heterosexual populations in other parts
of the world and why the incidence of HIV infection in young women in southern Africa
is so high. (AIDS 2012;26:1203-1204)

Chris Beyrer (Lancet 2012;380:367-77) found that promiscuity or behavior do not have
much effect in gay and bisexual men. Here is an audio interview -- the man is gay and
the immediate past president of the International AIDS Society after Barr-Sinoussi, who
co-discovered the virus:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2812%2960821-
6/abstract

It is the transmission rate per single act that is the driving factor. I think I found the
cause for that and have an idea on how to prevent it effectively, while making sex more
pleasurable.

Here is my article:
http://de.scribd.com/doc/275439127/Anogenital-anatomy-and-sexual-HIV-spread

I can give personal medical recommendation only as soon as these claims are validated.
The current safer sex recommendations will only be augmented by novel prevention
measures anyway. And even if my claims are vaild, the circumstances and risk factors in
some individual cases may be different. But, in principle, regular anal and/or vaginal sex
or self-dilation may solve it all causally. It could be easier than tooth-brushing, and less
often needed.

Condoms do protect but low use of them cannot be the culprit for the fact that the
pandemic is out of control in gay and bisexual men worldwide (there is a new
development in a few cities now, e.g., London and San Francisco, where the rates go
down drastically, maybe due to PrEP, early treatment, and more testing, yet PrEP use is
relatively low still for that large reduction of new infections --up to 40 %-- and despite
early treatment and testing, we know that the virus spreads sexual networks in us at
great speed, it could be people listening to me and fucking more regularly). Condoms
prevent more infections than do occur, so they are very effective. But even consistent
condom use would only reduce the total number of new infections among us by 20-40
% as Chris Beyrer and his colleagues at Johns Hopkins calculated. This is not enough
protection because it means that the number of new infections will continue to rise
exponentially. Behavioral interventions have been shown to be insufficient by Beyrer's
group.

The female sex workers in Nairobi are probably our saviors. This was a striking anomaly
in HIV spread phenomena from the last three decades that I stumbled upon (J Clin
Invest 2001;107:341-9, Lancet 1996;348:1347-51). Those who started regular sex work
before the peak of the pandemic had enormous protection against transmission (over
100-fold over the decade, 12-fold for every weighted year of exposure). Their vaginas
might have acquired a healthy caliber. And some of them had been regarded resistant
to HIV transmission but caught it exactly after taking a break from sex work with less
regular sexual intercourse. All this couldn't be linked to sexual behavior, to sex during
menses, anal sex, other STIs, sexual violence, drug use, contraception method, medical
procedures, or age.

The other ingenious finding that my work is based upon was done by Vansintejan in
Belgium who found that pain during anal intercourse (60 % of gays know it, 40 % of
gays have no pain) has relatively little to do with finger stimulation or foreplay, amount
of lubrication, feeling comfortable with a male partner or with the number of previous
partners for anal sex (Sexual Medicine 2013;1:87-94). The only modifiable factor which
remained significantly correlated with painful anal intercourse after rigorous statistical
analysis was the frequency of sex. It reduced pain.

Here is a curious comment by Gerd Paul, Deutsche AIDS-Hilfe:

"Ich hab manchmal den dummen Spruch gesagt 'wenn *ich* nicht positiv bin, dann
gibt's kein AIDS' -- so hab ich gelebt, aber ich hab Glck gehabt, es war nicht der Fall."
(I sometimes had the silly saying 'if *I*'m not positive, there is no AIDS' -- this is how I
had lived, but I was lucky, it wasn't the case.)

Lucky? On my account, his enormous desire and love exactly could have protected him
and many others from getting the virus. It should have been expected in case my
hypothesis is correct. It fits with the sex workers in Nairobi; and the typical case is
always more likely than the exception -- or 'luck' a rare thing.

He said that here:

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XO42O-myqtI#t=488

I know that these are brash claims, and they need to be scientifically investigated. Yet
they are perfectly in line with HIV transmission and spread research from the last
decades and recent years. It will be safer to leave the number of sexual contacts
unchanged at first and perform self-dilation in each greater interval between actual
intercourses in studies. But it has been well shown now that promiscuity or high number
of partners alone cannot explain the spread of HIV in us -- this has been done by Chris
in his LANCET series on gay men (Lancet 2012;380:367-77):

It is biological factors that are responsible. If we could only reduce the biological risk of
anal sex to that of vaginal sex in Caucasian populations, then even if nothing in
promiscuity, drug use, anonymous sex, condoms, etc., changes, HIV infections in gay
men would go down by 80-90 %! Behavior only explains a tiny portion of new
transmissions. The pandemic is driven by the elevated per-act risk among us, not by
how many acts or partners people have. I think I may have identified one of the main
biological culprits here. And an exciting thing is: that one may be changed without
recommending chastity or becoming straight or other absurdities...

Also little wonder that elevated lubricant use is associated with *more* sexually
transmitted infections (Sex Transm Dis 2012;39:59-64). Lubricants are helpful and good
but only reduce the friction between penis and anal skin. Yet there is little skin-skin
friction during actual fucking; the skin goes back and forth a great deal on penis and in
the ass. So people who are pathologically tight think: oh, it's not enough lube, I need
more lube. But the problem is the skin circumference, not a lack of lubrication.
Therefore, little wonder that tight people catch more infections because they have more
lacerations. The tears are due to the low basic circumference, not to a lack of lubrication.
Lubricants help with insertion but they cannot widen the anus. The same holds true for
poppers; they sure relax the muscle but they fail to widen the anal skin (the anal
sphincters are below).

Details: http://www.youtube.com/user/Jackies1979/videos

Any criticism, refutations, comments welcome.

A while ago I watched a documentary on the first researchers from the CDC who
reported on the heterosexual spread of HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa, and the reaction
from home base was: "Something must be wrong. They have a different VIRUS [my
emphasis]." -- With all due respect that I have for the CDC people, the first letter of that
word may even have been right. Paula Pendergrass -- our and Africa's heroine probably
-- found a vaginal shape variant and a much narrower vaginal entry in Black Americans
in a study from 2000 (Gynecol Obstet Invest 2000;50:54-9).

Africans and gays must unite against this virus. There is no HIV problem in
gay/bisexual/transgender people on the one hand and one in Africa on the other, it is
exactly the same problem, in almost all respects.

I look for collaborators for research projects.