# Chances of getting HIV **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [December 13, 2014, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chances-of-getting-hiv/707094 "2014-12-13T06:22:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Nait](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e56c9b/32.png) [@Nait](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nait)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2014, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chances-of-getting-hiv/707094/1 "2014-12-13T06:22:35Z")
The article on the chances of getting HIV from 2002 is out of date. The PARTNER Study has published an interim report and estimates that the risk of transmission is near zero if the positive person is on treatment and has an undetectable viral load. They have been following 1110 couples for 2 years and estimate that between them, in that time they have had sex 44400 times and not used condoms 70% of the time. So far there has been zero transmissions. They’re not yet ready to call it zero, the study is set to be completed in 2017, however given the data I do think that the article on here is worthy of a follow up. > **[No-one with an undetectable viral load, gay or heterosexual, transmits HIV in...](https://www.aidsmap.com/news/mar-2014/no-one-undetectable-viral-load-gay-or-heterosexual-transmits-hiv-first-two-years)** > > The second large study to look at whether people with HIV become non-infectious if they are on antiretroviral therapy (ART) has found no cases where someone with a viral load under 200 copies/ml transmitted HIV, either by anal or vaginal... ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2014, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chances-of-getting-hiv/707094/2 "2014-12-13T12:20:47Z")
I assume you’re referring to this column: [Update: What are your chances of getting HIV?](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2342/update-what-are-your-chances-of-getting-hiv) (which is itself an update on a column from 1988 that starts with the words “The following numbers are old, and they’re all pretty much guesswork anyway, so take them with a grain of salt.”) Thanks for your update on the update. ---
**Author:** ![Nait](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e56c9b/32.png) [@Nait](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nait)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chances-of-getting-hiv/707094/3 "2014-12-14T06:47:56Z")
Fighting ignorance with guesswork in itself is an ignorant thing to do given that there is evidence available to the contrary. By not correcting the post or attaching my comment to the post perpetuates that ignorance, particularly given the fact that most transmissions occur from people that do not know that they are positive, therefore are not on treatment and are highly infectious. So the advise to serosort with other HIV negative people is not only incorrect based on the evidence above but also potentially quite risky, particularly for those in high risk groups, as it assumes a false sense of security. It is also very stigmatising to those that are HIV positive. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2014, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chances-of-getting-hiv/707094/4 "2014-12-14T14:11:47Z")
Dude, it’s the weekend. Give them a couple days…