help me understand

[fuzzbuzz]

I received advice regarding what I thought was a risk (receiving oral sex from hiv positive male).  Did an RNA test 11 days post exposure,  which was nonreactive.  I know I didn't have a risk and only did the testing for a piece of mind.  After this experience however, the subject of hiv has me interested. This question is just to get a better understanding.  Literature suggest that it takes a significant amount of blood to infect someone with HIV.   And that the virus is not easily transmitted.  For example with oral sex, there is not enough of the virus, in the saliva to transmit the virus.  And if the virus was in the saliva it would have to be a tremendous amount to infect the person.  My question is this, it's the blood that transmit the virus right? If that is so, why does there have to be a significant amount present in the saliva to transmit the virus and only minimal amounts in cases where healthcare workers have been infected with the virus with only a splash of infected blood in their eyes or even from a needle stick with a small amount of blood?

[Teak]

Doesn't take many words to say your never had an exposure after reading your question.

[fuzzbuzz]

Initially,  I used to think that people were being hard on you.  I understand that I didn't have an exposure.   Did you even read what I wrote?   Are all of your answers so generic?

[Teak]

You never had an exposure.