One case out of the millions of HIV cases. No one here is going to tell you that masturbation/fluids are a risk based on ONE case, from 1988, which cannot even be verified to be the true method of transmission.
You might as well fear being trampled by a herd of elephants while trying to dodge a falling meteorite.
That was from 1988.
Given that the advancements in testing, treatment and knowledge of the transmission of HIV we have today, indeed that once outside of the body the changes in the temperature and exposure render the virus unable to infect. Transmission requires inside the body for it to be a risk as well as the air right space of a needle.
This is another reason why I advise people to try to stop researching on the web. There is a lot of data that is agenda driven or , like in this case, out of date and not up to the current standards of knowledge of the virus.
Well what I am trying to point out here is that........when people access risks......do they take into account the prevalence and the viral load?
For example a person having an incident in South Africa is not the same as somebody having an incident in England or the US. This is because of prevalence.....in SA HIV is much more an issue.
Also the viral load has to be taken into account. I don't know when people say that mutual masturbation is not a risk in the presence of vaginal/semen as lube whether they take into account the viral load?
Same in the case of giving oral....if someone is giving oral to a guy who then ejaculates in that someone's mouth, if the viral load is high....there is a risk..................what do you think people?
If you look in the article below, one can see that there has been documented cases of hiv transmission via oral sex.