Antiretroviral preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP; emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate [Truvada]) prevents HIV without penalizing sexual pleasure, and may even enhance pleasure (e.g., by reducing HIV-related anxiety). However, concern about sexual risk behavior increasing with PrEP use (risk compensation) and corresponding stereotypes of promiscuity may undermine PrEP's preventive potential. In this commentary, we review literature on sexual behavior change accompanying PrEP use, discuss risk compensation concerns and the "Truvada whore" stereotype as PrEP barriers, question the appropriateness of restricting PrEP access because of risk compensation, and consider sexual pleasure as a benefit of PrEP, an acceptable motive for seeking PrEP, and a core element of health. It is essential for science to trump stereotypes and sex-negative messaging in guiding decision-making affecting PrEP access and uptake.

Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has received increasing recognition as a viable prescription-based intervention for people at risk for HIV acquisition. However, little is known about racial biases affecting healthcare providers’ willingness to prescribe PrEP. This investigation sought to explore medical students’ stereotypes about sexual risk compensation among Black versus White men who have sex with men seeking PrEP, and the impact of such stereotypes on willingness to prescribe PrEP. An online survey presented participants (n = 102) with a clinical vignette of a PrEP-seeking, HIV-negative man with an HIV-positive male partner. Patient race was systematically manipulated. Participants reported predictions about patient sexual risk compensation, willingness to prescribe PrEP, and other clinical judgments. Bootstrapping analyses revealed that the Black patient was rated as more likely than the White patient to engage in increased unprotected sex if prescribed PrEP, which, in turn, was associated with reduced willingness to prescribe PrEP to the patient.

Black sexual minority women are triply marginalized due to their race, gender, and sexual orientation. We compared three dimensions of discrimination—frequency (regularity of occurrences), scope (number of types of discriminatory acts experienced), and number of bases (number of social statuses to which discrimination was attributed)—and self-reported mental health (depressive symptoms, psychological well-being, and social well-being) between 64 Black sexual minority women and each of two groups sharing two of three marginalized statuses: (a) 67 White sexual minority women and (b) 67 Black sexual minority men. Black sexual minority women reported greater discrimination frequency, scope, and number of bases and poorer psychological and social well-being than White sexual minority women and more discrimination bases, a higher level of depressive symptoms, and poorer social well-being than Black sexual minority men. We then tested and contrasted dimensions of discrimination as mediators between social status (race or gender) and mental health outcomes. Discrimination frequency and scope mediated the association between race and mental health, with a stronger effect via frequency among sexual minority women. Number of discrimination bases mediated the association between gender and mental health among Black sexual minorities. Future research and clinical practice would benefit from considering Black sexual minority women's mental health in a multidimensional minority stress context.

BACKGROUND: Among health care providers, prescription of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been low. Little is known specifically about primary care physicians (PCPs) with regard to PrEP awareness and adoption (i.e., prescription or referral), and factors associated with adoption. OBJECTIVE: To assess PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption, and factors associated with adoption among PCPs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey conducted in April and May 2015. RESPONDENTS: Members of a national professional organization for academic primary care physicians (n = 266). MAIN MEASURES: PrEP awareness, PrEP adoption (ever prescribed or referred a patient for PrEP [yes/no]), provider and practice characteristics, and self-rated knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs associated with adoption. KEY RESULTS: The survey response rate was 8.6 % (266/2093). Ninety-three percent of respondents reported prior awareness of PrEP. Of these, 34.9 % reported PrEP adoption. In multivariable analysis of provider and practice characteristics, compared with non-adopters, adopters were more likely to provide care to more than 50 HIV-positive patients (vs. 0, aOR = 6.82, 95 % CI 2.06-22.52). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were also more likely to report excellent, very good, or good selfrated PrEP knowledge (15.1 %, 33.7 %, 30.2 % vs. 2.5 %, 18.1 %, 23.8 %, respectively; p < 0.001) and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe (35.1 % vs. 10.7 %; p = 0.002). Compared with non-adopters, adopters were less likely to perceive PrEP as being moderately likely to increase risk behaviors ("risk compensation") (12.8 % vs. 28.8 %, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: While most respondents were aware of PrEP, only one-third of PrEP-aware PCPs reported adoption. Adopters were more likely to have experience providing HIV care and to perceive PrEP as extremely safe, and were less likely to perceive PrEP use as leading to risk compensation. To enhance PCP adoption of PrEP, educational efforts targeting PCPs without HIV care experience should be considered, as well as training those with HIV care experience to be PrEP "clinical champions". Concerns about safety and risk compensation must also be addressed.

There is growing recognition that stigma plays an important role in producing health disparities between members of socially advantaged and disadvantaged (marginalized) groups. This chapter defines stigma, describes differences among stigmatized marks, and discusses the functions that stigma may serve for individuals, groups, and societies. It also provides a conceptual model of the pathways by which stigma relates to health. This model posits that socially conferred marks that are devalued in society are the basis for four key stigma processes: enacted stigma, felt stigma, internalized stigma, and anticipated stigma. These stigma processes lead to stress and accompanying individual-level affective, cognitive, behavioral, and physiological responses, as well as to social and community-level exclusion from important domains of life that collectively have downstream negative consequences for health. This chapter provides an integrative overview of the chapters in the current volume and concludes with suggestions for future research on stigma and health.