Casual sex among MSM during the period of sheltering in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19: Results of national, online surveys in Brazil and Portugal =========================================================================================================================================================== * Alvaro Francisco Lopes Sousa * Layze Braz de Oliveira * Artur Acelino Francisco Luz Nunes Queiroz * Hérica Emilia Felix de Carvalho * Guilherme Schneider * Emerson Lucas Silva Camargo * Telma Evangelista de Araujo * Sandra Brignol * Isabel Amélia Costa Mendes * Willi McFarland * Inês Fronteira ## ABSTRACT **Background** Sheltering in place to reduce the spread of COVID-19 may have adverse effects on mental and sexual health, particularly for LGBT populations whose social support may be fragile. In this study, we investigated the extent to which Brazilian and Portuguese MSM had casual sex partners outside their homes during the period of sheltering in place for the COVID-19 pandemic. **Methods** An online survey was implemented nationally in Brazil and Portugal in April 2020, during the period of social isolation for COVID-19, with a sample of 2,361 MSM (1,651 in Brazil, 710 in Portugal). Recruitment was done through meeting apps and Facebook groups catering to MSM. Data collection was online via CASI. **Results** Over 95% of MSM were sheltering at least partially at the time of the survey. Nearly 50% said sheltering had a high impact on their lives. A majority (53.0%) had casual sex partners during sheltering. Factors that increased the odds of engaging in casual sex in Brazil were having group sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.4), living in a urban area (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), feeling that sheltering had high impact on daily life (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.1-8.3), having casual vs steady partners (aOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.8-3.5), and not decreasing the number of partners during the COVID-19 epidemic (aOR 6.5, 95% CI 4.2-10.0). In Portugal, the odds of engaging in casual sex increased with using Facebook to find partners (aOR 4.6, 95% CI 3.0-7.2), not decreasing the number of partners during the COVID-19 epidemic (aOR 3.8, 95% CI 2.9-5.9), usually (pre-COVID-19) finding partners in physical venues (aOR 5.4, 95% CI 3.2-8.9), feeling that the isolation had high impact on daily life (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.3-6.7), and HIV-positive serostatus (aOR 11.7, 95% CI 4.7-29.2). Surprisingly, taking PrEP/Truvada to prevent COVID-19 was reported by 12.7% of MSM. **Conclusions** The COVID-19 epidemic has not stopped the majority of Brazilian and Portuguese MSM from finding sexual partners outside their home, with high risk sexual behaviors continuing. Public health messages for the prevention of COVID-19 need to be crafted to explicitly link sexual behavior to reduce pandemics in the current moment. Keywords * Casual sex * Sex partners * MSM * SARS-CoV-2 * COVID-19 ## Background By June 01, 2020, Brazil had become one of the countries most severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. With 35,000 deaths and 690,000 cases of COVID-19 officially confirmed [1], Brazil ranked in the second position in the world [2]. Portugal, where the spread the infection began nearly one month before Brazil, had 34,000 confirmed cases and 1,400 deaths by COVID-19 by the same date [3]. Without a vaccine or effective treatment, general preventive measures for respiratory infections remain the main means of containing the spread of the virus. Minimizing the gathering and movement of people, that is, “sheltering in place” to varying degrees of strictness have been adopted by many countries, including Brazil and Portugal [4,5]. There appear to be positive effects of sheltering on reducing the speed of COVID-19 infection. However, mental and other aspects of health, including sexual health, may be suffering [6]. Social support is a known protective factor for general health [7] and social withdrawal can potentiate, or trigger, harmful consequences for mental and physical health. In populations where this support is more fragile, as in the case of LGBT populations, interruptions in social support can have severe negative consequences, including greater risk of exposure to COVID-19, which is still not fully understood [6]. To measure the potential consequences of COVID-19 on the mental health and sexual behavior of MSM, the In_PrEP Group in Brazil and Portugal implemented an online questionnaire. In particular, the questionnaire sought to measure whether MSM were seeking casual partners outside their homes during the period when shelter in place directives were in effect and measures they were undertaking to reduce the risk of COVID-19, HIV, and STI. Brazil and Portugal were selected as they share language and a large flow