Herpes or Marijuana

February 20, 2012

LMAO HSV2 does not cause cold sores on the mouth. I'm done with you. Good luck not getting it.

Difference Between Cold Sores And Herpes - YouTube

Listen to the doctor. Then google some facts and educate yourself. You have herpes, so you should know its possible for HSV 2 to end up on your face. Its as simple as touching an open sore and then touching your face.

How can someone who has the condition themself, be so clueless?

February 20, 2012

Not if they're taking an antiviral.

It's virtually impossible to contract it if the person is taking their meds. You have a higher chance of getting infected if you have sex with someone you just met (using a condom, even) than you do if you have sex with someone who has been diagnosed with herpes but is on medication to treat an outbreak.

Well according to what you are saying, then I have absolutely no risk of catching it from someone whos been tested negative for herpes. I think Id go with that one instead. Sorry

However, another poster keeps telling me that theres risk even with that because of supposed false negatives and sham antibody counts...so which reasoning is right? Because if I use her reasoning, Im still at risk with the person who has herpes.

February 20, 2012

Difference Between Cold Sores And Herpes - YouTube

Listen to the doctor. Then google some facts and educate yourself. You have herpes, so you should know its possible for HSV 2 to end up on your face. Its as simple as touching an open sore and then touching your face.

How can someone who has the condition themself, be so clueless?

That is not correct.

It is possible to get HSV-2 on the face IF you don't have it already on your genitals. It is also possible to get HSV-1 on your genitals (from oral sex) if you don't already have it on your face. However, it is nearly impossible to infect multiple parts of the body with the same virus.

Knowing all the things you do, I certainly hope you're as vigilant about not getting oral herpes (which could be either HSV-1 or HSV-2) as you are about getting genital herpes (which, again, could be either HSV-1 or HSV-2). As such, I'm sure you ask every every single girl for her STD test results before even kissing her. Riiiiiight?

February 20, 2012

Well according to what you are saying, then I have absolutely no risk of catching it from someone whos been tested negative for herpes. I think Id go with that one instead. Sorry

That is not at all what she's saying.

If someone's tested negative for herpes, WTF would they take antivirals? No doctor would proscribe it.

February 20, 2012

Funny how so many people on this thread are so anti-marijuana, even though they've probably dated an alcoholic before or someone who socially drank.

February 20, 2012

Funny how so many people on this thread are so anti-marijuana, even though they've probably dated an alcoholic before or someone who socially drank.

Or someone who smoked pot and they didnt know it.

That is not correct.

It is possible to get HSV-2 on the face IF you don't have it already on your genitals. It is also possible to get HSV-1 on your genitals (from oral sex) if you don't already have it on your face. However, it is nearly impossible to infect multiple parts of the body with the same virus.

Really? Are you sure about this? How about some citations? Because posters on this very forum with herpes have even said you can get it on different areas of the body. Not to mention other sources ive read besides the good doctor.

I am guessing you are more correct than a PhD huh?

And "nearly impossible" does not mean theres a 100% chance of not infecting multiple parts.

Knowing all the things you do, I certainly hope you're as vigilant about not getting oral herpes (which could be either HSV-1 or HSV-2) as you are about getting genital herpes (which, again, could be either HSV-1 or HSV-2). As such, I'm sure you ask every every single girl for her STD test results before even kissing her. Riiiiiight?

And what if I did?

Im sick and tired of this reasoning of yours. Ive seen it on this forum before from the pro-herpes crowd. Just because someone could catch something, should NOT mean they should willingly put themselves in line to contract it.

Thats idiotic reasoning. And then after you make such reasoning, you use anything you can to say that theres "in fact no way you know someone doesnt have it" Jeez Louise.

I guess I should just willingly run out into the world and try to contract herpes then huh?

Just get over the fact that I dont want the disease. Im not hurting anyone by having this dating preference. Some girls dont wanna date me because Im black or not 6 ft tall. Am I gonna give em grief about it? Its their life.

February 20, 2012

Or someone who smoked pot and they didnt know it.

Yup. That too. Although from certain posters this attitude doesn't surprise me.

February 20, 2012

That is not at all what she's saying.

