Blood exposure!

[JasonB]

Hello all. I have read the forums for sometime ever since an incident I had about a year ago and have often noticed members saying Insertive oral sex (getting a blow job) as no risk or very low risk. This was what happened to me from a girl that went to my school for about 15 or so seconds. It was not rough and I have not had any symptoms since then for the past year but it is still a source of anxiety. I have not yet gotten tested and I cannot right now but will do so in the coming months. In the mean time I like to try to quantify the risk and get your comments if I can.

CDC quote for risk transmission is 1/20000.
The girl is from the USA where 1/300 are infected since approximately 1 million are said to be infected out of the 300 million in the population of USA.
It is also said that approximately 80% of people who get infected get acute retroviral syndrome (based on wikipedia page). Not sure about this statistic.

Now given all this I calculate the risk as:

Risk = 1/20000 x 1/300 x 2/10 (Since I never had retroviral syndrome)
 = 1/30000000 Or 1 in 30 million.

Does this seem correct to you? I appreciate all your comments. I realize that this is a very low risk but for some reason it still bothers me a great deal given that there is still a possibility no matter how remote.

Also on an unrelated note, does anyone have any idea on my possible risk for Hepatitis C from this encounter (I have A and B vaccine so I am not concerned about that).

Thank you very much.

[Matty the Damned]

Wikipedia is horseshit. I could toddle over there now and edit that page to say whatever I want it to say.

Your risk of getting HIV from a 15 second hummer is exactly zero. The theoretical risk of contracting HIV from a blowjob pertains to the catcher not the pitcher.

Hepatitis C is also a no risk issue in this situation.

You do not need to be tested for HIV. Please take the time to read our Welcome Thread to learn more about how HIV is and is not transmitted.

MtD

[JasonB]

Thank you for your reply. It seems wherever I look the notion of transmission is said to be theoretically possible or even documented while your site and others say it is not so. Following the literature these are the only two studies I could find supporting the notion of Female to Male transmission but I could not get abstracts. Matty thank you for your statement it is reassuring. I just dislike the lack of absolutism used on other sites where they only say it is lower risk than vaginal and anal rather than no or 0 risk.

3. Rozembaum W, Gharakhanian S, Cardon B, Duval E, Coulaud JP. HIV transmission by oral sex [Letter]. Lancet 1988, i: 1395.1395.
Cited Here...

4. Spitzer PG, Weiner NJ. Transmission of HIV infection from a woman to a man by oral sex [Letter]. N Engl J Med 1989, 320: 251.251.
Cited Here... | PubMed

[Matty the Damned]

The studies you cite here are more than 20 years old and have long since been supplanted by other research.

MtD

[Ann]

Jason,

You've never seen one of us (me, Andy, Matty or Rodney) say that getting a blowjob  is "low" risk. GETTING A BLOWJOB IS NO RISK. 

Not only is saliva not infectious, but it also contains over a dozen different proteins and enzymes that damage hiv and render it unable to infect. You're not going to change our minds on this matter by bringing us ancient research that has since been disproved.

Ann

[JasonB]

Good points and thank you matty and Ann. Your posts are very reassuring and make me feel quite relieved.

I find it interesting that the CDC claims numerous studies show there is transmission from a woman to a man through oral sex yet they don't cite which studies they are referring to. Perhaps it is the same case studies that I have shown you.

Anyhow thank you for your comments I really appreciate it!

[Andy Velez]

...And the CDC as well as other organizations and doctors are inclined to cover their butts by saying transmission is possible in any number of ways. It's about "theoretical" risk. But in the real world of HIV we know that the sexual transmission of HIV is about unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse. Could it happen other ways? Maybe. But such claims never seem to hold up under careful scrutiny.

[JasonB]

...And the CDC as well as other organizations and doctors are inclined to cover their butts by saying transmission is possible in any number of ways. It's about "theoretical" risk. But in the real world of HIV we know that the sexual transmission of HIV is about unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse. Could it happen other ways? Maybe. But such claims never seem to hold up under careful scrutiny.

What other routes do you hypothesize are viable?

[RapidRod]

What other routes do you hypothesize are viable?

Andy didn't hypothesize he gave your scientific facts.

