With regard to their being no documented instances of HIV transmission via needlestick outside a medical setting, is the core reason the non-immediacy of such events - i.e., it is unlikely that one would impale one's foot on a needle freshly dropped from an IV (and HIV positive) drug user's hand.
Because I imagine that it's probable that there have been occasions that persons have been accidentally stuck with a needle (and that said needle has hit a vein, for example), but with no transmission taking place..
I guess my question is, even if one were to step on a discarded needle such that it enters a vein, one would not become infected on account of the needle in question not being freshly discarded?
It's likely, right, that people have sometimes been stuck by a needle that happened to hit a vein.. but with no transmission taking place because it is unlikely that people have stepped on needles (even in such a way that a vein is entered) seconds after an IV drug user discarded it?
Sorry for the long-winded post.
Basically, I'm trying to understand the statistics re: non medical needlestick HIV transmission.
There have been no such documented cases not because no one has ever been accidentally stuck in a vein by a discarded needle.. but because no one has ever been stuck in a vein five seconds after the needle was discarded?
Please help me understand the importance of "vein-hitting" and "immediacy" in the context of their being no documented needlestick HIV transmission outside a medical setting.
Thank you