It's risk free when it comes to HIV infections and the last time I looked this is an HIV forum.
Oral sex isnt compltely risk free for the partner getting the blowjob either. So if woman A had Hiv you could have it
Missed your post asking how I'd feel is the situation is reversed.
Well the only reason I have any concern at all is because I realize the situation may have already been reversed.
If woman B is being honest about being tested in August and hasn't done anything risky before getting involved with me then I have nothing to worry about at all really.
But she could be just as dishonest as I've been with woman A. So the possibilty of the situation being reversed is in fact my only real concern here.
If it hasn't been reversed then I have no reason to even blink when woman A gets sick.
Thank you. This has been my point from the very beginning until I was ransacked by the "oral is ok" boys club. The subject matter is not conclusive and multiple studies conflict with each other. People are entitled to their opinions. The evidence is enough for me to believe that oral sex, for the RECEPTIVE partner, is not entirely risk free. Blanket statements otherwise is simply irresponsible.
I'm sure woman A is fine. Her sore throat could be attributed to any number of conditions. You are correct. Risk from oral sex is quite minimal and ARS symptoms do not normally occur within 3 days. The medical community quite frequently states that ARS does not manifest until 2 to 4 weeks out. This is the average.
I've just been concerned becuase what Woman A described to me sounded a lot like ARS.
But two things in particular don't seem consistent with it.
1) Low risk through oral.
2) Timing. She got sick within about 3 days.
this is an open forum , everyone is welcomed, all opinions should be shared, people need to do their own research, oral sex is still one of these grey area. as i have read a spanish study that said 0 risk , i read a british study which said up to 7 percent of new cases would be contributed to oral sex, san francisco study that said zero with no ejaculation and good oral conditions, but that ejaculation and oral problems could contribute to transmission, i personally think they dont know for sure,. only my opinion
Nobody should attack you for asking questions or having concerns. You are the only one who can decided if you think the information is good or bad. This your health you are dealing with and looking for some insight. If you have more concerns seek a health care provider to get them answered and to feel comfortable with those answers. Good Luck.
Also, I'm thinking that a lot of the stats about transmission are based on the accounts of people infected an don't seem terribly scienific.
I'm sure that there are MANY people who contracted HIV and other STDs by engaging insexual acts of which they are not proud. For instance, I would imagine that many men have gotten it from receptive anal sex, and have told doctors it came from some kind of heterosexual sex.
There's also the cases in which a person has engaged in every possible sex act, and the transmission was attributed to what is seen as the most high risk of them, without actually KNOWING how it happened.
Before anybody attacks me for my ignorance, let me make it clear... I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS AND MAKING THESE STATEMENTS ABOUT MY UNDERSTANDINGS (OR LACK THEREOF) BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW ALL I SHOULD.
I believe the doctor state also is to never trust symptoms. The only way to know your status is by testing. Remember there is a nasty flu running rampant right now and everybody seem ill. Oh well my 2 cents worth.
For folks believing these three gentlemen are correct that HIV can't be transmitted via oral sex.. you're taking a risk with your health. I would strongly suggest that you seek the advice of medical infectious disease professionals, who will tell you that oral sex is a risk factor....no matter how small it may be. These 3 are wanting to "be right" for the sake of being right and winning an argument. They don't really care about you.
I have stated that my position is an opinion. I have plenty of studies that agree with me. You can make your own decisions because you're adults and I'll respect you for whatever your position you take. But these three obviously have their own agendas (and egos) and its sad that they can't even take a moderate position on this subject. Very very sad.
OK, I've never been in these forums until now.
Surprised at how many of the folks here are engaged in what seems to ME to be almost personal attacks with almost no diplomacy at all.
Anyway, I posted this same post on the doctor's side, and the doctor says I have litte reason to be concerned.
He says the timing of Woman A's illness is most likely a coincidence.
I just end up nervous anyway, because part of his reaoning is that Woman B was tested in August and hasn't engaged in risky behavior since. BUT... that's based solely on her word. and if MY behavior proves anything... a person's WORD isn't always the best indicator, as both women think we're exclusive.
