Leaderboard

PS. We listen to Dr. Fauci. Under the prior administration, he was not allowed to tell what he knew or thought. He is now free to do so. He is a very smart and very honest man. He embraces the idea that science is self-correcting as new findings and data emerge. Whether you like him or believe him is less important than how you weigh his insights. He has been right far more often than he has been wrong about the pandemic. No one can be told what to believe. That said, we think Dr. Fauci's insights are especially important.

Greetings. We write to offer a bit of perspective. The disclaimer is that our crystal ball is no clearer than anyone else's. When this topic comes up in our vanilla lives--it does frequently--we divide our response into three buckets: what is known, what is thought, and what is hoped. What is known Viruses constantly try to jump from one species to another. The pandemic is the result of a very rare successful jump from a bat to a human. Successful jumps are very rare, but when they are successful, and if the infected person comes into contact with another susceptible person, outbreaks begin. If the early outbreak is not contained, a pandemic occurs. Pandemics are fairly frequent and they have begun all over the world. (Last decade's swine flu began in the USA.) Frequently outbreaks are contained because the virus kills too quickly. This has been the case with two other coronavirus outbreaks in recent memory, SARS at the beginning of the century, and MERS about 10 years ago. Those viruses cause sudden and severe symptoms, and provided that the infected can be quarantined as soon as symptoms appear or exposures are known, those outbreaks are readily stopped with a few hundred deaths. On the other side of the problem is seasonal influenza. Symptoms appear somewhat late in infection and the death rate is comparatively much lower, so that while flu has been common during the winter respiratory season, with bad years here and there, it typically does NOT require hospitalization and typically does not leave those infected with long term health problems. The current virus, SARS-CoV-2, has been successful because it occupies a "sweet spot" between transmissibility, the appearance of symptoms, and mortality. It is highly transmissible, symptoms take around a week to appear (and the virus is transmissible for several days before symptoms appear), and has a case fatality rate about ten times higher than bad influenza. There are three additional facts that matter here. 1. Humans have never before successfully developed a vaccine against coronaviruses. Part of that relates to the immunology of coronaviruses. Different from the immunology related to measles or mumps, the immune response to coronaviruses fades quickly. There are several coronaviruses that are responsible for about 40% of what we think of as "the common cold", and we can "catch" the same virus every few years. They are mostly childhood nuisances. As such there has never been an economic incentive to try and make a vaccine. 2. All viruses, and especially all RNA viruses (coronaviruses are RNA viruses) undergo mutations at a fairly rapid rate: their replication is intentionally sloppy. This is precisely what Darwin called "random mutation". The genetic code undergoes frequent misprints. There is a recent case report of a patient with a defective immune system who had 145 days of more or less continuous infection (not recurrence, continuing infection) before death. His viruses were sampled and sequenced regularly and literally dozens and dozens of mutations were detected. None of them became dominant in the patient, but.... 3. ...all mutants have a different fitness level. Some are more transmissible, some have a longer period in which to spread before symptoms appear, some reproduce (replicate) more efficiently in the host human. They will undergo the other half of Darwin's insight, namely "natural selection". This is what is being seeing worldwide right now. The mutations have occurred, and more "fit" variants are spreading through the human population. This should surprise no one--influenza does this every year, which is why new "shots" are needed every year--scientists try to forecast which species are becoming more fit, prepare vaccines against those emerging strains, and that is why you go for the annual flu jab. One more thing. If infected, it's now clear that there is small but meaningful risk of long-term organ damage and disability. No one knows how long, but "surviving the acute infection" is not the same as "clean bill of health". What is thought Combatting the virus depends on reducing the so-called R value below 1. If an infected human transmits the virus, on average, to less than one other infected human (that is, if ten infected humans only transmit to 8 more, R=8/10=0.8) then the outbreak/pandemic ends. The idea is to supplement the physical barriers to transmission--travel restrictions, distancing, mask wearing, hand hygeine etc--with raising the level of population immunity with vaccines. There is evidence that masking is effective, and early evidence that double masking may be more effective--a cloth mask over a tight fitting paper mask or respirator. All of the calculations about controlling the virus have to figure in the degree to which physical transmission is reduced by such measures. Masks likely protect the wearer and also those around the wearer provided the wearing is well fit. Masks are known to protect wearers from tuberculosis for example (yes, it's a much larger particle, but the problem with masks is not the filtration as much as it is the fit). Masks certainly reduce droplet transmission. No mask ever works if improperly worn. There is evidence that the mRNA vaccines are ~95% effective in the population that was willing to participate in the clinical trials. That is *not* the same as the general population, because different types of people volunteer for clinical trials. All that is *known* is that the relative risk o getting covid when the *trial participants* were sent back into the general population was that their attack rate was about 5% of those who received the placebo. They were still advised to wear masks, practice social distancing and so on. Of note, they were *not* told it was okay to go to bars and throw away their masks. This is important because while the vaccine may have prevented clinical illness, we have *no idea* whether it prevents transmission as a result of asymptomatic infection. Just because you do not have symptoms (clinical illness) does not mean that cannot transmit the virus. Indeed, most infections are indeed asymptomatic. Unfortunately, there is such a large infected population that there is a large population of sick people, including those on life support. Masks indeed protect you and also those around you, Physical distancing protects you and those around you. We *think* vaccines protect you (from clinical illness)--but that depends on the extent to which you match those who were willing to volunteer for trials. We *think* vaccines protect others, because we *think* you are less likely to have a transmissible asymptomatic infection. We *think* that the different vaccines will work reasonably well--you are hearing of other vaccines producing 75-90% reductions in attack rates. Not perfect, but much better than flu, where we are lucky to see 50%. The problem arises: the vaccines were made to combat the original strain of the virus, and not the emerging mutants. There is evidence that the vaccines remain partially effective against the emerging mutant strains, but most studies so far say that the vaccines are not as effective against the mutant strains as against the parent strain. What is hoped The hope is that widespread vaccination --along with continued physical measures to prevent transmission--will be sufficient to reduce R below 1 for all strains. The benefit of vaccination is to reduce the spread in the population. If it happens to prevent an individual from getting sick, wonderful. If it happens to prevent an individual from dying, even better. But the idea behind vaccination is really to protect the health of a population by making it difficult and eventually impossible for viruses to spread to more than an average of one person per infected person. Kids seem to do better with the virus, and the hope is to keep the reservoir of infected persons generally kids, most---but not all!!!--experience the infection as a bad cold. No one we know of believes that the virus will disappear from the face of the earth. That's not how the process works. Even with massive global vaccination, this type of respiratory virus fades into the background (becomes endemic) and does not disappear. What this might mean for you Small groups of people with immunity--natural or from immunization--are going to become relatively safer to interact with. Large groups, not so much owing to the natural ineffectiveness of the vaccines. Get enough people with no immunity to unmask and be in close quarters, and there *will* be an outbreak if just one person is infected. Laws of large numbers and so on. There is an obvious and palpable tension between trying to stay safe and connecting with other human beings. There are no guarantees at this point. Official advice from the CDC etc is going to more reliable than "research on the internet" where all voices can appear equal and invite choosing something that reinforces what you want to believe.

