“If we create a circle of people around you that at least know a word or two about rectal microbicides I believe the work is done, because everyone has his own circle, so the knowledge in one way or another will flow.” – Daniel Julio Eduardo Nuñez, Lima, Peru
Daniel Nuñez is studying law. While working towards his law degree he began working at Epicentro with his local gay community. It is at Epicentro that Daniel met an IRMA member (Epicentro is the headquarters for IRMA-ALC, IRMA’s South American sister) and, anxious to find out more about rectal microbicides, immediately sought more information. He was quickly inspired to spread the word about IRMA and its goals.

Daniel realizes that rectal microbicides are important “because we are humans and not robots, we don’t necessarily act following a program and sometimes we do things that don’t correspond to safe sexual behavior”. Because of this he works to make many prevention options available to everyone.

He urges every IRMA advocate and anyone interested in microbicides or HIV prevention at all to discuss options and knowledge with family and friends. With each person able to talk openly and knowledgeably about AIDS and HIV prevention, Daniel hopes that the topic will become less taboo and more can be done in the fight against AIDS.

In his free time Daniel provides freelance tech support, but he enjoys it so it doesn’t feel like work. He also enjoys watching TV programs from the United States such as A Game of Thrones, his current favorite show.

Read about other friendly rectal microbicides advocates. Newly featured advocates include Luis Fernando Galarza, Amy Stapleford Jackson, Maheswar Satpathy, Vanessa Marquez, and Mark Hubbard.

Want to join the best e-mail discussion list on new prevention technologies on the planet? Send a note to IRMA here – rectalmicro@gmail.com – and we will get you signed up.Joining the list makes you an automatic IRMA member too!

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article’s content, whether in support or in opposition.]