Aa
The one area where we find the Doctor's oral-sex pos ition confusing...
Teak, if you're available...
First, I'll apologize if incomplete parts of this question were sent to you prior to this. My computer has an issue these days and has been sending off partial messages prematurely.
A couple of seemingly contradictory statements by the immensely knowledgeable Dr. Handsfield have a few of us confused and hoping you can clarify what you would know his specific position to be regarding this oral sex issue.
In May/2011, a poster referenced this comment by Dr. Handsfield:
"There are reports of people acquiring HIV by receiving oral sex (fellatio, not cunnilingus). However, many (most? all?) such reports were by people who might have denied or forgotten other exposures, and some experts do not consider them validated cases. My view is that such transmissions probably occur, but too rare to worry about for practical purposes."
DR HHH
Yet, in other postings, the Doctor states that:
"And oral sex is basically safe sex -- completely safe with respect to HIV and although not zero risk for other STDs, the chance of infection is far lower than for unprotected vaginal or anal sex. Please educate yourself about the real risks. If you stick with oral sex and condom-protected vaginal or anal sex, you have no HIV worries and very little worry about other STDs. " DR HANSFIELD
Teak, the doctor can't call oral sex "completely safe with respect to HIV" and also state that, "My view is that such (oral sex) transmissions probably occur, but too rare to worry about for practical purposes." If oral sex is causing even rare HIV transmissions, then it surely is not "completely safe with respect to HIV".
This causes us confusion, and degree and consistency matter to people desperate to find clarity and hope regarding their situations, as they examine the specifics of these highly esteemed medical experts' statements. These specific comments above represent a contradiction at a time when we are looking for consistency to hang on to. A particular sex practice simply cannot be "completely safe" but also be responsible for HIV transmissions, however "rare". Completely safe is completely safe. Somebody couldn't say, "I'm completely off drugs and use them too rarely to worry about for practical purposes."
Please address these questions, if you would:
1. Do the two differing viewpoints above simply represent an evolution in Dr. Handsfield's thinking, whereby in the past he felt that such rare transmissions via oral sex did occur but now feels that oral sex is completely safe?
2. Currently, does he believe that oral-sex transmissions of HIV do occur, however rarely--or does he believe that oral sex is "completely safe" regarding HIV transmission?
3. If the doctor does believe that oral-sex transmission of HIV does rarely occur, does he believe that receiving fellatio is completely safe and that the risk lies only to the person performing fellatio or does he think that, however rarely, a person receiving a blowjob has actually acquired HIV as a result of receiving that oral sex act only and that such transmission is possible?
4. Is there a unanimous viewpoint among you and the other experts with whom you interact, regarding the above distinction between whether receiving a blowjob is "completely safe" or is less than completely safe and could result in HIV infection, however rarely?
Thank you very much for your time and willingness to give us some peace of mind with this specific situation. This one inconsistency has caused second-guessing in some members of our group and we appreciate your help in clarifying the doctor's current position with regard to the above statements, as well as addressing the above question from your own perspective.
Jarvis
First, I'll apologize if incomplete parts of this question were sent to you prior to this. My computer has an issue these days and has been sending off partial messages prematurely.
A couple of seemingly contradictory statements by the immensely knowledgeable Dr. Handsfield have a few of us confused and hoping you can clarify what you would know his specific position to be regarding this oral sex issue.
In May/2011, a poster referenced this comment by Dr. Handsfield:
"There are reports of people acquiring HIV by receiving oral sex (fellatio, not cunnilingus). However, many (most? all?) such reports were by people who might have denied or forgotten other exposures, and some experts do not consider them validated cases. My view is that such transmissions probably occur, but too rare to worry about for practical purposes."
DR HHH
Yet, in other postings, the Doctor states that:
"And oral sex is basically safe sex -- completely safe with respect to HIV and although not zero risk for other STDs, the chance of infection is far lower than for unprotected vaginal or anal sex. Please educate yourself about the real risks. If you stick with oral sex and condom-protected vaginal or anal sex, you have no HIV worries and very little worry about other STDs. " DR HANSFIELD
Teak, the doctor can't call oral sex "completely safe with respect to HIV" and also state that, "My view is that such (oral sex) transmissions probably occur, but too rare to worry about for practical purposes." If oral sex is causing even rare HIV transmissions, then it surely is not "completely safe with respect to HIV".
This causes us confusion, and degree and consistency matter to people desperate to find clarity and hope regarding their situations, as they examine the specifics of these highly esteemed medical experts' statements. These specific comments above represent a contradiction at a time when we are looking for consistency to hang on to. A particular sex practice simply cannot be "completely safe" but also be responsible for HIV transmissions, however "rare". Completely safe is completely safe. Somebody couldn't say, "I'm completely off drugs and use them too rarely to worry about for practical purposes."