[Matty the Damned]

What other routes do you hypothesize are viable?

We don't engage in speculation here.

HIV is transmitted via unprotected anal and vaginal sex, sharing contaminated injecting equipment such as needles and syringes and in some cases from HIV positive mother to unborn child.

MtD

[JasonB]

One additional question if I may. What is my risk of Herpes from this encounter given I have not had any symptoms (warts) for more than a year?

Also I don't know if she had herpes but if she did (oral herpes) does that change the possibility of HIV transmission in any way?

Thanks!

[RapidRod]

No.

[Ann]

Jason,

Why are you still worrying about this 15 second blowjob? Don't you have better things to do?

What's this about herpes and warts? Herpes and warts are two completely different things. Herpes causes sores that are called blisters or lesions. If you have herpes, you may go ages between outbreaks, but your body still harbours the virus.

If she has oral herpes and was having an outbreak on her lips when she blew you, then you have a chance of getting herpes on your penis. You should never stick your dick into a mouth that has any sort of lesions on the lips. that's just common sense. However, this does not increase your chance of getting hiv through a blowjob. Getting a blowjob is NOT a risk for hiv infection no matter what sort of details you can come up with.

You will not be permitted to use this forum to continue to fret about your brief blowjob. You got your dick sucked, now get over it.

Ann

[JasonB]

Sorry Ann. Yes she did not have any blisters on her lips. I will then get tested for herpes as well when I do all my other testing in the coming days.

Yes I do have better things to do thats why all my obsessive thinking is so obtrusive. Sometimes I am able to just ignore it but sometimes my mind gets the better of me and its hard to say no to it. Its almost a borderline Obsessive-thought disorder type of issue. I need to develop some better mental coping strategies in the interim.

But the advice you have provided me is really invaluable to me and I'm confident will help me through this time.

Thank you.

[JasonB]

Not only do they claim risks for oral but they even say that using condoms can significantly lower the risk of infection without saying safe sex has 0 risk.

Why do they not say these activities have no risk? Why do so many people in fact always qualify their statements about oral and protected sex (on other sites) with very low or almost 0 etc?

Also Dr. Frascino of thebody keeps saying this:

"You are correct: I have been asked the same question millions of times. Just take a read through the chapter in the archives of this forum devoted to oral sex for proof! My answer is always the same: Oral sex, particularly insertive oral sex, carries a minimal risk for HIV acquisition."

Notice the minimal rather than 0.

I hate the non-absolutism of it.

EDIT: Sorry I thought this topic warranted a separate thread, but can I get some comments on this anyhow? I'm sorry if you guys find this annoying but I think its a genuine point.

[Ann]

Jason,

I've merged your new thread into your original thread - where you should post all your additional thoughts or questions. It helps us to help you when you keep all your additional thoughts or questions in one thread. It doesn't matter how long it has been since you last posted in your thread or if the subject matter is different.

If you need help finding your thread when you come here, click on the "Show own posts" link under your name in the left-hand column of any forum page.

Please also read through the Welcome Thread so you can familiarize yourself with our Forum Posting Guidelines. Thank you for your cooperation.





It's a typical CYA - cover your ass - attitude.

The reason they say that using condoms can "significantly lower" the risk is because they sometimes break. However, a correctly used and stored condom rarely, if ever, breaks. Make sure you read through all three condom and lube links in my signature line so you can use them with confidence. And make sure you use them consistently as well.

It seems that because some people insist they've been infected through oral, the CDC refuses to rule it out altogether. This is despite the fact that the science of transmission doesn't support their claims. Especially for the insertive partner in oral.

As you've been told, you will not be permitted to use this website to continue to fret about a fifteen second NO RISK blowjob.

If you read the Welcome Thread before posting like you're supposed to, you will have read the following posting guideline:

Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.

Please consider yourself warned!

Ann

[JasonB]

Ok thanks Ann and sorry.

[Andy Velez]

...And if you continue to search the web for material with which you can feed your fears I can absolutely promise you will find it. All to no good or useful purpose of course. The truth is that anytime you have sexual activity with another person there is theoretically some risk. Nothing including a condom is ever going to be 100% safe other than sex with your own hand.