If someone's tested negative for herpes, WTF would they take antivirals? No doctor would proscribe it.

You obviously didnt understand what I was saying.

sweetjasmine's said that someone who has the virus but takes antivirals has virtually no chance of giving you the virus.

Youve been saying from the get go that tests are unreliable and antibody counts arent 100% correct.

Hence I was comparing to the two viewpoints from the statements. Her statement would imply that someone who hasnt been confirmed to have the virus would have no chance of giving me the virus at all. Thats the logical conclusion if someone who has it but is in antiviral posts a "nearly impossible" ability to give it to me.

Your statements would mean that Im at risk for contracting the virus even if someone has tested negative, because of your original statements regarding false negatives and antibody tests.

Now do you get what I was saying before? Given these two scenarios, I asked "Which am I supposed to go with?"

February 20, 2012

Yup. That too. Although from certain posters this attitude doesn't surprise me.

It makes no sense that pot smoking is a reasonable deal breaker, but an incurable disease isnt.

I mean really?

They act as if pots stigma has nothing to do with the laws of the land. If we lived in Canada or freaking Holland, this negative stigma wouldnt be so huge.

You cant get made about the negative stigma society places on herpes, and then play RIGHT INTO the negative stigma society places on marijuana.

February 20, 2012

Her statement would imply that someone who hasnt been confirmed to have the virus would have no chance of giving me the virus at all.

Is that your idea of logic? Really? Wow.

[i'm not going to respond to your posts anymore on this topic. You're clearly oversensitive about it, and verging on inflammatory by trying to bait me into an argument. I've said my piece. Me thinks you protest to much. I do wonder why...]

February 20, 2012

It makes no sense that pot smoking is a reasonable deal breaker, but an incurable disease isnt.

I mean really?

They act as if pots stigma has nothing to do with the laws of the land. If we lived in Canada or freaking Holland, this negative stigma wouldnt be so huge.

You cant get made about the negative stigma society places on herpes, and then play RIGHT INTO the negative stigma society places on marijuana.

Yeah imagine if I said "I'd never date a social drinker, they're drunks and degenerate losers". Lots of people would call me irrational and insensitive.

I don't smoke pot (or smoke anything or even drink alcohol) but I know people who do. They're nice enough people and not worth the scorn some give them.

February 20, 2012

Is that your idea of logic? Really? Wow.

[i'm not going to respond to your posts anymore on this topic. You're clearly oversensitive about it, and verging on inflammatory by trying to bait me into an argument. I've said my piece. Me thinks you protest to much. I do wonder why...]

My statement was clearly a viewpoint drawn from the language of her post. Did you not get that?

She said "It's virtually impossible to contract it if the person is taking their meds."

Virtually impossible does not mean absolutely impossible. Virtually impossible means theres a (very) small chance of getting herpes from someone whos positive but on antivirals.

Now given the language of her post, would this not mean its impossible for me to get herpes from someone who is negative for the disease?...despite everything you said in the beginning about false negatives and antibody tests? Or would those negative tests mean nothing and I am still at risk?

I dont see whats so hard for you to understand. I was simply flowing with the language of the posters response.

It is better that you dont respond again, because this is going nowhere. Nice character attack though by calling me oversensitive. However it was you in the beginning who was sensitive to my viewpoint. You could not accept my deal breaker regarding an STD even though I accepted your view of pot smoking as a deal breaker.

If you consider simply debate inflammatory than you need to grow a thicker skin, especially when you try to brand someone as close minded when that is exactly how you are regarding marijuana.

And honey, we both protest too much. That is the nature of debate.

February 20, 2012

You obviously didnt understand what I was saying.

sweetjasmine's said that someone who has the virus but takes antivirals has virtually no chance of giving you the virus.

Youve been saying from the get go that tests are unreliable and antibody counts arent 100% correct.

Hence I was comparing to the two viewpoints from the statements. Her statement would imply that someone who hasnt been confirmed to have the virus would have no chance of giving me the virus at all. Thats the logical conclusion if someone who has it but is in antiviral posts a "nearly impossible" ability to give it to me.

Your statements would mean that Im at risk for contracting the virus even if someone has tested negative, because of your original statements regarding false negatives and antibody tests.