Please address these questions, if you would:
1. Do the two differing viewpoints above simply represent an evolution in Dr. Handsfield's thinking, whereby in the past he felt that such rare transmissions via oral sex did occur but now feels that oral sex is completely safe?
2. Currently, does he believe that oral-sex transmissions of HIV do occur, however rarely--or does he believe that oral sex is "completely safe" regarding HIV transmission?
3. If the doctor does believe that oral-sex transmission of HIV does rarely occur, does he believe that receiving fellatio is completely safe and that the risk lies only to the person performing fellatio or does he think that, however rarely, a person receiving a blowjob has actually acquired HIV as a result of receiving that oral sex act only and that such transmission is possible?
4. Is there a unanimous viewpoint among you and the other experts with whom you interact, regarding the above distinction between whether receiving a blowjob is "completely safe" or is less than completely safe and could result in HIV infection, however rarely?
Thank you very much for your time and willingness to give us some peace of mind with this specific situation. This one inconsistency has caused second-guessing in some members of our group and we appreciate your help in clarifying the doctor's current position with regard to the above statements, as well as addressing the above question from your own perspective.
Jarvis
It does apply, and if you don't like the answers you've received take it to another website. Our answers aren't going to change.
Hi - this specific question has received specific answers multiple times. If anyone here felt that oral sex was a risk for HIV transmission, they would not say it was not multiple times. There is no confirmation that anyone has been infected this way.
Any follow-up questions regarding our Experts' comments or stance should be addressed by posting in that forum.
This thread is now closed.
Any follow-up questions regarding our Experts' comments or stance should be addressed by posting in that forum.
This thread is now closed.
That doesn't apply. I'm not debating your stance. I'm asking you specifically what your stance IS in relation to my direct, specific question.
Kirstie_MHModerator Feb 06, 2014
We can't tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that our forums aren't a venue for debate over our stance that oral sex carries no risk for HIV. Our stance will not change unless we receive definitive scientific evidence to the contrary.
We can't tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that our forums aren't a venue for debate over our stance that oral sex carries no risk for HIV. Our stance will not change unless we receive definitive scientific evidence to the contrary.
Teak, would you at least tell me this: what is your main reason for not giving me just a yes or a no to my very specific question above? It's so easy to do.
You were advised if you want to know why he said what he said, you pay and post your questions to him directly.
Kirstie_MHModerator Feb 06, 2014
We can't tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that our forums aren't a venue for debate over our stance that oral sex carries no risk for HIV. Our stance will not change unless we receive definitive scientific evidence to the contrary.
Kirstie_MHModerator Feb 06, 2014
We can't tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that our forums aren't a venue for debate over our stance that oral sex carries no risk for HIV. Our stance will not change unless we receive definitive scientific evidence to the contrary.
Nobody seems to want to directly address my specific question regarding the general point contained in a prior comment of Dr. Handsfield, where he stated that he feels that receptive oral sex has, in fact, resulted in HIV transmission (rarely).
Dr. Handsfield: "My view is that such transmissions probably occur, but too rare to worry about for practical purposes."
I was hoping for something different in terms of the forum's reply.
Dr. Handsfield: "My view is that such transmissions probably occur, but too rare to worry about for practical purposes."
I was hoping for something different in terms of the forum's reply.
* 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.
* 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.
To be accurate, I did not get a 'yes' or 'no' answer to my specific question. I got Teak telling me that he had answered similar questions.
A 'yes' or 'no' will be the end of it. I've asked repeatedly for that but there is apparently a reluctance to give that direct and specific an answer to that specific question. Everybody else gets yes/no answers to their specific questions; why is this one a problem?
A 'yes' or 'no' will be the end of it. I've asked repeatedly for that but there is apparently a reluctance to give that direct and specific an answer to that specific question. Everybody else gets yes/no answers to their specific questions; why is this one a problem?
Teak has answered you 2'x already with the same answer.
It would have comforted me to have that specific question answered, given my current anxiety, but I think you wish to leave it at that.
Okay, Teak, I thought that this wording, while similar, did make the scenario a bit different and was worth a dedicated answer but if, in your opinion, it's completely redundant then I'm sorry for that. I wasn't trying to be sneaky and get over on you, I really did (and do, to be honest) see a difference but I don't want to pester you. I do thank you for responding and again, I'm sorry if this wasn't the type of question I should have asked here. I don't get out/online too often.:)
You are asking the same questions that you have already asked and been answered. Changing the wording isn't going to obtain a different answer.