You need to let go of this totally unhelpful searching and get on with your life. If you can't do that then it might be time for you to sit down with a therapist or other professional and discuss what is driving this unhelpful quest of yours. We can't address that issue in this setting. All we can do is evaluate risks or non-risks.

If you continue to return here repeatedly about a non-risk you are going to find yourself getting a 28 day Time Out from the site.

[JasonB]

Can I reply to your post Andy or will I be banned.

[Andy Velez]

That's up to you if you feel you have something new to say. Like your sexual choices, it's your responsibility.

[JasonB]

I just wanted to say that sometimes you say oral is 0 risk sometimes you say anything has a potential risk (except for doing yourself as you said).

"You are worrying needlessly. In the entire history of the epidemic and uncountable numbers of billions of blowjobs later, no guy has ever been confirmed to have been infected from getting oral. And that includes with nicks, sores, bruises and whatever else on the penis.

Getting oral is ZERO risk for HIV transmission. Period. End of story."

So I just wanted to know your real view on the matter. 0 is of course not the same as there is some risk. Also if you feel there is some possible risk then I guess you would not be in agreement with other members like RapidRod and the others? I mention Rod because he is the one I see most strongly saying there is no risk but of course Ann and matty too.

If you feel what I wrote is offensive please just say so and I will refrain from posting but no need to ban me.

[Matty the Damned]

We have always held that a man receiving unprotected oral is at zero risk of being infected with HIV. Giving unprotected oral to a man presents a theoretical risk.

I fail to see why you find this so confusing.

MtD

/edit: small typo/

[JasonB]

Matty I'm referring to this post by Andy:

"The truth is that anytime you have sexual activity with another person there is theoretically some risk. Nothing including a condom is ever going to be 100% safe other than sex with your own hand."

[RapidRod]

Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.

[JasonB]

Rapid rod I am not posting questioning anything about me! I just want the honest opinion of Andy nothing more. I am not even talking about my incident. I want ANDY real true and final opinion and I'm sorry but only he can give it.

[Andy Velez]

I have made some differentiation between giving oral and receiving oral. There has never been a single documented case of HIV transmission to someone through receiving oral sex. Not one. So I don't see any risk in receiving oral.

About giving oral as I had said, we hear reports from time to time. Those reports never seem to stand up under scrutiny but concerns seem to continue.

You have to decide for yourself what you are comfortable doing even though personally I don't see giving oral to be a risk.

Any opinion I give here on this site is "my real and true opinion." There is no contradiction in anything I have said.

Now I suggest that you need to take a step back and consider what has been said. As far as I am concerned I don't have anything to add to the discussion at this point. If you relentlessly continue to return in an attempt to dot every "i" and cross every "t" when you have been answered thoroughly and repeatedly, then you are definitely going to get yourself a Time Out.

Stop with the obsessive questioning and get on with your life. Game's over here.

[JasonB]

Thanks. Well I guess I'll take your view on insertive as 0 risk. Although you seem to give it with a bit more of a cautious tone then rapidrod or matty who say ZERO RISK!!!!

Anyhow thanks a lot guys. I will try not to bother anyone anymore.

[JasonB]

Hey all. I posted sometime ago about my potential HIV exposure and wanted to follow up with a question about HIV Testing.

I had a rapid test at a clinic (Pin prick) but I don't know what company it was that made the test. The test came out negative and my possible exposure was about a year before that. My question is what is the likely sensitivity and specificity of this test and is it possible this test only tests for HIV-1 and not HIV-2 ? I see that HIV-2 is more prevalent in Africa but I wanted to know if it was a risk here.

Another concern I had was I volunteer at a clinic and recently helped a women with an xray scan by holding her bare arm. I later found out by the physician that this woman was HIV+. I realize that transmission through such contact has not been documented but do you think there is any potential give that the Langerhans cells in the surface of the skin are often reservoirs for the virus?

Note: Thanks to matty for directing me to the original thread.

I really appreciate it!

[jkinatl2]

Please do not continue to volunteer at that clinic until you have seen a counselor about your irrational fear of HIV.

If the cells in the surface of the skin were a conduit for HIV, then the world would be infected.

I would normally request that you re-read the section on this site dealing with transmission vectors. Clearly rational thought will not suffice.

