giving oral sex

[onestoll]

I am a male and had unprotected oral sex performed on me by a female CWS she gave me a Blow job on the 25th of july. I did not ejaculate in her mouth.
What are my risks of getting infected with HIV this way by receiving oral sex
Please advice if i should for a HIV test. I am scared as hell.
This is my first and only unprotected mistake.

[jkinatl2]

You do not get HIV from getting a blowjob.

Saliva is not infectious. Moreover, it contains over a dozen elements that neutralize HIV.

This is NOT an HIV situation.

[Andy Velez]

First of all, I deleted your entry in someone else's thread. Only those who are authorized to do so can write in other member threads. Please follow our rule and keep all of your entries in this same thread.

You are worrying absolutely needlessly. Getting a blowjob is one of the most common of sexual activities. In the entire history of the epidemic there has never been a single confirmed case of HIV transmission to a guy through his getting sucked. Not one. It's safe to say you are not going to make history by becoming the first.

Whether you ejaculated or not is totally irrelevant in terms of any risk or lack of to you. There is no need for testing.

Going forward you need to know that the only confirmed risks for the sexual transmission of HIV are unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse. As long as you always you condoms for those activities you will be effectively protected.


You have no cause for further concern this time.  

[onestoll]

Thank you very much Andy
regards

[Andy Velez]

You're welcome.

Get on with your life.

[onestoll]

I ve only received oral sex myself  once from a CSW and Ive been told here and elsewhere that receiving oral sex does not carry an HIV risk

But my question> is giving oral sex  a risk of hiv?? because of semen in mouth etc...
i am asking because a friend of mine is worried about her exposure she gave a blow job to someone she didnt know very well and she asked me if I knew the risks of HIV through sucking a penis.
Thanks

[Andy Velez]

One's saliva contains over a dozen enzymes and proteins which for a very effective barrier against the transmission of viable HIV, if HIV is present.

Receiving oral is absolutely not a risk for transmission to the receiver.

[jkinatl2]

Giving oral sex (specifically taking semen into the mouth) has been a hotly contested topic in the scientific community for years and years. In the early and mid nineties, before the advent of HAART anti-viral treatment, people simply did not live long enough, healthy enough lives with HIV to monitor sero-discordant relationships (where one partner is positive and one is negative) for any length of time.

Aside from laboratory data and working with simians, which only roughly translates to human experience both in context and in content, the basis for HIV transmission theory was patient report after transmission, and in some studies, before and after interviews with selected populations.

Which is the weakest link in "hard" science, as patient report is notoriously unreliable. There are many reasons why patients don't disclose high risk activity (especially unprotected anal sex). The patient might simply not remember, due to drugs and/or alcohol intoxication. The patient might be embarrassed or ashamed for doing something that was known to be the highest possible risk for HIV. It is a known fact that patients will obfuscate in order to appease authority figures, tell them what they th ink they want to hear.

And given the puritanical state of our society AND the stigma associated with certain sexual acts, self-loathing and cognitive dissonance come into play. And not only on the part of patients. Researchers too often have bias, which they are not always careful to/good at being able to hide.

No pun intended, but researchers spent years salivating over the notion of seemingly tough barriers against pathogens failing when faced with HIV. From kissing to blowjobs, the zeal to uncover the notion of HIV as a near-contagion (and the associated fame and money that goes along with that) was a very alluring siren call to many researchers, particularly those already biased against homosexuality, gay males in specific, and particularly anal sex.

However, the figures simply never added up. Because if giving oral sex WAS a viable means of HIV transmission, then the cases in the heterosexual female community should have reflected this - especially in the larger urban areas where multiple partners of different genders were not as uncommon. The statistics simply did not reflect that.

What DID happen, was the miracle of anti-viral HIV meds, HAART therapy. Those powerful meds were basically the iPhone of the AIDS Pandemic - literally a game-changer. People stopped dying. Moreover, people started living healthy lives without sickness and weakness. People engaged in relationships, many with partners who were negative.

Several long-term studies were held after the introduction of those medications. Two long term studies in the US and one overseas. The studies tracked couples who fit into two criteria. They were "magnetic" couples (where one was positive and one was negative) and they freely admitted to using condoms ONLY for penetrative vaginal or anal sex, not for oral sex.

These studies spanned over seventeen cumulative years, used hundreds of couples, and who knows how many tens/hundreds of thousands of sexual acts. The couples ranged from having no discernible viral load to having a huge viral load, but they used condoms carefully and consistently for penetrative sex.

And only a handful of the negative partners in all these studies seroconverted. And of those that did, each instance was traced to condom failure or failure to use a condom for anal or vaginal sex. Every one. No documented case of oral transmission happened. And we are talking about an awful lot of fellatio and cunnilingus.

This was the first time that a study had circumvented the unreliability of patient report by specifying unprotected oral sex. And these studies perfectly matched the epidemiology. it also reflected the science. Sadly, many institutions, even reputable ones, tend to mix patient report studies in with the more recent, more reliable science. This leads to a mishmash of "covering your ass" statements and confusing guidelines for safer sex. Even this site has not been totally innocent of that, though it has evolved well beyond any other HIV information site I have ever seen in that regard.

As someone who worked with AIDS Prevention and Outreach programs a LOT in the 90s, it was common knowledge that using condoms for oral sex simply didn't happen. Sure we gave out flavored condoms. But they were rarely if ever used.

While it is sad that the continued uptick in new HIV infection exists, it is because people simply do not like to use condoms for penetrative sex.

I hope that this has helped to answer your question.

[Ann]

One,

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 everything 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.