Now do you get what I was saying before? Given these two scenarios, I asked "Which am I supposed to go with?"

Have you considered that many people with Herpes don't even know they have it?

If you want to be sure, you'll have to ask everyone you date for a blood test.

As for smoking pot, I think it's harmless if they are not a chronic smoker. I can't relate to people if they are high, and since I don't get high myself, I would probably choose not to date the pot smoker- although I don't judge people that do it.

February 20, 2012

Have you considered that many people with Herpes don't even know they have it?

If you want to be sure, you'll have to ask everyone you date for a blood test.

As for smoking pot, I think it's harmless if they are not a chronic smoker. I can't relate to people if they are high, and since I don't get high myself, I would probably choose not to date the pot smoker- although I don't judge people that do it.

I know that some people dont know they have it. This is exactly why I dont have as much sex as Id like when single, because Im paranoid about STDs. Oh wells. Id rather be safe than a stud. Plus I could always hook up with a friend I trust whos been tested recently.

Before sex, Id ask someone if theyve been tested since their last encounter. I feel everyone should get tested in between partners so they know their status and can prevent the spread of things. However, the reality is that many dont do this.

And in regards to pot, Im the same. I prefer to date a non smoker, but Im not gonna judge them harshly if they do.

Edited February 20, 2012 by kaylan

February 20, 2012

I know that some people dont know they have it. This is why Id ask someone if theyve been tested since their last encounter. I feel everyone should get tested in between partners so they know their status and can prevent the spread of things. However, the reality is that many dont do this.

And in regards to pot, Im the same. I prefer to date a non smoker, but Im not gonna judge them harshly if they do.

A routine STD screening test does not include testing for HSV. That's something that has to be specifically requested by the patient, and requires bloodwork.

You must take into account that people might know they have it and say they don't.

You can potentially manifest Herpes anywhere... Including your throat or your eye. I used to work in a group home where I taught Sex Ed. classes. There was a time where there was a particular group of girls staying at the facility that all came down with Gonorrhea at the same time- because they were all passing it back and forth "dating" the same guys. I remember taking a client to the Dr. thinking she had Strep throat and finding out it was Gonorrhea.

February 20, 2012

A routine STD screening test does not include testing for HSV. That's something that has to be specifically requested by the patient, and requires bloodwork.

You must take into account that people might know they have it and say they don't.

You can potentially manifest Herpes anywhere... Including your throat or your eye. I used to work in a group home where I taught Sex Ed. classes. There was a time where there was a particular group of girls staying at the facility that all came down with Gonorrhea at the same time- because they were all passing it back and forth "dating" the same guys. I remember taking a client to the Dr. thinking she had Strep throat and finding out it was Gonorrhea.

I know that a routine screening doesnt test for it. Im telling you that Id ask someone if they were testing for everything STD related before getting sexual. Im too paranoid not to be safe =p

For the people who lie, they wouldnt fool me. Like I said, I want results. Plus I can spot shady women really well. Certain things about their character you can pick out. Plus from things Ive read online and from people Ive talked to, it seems men are much more apt to lie about STDS and spread them than women. Either way, if I suspect someone of lieing to me I wouldnt sleep with them to begin with.

And thanks for the last part about herpes eye and herpes throat....that definitely makes me wanna be celibate. =(

February 20, 2012

I know that a routine screening doesnt test for it. Im telling you that Id ask someone if they were testing for everything STD related before getting sexual. Im too paranoid not to be safe =p

For the people who lie, they wouldnt fool me. Like I said, I want results. Plus I can spot shady women really well. Certain things about their character you can pick out. Plus from things Ive read online and from people Ive talked to, it seems men are much more apt to lie about STDS and spread them than women. Either way, if I suspect someone of lieing to me I wouldnt sleep with them to begin with.

And thanks for the last part about herpes eye and herpes throat....that definitely makes me wanna be celibate. =(

Sorry, lol.

The thing is, you can meet an awesome girl- and she might have Herpes and not know it. That's why it's a sexual virus approaching such a high percentage of the population.

You think you're being careful by using a condom, but Herpes is a skin to skin contact virus.

