Are STD's real or not and if not - what explains the symptoms of STD's ?

[JamesGatz]

I was reading this thread :

Having zero concern for STDs?

I like having sexual intercourse without protection and I don't care about STDs that much! I think STDs can be taken care by the immune system when thyroid is ideal! I think HIV could be a hoax! I hate condoms and love to have intercourse as naturally as possible! Should I be concerned about...

raypeatforum.com

So what do people think of this germ theory ? It seems people on this forum are split 50/50 if these germs or many of these STD's actually exist ?

If STD's are not real and the germ theory is correct what explains STD symptoms ? Is the act of exchanging fluids with someone new give this type of reaction as normal ? I have a hard time understanding how this would work

Many users say you should still wrap up but latex is estrogenic - many of these materials used for condoms seem to be estrogenic so not only is it bad for your health - but it definitely affects your performance if estrogen is raised in this instance especially

If you try to get condoms of special material it seems you sacrifice safety so what is the consensus on STD's ? You really cannot trust anyone these days - even if you are monogamous your partner can still be cheating and bringing home STD's even if you trust them so it's important to address this issue

One has to think that:

"A: In the United States, about 42% of adults ages 18-59 years have genital human papillomavirus (HPV) infections and about 7% have oral HPV. Experts estimate 80% of sexually active people are infected. There are 14 million new HPV infections a year."

42% in the united states - that means flip a coin and the person you are having a relationship with has HPV and that doesn't even include any other STD's

Is there really a concern for STD's and if so which STD's are actually of concern (i.e. many of these STD's seem to be cured very easily- but many like herpes seem to stay with the user for life and can't seem to be gotten rid of by the immune system ?

Is it more-so that only HIV and HSV are dangerous long-term for immunosuppressive effects and nothing else is really of concern ? Should anyone really be concerned if their metabolism and immune system is strong?

Any mammal I observe in the wild even ones that are not so far off from humans like primates - they seem to have unprotected sex all the time and nothing happens to them ? I have never seen these animals in the wild drop dead from an STD - why are humans the only species where STD's are of serious concern ? I even used to take my dog to the dog park and I would see many dogs engage in these activities with each other and yet nothing showed up ever in my dog or from any of these other dogs that I had taken to the park (I used to take numerous dogs to the park) in their genital area that resembled anything like a human STD ? I have a hard time making sense of this all

Are any STD's of real concern to someone with a healthy metabolism and if so which ones are the ones we should be concerned about (i.e. I have heard HIV and HSV are lifelong and have damaging immunosuppressive symptoms )​

 

[Stifler]

Bump - I am interested in hearing about this as well

 

[Makrosky]

Legitimate concern, but... man... if your only concern is (maybe) getting some minor estrogenicity from using a latex condom when you **** a stranger vs. the possibility (whether you believe in them or not) to get something like AIDS, Hepatitis C or Siphilis....

The (possible) estrogenicity of the condoms should not be a factor when discussing this.

After all the milk you drink comes in a plastic container. And it is full of hormones. So does every single food that you cannot certify it is biologically grown. Or you drink it straight from the cow? And grow our own mangoes in the backyard?

 

[Logan-]

Bump - I am interested in hearing about this as well

+1.

 

[Atonewithme]

I was taught that if there is any shame or guilt attached to sex from ingrained societal /religious/cultural pressure, we tend to attract STDs or have an inability to fight it off. I think we tend to treat ourselves better when we are free from shame also. I had one cool parent anyway. I believe that stemmed from Reichian Psychology or my dad’s enlightenment from it. Works for me.

 

[BearWithMe]

Any mammal I observe in the wild even ones that are not so far off from humans like primates - they seem to have unprotected sex all the time and nothing happens to them ? I have never seen these animals in the wild drop dead from an STD - why are humans the only species where STD's are of serious concern ? I even used to take my dog to the dog park and I would see many dogs engage in these activities with each other and yet nothing showed up ever in my dog or from any of these other dogs that I had taken to the park (I used to take numerous dogs to the park) in their genital area that resembled anything like a human STD ? I have a hard time making sense of this all ​

Because most of the STDs are man-made.

They absolutely are real, but they are absolutely not natural or normal.

That being said, I think the issue is hugely overblown by our culture and media.

