Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
Avatar universal

HIV Risk - Oral Sex No Ejaculation Anal Fingering

Hi Everyone.

Two weeks ago I hooked up with a guy (I'm male) and he said he was HIV-, D/D Free but you never know.  We gave each other unprotected oral with no ejaculation (maybe a little precum although I didnt see any), he fingered my anus and he edged me (no penetration).  Got a little weirded out as he said he was always safe but when edging me was trying to penetrate which I didnt let happen.

Any risk here?  If so, I saw the window period on the Seattle website as two weeks for an RNA test.  I also called them and they said a negative RNA at two weeks is conclusive.  What does everyone think?
10 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
186166 tn?1385259382
offense?  no

IF YOU HAD A RISK...we would be more than happy to discuss your testing needs.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
I appreciate the response.  This was my first time with a male which has probably contributed to my anxiety levels.  I will probably test just to deal with anxiety and move on.  Not sure if the encounter would have happened had I not just lost a very close family member and I was at a very vulnerable time.

Lizzie Lou - I appreciate the time and effort the moderators put in on this site.  Seeing as this is the first time I have done extensive research on HIV, I am just trying to get answers and sift through all the data out there.  It seems the more I look, the more contradictory information I have found.  So please don't take offense to my questions.
Helpful - 0
186166 tn?1385259382
The APTIMA HIV-1 RNA Qualitative Assay is not meant to be used as a stand-alone test for the diagnosis of HIV-1 infection.  A positive NAT result indicates probable infection and should be followed up later with traditional EIA antibody testing to confirm HIV infection.

you have been assessed as not having a risk from what you have described.  now move along.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Nobody on here has ever said that RNA tests are not approved diagnostic tests. You probably read a comment about DNA tests, which are not approved, and got confused.

My understanding was that RNA tests at King County are used in combination with antibody tests, but maybe that has changed. The antibody test was still used as a safety measure, because the RNA testing is so new. See the thread below from Dr. HHH that explains the program:

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/Further-testing-required/show/550794

I agree that RNA should show positive at two weeks if someone is infected, which is the peak of the viremic phase. However, I believe that the manufacturers of the RNA test do not recommend it as a stand alone test, hence the recommendations on this forum. You can probably find more information on that in this forum from one of Teak's threads.

I personal think that it is a complete waste of resources for you to get an RNA test over oral sex. However, from rereading Dr. HHH's summary of the program, you may qualify because you are in a high risk group.

Both doctors here consider oral sex to be virtually zero risk, and there are several other websites that support the same view (SF City Clinic, Johns Hopkins). But if you'd rather believe the CDC then this website then please do not continue to post here.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
I know you guys are saying I dont have a risk.  However, a negative test would help out significantly.  I also see where everyone says an RNA test is not approved for diagnostic purposes per the CDC but then everyone says that oral sex is no risk but the CDC says it is.  I called the two city run clinics that administer the RNA test (S.F, and Seattle) and they both said testing negative after two weeks is conclusive in their mind.  They said after two weeks that anyone who was positive would have a measurable viral load.  they did warn of false positives.

It just seems some responses quote the CDC about some things (RNA not a diagnostic test) and negates their information about oral sex being a risk.  Then when I call the counselors at the clinics themselves and they tell me RNA is a gold standard for them, I get confused.  Especially since this clinic is Dr. H's home clinic.  Not trying to start a war or debate but just trying to understand the informaiton that is out there.

http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthServices/health/communicable/hiv/resources/testing.aspx

How long should I wait after a possible risk to get tested?


No matter what kind of HIV test you use, there is a short period of time right after infection when the tests won't be able to detect signs of HIV, even if you are infected. This is called a "window period." If you get tested too soon (during the window period), your results may be wrong. How long you must wait depends on the type of test you take.

For antibody testing:

When HIV enters the blood, the body reacts by making cells called antibodies. Most people will create enough antibodies within just 4 weeks after infection though another test is recommended after 3 – 6 months to be sure. In very rare cases, it can take 6 months. Therefore, it's best to test one month after a possible exposure, and again at 3 – 6 months.

For RNA testing:

Most people will get accurate results 1 week after infection, although it may take up to 2 weeks. To be absolutely sure, you should wait 2 weeks before getting an RNA test
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Thanks.  I guess I will forego any testing since this has been my only risk episode since my last test and will consider myself HIV-.  Appreciate the advice.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Fingering is not a risk either.

RNA tests are reserved for people who had a risk (you don't qualify), and they are used in conjuction with antibody tests. The RNA test can provide a good indication of one's status at two weeks, but an antibody test is still required at 3 months for a conclusive result. Again, that applies to people who had a risk (you did not).
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
What about anal fingering or the RNA test question?  Thanks for responding.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
That post has no relevance to the advice on this forum. Scientific studies show that oral sex is not a means for transmission. And that poster did not know whether or not there was consistent condom use during his anal sex act.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
One things to add.  I might not have given this much thought but the poster before me was adamant that he acquired HIV by giving oral sex with no ejaculaiton from someone who said they were HIV-.
Helpful - 0
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the HIV Prevention Community

Top HIV Answerers
366749 tn?1544695265
Karachi, Pakistan
370181 tn?1595629445
Arlington, WA
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
Can I get HIV from surfaces, like toilet seats?
Can you get HIV from casual contact, like hugging?
Frequency of HIV testing depends on your risk.
Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) may help prevent HIV infection.