Aa
A
A
Close
Avatar universal
have a question regarding oraquick rapid test
My question is not regarding a risk or exposure.  I have had none. But in the past i have had the oraquick rapid test done with drop of blood from my finger where the tester even said oral is no risk. But the other day at Walgreens at the pharmacy counter they were selling an oraquick rapid test and the back of the box stated for use if u have had unprotected vaginal. Anal, or oral sex... is this correct? Why is the boxreading differently and the tester saying differently?  Just curious
Cancel
2 Answers
Page 1 of 1
480448 tn?1426952138
It's no secret that there are conservative agencies that place a minimal or theoretical risk to oral sex.  Even the CDC says there is a very low risk associated with oral sex.  

In the case of the oraquick home test, remember, they are out to make a profit, so including that info on the box dramatically increases the number of people who would purchase the test.

The FACTS tell a very different story about oral sex.  If indeed it was an appreciable risk, there would be newly reported infections from oral on a daily basis, and there just isn't.  

We have this debate all the time on this forum, people question how we could tell people oral is no risk.  We give our advice based on scientific facts...studies, physiology, and the fact that there is NO statistical data about oral sex related HIV infections.  We give out assessments based on our knowledge, people have to decide for themselves if they want to choose to worry about oral sex.
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Submit Comment
Avatar universal
Thanks nursegirl i trust ur guys advice ..
Comment
Cancel
Comment
Avatar universal
Comment
Comment
Submit Comment
Your Answer
Avatar universal
Answer
Know how to answer? Tap here to leave your answer...
Answer
Submit Answer
A
A
Blank
Weight Tracker
Weight Tracker
Start Tracking Now
HIV Prevention Community Resources