Thread: Reports: Charlie Sheen is HIV positive

Originally Posted by Cujo

I like Charlie Sheen. Not that I've ever met him but I think he's the type of guy the young lads can look up to.
I mean snorting coke of hookers tits in the restaurant toilets, how cool is that.

I like Charlie as well, he is one loose mother fooker and has lived 50 life times already.

Quite lucky really, if he has AID's this one might be ending soon.

Bummer,

The world needs fukers like Charlie just to show the world that some of us don't give a Fook.

Originally Posted by terry57

Quite lucky really, if he has AID's this one might be ending soon.

Bummer,

The days of HIV infection being a short route to an early grave are long, long gone.

Well, unless you are poverty stricken and in a shithole like africa. Or Thailand.

With money, it would probably not knock a year off his life.

Originally Posted by thaimeme

even the eccentric Mr. Sheen would know better where to step and where not to.

This opinion is based on what ?

The big interview is about to start....

Or at least the programme has started.

He's wearing his best whistle though.

Obviously wants to be taken seriously.

got an online link, I have the TV on high 5.

OK he's on.

He admits he is HIV+.

And he doesn't look too high either.

He's known for four years apparently.

And he's spent millions to keep it quiet.

I wonder how Earvin "Magic" Johnson is doing these days...

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

No offense meant NZDick but how old are you?

32 and 1/4 why? lol

*I think it's the (lol) lol...


one a day for 15 years!? holy sheet metal batman!... I fink someone trying to say I'm a bit immature...

Keep it up bro !
These ole farts here at TD are just pissed because they have missplaced their dentures....again.

Being HIV+ isn't the death sentence it was back in the 80's or even the 90's, the drugs available these days to those in Western countries anyway are basically keeping people alive indefinitely. Would be interesting to know how Charlie caught it though, I haven't watched the interview so don't know if he said. The reason I find it interesting as most people believe whether rightly or wrongly that it's pretty hard for a bloke to get it from just pussy sex, where as easy from shooting up with an infected needle or batty sex.

Pretty hard is not impossible. And law of averages says he was playing with several loaded guns.

I have no problem with the guy screwing 5,000 women... fooking "legend" springs to mind...

BUT... if one knows one has HIV... one should wear a rain-coat... or abstain no?
otherwise you are knowingly infecting other people and even sluts don't deserve that.

I like to joke around with you lads... But that's seriously just wrong..

Originally Posted by NZdick1983

fooking "legend" springs to mind...

Until he contracted HIV. And then fooking stupid springs to mind.

Non sequitur...

Originally Posted by kingwilly

Until he contracted HIV. And then fooking stupid springs to mind.

Touché...

Made me curious:

Probabilities of HIV transmission per exposure to the virus are usually expressed in percentages or as odds (see chart at the end of this article). For example, the average risk of contracting HIV through sharing a needle one time with an HIV-positive drug user is 0.67 percent, which can also be stated as 1 in 149 or, using the ratios the CDC prefers, 67 out of 10,000 exposures. The risk from giving a blowjob to an HIV-positive man not on treatment is at most 1 in 2,500 (or 0.04 percent per act). The risk of contracting HIV during vaginal penetration, for a woman in the United States, is 1 per 1,250 exposures (or 0.08 percent); for the man in that scenario, it’s 1 per 2,500 exposures (0.04 percent, which is the same as performing fellatio).

As for anal sex, the most risky sex act in terms of HIV transmission, if an HIV-negative top—the insertive partner—and an HIV-positive bottom have unprotected sex, the chances of the top contracting the virus from a single encounter are 1 in 909 (or 0.11 percent) if he’s circumcised and 1 in 161 (or 0.62 percent) if he’s uncircumcised. And if an HIV-negative person bottoms for an HIV-positive top who doesn’t use any protection but does ejaculate inside, the chances of HIV transmission are, on average, less than 2 percent. Specifically, it is 1.43 percent, or 1 out of 70. If the guy pulls out before ejaculation, then the odds are 1 out of 154.

April/May #195 : Against All Odds - by Trenton Straube

Pretty low odds really but then why risk it.

Originally Posted by BaitongBoy

I wonder how Earvin "Magic" Johnson is doing these days...

About 25 years now since he announced he was HIV positive and from what I've read over the years doing quite well. See him on TV sometimes for NBA games. His son came out as a poofter a few years ago.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Made me curious:

Probabilities of HIV transmission per exposure to the virus are usually expressed in percentages or as odds (see chart at the end of this article). For example, the average risk of contracting HIV through sharing a needle one time with an HIV-positive drug user is 0.67 percent, which can also be stated as 1 in 149 or, using the ratios the CDC prefers, 67 out of 10,000 exposures. The risk from giving a blowjob to an HIV-positive man not on treatment is at most 1 in 2,500 (or 0.04 percent per act). The risk of contracting HIV during vaginal penetration, for a woman in the United States, is 1 per 1,250 exposures (or 0.08 percent); for the man in that scenario, it’s 1 per 2,500 exposures (0.04 percent, which is the same as performing fellatio).