SO MUCH of the info on HIV errs on the side of caution. They list everything from having a bad hair day to lightening striking you symptoms (obviously an exaggeration on my part), and then say that symptoms may include all, some, none of these or OTHER symptoms.
My whole concern in the first place is that Woman A's symptoms seem close to what I've read about ARS (I think that's the abbreviation I'm looking for). But I wonder... if it was THAT... would she had gotten the symptoms TWICE? I'm thinking she wouldn't, but I really don't know.
Here I was being blasted by stating that my evidence is based off speculation and probability yet this study uses the same wordage. Probability. It also suggests with this statement:
"you find significant HIV transmission even among those who used protection during receptive anal intercourse"
that condoms aren't effective. Hmmm... this study doesn't convince me at all. Probability of infection remains possible, albeit low from oral sex. I've been saying this from the beginning. This is also a 2002 study and I was looking at studies later than that. This doen't prove anything to me.
I still have my right to my opinion.. and if you wanna kick me off because I state that HIV can be transmitted via Oral Sex, despite it being a low risk, then go ahead, blacklist me. But it will show just how ignorant you are.
Oh he can't find the studies. Shows you he didn't look. He would have proved himself wrong and he's not one to apologize.
You guys seriously believe there's absolutely 100% no risk? No risk at all of HIV viral particles infecting oral tissue? LOL. None what so ever? There are plenty of studies suggesting otherwise....that may be in opposition to your study...but you know what? I choose to error on the side of caution as opposed to putting out a blanket statement that says you can't get HIV this way AT ALL. You can't back that up. I've asked for Medhelps' official position from doctors here on this site, nobody has given me that. I've asked for links to the UCLA studies... nope..nothing there either...I'm told go look for it yourself. Oh you're all so very helpful aren't you. All I'm asking for is for your equivocable proof that absolutely NO risk exists. I don't think there is an infectious disease doctor in the world that will make that claim and stake his career on it.
I've been told to look.. so I'm looking. Lets see... I see a UCLA study that states that alcohol and increase risk of HIV from oral sex. There's a UCLA study of HIV patients feeling stigmatized. A UCLA study for demand for PEP. UCLA study for anal cancer rates in homosexual men. Here's a UCLA scientist saying Antiretroviral drugs can eradicate AIDS epidemic. Hmmm.. wonder why that one hasn't come to pass yet. I found one that that confirms that anal transmission is definitely a higher risk of transmission over oral sex, but it didn't say that oral transmission doesn't exist. It just confirmed its a lower risk. There's another study by USCF in 2006 confirming oral sex risk exists, but is low. Here's a British study saying the same thing. Hmmmm. I keep seeing a trend here. Risk exists, but is very low. Funny, that's what I've said.
Here's a great quote..albeit from 2001:
The primary mode of HIV transmission worldwide is by exposure to the virus at vaginal, rectal and oral mucosal surfaces. Transmission via the vagina and rectum appears to be far greater than that via the mouth/throat. The lower transmission rates of HIV via the oral route are leading many individuals to the false conclusion that oral sex is safe from the risk of HIV infection. Epidemiological data support the premise that, whereas HIV transmission via saliva is low or non-existent, oral infection with HIV in semen appears to be possible. Animal studies confirm that HIV can be transmitted via the oral tissues. In addition, mucosal lymphoid cells in the oral epithelia and tonsils, as well as the salivary glands, appear to be a target of HIV infection and a possible reservoir of infectious HIV. In this regard, oral tissues can be infected in vivo and in vitro, and can support viral replication. Oral trauma, ulcers, drug use, smoking, co-infection with oral herpes, sexually transmitted bacterial diseases (e.g., oral gonorrhea) or periodontal disease might increase oral HIV transmission.
Ok...still a lot of speculation, but it is backed by some reasonable facts. Add in other aggrevating factors as listed at the end of the comment and you can rule out oral sex as being 100% safe.
