On AIDS and checkups
Doug Clark's column (Sept. 27) reconstruction of his fictional annual checkup is quite correct except for one critical assertion: He can't speak for his wife. His assertion about his wife, "certainly not," is a belief, not a statement of fact. Also, his assertion about himself is suspect; sexual histories are notoriously unreliable. He may be certain about himself, but that is as far as it goes.
Also, if you knew someone had HIV, would you have sex with them with nothing but a condom to protect you? No one in my practice has ever answered that with a "yes." Wise. "Let's go get tested" is the only rational approach to a new partner.
In addition to HIV, include hepatitis B and C, syphilis and chlamydia, all in one profile. Sex should be premeditated. Marriage is the ultimate in premeditated sex.
Dr. John R. Dykers Jr.
Siler City
Comments (5)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Testing yep, all for it. But if you think that marriage is the ultimate in premeditated sex you've obviously never met my ex-wife.
So far, that list includes you and one used car saleman in Lenoir.
Sorry, had to say it.
Posted on October 4, 2006 7:19 AM
For some segments of the population it is safe to say that frequent testing for STDs is more than a good idea. But Doc! All people between the ages of 13 and 65 (or whatever). As much as you assure me, Doug Clark and others like us that we are truly at jeopardy... it just aint true and we know it. I dont need testing, my wife of 16 years doesnt need testing and my (gasp!, eye roll) 13 year old daughter doesnt need testing. Save the money and the testing for those truly at risk.
I know there are many out there who will jump on me about this and have all kinds of stories to tell me but ... too bad. Thanks, we're good.
Posted on October 4, 2006 9:40 AM
I'm sure Doug will appreciate the implication that his wife is not only a liar but a whore.
I do think it makes sense to get tested before beginning a new sexual relationship. When I was married, I think it was actually required.
Jan, you know what they say. Put a penny in the jar every time you have sex during the first year. Take one out every time you have sex after the first year. The jar never gets empty.
Posted on October 4, 2006 9:51 AM
The letter is super. We obviously need to modify our advise about protection. We've all been told that the condom does it all and obviously, from your letter, that is far from true. If I have read you correctly, a condom can't protect against everything; so what else should be done?
Posted on October 4, 2006 4:37 PM
"Also, if you knew someone had HIV, would you have sex with them with nothing but a condom to protect you?"
joejoe makes a good point. If a condom doesn't offer protection, then why is it being sold to our kids as the ultimate in protection? The only sure-fire protection from a sexually transmitted disease is abstinence. A dirty word fo many.
Posted on October 5, 2006 8:41 AM