A virgin can wait until marriage to have sex and contract Herpes from a partner. The point being, you can't really judge a person as being slutty simply because they have Herpes. Herpes isn't discerning.

February 20, 2012

STARGAZER told you the test doesn't show if some one has herpes unless they are currently having an outbreak.

That is not what I said.

February 20, 2012

STARGAZER told you the test doesn't show if some one has herpes unless they are currently having an outbreak. It's just something to help morons like you who probably have herpes and don't know it.

Lmao...starting a response with an insult. Classic. Grow up, K?

As far as I know I don't have herpes... but then again maybe I just never had an outbreak and never will... I don't have one night stands so any girl I've ever slept with knows exactly who I am and I'm sure would have told me I infected them or something... thats the only thing that makes me think I don't have it. Then again maybe they have it and never had an outbreak or mistaked their outbreak for something else.

Cool story bro.

Stop thinking taking some blood test is some how going to protect you. Wear a full body condom and have sex through a sheet with your clothes on if you're that worried.

Why wouldnt a blood test protect me? Im at less risk of contracting something from someone with a negative blood test than someone with a positive blood test.

Lets get serious here.

Or are you saying we should always assume we have herpes even without any evidence ever showing us so? Um ok?

In that case I should just sleep with people indiscriminately then. You post provides all us reading with some fine logic.

February 20, 2012

Whatever you say dude =/

February 20, 2012

Funny how so many people on this thread are so anti-marijuana, even though they've probably dated an alcoholic before or someone who socially drank.

I'm not anti-mj in general. I'm pro-legalization.

I just don't want a partner who uses it. It's a personal thing.

February 20, 2012

This is stupid. You cannot equate a soft drug that has no long term negative affects to your body to an STD thats incurable and causes sores.

This.

Marijuana is the least harmful recreational drug around (atleast in my opinion) , how can you compare it to an STD?

February 20, 2012

This is the best argument for the herpes so far.

Exactly.....

February 20, 2012

Jeesh, am I allowed to say neither?

Probably the herpes, solely if the guy contracted it a long time ago from an ex he was genuinely in love with (as opposed to sleeping around with hookers). People make mistakes, and I would not want to turn down someone whom I connect with on all levels because of a mistake made years ago. On the other hand, continually smoking weed is a continuous choice. If he is willing to give it up and stick with it through a systemic plan, fine. If he isn't, it points to immense differences in our values and we most certainly would NOT connect on all levels.

February 20, 2012

And Std is sometimes reflective of their choices though.

Also, Pot is not contagious (lol) and you can stop using a drug if you want to.

An Std like herpes is contagious and with you for life.

Screw that ish. Im a perfectly healthy male and wanna stay that way. Id rather not shrink my dating pool even more than it is lol

Herpes is no joke, but in terms of revealing character.. pot's worse. Unless you're certain the person was simply promiscuous and caught it from careless causal flings.

Speaking from experience, most of the real pot smokers that I've known were total losers. It was their life, among other childish vapid **** that requires nothing going on upstairs to process - perfect for potheads the same way nascar is great for drunk red necks.

They're going to be in the same situation 15 years from now, most likely, unless they someday wake up and realize "wow, I'm a total f*ck up" before it's too late. It'll be hard for them to get any respectful, decent job with pot in their system, at least.

Even very infrequent pot smoking is (reluctantly) OK in my book, but I've tried it several times and didn't like it. I generally don't associate it with productive, intelligent members of society, because as a majority, pot smokers are dense as f*ck. I don't knock others, but most people that use it let that define them in some major way, like relating everything to your astrological sign because otherwise you've got nothing interesting about yourself to share with the world.

Hey, at least I could get paid a quick 5 just for pissing in a cup.

Sign In

Herpes or Marijuana

Recommended Posts

kaylan

kaylan

Star Gazer

Star Gazer

fortyninethousand322

kaylan

fortyninethousand322

kaylan

kaylan

Star Gazer

fortyninethousand322

kaylan

D-Lish

kaylan

D-Lish

kaylan

D-Lish

Star Gazer

kaylan

kaylan

xxoo

ThatDudeXO

Crusoe

Els

ScreamingTrees

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...