Studies NEVER give you the entire picture gentlemen. Neither do statistics. There can be studies that suggest that smoking can be good for you, but we really know better. Statistics and odds can also say that dying in a plane crash is somewhere around 250,000 to 1. But people die that way all the time. The reason we know this is because its news worthy. But if only 1, 10, or 100 people in millions get HIV through oral sex, it just might not register on the radar. But for those 100 people, its a stark reality. You are marginalizing the person who is stuck in this position all because you want to make blanket statements that you can't be infected this way. Sad, sad, sad. You should be ashamed.
Maybe I just see the men of this forum wanting to take a pathetic position on this issue because the want to justify their sexual activities because they don't want to see it as potential problem for them since they are the insertive partner. Yet the women and gay men of this forum may think want to think otherwise. They're the one's who are at risk here. Perhaps you boys would consider ingesting some HIV+ blood or semen to prove your point? Swish it around in your mouth, spit it out... do I think you'd be comfortable with that? I seriously doubt it. Grow up.
UCLA just completed one. Look it up. You say you're in California, you won't have any trouble looking it up. Look up the serodiscordant studies while you're at it. Frankly I don't care if you reconsider or not. You don't know what you're talking about.
Gentlemen,
The proof of burden is on you.. not by what you have seen or encountered on the forum. Please provide me with official positions by the CDC or other noteworthy experts on this subject and I'll gladly reconsider. I'd love to see the studys you talk about.
Now why don't you get the resent studies and post them that were done on oral sex? Bring facts with you, not theoretical observations. There has never ever been anyone contract HIV via receptive oral sex nor has there ever been a documented case of anyone contracting HIV by giving oral sex.
None of these new people care if you feel bad or if you love this fourm,i ask niceley please lets stay with the facts,this is a hiv fourm,if you wont to talk start a new post, med help will not mind.
thanks lesbin
Sorry Teak.. the CDC tends to disagree with you...and I choose to believe them, along with several other doctors. We can only give opinions here. Now if Medhelp officially states oral sex is no risk, please point me to the URL of the doctor here that says that. I really would like to read it for myself. If not.. then you're only standing on your side of the debate and I'm quite happy to let you do that...but I'll stay on my side thanks.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/qa/qa19.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/oralsexqa.htm
http://www.thebody.com/index/safesex/oralsex.html
As minor as it may seem, it is not a no risk situation....so when the next person who comes on here that seroconverts and swears to God that he or she did not engage in unprotected anal or vagina sex but did blow somebody, what are you gonna tell them? That they're lying to you? That they must have been anally or vaginally penetrated at some point in time?
Maybe some folks will finally admit and say yes, they have engaged in unprotected anal or vaginal sex... but I'd care to say that there will be several who are telling you the complete truth.
Oral sex is not a risk no matter what kind of spin you try to put on it.
I wont get into a big debate here. I've never proclaimed to be master or ruler of anything on these forums. If you want clarification on this issue, I can gladly provide you with the links that support my position. The medical community is divided on the issue of oral sex, and my research has shown me that there's plenty of reasons why oral sex can't be considered 100% safe. I'm sorry. If anything Chris, its irresponsible to tell individuals that they are not at risk when giving someone oral sex when they can be.
You are being excessively abrassive to an individual who has done nothing but listen and care about those asking questions. I give my opinions and I am entitled. If people don't want to read my responses, that's ok. I'm not hurt by that. You however seem to enjoy pointing fingers and telling people what to do and if you wanna be the real ****.. go for it. But you won't change my opinion. People here are worried, scared, and quite frankly, appreciate a little thought about what they are doing. I bring up larger life questions that most of these people don't consider. They just want to stop being afraid...but they can't do that unless they understand why they are afraid. If you don't like to look deeper into some of the things you're doing.. then continue to blast people like me if you want...I'll just shrug my shoulders and wish you well.
As far as that article on tonsils, at the time, I figured since it came from a scientific magazine that I respected and was a subscriber of, I felt it was legitimate info. Believe me, coming here has been an amazing experience for me, as I really was going bonkers at the time. You have helped me greatly, so I really don't want to get on your bad side.