Both have had both doses Pfizer. Wu no problems. I had feeling of imbalance for a day after both with standing and walking but not with exercising. Plan to continue masking and social care although we feel personally safer might consider some travel probably only in USA.

Mr. FL, Pfizer x 2. Minimal arm soreness on both injections, a day of fatigue and feeling crummy after the second. Mrs. FL Moderna x 2. Minimal arm soreness after first injection. Soreness, headache, moderate fatigue for about 24 hours beginning the day after the second injection. All resolved around 60 hours after the second injection. We would both do it again in a heartbeat.

No I in threesome, but there is an M and an E If you know how to search Google, you can find places to watch it online...

As much as it pains us not to be able to explore our sexual fantasies at the moment we totally agree with lovtosuc. If either one of us got sick or even worse as a result of throwing caution to the wind simply for some play time with others, we would always regret that mistake. To us, the risk is just not worth it just for a little play time or to be able to get some "strange". Our LS activity has been at a complete stop and we have not interacted with anyone else since February 2020. Like everything else, this too shall pass and we can venture out again but for now, we are perfectly content with having just each other. Besides, that is how we started out, only with each other.

Congratulations. Please share your experience with us all. We're going to wait for now, my wife's biochem degree and background is throwing up a few flags on the play. We do not however, suggest others follow our lead, we tend to be out of the mainstream on these things. To your health!

Shy couple, your non-monogamy may be genetically inherited.

My memory of the timeline is fuzzy, when I met my wife I had no idea of her other job. I met an attractive athletic girl and took a liking which I think was mutual. Our first date was like dates I had with others in my life, pretty sure it was a bar with friends. Second date was again like other dates I had where it ended up it spending a night. I was amazed at her body, I still am. We dated and dated and I fell in love, wasn’t sure if she felt the same way. I worried that she wasn’t honest in the places she told me she was going to. My insecurities showing. She didn’t tell me about her job for some time.

