Hypothtically, if there were an HIV vaccine

and it were 99.9999% effective and 99.9999% safe, would you give it to your children and yourself? And would you or your children suddenly start to have more sex?

 

Not all vaccines use a 'live' virus or bacteria.

 

When seat belts and air bags became available did you start driving more?

 

One other issue is that after getting vaccinated you will always test positive for HIV. It is (hopefully) a false positive, but can cause concern.

JeffD

 

i love how people come to the conclusion that vaccinating your kids against diseases that are primarily sexually transmitted sends the message that they should have as much sex as possible all of a sudden. to me, that seems to be something you should be talking to your kids about... but then again, most parents who are all nervous about their kids having sex are the ones who aren't talking to them about it.

i think many of us got the above message on our own, without vaccination, thanks to these unpreventable things called hormones.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Feb 5 2007, 01:12 PM) [snapback]385636[/snapback]</div>

given your parameters, there is no downside to getting vaccinated. I would still advise the practice of "safe sex" with the knowledge that there are sexual diseases that you are still at risk for contracting - and as always - there is always the possibility of the onset of the next new "hiv" epidemic that will hit us - just a matter of when.

As far as my kids having sex - its too late for several of them. My daughter has a four month old boy - so that cat has been out of the bag for years. My two older boys - also too late. My 12 year old - still a spectator.

As for me - I would never turn down more sex - so if your vaccine would offer that to me as a side-effect I would probably take two or three injections and get a booster regularly

 

I’ve never thought that having more sex was irresponsible? I think that everyone should have as much sex that they want, no mater what age. That is assuming that they take all the normal precautions against pregnancies and disease. Sex is a good thing and you won’t be having much when you are older for several reasons. One is that you lose the desire and the other is that it gets to be too much work. But the latter only comes when you’ve had more than you needed. I don’t expect some young people to believe this.

 

When I was 16 I had a sexually active girlfriend her parents where really cool they gave her a box of condoms I could go over and do her in her room while the parents were home in the living room watching tv... Teenagers dream come true, as long as we used the Condoms! B)

Looking back Im really surprised the parents where so leaniant...... :mellow:

If they had a vaccine that protected you from all STDs back then, I would have been the male equivalent of a WHORE .. :lol: :lol: :lol: B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Feb 5 2007, 02:12 PM) [snapback]385636[/snapback]</div>

If I could have more sex I would. Sex is a good thing, right?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Feb 5 2007, 01:12 PM) [snapback]385636[/snapback]</div>

What, exactly, are you trying to suggest with such a loaded question?

--That, since HIV is primarily a 'gay' pandemic, this would promote even further moral decay of our society?
--That we should never find cures for anything that results from an activity which someone or some group might feel is 'immoral?' (funny, though, how preventative measures for hetero STD's are okay...)

I trust that I'm wrong on both counts?

 

I don't have children so I can't be sure. I just know how I was when I was a child and I was not well behaved. From my perspective, children are going to have sex, and as much sex, as they want no matter. Even if they are well behaved, eventually these children are going to grow up, and at various ages they'll have to act of their own accord. They'll be basing their decision on the information that's been accumulated during their years. As such, I'm guessing it's better to provide them with the information you want them evaluating when they start to make these decisions.

I can't say for sure, but if my child were of a sexually active age, I would probably provide for them access to any vaccines available in order to protect their health. I would rather them have sex and be alive, than withhold these tools and they wind up ill or dead.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jdenenberg @ Feb 6 2007, 10:57 AM) [snapback]386047[/snapback]</div>

i admit i didn't pay THAT close attention in immunology class, and that it was what, 2.5 years ago now, but if i'm remembering correctly... immunizations give you [edit to clarify: they *help to create*] memory cells and you're not actively pumping soluble antibody into the blood. the memory cells provide a quick response that should be sufficient to destroy incoming antigen, especially over somebody with zero exposure who has to first build the response.

someone correct me if that's wrong.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(grasshopper @ Feb 6 2007, 11:12 AM) [snapback]386058[/snapback]</div>

:blink:

 

HIV vaccine in a heartbeat. For me, my daughter, my wife, and a call to my legislature to mandate it for children.

Also, a donation to overseas to work on eradication. (Like smallpox and soon polio).

I don't understand what the debate is about.

Human sexuality cannot be denied or controlled. If you want to remain chaste, then do so, but STD's remain a fact of life for the public.

Nate

 

I think what inflamed my response was that I perceived an attempt to make controversial a 'hypothetical HIV vaccine' by even suggesting that an increase in sexual activity would occur.

Why does it matter, one way or the other? And why would the OP phrase the question in this manner unless, to them, it does?

Further, would the question be asked in such a manner if we'd been discussing a 'hypothetical vaccine' for, say, genetal herpes?

 

If I had a girlfriend, I would have as much sex as she'd permit. This has nothing to do with whether or not there was a vaccine. Having no girlfriend, I'm SOL.

Entirely different topic:

If there were an HIV vaccine, I would get the vaccine, even if it were far less safe and effective than postulated, to guard against accidental exposure. This would have no effect on my sex life because, as noted above, I'd have sex if I had the opportunity. The problem about sex is that you have to convince someone else to participate. Since I am a pacifist, I cannot use force to convince someone. I therefore must wait until someone comes along who wants me.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Feb 5 2007, 01:12 PM) [snapback]385636[/snapback]</div>

Yes, I would give it to me and my children.

And no, it wouldn't make anyone (I think) have more sex than normal. Fear of disease never stopped me from having sex. Fear of disease stopped me from having unprotected sex.

But i think what some of the other posters have written are true: it wouldn't negate the need for other protections.