Probably because all the women subsequently tested negative.
The prosecution didn't have any HAART.
Wait, it doesn't spread every time? Then why use condoms?
Condoms are just for signaling wealth. Grad students don't need to use them.
HIV doesn't have very high infectivity rates as STDs go. There's probably more recent research, but the 1992 reports I have cite a transmission rate of 0.002 (1 in 500 chance of transmission per incident of PIV intercourse). In contrast, gonorrhea, syphilis, and chlamydia have a transmission rates in the 0.2 to 0.5 range.
HIV doesn't have very high infectivity rates as STDs go.
Especially when you consider that somewhere between a quarter and a half of all people under 25 have HPV.
6: doesn't it also vary greatly based on the kind of sex?
PIV = Particle image velocimetry?
Hott.
8: Very much so. The ranking (starting with the riskiest) is supposed to be:
Unprotected anal, receiving
Unprotected anal, giving
Protected anal, receiving
Protected anal, giving
Then comes the four categories for vaginal sex, in the same analogous order. I don't remeber what the magnitude of the differences in risk are, though.
Interestingly, there's never been an undisputed case of oral transmission.
having anal sex with a condom on puts you at more risk for HIV transmission than having unprotected vaginal sex? well, that's news to me. seems like kind of a rip-off for gay men.
seems like kind of a rip-off for gay men.
West Hollywood is up in arms.
Hey, the "raise the roof" joke was there in preview! Crap. Never you mind then, Mineshaft...
Maybe I'm misremembering: it was a couple of years ago that I looked into this (I remember gettting a lot of info from the SF Health Department's website). But there is a prima facie plausible explanation in the fact that microtrauma (to superficial blood vessels) is much more likely in anal sex.
Is relative incidence a factor in the rankings (e.g. gay men have a greater percentage of HIV-positive persons having sex than straights, thus the likelihood of exposure based on the universe of data available indicates blah bolah blah).
"Man"? Don't we have any standards these days?