I agree with lizzie and teak,
for me I was given a No risk assessment but I have the same psychological response to their statement but I wouldn't like to bother them again and again because I know that a lot of people need help here and it would be time consuming for them to stay at one post and tell me that its fine all over again.
I admit until now the phobia lingers in me, from time to time but teak and lizzie saying concrete and solid statements like "move on!" makes me feel better. God is with us.
exactly the point of teak's comment:
we are NOT a psychological counseling service...that is not the point of THIS forum. before teak and i answer any questions, we do a search of the poster. our answers are given accordingly. we simply cannot continue to tell someone 1,400 times that they had no risk...that they do not need testing...etc, etc. do you have any idea how many of these posters are posting using multiple screen names? I DO...I READ EACH AND EVERY POST ON THIS FORUM AND THROUGH SEARCHES I REPORT SOMETIMES A DOZEN OR MORE EACH DAY. so until YOU know the background of the posters as i do...you have no business judging our answers. THE POSTERS KNOW WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
TEAK, that's why your answers bring more and more questions.
This issue also needs physicological councilling. Teak, I suggest you to read posts of Ann and Andy Velez. They do not give up as you do. They try to relieve people.
If this is a voluntary task, do your best. This is my opinion. I respect you. You are an expert but you have to consider and take physicological councilling into account.
Lizzie, That is the point: "Hiv is NOT their problem...they have deeper, underlying "issues"."
That is what I am talking about.
"Hiv is not your problem move on"
"Do not post again or you will be banned"
"Take test at 3 months. move. "
"Shut up and move"
You should not act in that manner.
oh i understand the psychology of the ppl in this forum. hiv is NOT their problem...they have deeper, underlying "issues". what i also understand is that you being a PhD student makes you no different than the rest of them. TOTALLY IRRELEVANT ! ! !
This isn't a hand holding forum and we don't offer physicological councilling.
Lizzie,
First of all, this post shows that unfortunately you are not able to understand the psychology of people in here. I was one of these people. I knew that oral sex is no risk for HIV infection, but "human" needs confirmation. That's why I asked to doctor: to ease my mind.
Secondly, I am PhD student at one of the best universities in Europe and you are the last person who can tell me "move on".
Thirdly, just warn me if I do mistake while answering.
wouldnt this be a case of the pot calling the kettle black? just looked at your posting history and AGAIN on may 20th, you asked dr hansfield if you should test for hiv. this is after you telling ppl on the forum to accept their no risk oral sex assessment.
kindly move on...
Look. There are some people here who are really in need of help. Be respectful and do not post any question because you do not need help regarding to HIV. You need psychological help, I think.
* 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.