As for anal sex, the most risky sex act in terms of HIV transmission, if an HIV-negative top—the insertive partner—and an HIV-positive bottom have unprotected sex, the chances of the top contracting the virus from a single encounter are 1 in 909 (or 0.11 percent) if he’s circumcised and 1 in 161 (or 0.62 percent) if he’s uncircumcised. And if an HIV-negative person bottoms for an HIV-positive top who doesn’t use any protection but does ejaculate inside, the chances of HIV transmission are, on average, less than 2 percent. Specifically, it is 1.43 percent, or 1 out of 70. If the guy pulls out before ejaculation, then the odds are 1 out of 154.

April/May #195 : Against All Odds - by Trenton Straube

Pretty low odds really but then why risk it.

So in Thailand even if one is dumb enough not to wear a condom, getting to the bar and getting home afterwards are still the most dangerous part of an evening in Pattaya or Ban Chang.

Originally Posted by BobR

So in Thailand even if one is dumb enough not to wear a condom, getting to the bar and getting home afterwards are still the most dangerous part of an evening in Pattaya or Ban Chang

Pretty much. Although I also recall reading ages ago that the HIV strain prevalent in Thailand is more contagious?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by BobR

So in Thailand even if one is dumb enough not to wear a condom, getting to the bar and getting home afterwards are still the most dangerous part of an evening in Pattaya or Ban Chang

Pretty much. Although I also recall reading ages ago that the HIV strain prevalent in Thailand is more contagious?

Isn't HIV in Thailand more prevalent in prostitutes who work with Thai than those working with farang?

By the way my BIL died of AIDS. There is a story connected to this that still angers me to this day. Not going to discuss it on TD though.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

By the way my BIL died of AIDS. There is a story connected to this that still angers me to this day. Not going to discuss it on TD though.

So drop a bomb, but then run. Nicely done.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Isn't HIV in Thailand more prevalent in prostitutes who work with Thai than those working with farang?

No idea mate. I just recall the variation in the strain thing from an article I read years ago about patenting HIV drugs.

If I had to hazard a guess I'd say yes though.

I had an old mate that contacted HIV back in the very early years.

He was a hemophiliac and got it through a dodgy blood transfusion.

Long time ago now must be at least 25 +++ years.

The Government gave him a massive pay out at the time, he had two young kids and a wife.

Wonder if he is still going ?

Must be 60 now.

Charlie is a different story though, Jesus he did get around huh.

Apocalyptic. I've allways felt the roll went to his head.

Not that many did. A friend of mine did too, 1 of only 8 or 9 in the state of Victoria. Wonder if they knew each other?

Charlie Sheen Spent $1.6million On Prostitutes In A Year Following HIV Diagnosis

Yesterday, Charlie Sheen bravely admitted that he is HIV+ in an emotional interview on The Today Show, and it didn’t take long for his former lovers to come forward and claim that he had assured them that he was “clean” when they were engaging in a sexual relationship with him.


The Hollywood actor revealed that he was diagnosed “roughly four years ago”, which is around the time that the star had his very public meltdown, that saw him call himself a “warlock” and that he had “tiger blood”.

Now, a madam has claimed that Charlie spent over $1.6million on prostitutes in 2013 alone - two years after he was told that he was carrying the incurable disease.

She also revealed that she supplied Charlie and his ex-wife, Brooke Mueller, with prostitutes up until a few months before he was diagnosed, and that the star would pay extra to have sex without a condom.


The National Enquirer have obtained financial records for Charlie’s production company, ‘9th Step’, that confirmed that the huge amount of money had been spent on sex parties - listed as ‘Friendly Entertainment’ in the records.

A source close to the actor said that there is no way of telling if he’d told the girls that he was HIV+, or how many people were involved.


According to Gristina, who pleaded guilty to promoting prostitution back in 2012, Charlie would spend up to $75,000 and $100,000 a night.

A former personal assistant of the 50-year-old has also admitted in an interview that there were many times that Brooke threatened to expose her ex-husband following their divorce, sharing: “Brooke, she almost pulled the trigger plenty of times when they were at war.

“I know there were times when she was super close to letting the cat out of the bag. She held that over his head for four years.”


However, the duo seem to be on good terms now, with Brooke being spotted embracing Charlie before he flew out to New York for yesterday’s interview on Monday.


Meanwhile, Jason Quinlan, a friend of a woman who allegedly slept with Charlie back in 2011, told the Daily Mail that the father-of-five paid two women $10million after they learned he was HIV+ - which he had not disclosed before they had unprotected sex.

TMZ are also reporting that at least six of the star’s former sexual partners are planning to sue the actor for ‘intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, sexual battery’, with some claiming they had slept with Charlie as recently as a month ago and he’d not told them about his illness.

https://uk.celebrity.yahoo.com/post/...prostitutes-in