* Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusively negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to action by MedHelp. Conclusively negative results or a no-risk situation will be based upon the criteria established by MedHelp’s doctors. Action will be taken as follows:
* After excessive posting, a warning will be issued by MedHelp
* Continuing to post regarding the negative result / no risk situation will result in a 3 day suspension
* Continuing to post upon your return will result in a permanent ban.
* Any member who creates a second nickname will immediately be banned and have any subsequent nicknames banned.
I understand your position. I just don't think you guys take into consideration all potential situations. Like, some people are concerned about mouth cuts, ulcerations, bleeding gums upon oral contact with genitals that are susceptible to the dangers in the givers/receivers mouths. Also, there is no scientific proof that says saliva renders the HIV virus completely like many claim.
You are free to believe what you like. If you feel oral sex is a risk, then use condoms for oral.
If oral sex was a REAL risk, half the world would be infected by now, and there would be newly reported infections every day, instead of an occasional convoluted, unverified claim. The numerous studies that have been done about oral sex would have yielded at least ONE person who became positive. That hasn't happened.
Our advice will not change, no matter what you're opinion is. You are not obligated to read our posts, or visit this forum.
Heard but, the knowledge that you guys are based off of or scientific, or case studied correct? How can you bias yourselves off of this when not every single hiv contraction is put on blast by the world or scientists. I feel like a person from a small Podunk town who contracted the virus through oral, even if it did get some recognition, people would put it off as that person was lying, or they had vaginal/anal, or shared needles. I think that telling people there is no risk for something, when clearly there is and nothing is impossible, is wrong. From what I have gathered/studied/personal experience (father died from AIDS) what you are telling people is not accurate. Albeit it you say there is no scientific proof or studies that can prove oral is a risk, when people bring these stories to light or prove that their concerns for HIV from oral are very real, the "specialists" on this forum immediately shut it down as, "that person couldn't have just been having oral" or "they're lying" or a simple "that's not correct oral sex is not a gateway for HIV transmission"
You didn't have an exposure and no this is not the only forum that states oral sex is not a risk.
by Emily_MHModerator,
And to clarify, it is this site's stance, based on studies and our own MedHelp experts (all of whom are world-renowned for their work in this field), that oral sex carries no risk for HIV.
Emily
Yes, but from what I am reading from this forum, ONLY. You guys are saying oral sex is not a valid exposure and no need for concern.
Did you have a possible exposure/
Would you say 4 weeks is a good indication of my HIV status from a rapid blood test? I know it isn't conclusive but a pretty good indicator of my status?
You don't really need to ask what kind of test a clinic offers. They will have either a 3rd or 4th generation, both which are accurate.
I have tried doing that, and literally no one knows anything about their testing information. Would planned Parenthood offer that, because I called and they literally had no clue about their testing information.
yes the U.S. offers the duo test. it is not widely available though, so it might take some calling around to find out where it's offered.
a duo is not necessary after the 4th week post exposure. an antibody test at 6 weeks will also give you a very good indication of your status. both need to be followed up at 3 months post exposure for a conclusive result.