of people between these countires each year (28,210 thousand) [8], through immigration, professional and student activities, and tourism [9]. ## Methods ### Study design, population, sampling, and recruitment This project entitled “40tena” is derived from the In_PrEP cohort study, a multicenter survey implemented in all 26 Brazilian states and the Federal District, and in 15 districts of Portugal. A rapid and dynamic data collection process took place in April 2020 at a time when the two countries were under sheltering directives. Recruitment of MSM was done using a combination of strategies for dating apps and Facebook. The design was a modified time-space sampling technique adapted to the virtual environment, following procedures used in previous studies [10, 11, 12]. Two dating applications catering to the MSM population were chosen to meet participants through direct chat with online users. The researchers registered as users with the apps, changing their selected locations to produce a diversified sample within the targeted coverage areas planned for the research. We included only individuals who identified themselves as male (cis or trans), aged 18 or over, and living in one of the two countries. Non-Portuguese speakers and tourists were excluded. For Facebook recruitment, the researchers used the boost on the social network feature to target MSM in both countries. A fixed post on the official research page ([https://www.facebook.com/taafimdeque/](https://www.facebook.com/taafimdeque/)) was accompanied by an electronic link which provided access to the informed consent form and the survey questionnaire. ### Measures Data were collected by Computer-Assisted Technique Interview (CASI). The data collection questionnaire was hosted on a study website, only allowing answers from IP for security reasons. The questionnaire was divided into five sections including sociodemographic information, sheltering, issues of sexual health, sexual behavior in the period of sheltering, and COVID-19 prevention measures. ### Analysis Descriptive analysis was performed for key numerical and categorical variables. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to characterize associations with having casual sex with partners outside the home during the period of sheltering. A final model was selected based on retaining those variables with p<0.1 while using the cut-off of p<0.05 for significance. ### Ethical considerations The research project obtained ethical approval from the Universidade Nova de Lisboa and Universidade de Sao Paulo. Informed consent was obtained from all users online, before proceeding with the questionnaire. ## Results A total of 2,361 MSM participated in the online surveys, including 1,651 (69.9%) from Brazil and 710 (30.1%) from Portugal (Table 1). The median age was 29 years (range 18-66). View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/09/2020.06.07.20113142/T1) Table 1. Characteristics and sexual practices during the COVID-19 shelter in place period, men who have sex with men, Brazil and Portugual, 2020. Majorities in both countries lived in urban areas (69.0% in Brazil, 95.4% in Portugal) and were single (69.2% in Brazil, 82.3% in Portugal). One in ten (9.9%) MSM respondents in Brazil self-reported their HIV status as positive, as did 12.1% of respondents in Portugal. In Brazil, 10.5% reported testing and 5.5% reported being diagnosed with COVID-19. In Portugal, 15.5% had tested and 1.8% were diagnosed with COVID-19. Majorities of MSM in Brazil (71.0%) and Portugal (74.6%) reported that they were sheltering at the time of the survey. Most of the remaining reported partially sheltering. Only 4.5% of MSM respondents in Brazil and 4.2% in Portugal said they were not sheltering in any form. Nearly half of MSM respondents (48.0% in Brazil, 49.0% in Portugal) felt sheltering had high impact on their lives. Table 1 also describes how the COVID-19 epidemic changed the respondents’ sexual behavior. Respondents reported a median of 1.0 sex partners (range 0-32) during the period of sheltering. Two-thirds reported having only casual partner (66.4%), with many having both casual and steady partners (14.0%). Overall, 14.6% of respondents lived with their sex partner. Substantial majorities of MSM (75.9% in Brazil, 72.5% in Portugal) reported a decreased number of sexual partners and sexual frequency (72.0% in Brazil, 86.6%) during the sheltering period. Nonetheless, over half of respondents (53.0%) had casual sex, with paying for sex (3.0%), group sex (15.8%), sex under the influence of alcohol or drugs (39.0%), and condomless sex (30.4%) also reported. Many MSM reported behaviors that they believed would reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. Apart from measures taken with respect to sex, general preventive measures (25.8%), asking if the partner was sheltering (30.7%), and asking if the partner had symptoms (27.5%) were mentioned. Other measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19 included avoiding kissing during sex (16.2%), washing hands before and after sex (27.6%), and disinfecting the area before and after sex (14.6%). Of note, some mentioned taking PrEP/Truvada (12.7%) and using condoms (21.9%) as measures adopted to prevent COVID-19 transmission. Table 2 presents correlates of leaving the house or having someone in their house for casual sex during the sheltering period in bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models for each country. In Brazil, the odds of engaging in casual sex increased with having group sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.4), living in a urban area (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), feeling that sheltering had average (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.5-3.2) or high impact on their daily life (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.1-8.3) compared to low impact, having casual partners (aOR 2.5, 95% CI 1.8-3.5), and not decreasing the number of partners during the COVID-19 epidemic (aOR 6.5, 95% CI 4.2-10.0). In Portugal, the odds of engaging in casual sex increased with using Facebook to find partners (aOR 4.6, 95% CI 3.0-7.2), not decreasing the number of partners during the COVID-19 epidemic (aOR 3.8, 95% CI 2.9-5.9), usually (pre-COVID-19) finding partners in physical venues (aOR 5.4, 95% CI 3.2-8.9), feeling that the isolation had high impact on their daily life (aOR 3.0, 95% CI 1.3-6.7), and reporting HIV-positive serostatus (aOR 11.7, 95% CI 4.7-29.2). View this table: [Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/09/2020.06.07.20113142/T2) Table 2. Factors associated with having casual sex during the COVID-19 shelter in place period, men who have sex with men, Brazil and Portugal, 2020. ## Discussion Our study showed that the COVID-19 epidemic and the period of sheltering in place did not stop the majority of Brazilian and Portuguese MSM from finding sexual partners outside their home. Nonetheless, over 95% of respondents say they adopted at least partial sheltering in place. For Brazil, this level may be higher than typically reported by local authorities for the general population (between 40% and 55%) [13] – levels which have cause for concern in overcrowding hospitals [14]. For Portugal, compliance in the general population appears to have been high enough to avert overwhelming the hospital system [15]. Although slightly over half of MSM still found casual partners outside their homes, three-fourths had fewer partners compared to before the COVID-19 epidemic. MSM reported other measures to reduce the risk for COVID-19 akin to harm reduction practices. For example, more than one in four asked if their partners were otherwise sheltering and if they had any symptoms of COVID-19. Although close contact was inherent or implied in having casual sex, many MSM reported avoiding kissing, handwashing before and after sex, and disinfecting the area before and after sex. A surprising and unexpected finding was the use of PrEP/Truvada for COVID-19 prophylaxis. In the absence of evidence of efficacy for COVID-19 prevention, the assumption risks causing people on PrEP to neglect effective measures. A possible explanation for the adoption of this practice might be misunderstanding the discussion of potential of prophylaxis drugs for SARS-CoV2 in the popular media [26]. Some MSM may have mistaken Truvada, promoted for HIV prophylaxis, as having a similar mechanism for SARS-CoV2. Specific messaging may be needed to dispel this false connection through programs promoting PrEP for HIV. Our study also found continuation of behaviors that may place MSM at high risk for acquiring or transmitting HIV and STI during the COVID-19 epidemic. More than one in six MSM reported group sex, implying the meeting of several people in very close contact, thus amplifying potential COVID-9 exposure [18]. Engaging in group sex was further associated with increased odds of having casual partners outside the home among Brazilian MSM. Sexual encounters under the influence of drugs or alcohol, also common during the sheltering period, can decrease reasoning capacity and hinder the adoption of preventive measures for HIV/STI and COVID-19 [19]. Condomless sex itself was reported by over one in three Brazilian MSM and one in five Portuguese MSM during the shelter in place period, apparently high levels [12]. The duration of the sheltering period, with accompanying feelings of isolation, may partly explain the high-risk sexual behaviors. The large majority of participants had been isolated for at least 30 days, and many recognized a high impact of social isolation on their lives. This in turn may have led MSM to feel a greater need for social contact, to seek a “break” in isolation to seek partners [16], with an additional break for HIV preventive measures. This hypothesis is