sexual or environmental?

if a woman gets semen on her index finger, but then
> wipes it off on a man's shirt(assuming most gets
> wiped
> off if not all, but she didn't see it) of it all,
> then, a few seconds later, touches her labia minora
> with that same finger, is that considered
> environmental transmission in terms of HIV
> transmission?  like i described in the exposure?
>
> if HIV-infected semen gets outside the human body,
> then does HIV stop immeditely reproducing outside
> it's
> host?

[Teak]

No risk.

[selle]

why do u keep sayign no risk? the CDC said it's a sexual risk?

[selle]

what do u mean? i mean how is it that everyone says it's no risk when the CDC says it's a sexual risk?

[Teak]

They don't say it's a sexual risk now move on.

[selle]

are u accusing me of lying? the cdc counselor said it's a risk and a high one since the virus can survive hours outside of the body, so i'm scared stiff.

[Teak]

Yes, I just accused you of lying. Plus a CDC counselor you NEVER make that statement. So go play your little games on another forum.

[selle]

why do u knwo so much about it? i mena, anyone can say anythign on thsi forum, so why should i beleive u when u say no risk when the CDC is the expert and says it is? no offense to you, i just mean to say the CDC said it's high risk, so i say this.

[selle]

I still say i';m not lying, why wud i on such a serious disease. maybe you're lyuing to me when u say no risk, how wud u know? the CDC wrote in their e-mails to me that it's high risk.

[Teak]

They didn't tell you it was high risk, they didn't even tell you it was a risk. So move on and play your games elsewhere.

[Xhost]

Well, I do not know if you are "playing games" or not, so I will assume, not. If a CDC counselor told you that this was a high risk, I understand why you might be concerned. I have also gotten bad information, yes, from the CDC, or at least the employees of whichever company they outsource their HIV/AIDS hotline to.

And yes, you were given bad information. The type of thing you are talking about, I believe, would be termed incidental contact. What exactly does that mean? Well, as a way to explain, you should know this: HIV likes to infect inside of the body. This means that it comes from the body, and infects in the body. Thus, a vast, vast majority of new infections happen through direct transmission. The penis enters the vagina or anus, and that is where infection occurs. An IV drug user injects him or herself with a needled used recently by another HIV infected drug addict. Do you see? Direct transmission of the HIV virus from a source to the target.

Why is this so? Well, I am not HIV expert, but from my reading I would have to say that this is so because of a couple of reasons:

1. The cells that HIV infects reside, well, inside of one's body, not on the outer parts. Thus, kissing isn't a risk, nor is fingering, or dry humping, or even, as far as I can tell, oral sex.

2. HIV is a fragile virus. It does not live long outside of it's host (which is, by the way, us). Exposure to the environment outside of the body quickly attenuates the virus, leaving it incapable of infecting the cells discussed earlier, even if they were then introduced into the body. How long it takes to kill HIV is a matter of debate, but I can say it happens fairly quickly. If you have read studies of HIV's survivability outside of the human host, you may be disagreeing with me here. But, you should also know that the environmental factors in those experiments were manipulated to prolong the viability of the virii being studied. In other words, the studies were fixed to predispose towards a higher survivability bias. In real world terms, HIV dies off fairly quickly because, as we discussed earlier, it really if fairly fragile.

Contrary to what you may believe, it really isn't all that easy to transmit or contract the virus. The odds of doing so, even in situations considered high risk, are still in the favor of those involved. This does not mean that it does not happen, clearly it does, with depressing regularity. So, protection, in the form of wearing condoms, is always advisable.

However, in situations such as you have described, transmission just does not seem to occur this way. As I said before, your contact was incidental, and most certainly did not lead to HIV infection. If it did, I would imagine many, many more millions of people would have contracted the disease during the course of this plague, and we would read much more about this being a risk. Well, it doesn't so we haven't. See what I am saying?

You certainly do not need to test for this situation, as there was no real risk of infection. However, if it has you worried, taking a test at 6 weeks wouldn't hurt anyone. Indeed, every sexually active person should have an HIV test at least once a year. So, go get it and consider your yearly test. Based solely on your description of the events that have you concerned, the test will be negative.

[Xhost]

Arg, I must be tired. The last few sentences should read:

Indeed, every sexually active person should have an HIV test at least once yearly. So, go get it at 6 weeks and consider this your yearly test. Based solely on your description of the events that have you concerned (unnecessarily, by the way), your test will most surely be negative.

