the exact reason ppl should not continue searching and reading on the internet. i could make a dvd or design a website saying anything and everything i wanted...doesnt mean it has to be correct.
Uh yeah I understand that. People come to this site to get some information from people that know what they are talking about. To maybe get some piece of mind and reassurance. Isn't that what you are doing on this site?
The post I had posted a week or so ago I did not think was so out of the ordinary to ask. I am a registered nurse and from all the information I had ever learned, oral sex
is a risk, not so much as anal/vaginal, but still a risk.
My point is when people come on here and see the few people saying it is not a risk, why is it surprising to you that they are still questioning it a bit?
I have had a lot of education in my career, and I still had a worry, especially since there was ejaculation
during so.
So my THOUSANDS of apologies for asking a question that probably has been asked a million times. But when I came on here I posted a question before even reading any other posts.
I know that. What I am saying is why is it suprising to you that people are curious why it is not a risk orally? Based on everything everybody everywhere everything says, it is a risk. I respect everyone here for their first hand knowledge on HIV and their expertise.
But some people seem to get so annoyed with some questions people ask. They are just scared, as I am.
Even without looking up HIV on the internet, based on the education I have received in school, oral was always said to be a risk, that's why I posted a post previously asking about my risk with the sore throat and swollen lymph node in my neck.
I don't know if EVERYWHERE says its a risk to cover their buts so people are really protected or what, lots of confusing information.
The only time I have ever heard it is a risk is if there are open wounds on the individual who is performing or receiving oral sex (assuming the other person is positive). So, I've seen thebody.com and medhelp.org Dr's and community experts say this over and over. There are no absolutes in medicine as I am sure you know as a nurse but if the CDC and Dr's don't suggest testing after unprotected oral the risk has to be astronomically low.
If it were TRULY a riak, there would be REPUTABLE agencies reporting new infections via that route all the time.
In REPUTABLE studies with serodiscordant couples...who had only unprotected oral for YEARS...NOT ONE infection was reported. Also.....I have worked with many ID docs through the years, as well as with HIV/AIDS patients on a REGULAR basis (I'm not talking hit or miss here and there like most HCW's)...and can honestly say that from what I have experienced...I have NO doubt that oral does not pose a "MEASURABLE" risk.
Also, when I went to Nursing school...we were taught. JUST as it is being laid out here...that it was a risk, only theoretically.
Even the CDC site, which even allows for a miniscule risk to be assigned to oral.....outlines it in very real numbers....and concretely states in so many words it is about the smallest sexual risk possible. They have to be responsible and conservative.
This convo comes up on this forum at least twice a day. People are so resistant to hear what we have to say and believe all of the garbage out there...that, yes, it becomes frustrating.