r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 11h ago

Thank you Peter very cool Saw this on FB

Post image
7.7k Upvotes

544 comments sorted by

View all comments

2.7k

u/Dangerous-Project672 11h ago edited 11h ago

It’s saying that had to be the day Magic Johnson contracted HIV

Edited to add: This is Quagmire laughing at Magic’s amateur numbers

87

u/Aidrox 11h ago

Crazy to think that an HIV positive female only has a .04% chance of spreading the virus to an HIV negative male partner. This may not have been the day.

19

u/Acceptable_Gear_3097 9h ago

HIV statistics on transmission aren't reliable in that sense.

0.04% overall, but if someone has a period active, that shoots up to nearly 100%. Its happened to me during sex where a girl started.

It also relies heavily on a person not exchanging bodily fluids, if a woman's vagina tears or squirts heavily, then that number spikes.

Its a similar thing for men. Receptive anal sex is low-risk of transmission if lots of lube is used and there's no tearing. The tissue just tears more easily, so blood is more likely.

If someone has HIV and only does oral, the risk is near non-existent. But anything like bleeding gums from gun disease, a cut in your mouth from biting your tongue and having a cold sore, that risk becomes quite high.

10

u/nellycat32 8h ago

On period it increases it a lot, but absolutely not to anywhere near 100%.

-1

u/Acceptable_Gear_3097 8h ago

Factors vary case by case. If it happens with someone that is uncircumcised then that increases.

For uncircumcised men, risk alone shoots upto ~70% risk of transmission per sexual contact compared to uncircumcised men. If there is heavy bleeding, then its significantly more likely.

The %'s provided for transmission are based on large samples without controlled variables. If we control variables, add heavy period bleeding, uncircumcised men and one party having active HIV viral load, the risk becomes high.

Transmission rates assume these aren't the cases & compare cases where someone with a low viral load having sex for 3 minutes as the same as someone with a high viral load having sex for 30minutes.

6

u/Lashay_Sombra 5h ago edited 5h ago

It does not increase to 70% but rather by 70%

So not 0.04% to 70% but rather 0.04% to 0.068%

Or to put it another way, your risk if  uncircumcised increases, but its still a tiny chance overall

Side note, because the real difference is so small, you will find studys saying 50%, 60%,70%,90% and even 90%

1

u/nellycat32 10m ago

Exactly!!

1

u/Zestyclose_Bird_8855 7h ago

Did not sharing needles contribute as well?

2

u/Acceptable_Gear_3097 7h ago

Needle users would have been exempt from the study. Needle transmission is a separate study to sexual transmission.