Thank you Teak. But why? If he was bleeding, even one drop of blood, is that not equivalent to having unprotected sex? Is that not direct blood exposure being massaged into susceptible tissue?
NO because you never had a risk from that situation.Your safe.No need to worry anymore.
So I do not need to be tested?
It was before it was inside you and as you put it you didn,t even notice an open cut on his finger anyway so this is pure speculation on your part and paranoia.
But it wasn't exposed to air if it was inside me
Hiv is unable to reproduce outside its living host,it becomes inactive and therefore unable to infect.Once exposed to the air it becomes inactive,even with blood on his finger.Your safe.
I know the HIV would not have been transmitted sexually, but am afraid it is instead from direct exposure to HIV blood.
HIV is not transmitted by fingering, with or without cuts, abrasions, scrapes or hangnails.
But what if he did have an open cut on his finger? It was very dark so I couldn't see -- I think the chance he'd have one is somewhat likely
Thank you, Ricky. That is reassuring.
HIV only transmissible through unprotected vaginal/anal sex, sharing drug works such as needles, or from mother to child. You avoid these and you won't have the slightest of HIV risk.