Ann

[onestoll]

So to end up with this thread
there is zero risk for receiving oral sex being sucked.
and there is a theoretical risk for giving oral sex sucking
Thanks all for your very useful comments.
Regards
onestoll

[Andy Velez]

Yes, that's right. But the only CONFIRMED risks for the sexual transmission of HIV are unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse.

[onestoll]

Hi Andy
I received oral sex from a CSW 4 months ago as you know from my previous post.
But why the CDC say in their web page that there is a very low risk from receiving oral sex, I cant understand why they keep saying this if there is NO risk from Oral sex.
Please Andy can you provide me with some useful info about this topic.
Do you think its necessary to test for this only encounter
Cheers Regards
Onestoll

[Andy Velez]

I've merged  your threads here. In the future please follow our rule which is to always write in the same thread and don't start any new ones. Thanks for your cooperation.

Theoretically only sex with your own hand is 100% safe. The CDC is just covering all bases when it says getting oral is a risk, albeit a very low one. Receiving oral is one of the most common of sexual activities. And having said that, there has never been a single confirmed case of transmission to a guy through his getting a blowjob. Not one.

You are worrying needlessly. Let it go and get on with your life. Really.

[onestoll]

Thanks Andy
So the CDC are just being over safe and protective towards people maybe to protect people from other STDs from receiving oral sex.
What do you mean by * albeit a very low one*

[jkinatl2]

What Andy says is accurate.

There have been no verifiable documented cases of HIV being transmitted through any sexual activity other than penetrative anal and vaginal sex.

As you know, oral sex can mean four different things. Sucking, getting sucked, performing oral sex on a female, or being a female and having oral sex performed on you.

Of these four things, the ONLY subject of ANY controversy remains sucking/swallowing semen.

However, since the advent of HAART treatment to arrest HIV replication, there have been numerous studies of serodiscordant couples (thats where one  person is positive and one is negative)

These stories took place on two continents over the span of fifteen years, and followed couples with low/undetectable viral loads/on meds as well as those with HIV viral loads who were not yet on medication.

The result? Not a single transmission so long as the couples correctly and consistently used condoms for anal and vaginal sex. Not one.

One of the criteria of the studies was that the couples admitted to having used condoms ONLY for penetrative sex, NOT for oral sex. This admission, this criteria successfully removed the barrier of inaccurate patient report after the fact. insofar as oral sex was concerned.

Here are the studies in question:



No incident HIV infections among MSM who practice exclusively oral sex.
Int Conf AIDS 2004 Jul 11-16; 15:(abstract no. WePpC2072)??Balls JE, Evans JL, Dilley J, Osmond D, Shiboski S, Shiboski C, Klausner J, McFarland W, Greenspan D, Page-Shafer K?University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States

Oral transmission of HIV, reality or fiction? An update
J Campo1, MA Perea1, J del Romero2, J Cano1, V Hernando2, A Bascones1
Oral Diseases (2006) 12, 219–228

AIDS: Volume 16(17) 22 November 2002 pp 2350-2352
Risk of HIV infection attributable to oral sex among men who have sex with men and in the population of men who have sex with men

Page-Shafer, Kimberlya,b; Shiboski, Caroline Hb; Osmond, Dennis Hc; Dilley, Jamesd; McFarland, Willie; Shiboski, Steve Cc; Klausner, Jeffrey De; Balls, Joycea; Greenspan, Deborahb; Greenspan
Page-Shafer K, Veugelers PJ, Moss AR, Strathdee S, Kaldor JM, van Griensven GJ. Sexual risk behavior and risk factors for HIV-1 seroconversion in homosexual men participating in the Tricontinental Seroconverter Study, 1982-1994 [published erratum appears in Am J Epidemiol 1997 15 Dec; 146(12):1076]. Am J Epidemiol 1997, 146:531-542.

Studies which show the fallacy of relying on anecdotal evidence as opposed to carefully controlled study insofar as HIV transmission risk is concerned:

Jenicek M. "Clinical Case Reporting" in Evidence-Based Medicine. Oxford: Butterworth–Heinemann; 1999:117
Saltzman SP, Stoddard AM, McCusker J, Moon MW, Mayer KH. Reliability of self-reported sexual behavior risk factors for HIV infection in homosexual men. Public Health Rep. 1987 102(6):692–697.Nov–Dec;

Catania JA, Gibson DR, Chitwood DD, Coates TJ. Methodological problems in AIDS behavioral research: influences on measurement error and participation bias in studies of sexual behavior. Psychol Bull. 1990 Nov;108(3):339–362.


Now as to why the CDC still maintains it's nebulous (at best) attitude towards oral sex is anyone's guess. The CDC, for all it's good work, is still a political entity. And yes, they are quick to point out that you can certainly get OTHER STDs from oral sex.

[Andy Velez]

The "albeit a very low one" is not my/our evaluation. It's the CDC's. And like I said, they are just covering themselves because theoretically anything but sex with your own hand could be a risk.

[onestoll]

Its been 6 months already and havent forgotten my oral sex episode.
Andy you have been very helpful with your advise an d I appreciate it very much. Its the only forum I follow now and has provided me with really correct info.
in an other site they told me that receiving oral sex carries a risk of less than 1 in 10000 chances of getting infected, what do you think.. do you agree with this?
Regards
Onestoll

[onestoll]

Dear Andy
Is there a chance for you to Change the original name of my topic to Receiving Oral sex instead of giving oral sex
cheers

[Andy Velez]

There has never been a single confirmed case of HIV transmission to a guy through his receiving oral. You aren't going to make history by becoming the first.

[onestoll]

Andy you said in another person thread that.
You have a greater likelihood of beeing struck by lightning that you do of a problem with giving oral and Hiv.
I guess that receiving oral sex unprotected its even harder to catch than being struck by lightning.

[Andy Velez]

Exactly.

Get on with your life. Really.