To TEAK , Mike_no, Joan123

[sad82]

I hate to repeat myself again, but nobody sseems to ans my question.
I had a 9 week negative test ( rapid test, finger ***** ), risk is unprotected viginal sex with a girl, CAN I MOVE ON NOW?

Question 2: TEAK keep mention that unprotected sex is consider HIGH risk, but i check through some of the post in Dr HHH reply and he say its a LOW risk( 1 in 2000, and insertive party is even lower), Now is your word against Dr HHH, a professional doctor, whom do i believe?

[Teak]

I have know idea where you get your information, I'll tell you from experience, HIV is the end of the world as one previously had. Do you think it's just taking pills and it's fine? Have you ever taken PEP just for 28 days. We that have HIV do that everyday. You live with stomach cramps, diarrhea, vision trouble, hearing trouble, PN, OIs, resistance to meds, brain fog, dementia, severely fatigue and the list goes on. Some are bed fast, some are wheel chair bound. Some have to have continuous home health care. You don't think that is not the end of the world for some? It's not the life they had before contracting HIV. You Monkey make it sound like it's nothing and that's HIV is nothing to worry about. Put yourself in anyone

[parrot 12]

6 to 8  or 10 to 14, does it really matter?
i think that u all taking that too far.

u made a mistake, lower or higher risk, so im sure u can wait 6,8, or 10 if u want to know if u are ok

everyone relax

[Teak]

There you go with your odds and statistics again, which have nothing to do with someone's actual status. It's a piece of paper, where changes can be made at the stroke of a pencil. You can't do that with someone that has had an exposure. Only testing will give them their status. Anyone that has had a risk and goes by stats and odds are just fooling himself or herself. HIV is not a guessing game to be played with as some on here seems to think.

[monkeyflower]

Actually, sorry to say that blood transfusions and needle sharing are at the top of the list. Unprotected receptive anal is considerably higher risk than unprotected receptive vaginal. Unprotected insertive anal is higher than unprotected insertive vaginal--which, in answer to the original poster's question, is indeed a 1 in 2000 risk. I'm not even going into this absurd testing nonsense.

So, gosh, who to trust. An internationally known and highly respected HIV/STD prevention expert, or another anonymous internet yahoo without even so much as a MD on some peer to peer board? Decisions, decisions.

[Teak]

Sorry to say unprotect vaginal sex is not low. It's up there with unprotected anal sex and unprotect anal sex is the top of the list.

[sad82]

but Dr HHH say that unprotected viginal sex is consider low risk.