I know people that engage in incredibly "risky" behaviors all their adult life, and they all swear they never got any serious STD. I believe them.

I think you need to have compromised immune system and/or engage with people with very compromised immune systems to "catch something".

Keep your immune system healthy and don't engage with hood rats, and your chances of getting a STD are tiny.

 

[DeadCatBounce]

The body seems to adapt to a new partner and people get so called "STDs" when they change the person they sleep with. Also lack of collagen and/or vit C combined with very rough sex, or sex in the wrong hole can cause different symptoms like "herpes" and such and can cause itching and rashes. Reactions to feces getting inside the penis are very common causing a detox to occur. Many different reasons but none in my research caused by a "virus".

 

[JamesGatz]

Recently I have arrived to the conclusion that there are no such thing as STD's - I can't wrap my head around it

1) I have known quiet a few men in my lifetime who have had rampant unprotected sex - totally fine and if anything looked metabolically healthy

2) Animals I have taken care of - rampant, unprotected sex - not a thing has ever showed up in that animal

Chimps have rampant orgies in the jungle all the time and I;ve never seen one drop dead from an STD

3) Not to mention - if STD's are a psy-op - gov agencies have a lot to gain from this fairytale - if everyone's scared of std's and wears condoms - no risk of having kids - just another way to keep the population controlled

Now with all of this being said - I do have a theory that I think can accurately explain STD symptoms, but it will take too long to explain so I will reserve it for another thread

 

[AspiringSage]

This is really a discussion of germ theory vs terrain theory. In a sense, an echo of a now famous debate between Louis Pasteur and Antoine Béchamp. A simplified version of the long running debate would be that Pasteur thought germs caused all disease. While Béchamp thought that we all have pathogens and that poor health allows us to manifest disease symptoms.

This debate is classically taught in biology programs as having been won definitively by Pasteur. A singular stroke of rationalizing genius that spawned the antibiotic/vaccine revolution and more recently the testing/antiviral revolution.

Like many stories there is probably a lot of truth to both sides. There are most certainly virus, bacteria and parasitical pathogens that will make us sick or outright kill us. Some of them are demonstrably sexually transmitted. With that being said even the mainstream acknowledges aspects of terrain theory - they just use a different and perhaps more developed, defuse and nuanced meme space.

Think about terms like: “genetic susceptibility” “herd immunity” “asymptomatic infection” “immuno compromised“ “clinical latency” “viral latency” “latent infection” “virus reactivation” “abortive infection” or “quiescent virus” these are all terms that describe echos of terrain theory.

 

[AspiringSage]

With respect to your points:

1) Heterosexual males are generally accepted to be at the lowest risk for physiological/anatomy reasons. Males are also generally more likely to be asymptomatic than females. Your observation of friends is likely skewed towards a younger/healthy/male cohort - who are hence more likely to be asymptomatic than say the population of a nursing home that skews female and have degraded immune systems from aging.

The younger cohort that you are observing might also be able to be exposed to an STD with lower chance of actually contracting active symptomatic infection (there’s a pesky echo of terrain theory again). They also might not want to speak about infections because of social stigma.

2) Plenty of STDs in animals, I’ll leave a few papers for your consideration:

Herpes STDs: From Chimps to Humans to Cold Sore Cousin Mixing Before Worldwide Spread

High Prevalence of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus Infection in a Community of Savanna Chimpanzees

Contagious equine metritis cases reported in France since 2006

3) The best propaganda always has very significant elements of demonstrable truth. A story that’s easily disproved is low grade propaganda. Inventing a completely fake disease is a high risk move. Miss representing your odds of contracting an infection or the certainty of becoming symptomatic jives more closely with historical uses of propaganda. I would suggest that, if you carefully consider the evidence, germ theory layers nicely right on top of terrain theory.

Plenty of nasty STDs out there that you don’t want to add to your personal terrain. Plenty of annoying ones that will be painful and annoying (HSV-1 aka cold sores). Plenty of others that are curable (syphilis) with a nasty corses of toxic antibiotics to drive into remission. Aside from latex allergies, or spermicidal lubricants, I wouldn’t worry about any negative health consequences from using condoms. The brief exposure (even if estrogenic) is mild compared to estrogenic foods, detergents or medications.