This is where I said I told you so #HIV #AIDS #Serosorting

70% of those surveyed have no intention of using Oraquick’s Home HIV test on themselves: It’s for screening their partners

This is where I said I told you so.  Way more than 1/2 of those surveyed on their intended uses of the HIV at home test from Oraquick have every intention of using it for screening their sex partners:

But some experts and advocates say that another use, unadvertised, for the OraQuick test — to screen potential sexual partners — may become equally popular and even help slow an epidemic stuck at 50,000 new infections each year in the United States.

There are reasons to think that screening might make a difference. Studies have found that a significant minority of people who are H.I.V.-positive either lie about their status or keep it secret, infecting unsuspecting partners.

And though the manufacturer, OraSure Technologies, is not promoting the use of the test for screening, 70 percent of the 4,000 men and women in the company’s clinical trials said they would either definitely or very likely use it that way. Some even suggested that the company sell boxes of two so couples could be tested together.

The only study of the practice — a small one involving 27 gay men who frequently had sex with virtual strangers without using condoms — found that it probably prevented some infections. The study was published online in August by the journal AIDS and Behavior.

“If it becomes a community norm, people may start testing their partners,” said Alex Carballo-Diéguez, the lead author of the study, who is a psychology professor at Columbia University and the associate director of the H.I.V. Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies at the New York State Psychiatric Institute. “On sex sites now, men advertise themselves as ‘drug-and-disease-free.’ They could start saying ‘D-and-D-free, and willing to prove it.’ ”

Other AIDS experts had doubts. Some thought $40 was too much for people who need to screen multiple partners. Others said that men and women who are not comfortable demanding that their partners wear condoms would be unable to insist on a test.

This has disaster written all over it. It’s “intended” use is a footnote at this point. Now, it’s out there that you can screen away your potential sex partners if they’re HIV positive (or for the poz people that only play with poz, screen out the negatives)

Worse is that the community ignorance around the test is staggering at the start. Some websites don’t even know the test was made available to the public some time ago.

Related posts:

1. Serosorting: HIV prevention tool, or just plain discrimination? #HIV #AIDS I've gone off the rails on this subject before, and...
2. There are so MANY things wrong with this flawed “study” #HIV #AIDS #AIDS2012 Since day one, I've been concerned about the possibility of...
3. HIV superinfection: it happens as often as the first one #HIV #AIDS Very interesting report and information. Superinfections don't receive alot of...
4. Gay men and how they moderate their HIV exposure risk #HIV #AIDS Very interesting study presented at the Tenth AIDS Impact conference...
5. Canada News: Ontario study shows that 25% of new HIV infections were women #HIV #AIDS Despite significant clinical advances in HIV care, an estimated 25...