Well, that's true--a person should be brave. But I have asked a question of Teak above and I know that, even if the question is somewhat repetitive, he has always answered the people graciously and sometimes firmly, but he has taken the time to address their fears and concerns.
That is all I am asking of him here, to answer the question I posted because I value his opinion and wish to have his answer to this specific, exact question from him, which is how I understand this forum to work, that specific questions may be asked.
"Is it your opinion that no one has ever acquired HIV as the result of receiving a blowjob and that such an act is 100% safe with regard to transmission of HIV?"
That is all I am asking of him here, to answer the question I posted because I value his opinion and wish to have his answer to this specific, exact question from him, which is how I understand this forum to work, that specific questions may be asked.
"Is it your opinion that no one has ever acquired HIV as the result of receiving a blowjob and that such an act is 100% safe with regard to transmission of HIV?"
All these you have said showed how scare you are. You said so firmly just to want to get the real reason that why it is no risk by doing oral-sex, basically because you are so fear to be injected with hiv !
If you believe the words Teak said, you can say no words here or you should be responsable for what you have done . You should be brave to stand any risk of hiv or other STDs.
That is all !
If you believe the words Teak said, you can say no words here or you should be responsable for what you have done . You should be brave to stand any risk of hiv or other STDs.
That is all !
Teak, that could be the case re. "Nick" but I don't recognize or recall the username. As I said, it has been a very long time. I have also allowed a visiting colleague to use this account to make inquiries; I hope that's not a problem.
So, Teak, if I could just ask you to directly answer this question, I'd be grateful:
Is it your opinion that no one has ever acquired HIV as the result of receiving a blowjob and that such an act is 100% safe with regard to transmission of HIV?
Thank you.
Is it your opinion that no one has ever acquired HIV as the result of receiving a blowjob and that such an act is 100% safe with regard to transmission of HIV?
Thank you.
Then you are not using your original nick, correct?
As I indicated, Teak, it has been a very long time. I don't know what I've done to get you so upset. Whatever it is, I'm sorry about that. I just wanted a bit of a clarification, is all. Instead of directly answering my question, you're asking me one. Compared to some of the disrespectful questions on here, I think I've been civil and maybe don't know all the rules but I'm not trying to be disagreeable.
If I had thought or known, that HIV could be transmitted by oral sex do you actually think that I would say it is not a risk of HIV transmission? You've never posted on this forum before?
Okay, that's fair. I have not been on here in a very long time and was not aware, until this moment, that that option existed. Thanks for pointing it out.
Teak, could I then ask you this specifically:
Is it your own opinion that receiving fellatio has ever resulted in acquiring HIV, however rarely? Or is it your opinion that no one has ever acquired HIV as the result of receiving a blowjob and that such an act is "completely safe" with regard to HIV?
Thanks.
Teak, could I then ask you this specifically:
Is it your own opinion that receiving fellatio has ever resulted in acquiring HIV, however rarely? Or is it your opinion that no one has ever acquired HIV as the result of receiving a blowjob and that such an act is "completely safe" with regard to HIV?
Thanks.
If you would like to understand why any of the doctor say what they say, pay your 22 dollars and ask them personally. It's not up for discussion in the forum.
Please, don't misunderstand my question. I believe my question is legitimate, in that we have simply noted two seemingly diverging opinions on this issue by your highly esteemed Dr. Handsfield, whom we regard with the greatest respect.
We are not being confrontational or asking that you tell us what to believe. We have simply spotted what anyone would consider to be an informational inconsistency and are asking that you help us to understand the intended meaning.
Surely you would be willing to do that to someone who is writing with respect and humility to you. At no time was this question intended to be disrespectful, that is the opposite of our feeling toward your most helpful and compassionate website. This is just a matter of wanting to better understand a particular stated position. That is all. Thank you again.
We are not being confrontational or asking that you tell us what to believe. We have simply spotted what anyone would consider to be an informational inconsistency and are asking that you help us to understand the intended meaning.
Surely you would be willing to do that to someone who is writing with respect and humility to you. At no time was this question intended to be disrespectful, that is the opposite of our feeling toward your most helpful and compassionate website. This is just a matter of wanting to better understand a particular stated position. That is all. Thank you again.
Kirstie_MHModerator Feb 06, 2014
We can't tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that our forums aren't a venue for debate over our stance that oral sex carries no risk for HIV. Our stance will not change unless we receive definitive scientific evidence to the contrary.
We can't tell you what to believe, but we can tell you that our forums aren't a venue for debate over our stance that oral sex carries no risk for HIV. Our stance will not change unless we receive definitive scientific evidence to the contrary.
This discussion was closed by the MedHelp Community Moderation team. If you have any questions please
contact us.
You are reading content posted in the HIV Prevention Community
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.