What Andy said, what Matty said, what Ann and I have said are exactly the same things.

Do you think there is a 100% certainty that the sun will rise tomorrow? There is not. Do you think there is a 100% certainty that HIV or any virus will NEVER mutate to become airborne? There is not.

But it's a safe bet that if you call into work tomorrow out of fear, because the sun might explode or an asteroid might hit the earth, people would not take kindly to such an explanation.

however, there is a HUGE chance that your fear of HIV will end up alienating the HIV positive people with whom you must, as a volunteer, spend your time. Please do them a favor and address your own fear before perpetuating the often crippling emotional stigma that comes from being HIV positive.

As the flight attendant always says, secure your breathing mask on your own face before attending to the child next to you.

I urge you to seek help. This forum is absolutely not equipped to handle the problems you present.

[JasonB]

jkinatl2 I appreciate your post. My question was one of pure biology rather than statistics regarding the langerhans cell. I understand this is not a documented method of transfer but I always wondered why not given the langerhans cells of the epidermis or maybe dermis only harbor the virus. Perhaps the stratum corneum and granulosum protect against such a transmission vector.

Despite my realization that this form of contact is not a documented risk factor there is still likely to be some admitted hesitancy on my part if I were to physically contact someone I know that is HIV+. As you say I will have to talk to other professionals to address this uneasiness I have given my role in the clinic.

Regarding my testing question, do you have any insight? Thank you.

[JasonB]

I should follow up by saying perhaps part of my hesitation in these scenarios may stem from the believe that there are microscopic tears in the patient and myself that might expose me. Again though this is not a documented risk so I realize it is not appropriate to feel this way.

[Ann]

Jason,

Most rapid hiv tests look for antibodies to both hiv1 and hiv2. Unless you've been having unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse you neglected to tell us about, you haven't had a risk for either anyway.

Langerhans cells are not present everywhere in the skin. They ARE present in the inner surface of the foreskin and in the vagina. If you think simply touching an hiv positive person is a risk for infection, you have a lot to learn and should not be volunteering in a position where you may come into contact with positive patients. And that doctor had NO BUSINESS disclosing that woman's hiv status to you. Get a grip.

Ann

[jkinatl2]

I should follow up by saying perhaps part of my hesitation in these scenarios may stem from the believe that there are microscopic tears in the patient and myself that might expose me. Again though this is not a documented risk so I realize it is not appropriate to feel this way.

The notion of "microscopic tears" has been disproven since the late 1980s. You have a LOT of education on which to catch up. I highly recommend this site's lessons on transmission.

[Matty the Damned]

The notion of "microscopic tears" has been disproven since the late 1980s. You have a LOT of education on which to catch up. I highly recommend this site's lessons on transmission.

I second this. Also you might benefit from some professional inservice training on blood borne diseases. Ask your employer.

MtD

[JasonB]

Jason,

Most rapid hiv tests look for antibodies to both hiv1 and hiv2. Unless you've been having unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse you neglected to tell us about, you haven't had a risk for either anyway.

Langerhans cells are not present everywhere in the skin. They ARE present in the inner surface of the foreskin and in the vagina. If you think simply touching an hiv positive person is a risk for infection, you have a lot to learn and should not be volunteering in a position where you may come into contact with positive patients. And that doctor had NO BUSINESS disclosing that woman's hiv status to you. Get a grip.

Ann

Ann I found an interesting article. It seems langerhans cells are throughout our epidermis but they found they actually protect against infection!

However, "we observed that Langerin is able to scavenge viruses from the surrounding environment, thereby preventing infection," said lead researcher Teunis Geijtenbeek, an immunologist researcher at Vrije University Medical Center in Amsterdam.

"And since generally all tissues on the outside of our bodies have Langerhans cells, we think that the human body is equipped with an antiviral defense mechanism, destroying incoming viruses," Geijtenbeek said.

http://sexualhealth.e-healthsource.com/index.php?p=news1&id=602421

Thanks to matty and jkinatl2.

[JasonB]

Ann what do you think the sensitivity and specificity of the rapid blood test is? The clinic says it is 99.5% accurate but does that mean the sensitivity and specificity are both 99.5%?

