It didn't fail there was NO RISK. No more questions on this subject.
Sir I have one more condom question. The one I used was kept in a compartment in my truck for about a month or so during the summer. Although it did not break, would that pose a risk or do you still stick by your answer?
Sorry, I know it's alot of questions, just frightened of it all. Good evening
You were never at risk, period. If you can't move on take it to the Anxiety Forum.
so I assume little to no risk?
what if the girl in question smokes?
I still have questions about the fellatio performed on me. Like I said, I noticed no blood or cuts that I saw, how effective is saliva in killing the virus if exposed in this matter?
Polyurthane is as good as Latex. NO RISK.
and that includes polyurthane condoms (I think I used that one) definatley, one of the two.
Including the HIV virus. Reread, they were not talking about "LATEX" condoms.
including the HIV virus? From what I've read, (correct me if I'm wrong) but I heard in some cases the pores are bigger than the virus. Others I've heard the latex condoms are so called (double dipped) I know whatr you said about the scenario but you still think that the unprotected fellatio could've posed some risk?
Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in
preventing transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. In addition, correct
and consistent use of latex condoms can reduce the risk of other sexually
transmitted diseases (STDs), including discharge and genital ulcer diseases.
While the effect of condoms in preventing human papilloma virus (HPV) infection
is unknown, condom use has been associated with a lower rate of cervical
cancer, an HPV-associated disease. Laboratory studies have demonstrated that latex condoms provide an essentially impermeable barrier to particles the size of STD pathogens.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/condoms.pdf
What kind of inputs do you have regarding pores in condoms?
I see, well as stated before I appreciate the inputs, I just needed these and more professional opinions on the matter. Quite the learning experience.
You may think you are erudite on the matter of early HIV infection and symptoms, given that you've read a "plethora of research" about this. However, if you read just a little bit more, you will find that symptoms are not a valid indicator on whether or not you have HIV.
Lots of things cause lymphadenopathy. The flu is an example.
Plus, HIV does not just cause one node to swell. Nodes throughout your body swell.
The fact remains that most people who contract HIV do not exhibit symptoms of any sort, until they get opportunistic infections and become sick.
What was my first reply to you?
Ok, It's just from what I've been reading, I've done a plethora of research on the matter, and I read that a swollen gland is a possible symptom. So you think my test will come back negative? Thank you for your input sir.
Doesn't have anything to do with HIV.
was it a good idea to get tested. Been 3 months and I REALLY started worrying about a week ago
oh and I had a swollen lymph node about a month and a half ago, but no other symptoms that I was aware of
Doesn't change the fact you didn't have a risk.
I heard she was (and I hate give out this info but I'm to worried) molested by her possibly HIV+ father. That' just what I was told. the first test was done I think after all of this. Sorry, just remebered.
Alot of people think I'm fine, but do you think I could be that ONE in a whatever # chance?