We are neither old or have any health problems so we are low on the list of priority! Probably be quite a while before we get ours and I am okay with that. Rather not get it at all, but going to have to at some point I am sure.

We have both had the first Moderna shot with no side effects. 2nd shot scheduled. We have friends who had mixed reactions from none to a day or two of sleepiness and chills.

My husband and I agree that starting out with a threesome would be more personable allowing all three individuals to be involved together. We love watching each other for a bit but always join in and make sure everyone is involved. Although everyone has their own preference of how a foursome should take place, we feel it should involve all four individuals as well. The main factor my husband and I look for is the enjoyment of being able to be involved with each other, watch what each other is doing with other individuals and not be separated and simply focusing our attention on the other couples spouse. We would not get near the same enjoyment or pleasure out of it or what we’re looking for if it were just a simple spouse swap. Swinging to us is all about seeing each other give and get pleasure from others and to others. When we play with other couples we always make sure to have some involvement with each other while enjoying seeing each other playing with the opposing spouse. basically, everyone involved with each other with only one exception and that is no m/m play as my husband is straight. If my husband chooses to step back and watch me with another couple before he joins back in, then that is done by his choice and not because he feels he is being pushed out. I’m playing with another couple and Three separate on the other couples spouse couples spouse, it doesn’t allow us to share the enjoyment each other with each other of what is taking place. Swinging to us is all about watching each other enjoying each other and being a part of whatever experience one of us is having.

Seriously, I do wonder if there is a genetic component to it.

Mrs. Shy and I are both in healthcare and were vaccinated. Her with Moderna and I had Phizer. Nothing to report. No symptoms afterward. Arm pain was no worse than the flu shot. I had really hoped to wait until the end of the healthcare line but my number was called right after Christmas and was afraid if I decided to wait, I would end up waiting until summer.

First Pfizer on Jan 29 ... second one Feb 19. Both had sore arms the next day. Wife had a few chills and muscle aches several days later. Nothing acetaminophen wouldn’t handle.

The CDC knows more than the people on here. Science evolves and is not static unlike the minds of some people. Better medications, my mom said it was only penicillin when she was young, then antibiotics and even antibiotics change. Polio vaccine, first Salk then Sabin. This virus keeps changing and science has only a very brief history to work with. You want to play scientist, go ahead, I’ll listen to the best minds our country has even if their direction changes.

That's not something you read in the local press. ? I love this site and the people on it. To infidelity and beyond!

I don't know you two except through your posts, but don't think any less of either of you for what you have posted. I admire you both. All the best.

This was my post about Super Bowl and you don’t need to apologize for anything you post. You are most likely on the younger side of posters, like me, and for me posting is cleansing, cathartic, and it gives me time to reflect and free think. I post things that I would not share outside of an anonymous forum. The things you and your wife did in your past is only your business and not to be judged by others. You lived through that past and are only living in the present. I hope you aren’t venting because you have doubts in your marriage. I can’t tell how long you are married but you both seem to be enjoying your lives. Just a tip, pushing the submit button leaves very little time to edit or delete, I have deleted many a post before submitting.

We both on scholarship when we met that paid most of our college costs not our everyday expenses. Most of us found jobs both private and on campus jobs. Honey was a gymnast and spent hours and hours conditioning and practicing, I did also maybe not as dedicated. I knew where she worked and was amazed the hours after practices she had to work. I was very busy myself trying to finish my senior year and we got together whenever we could and I made the most of it fucking a gymnast is the best sex a guy can get. At her place after a great fuck and still in her bed she became nervous and asked me to listen. She said that I only knew about her office job not about the man who gave her the money for her place, her Benefactor. The man was a voyeur who liked to watch. Then she asked about another girl athlete I knew, he was helping her also. He would have the two of them have sex for him to watch. I just wanted to blow the whistle on this perv or kick the shit out of him. She stopped me and pleaded with me to have sex with her and her friend but it had to be in front of her Benefactor. He would just watch and won’t be involved. That’s when I found out she had done this before with other friends. I was sunken to know she had been doing this all along. I did it. My first time with two gorgeous women and a perv watching. I was going to break up with her afterwards, I didn’t want a whore. Now I’m still enjoying her as my wife.