[selle]

i am NOT playing games at all, thankls for believing me. that CDC counseling hotline really gave me a fright. the CDC needs to get their info straight. they said a woman receing oral sex can get gonorrhea and chlamydia therough receiving oral sex, which is not true. not in reality.  i foudn thus out, and that's why i'm asking if this is true or not too. this made me panic, and i got sick from it. believe me. what wrogn info did they give you, jsut out of curiosity?

in terms of incidental contact, do u mean to say that the finger incident was NOT direct expousre? sinc it did get outside the body, in the open air, why can't it be called environmental transmission?

on a side note, i tested negative for gonorrhea, chlamydia and syphiliis and trichomoniasis after this incident, so sicne these stds are easier to acquire than HIV, does this further prove that my risk for acquirign HIV are low?

laslty, do gonorrhea, trichmoniasis and chlamydia live longer outside the human body than HIV? like if infected semen with any of these infections hit the air, on average, do they survive longer than HIV outside the human body?

[selle]

'Contrary to what you may believe, it really isn't all that easy to transmit or contract the virus. The odds of doing so, even in situations considered high risk, are still in the favor of those involved. This does not mean that it does not happen, clearly it does, with depressing regularity. So, protection, in the form of wearing condoms, is always advisable'

how can u say its in favor of those involved but then say it happens with regularity? i don[t get it.

[Xhost]

You make a good point about a confusing portion of my post. It means that while the odds are typically better that one did not catch HIV than one did catch HIV, people still do get the virus. Does this mean that you may have contracted HIV from the incident that you describe? No, not at all.

Look, you have to view all of this with the benefit of some critical reasoning. Your situation is not low risk, it is basically no risk. If there is any risk involved, it is so low as to be negligible, and thus not worth the effort involved in worrying about it at all. The idea here is that while you are perfectly welcome to continue worrying about this, there really is no reason to worry.

Ask yourself this: how often do you worry about being hit on the head by a piece of debris falling off of an airplane? About your house being hit by a falling piece of space debris? Of being struck by lightning on an overcast day? Probably not much at all. However, these things do happen. Thing is, they just don't happen very often at all.

Now, think of that, and then think of this: your odds of dying in a car crash are thousands of times greater than being hit by lightning. Your odds increase as you add in other factors, such as lack of sleep, intoxication, road conditions, etc. The person driving their car whilst drunk during an ice storm and going 100 MPH, well, he's putting himself at risk. Just like a person who regularly has, say, anal intercourse without a condom. Will our driver crash and die every time he drives in such a manner? No, probably not. Will he get HIV every time he engages in unprotected anal intercourse? No, odds are against any one episode leading to HIV. However, the risk is cumulative in both cases: keep engaging in that behavior, and odds are, something bad is going to happen.

Now, back to your situation: your in the getting hit by a meteor category. Sure, you can worry about it, but why would you? As I have said, the episode that you described is no risk for HIV, or no appreciable risk. Just like getting hit by a meteor.

Does this make more sense?

[selle]

its just that i coem from a culture where pre-marital sex is a no-no, and i made soem mistakes which i hate myself over. also, what baout my symptoms? i keep getting sick with colds and allergies, and so i feel i;m liosing immunity.

on a side note, i tested negative for gonorrhea, chlamydia syphillis (syphilis) and trichomoniasis after this, and sicne these thignss are easier to catch than HIV, can i also bet that i didn't catch it either?

and do u really mean that even with a partner confirmed to be HIV+, and the other partner is HIV-,  that they have anal sex, the odds are still in favor of the negative partner of not getign the virus? if so, why?

[selle]

this is my full exposure: i'm a female who engaged in deep prolonged french

kissine a few times, received unprotected oral sex

from a guy a few times, was fingered a few times, and

sat on a guy's penis(which was covered by his

semen-soaked underwear, and I had NO underwear on at

the time), and got some of his semen on my index

finger, and then wiped it off on his shirt, then

stupidly grabbed my labia minora with that same finger

a few secodns later. I'm sure most of the semen should

have come off, although i didn't see it. what's my

risk for getting HIV, if at all?

[Xhost]

Selle,

I understand why you are feeling this way, I really do. Given your description of the events in question, my answer remains the same: you had absolutely no chance of contracting HIV. None, zero, nada, zilch.

Now, back to your statement that you come from a culture that frowns upon pre-marital sex. The issue here is that you feel guilty and poorly about yourself for engaging in an activity that is disapproved of by those that you love and respect. These are common feelings when we have crossed some internal moral boundary. You feel you have made a mistake, and now feel that you must punish yourself for that mistake. And what better way to punish yourself than to convince yourself that, against all logic and reason, you may have contracted a terrible disease?

Your conscience is a guide to daily life. It helps you make good moral decisions and treat others well, for instance. However, in some people, the conscience is not only a guide, it is a punisher. And yours is certainly punishing you. The situation is this: you did something you are not proud of. Ok, you are human, and as such, will make mistakes. The question now is how will you deal with this?

Your two options are:

1. Go ahead and feel bad, feel ashamed, feel guilty, but resolve to "do better" in the future, to learn from this experience and make different decisions when faced with the same situations later in life.* In short, go through the long or short process of forgiving yourself a simple mistake and then moving forward.

