Riobard

Hightailing it out of town … RPReplay_Final1735359458.mov

Troll feeding time:

Oh come on! This from the keyboard of somebody permanently logged in and with insatiable craving for influence.

Clean up on blocked overstocked aisle Beer & Spirits?

And nonstraight backward punters into comprehensive jackass responding. 😘

Perhaps I could have bided my time. You yourself are making the point that recommended protection strategy does not work in the real world. I’ll leave it to others to decipher the way in which you contribute to that sad reality when there are other factors at play as well and, in fact, that you imply that you celebrate exacerbating the health risks of socially disadvantaged trade, eg Venezuelan diaspora. ‘House boy’? Antebellum much? Whiny mental powerlessness and learned helplessness are thin disguises for true personality disturbance. If you don’t know better and they don’t know better it’s all good, right? You take no responsibility in holding the cards. Sad case. The OP was on to something altruistic and mostly correct, another reader dismissed it based on some degree of distortion of scientific facts, and you went on to flaunt such a dismissal as anchored in your privilege.

I’m not suggesting that anybody should do anything. I’m merely agreeing that a monopolizer already endlessly posts random topics as if tossing a bunch of newspapers down the stairs and picking the headlines that showed most prominently on the landing, the result of the method is sedating, and there’s no point in attempting to undig that one insistent set of 👠 👠. One can consider giving a wide berth to the territorial girl that has nowhere else to squat. Let her stake the pioneering claim to her own Facebook page here since it’s mostly meta about the MO of posting anyway.

Not to mention the micro part.

That’s the Secret nobody can get to the bottom of.

And tongue naturally.

Oh so that’s why

No chocolates ever again for those assholes.

Too much under the influence, sadly.

Busted. Too much I don’t give a fig pudding.

It’s a free cuntry but let's be real. One person apparently predominantly enters 'beer bar' topics arbitrarily and somewhat geographically centric, approaching the level of board tradition, and there will inevitably be a 'red stripe' slashed through the practice by some that find the themes to be irrelevant. So who’s to stop somebody perpetually wielding on any one hill? But if a dozen more were to replicate the pattern, say, Brazilian Report articles and several more thematically centric posts but across a broad range of entry types to infinity the subforum would collapse under overwhelming mixology. What is not lost on me is that one person dictates content through which I must selectively wade and others dictate that such selectivity is everybody's prerogative. Two reaction categories can co-exist and no one preference can prevail. Not this hill.

The point is that the gold standard of analysis is intent-to-prophylaxis and research subjects are usually as a whole more adherent to ideal drug uptake for prevention than in the real world as they are altruistically committed to scientific contribution. The real world assessed estimates of PrEP results are dreadful. Nobody in spite of demonstrated perfect adherence is justifiably dissuaded from regular testing and considerations of transmission risk. “If only they had done it right” as a factor in breakthrough infection is no rational argument for the cavalier assertion that prevention is virtually guaranteed and that the HIV-negative partner of a PrEP consumer need not make all efforts to access the same prophylaxis advantages. The fact is that the relative contributions, to a research trial’s HIV seroconversion rate, of adherence, the much higher known risk of receptive anal intercourse position orientation, encounter risk frequency, co-STI infection, and reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance are unknown. The high rates of breakthrough infection in structured research over short durations are sobering.

Naked model seating evidence all thanks to bum spatter patterns.

To @hotguysATLASt ?

Who needs the usual socials when there are opportunities such as Instagramps, the occasional X-rated Twit, 2Facebrooked, Slinkedin, flamboyant Threads, and Tell-a-Gramp.

I doubt that either the OP or the 1 in 60 research subjects assigned to Truvada and acquiring HIV infection over their first year of enrolment in a more recent trial buy into the lottery odds analogy.

Pretty much all you could do was compliment or validate the confrontational guy’s memory because he caught you out and you were beyond plausible deniability. “You’re better at names and faces” or “No flies on you”. It would be one thing you could do despite his own social etiquette gaffe and there would be no way for him to twist the knife. If you wanted to be a bit snotty or shut the door on the topic when he tried to embarrass you, intentionally or simply awkward himself, you could say “You spelled it out without being asked”. Or turned to your partner, saying “Didn’t I favour the name-tag idea?” In his swimwear crasher #1 had obviously been a ‘no’, not a ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’ for fuckable.

Here’s the very organized and detailed PrEP manifesto. Apparently prescribing and dispensing is covered under the public health system. Locals’ awareness is key. https://prep-colombia.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Lineamiento-PrEP_FINAL_Junio2023.pdf