corroborated by the findings of the multivariate analysis, in which acknowledging high impact of the sheltering period was associated with seeking outside casual sex partners in both in Brazil and in Portugal. The effect of a prolonged isolation period is particularly worrisome as Brazil moves towards becoming a COVID-19 epicenter in Latin America and the world [17]. There are some studies in the literature implying social isolation may lead to higher utilization of virtual networks to search for sexual encounters [6, 23]. Tinder connections increased 15% in the US and 25% in Italy and Spain during the COVID-19 epidemic [23]. The duration of chat activity also increased by 30% [23]. Notably, the use of Facebook was significantly associated with an increased odds for Portuguese MSM seeking partners through this platform. Another hypothesis is that partnering through Facebook can provide a false sense of controlling exposure by enabling sex with someone known and belonging to the same social network (friend/acquaintance). Yet another possible explanation for the association of increased casual partnering during COVID-19 and use of Facebook, not yet documented in the literature, may be fear of judgment (i.e., for breaking sheltering) by closer friends, which leads MSM to seek out like-minded strangers. On the other hand, to the extent that social media can assist with keeping to smaller social groups and the adoption of virtual sex and masturbation [20, 22], it may reduce risks for transmissible infections. Other significant associations with seeking causal sex during COVID-19 are notable. Being HIV positive also increased the odds of engaging in casual sex in Portuguese MSM. One hypothesis may be a false sense of protection due to antiretrovirals for HIV currently being tested in COVID-19 patients [24]. This may be consistent with assumptions or misunderstandings about PrEP, as mentioned above. In both Brazil and in Portugal, living in an urban area increased the odds of casual sex, likely explained by a access to greater numbers of MSM [25] easy to locate and select partners by dating Apps or other social media [12]. This study has limitations. First, we recognize the data derive from a convenience sample in both countries. Understandably, venue-based and peer referral mechanism to sample and recruit are made harder during the COVID-19 epidemic. Second, we did not measure variables recognized as important in hindsight, such as exact days sheltering, different sexual practices, and the organization of other events, such as parties where sex may have occurred. Lastly, we did not test for COVID-19 and therefore could not fully link behaviors directly to acquisition of infection. ## Conclusions We were able to identify a high frequency of casual sex among MSM, and associated factors that might increase exposure to SARS-CoV-2, HIV, and other STI during a period of high COVID-19 transmission when sheltering in place was implemented. Although many strategies were adopted to minimize the exposure to SARS-CoV-2, the effectiveness of those measures is threatened by high-risk practices common to COVID-19 and HIV, including condomless sexual intercourse and group sex. By analyzing two countries with different outcomes in terms of the control of the COVID-19 epidemic, our results demonstrate the vulnerability of MSM communities and if left unaddressed they may hamper the pandemic response. We suggest that governments craft messages for the prevention of COVID-19 explicitly linked to messages on sexual behavior to reduce the impact of the current era on both pandemics. ## Data Availability Available upon request to authors. ## Funding Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa – CNPq, Brazil. * Received June 7, 2020. * Revision received June 7, 2020. * Accepted June 9, 2020. * © 2020, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International), CC BY-NC 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ## References 1. 1.Ministério da Saúde (Brazil). Painel Coronavírus. 2020. Available at: [https://covid.saude.gov.br/](https://covid.saude.gov.br/) 2. 2.WHO. Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) situation reports. Available from: [https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports](https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports) 3. 3.Ministério da Saúde (Portugal). SNS-24. Temas da saúde - COVID-19. Available at: [https://www.sns24.gov.pt/tema/doencas-infecciosas/covid-19/](https://www.sns24.gov.pt/tema/doencas-infecciosas/covid-19/) 4. 4.Peixoto VR, Vieira A, Aguiar P, Sousa Abrantes A. “Timing”, Adesão e Impacto das Medidas de Contenção da COVID-19 em Portugal. NOVA National School of Public Health report 2020. 5. 5.Albuquerque LP, Silva RB, Araújo RMS. COVID-19: origin, pathogenesis, transmission, clinical aspects and current therapeutic strategies. Rev Pre Infec e Saúde. 2020; 6:10432. 6. 