Im just considering whether I should re-test to just decrease any chance of error in the test.

Thanks.

[RapidRod]

At no time were you at risk of contracting HIV and you don't need an HIV test.

   Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.

[Ann]

Jason,

You do not need further testing as you HAD NO RISK IN THE FIRST PLACE. That means your negative result is not going to change no matter how many times you test.

I'm giving you that time out you've been warned about. Do not attempt to create a new account to get around your time out because if you do, you will be permanently banned.

Ann

[JasonB]

This is a new case so I thought I would make a new thread, if you would like to merge it with my old thread please do so.

I was volunteering in the hospital and was dealing with bleeding patient. I wore gloves but afterwards when it took my gloves off I noticed some blood on my finger (not on the nail but on the other side). I have no idea how the blood got there because I was very careful taking the gloves off. I immediately washed my hands with soap and water and after used a hand sanitizer. Now I don't know this patients HIV or Hep C status but I am worried about the exposure.

The good thing is I had no visible cuts or breaks in my skin where the blood was. I do have some dermatitis from dryness in between my fingers near the palm but I don't think there was any blood in that area. I asked the doctor I was working with about it and he said that if I didn't have any cuts I should be fine.

What do you all think about this? Thank you!

[anniebc]

You do have to keep all your all post together regardless of the different scenarios, I'm sure one of the Mods will merge this for you.

As for your incident, rest assured there is definately no risk to your health, please read the lessons here on how HIV is and is not transmitted.

If you are going to worry everytime you come across blood, then may I suggest you find another good cause to do your volunteering in, working in a hospital is not the the place for you.

Jan

[JasonB]

Hey Annie, well I just thought that actually getting blood on your hands was rather unusual in the hospital because protective equipment that all doctors and nurses use is fairly effective.

I am worried about HIV but also Hep C. Also by come across blood do you refer to directly contacting blood with your skin? I have no problem with seeing blood and touching it while my hands are protected by gloves, but getting blood on my skin is something I worry about. Do you think thats a unnecessary worry?

I enjoy working in the hospital so I would prefer to deal with my worries rather than just giving up.

[Ann]

Jason,

You have been told the following before - now please start to do as we ask regarding not starting new threads.

I've merged your new thread into your original thread - where you should post all your additional thoughts or questions. It helps us to help you when you keep all your additional thoughts or questions in one thread. It doesn't matter how long it has been since you last posted in your thread or if the subject matter is different.

If you need help finding your thread when you come here, click on the "Show own posts" link under your name in the left-hand column of any forum page.

Please also read through the Welcome Thread so you can familiarize yourself with our Forum Posting Guidelines. Thank you for your cooperation.






Unless you had a deep, fresh cut yourself, you're worrying over nothing. You asked a doctor the same question and our answer is not going to be any different to what he told you - NO RISK.

Ann

[JasonB]

Hi Anne, I am a little concerned about the dermatitis I had in between my fingers and especially hep C. I don't think there was blood there but maybe when I washed my hands some blood washed on the dermatitis. The dermatitis is a dry winter dermatitis so its not actively bleeding or anything but its also not as good as perfectly intact skin.

I'm just trying to think how I got the blood on my finger because I took my gloves off so carefully and with the standard technique. But it all happened so fast that it was a blur. I remember I took one off then held it with the other and took the other off being careful to keep it all contained with that overlapping technique when 1 gloves goes in the other, then I through it out and looked down and saw the blood on my pinky and a bit on the ring finger. It was about a 3 cm amount and about 2 cm wide on my pinky.

I realize if it was only in that area then I am fine since I had intact skin but as I said before Im a bit worried about the dermatitis and if I possibly had some blood on the back of my hand in the dermatitis area.

You might say if you are so worried get tested for hiv/hep c, but I will have to wait quite some time before i can get a really conclusive result. So in the meantime I will try not to think about it.

[Andy Velez]

This is more of worrying in the domain of "what ifs," which is never a healthy place to hang out.

You have no real basis about which to be worried about HIV and frankly we are not going to indulge you in another series of back and forths about it.

If you can't give up this kind of unnecessary worrying then you might give serious thought to seeing a therapist or other professional to discuss your fears.

This is not an HIV situation. Period.