Or,

2. Spend the next number of months worrying that you have HIV, when clearly you do not, drive yourself crazy and, when you feel you have punished yourself enough, eventually realize that you did not contract HIV. Then, you will still have to go through the process of forgiving yourself.

My advice, go with option #1. It is a healthier and less damaging path to follow, believe me.

*While I understand that you feel very ashamed of premarital sex, I wrote what I did from your viewpoint, not my own, as I don't see much wrong with it. Just play safe, use a condom for vaginal intercourse, and you will be fine.

Good luck to you,

xhost

[selle]

thanks for ur help, i appreciate it. but one thing i ant to clearly state in response to your use condom for vaginal sex: i never had vaginal or anal sex, so why do u mention condoms all of a sudden? or is it to just advise me on it?  if so, i take ur advice. or cud i have somehow had vaginal or anal sex by just sitting on the guy's penis and not known it?  i wasn't drunk or anythign then. i was consciuous and sat on it, which was covered by his udnwerwear, but i had no underwear on.

also, can a woman get gonorrhea, chlamydia or trichomoniasis  if a man who has it ejaculates semen on his hand, then fingers her vagina?

and do gonorhea and chlamydia live longer outside the body than HIV? that makes sense to me, sicne they're both bacteria, with a cell wall.

[Xhost]

First, my comment about using a condom was just general advice. You are right, you in now way had intercourse. And, you in now way had any chance of catching HIV from any of the activities that you described.

As for the other STDs that you mention, I cannot speak to those with any intelligence. However, did you not say that you were tested for those and the tests were negative.

My advice, take a deep breath, sit back and try to calm down a bit. You were not in danger of contracting anything, except a bad case of guilt.

[selle]

i know u can still get HIV if u test negative for other stds, but based on the activities i did, and knowing that i tested negative for gonorrhea, chlamydia, trichonmoniasis, syphillis (syphilis) and dont have other stds either, and they're easier to catch than HIV, isn't it feaible to conclude my chances of gettng a negative test are good?

also, is it true that more people would get it if it were that easy? in terms of my semen on finger part where,  i 'got some of his semen on my index
finger, and then wiped it off on his shirt, then
stupidly grabbed my labia minora with that same finger
a few secodns later. I'm sure most of the semen should
have come off, although i didn't see it?' i mean if it were that easy, than more people would easily have it, no? its never been documented to be transmitted this way.

[Xhost]

Everything you have said is entirely correct, and I am glad you are thinking this way! First, yes, all of those other STIs are entirely easier to acquire than HIV. So, yes, not only is it feasible to think that your HIV test will be negative, it is a certainty that your HIV test will be negative. In fact, you do not even need a test!

Yes, it is true that if HIV were that easy to acquire, many, many more people would have been infected over the course of HIV's life cycle. A good thought.

You have described what has happened several times now. I understand your situation, so, no need to describe it again. And, yes again! To my knowledge, there is no documented case of HIV having been transmitted in the manner in which you describe, which should put the notion that you somehow contracted it in this manner completely out of your head. It is beyond the realm of possibility that you did so.

And now, what will you do? The right thing, which is to stop worrying about HIV? Or, the wrong thing, which is to continue to worry about something that had no chance of happening?

[alienshadow]

amen

[selle]

someone said to me that while u can get HIV without getting another STD, the fact alone that my tests my activities were low risk to start with, and that stds can be transmitted easier even sometiems in low risk activities, that my chances of HIV are also nonexistant, is that why they think my test will likely be negative, even though a person can get HIV without another std?because my
activities were low risk to start with, and that sicne
the other STDs(gonorrhe, chlamydia and syphillis (syphilis) and
trich) are passed the same or similar wyas, and i
didn't get them, that i'm also at no risk for HIV

[selle]

i menat i did ow risk activities, and that i ddn't get other stds, and they're easier than HIV to acquire, that my chances of HIV being positive are extremely low. makes sense? i reiterate cuz i think i made a grammer mistake.

[Xhost]

Typically, one would not take tests for other STIs and ordinarily rule out HIV based on the results of those tests. I say this because I view our discussion as an opportunity to educate, and that is the only reason.

The simple fact of the matter is that you are, I believe, so focused on HIV that you are missing what I am saying. Which is this: you have no reason to worry about HIV, or any other STIs (you have been tested for those, after all). Regardless of the relative difficulty of contracting any other STI compared to HIV, this is a moot point for you. Why? Because, HIV simply does not seem to be transmitted in the manner in which you have described. It just doesn't happen.

In other words, you seem very worried about a disease you do not have, could not have caught, and will not test positive for. It's as simple as that: no chance, no way. You do not have HIV.

[selle]

regardless of the relative difficulty of contracting any other std compared to HIV.
what does this mean?

also, i knwo one shoudln't knowck out HIV based on negative results of other stds, but sicne i did engage in low risk behaviour, and tested negaitve, doesn't it sypport my chances of HIV beign none basedon this fact, thats what i meant.