6.Brennan DJ, Card KG, Collict D, Jollimore J, Lachowsky NJ. How Might Social Distancing Impact Gay, Bisexual, Queer, Trans and Two-Spirit Men in Canada? AIDS Behav 2020 30:1–3. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s10461-020-02891-5&link_type=DOI) 7. 7.McDonald K. Social Support and Mental Health in LGBTQ Adolescents: A review of the literature. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2018; 39(1):16–29. 8. 8.Portugal. Serviço de Estrangeiros e Fronteiras, 2018. Available at: [https://sefstat.sef.pt/Docs/Rifa2018.pdf](https://sefstat.sef.pt/Docs/Rifa2018.pdf) 9. 9.Barbosa B, Santos CM, Santos M. Tourists with migrants’ eyes: the mediating role of tourism in international retirement migration. J Tour Cult Chang 2020. 10. 10.Queiroz AAFLN, Sousa AFL, Matos MCB, Araújo TME, Reis RK, Moura MEB. Knowledge about HIV/AIDS and implications of establishing partnerships among Hornet® users. Rev Bras Enferm 2018; 71(4): 1949–1955. 11. 11.Queiroz AAFLN, Sousa ÁFL, Matos MCB, et al. Factors associated with self-reported non-completion of the hepatitis B vaccine series in men who have sex with men in Brazil. BMC Infect Dis 2019;19(1):335. 12. 12.Queiroz AAFLN, Sousa AFL, Brignol S, Araújo TME, Reis RK. Vulnerability to HIV among older men who have sex with men users of dating apps in Brazil. Braz J Infect Dis 2019; 23(5): 298–306. 13. 13.Lana RM, Coelho FC, Gomes MFC, Cruz OG, Bastos LS, Villela DAM et al. The novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) emergency and the role of timely and effective national health surveillance. Cad Saúde Pública 2020; 36 (3): e00019620. 14. 14.Freitas ARR, Napimoga M, Donalisio MR. Assessing the severity of COVID-19. Epidemiol Serv Saúde 2020; e2020119. 15. 15.Peixoto VR, Vieira A, Aguiara P, Carvalho C, Thomas D, Abrantes A. Rapid assessment of the impact of “lockdown” on the COVID-19 epidemic in Portugal. MedRxiv 2020. 16. 16.Sanchez TH, Zlotorzynska M, Rai M, Baral SD. Characterizing the Impact of COVID-19 on Men Who Have Sex with Men Across the United States in April, 2020. AIDS and Behav 2020; 1–9. 17. 17.Menezes PL, Garner DM, Valenti VE. Brazil is projected to be the next global COVID-19 pandemic epicenter. Medrxiv 2020. 18. 18.Yuen KS, Ye ZW, Fung SY, Chan CP, Jin DY. SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: The most important research questions. Cell Biosci 2020 16;10:40. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13578-020-00404-4&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32190290&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F06%2F09%2F2020.06.07.20113142.atom) 19. 19.Wong NS, Kwan TH, Lee KCK, Lau JYC, Lee SS. Delineation of chemsex patterns of men who have sex with men in association with their sexual networks and linkage to HIV prevention. Int J Drug Policy. 2020;75:102591. 20. 20.NYC. Sex and COVID-19 Fact Sheet. Available from: [https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-sex-guidance.pdf?utm\_source=morning\_brew](https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-sex-guidance.pdf?utm_source=morning_brew). Acess 27 May 2020. 21. 21.Yeo C, Sanghvi K, Yeo D: Enteric involvement of coronaviruses: is faecal-oral transmission of SARS-CoV-2 possible?. Lancet Gastroenterol. 2020, 5:P335–337. doi:10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30048-0 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30048-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32087098&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F06%2F09%2F2020.06.07.20113142.atom) 22. 22.UNAIDS. Safer sex in the time of COVID-19. Available from: [https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/covid-blog](https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/covid-blog), acess in 27 may 2020 23. 23.Sullivan A. Love in the time of coronavirus: COVID-19 changes the game for online dating. Deutsche Welle. 2020. [https://www.dw.com/en/love-in-the-time-of-coronaviruscovid-19-changes-the-game-for-online-dating/a-52933001](https://www.dw.com/en/love-in-the-time-of-coronaviruscovid-19-changes-the-game-for-online-dating/a-52933001). Accessed 27 May 2020. 24. 24.Cao B, Wang Y, Wen D et al. A Trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19. N Engl J Med 2020; 382:1787–1799. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F06%2F09%2F2020.06.07.20113142.atom) 25. 25.Whitfield DL, Kattari SK, Walls NE, Al-Tayyib A. Grindr, Scruff, and on the Hunt: Predictors of Condomless Anal Sex, Internet Use, and Mobile Application Use Among Men Who Have Sex With Men. Am J Mens Health. 2017;11(3):775–784. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/1557988316687843&link_type=DOI) 26. 26.[https://www.pharmacytimes.com/ajax/development-of-prep-for-covid-19-could-allow-country-to-open-safely-before-a-vaccine-is-available](https://www.pharmacytimes.com/ajax/development-of-prep-for-covid-19-could-allow-country-to-open-safely-before-a-vaccine-is-available)